Archive for the ‘Politics’ Category

Obama’s New Bolsheviks: His Vanguard of “Radical Change” (A KJ Op Ed)

November 17, 2014

AFBrancoConsequences111714Back in the 1990s, I worked in the Education/Media Services Department, of one of the largest hospitals in America. The department was overseen by an older lady, who had an educational doctorate. This lady was full of energy, was very sweet, and very smart. However, she became notorious for what my manager labeled “crisis management”. Meaning, that when the president of the hospital wanted her to undertake a major project and wanted a report of her plans before she began, she would wait until the last cotton picking minute to get her act together and her report as well, sending the whole department into a frenzy which was reminiscent of the chase scene at the end of The Benny Hill Show.

I remembered that story, as I was trying to get a handle on United States President Barack Hussein Obama’s management style. Obama, as we all know, has a management style that is reactive, instead of being proactive. His management of our nation’s resources leaves a lot to be desired. And, I am being very kind when I say that.

Perhaps there is a purpose in Obama’s slapdash method of handling his job duties.

We have all come to recognize that Obama does not handle criticism of his job performance very well. Let’s face it, Obama’s ego is as big as the great outdoors. And, of course, when you are a super genius such as Barack Hussein Obama, you don’t have to listen to peons like you and me, anyway.

The thread that ties together the story which I began today’s blog with and Barack Hussein Obama’s management style, is the fact that when you practice crisis management, more times than not, you do it in the fervent hope that by doing such, no one can question your management style until everything is said and done. In other words, until it is too late to do anything about it.

Obama, while practicing this management style, hopes to circumvent the Constitution of the United States, by portraying the “plight” of people who have trespassed into our country as an “emergency humanitarian situation”. If news had not leaked out last week that Obama was going to grant Amnesty by Executive Order, he probably would have just come on television this Friday and explained his whole brilliant plan to all of us. And, by the time we finished watching his pronouncement slack-jawed, in his mind anyway, it would have been too late for us to do anything about it.

When you have a crisis manager such as Obama, it is a very natural reaction for them not to take criticism well, and for them to be surprised when somebody bucks them on what they believe is a brilliant idea and a brilliant game plan.

Hence, the Presidential Temper Tantrums that Scooter throws every time somebody tells him “NO”.

However, in our present situation in America, I believe that this may be more than the simple case of a crisis manager’s plans being thwarted.

When you have an orderly structure already in place, such as our System of Checks and Balances, which was set up to provide a mechanism which protects our sovereign nation from usurpation of our Constitution, and provided for us in the founding of this country by our forefathers, it is not easily circumvented.

It hit me yesterday, after I wrote a blog about Obama’ s meeting with the protest leaders who are presently chomping at the bit to write it in Ferguson Missouri over the shooting of the young thug, Michael Brown.

What Obama was running for president, he promised to “radically change” the Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave into a vision which he had for America. I believe that not only this upcoming amnesty on Friday, but the racial upheaval in Ferguson and across the country, which Obama’s irresponsible use of the rhetoric of race and class warfare has directly caused, as well, are both political tools, which he wishes to use as a Vanguard for his own revolution, whose sole purpose is to usher in the “radical change” which he spoke of all those years ago.

Just as was the case in the Russian Revolution, any “Democratic Socialist” nation we see around our Modern World, went through a course-altering revolution, whether through a violent overthrow of the Government or through a “radical change” in the political ideology of their nation and the way that their populace voted in the subsequent election.

I firmly believe that the mission of Barack Hussein Obama, from the moment he became President of United States to this very day, has been exactly what he said it was during his first presidential campaign: to “radically change” our nation into something that every patriotic American will no longer recognize.

With citizenship and voting rights granted to illegal aliens and with Obama’s covert and overt support of these perpetually-grieved protesters, fueled by racial animus, Obama has created his own version of Lenin’s Bolsheviks.

That is why the election earlier this month was so very important. No matter what the puppets of the Obama Administration, the Main Street Media proclaims,  the reason that Americans elected Republicans to both Houses of Congress was not to work with Barack Hussein Obama, but to oppose him at every turn.

America’s survival as a free nation depends on it.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Riot Preparation For the Verdict in Ferguson. Obama Secretly Meets with Ferguson “Protestors”.

November 16, 2014

Ferguson1Missouri State Authorities are getting their assets in place as the decision by the Grand Jury, who are deliberating, after hearing the evidence for or against indictment in the case of the shooting of Ferguson , Missouri young thug, Michael Brown, by Police Office Darren Wilson looms nigh.

The New York Times reports that

Since August, a disparate array of demonstrators — some from longstanding organizations, others from new groups with names like Hands Up United and Lost Voices — has been drawn here to protest not just the shooting of Mr. Brown, but also the broader issues of racial profiling and police conduct.

Now, with the grand jury’s decision expected in the coming days, the groups are preparing with intricate precision to protest the no-indictment vote most consider inevitable. Organizers are outlining “rules of engagement” for dealing with the police, circulating long lists of equipment, including bandages and shatterproof goggles, and establishing “safe spaces” where protesters can escape the cold — or the tear gas.

Graphic | What Happened in Ferguson?Why did the police shoot an unarmed black teenager in a St. Louis suburb, and what has unfolded since then? Here’s what you need to know about the situation in Missouri.

Yet the most important part of the planning may also be the hardest: how to prevent demonstrations from turning violent. Organizers say they want their efforts here to blossom into a lasting, national movement. So they say they hope for the protests to be forceful, loud and unrelenting, but without the looting or arson that could undermine their message. But they also know that some among the ranks may be more volatile and harder to control.

“We’ve come to the conclusion that we really don’t want violence,” said one organizer with Lost Voices, who goes by the name Bud Cuzz. “We want to fix this. We still want to fight to make the laws change. We still want to raise awareness. But we don’t want the city to turn upside down.”

Montague Simmons, a leader of theOrganization for Black Struggle, said there was a growing circle of demonstrators with “a clear message about what we are about and what kind of behavior we are looking for.” Yet beyond their carefully orchestrated plans for a series of shows of protest and civil disobedience, leaders here acknowledge that there are disagreements about what form of response is fitting and whether militant acts might spill over into violence.

At least one group has said on Twitter that it was offering a reward for information on the whereabouts of the officer, Darren Wilson, and, at another point, that it was “restocking on 7.62 & 9mm ammo.” Law enforcement authorities said they would not discuss individual groups, but that they were “constantly looking,” at several groups, according to Brian Schellman of the St. Louis County Police, “trying to separate the rhetoric from the actual threats.”

Immediately after Mr. Brown’s death on Aug. 9, protests began. For days, people marched and chanted along West Florissant Avenue, not far from where the shooting took place and, for brief periods, the protests grew violent. Stores were looted, and the police said demonstrators threw gasoline bombs and tried to set fires. The police used tear gas and rubber bullets. Protesters said the police response was an overreaction to just a few in the otherwise peaceful crowd.

Though the confrontations quieted, the demonstrations have continued nearly nightly since. About 50 organizations, including Mr. Simmons’s, have joined forces in a “Don’t Shoot Coalition,” and the level of planning is intense.

And what is the First Black President of the United States of America doing about this incendiary situatio0n?

Why, Barack Hussein Obama is throwing kerosene on it, of course.

Jim Hoft at gatewaypundit.com reported yesterday that,

President Obama met with Ferguson protest leaders on November 5th, the day after the midterm elections. The meeting was not on his daily schedule. He was concerned that the protesters “stay on course.”

What does that mean?

And why is the president meeting with the violent Mike Brown protesters before a verdict is reached in the court case?

The Ferguson protesters have looted over 100 businesses in the St. Louis area.

The New York Times hid this in the 21st paragraph of their report:

But leaders here say that is the nature of a movement that has taken place, in part, on social media and that does not match an earlier-era protest structure where a single, outspoken leader might have led the way. “This is not your momma’s civil rights movement,” said Ashley Yates, a leader of Millennial Activists United. “This is a movement where you have several difference voices, different people. The person in charge is really — the people. But the message from everyone is the same: Stop killing us.”

At times, there has been a split between national civil rights leaders and the younger leaders on the ground here, who see their efforts as more immediate, less passive than an older generation’s. But some here said relations have improved in recent weeks.

Some of the national leaders met with President Obama on Nov. 5 for a gathering that included a conversation about Ferguson.

According to the Rev. Al Sharpton, who has appeared frequently in St. Louis with the Brown family and delivered a speech at Mr. Brown’s funeral, Mr. Obama “was concerned about Ferguson staying on course in terms of pursuing what it was that he knew we were advocating. He said he hopes that we’re doing all we can to keep peace.”

Obama wants the protesters to stay on course?

Unbelievable.

I have watching in fascination…and disgust…as the situation in Ferguson, Missouri has devolved into some sort of bizarre rush to judgement, for the purpose of some kind of strange racial reparation.

As the evidence against Michael Brown makes its way into the harsh light of day, the professional race-baiters, who have besieged the tiny town of Ferguson, and their supporting Liberal Pundits and sycophants on the World Wide Web, have continued their chorus of “innocence due to perpetual victimhood”, in the case of Michael Brown, proving that denial is not just a river in Egypt.

You see, boys and girls, at this point in the Liberal fairy tale narrative of “Mike the Gentle Giant”, with all of the blood-thirsty Liberal Trolls, who have descended upon the town of Ferguson, publicly writhing in anticipation of a presumed guilty verdict in the trial of Officer Darren Vinson, anything less than a guilty verdict will not satisfy their blood lust.

Of course, Obama will not tell the terminally aggrieved to stand down.

Since he took office, Obama has combined the political philosophies of Marx and Alinsky, and used them to turn a rhetorical political mixture of the rhetoric of Class Warfare and “perceived racial discrimination”, fueled by racial animus, into a political weapon, a skill which he learned during his time as a community organizer in Chicago.

That is why President Barack Hussein Obama sent Attorney General Eric Holder down to Ferguson. Holder went there to make sure that Officer Vinson was indicted in the “wrongful death” of “Gentle Giant” Michael Brown.

Even if the shooting of the 6’4″, 290 lb. thieving, store owner-bullying, dope-smoking, 18 year-old thug was justified.

Decades ago, when the Ku Klux Klan rode through the nation, innocent black men were hung from the nearest tree, simply because of the color of their skin.

Today, in 2014, it appears that those roles have been reversed.

And, it has been sanctioned by Presidential Decree.

President Barack Hussein Obama, who swore an oath, at least twice, to defend this nation, seems determined to tear it apart.

Two wrongs do not make a right…”civil” or otherwise.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Obama’s Amnesty: What Is Our Duty As Christian Americans?

November 15, 2014

American Christianity 2PROLOGUE: This past week, I have gotten into several “discussions” on Political Facebook Pages with several Liberal “friends”, concerning the news out of Washington that President Barack Hussein Obama was going to grant amnesty to 5 million criminals, who have broken into our country, via Executive Order. They all jumped on me, giving me instructions as to how I should think and act, due to my unashamed pronouncement of my Christian Faith. While answering them back as best as I could at the time, I felt that they deserved a more complete answer, so that I would not be misunderstood.

So, hold on to something. Here we go.

(Romans 13:1-7) This Biblical passage leaves no doubt  that God expects us to obey the laws of the government. The only exception to this is when a law of the government is in opposition to one of God’s commands (Acts 5:29).

America’s current invasion by illegal aliens, including the recent influx and distribution of underage Latin American Minors, who were transported up to our southern Border by the Drug Cartels, is an example of Roman 13: 1-7.

Illegal immigration is the breaking of a governmental law. There is no scripture in the Holy Bible that contradicts a nation having immigration laws. Therefore, it is a sin, rebellion against God, to illegally enter into another country.

Illegal immigration is definitely a controversial issue, not only in the United States, but in European countries, as well, as they are being invaded by Muslims who are setting up Sharia Law in countries such as the United Kingdom, Sweden, and Denmark.

The fact of the matter is, Romans 13:1-7 does not give any Christian permission to violate a law just because it is unjust. Again, the issue is not the fairness of a law.

Judge Roy Stewart Moore (born February 11, 1947) is an American judge and Republican politician and the former Chief Justice of the Alabama Supreme Court. He is noted for his prior refusal, in 2003, as Chief Justice of the Alabama Supreme Court, to remove a monument of the Ten Commandments from the Alabama Judicial Building despite orders to do so from a federal judge. On November 13, 2003, the Alabama Court of the Judiciary unanimously removed Moore from his post as Chief Justice.

On November 6, 2012, Moore won election back to the office of Alabama Chief Justice, defeating replacement Democratic candidate Bob Vance.

During his swearing-in ceremony Moore told an overflow audience, some of who watched from another room on closed circuit television,

We’ve got to remember that most of what we do in court comes from some Scripture or is backed by Scripture.

The following is an Opinion Piece he has written, which is as good a one on the subject of this blog, as I have read.

Immigration and Christian Duty

Just last week a reporter covering the annual meeting of the Southern Baptist Convention asked me about the debate in the Christian community over the treatment of illegal immigrants: should we demonstrate Christian love and concern for their salvation or should we oppose amnesty legislation and enforce the immigration laws? The answer is yes: we can and should do both. America is a nation of immigrants. From the beginning, people have come here for freedom and prosperity. As early as 1783, George Washington wisely explained the privileges and duties of those seeking to become citizens of our Country: The bosom of America is open to receive not only the Opulent and respectable Stranger, but the oppressed and persecuted of all Nations and Religions; whom we shall welcome to a participation of all our rights and privileges, if by decency and propriety of conduct they appear to merit the enjoyment.

…The Statue of Liberty still beckons from the New York Harbor, “Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free.” We should never turn our backs to those who show by their “decency and propriety of conduct” that they deserve to live here as an American citizen. But as Washington explained, citizenship entails not only the rights and privileges which flow from it, but also the duties and responsibilities which entitle an individual to its enjoyment.

Immigration is the legal means by which one becomes a citizen of the United States. It has historically required an application process for citizenship, including a test, an investigation, and an oath of allegiance to our Country and Constitution. To call those illegally residing here “immigrants” is an insult to those who have demonstrated the patience, responsibility, and fortitude to immigrate here legally.

When a person – from any country – enters our Country illegally, makes no application for citizenship, does not learn our language, does not care for our customs, and seeks only the benefits of living in America, they have not “immigrated” here at all. They are not “immigrants,” but rather, “illegal aliens.” Recent “May Day” demonstrations by illegal aliens that feature Mexican flags, anti-American slogans, and racist statements against “gringos” only confirm the intentions of many illegal aliens to not assimilate into our culture and way of life, but to displace it with their own. Their lack of “decency and propriety of conduct” show they neither desire nor deserve to be legal citizens.

…Unfortunately, too many Christians have been deceived to think that our duty to love and care for illegal aliens means that we should ignore immigration laws and disregard our borders. But as President Ronald Reagan once said, “A nation without borders is not a nation.” Our borders are compromised by illegal immigration, infiltration of terrorists, and by government policies of regional partnership that actually dilute the sovereignty of the United States. The choice is not between our Christian duty and our border laws,  it’s a matter of life or death for our nation. The same God who commands that we treat aliens and “strangers” with righteousness and justice also clearly defined the physical borders for the nation of Israel, in detailed geographical terms, in Numbers 34. Israel, then and today, would not exist without borders?and neither will America. We should love and care for “the stranger among us” and always be mindful of their need for salvation. But we also have a duty to apply all laws equally and fairly without regard to race, creed, color, or national origin. Our immigration laws must be strictly and justly enforced. It’s not only a matter of national survival. It’s our Christian duty.

The vast majority of illegal immigrants in the United States have come for the purpose of having a better life, providing for their families, and escaping from poverty. These are good goals and motivations. However, it is not biblical to violate a law to achieve something “good.” Caring for the poor, orphans, and widows is something the Bible commands us to do (Galatians 2:10; James 1:27; 2:2-15). However, the biblical fact that we are to care for the downtrodden does not mean we should violate the law in doing so. Supporting, enabling, and/or encouraging illegal immigration is, therefore, also a violation of God’s Word. Those seeking to immigrate to another country should always obey the immigration laws of that country. While this may cause delays and frustrations, these reasons do not give a person the right to violate a law.

So, what is the biblical solution to illegal immigration? Simple…don’t do it; obey the laws.

Liberals tend to attempt to set the boundaries and to change the teachings of Jesus Christ to fit with their “political collective” mindset. The turning of political situations, such as “Obamacare, “The Mexican Munchkin Migration”, and now, Amnesty, into “humanitarian catastrophies” are just the most recent examples.

Their claim concerning salvation is framed in similar terms. Liberals, including President Barack Hussein Obama, put forth the opinion that Salvation is a group experience, , likening it to a political movement, which could not be further from the truth, couching their political ideology-driven benevolence behind the term “Social Justice”.

I do not believe that Jesus would be a part of the social justice movement. His was and is a soul-saving movement. One that still brings hundreds of thousand of people to salvation on this terrestrial ball every day. A movement that, in fact, was embraced by the Founders of this cherished land.

It is interesting to me, that the “most caring people in the room”, whom, under normal circumstances, want Conservative American Christians to sit down, shut up, and limit their faith to Sunday mornings from 10 a.m. – Noon, now are lecturing us about how we should support their fallen messiah’s plan to grant Amnesty to 5 million Illegal Aliens.

I will wrap up this post by quoting  Dr. Albert Mohler, President of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary:

Regrettably, there is no shortage of preachers who have traded the Gospel for a platform of political and economic change, most often packaged as a call for social justice…

The church is not to adopt a social reform platform as its message, but the faithful church, wherever it is found, is itself a social reform movement precisely because it is populated by redeemed sinners who are called to faithfulness in following Christ. The Gospel is not a message of social (collective) salvation, but it does have social implications.

Luke 20:25 

And he (Jesus) said unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things which be Caesar‘s, and unto God the things which be God’s.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Why Should Illegals Get Free Healthcare For Breaking Into Our Country? (A KJ Op Ed)

November 14, 2014

AFBrancoVoting Results111514We should insist that if the immigrant who comes here does in good faith become an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed or birth-place or origin.

But this is predicated upon the man’s becoming in very fact an American and nothing but an American. If he tries to keep segregated with men of his own origin and separated from the rest of America, then he isn’t doing his part as an American. There can be no divided allegiance here. . . We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language, for we intend to see that the crucible turns our people out as Americans, of American nationality, and not as dwellers in a polyglot boarding-house; and we have room for but one soul loyalty, and that is loyalty to the American people. – President Teddy Roosevelt

I remember it as if it was yesterday. It was a Sunday morning, around this time of year. I was 11 years old and I was sick as a dog from bronchitis.

My devoted Daddy was driving me to the doctor’s office. One of the three doctors, who literally raised me  as an asthmatic child, would open up the office for a couple of hours on Sunday morning, for folks who were seriously ill.

Since all three of them felt like they were my surrogate fathers, when we got to the office, the doctor immediately set me down and started to care for me.

Both my mother and father worked for Sears for 20 years. This being the 1960’s, there were no hoops to jump through, just insurance to be filed later by the doctor’s office.

Now, all these years later, I am still asthmatic, however, my condition is controlled by medication prescribed to me by physicians who worked in the finest healthcare system in the world.

As an adult, in the past, even during periods of unemployment, I was always able to receive treatment, from doctors who would work with me.

Having recently gone through a period of unemployment, I found, with the advent of Obamacare, that if you did not have insurance, doctors were more reluctant to work with you in regards to payment of their services. In fact, my physician requested payment of $250 on the spot for treating me for another case of bronchitis. Luckily, I had it, or else I would have been out of luck.

Now, it’s not like I did not try to get Obamacare while I was out of work. However, my wife has insurance through her job, and, according to the Obamacare website, I was not eligible, even though the cost of adding me to my wife’s insurance was beyond our means to pay.

Through the providence of Gods, now I have a great job, and will be eligible in January for my company’s insurance plan.

All that being said, were you aware that the secretary of Human Services has suggested giving all of these five million illegal aliens whom Obama is fixing to grant amnesty to, FREE OBAMACARE?

I’m not kidding.

That’s correct. The Prevaricator-in-Chief, Barack Hussein Obama, wants to give away free healthcare to people who have never sworn allegiance to our country.

Let that soak in for a moment, boys and girls.

These criminals, who have broken into our country, violated our laws, and already are on EBT cards and are receiving driver’s licenses, will now receive their healthcare absolutely free.

Do you think that if we broke in to Mexico that we would get all this stuff for free?

There’s less chance of that happening, than Davy Crockett and those boys had in surviving the Alamo.

However, you have to admit, that it is a heck of a way to both create and buy off new voters.

And, that is what this is all about. Barack Hussein Obama is not being benevolent. He is as self-centered and Machiavellian as they come.

The fact is, the Democratic Party cannot stand on their own ideals. They just got their hindquarters handed to them in the midterm elections.

Anybody with any common sense whatsoever, knows that socialism has failed everywhere it has been tried. These self-proclaimed geniuses are no smarter than any other want-to-be socialists, who have tried to implement “sharing the wealth” in the past. They just have a more effective propaganda machine.

What we saw on Tuesday the 4th, was what happens when the promise of a Marxist ideology, turns out to be the reality of a failed presidency.

And, just like Lenin used the Bolsheviks to overthrow the Czar in the Russian Revolution, so are Obama and the Democrats using the illegal aliens to ensure that they will be elected to office for decades to come.

This next week will show us exactly what we bought with our votes on November the 4th.

It is up to Mitch McConnell, John Boehner, and the rest of the Republicans in Congress, to stand tough against this usurpation of the Constitution.

Contrary to what the mainstream media and the rest of the Democrats have been saying since the election, Americans did not collect all these Republicans to work with the Democrats, we elected them to stop them.

This week is their chance to prove that we made the right decision.

Their bosses, We the People, are watching.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Al Qaeda’s “On the Run”, Alright. Right Into the Arms of ISIS.

November 14, 2014

AFBrancoObamaISIS9242014In what amounts to a new “Axis of Evil”, two of America’s sworn enemies have now joined forces.

According to the Associated Press,

Militant leaders from the Islamic State group and al-Qaida gathered at a farm house in northern Syria last week and agreed on a plan to stop fighting each other and work together against their opponents, a high-level Syrian opposition official and a rebel commander have told The Associated Press.

Such an accord could present new difficulties for Washington’s strategy against the IS group. While warplanes from a U.S.-led coalition strike militants from the air, the Obama administration has counted on arming “moderate” rebel factions to push them back on the ground. Those rebels, already considered relatively weak and disorganized, would face far stronger opposition if the two heavy-hitting militant groups now are working together.

IS – the group that has seized nearly a third of Syria and Iraq with a campaign of brutality and beheadings this year – and al-Qaeda’s affiliate in Syria, known as the Nusra Front, have fought each other bitterly for more than a year to dominate the rebellion against Syrian President Bashar Assad.

The Associated Press reported late last month on signs that the two groups appear to have curtailed their feud with informal local truces. Their new agreement, according to the sources in rebel groups opposed to both IS and Nusra Front, would involve a promise to stop fighting and team up in attacks in some areas of northern Syria.

Cooperation, however, would fall short of unifying the rival groups, and experts believe any pact between the two sides could easily unravel. U.S. intelligence officials have been watching the groups closely and say a full merger is not expected soon – if ever. A U.S. official with access to intelligence about Syria said the American intelligence community has not seen any indications of a shift in the two groups’ strategy, but added that he could not rule out tactical deals on the ground. The official insisted on anonymity because he said he was not authorized to speak publicly about the subject.

According to a Syrian opposition official speaking in Turkey, the meeting took place Nov. 2 in the town of Atareb, west of Aleppo, starting at around midnight and lasting until 4 a.m. The official said the meeting was closely followed by members of his movement, and he is certain that an agreement was reached. The official said about seven top militant leaders attended.

A second source, a commander of brigades affiliated with the Western-backed Free Syrian Army who is known as Abu Musafer, said he also had learned that high-ranking members of Nusra and IS met on Nov. 2. He did not disclose the exact location, but said it was organized by a third party and took place in an area where the FSA is active.

About al-Qaeda...

The group was founded in approximately 1988 by Osama bin Laden, Abdullah Azzam, and Muhammad Atef — the latter a native Egyptian and a onetime member of the terrorist group Egyptian Islamic Jihad. Al Qaeda’s overriding objective is to establish a worldwide caliphate governing all the earth via the dictates of Islamic Law. Crucial to the achievement of that goal is the destruction of America by any means necessary. As one Al Qaeda Training Manual makes explicitly clear, violence is the preferred method of dealing with the enemy:

“Islamic governments have never and will never be established through peaceful solutions and cooperative councils. They are established as they [always] have been by pen and gun, by word and bullet, by tongue and teeth.”

The manual further exhorts jihadists to “pledge … to make their [the infidels’] women widows and their children orphans … to slaughter them like lambs and let the [rivers] flow with their blood.”

According to Abu Musafer, two decisions were reached: First, to halt infighting between Nusra and IS and second, for the groups together to open up fronts against Kurdish fighters in a couple of new areas of northern Syria.

The fact is, Obama believes that everything can be handled through “Community Organizing”.

If you remember, Obama was the first American Presidential Candidate to campaign for our Presidency, outside of our nation. All of the Main Stream Media fawned over his European campaigning as a brilliant move, while Americans were bumfuzzled at the media spectacle, trying to figure out why he would give campaign speeches to people who could not even vote for him.

Then, after he became President, one  of the first things Obama did was to go on a World Apology Tour,culminating with an “Address to the Muslim World” at the University of Cairo, in which he lauded the contributions of Muslims to world civilization and to the history of the united States of America, even though the population of Muslims in America, was only around 1% at the time.

Yeah…our Revolutionary War Hero and First President of the United States of America, Mohammed Washington…that’s the ticket!

Since then, Obama has continued to “reach out” to the Muslim World in an attempt to “Community Organize” them, even to the detriment of the country and its citizenry, whom he is supposed to be protecting.

Ambassador Christopher Stevens remains unavailable for comment.

In his zeal to appease his American voting base, and those whom he has worked so hard to “organize”, Obama pulled our troops out of the unstable, Radical Muslim nation of Iraq, in a “premature evacuation”.

Proudly announcing that “al Qaeda was on the run”, Scooter (my pet name for Obama) turned his attention to giving campaign speeches and rallying his Liberal Base, even though he was a President presiding over a tanking economy, with over 92 million Americans already gone from our workforce.

Then, it happened.

ISIS/ISIL, a Radical Muslim Terrorist Organization, with over 32 thousand adherents, invaded Iraq, killing innocent Muslims and Christians, and threatening to flood Baghdad, by blowing up an essential dam on the Euphrates River.

Obama sprang into “Community Organizing” mode once again. He sent “military advisors” to Iraq, and sent Secretary of State John “I served in Vietnam” Kerry on a European and Middle Tour to trying to get a consensus to support our actions, and to try to form a coalition to assist in the “prosecution of ISIS/ISIL, in order for Obama to keep his promise to his Far Left Supporters that there would be “no boots on the ground” in Iraq.

Think of it as General Custer sending the Scouts first into Little Big Horn, while he sat on his horse, watching from a hill.

Yeah. The Europeans wanted no part of it, either.

However, some of the Middle Eastern Nations decided that they would join in, for their own self-protecting, mercenary reasons (Remember the Hessians in the Revolutionary War?).

Heck,Obama has even been negotiating with the Head Ayatollah in Iran, (the same country who is developing a nuclear bomb, in order to annihilate us) trying to get them to side with us against ISIS.

President Barack Hussein Obama’s International “Street Cred” has been tarnished beyond repair after the abysmal consequences, as regards the stability of the Middle East, of  his failed Foreign Policy of “Smart Power!”

The terrifying results of Obama’s attempt at “Community Organizing” the Muslim World, including the lost of life of both innocent civilians and of America’s Brightest and best, which has dwarfed the war casualties which occurred under his predecessor, President George W. Bush, now have begun to arrived at our own shores, with Korans and prayer rugs being found at our open Southern Border and honor killings and attacks by Radical Muslims, labelled as “work place violence” by the Obama Administration.

It is time for Obama to stop being the world’s  “Community Organizer” and to perform his duties as the President of the United States.

Before it is too late.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Obama to Issue Amnesty E.O. Next Friday. Over 92 Million Americans Still Out of Workforce.

November 13, 2014

obamamyworkThis is an advertisement to the whole world, particularly Latin America, where it’s easy to get across the border, that you come into America illegally, it’s up to you, we do not control our borders, and if you wait long enough, and you make strong enough case and there’s enough pressure, we will legalize you – Dr. Charles Krauthammer

Yesterday, I wrote that Obama was gearing up to issue an Executive Order granting Amnesty to the criminals who have broken into our home.

Well, yesterday, the number one channel in cable news released the specifics.

Foxnews.com reports that

EXCLUSIVE: President Obama is planning to unveil a 10-part plan for overhauling U.S. immigration policy via executive action — including suspending deportations for millions — as early as next Friday, a source close to the White House told Fox News. 

The president’s plans were contained in a draft proposal from a U.S. government agency. The source said the plan could be announced as early as Nov. 21, though the date might slip a few days pending final White House approval. 

Obama was briefed at the White House by Homeland Security officials before leaving on his Asia-Pacific trip last week, Fox News has learned. 

The plan contains 10 initiatives than span everything from boosting border security to improving pay for immigration officers. 

But the most controversial pertain to the millions who could get a deportation reprieve under what is known as “deferred action.” 

The plan calls for expanding deferred action for illegal immigrants who came to the U.S. as children — but also for the parents of U.S. citizens and legal permanent residents. 

The latter could allow upwards of 4.5 million illegal immigrant adults with U.S.-born children to stay, according to estimates. 

Critics in the Senate say those who receive deferred action, according to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, receive work authorization in the United States, Social Security numbers and government-issued IDs.

Another portion that is sure to cause consternation among anti-“amnesty” lawmakers is a plan to expand deferred action for young people. In June 2012, Obama created such a program for illegal immigrants who came to the U.S. as children, entered before June 2007 and were under 31 as of June 2012. The change would expand that to cover anyone who entered before they were 16, and change the cut-off from June 2007 to Jan. 1, 2010. This is estimated to make nearly 300,000 illegal immigrants eligible. 

One of the architects for the president’s planned executive actions at DHS is Esther Olavarria, the late Sen. Ted Kennedy’s former top immigration lawyer. 

Under the changes, Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers also would see a pay raise in order to “increase morale” within the ICE workforce. 

DHS also is planning to “promote” the new naturalization process by giving a 50 percent discount on the first 10,000 applicants who come forward, with the exception of those who have income levels above 200 percent of the poverty level. 

Tech jobs though a State Department immigrant visa program would offer another half-million immigrants a path to citizenship. This would include their spouses as well. 

The other measures include calls to revise removal priorities to target serious criminals for deportation and end the program known as “Secure Communities” and start a new program.

The planning comes as immigrant advocates urge Obama to act. As lawmakers returned for a lame-duck session, Democrats in Congress on Wednesday implored Obama to take executive action. 

So, with over 92, 600,000 giving up on the American Dream and dropping out of our workforce, King Barack the First has decided that he will increase the competition for America’s jobs, to the detriment of legal American citizens.

Last year, brilliant American Economist and Political Pundit, Dr. Thomas Sowell, was interviewed by Laura Ingraham, on her syndicated radio program. Here is what he had to say about Amnesty and the Economy:

That’s incredible. I mean —first of all to an economist, it is incredible to speak about shortages without talking about prices, in this case wages…You know there, there have been so many predictions of shortages of so many occupations and the shortages don’t materialize. And why not? Because if there is a shortage, the wage rate goes up. That attracts in more people and lo and behold, the jobs are filled.

In agriculture, the farmers would obviously prefer to get workers who get low pay rather than workers they have to pay a higher wage. And as long as there are an unlimited supply of farm workers coming in from Mexico, they will never have to raise the wages very much. They say Americans won’t do these jobs. These are jobs Americans have done for generations, if not centuries. And it’s a time when millions of Americans are out of work, and are looking for any kind of work. And so this is utter nonsense.

…They constantly talk about immigrants in the abstract. You know, there are no such thing as abstract immigrants. There are immigrants from country a, b, c, d. They are radically different. People coming in from some countries almost never go on welfare. Immigrants coming in from other countries go on welfare to a great extent. If we’re going to have a rational immigration policy, then we have to be able to decide what people, what countries, what occupations — things like that, instead of rushing everything through.

The other main thing though is that if we don’t control the borders, we don’t have an immigration policy because regardless of what policy you put on paper, if people can just walk across the border when they darn well please, then your policy means nothing. The other thing that bothers me is the Republicans seem to think we will give — illegal immigrants citizenship if they do a, b or c. Democrats say x, y and z. I don’t know why we need promise anybody citizenship before we get control of the borders and have time to sit down and think and look at the facts, and then try to draw up some rational policy.

In 1903,  Jacob A. Riis,  a reporter who was born in Denmark in 1849 and immigrated to America at the age of 21, wrote the following about the immigrants who landed at Ellis Island,

The railroad ferries come and take their daily host straight from Ellis Island to the train, ticketed now with the name of the route that is to deliver them at their new homes, West and East. And the Battery boat comes every hour for its share. Then the many-hued procession-the women are hooded, one and all, in their gayety shawls for the entry-is led down on a long pathway divided in the middle by a wire screen, form behind which come shrieks of recognition from fathers, brothers, uncles, and aunts that are gathered there in the holiday togs of Mulberry or Division Street. The contrast is sharp-an artist would say all in favor of the newcomers. But they would be the last to agree with him. In another week the rainbow colors will have been laid aside, and the landscape will be poorer for it. On the boat they meet their friends, and the long journey is over, the new life begun. Those who have no friends run the gauntlet of the boarding-house runners, and take their chances with the new freedom, unless the missionary or “the society” of their people holds out a helping hand. For at the barge-office gate Uncle Sam lets go. Through it they must walk alone.

I know that you have heard America referred to as a Melting Pot.

That phrase was actually made popular in the 1908 play, “The Melting Pot,” a stage play by Israel Zangwill that encouraged assimilation into our nation’s culture by the immigrants of the time.

Zangwill was the London-born son of Russian Jewish immigrants. His play made its debut in Washington in 1908 and played in New York for four months the next year. The main character is David Quixano, a Jewish immigrant, orphaned by a pogram, which is a massacre of Jews. Quizano lives with his uncle on Staten Island and becomes smitten with the daughter of a Russian nobleman.

In the end, the good guy(David) gets the girl, which inspires him to shout from the rooftop of a Lower East Side settlement house that “America is God’s crucible” and to proclaim: “What is the glory of Rome and Jerusalem where all nations and races come to worship and look back, compared with the glory of America, where all races and nations come to labor and look forward!”

What Petulant President Pantywaist and his sycophantic Liberal supporters in Washington, the Main Stream Media, and elsewhere fail to realize, is that you can’t buy loyalty to a nation. 

The British found that out with their hired German Mercenaries, the Hessians, during the Revolutionary War.

In their self-absorbed Political Greed, America’s professional politicians are setting the stage for the possible fall of our nation.

Legal Immigrants earned their citizenship. They showed that they were willing to become a part of the Great American Melting Pot (from the Schoolhouse Rock video of the same name).

Illegal Immigrants do not respect the laws of our land, to begin with. Why would that change, if they were given the rights of citizenship?

And, what about the 37.2% of America’s workforce, who have dropped out due to frustration, depression, and aggravation?

How about taking care of those whom you are supposed to be serving, first, Mr. President?

Until He Comes,

KJ

Obama Rubbing Hands in Glee, Preparing to Grant Mass Amnesty

November 12, 2014

illegal immigration 7714President Barack Hussein Obama plans on issuing an Executive order, rewarding as many as 5,000,000 criminals with a “Get Out of Jail Free” card.

And, he couldn’t be more pleased with himself.

According to fusion.net,

It’s time for another showdown in the country’s capital. Republicans won the Senate and full control of Congress in the midterm elections. The president is reportedly about to counter with executive action on immigration reform, though nobody knows how far he’ll go.

White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest told Fusion’s Jorge Ramos that the White House hasn’t made a final decision, but the president is ready to make good on his promise to act on behalf of the nation’s undocumented immigrants in the absence of a new law before the end of the year.

“The president is disappointed that this legislative solution won’t be achieved, but the president is looking forward to taking executive action on his own, to solve as many of these problems as he can,” Earnest said.

Few things will rile Republicans more than unilateral White House action on such a contentious issue, especially coming off of their midterm gains. Earnest acknowledged the White House’s displeasure with the election results while describing them as a call for more movement in Washington.

“[Voters] want their elected representatives in Washington, D.C. to get some results, and we haven’t seen a lot of results over the last two years in the United States Congress in particular,” Earnest said.

It’s a fine line given the departing Democratic Senate majority, but the White House wants to cast Republicans – who have internal splits on this issue – as the main reason for legislative delays and justify executive action now that they’ve won more power. Leading Republicans caution that such a confrontation would be playing with fire.

“If we get sidetracked with old ideological fights and holding each other accountable for long-held differences, we’re not going to make much progress,” Earnest said when asked about Senator Mitch McConnell’s warning that immigration executive action is “like waving a red flag in front of a bull.”

Republicans could respond with several tactics. The attorney general oversees the legal argument Obama will make for his authority to take action under current immigration law, and Republicans could block the Senate confirmation of Loretta Lynch, who Obama tapped to replace Attorney General Eric Holder. The could also withhold funding, though another shutdown looks unlikely, or even supersede Obama with a new immigration bill, which the president has always said he favors over acting on his own.

The White House is feeling heat from the left on the details of their executive action plan, even though they’re not yet known. Activists and immigrant groups shared a recent New York Times editorial’s fear that the plan won’t go far enough in the face of sure opposition. They argue that if the fight’s inevitable, it might as well be over a strong position.

“So why not be unapologetic, go bold, and really protect millions of our families that are waiting for the president to act,” said Cristina Jimenez, the managing director of the youth immigration activist group United We Dream, in an interview with Jorge Ramos.

A potential plan allowing upwards of 5 million undocumented immigrants to remain in the U.S. could be cut to a couple million or less as the president focuses on smaller slices of the nation’s 11 million undocumented.

The late Congresswoman from Texas, Barbara Jordan, would not be proud of her fellow Democrat, President Barack Hussein Obama.

The last bipartisan U.S. Commission on Immigration Reform wrangled with the topic of Illegal Immigration for six years. President Clinton appointed former congresswoman and Democratic icon Barbara Jordan as its chair. Jordan came from humble beginnings to become a lawyer and the first Southern black woman elected to the House of Representatives. Rep. Jordan was a leader in the Civil Rights Movement, a Professor of Ethics, a recipient of the Presidential Medal of Freedom, and a world-class orator (two of her speeches are considered among the greatest of the 20th century). Her appointment gave the commission instant credibility. According to Jordan, she believed her responsibility as the head of the commission was to restore credibility to the U.S. Immigration System. On the issue of Illegal Immigration, Jordan was very clear and succinct:

Unlawful Immigration is unacceptable. Those who should not be here will be required to leave.

Rep. Jordan recognized the  dangerous illegality of “Unlawful Immigration”.

Let’s pretend I broke into your house.  When you discover me there, you insist I leave.  But I say, “I’ve made all the beds, washed the dishes, did the laundry, and cleaned the floors; I’ve done all the work you don’t like to do. I’m hardworking and honest (except for breaking into your house). Not only must you let me stay, you must also add me to your insurance plan, educate my kids, and provide these benefits to my husband, too (he will do your yardwork, he’s honest and hardworking too–except for that breaking in part). If you try to force me out, I will call my friends who will picket your house and proclaim my right to be there! It’s only fair, because you have a nicer house than I do, and I’m trying to better myself. I’m hardworking and honest…except for, well, you know. I will live in your house, contributing only a fraction of the cost of my keep, and there is nothing you can do about it without being accused of selfishness and prejudice.

Oh yeah, I want you to learn my language so you can communicate with me.

Good plan..don’t you think? 

Is this a behavior we should be rewarding?

What makes the current influx of illegal immigrants exempt from the rules and regulations that every other generation of immigrants to this country had to abide by in order to become legal citizens of the greatest nation in the world? By being here illegally, they are not entitled to the same rights as natural-born or naturalized American citizens.

And, yet, even as I write this, they are in our hospitals, taking advantage of our charity and the finest health care system in the world, and driving our streets, with either forged drivers licenses or those obtained from states who have acquiesced and given them to these “undocumented workers”.

This is in no way a human rights issue. Freedom is God-given, and with freedom comes responsibility. With citizenship comes responsibility, like paying taxes and making your own way.

My concerns about this whole “Path to Citizenship” business, can be divided into three bullet points. (Hey, I used to be a VP of Marketing. What do you expect?)

1. Patriotism – Will these new “citizens” be willing to fly our flag above theirs? Will they be willing, if called upon, to serve in our Armed Forces, at home or abroad? Will they love this country, more than the one they left?

2. Loyalty – When these “new Americans” achieve the right to vote, are they all going to vote Democrat, so that they can receive more FREE STUFF? Is the Republican Party shooting themselves in both feet by pushing an outcome which will simply add new Democratic Voters? As I asked in the first point, will they honestly embrace our sovereign nation as their new home? Or, will they remain loyal to Mexico?

3.  Immigration – Are we rewarding illegal behavior, while at the same time, insulting all of the brave souls who have come here legally, seeking a better life for themselves and their families?

I understand that people want a better life for themselves and their children.  We are all immigrants in this land, except for American Indians, and they got here by crossing the Bering Straight.  But there is a huge difference between immigrating here legally and sneaking in illegally, between assimilating into an existing culture, and insisting on replacing a country’s existing culture with that of the country you left.

I’m all for assisting anyone in becoming a legal citizen of the United States, if that is their wish.  But, it must be done the right way, and they must accept responsibility for their illegal entry, show a willingness to learn our language, and embrace our American way of life, including respecting the American Flag.

So, let’s take this one step at a time.  Secure our borders.  Enforce the anti-illegal immigration laws.  And, if the Federal Government won’t, the states, like Arizona, will have to pass their own laws.  America became a great nation because it is a melting pot of American-born and legally-immigrated citizens with a shared allegiance, not a multi-cultural United Nations with everyone loyal to their home country.

As the diseases, which the Mexican Munchkin Migration brought in with them have warned us, a wide-open Southern Border is as big a threat to the sovereignty of the United States as anything that our enemies can throw at us right now.  All of OUR SERVANTS, up on Capitol Hill, need to quit playing political games.  The safety of America is at stake .  SECURE THE BORDER NOW.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Obama Pushing Once Again For “Net Neutrality”

November 10, 2014

obamabigbroThe nine most terrifying words in the English language are, ‘I’m from the government and I’m here to help. – United States President Ronald Wilson Reagan

Now that the Obama Administration has successfully controlled the food which our children and grandchildren are fed in their school cafeterias, they now, once again, are attempting to regulate the World Wide Web.

Foxnews.com reports that

President Obama threw down the gauntlet Monday with cable companies and Internet providers by declaring they shouldn’t be allowed to cut deals with online services like YouTube to move their content faster.

It was his most definitive statement to date on so-called “net neutrality,” and escalates a battle that has been simmering for years between industry groups and Internet activists who warn against the creation of Internet “fast lanes.” The president’s statement swiftly drew an aggressive response from trade groups, which are fighting against additional regulation, as well as congressional Republicans. 

We are stunned the president would abandon the longstanding, bipartisan policy of lightly regulating the Internet and calling for extreme” regulation, said Michael Powell, president and CEO of the National Cable and Telecommunications Association, the primary lobbying arm of the cable industry.

Obama, in his statement, called for an “explicit ban” on “paid prioritization,” or better, faster service for companies that pay extra. The president said federal regulators should reclassify the Internet as a public utility under Title II of the 1934 Communications Act.

“For almost a century, our law has recognized that companies who connect you to the world have special obligations not to exploit the monopoly they enjoy over access in and out of your home or business,” Obama said in his statement. “That is why a phone call from a customer of one phone company can reliably reach a customer of a different one, and why you will not be penalized solely for calling someone who is using another provider. It is common sense that the same philosophy should guide any service that is based on the transmission of information — whether a phone call, or a packet of data.”

Obama’s statement puts him in the middle of a debate between industry groups and the Federal Communications Commission, which is under public pressure – now from Obama as well — to prevent broadband providers from creating the “fast lanes.”

According to Senator Ted  Cruz (R-TX),

The biggest regulatory threat to the Internet is “net neutrality.”

In short, net neutrality is Obamacare for the Internet. It puts the government in charge of determining Internet pricing, terms of service, and what types of products and services can be delivered, leading to fewer choices, fewer opportunities, and higher prices for consumers.

The Internet should not operate at the speed of government.

Way back on December 10, 2010. the Godfather of Talk Radio. Rush Limbaugh, explained what the Obama Administration’s  backing of “net neutrality” is all about…

…This is about the Feds wanting to control the Internet just as they control the public airwaves. They want to be able to determine who gets to say what, where, how often. They want to be able to determine what search services are providing what answers to your queries. It’s total government control of the Internet and the regime has just awarded it to itself, after a court said no, after a court denied them this authority, they went ahead and did it anyway. 

…Net neutrality is a solution in search of a problem. It’s just a bunch of liberals wanting to get their hands on something that is massive, that can harm them. They have to control, as much as they can, the free flow of information. They have to be in charge of it, they have to be able to censor it, and that’s what this is all about.

There is no problem on the Internet. None. In fact, in most of life, there wasn’t a problem until the liberals went in search of one so that they could control people’s behavior and try to legislate the outcomes of individuals in life. The only problem here appears to be too much freedom, at least in the minds of the government. There’s too much freedom on the Internet in the minds of Obama and his FCC people. All you really have to know about net neutrality is that its biggest promoters are George Soros and Google and MoveOn.org, which is heavily funded by Mr. Soros and Google. It is also promoted by a number of other radical left Soros fronts, such as the Free Press, the Center for American Progress, and a couple of additional groups improperly named.

The Center for American Progress is about the opposite. They’re not about American progress. And Free Press is not about a free press. So what we’re doing here is neutering the Internet. It’s another private industry. It’s another gleaming aspect of free speech, free market, private industry, that Obama has decided to take over as a Christmas present to himself and the Democrat National Committee and to Mr. Soros.

Speaking of the evil puppetmaster, George Soros, back in December of 2010, FCC Chairman, Julius Genachowski, announced that some of the “net neutrality” fans who support the move, included the Consumer Federation of America, Consumers Union, the Center for Democracy and Technology, and the Communications Workers of America.

  • The Consumer Federation for America (CFA) was founded in 1968, based in Washington, DC.  It describes itself as an “advocacy, research, education, and service organization” on issues affecting consumers and “looks out for those who have the greatest needs, especially the least affluent.” CFA’s membership comprises approximately 280 nonprofit consumer organizations from around the U.S.  It receives its funding from unions and corporations, especially the Rockefeller Foundation.   Per activistcash.com, in the year between 1999-2000, CFA received $266,700 From George Soros’ Open Society Institute.
  • The Center for Democracy and Technology (CDT) is a 501(c) “non-profit public policy organization dedicated to promoting the democratic potential of today’s open, decentralized global Internet,” per its website. CDT’s stated mission is “to conceptualize, develop, and implement public policies to preserve and enhance free expression, privacy, open access, and other democratic values in the new and increasingly integrated communications medium.” It was founded in 1994 by Jonah Seiger who also served as its Communications Director.  Per Forbes.com, George Soros gave the Center $300,000 this year.
  • Communication Workers of America (CWA) is the largest telecommunications union in the world and represents over 700,000 men and women in both private and public sectors, including over half a million workers who are building the Information Highway.CWA was founded in 1938 at meetings in Chicago and New Orleans. First known as the National Federation of Telephone Workers, the union became the Communications Workers of America in 1947.   The CWA is aligned with the Communist ideology-driven Working Families Party and the SEIU, who are in turn aligned with, you guessed it, George Soros.

You know, if I were the paranoid type, I would see some sort of conspiracy behind this push to control the Web.

Nah, couldn’t be.  Hey, what’s that black helicopter doing hovering over my roof?

Until He Comes,

KJ

AG Nominee Loretta Lynch Turns Out To Be Just Another “Community Organizer”

November 10, 2014

Loretta LynchWhen President Barack Hussein Obama announced his pick to succeed Eric Holder as Attorney General, the first reports profiled her as an “overqualified” Prosecutor from Brooklyn, NY.

While Ms. Lynch may or many not actually have the legal skills for the position, it is a certainty that she has the correct political ideology and racial animus to work within the Obama Administration.

Yesterday, Breitbart News reported that

Loretta Lynch, President Barack Obama’s choice to replace Eric Holder as Attorney General, would likely sail through confirmation hearings under normal circumstances–i.e. even when Democrats had not gutted the filibuster rule in a cynical act of partisanship, and when the administration had not turned the nation’s top law enforcement office into such a politicized and race-obsessed office. She certainly has the right qualifications.
 
Lynch has served twice as U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of New York, and has a long résumé of high-profile prosecutions. Her most recent headline case has been that of U.S. Rep. Michael Grimm (R-NY), who was indicted earlier this year for a variety of charges, including hiding $1 million in business receipts from the Internal Revenue Service and hiring illegal immigrant workers, whom he paid in cash, at his restaurant.

In addition, her life and career boast strong civil rights themes. Growing up in North Carolina, Lynch’s mother worked as a farmhand; her daughter would go on to graduate from Harvard twice. Lynch also prosecuted the Abner Louima case, involving a Hatian immigrant who was beaten and sodomized with a broom handle by New York City police in 1997. The case was one of the few political crises in Mayor Rudy Giuliani’s administration.

An open Democrat, Lynch has certainly created trouble for Republicans. Yet her career shows close familiarity with the nuts and bolts of justice, from terror prosecutions to corporate law and even white-collar defense. Indeed, it is worth asking why Holder, with his highly dubious history during the Clinton administration (see, for example, the Marc Rich and Puerto Rican terrorists’ cases), was nominated ahead of someone like Lynch.

The answer, of course, is politics–and politics is again playing a role, as Lynch was certainly chosen not just for her qualifications but also to insulate the Obama administration from a tough confirmation hearing. 

Sens. Mike Lee (R-UT) and Ted Cruz (R-TX) have already insisted that Lynch must make clear her views on Obama’s proposed “executive amnesty,” his effort to circumvent Congress and change immigration laws by executive fiat.

Yet there is so much more that Republicans might hope to ask Holder’s successor about–Operation Fast and Furious, for example, and the non-compliance of the Attorney General with Congress; the role of the Justice Department in inflaming racial tensions in the Trayvon Martin and Ferguson cases; the dropped prosecution of the New Black Panther Party for voter intimidation in 2008; the lingering IRS scandal; and so much more.

Obama’s gamble seems to be that Republicans will be more reluctant to grill a black, female nominee. If that seems far-fetched, consider that after the 2012 election Democrats applied the same logic to Susan Rice’s anticipated nomination as Secretary of State, calling criticism of her role in the Benghazi cover-up racist and sexist, as President Obama dared Republican critics not to pick on her but to criticize him instead. (They did).

Steven Dennis of Roll Call observes that “the [Republican] party would be blocking the first African American woman attorney general over immigration when party leaders have professed a desire to do more to appeal to African Americans, women and Hispanics.” 

So despite Lynch’s qualifications, she has been thrust into a cynical game involving race, gender and identity. It’s hardly a fresh start for the Obama administration.

Yes, there is a reason for Republicans to be leery about Ms. Lynch.

Punditpress.com reports that

In a speech given at Long Beach earlier this year, President Obama’s new nominee for Attorney General, Loretta Lynch, specifically called out voter ID laws as racist and schools as disproportionately using zero tolerance policies against minorities. The video was uncovered by Pundit Press.

The remarks came at the end of a long speech, explaining the examples that Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and Nelson Mandela set for people.

Ms. Lynch then began talking about the inequities that she sees in the United States.

“There’s still more work to do,” Ms. Lynch explained. “People tell us the Dream is not realized because dreams never are. Mandela and King knew we had to continue working, and I’d be remiss if I didn’t tell you, that under this President and under this Attorney General, that the Department of Justice is committed to following through with those dreams.”

She continued, “50 years after the march on Washington, 50 years after the civil rights movement, we stand in this country at a time when we see people trying to take back so much of what Dr. King fought for. We stand in this country. People try and take over the State House and reverse the goals that have been made in voting in this country. 

“But I’m proud to tell you that the Department of Justice has looked at these laws and looked at what’s happening in the Deep South, and in my home state of North Carolina has brought lawsuits against those voting rights changes that seek to limit out ability to stand up and exercise our rights as citizens. And those lawsuits will continue.”

Ms. Lynch was no doubt talking about the Justice Department’s lawsuit against North Carolina to stop their voter ID laws. Eric Holder even used the same kind of language as Lynch: “Allowing limits on voting rights that disproportionately exclude minority voters would be inconsistent with our ideals as a nation,” he explained.

It is plain to see that Ms. Lynch is arguing that people in the “Deep South” have passed these laws so that minority voters would be disenfranchised.

“Disenfranchised”? How in the name of Dow Jones and all his little averages is having to prove that you’re not a dead guy at the Voting Booth, by presenting the same ID that you have to show in order to purchase a pack of cigarettes, being “disenfranchised”?

Gimme a break.

When Obama was being slobbered over by the Main Stream Media and the rest of his Democratic Sycophants as the Democrat Nominee for President, he was lauded as “The First Post-Racial President”, meaning, as a Black American (I almost said “African”), he would be able to unite the races.

And, then, Obama started to campaign. And, as he begin to talk about “radically changing” our country…a red warning light started flashing in the minds of Americans out here in the Heartland.

)So, Americans interested in the background of this “clean and articulate” (as his VP, Joe Biden, called him) Black Presidential Candidate started doing the research that the Main Stream Media refused to do.

And, we found out that the first “job” that Obama ever had was a political one.

From 1985 – 1988, Obama was a Community Organizer in Chicago.  What does a Community Organizer do?  I’m glad you asked.

Per Byron York in an article found at nationalreview.com:

Community organizing is most identified with the left-wing Chicago activist Saul Alinsky (1909-72), who pretty much defined the profession. In his classic book, Rules for Radicals, Alinsky wrote that a successful organizer should be “an abrasive agent to rub raw the resentments of the people of the community; to fan latent hostilities of many of the people to the point of overt expressions.” Once such hostilities were “whipped up to a fighting pitch,” Alinsky continued, the organizer steered his group toward confrontation, in the form of picketing, demonstrating, and general hell-raising.

Obama was hired by Jerry Kellman, a New Yorker who had gotten into organizing in the 1960s.  Kellman was trying to help laid-off factory workers on the far South Side of Chicago, in a nearly 100% black community.   He led a group, the Calumet Community Religious Conference, that had been created by several local Catholic churches in the industrial community.   Kellman was advised to hire a black organizer for a new spinoff from CCRC.  They called it the Developing Communities Project, designed to focus solely on the Chicago part of the area.

One of Obama’s projects while he was there, was to try to build an alliance of white and black churches and enlist them in the cause of social justice.  Obama had a problem, though.   He didn’t go to church himself.   And that, brothers and sisters, is how Obama, drawn to the preaching of Rev. Jeremiah Wright (and a political opportunity), joined Trinity United Church of Christ on 95th Street.

If you ask Obama’s fellow Community Organizers what his most significant accomplishments were, they’ll say two things: the expansion of a city summer-job program for South Side teenagers and the removal of asbestos from one of the area’s oldest housing projects.   Those  were his biggest victories.

As I have written before, Obama ascended to the throne of the Regime during a period when our nation was experiencing a period of economic recession, by appealing to the masses by promising that if he was elected, the oceans would rise and fall, the sun would come out tomorrow (Hey, that sounds like a song. Oh…never mind.) and everybody would receive a unicorn in their backyard. (Okay. He didn’t really promise that. But, heck, he promised everything else.)

Obama’s “speechifying” sounded great to the 47%, who have relied on Uncle Sugar’s largesse for generations.

Obama has always aimed his “soaring rhetoric” toward that audience, preaching not only economic class division, but racial division, as well.

The attention which he has paid to isolated racial incidents, like the shooting of Michael Brown, blown up to national attention by the Democrat Party and their professional race-baiters, including Obama himself, diminishes the presidency.

And now, he is about to nominate for the important job of Attorney General, another “community-organizing race baiter”, seemingly fixated upon the color of one’s skin, instead of the letter of the law.

And, the Democrats still can’t figure out why they were voted out of office last Tuesday.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Christian Americans, Homosexuality, and the Bible (A KJ Sunday Morning Op Ed)

November 8, 2014

PhilRobertsonCartoon9 Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men 10 nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. – 1 Coringthians 6:9-10 (NIV)

While sitting in my car, in the parking lot of a Walmart last night, waiting for my wife to come back from grocery shopping, I started thinking about America and God’s Providence.

Is the decayed position our society finds itself in the result of God’s taking his hand of protection off of the nation he built?

I don’t think so. As the popular movie, “God’s Not Dead”, pointed out so well, God is still moving in America.

And, Americans still know, in their hearts, the difference between right and wrong. Please refer to Tuesday’s Midterm Elections, for an example.

Earler this week, a Cincinnati Appeals Court upheld the ban on Gay Marriage, which had been overwhelmingly voted for by Americans in four states.

As I have written time and again, American is still an overwhelmingly Christian-Majority Natiion, as 76% of our countrymen and women, proclaim Jesus Christ as their personal Savior, per Gallup.

That being said, is homosexual marriage a “Civil Right, or the use of a word, defined as the union of one man and one woman to glorify and normalize a sexual sin?

Shane Idelman, the founder and lead pastor of Westside Christian Fellowship in Lancaster, California, just North of Los Angeles, just released his 7th book, “Desperate for More of God”. Shane’s sermons, articles, books, and radio program can all be found at http://www.wcfav.org. He recently wrote the following thought-provoking opinion piece, “Gay Marriage: What Does the Bible Really Say?” for The Christian Post.

I have nothing but compassion for those trapped in sexual sin. My hope is that readers will read the entire article before drawing conclusions. Those who strongly believe in the Bible and God’s will regarding sexual behavior also strongly believe in unconditional love and forgiveness. To say that authentic Christians hate or fear those trapped in the homosexual lifestyle demonstrates a gross misunderstanding of the Christian faith.

To “confront in love” simply comes from a desire to honor God and to truly love and care for others. The ability to relate to people on their level, show genuine concern, and love them regardless of their lifestyle is the mark of true Christianity.

In case you don’t continue reading, let me offer some encouragement: If you’re hopeless, depressed, and confused, look to the One who created you. He has the answers. No matter what you have done, you have the ability to turn to Christ and start anew. “If you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved” (Romans 10:9). “If anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation. The old has passed away; behold, the new has come” (2 Corinthians 5:17).

It’s no surprise that the Church, and our nation, desperately need to hear “the voice of one crying in the wilderness” to awaken, convict, and restore. It was not so long ago that we were concerned about “the fall of America.” America cannot fall because she has already fallen. We are now picking up the pieces of a broken nation reflected in our laws, lives, families, and children. America’s moral heartbeat has ceased because we cut off the source of life. We need resuscitation, renewal, and revival of the truth.

Unfortunately, those who are sounding the alarm are often categorized as irrational, judgmental, bigoted, and intolerant. But how can we warn if we won’t confront, correct if we won’t challenge, and contend if we won’t question? We must speak the truth in love…the Bible is crystal clear on sexual sin, including homosexuality.

Why is there a lack of conviction today? The reason may not be only in the pew, but in the pulpit as well. Pastors focused only on feel-good messages, pleasing the masses, and not being controversial, are in a dangerous spot. God’s Word does not call us to make the truth popular, but to make the truth clear.

The majority of the churches in America are seeking to please the masses rather than convict. Judgment is never mentioned, repentance is rarely sought, and sin is often excused. We want to build a church rather than break a heart; be politically correct rather than biblically correct; coddle and comfort rather than stir and convict. This leaves people confused and deceived because we teach and live a form of Christianity void of repentance…void of truth.

Many reject the Bible as absolute truth because absolute truth, by definition, is exclusive. But they fail to realize that relativism is also exclusive—it excludes those who hold to absolutes. People will accept numerical truth such as 2 + 2 = 4, but they don’t like “moral” truth.

They want the freedom to do what they want, when they want, how they want, to whom they want, which, according to Scripture, leads to their our own destruction. God’s Word says to confront, confess, and turn from our sins, whereas relativism encourages us to ignore, overlook, and continue in them. Relativism says, “If it ‘feels’ good, do it.” If you doubt this, simply read all the negative comments that will occur after this article is posted. When darkness is exposed, it lashes out (cf. Romans 1).

Consider the following in light of God’s truth:

1. The “moral” laws in the Old Testament such as killing, stealing, lying, adultery, sexual immorality, and so on are all valid today. Jesus referred often to the Old Testament, and said that He didn’t come to abolish it, but to fulfill it. Although many of the ceremonial and dietary laws of the Old Testament do not apply today, the moral laws do. They are as significant today as they have been throughout history. For example, Leviticus 20:13 states, “If a man lies with a male as he lies with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination….” To suggest that this verse is invalid today is to advocate the dangerous practice of redefining or deleting what God has said. Jesus referred to the Old Testament often in regard to moral behavior.

The consequences of wrong actions may have changed, but the moral implications remain the same. For instance, even though we no longer stone to death those who commit adultery, this does not mean that adultery is acceptable or any less dangerous. Adultery is wrong even though there aren’t legal consequences.

2. Jesus condemned “all” sexual activity outside of marriage between a man and woman when He said, “Out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications…these defile a man” (Matthew 15:19). Jesus was implying that all sexual activity outside of marriage between a man and a woman is harmful and immoral. The word “fornication” in the Greek is porneia; where the word “pornography” comes from. We cannot say, “But I was born this way,” because we were all born to lie, cheat, lust, and deceive, but this doesn’t make it right…it makes us sinful and in need of a Savior.

3. An argument cannot be based solely on silence. To suggest that Jesus approved of homosexuality simply because He did not use the term “homosexual,” is to imply that He approved of necrophilia, pedophilia, incest, and bestiality. But, of course, we know better.

4. Other passage in the New Testament are clear on this issue as well. Romans 1:18-32 and 1 Corinthians 6:1-20 are good places to start. In short, mankind did not see fit to acknowledge God and they suppressed the truth; therefore, God gave them over to a depraved mind-to do those things which are not proper. Homosexual behavior, and sexual sin in general, is comparable with dishonoring the body and turning from God. “The sexual disordering of the human race is a judgment of God for exchanging Him for the creature, said theologian John Piper.

5. Jesus said that since the beginning of creation, God created them male and female in order that they would be joined together and become one flesh. He adds, “Therefore what God has joined together, let not man separate” (Mark 10:9). Marriage between a man and a woman is God’s plan since creation. No matter how many laws are passed in favor of gay-marriage, it will not change God’s mind. Man often rebels against God; this is nothing new.

In closing, Jesus would often speak out against sin, but His love and mercy also reached out to those who regretted and hated their condition. Forgiveness is a mark of genuine faith. We should have compassion for those who struggle with same-sex attraction because we all struggle with sin, but at the same time, we should not condone or excuse this type of sin any more than we condone or excuse any other sin.

I believe the position that America finds itself in, is a result of a lack of moral guidance from generations before. The Bible tells us to lead children in the ways in which they should go. As humans, we are fallen creatures, who often do not do the right thing. Being good parents is one of those things which God requires of us.

Now, I’m not saying that homosexuality is the result of failed parenting. As most of you are aware, homosexuality can have several causes. In college, when I took the class, “The Sociology of Deviant Behavior”, back around the late seventies, the professors at that time theorized that homosexuality was caused by any number of social and psychological causes. Whether it be a dominant mother, an effeminate father, or some sort of deep shock to the system when the individual is young, they theorized that homosexuality could come from a myriad of experiences in each individual’s life.

The only thing that I can say for certain is that it is not a biological predisposition.

Why do I say that?

The reason for my comment, is the fact that scientists have tried to identify a gene or some genetic marker that causes homosexuality. And, as of today , in 2014, they have been stymied in their attempts to find a biological cause for homosexuality.

In recent years. Liberals have pushed homosexuality as normal sexual behavior. They have featured it on television shows, in movies, books, and encouraged mass demonstrations of it, in public, if you will, as Professional wrestler Dusty Rhodes used to say.

However, try as they may, a majority of Americans still view it as abnormal behavior. And, as demonstrated in the last few years by popular vote, the majority of Americans remain against Gay Marriage.

In confrontations with homosexuals,, concerning their behavior, our opposition to their sexual lifestyle, as Christians, is based on Christian concern and compassion for their very souls.

However, what gets in the way of Christians’ efforts to reach out to homosexuals, is the fact that God gave us all free will.

And yes, if you are homosexual and reading this, it is your right as an American and as a human being to exercise the free will which the Lord gave you, when he made you. However, do not expect him to approve of your sin, or expect me as a Christian American, to give you free license to engage in your sexual sin.

Because, you see, God gave me free will as well, and being American born, I have the Constitutional Right to speak my mind…in the street, behind a pulpit, or in the voting booth.

I don’t hate you. As an acquaintance or if  you are  with a family member, I love you. I will pray for you. I will work with you. I will invite you inside my home. I will be your friend.

However, I will, out of Christian love, tell you straight to your face that what you are engaging in is wrong.

As the author says in the article, confronting the sinner is not an act of hatred, it’s an act of Christian Concern.

If you are an American Liberal, one of the 23 percent of our population who believe that political ideology, do not attempt to tell me that my ideas about traditional marriage and about what is acceptable and unacceptable behavior, are wrong.

Someone possessing a higher pay grade than you, is Whom I listen to.

And, He left me a guide to make sure that I get it right.

Until He Comes,

KJ


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,615 other followers