Posts Tagged ‘Barack Hussein Obama’

Obama Goes to Paris Climate Change Summit To Pledge OUR Money. Congress to Fight.

November 29, 2015

untitled (12)

The President of the United States of America, Barack Hussein Obama, is about to spend a boatload of American Taxpayers’ money on a psuedo-science that the majority of Americans do not believe is an important issue at all.

The New York Times reports the following

WASHINGTON — At a joint news conference here Tuesday with President François Hollande of France, President Obama veered from his focus on the terrorist attacks in Paris to bring up the huge international gathering beginning in the French capital on Monday to hammer out a global response to climate change.

“What a powerful rebuke to the terrorists it will be when the world stands as one and shows that we will not be deterred from building a better future for our children,” Mr. Obama said of the climate conference.

The segue brought mockery, even castigation, from the political right, but it was a reminder of the importance Mr. Obama places on climate change in shaping his legacy. During his 2012 re-election campaign, he barely mentioned global warming, but the issue has become a hallmark of his second term.

And on Sunday night he arrives in Paris, hoping to make climate policy the signature environmental achievement of his, and perhaps any, presidency.

“He comes to Paris with a moral authority that no other president has had on the issue of climate change,” said Douglas Brinkley, a presidential historian at Rice University who noted that Mr. Obama’s domestic climate efforts already stand alone in American history. “No other president has had a climate change policy. It makes him unique.”

In Paris, Mr. Obama will join more than 120 world leaders to kick off two weeks of negotiations aimed at forging a new climate change accord that would, for the first time, commit almost every country on Earth to lowering its greenhouse gas pollution. All year, Mr. Obama’s negotiators have worked behind the scenes to fashion a Paris deal.

Crucial to Mr. Obama’s leverage has been the release of his domestic climate change regulations, which he then pushed other countries to emulate. So far, at least 170 countries have put forth emission reduction plans.

But even as Mr. Obama presses for a deal in Paris, it faces steep obstacles, not least the legal and legislative assault on his own regulations at home. During the course of the Paris talks, Republicans in Congress are planning a series of votes to fight Mr. Obama’s climate agenda. More than half the states are suing the administration on the legality of his climate plan. And all the Republican presidential candidates have said that they would undo the regulations if elected.

On Nov. 19, Senator James M. Inhofe, Republican of Oklahoma, chairman of the environment committee and the Senate’s most vocal skeptic on climate change science, and Senator John Barrasso of Wyoming sent a letter to Mr. Obama, signed by 35 other senators, promising to block the funding for any climate deal unless the Paris pact is sent to Congress for ratification. A vote on the deal would fail in the Republican-controlled Congress.

“Our constituents are worried that the pledges you are committing the United States to will strengthen foreign economies at the expense of American workers,” the senators wrote. “They are also skeptical about sending billions of their hard-earned dollars to government officials from developing nations.”

Nonetheless, Mr. Obama is pushing forward. He unveiled the rules on curbing heat-trapping greenhouse gas emissions with a tight timeline, ensuring that they would be finalized before he leaves office. He has raised the issue of climate change in dozens of speeches and with every recent visiting foreign leader. In Washington, a team of environmental lawyers is preparing to defend the rules in court, while at the State Department, climate envoys are in constant contact with their counterparts around the world

If his domestic regulations and a Paris accord withstand efforts to gut them, “climate change will become the heart and soul of his presidency,” Mr. Brinkley said.

When you attempt to discuss the Global Warming/Climate Change/Whatever-They-Decided-To-Call-It-Today Hoax with one of the members of the Cult, they will tell you that 97% of the World’s Scientists are believers.

Have you ever wondered where they get that outlandish figure from?

Back on May 26, 2014, Joseph Bast, of the Heartland Institute, and Dr. Roy Spencer, Founder of The Weather Channel, wrote the following article for The Wall Street Journal

Last week Secretary of State John Kerry warned graduating students at Boston College of the “crippling consequences” of climate change. “Ninety-seven percent of the world’s scientists,” he added, “tell us this is urgent.”

Where did Mr. Kerry get the 97% figure? Perhaps from his boss, President Obama, who tweeted on May 16 that “Ninety-seven percent of scientists agree: #climate change is real, man-made and dangerous.” Or maybe from NASA, which posted (in more measured language) on its website, “Ninety-seven percent of climate scientists agree that climate-warming trends over the past century are very likely due to human activities.”

Yet the assertion that 97% of scientists believe that climate change is a man-made, urgent problem is a fiction. The so-called consensus comes from a handful of surveys and abstract-counting exercises that have been contradicted by more reliable research.

One frequently cited source for the consensus is a 2004 opinion essay published in Science magazine by Naomi Oreskes, a science historian now at Harvard. She claimed to have examined abstracts of 928 articles published in scientific journals between 1993 and 2003, and found that 75% supported the view that human activities are responsible for most of the observed warming over the previous 50 years while none directly dissented.

Ms. Oreskes’s definition of consensus covered “man-made” but left out “dangerous”—and scores of articles by prominent scientists such as Richard Lindzen, John Christy, Sherwood Idso and Patrick Michaels, who question the consensus, were excluded. The methodology is also flawed. A study published earlier this year in Nature noted that abstracts of academic papers often contain claims that aren’t substantiated in the papers.

Another widely cited source for the consensus view is a 2009 article in “Eos, Transactions American Geophysical Union” by Maggie Kendall Zimmerman, a student at the University of Illinois, and her master’s thesis adviser Peter Doran. It reported the results of a two-question online survey of selected scientists. Mr. Doran and Ms. Zimmerman claimed “97 percent of climate scientists agree” that global temperatures have risen and that humans are a significant contributing factor.

The survey’s questions don’t reveal much of interest. Most scientists who are skeptical of catastrophic global warming nevertheless would answer “yes” to both questions. The survey was silent on whether the human impact is large enough to constitute a problem. Nor did it include solar scientists, space scientists, cosmologists, physicists, meteorologists or astronomers, who are the scientists most likely to be aware of natural causes of climate change.

The “97 percent” figure in the Zimmerman/Doran survey represents the views of only 79 respondents who listed climate science as an area of expertise and said they published more than half of their recent peer-reviewed papers on climate change. Seventy-nine scientists—of the 3,146 who responded to the survey—does not a consensus make.

In 2010, William R. Love Anderegg, then a student at Stanford University, used Google Scholar to identify the views of the most prolific writers on climate change. His findings were published in Proceedings of the National Academies of Sciences. Mr. Love Anderegg found that 97% to 98% of the 200 most prolific writers on climate change believe “anthropogenic greenhouse gases have been responsible for ‘most’ of the ‘unequivocal’ warming.” There was no mention of how dangerous this climate change might be; and, of course, 200 researchers out of the thousands who have contributed to the climate science debate is not evidence of consensus.

In 2013, John Cook, an Australia-based blogger, and some of his friends reviewed abstracts of peer-reviewed papers published from 1991 to 2011. Mr. Cook reported that 97% of those who stated a position explicitly or implicitly suggest that human activity is responsible for some warming. His findings were published in Environmental Research Letters.

Mr. Cook’s work was quickly debunked. In Science and Education in August 2013, for example, David R. Legates (a professor of geography at the University of Delaware and former director of its Center for Climatic Research) and three coauthors reviewed the same papers as did Mr. Cook and found “only 41 papers—0.3 percent of all 11,944 abstracts or 1.0 percent of the 4,014 expressing an opinion, and not 97.1 percent—had been found to endorse” the claim that human activity is causing most of the current warming. Elsewhere, climate scientists including Craig Idso, Nicola Scafetta, Nir J. Shaviv and Nils- Axel Morner, whose research questions the alleged consensus, protested that Mr. Cook ignored or misrepresented their work.

Rigorous international surveys conducted by German scientists Dennis Bray and Hans von Storch—most recently published in Environmental Science & Policy in 2010—have found that most climate scientists disagree with the consensus on key issues such as the reliability of climate data and computer models. They do not believe that climate processes such as cloud formation and precipitation are sufficiently understood to predict future climate change.

Surveys of meteorologists repeatedly find a majority oppose the alleged consensus. Only 39.5% of 1,854 American Meteorological Society members who responded to a survey in 2012 said man-made global warming is dangerous.

Finally, the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change—which claims to speak for more than 2,500 scientists—is probably the most frequently cited source for the consensus. Its latest report claims that “human interference with the climate system is occurring, and climate change poses risks for human and natural systems.” Yet relatively few have either written on or reviewed research having to do with the key question: How much of the temperature increase and other climate changes observed in the 20th century was caused by man-made greenhouse-gas emissions? The IPCC lists only 41 authors and editors of the relevant chapter of the Fifth Assessment Report addressing “anthropogenic and natural radiative forcing.”

Of the various petitions on global warming circulated for signatures by scientists, the one by the Petition Project, a group of physicists and physical chemists based in La Jolla, Calif., has by far the most signatures—more than 31,000 (more than 9,000 with a Ph.D.). It was most recently published in 2009, and most signers were added or reaffirmed since 2007. The petition states that “there is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of . . . carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gases is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth’s atmosphere and disruption of the Earth’s climate.”

We could go on, but the larger point is plain. There is no basis for the claim that 97% of scientists believe that man-made climate change is a dangerous problem.

So, why is Obama on this Quixotic Crusade to make a belief in a pseudo-science his legacy?

1.  Appeasing the Gullible -Hey “The Facts Are In.” The “science” is true. And, as P.T. Barnum said,

There is a sucker born every minute.

Remember…these “true believers of the Goreacle, also voted for Obama. They are easily fooled.

2. Money, Money, Money – Too much money invested by Democrat “Power Brokers” and to much of American Taxpayers money spent needlessly to back down now. Obama’s got political promises to keep.

3. Hey, look! Squirrel! – Obama needs to grasp for whatever national distraction he can come up with bringing in Syrian Refugees by the tens of thousand into our country, imbedded with possible Islamic Terrorists from ISIS, he desperately needs a distraction. The Planned Parenthood Attack in Colorado by a nut job, didn’t provide near enough cover.

4. Well, he sure can’t make his failed Foreign Policy his legacy.

5. Man is his own god – It is an unbelievable arrogance that allows those who believe in “Climate Change” to proclaim that man can lay claim to the Sovereignty of the God of Abraham, by controlling the very weather around us, by recycling plastic bottles, etc.

So, there you go. I wonder what argument Obama is going to present to these World Leaders that he is meeting with? 

Perhaps, he will present a showing of “The Day After Tomorrow”, the movie starring Dennis Quaid, which bombed spectacularly, in which the ice was chasing everybody.


Until He Comes,


Turkey Shoots Down Russian Jet. Kills Pilots in the Air. Obama to “Rebuke” ISIS By Attending Climate Change Summit. “Hello, McFly!!!”

November 25, 2015

The-Block-NRD-600-578x420And, you don’t believe we’re on the Eve of Destruction… – Barry McGuire (1965)

The Washington Post reports that

BEIRUT — NATO faced being thrust into a new Middle Eastern crisis on Tuesday after warplanes from member state Turkey shot down a Russian jet that Turkish officials said had violated their country’s airspace on the border with Syria.The incident marked a serious escalation that is likely to further strain relations between Russia and the NATO alliance.

Russian officials confirmed that a Russian Su-24 attack aircraft was shot down Tuesday morning but insisted it had not violated Turkey’s airspace.

Russia’s Defense Ministry said one of at least two pilots probably died during the incident, and a marine also was killed by apparent Syrian insurgent fire during a helicopter rescue operation to retrieve the downed airmen.

The downing brings renewed attention to a scenario feared for months by the Pentagon and its partners: a potential conflict arising from overlapping air missions over Syria — with Russia backing the government of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and a U.S.-led coalition conducting airstrikes against the Islamic State.

Turkish officials have accused Russia of repeated airspace violations since it launched airstrikes against Assad’s armed opposition in late September.

Russian President Vladimir Putin had strong words for Turkey, calling the incident a “stab in the back.”

In Washington, President Obama called for de-escalation but said Turkey had the right to defend its airspace.

Turkey’s military said the Russian jet was warned multiple times before it was targeted by two F-16 fighter jets in the border zone in western Syria in mountains not far from the Mediterranean coast.

Turkey called for an emergency NATO session to discuss the incident but has not invoked alliance provisions that would involve other members in its defense.

NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg said after the meeting that NATO allies with intelligence assets near where Turkey shot down the Russian warplane had confirmed Turkey’s version of events and rejected Russia’s claim that its aircraft was flying over Syria and had not crossed into Turkish airspace.

“The information we have from other allies is consistent with what we have got from Turkey,” Stoltenberg told reporters in Brussels.

“This is a serious situation” that calls for prudence and de-escalation, Stoltenberg said. “We have to avoid that situations, incidents, accidents spiral out of control.”

A U.S. military spokesman confirmed that Turkish pilots issued 10 notifications to their Russian counterparts warning that they were in Turkish airspace and that the Russians did not respond.

“On the radio . . . we were able to hear everything that was going on,” said Col. Steve Warren, spokesman at the Baghdad headquarters for U.S. forces operating in Iraq and Syria.

Last month, NATO decried a “troubling escalation” by Russian forces in Syria and raised concerns about attack missions within sight of the Western alliance’s borders.

Although Turkey and the United States oppose Assad, their warplanes have avoided the Syrian leader’s military and are instead bombarding the Islamic State militant group, which controls parts of Syria and Iraq. Russian aircraft have primarily hit non-Islamic State rebels, including some groups that are backed by the United States and Turkey.

The fallout could complicate a diplomatic push to bring greater international coordination to the fight against the Islamic State. The radical group has claimed responsibility for the Nov. 13 Paris attacks that killed at least 130, as well as the Oct. 31 downing of a Russian passenger plane over Egypt’s Sinai Peninsula that killed all 224 aboard.

French President François Hollande met with Obama in Washington on Tuesday to discuss strategies against the Islamic State and parallel efforts to seek a negotiated end to Syria’s nearly five-year civil war. Hollande is expected to meet later in the week with Putin and other world leaders.

In the Russian resort city of Sochi, Putin said the plane “did not threaten the territory of Turkey” and that it was “pursuing operations” against the Islamic State in mountainous areas north of the Syrian port of Latakia.

“Today’s tragic cases will have significant consequences for the relations between Russia and Turkey,” Putin told reporters after talks with Jordan’s King Abdullah II, whose nation is part of the U.S.-led coalition.

Some Russian lawmakers have called for retaliation against Turkey by evacuating Russian tourists from popular vacation destinations. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov canceled a scheduled trip to Turkey.

Video footage of the incident showed a warplane on fire before crashing on a hill and two crew members apparently parachuting down. But a video purportedly posted by Syrian rebels appeared to show the body of a Russian pilot.

Sergei Rudskoi, an officer in the Russian army’s General Staff, said a rescue helicopter sent to retrieve the pilots came under heavy fire. “During the operation, one of the helicopters due to gunfire was damaged and forced to make an emergency landing on neutral territory,” Rudskoi said in a briefing with Russian journalists. “One marine was killed.”

Rebel forces released video footage showing an anti-government fighter using a surface-to-surface missile to destroy what appears to be a Russian helicopter. The authenticity of the video could not be confirmed.

Some rebels have been using U.S.-made BGM-71 TOW missiles as part of a covert program coordinated between the United States and its allies.

In early November, the United States deployed additional fighter aircraft to Turkey’s Incirlik air base to help the country protect its airspace.

Friction between Ankara and Moscow has also intensified over alleged Russian airstrikes on Syrian villages dominated by Turkmen, an ethnic minority with cultural ties to Turkey.

Last month, Turkey’s military downed an unmanned aerial vehicle near the border with Syria that military analysts said appeared to be Russian-made. Officials in Moscow denied connection to that downed aircraft and sent a delegation to Turkey to smooth over concerns.

Russia issued a formal apology to Turkey in early October when a jet violated Turkish airspace and Turkish F-16s were scrambled to intercept the plane. The Russians called the mistake “a navigational error.”

Russia has carried out more than 4,000 airstrikes since the beginning of its intervention in Syria, using a force of modern and modified Soviet-era aircraft. Russia has at least 32 fixed-wing aircraft and 16 helicopters at the Khmeimim air base near Latakia, an Assad stronghold on the Mediterranean Sea just 30 miles from the Turkish border.

The Godfather of Conservative Talk Radio, Rush Limbaugh, said the following about this ominous incident…

This is a mess.  This is a total mess.  And it’s not hard to pinpoint why.  But if I were to say it, I would be accused of the same thing I’m accusing all these Drive-Bys of, drawing this comparison.  Well, if Obama was providing standard, ordinary, expected American leadership in the last seven years, we wouldn’t even be here.  There wouldn’t even be an ISIS.  There wouldn’t be an Iran ascending to run the entire Middle East because they wouldn’t have been enabled to create a military weapons program.  None of this would have happened it’s safe to say if anybody else had been elected president. 

Now, if Hillary had won the Democrat nomination, I don’t know.  But we’re dealing with a dangerous set of circumstances.  On the one hand we’ve got leadership incompetence, or maybe leadership absence on the part of Obama.  It’s just not something he wants to do.  And, by the way, don’t get on me.  It was Obama who said it last week at that press conference he had in Turkey where he said he’s not into sloganeering and these concepts of American leadership and American victory, winning.  Those are things that make him uncomfortable.  It’s not what this is really all about. 

You can interpret that in any number of ways, but one thing, he doesn’t want to lead, he doesn’t want the US in a leadership or dominant position.  And the reasons for that are multi.  He doesn’t think that we deserve it.  We are not the world’s superpower.  We’re illegitimate.  You know the drill.  What my opinion of Obama’s opinion of the United States is.  So a lot of people are understandably worried about what comes next because this is Vladimir Putin who has been attacked, and Putin is interested in winning, and Putin is interested in Russian leadership, and Putin does want to be allied with whoever ends up running the Middle East.  Winning and victory and leadership are not concepts that Putin finds nervous or embarrassing.  He finds them challenging.  So this could go any number of places.  We just have to sit and watch, see how it plays out. 

In a memo e-mailed the week of March 25th, 2009, in the middle of the World Apology Tour, to Pentagon staff members, the Defense Department’s office of security review proclaimed that “this administration prefers to avoid using the term ‘Long War’ or ‘Global War on Terror’ [GWOT.] Please use ‘Overseas Contingency Operation.’ ”

And so it began.

On Thursday, June 4th, 2009 at the University of Cairo, Obama addressed the Muslim World.  Here is an excerpt from the 6:35 a.m. speech:

Islam has a proud tradition of tolerance. We see it in the history of Andalusia and Cordoba during the Inquisition. I saw it firsthand as a child in Indonesia, where devout Christians worshiped freely in an overwhelmingly Muslim country. That is the spirit we need today. People in every country should be free to choose and live their faith-based lives upon the persuasion of the mind, heart, and soul. This tolerance is essential for religion to thrive, but it is being challenged in many different ways.

Among some Muslims, there is a disturbing tendency to measure one’s own faith by the rejection of another’s. The richness of religious diversity must be upheld – whether it is for Maronites in Lebanon or the Copts in Egypt. And fault lines must be closed among Muslims as well, as the divisions between Sunni and Shia have led to tragic violence, particularly in Iraq. 

Freedom of religion is central to the ability of peoples to live together. We must always examine the ways in which we protect it. For instance, in the United States, rules on charitable giving have made it harder for Muslims to fulfill their religious obligation. That is why I am committed to working with American Muslims to ensure that they can fulfill zakat. 

Likewise, it is important for Western countries to avoid impeding Muslim citizens from practicing religion as they see fit – for instance, by dictating what clothes a Muslim woman should wear. We cannot disguise hostility towards any religion behind the pretence of liberalism.

Scooter believed that by reaching out to the Muslim world through changing and softening our terminology as it pertained to the Jihad declared against the United States by Muslim Extremists, his administration would make huge inroads in America’s relationship with the Islamic World.  This action did nothing but encourage our enemies.

As I have written before, Obama’s insistence that Radical Islam does not exist, even now, in the face of the possible beginning of a global Conflict, is either naiveté, stemming from a livelong dhimmitude, or being an intellectual lightweight.

A recent Fox News Poll reveal that the overwhelming majority of Americans view Muslim Terrorist as the number one thing that they are concerned with. Obama’s obsession, Climate Change was down toward the bottom of the list.

And yet, the President of the United States of America, yesterday said that he was going to “strongly rebuke” ISIS by attending the Climate Change summit.

Obama must still be hanging with the Choom Gang, partaking of “herb”, as he did in high school.

God protect us.

Until He Comes,



Obama’s “JV Team” Causes Worldwide Travel Alert. How Did We Get Here?

November 23, 2015

Spring-Forward-600-LIThis business will get out of control. It will get out of control and we’ll be lucky to live through it. – Admiral Josh Painter (Fred Thompson), “The Hunt For Red October”

WPIX Channel 11 reports that

WASHINGTON — The State Department issued a rare worldwide travel alert Monday evening for U.S. citizens amid several terror threats overseas.

” Current information suggests that ISIL (aka Da’esh), al-Qa’ida, Boko Haram, and other terrorist groups continue to plan terrorist attacks in multiple regions,” a statement from the department read. “These attacks may employ a wide variety of tactics, using conventional and non-conventional weapons and targeting both official and private interests.”

“Authorities believe the likelihood of terror attacks will continue as members of ISIL/Da’esh return from Syria and Iraq.  Additionally, there is a continuing threat from unaffiliated persons planning attacks inspired by major terrorist organizations but conducted on an individual basis.  Extremists have targeted large sporting events, theatres, open markets, and aviation services.  In the past year, there have been multiple attacks in France, Nigeria, Denmark, Turkey, and Mali.  ISIL/Da’esh has claimed responsibility for the bombing of a Russian airliner in Egypt.”

The department says all U.S. citizens should remain vigilant when in public places or using transportation.

Last week, ISIS released a video making threats against New York City. The video showed Times Square, Herald Square and images of terrorists wearing suicide belts.

“We understand it is the goal of terrorists to intimidate and disrupt our democratic society,” Mayor Bill de Blasio said. “We will not submit. It’s crucial that people go about their normal business recognizing the NYPD is providing extraordinary protection for the people of this city.”

To stay informed, people should watch local media and other information sources when making travel plans. Anyone with concerns about their safety should call local police.

People are urged to have a heightened awareness while traveling for the holidays.

The alert expires on February 24, 2016.

So, how did we get here?

The United States of America and our allies being threatened worldwide by the Radical Islamic Barbarians of ISIS?

#1 – Underestimation…and Obfuscation

The President of these United States, Barack Hussein Obama, said the following about the Radical Islamic Terrorist Organization, ISIS, in a interview with The New Yorker Magazine, published on January 27th, 2014:

The analogy we use around here sometimes, and I think is accurate, is if a JV team puts on Lakers uniforms that doesn’t make them Kobe Bryant. I think there is a distinction between the capacity and reach of a bin Laden and a network that is actively planning major terrorist plots against the homeland versus jihadists who are engaged in various local power struggles and disputes, often sectarian.

Catherine Herridge reports for that

Analysts at U.S. Central Command were pressured to ease off negative assessments about the Islamic State threat and were even told in an email to “cut it out,” Fox News has learned – as an investigation expands into whether intelligence reports were altered to present a more positive picture.  

Fox News is told by a source close to the CENTCOM analysts that the pressure on them included at least two emails saying they needed to “cut it out” and “toe the line.”

Separately, a former Pentagon official told Fox News there apparently was an attempt to destroy the communications. The Pentagon official said the email warnings were “not well received” by the analysts.

Those emails, among others, are now in the possession of the Pentagon inspector general. The IG’s probe is expanding into whether intelligence assessments were changed to give a more positive picture of the anti-ISIS campaign.

The former Pentagon official said there were “multiple assessments” from military intelligence and the CIA regarding the “rapid rise” of ISIS in Iraq and North Africa in the year leading up to the group’s territory grab in 2014.

Similar intelligence was included in the President’s Daily Brief, or PDB – the intelligence community’s most authoritative product — during the same time period. Yet the official, who was part of the White House discussions, said the administration kept “kicking the can down the road.” The official said there was no discussion of the military involvement needed to make a difference.

The IG probe started earlier this year amid complaints that information was changed to make ISIS look more degraded than it really was.

Among the complaints is that after the U.S. air campaign started in August 2014, the metrics to measure progress changed. They were modified to use measures such as the number of sorties and body counts — a metric not used since the Vietnam War — to paint a more positive picture.

Critics say this “activity-based approach” to tracking the effectiveness of strikes does not paint a comprehensive picture of whether ISIS is being degraded and contained.

The New York Times first reported on Sunday that the IG investigation was expanding and adding more investigators, and that the office had taken possession of a trove of documents and emails as part of that probe.

Asked about the report, House intelligence committee Chairman Devin Nunes, R-Calif., said Sunday that his committee and others are involved in the investigation.

“We heard from a lot of whistle-blowers and other informants who have given us information. And not just … related strictly to the latest allegations,” Nunes said on CNN’s “State of the Union.”

Citing the renewed focus on ISIS after the Paris terror attacks, he added: “So the president, to have a successful strategy, is going to admit that they’ve got it wrong and they need to relook at a larger strategy that deals with north Africa, the Middle East, all the way over to Afghanistan, Pakistan, and then work closely with our NATO allies with what appears to be a command and control structure that ISIS has created successfully in Europe.”

President Obama, speaking at a press conference in Malaysia over the weekend, said he expects to “get to the bottom” of whether ISIS intelligence reports were altered – and has told his top military officials as much.

“One of the things I insisted on the day I walked into the Oval Office was that I don’t want intelligence shaded by politics. I don’t want it shaded by the desire to tell a feel-good story,” Obama said Sunday. “I believe that the Department of Defense and all those who head up our intelligence agencies understand that, and that I have made it repeatedly clear to all my top national security advisers that I never want them to hold back, even if the intelligence or their opinions about the intelligence, their analysis or interpretations of the data contradict current policy.”

At the same time, he said, “As a consumer of this intelligence, it’s not as if I’ve been receiving wonderfully rosy, glowing portraits of what’s been happening in Iraq and Syria over the last year and a half. … [I]t feels to me like, at my level at least, we’ve had a pretty clear-eyed, sober assessment.”

The president’s call for a thorough investigation was greeted with cynicism by those involved in the 2014 intelligence assessments, since the administration did not act on the earlier raw intelligence that painted a dire picture of developments, especially in Iraq.

#2- “Smart Power!”…alienating our friends and empowering our enemies…

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.

Back on July 7, 2013, I wrote

“Now, I’m just spitballin’ here…but, shouldn’t the President of the United States of America be standing for Freedom, not for Oppression?

Is this never-ending Arab Spring in the Middle East a direct result of his June 4, 2009 suck-up to the Muslim World?

Is Meghan McCain useless?

If you will remember, gentle reader, at the same time Obama was kissing the posteriors of the Muslim World, his State Department Spokespeople were telling us that the “War on Terror” was over with, and there were no such thing as Islamic Terrorist Attacks any more, just “Man-Caused Disasters”.

The kissing up to the Muslim World continues in Obama’s Second Term as, just in the past several months, Obama has hosted representatives off the MB, the ISNA, and Radical Islamic Cleric, Sheik Abdullah bin Bayyahm, who had actually been barred from entering our country!

Shouldn’t Obama be protecting us from our sworn enemies, not inviting them to OUR White House and hugging their necks?

While Obama’s DOJ and IRS have been harassing Christian and Conservative Groups alike, Obama has been welcoming those who wish to behead us Infidels, with open arms.

Think about something, did the gigantic bonfire, known as Arab Spring, happen under President Ronald Reagan? Did it happen under President George W. Bush? NO.

The responsibility for what is going on in the Middle East and its potential threat to our allies in Israel and to this sacred land, as well, lies on the narrow shoulders of President Barack Hussein Obama (mm mmm mmmm).”

Lord, I hate it when I’m right.

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?).

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 arrive at our own shores, with Korans and prayer rugs being found at our open Southern Border, honor killings and attacks by Radical Muslims, labeled as “work place violence” by the Obama Administration. and now, thousands of  Syrian “Refugees”, with members of ISIS probably embedded among them, being transported to our cities by President Barack Hussein Obama, himself.

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.

…While we still have a country.

Until He Comes,


From Hollywood to Washington, Christian Americans are Fighting Back.

November 22, 2015

th1DXO5NI3When you come to see a picture of mine, I want you to know that I’m not going to do anything that will make you uncomfortable. I want you to know that you won’t be disappointed in me. – John Wayne reports that

Arrogant, big-mouthed, divisive Hollywood blowhards took a massive hit at the American box office this weekend. The highly-anticipated fourth and final chapter of “The Hunger Games” should have been bullet-proof. But after star Jennifer Lawrence used the film’s publicity tour to trash Christians and Republican frontrunner Donald Trump, “Mockingjay – Part 2″ is under-performing in a way no box office analyst had predicted.

“The Night Before,” an R-rated comedy starring Seth Rogen, the same big-mouthed bigot who lashed out with a “F*ck you!” to Republican Ben Carson last month, is looking like an outright disaster, as is “Secret In Their Eyes,” which was supposed to be a comeback (and Oscar) vehicle for Republican-basher Julia Roberts.

Although it was released into nearly 3000 theatres and received a ton of publicity, Rogen crashed and burned with just a $10.7 million opening. To put this in the proper perspective, just last year and in nearly the same amount of theatres, “Neighbors” opened to $49 million and “This Is the End” opened to $21 million.

Julia Roberts just sucks, and has for more than a decade. And it is beyond comprehension why anyone thought that it was a good idea to team Roberts up with box office poison Nicole Kidman. In nearly 2400 theatres, “Secret In Their Eyes” was predicted to bomb with $7.5 million and did exactly that.

Let’s move on to the weekend’s real shocker.

A mere two days ago Box Office Mojo predicted the opening weekend for “Mockingjay – Part 2″ would score $127.3 million. They were not alone. However, according to Deadline, the fourquel is not only way underperforming at $104 million but this is by far the worst opening of the franchise. The previous low was “Mockingjay – Part 1,” which hauled in a much healthier $122 million.

Granted, $104 million is not peanuts, but a final chapter of an iconic franchise should in no way be underperforming like this. As an example, the final Harry Potter film blew the doors off the opening weekend records held by the seven previous chapters. The fourth and final “Twilight” film was right up there.

So what happened?

If past is prologue, the entertainment media won’t say so out loud, but could it be that star Jennifer Lawrence using the “Hunger Games” publicity tour to reveal herself as a spoiled, nasty, bigoted whiner damaged her image — and by extension the film? Overnight, Lawrence seemed to go from a young, beautiful, approachable star to just another Hollywood A-list jerk.

In short, Jennifer Lawrence spent the better part of the summer making an ass of herself. During the eighth year of a brutally slow economic “recovery” that has only benefited the top one-percent (like Lawrence), the once universally-beloved superstar first ran to rape-hoaxer Lena Dunham to crybaby about sexism, while using eight-figure paychecks to wipe away the tears.

That was just the beginning of her bubble-diva implosion. At the worst possible moment, during the run up to Friday’s release of the franchise that made her a star, Lawrence arrogantly trashed Republican frontrunner Donald Trump.

A mere ten days before the film’s release, Lawrence went so far as to expose her anti-Christian bigotry, telling Vogue magazine that Christians are “those people holding their crucifixes, which may as well be pitchforks, thinking they’re fighting the good fight. I grew up in Kentucky. I know how they are.”

And now the profitability of “Mockingjay – Part 2″ is in question. I love the way Deadline spins this sorry truth into what sounds like a positive, but that doesn’t change the underlying truth: The once sure-fire “Mockingjay – Part 2″ might need ancillary markets to break even:

[I]t’s possible that the fourth film, which carries an estimated combined budget and P&A cost of $215M stateside, could profit off of theatrical just like MJ1, before Lionsgate counts TV and home entertainment dollars and costs.

Don’t be mad, Hollywood.

America is just hating you back.

We live in a time in our country where Traditional American ethics and values, including our Christian Faith, have been ridiculed and mocked by the Left and their Power Brokers as being antiquated, restrictive, ignorant, and even, bigoted.

And the majority of the movies which Hollywood has expectorated out in the last few years have reflected this skewed and intolerant view of Traditional American ethics and values.

For example, movies like Redacted, about the Iraq War, which Americans shunned like a Yoko Ono Concert.

When a movie is entertaining, and doesn’t try to run down our country, or teach anti-Christian or anti-American views and values, people turn out in droves, like they did in the case of “The Avengers”.

Americans are looking for another John Ford or Frank Capra, but instead, Hollywood’s giving us Tim Burton and Rob Zombie.

And, today’s “stars” have the staying power…and intelligence of a Dum Dum Lollipop.

The old Hollywood “Stars” respected their fans.

Like…for example…John Wayne.

When I started dating my bride, I found out that she was a John Wayne fan, as well. She owns most, if not all, of his library of films on video tape and owns a couple of collectible dolls, as well.

She also owns The Duke, himself. Well, not the actual Duke, but a life-size cardboard cut-out of him, that sits in the corner of our dining room.

In the other corner of the dining room, sits a John Wayne Grandfather Clock. I kid you not.

When I brought my bride home for good, I brought “The Duke” home, as well. It was a package deal.

Anyway, I was sitting at my computer this morning, trying to come up with something to write about, when a thought occurred to me:

What would John Wayne, American Patriot, think about our country and the shape we’re in, brought about by those who want to “radically change” her?

Here is what he said about the subject, back in 1975. It could have just as easily have been yesterday.

…I always thought I was a liberal but I came up terribly surprised when I found I was a right wing conservative extremist…I have always listened to every human being I’ve ever met about how I should feel.  But this so-called new liberal group… they never listen to your point of view and they make a decision as to what you think and they’re articulate enough and in control of enough of the press to force that image out for the average person.  For some reason, maybe it’s these pictures, they have not been able to do that with me…it hasn’t affected my career in popularity in spite of the fact that they’ve tried to make them do it.  There isn’t a hell of a lot we can do to change human behavior.  We keep making laws to try to change human behavior but we can’t do it…You’re being conned into Keynesianism and socialism now but it isn’t going to stop the selfishness of human behavior.  It isn’t going to stop the greed.  If you take $20 and give a dollar to every son of a b!tch in the room, you come back a year later one of the b@st@rds will have most of the money.  It’s just human nature.  We’re never gonna whip it with a lot of laws. 

As communication gets better and you make people conscious of somebody in trouble, starving or something like that, the average person will help…I think there are people who try to affect a thinking where they know more than some other son of a b!tch and try to pull a false impression on what human nature is.  We’ve proven we go back to hope at the first opportunity…and bam they’re out there ready to grab it.  So we are optimistic; we have to be optimistic.  What else would we be if you lose optimism?”

The Duke was a prophet.

In our American culture today, the art of civil discourse has degenerated into a shouting match…especially on the Social Media, such as Twitter and Facebook Political Pages.

This wouldn’t be so bad, if both sides had the right to shout equally as loud as the other side.

The problem is, as John Wayne experienced, back in 1975, for some reason Conservatives, especially Christian Conservatives, are expected to mind our manners, be meek and mild, and follow the Marquis of Queensbury rules, while Liberals, libertarians, and Moderates (Social Liberals) call us everything but a child of God.

However, this doesn’t just happen on the Internet, this happens in the Real World as well… and it all starts with the President of the United States and trickles down from there.

Before Obama became President, in a private fund raiser in Pennsylvania, he referred to us American Conservatives as bitter clingers, clinging to our guns and Bibles. Then, the Main Stream Media, totally in love with their new messiah, told everyone who would listen, that if you did not vote for Barack Hussein Obama as President, you are a racist.

When Conservatives started to dig up historical facts about Obama, both the Republicans and the Democrats told us to sit down, shut up, and know “our role”.

After Obama was elected, and the country started to find out just exactly who he was, Conservatives started to speak out again. Again, we were told to sit down, shut up, and know our “role”.

Finally, we had enough and began a groundswell which led to the formation of  what has become known as the Tea Party.

The rise of the Tea Party movement and America’s continuing return to Conservatism, which resulted in the political massacres known as the 2010 and 2014 Midterm Elections, was a complete and utter surprise to them.  In their self-imposed isolation, they actually thought that the America people wanted them to continue their deal-making, soul-selling, business-as-usual politics.

They were in shock when American Conservatives stood up on their hind legs and gave the House of Representatives back to the Republican Party.

And, you know what happened after both Midterm Elections?

“Moderate” Republican Speaker of the House John Boehner and the rest of the GOP establishment,once again, told us to sit down, shut up, and know our “role”.

Are you beginning to see a pattern, boys and girls?

You see, the Moderate or Socially Liberal Republicans, just like the Liberal Democrats, both in politics and in Hollywood, expect us to behave like a dog who has been whipped too much, and go cower in a corner or obey their orders in a dutiful fashion, coming when they call for us to vote for them in the next election, or premiere their next movie.

Their expectation of Conservative Behavior is predicated on the fact that they know that we were raised right, and that the majority of us are Christians and were raised to respect authority, and average Americans are desperate for entertainment to take our minds off of our president day-to-day lives under Barack Hussein Obama.

Therefore, Moderate Republicans and Liberal Democrats feel as if they can take advantage of the good nature of American Conservatives,the overwhelming majority of whom are also Christians, and walk all over us.

Well, I’ve got some news for them.

As a Christian American Conservative, I do my best to live my faith, every day.

However, boys and girls, don’t forget… Jesus ran the money changers out of the temple.

And, just like in those old Westerns, which I have become fond of watching, Good will eventually triumph over Evil.

As The Duke said, way back in 1975,

…we have to be optimistic.  What else would we be if you lose optimism?

Until He Comes,


Majority of Americans Identify Radical Islam as Our Enemy. Why Won’t Obama?

November 20, 2015

Say-It-NRD-600We know that ISIL — which emerged out of the chaos of Iraq and Syria — depends on perpetual war to survive. But we also know that they gain adherents because of a poisonous ideology. So part of our job, together, is to work to reject such extremism that infects too many of our young people. Part of that effort must be a continued rejection by Muslims of those who distort Islam to preach intolerance and promote violence, and it must also a rejection by non-Muslims of the ignorance that equates Islam with terror.

This work will take time. There are no easy answers to Syria. And there are no simple answers to the changes that are taking place in much of the Middle East and North Africa. But so many families need help right now; they don’t have time. And that’s why the United States is increasing the number of refugees who we welcome within our borders. That’s why we will continue to be the largest donor of assistance to support those refugees. And today we are launching new efforts to ensure that our people and our businesses, our universities and our NGOs can help as well — because in the faces of suffering families, our nation of immigrants sees ourselves. – President Barack Hussein Obama, Speech to the U.N. General Assembly, 9/27/2015 reports that

The majority of Americans say the country is at war with radical Islamic terrorism, according to a new poll taken in the aftermath of last week’s terrorist attacks in France.

A survey by the conservative-leaning Rasmussen Reports published Friday found that 60 percent of likely voters believe the country is at war, compared with 24 percent who say the U.S. is not at war.

“President Obama, Hillary Clinton and other senior Democrats refuse to say America is at war with ‘radical Islamic terrorism’ for fear of insulting all Muslims, but voters beg to disagree,” the polling agency said.

Majorities from both major parties said the U.S. is engaged in a conflict with radical Islam: 56 percent of Democrats and 70 percent of Republicans, as well as 54 percent of independents.

Ninety-two percent of respondents also said they regard radical Islamic terrorism as a “serious” threat to national security, including 73 percent who said the threat is a “very serious” one, which is up from 50 percent inOctober of last year.

American attitudes toward the Islamic faith as a whole also appear to have shifted.

Although a plurality of Americans, 46 percent, still said terrorist groups such as the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS) do not represent the true Muslim faith, that number is down from 58 percent in February. Thirty-five percent said ISIS does represent the Muslim faith.

ISIS has claimed responsibility for the Paris attack last week in which at least 130 people were killed and hundreds were injured.

 The Rasmussen poll surveyed 1,000 likely voters Nov. 17–18. The margin of error for the poll is 3 percentage points.

So, why doesn’t the President of the United States of America, Barack Hussein Obama, identify our enemy?

When Barack Obama, Jr. was 3-years-old, his parents divorced.  Obama only saw his father one time after that.  Dad moved to Kenya and his mother married an Indonesian man, Lolo Soetoro.  From ages six to 10, Barack Obama, Jr., attended a private school for well-off Islamic families in Jakarta.

Obama once said in a New York Times article posted March 3, 2007:

“I was a little Jakarta street kid,” he said in a wide-ranging interview in his office (excerpts are on my blog, He once got in trouble for making faces during Koran study classes in his elementary school, but a president is less likely to stereotype Muslims as fanatics — and more likely to be aware of their nationalism — if he once studied the Koran with them.

Mr. Obama recalled the opening lines of the Arabic call to prayer, reciting them with a first-rate accent. In a remark that seemed delightfully uncalculated (it’ll give Alabama voters heart attacks), Mr. Obama described the call to prayer as “one of the prettiest sounds on Earth at sunset.”

On October2. 2008, Rick Moran wrote the following article for…

Just  how much in donations from foreign countries is pouring into the Obama campaign coffers is a question one FEC auditor would like to have answered. The problem is that evidently, his bosses at the FEC are refusing to move on the charges which would almost certainly require them to ask the Justice Department and the FBI to look into the matter. This would, their reasoning goes, take on the appearance of a “criminal investigation” and would impact the coming election.

The anonymous investigator (who won’t reveal his name for fear of retribution) says that “I can’t get anyone to move. I believe we are looking at a hijacking of our political system that makes the Clinton and Gore fundraising scandals pale in comparison. And no one here wants to touch it.”

The American Spectator’s Washington Prowler writes:

The analyst, who declines to be identified for fear of retribution, says that on four different occasions in the past three months, he sought to open formal investigations into the Obama campaign’s fundraising techniques, but those investigations have been discouraged. “Without formal approval, I can’t get the resources I need, manpower, that kind of thing. This is a huge undertaking.” And the analyst says that he believes that campaign finance violations have occurred.

The Obama campaign has already had to deal with several FEC complaints about fraudulent donors and illegal foreign contributions, and the FEC says it has no record that those complaints have been resolved or closed. As well, the Obama campaign has been cagey at times about the means by which it has made its historic fundraising hauls, which now total almost $500 million for the election cycle. The Hillary Clinton campaign raised questions about the huge amount of e-retail sales the Obama campaign was making for such things as t-shirts and other campaign paraphernalia, and how such sales were being tracked and used for fundraising purposes. While the profits of those items counted against the $2,300 personal donation limit, there have always been lingering questions about the e-retail system.

“The question has always been, if you buy a $25 t-shirt and you go back to that purchaser eight or nine times with email appeals for $200 or $500 donations, and you have people donating like that all the time, at what point does the campaign bother to check if the FEC limit has been exceeded?” says a former Clinton campaign fundraiser. “There are enough of us from the 1992 and 1996 and 2000 races around to know that many of these kinds of violations never get caught until after the election has been won or lost.

Obama was forced to return $33,500 to a pair of Palestinian brothers who bought T-Shirts on the campaign’s website – a clear violation of FEC rules and the law. The campaign claims to have returned the money but the brothers deny they have received a refund. There have also been numerous questions about other donations that appear to come from the Middle East – not surprising given Obama’s connections to Tony Rezko (whose Middle East connections are mindblowing), Nadhmi Auchi, and other wealthy Arabs who might see an Obama presidency in a favorable light.

Then there was the curious case of a supposedly home grown video that was produced by a PR firm in Los Angeles owned by a huge, left wing, French media conglomerate. The money for the film and for the PR firm evidently came from Europeans.

There is little doubt that foreigners are licking their chops at the prospect of an inexperienced, naive, weak American president who will subsume American interests and cater to the whims of the UN while deferring the big questions to the Europeans. This isn’t even taking into account Obama’s strange policy toward Israel (where he says one thing but all his advisors say exactly the opposite) and the belief among Muslims that because he grew up in Indonesia, he will not be as forceful in prosecuting the war on terror.

There are dozens of reasons foreigners are pulling for Obama to win. There is little doubt that money from overseas is pouring into the Obama campaign.

And it is a dead certainty that the FEC won’t do a damn thing about it until after the election.

They never did.

In September of 2010,, published the following…

A substantial and growing number of Americans say that Barack Obama is a Muslim, while the proportion saying he is a Christian has declined. More than a year and a half into his presidency, a plurality of the public says they do not know what religion Obama follows.

A new national survey by the Pew Research Center finds that nearly one-in-five Americans (18%) now say Obama is a Muslim, up from 11% in March 2009. Only about one-third of adults (34%) say Obama is a Christian, down sharply from 48% in 2009. Fully 43% say they do not know what Obama’s religion is. The survey was completed in early August, before Obama’s recent comments about the proposed construction of a mosque near the site of the former World Trade Center.

The view that Obama is a Muslim is more widespread among his political opponents than among his backers. Roughly a third of conservative Republicans (34%) say Obama is a Muslim, as do 30% of those who disapprove of Obama’s job performance. But even among many of his supporters and allies, less than half now say Obama is a Christian. Among Democrats, for instance, 46% say Obama is a Christian, down from 55% in March 2009.

The belief that Obama is a Muslim has increased most sharply among Republicans (up 14 points since 2009), especially conservative Republicans (up 16 points). But the number of independents who say Obama is a Muslim has also increased significantly (up eight points). There has been little change in the number of Democrats who say Obama is a Muslim, but fewer Democrats today say he is a Christian (down nine points since 2009).

When asked how they learned about Obama’s religion in an open-ended question, 60% of those who say Obama is a Muslim cite the media. Among specific media sources, television (at 16%) is mentioned most frequently. About one-in-ten (11%) of those who say Obama is a Muslim say they learned of this through Obama’s own words and behavior.

So, why do Liberals, who, unlike, Obama, having not been educated in Islam, still refuse to admit that America is at WAR with Radical Islam?

On April 20, 2013, in the aftermath of the bombing of the Boston Marathon by two Radical Islamic Brothers, who were “Refugees” from  Chechnya, I wrote

So, why have Liberals, in the MSM, and elsewhere, been so afraid to call Muslim Terrorists, Muslim Terrorists?

Is it because of that heinous practice, known as Political Correctness?

We’ve all been a victim of it. And, it’s not just the Liberals who practice it.

A short time back, a young Libertarian lady, who just happens to be Black, had posted an article in a Facebook Page for Conservatives and Libertarians, featuring Patti Davis, the Liberal (and crazy) daughter of Former President Ronald Reagan. Davis had come out as the moral arbiter of some issue, and I pointed out that she was not fit to be the “moral arbiter” in any situation, as, to torque off her Dad, and make a political statement, she had posed topless for the cover of Playboy in 1994 with a Black guy, standing behind her, cupping her…umm…chest.

Both the young lady and her husband, who happens to be White, jumped on me, like I was some sort of RAAACIIIST, because I stated the obvious.

archiesammyTimes were different, back in ’94. Just as they were different back in the 70s, when Bud Yorkin and Norman Lear created All in the Family, starring the great American actor, Carroll O’Connor. The misadventures of Archie Bunker and his family could not be a hit today. Our tolerant American Liberals (and others) would not allow it. And, the lessons learned from that ground-breaking television series would be lost.

Perhaps, the reticence by the Media to identify the religious/political ideology of the two brothers is something else: loyalty to President Barack Hussein Obama.

They have a lot invested in The Lightbringer. They have campaigned endlessly for him, and the majority of “Broadcast Journalists” share his vision for a Socialist Utopia America. Additionally, the White House has been known to send e-mails and make telephone calls to these bastions of journalistic integrity, when they want something swept under the Oval Office rug.

The fact that these murdering terrorists are Muslims, does not reflect well on our dhimmi President. In fact, it proves that Smart Power! is anything, but.

Additionally, the fact that these two got into our sovereign land in the first place, shows the folly of relaxing our already-porous Immigration Laws (Sorry, Sen. Rubio.).

With the resounding defeat of Obama’s Gun Confiscation Bill, and now, in the aftermath of the New Boston Massacre, the Obama Administration and their Main Stream Media lackeys are bailing, just as fast as they can, in order to save Obama’s sinking Ship of State.

Oh, but, just wait.You ain’t seen nothin’, yet.

Dear Lord, I hate it when I’m right.

Until He Comes,





While Obama Scolds Americans for Worrying About ISIS Among “Refugees”, ISIS is Entering America At Our Southern Border.

November 18, 2015

AFBrancoRadicalIslamUnicorn21215This is a petulant, childish man-child who’s having trouble getting his way without opposition.  Opposition offends him.  How dare anybody oppose him.  There are real concerns and we see them on television every day.  We’re living daily fear.  The media.  If there is no terror attack during the day, the media’s got everybody in crisis mode on something else.  Every day, everybody keyed up, there’s a crisis of something happening that is threatening our health, our lives, our existence some way.  Every day in the news.  And here comes a real-life terror event, which is predictable, there will be more, and Obama impugns those who react to them. – Rush Limbaugh, November 18, 2015 reports that

President Obama threatened late Wednesday to veto legislation aimed at improving screening for Syrian refugees, potentially putting the White House and Congress on a collision course in a matter of days. 

The veto threat came as the House was preparing the bill — which sets high hurdles for refugee admission including FBI background checks and sign-offs by top officials — for floor action as early as Thursday. In a committee meeting, Rep. Pete Sessions, R-Texas, accused the president of confusing the public about the intentions of the legislation. 

Moments later, the White House issued a statement defending the current screening process and claiming the changes called for under the bill would create “significant delays and obstacles” for the existing vetting program. 

“Given the lives at stake and the critical importance to our partners in the Middle East and Europe of American leadership in addressing the Syrian refugee crisis … [Obama] would veto the bill,” the White House said. 

But House Republicans touted the legislation as a common-sense answer to security concerns. 

Further, while Republicans a day earlier called for a “pause” in Syrian refugee admissions, some on Wednesday indicated a willingness to accept refugees from Syria and Iraq who are fleeing the civil war and Islamic State militants — provided the screening process is improved, under the terms of the bill.  

“America has a proud tradition of welcoming refugees into our country, and we lead the world in humanitarian assistance. However, we also must put proper measures in place to ensure our country’s safety,” House Homeland Security Committee Chairman Michael McCaul, R-Texas, said in a statement. 

The bill introduced Wednesday would require the FBI director to certify a background investigation for each refugee — and several top security officials to certify that each refugee is not a security threat to the U.S. — before a refugee from Iraq or Syria can be admitted. 

House Speaker Paul Ryan said the chamber would vote on the bill later this week, and stressed that it would not subject applicants to a religious test. He made this clarification after some GOP presidential candidates suggested preference should be given to Christians. 

McCaul, in a statement, said that while he wants a “temporary suspension” of Syrian refugee admissions, “It is apparent that the President will ignore these concerns, making this legislation necessary to toughen security measures.” 

Indeed, Obama on Wednesday continued to defend plans to bring in an additional 10,000 Syrian refugees over the next year as he threatened to veto the House bill. 

“Slamming the door in the face of refugees would betray our deepest values. That’s not who we are. And it’s not what we’re going to do,” Obama tweeted late Wednesday morning. 

Rep. Richard Hudson, R-N.C., also touted the latest House bill, saying it was based on legislation he introduced just days earlier. Hudson said the new bill would likely be voted on in the House on Thursday. 

“America is a compassionate nation. No country on Earth does more or spends more to care for our fellow man. But being compassionate doesn’t mean we have to have reckless policies that put American lives at risk,” he said in a statement. 

McCaul’s committee also released a report Wednesday on the Syrian refugee flow, saying it reveals “alarming gaps in the vetting of Syrian refugees at home and abroad.” 

Already, the new legislation was facing criticism from both sides of the aisle — and not just the White House. 

Heritage Action executive officer Michael A. Needham said in a statement that the bill, while setting up better vetting, “provides no leverage for Congress to weigh in and relies solely on President Obama’s appointees to carry out the new vetting process.” 

House Democrats also voiced opposition, with one House Democratic leadership aide telling Fox News the bill would “end the refugee program altogether.” The aide said they hope to “negotiate a bipartisan bill” and are weighing introducing an “alternative bill.” 

Meanwhile, CIA Director John Brennan said in a speech Wednesday that about half of Syria’s population — or about 12 million people — has been displaced by the ISIS onslaught and the civil war, a number that includes both those who have been internally displaced and those forced to flee the country. 

Speaking at the Overseas Security Advisory Council Conference, Brennan said Syria is “approaching 50 percent of the population” that has been displaced.

House Republicans aren’t the only ones concerned. reports that

National Security: Speaking in another country 8,600 miles away from the U.S. capital, President Obama viciously attacked anyone who dares oppose his Syrian refugee plans. Does he include his fellow Democrats?

‘Apparently, they’re scared of widows and orphans coming into the United States of America.” That was how Obama, in Manila, rebuked Republicans on Tuesday for expressing concern about ISIS terrorists slipping into America amid the 10,000 Syrian refugees he wants to bring here.

The president’s sense of timing these days leaves something to be desired. Hours after he declared ISIS was “contained,” it launched a well-coordinated, multi-pronged surprise terrorist attack in Paris.

And hours after chastising the GOP for being scaredy-cats about widows, a woman connected with the Paris attacks blew herself up during a raid.

As his feckless anti-ISIS policy gets exposed by facts on the ground, Obama is become increasingly bellicose, agitated and hostile — against Republicans, not ISIS, which Obama insists on calling ISIL.

And he’s becoming increasingly isolated as Democrats come to realize how detached he is from reality.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., sharply criticized Obama for his “all is well” boasts, saying — on MSNBC, no less — that she’s “never been more concerned. I read the intelligence faithfully. ISIL is not contained. ISIL is expanding.” Now Feinstein is urging caution on admitting Syrian refugees.

Sen. Charles Schumer of New York has also refused to fall into line, saying a “pause” might be necessary.

Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.V., signed a letter to Obama urging him to stop admitting refugees until “federal authorities can guarantee with 100% assurance that they are not connected” to ISIS.

New Hampshire’s Democratic Gov. Maggie Hassan says she doesn’t want to accept Syrian refugees until the government can “ensure robust refugee screening.”

Other governors, Democrats and Republicans alike, are complaining that the administration won’t share information on how many or what kind of refugees may be headed their way.

Even top officials in Obama’s administration don’t buy his reassurances about the vetting process.

Director of National Intelligence James Clapper said in September that he wouldn’t “put it past the likes of ISIL to infiltrate operatives among these refugees,” adding that it’s “a huge concern of ours.”

FBI director James Comey told Congress last month that he couldn’t “offer anybody an absolute assurance that there’s no risk associated with this.”

He should know, since the FBI arrested two “robustly vetted” Iraqi refugees on terrorism charges six years ago, and suspended admission of more for months while investigating other possible infiltrations.

We haven’t even mentioned the fact that ISIS itself said it was going to use refugees as cover.

In the face of such unstoppable facts, Obama’s arrogance remains an immovable object.

It would be pathetic if it weren’t so dangerous.

Dangerous, indeed.

However, ISIS is also coming into our Sovereign Nation via a different route. reports that

Two federal agents operating under the umbrella of U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) are claiming that eight Syrian illegal aliens attempted to enter Texas from Mexico in the Laredo Sector. The federal agents spoke with Breitbart Texas on the condition of anonymity, however, a local president of the National Border Patrol Council (NBPC) confirmed that Laredo Border Patrol agents have been officially contacting the organization with concerns over reports from other federal agents about Syrians illegally entering the country in the Laredo Sector. The reports have caused a stir among the sector’s Border Patrol agents.

The sources claimed that eight Syrians were apprehended on Monday, November 16, 2015. According to the sources, the Syrians were in two separate “family units” and were apprehended at the Juarez Lincoln Bridge in Laredo, Texas, also known officially as Port of Entry 1.

Border Patrol agent and NBPC Local 2455 President Hector Garza told Breitbart Texas, “Border Patrol agents who we represent have been contacting our organization to voice concerns about reports from other agents that Syrians crossed the U.S. border from Mexico in the Laredo Sector. Our agents have heard about Syrians being apprehended in the area from other federal agents.” Agent Garza added, “At this time, I cannot confirm or deny that Syrians have crossed, for security reasons.”

Agent Garza further stated that in matters as sensitive as Syrians crossing the border from Mexico, it would be highly unlikely that federal agencies would publicize it or inform a broad group of law enforcement. He did say that Local 2455 is taking the reports seriously and that they “will be issuing an officer safety bulletin advising Border Patrol agents to exercise extra precautions as they patrol the border.”

Breitbart Texas can confirm that a Syrian did attempt to enter the U.S. illegally through Texas in late September. The Syrian was caught using a passport that belonged to someone else and U.S. authorities decided against prosecuting anyone involved due to “circumstances.”

Unfortunately, agents of Islamic State have been entering from our Southern Border for quite a while now.

The following information is from a blog I posted on August 29, 2014, titled “ISIS Gathering At Our Southern Border. No Strategy = No America.”:

Former Congressman, Lt. Col. Allen B. West, reported the following on July 11th on his website…

Congressman Ted Poe (R-TX) told CBS’s local Dallas Fort Worth affiliate he believes that ISIS will use Texas’s southern border to enter the United States. “Of course the way they would come to the United States would be through the porous border with Mexico. The drug cartels will bring people into the country no matter who they are — for money,” says Poe.

The U.S. Border Patrol has a specific classification for those caught illegally entering America called OTMs (Other than Mexicans) which denotes those not of Hispanic descent. It is well known that drug cartels are assisting Islamic terrorists in gaining entrance and crossing the border. In fact it’s been going on for some time.

According to, Human Events reported in 2010 that Iranian currency and prayer rugs were regularly found near the southern border.

A November 2012 House Committee on Homeland Security report from the Oversight Sub-Committee stated:

“U.S. Government officials who are directly responsible for our national security continue to affirm the vulnerability. In August 2007 former Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell stated that not only have terrorists used the Southwest border to enter the United States but that they will inevitably continue to do so as long as it is an available possibility. In a July 2012 hearing before the full U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Homeland Security, DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano confirmed that terrorists have crossed the Southwest border with the intent to harm the American people. Additionally, the U.S. Border Patrol regularly apprehends aliens from the 35 “special interest countries” designated by our intelligence community as countries that could export individuals that could bring harm to our country in the way of terrorism.” From Fiscal Years 2006 to 2011, there were 1,918 apprehensions of these Special Interest Aliens at our Southwest border.”

An independent security contractor told Breitbart News last week that six Special Interest Aliens (SIA’s) from Afghanistan, Iraq, and Yemen were picked up by U.S. border patrol near Laredo, Texas. Each one had 60,000 Iraqi Dinars ($51.00) apiece on them.

Last week  [the second week in July] in Arizona, a Muslim prayer rug was found.

Wrap your heads around that information for a while, gentle readers.

Thanks to Obama’s Open Border Policy, the Radical Islamic Terrorists known as ISIS, have been coming into America, with the rest of the Illegal Aliens, via our Southern Border.

How many are already here, living among us, plotting attacks against us?

Obama’s willful and arrogant obtuseness, concerning the danger of a wide open Southern Border, has added to the now apparent critical situation which our nation finds itself in, concerning these barbarians, who slaughter innocent people in the name of Islam, a political ideology masquerafing as a faith.

…Whose Call to Prayer, our president has stated, is “one of the most beautiful sounds on the face of the Earth”.

God protect us.

…Because Obama certainly does not seem to be inclined to.

Until He Comes,


Obama Refuses to Tell Governors Where He is Placing Syrian “Refugees”. Does He Even Have That Authority?

November 18, 2015

ISIS-Contained-NRD-600Yesterday, more of America’s Governors informed President Barack Hussein Obama that they would not accept the thousands of Syrian Refugees, whom he is hell-bent on disseminating throught America, with no way of actually knowing whether they are members of ISIS, sent here to murder us “infidels”, or not.

You see, boys and girls, you cannot vet someone with an undocumented background. reports that

More than half the nation’s governors say they oppose letting Syrian refugees into their states, although the final say on this contentious immigration issue will fall to the federal government.States protesting the admission of refugees range from Alabama and Georgia, to Texas and Arizona, to Michigan and Illinois, to Maine and New Hampshire. Among these 31 states, all but one have Republican governors. 

The announcements came after authorities revealed that at least one of the suspects believed to be involved in the Paris terrorist attacks entered Europe among the current wave of Syrian refugees. He had falsely identified himself as a Syrian named Ahmad al Muhammad and was allowed to enter Greece in early October.

Some leaders say they either oppose taking in any Syrian refugees being relocated as part of a national program or asked that they be particularly scrutinized as potential security threats.

Only 1,500 Syrian refugees have been accepted into the United States since 2011, but the Obama administration announced in September that 10,000 Syrians will be allowed entry next year.

The Council on American-Islamic Relations said Monday, “Defeating ISIS involves projecting American ideals to the world. Governors who reject those fleeing war and persecution abandon our ideals and instead project our fears to the world.”

Authority over admitting refugees to the country, though, rests with the federal government — not with the states — though individual states can make the acceptance process much more difficult, experts said.

Are these “experts” right?

Read on… reports that

In a call with senior Obama administration officials Tuesday evening, several governors demanded they be given access to information about Syrian refugees about to be resettled by the federal government in their states. Top White House officials refused.

Over a dozen governors from both parties joined the conference call, which was initiated by the White House after 27 governors vowed not to cooperate with further resettlement of Syrian refugees in their states. The outrage among governors came after European officials revealed that one of the Paris attackers may have entered Europe in October through the refugee process using a fake Syrian passport. (The details of the attacker’s travels are still murky.)

The administration officials on the call included White House Chief of Staff Denis McDonough, Deputy Secretary of Homeland Security Alejandro Mayorkas, State Department official Simon Henshaw, FBI official John Giacalone, and the deputy director of the National Counterterrorism Center John Mulligan.

On the call several Republican governors and two Democrats — New Hampshire’s Maggie Hassan and California’s Jerry Brown — repeatedly pressed administration officials to share more information about Syrian refugees entering the United States. The governors wanted notifications whenever refugees were resettled in their states, as well as access to classified information collected when the refugees were vetted.

“There was a real sense of frustration from all the governors that there is just a complete lack of transparency and communication coming from the federal government,” said one GOP state official who was on the call.

The administration officials, led by McDonough, assured the governors that the vetting process was thorough and that the risks of admitting Syrian refugees could be properly managed. He added that the federal government saw no reason to alter the current method of processing refugees.

Florida governor Rick Scott asked McDonough point blank if states could opt out of accepting refugees from Syria. McDonough said no, the GOP state official said.

In a readout of the call Tuesday night, the White House said that several governors “expressed their appreciation for the opportunity to better understand the process and have their issues addressed.” The White House noted that “others encouraged further communication” from the administration about the resettlement of refugees. 

Hassan, one of two Democrats to challenge the administration on the call, had already come out in favor of halting the flow of Syrian refugees to the United States. She expressed anger that state officials aren’t notified when Syrian refugees are resettled in their territory.

Brown said he favored continuing to admit Syrian refugees but wanted the federal government to hand over information that would allow states to keep track of them, the GOP state official said.

McDonough responded to Brown that there was currently no process in place to give states such information and the administration saw no reason to change the status quo. The non-governmental organizations that help resettle the refugees would have such information.

Brown countered by noting that state law enforcement agencies have active investigations into suspected radicals and that information about incoming Syrian refugees could help maintain their awareness about potential radicalization. He suggested the U.S. had to adjust the way it operates in light of the Paris attacks.

McDonough reiterated his confidence in the current process. While promising to consider what Brown and other senators had said, he emphasized that the administration had no plans to increase information sharing on refugees with states as of now.

Top GOP senators echoed the concerns of governors Tuesday. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Richard Burr joined House Speaker Paul Ryan’s call for a “pause” in the flow of Syrian refugees, which is intended to include 10,000 people by 2016. McConnell said “the ability to vet people coming from that part of the world is really quite limited.”

Democratic senators are split on the issue. Senators Chuck Schumer and Dianne Feinstein said Tuesday there may be a need for a pause in accepting Syrian refugees but they both wanted to hear more from the administration about the issue. Sen. Dick Durbin said that refugees aren’t the primary source of concern. He pointed to the millions of foreign visitors who enter America each year.

“Background checks need to be redoubled in terms of refugees but if we’re talking about threats to the United States, let’s put this in perspective,” he said. “Let us not just single out the refugees as the potential source of danger in the United States.”

The White House is trying hard to engage governors and lawmakers. Top administration officials held several briefings about the issue Tuesday on Capitol Hill. But if they don’t agree to share more with state and local politicians, the opposition to accepting Syrian refugees could quickly gain ground.

Evidently, King Obama the First has decided that it is important to treat our states like his own personal fiefdoms and their governors like his employees, whom he manages via the ol’ Mushroom Philosophy of communication…keep them in the dark and feed them well, you know.

Obama keeps purposefully forgetting that we are a Constitutional Republic. Not a monarchy.

So, who actually has authority over our nation’s Immigration Laws?

Rush Limbaugh noted the following on his program, yesterday…

American University law professor Stephen I. Vladeck put it this way: ‘Legally, states have no authority to do anything because the question of who should be allowed in this country is one that the Constitution commits to the federal government.'”

“But Vladeck noted that without the state’s participation, the federal government would have a much more arduous task.” Well, why?  Wait a minute, now, Mr. Vladeck, Professor Vladeck. If the states have no say-so and Obama can say, “(Raspberry) you!” and bring in these refugees no matter what the governors want, then why is it “more arduous” if the governors have no power, if the governors can’t say no?  You want to hear the truth, as interpreted by constitutional scholar Andrew McCarthy? “[N]owhere in the Constitution was the national government vested with an enumerated power,” meaning spelled out, “over immigration enforcement.” Let me read that to you again: “[N]owhere in the Constitution was the national government vested with an enumerated power,” a specific power, “over immigration enforcement. Congress was empowered only to set the terms for naturalization — to determine who qualifies for American citizenship.

“The police power, the power to enforce laws within their respective territories, was left to the states — left to the representative governments closest to the people whose lives, liberties, and property were most affected by the manner of enforcement.” This is exactly the way the country was founded.  The Founding Fathers went to great lengths to avoid vesting all of this power in the federal government.  They didn’t trust it.  The first 10 amendments to the Constitution limit the federal government.

Congress was empowered to set the terms for naturalization, to determine who qualifies for American citizenship.  The police power to enforce the laws within their respective territories was left to the states, to the governors.  If they don’t want these people here, there’s a clear argument they do not have to accept them.  And the federal government can’t make them. 

Imagine that.

So, while Obama hides away these Syrian Refugees, without properly vetting them, potentially allowing ISIS access to “soft targets”, he is taking powers upon himself that our Founding Fathers never meant for him to have.

Therefore, the logical conclusion to this post today is: Individual States indeed have the right to refuse entry to these Syrian Refugees”, who resemble extremely fit military men carrying cell phones.

Petulant President Pantywaist’s recent Presidential Temper Tantrum at the G20 Summit, notwithstanding.

Until He Comes,


Obama: Paris Massacre a “Setback”. Refusal to Accept Syrian “Refugees” “Not Who We Are”

November 17, 2015

obamamyworkHere at the G-20, our nations have sent an unmistakable message — that we are united against this threat. ISIL is the face of evil. Our goal, as I’ve said many times, is to degrade and ultimately destroy this barbaric terrorist organization. As I outlined this fall at the United Nations, we have a comprehensive strategy using all elements of our power, military intelligence, economic development, and the strength of our communities. We have always understood that this will be a long-term campaign. There will be setbacks and there will be successes. The terrible events in Paris were obviously a terrible and sickening setback. Even as we grieve with our French friends, however, we can’t lose sight that there is progress being made. – President Barack Hussein Obama, G20 Summit, 11/16/15, courtesy of

Over 100 innocent people dead and several hundred wounded.

And, Obama calls it a “setback???!!!

That was not a “setback”, it was a massacre by Radical Islamic Terrorists.

Also, during that same press conference in Antalya, Turkey at the G20 Summit, President Barack Obama proclaimed it would be “shameful and “not American” to only take Christians refugees and that we must not “close our hearts to these victims of such violence, and somehow start equating the issue of refugees with the issue of terrorism.” (remarks courtesy of

“One of the places that you’re seeing this debate play itself out is on the refugee issue. Both in Europe and in, I gather, it started popping up while I was gone back in the United States. The people who are fleeing Syria are the most harmed by terrorism. They are the most vulnerable as a consequence of civil war and strife. They are parents. They are children. They are orphans. And it is very important — I was glad to see that this was affirmed again and again by the G-20 — that we do not close our hearts to these victims of such violence, and somehow start equating the issue of refugees with the issue of terrorism”.

“In Europe, I think people like Chancellor Merkel have taken a very courageous stance in saying it is our moral obligation as fellow human beings to help people who are in such vulnerable situations. And I know that it is putting enormous strains on the resources of the people of Europe. Nobody’s been carrying a bigger burden than the people here in Turkey with 2 1/2 million refugees and the people of Jordan and Lebanon who are also admitting refugees. The fact that they’ve kept their borders open to these refugees is a signal of their belief in a common humanity. And so we have to, each of us, do our part. And the United States has to step up and do its part.”

“And when I hear folks say that, well, maybe we should just admit the Christians but not the Muslims. when I hear political leaders suggesting that there would be a religious test for which person is fleeing from a war-torn country is admitted. When some of those folks themselves come from families who benefited from protection when they were fleeing political persecution that’s shameful. That’s not American. That’s not who we are. We don’t have religious tests to our compassion. When Pope Francis came to visit the United States and gave a speech before congress, he didn’t just speak about Christians who were being persecuted. He didn’t call on Catholic parishes just to admit those who were of the same religious faith. He said protect people who are vulnerable. So I think it is very important for us right now, particularly those who are in leadership, particularly those who have a platform and can be heard, not to fall into that trap, not to feed that dark impulse inside of us.”

“I had a lot of disagreements with George W. Bush on policy, but I was very proud after 9/11 when he was adamant and clear about the fact that this is not a war on Islam. And the notion that some of those who have taken on leadership in his party would ignore all of that, that’s not who we are. On this, they should follow his example. It was the right one. It was the right impulse. It’s our better impulse. and whether are European or American, the values that we are defending, the values that we’re fighting against ISIS for, are precisely that we don’t discriminate against people because of their faith. We don’t kill people because they’re different than us. That’s what separates us from them. And we don’t feed that kind of notion that somehow Christians and Muslims are at war.”

“And if we want to be successful defeating ISIS, that’s a good place to start, by not promoting that kind of ideology, that kind of attitude. In the same way that the Muslim community has an obligation not to in any way excuse anti-Western or anti-Christian sentiment, we have the same obligation as Christians. And we are — it is good to remember that the United States does not have a religious test and we are a nation of many peoples of different faiths, which means that we show compassion to everybody. Those are the universal values we stand for. That’s what my administration intends to stand for. All right? thank you very much, everybody.”

“That’s not who we are.”

“We” who, Mr. President?

Americans have been aware, for the last 7 years, that there is a great disconnect between the citizens of the United States and their president.  It’s not just his stand-offish behavior.  There’s something else going on.
He was not raised like the majority of Americans.
He didn’t have rubber dart gun wars in the neighborhood backyards.  He didn’t play Nerf football in the front yards.  He didn’t go to Vacation Bible School.  I don’t know if he was ever told to stand with his hand over his heart during the Pledge of Allegiance.
It is this disconnect that is at the heart of the distrust that Americans have experienced and are experiencing, regarding the Presidency of Barack Hussein Obama.
Hope and Change have turned into despair and disbelief.  Obama has never understood the shared values of average Americans, because the people who raised him did not share those values, either.  It is the concern that we feel for one another, that shared American value system, that has caused a great awakening.

Allow me to tell you who “we”, the average Americans, who have been watching you tear OUR country apart for the last 7 years, are, Mr. President.

We are the men and women, who landed on the shores of an unknown, uncivilized land, in order to be free from a tyrant and, in order to be free to worship the God of Abraham as we pleased.
We are the people who defeated that same tyrant and began a nation that, despite growing pains, and a war which pitted brother against brother, became the Greatest Nation on the Face of God’s Green Earth.
We are that small band of Tennessee Volunteers, who, with Davy Crockett at the Alamo, though hopelessly outnumbered, gave their lives in defense of freedom.
We are the sons and grandsons of those brave men who landed on Normandy Beach, turning the tide of World War II.
We are the people who are the most charitable people on Earth, contributing millions upon millions of our hard-earned money to private and faith-based charities, and, who personally help our family friends, and neighbors out, when disaster strikes…OUT OF THE GOODNESS OF OUR HEARTS, NOT PRESIDENTIAL DECREE.
We have taken in millions of immigrants, who came here legally, to start a new life in this blessed land, eager to assimilate into the American Way of Life, where, by God’s Grace…and hard work, they , too, could achieve the American Dream.
That’s who “we” are, President Obama.
President Abraham Lincoln once said,
If once you forfeit the confidence of your fellow-citizens, you can never regain their respect and esteem.
That is the situation that you find yourself in today, Mr. President.
Judging by your past actions, including the clandestine dissemination of the “youths” from Central and South America, who arrived here, parentless, last year, throughout our country, we “average Americans”, do not trust you and your people, when you say that you will “vet” these Syrian “Refugees”. Especially, since the overwhelming majority of them are well-fit young men with cell phones, who look like soldiers.
And, that is why we and our states’ Governors’ are standing up to your plans to disseminate these Syrian “Refugees” among us.
It’s a matter of SURVIVAL.
Until He Comes,

The Paris Massacre: Petulant President Pantywaist Votes “Present”

November 16, 2015

AFBrancoObamaISIS922014The President of these United States, Barack Hussein Obama, said the following about the Radical Islamic Terrorist Organization, ISIS, in a interview with The New Yorker Magazine, published on January 27th, 2014:

The analogy we use around here sometimes, and I think is accurate, is if a JV team puts on Lakers uniforms that doesn’t make them Kobe Bryant. I think there is a distinction between the capacity and reach of a bin Laden and a network that is actively planning major terrorist plots against the homeland versus jihadists who are engaged in various local power struggles and disputes, often sectarian.

I wonder if ol’ Scooter is having second thoughts about his under-estimation, because, Obama’s ignorant analysis missed by a country mile.

Michael Goodwin, of the New York Post writes the following…

In any time and place, war is fiendishly simple. It is the ultimate zero-sum contest — you win or you lose. That eternal truth is so obvious that it should not need to be said. Yet even after the horrific slaughter in Paris, there remains a distressing doubt about whether America’s commander in chief gets it.

President Obama has spent the last seven years trying to avoid the world as it is. He has put his intellect and rhetorical skills into the dishonorable service of assigning blame and fudging failure. If nuances were bombs, Islamic State would have been destroyed years ago.

He refuses to say “Islamic terrorism,” as if that would offend the peaceful Muslims who make up the vast bulk of victims. He rejects the word “war,” even as jihadists carry out bloodthirsty attacks against Americans and innocent peoples around the world.

He shuns the mantle of global leadership that comes with the Oval Office, with an aide advancing the preposterous concept that Obama is “leading from behind.” He snubs important partners like Egypt, showers concessions on the apocalyptic mullahs of Iran, and called the Islamic State the “jayvee team” even as it was beginning to create a caliphate.

Having long ago identified American power as a problem, he continues to slash the military as the enemy expands its reach. In a globalized era, the Obama doctrine smacks of cowardly retreat and fanciful isolation.

In an accident of timing that captures his cluelessness, the president actually declared on Friday morning that Islamic State had been “contained,” practically boasting in a TV interview that, “They have not gained ground in Iraq and in Syria.”

What gall. What folly.

Paris is the final straw. Obama’s exemption from reality has expired. He must either commit to leading the free world to victory, or step aside so someone else can.

There is no more time to avoid the truth of war. America must organize the combined forces of the civilized world before Islamic State makes good on its vow to “taste” more American blood.

As a top intelligence adviser told me yesterday, “What they did in Paris means they are coming here.”

In fact, they already are here. Law-enforcement officials say the FBI has as many as 1,000 investigations open into Islamic State sympathizers inside the US.

Is America ready to stop multiple assault teams of suicide bombers? Is New York ready? Or Chicago, Los Angeles or Washington, DC?

Because Paris was a grand success to the terrorists, the propaganda value acts as an incentive for attacks on other western cities. While sparing no effort to stop them here, we must simultaneously destroy them in their foreign bases.

World War III began when Osama bin Laden declared war on the United States, though we did not grasp the significance until 9/11. The collapse of the Twin Towers, a smoking hole in the Pentagon and a downed jetliner in Pennsylvania revealed the price of our inaction.

The single greatest attack ever against America galvanized the nation and defined a new generation of policy makers and warriors.

Yet Obama always remained curiously cool about the whole endeavor, denouncing the invasion of Iraq as dumb while holding up Afghanistan as a necessary war. Once he got to the White House, though, he showed no conviction about Afghanistan either, surging troops only to demand that they return home quickly.

The pattern has never changed, and his relationship with a rotating cast of military leaders remains rocky. Robert Gates, secretary of defense under both President Bush and Obama, said in his memoir that Obama’s distrust of the military was destructive of the very mission he had given the troops.

After a heated 2011 meeting on Afghanistan, Gates concluded that Obama “doesn’t believe in his own strategy, and doesn’t consider the war to be his. For him, it’s all about getting out.”

Another former military leader, Gen. Jack Keane, notes that Obama never once agreed to the full request of his commanders. If they ask for 10,000 troops, Obama agrees to 5,000, 3,000 or none.

The raid that got bin Laden marked the high point of Obama’s commitment. He turned that achievement into political gold in 2012 and declared the “tide of war is receding” to justify his decision to withdraw from the field of battle.

It was a convenient figment of self-interest, as if his wish would make it true. Instead, the strategic dominos fell quickly as war metastasized. The hard-won gains in Iraq were reversed, Syria descended into hell and Islamic State was born in the vacuum.

Its ruthlessness and success in capturing territory enabled it to supplant al Qaeda as the most dangerous terrorist network. It has become the proverbial “strong horse,” with each terrifying attack bringing more recruits and more financing.

In the last two weeks, it shot down a commercial Russian airliner over Egypt and carried out bombings in Beirut. And then came Paris.

Its ability to inflict unprecedented casualties in such far-flung locations mark a growing strength and sophistication. The terrorists smell weakness and have increased the pace of their aggressive expansion. Their aim of global conquest must be taken seriously.

French President Francois Hollande understands the meaning of Friday’s slaughter. He called it an “act of war” and vowed that “France will not show any pity” against those who carried out the barbaric acts. World leaders quickly expressed their condolences and condemnation.

Yet it remains doubtful if our side is truly committed to winning. The determination and unity the free world showed after 9/11 faded as casualties, mistakes and politics eroded the mission.

So we are back to square one again, facing a stronger and more emboldened enemy. The time has run out for half measures and kicking the can down the road. The enemy must be destroyed on the battlefield before there can be any hope of peace.

If Obama cannot rise to the challenge of leadership in this historic crisis, then, for the good of humanity, he should resign. Those are the only options and it is his duty to decide.

President Obama is in a trap of his own making. It started with his Speech to the Muslim World at the University of Cairo, shortly after his first Inauguration as President, in which he sounded like a subservient dhimmi.

In the years that followed, his genteel Foreign Policy toward the Barbarians of the Muslim World, known as “Smart Power!”, led to a never-ending Radical Islamic Revolution in the Middle East, known as Arab Spring, through which Moderate Muslim Dictators were replaced by Radical Muslim Dictators. It also led to the increased threat of the extermination of Israel, and the changing of NASA into a Muslim Outreach Program.

The sixth President of the United States of America, John Quincy Adams, wrote the following about the nature of Islam:

THE ESSENCE OF HIS [MUHAMMAD’S] DOCTRINE WAS VIOLENCE AND LUST: TO EXALT THE BRUTAL OVER THE SPIRITUAL PART OF HUMAN NATURE [Adams’ capital letters]… Between these two religions, thus contrasted in their characters, a war of twelve hundred years has already raged. The war is yet flagrant… While the merciless and dissolute dogmas of the false prophet shall furnish motives to human action, there can never be peace upon earth, and goodwill towards men…The precept of the Koran is, perpetual war against all who deny, that Mahomet is the prophet of God. The vanquished may purchase their lives, by the payment of tribute; the victorious may be appeased by a false and delusive promise of peace; and the faithful follower of the prophet, may submit to the imperious necessities of defeat: but the command to propagate the Moslem creed by the sword is always obligatory, when it can be made effective. The commands of the prophet may be performed alike, by fraud, or by force.

In contrast, as he demonstrated on the evening of the horrible massacre in Paris, Petulant President Pantywaist, Barack Hussein Obama, will not even call Radical Islam by its name.

He has already proclaimed that we are not at war with Islam.

So, how can America win this war against Radical Islam, if the President of our country will not even admit that we are in one?

Until He Comes,


A KJ Sunday Morning Rebuttal: The Paris Massacre, Radical Islam, and American Christianity

November 15, 2015

American Christianity 2

PROLOGUE: With the Civilized World still reeling from the horrific massacre of civilians in Paris, France this week, it has been both incredulous and chilling, to witness American Liberals on Facebook and other sites on the Internet, blaming the actions of Radical Islamists, adherents to a political ideology masquerading as a religion, the Muslim Terrorists themselves, on anybody else that they could possibly think of, including Former President George W. Bush.

They even are espousing the naïve and ill-informed opinion that somehow, Islam and Christianity are exactly the same.

This past year, following President Barack Hussein Obama’s incendiary and decidedly anti-Christian remarks at the National Prayer Breakfast, Reverend Franklin Graham spoke truth to power:

Today at the National Prayer Breakfast, the President implied that what ISIS is doing is equivalent to what happened over 1000 years ago during the Crusades and the Inquisition. Mr. President–Many people in history have used the name of Jesus Christ to accomplish evil things for their own desires. But Jesus taught peace, love and forgiveness. He came to give His life for the sins of mankind, not to take life. Mohammad on the contrary was a warrior and killed many innocent people. True followers of Christ emulate Christ—true followers of Mohammed emulate Mohammed.

It’s as simple as that.

It has been both maddening and amusing to watch Liberals attempt to rewrite history over the last couple of days, in defense of the Followers of Mohammed and their fallen messiah’s failed Foreign Policy

Actual history shows that

The Crusades were started by the Muslims in the year 630 A.D. when Muhammad invaded and conquered Mecca. Later on, Muslims invaded Syria, Iraq, Jerusalem, Iran, Egypt, Africa, Spain, Italy, France, etc. The Western Crusades started around 1095 to try to stop the Islamic aggressive invasions. Islamic Crusades continued even after the Western Crusades.

630 – Muhammad conquers Mecca from his base in Medina.
632 – Muhammad dies in Medina. Islam controls the Hijaz.
636 – Muslims conquest of Syria, and the surrounding lands, all Christian – including Palestine and Iraq.
637 – Muslim Crusaders conquer Iraq (some date it in 635 or 636)
638 – Muslim Crusaders conquer and annex Jerusalem, taking it from the Byzantines.
638 – 650 Muslim Crusaders conquer Iran, except along Caspian Sea.
639 – 642 Muslim Crusaders conquer Egypt.
641 – Muslim Crusaders control Syria and Palestine.
643 – 707 Muslim Crusaders conquer North Africa.
644 – 650 Muslim Crusaders conquer Cyprus, Tripoli in North Africa, and establish Islamic rule in Iran, Afghanistan, and Sind.
673 – 678 Arabs besiege Constantinople, capital of Byzantine Empire
691 – Dome of the Rock is completed in Jerusalem, only six decades after Muhammad’s death.
710 – 713 Muslim Crusaders conquer the lower Indus Valley.
711 – 713 Muslim Crusaders conquer Spain and impose the kingdom of Andalus. The Muslim conquest moves into Europe.
718 – Conquest of Spain complete.
732 – Muslim invasion of France is stopped at the Battle of Poitiers / Battle of Tours. The Franks, under their leader Charles Martel (the grandfather of Charlemagne), defeat the Muslims and turn them back out of France.
762 – Foundation of Baghdad
785 – Foundation of the Great Mosque of Cordova
789 – Rise of Idrisid amirs (Muslim Crusaders) in Morocco; Christoforos, a Muslim who converted to Christianity, is executed.
800 – Autonomous Aghlabid dynasty (Muslim Crusaders) in Tunisia
807 – Caliph Harun al—Rashid orders the destruction of non-Muslim prayer houses & of the church of Mary Magdalene in Jerusalem
809 – Aghlabids (Muslim Crusaders) conquer Sardinia, Italy
813 – Christians in Palestine are attacked; many flee the country
831 – Muslim Crusaders capture Palermo, Italy; raids in Southern Italy
837 – 901 Aghlabids (Muslim Crusaders) conquer Sicily, raid Corsica, Italy, France
869 – 883 Revolt of black slaves in Iraq
909 – Rise of the Fatimid Caliphate in Tunisia; these Muslim Crusaders occupy Sicily, Sardinia
928 – 969 Byzantine military revival, they retake old territories, such as Cyprus (964) and Tarsus (969)
937 – The Church of the Resurrection (aka Church of Holy Sepulcher) is burned down by Muslims; more churches in Jerusalem are attacked
960 – Conversion of Qarakhanid Turks to Islam 969 – Fatimids (Muslim Crusaders) conquer Egypt and found Cairo
973 – Israel and southern Syria are again conquered by the Fatimids
1003 – First persecutions by al—Hakim; the Church of St. Mark in Fustat, Egypt, is destroyed
1009 – Destruction of the Church of the Resurrection by al—Hakim (see 937)
1012 – Beginning of al—Hakim’s oppressive decrees against Jews and Christians
1050 – Creation of Almoravid (Muslim Crusaders) movement in Mauretania; Almoravids (aka Murabitun) are coalition of western Saharan Berbers; followers of Islam, focusing on the Quran, the hadith, and Maliki law.
1071 – Battle of Manzikert, Seljuk Turks (Muslim Crusaders) defeat Byzantines and occupy much of Anatolia 1071 – Turks (Muslim Crusaders) invade Palestine
1073 – Conquest of Jerusalem by Turks (Muslim Crusaders)
1075 – Seljuks (Muslim Crusaders) capture Nicea (Iznik) and make it their capital in Anatolia
1076 – Almoravids (Muslim Crusaders) (see 1050) conquer western Ghana
1086 – Almoravids (Muslim Crusaders) (see 1050) send help to Andalus, Battle of Zallaca
1090 – 1091 Almoravids (Muslim Crusaders) occupy all of Andalus except Saragossa and Balearic Islands

The truth is Islam is a political ideology masquerading as a faith.

These figures are a rough estimate of the death of non-Muslims by the political act of jihad.

Thomas Sowell [Thomas Sowell, Race and Culture, BasicBooks, 1994, p. 188] estimates that 11 million slaves were shipped across the Atlantic and 14 million were sent to the Islamic nations of North Africa and the Middle East. For every slave captured many others died. Estimates of this collateral damage vary. The renowned missionary David Livingstone estimated that for every slave who reached a plantation, five others were killed in the initial raid or died of illness and privation on the forced march.[Woman’s Presbyterian Board of Missions, David Livingstone, p. 62, 1888] Those who were left behind were the very young, the weak, the sick and the old. These soon died since the main providers had been killed or enslaved. So, for 25 million slaves delivered to the market, we have an estimated death of about 120 million people. Islam ran the wholesale slave trade in Africa.
120 million Africans

The number of Christians martyred by Islam is 9 million [David B. Barrett, Todd M. Johnson, World Christian Trends AD 30-AD 2200, William Carey Library, 2001, p. 230, table 4-10] . A rough estimate by Raphael Moore in History of Asia Minor is that another 50 million died in wars by jihad. So counting the million African Christians killed in the 20th century we have:
60 million Christians

Back on February 15th of this year, reported that

A LifeWay Research poll has found that one in three American citizens fear that Islamic Shariah Law could be applied in the United States, following reports of the first known Islamic Tribunal court opening in Texas. The survey also found that only one in four Americans agree that the terror group ISIS represents the true nature of Islam.

“ISIS has stirred an odd religious debate in America today,” said Ed Stetzer, executive director of LifeWay Research. “In a nation that has long espoused religious freedom, Americans are thinking long and hard about the kind of society Islam fosters — especially the more radical groups that say they are Islamic — and whether Shariah law would ever be adopted here.”

The poll found that four in 10, or 43 percent of all respondents, believe that Islam can create a peaceful society.

Seventy-six percent of Protestant senior pastors revealed that they are in favor of military action against the terror group.

The poll surveyed 1,000 people; was conducted between Sept. 19-Oct. 5, 2014, and reports with 95 percent confidence that the sampling error does not exceed plus or minus 3.5 percent.

LifeWay’s poll found that Americans largely disagree with Obama’s assertions that ISIS has nothing to do with Islam, however. Only one in four, or 22 percent of the respondents, agreed with that statement, while three in 10 said they are not sure of the link.

There was a notable split in views among demographic lines, with Americans over 45 revealing that they’re more skeptical of Islam than the younger generation. Almost half, or 47 percent of the over 45 age-group respondents said they’re worried about Shariah law in America, while only 27 percent of those between 18 to 44 had similar concerns.

“Every religion has a broad spectrum of groups that fall under their umbrella,” said Stetzer. “Who is mainstream or extreme, who is orthodox or heretical is often a topic of fierce debate.”

First off…while I have met some very nice American Muslims, I have also been inside a mosque where I was looked at as if they wanted to take a scimitar to my neck.

If Moderate Muslims are not behind their radical brethren’s eternal jihad against us infidels, they need to get their mugs in front of the cable news networks’ TV cameras and say so…because all I see representing them when I turn on the news, are the abrasive members of CAIR, blaming America for all the world’s troubles.

Which is ironic, because the President of the United States of America is demonstrably Islam’s biggest supporter in this country, as so aptly proven by his refusal to participate in January’ssslast weekend’s March Against Radical Islam, led by 50 World Leaders, in Paris France.

Secondly, why are American liberals so naively defending these barbarians?

Are they so contrary, as to not realize that Radical Islam punishes every single social issue that American Liberals so “righteously” defend in this nation?

The maddening thing is that every time you challenge liberals on this fact, they try to equate radical Islam with American Christianity.

Frankly, the ignorance of these young Liberals blows my mind.

Now, I am not saying that every Muslim is on a jihad against “the infidels”.


When Christians become “radicalized”, we want to share the testimony of what God has done for us through His love, with everyone we meet. We get involved in our local church and we become better fathers, mothers, sisters, brothers, and American Citizens.

When Muslims become “radicalized”, they want to “kill the Infidels” in the name of “Allah the Merciful”.

In the case of the Chechen Muslim brothers who bombed the Boston Marathon, their immersion into Radical Islam led them to “kill the infidels” that horrendous day.

In the case of the barbarians of ISIS, it has turned them into doppelgangers of the Nazi Butchers of Dachau.

Islam and Christianity present two very different Deities, who may share some similarities, but who have different identities and ultimately different standards. To pretend they are the same is not only to be clueless of the faith of 70-75% of the citizens of this nation, but, to be ignorant of an integral part of our American Heritage, the legacy of Christian Faith, which our Founding Fathers bequeathed us.

The Father of our Country, our First President, George Washington, once delivered the following mighty words to a fledgling nation:

You do well to wish to learn our arts and ways of life, and above all, the religion of Jesus Christ. These will make you a greater and happier people than you are.

While we are zealously performing the duties of good citizens and soldiers, we certainly ought not to be inattentive to the higher duties of religion. To the distinguished character of Patriot, it should be our highest glory to add the more distinguished character of Christian.

The blessing and protection of Heaven are at all times necessary but especially so in times of public distress and danger. The General hopes and trusts that every officer and man will endeavor to live and act as becomes a Christian soldier, defending the dearest rights and liberties of his country.

I now make it my earnest prayer that God would… most graciously be pleased to dispose us all to do justice, to love mercy, and to demean ourselves with that charity, humility, and pacific temper of the mind which were the characteristics of the Divine Author of our blessed religion.

Please notice that the words, “ACCEPT CHRIST AS YOUR SAVIOR OR DIE” were nowhere in this transcript.

For Liberals to continue to espouse their false equivalency between Radical Islam and Christianity, is disingenuous at best, and just plain out-and-out lying at worst.

Professing to be wise, they became fools. – Romans 1:22

Until He Comes,



Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,701 other followers