Posts Tagged ‘Ronald Reagan’

Pope Francis: The Pope of the Far Left

May 17, 2015

th (7)The current Leader of the Catholic Church, Pope Francis, has chosen a very different path than any of his predecessors.

And, from this Christian American’s Viewpoint, that is not necessarily a good thing.

Yahoo News Canada reports that

Pope Francis’ hard-hitting criticisms of globalization and inequality long ago set him out as a leader unafraid of mixing theology and politics. He is now flexing the Vatican’s diplomatic muscles as well.

Last year, he helped to broker an historic accord between Cuba and the United States after half a century of hostility.

This past week, his office announced the first formal accord between the Vatican and the State of Palestine — a treaty that gives legal weight to the Holy See’s longstanding recognition of de-facto Palestinian statehood despite clear Israeli annoyance.

The pope ruffled even more feathers in Turkey last month by referring to the massacre of up to 1.5 million Armenians in the early 20th century as a “genocide”, something Ankara denies.

After the inward-looking pontificate of his scholarly predecessor, Pope Benedict, Francis has in some ways returned to the active Vatican diplomacy practiced by the globetrotting Pope John Paul II, widely credited for helping to end the Cold War.

Much of his effort has concentrated on improving relations between different faiths and protecting the embattled Middle East Christians, a clear priority for the Catholic Church.

However in an increasingly fractured geopolitical world, his diplomacy is less obviously aligned to one side in a global standoff between competing blocs than that of John Paul’s 27-year-long papacy.

This is reinforced by his status as the world’s first pope from Latin America, a region whose turbulent history, widespread poverty and love-hate relationship with the United States has given him an entirely different political grounding from any of his European predecessors.

“Under this pope, the Vatican’s foreign policy looks South,” said Massimo Franco, a prominent Italian political commentator and author of several books on the Vatican.

He said the pope has been careful to avoid taking sides on issues like Ukraine, where he has never defined Russia as an aggressor, but has always referred to the conflict between the government and Moscow-backed rebels as a civil war.

That approach is intended to ensure he remains more credible with countries like Syria, Russia or Cuba, all nations where Francis feels he can help local Christians best by steering an independent course.

DIPLOMATIC RISKS

Francis already has his hands full overhauling the Vatican’s complex internal bureaucracy after a series of financial and sexual scandals involving abuse of children by priests which date back decades.

But clearly deeply interested in how the world outside the walls of the Vatican works, he appears determined to use his position and the huge global audience he commands to challenge entrenched diplomatic positions as well.

The former secretary of state, Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, a veteran insider whose office formerly controlled both relations with foreign powers and many internal Vatican affairs, has been replaced. His office has been downgraded to resemble a more classical diplomatic service while Francis has set a bolder, more personal stamp on Vatican foreign policy.

“He’s someone who’s capable of praying in the Blue Mosque in Istanbul and then talking about the Armenian genocide. He’s not someone who’s bound by political correctness,” said former Italian Foreign Minister Franco Frattini.

“It’s the diplomacy of a real leader.”

Whether it is to the taste of all the world’s 1.2 billion Catholics, world politicians with priorities of their own or even the many layers of the Church’s own administration is another matter.

With many conservative Catholics unhappy about the pope’s focus on issues like economic injustice and his relatively tolerant tone on sensitive social topics like homosexuality and the status of divorced people, pronounced views on delicate diplomatic issues could cause further division in the Church.

It is a point where he will be particularly tested in September on his upcoming visit to the United States, where some conservative U.S. Catholics are openly hostile.

After helping to foster last year’s agreement reviving diplomatic relations between Havana and Washington, Francis reaped criticism from many U.S. conservatives, including Marco Rubio, a candidate for the Republican nomination for president.

Rubio, the son of Cuban immigrants and a practicing Catholic, avoided directly admonishing the pope, but said he should “take up the cause of freedom and democracy” in Cuba.

That kind of veiled criticism from a politician who would normally be considered a staunch Church ally reflects the wider unease some Catholics feel at the change Francis has ushered in at one of the world’s most conservative institutions.

“Bishops complain that he becomes popular by attacking the Church,” said Franco.

“He speaks directly to the people and doesn’t respect the usual command structures. He decides on his own or with people who are not those who previously had a central role.”

In other words, he is the first pope who seemingly represents the Far Left Political Viewpoint.

Pope Francis seems more comfortable reaching out to Communist and Socialist countries, then he does to the Vatican’s Traditional allies, those countries who enjoy strong economies, built upon freedom and a competitive marketplace.

I know that I may sound like an old cracker, but my generation was blessed with three very remarkable leaders: United States President Ronald Reagan, British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, and Pope John Paul II.

These three stood for everything that was good about freedom.

All three knew the dangers and corruption of the implementation of Marxist Theory through the governments of man.

Here is what the wonderful and gracious Pope John Paul II said about an out-of-control Nanny-State (Socialist) Government:

By intervening directly and depriving society of its responsibility, the Social Assistance State leads to a loss of human energies and an inordinate increase of public agencies, which are dominated more by bureaucratic thinking than by concern for serving their clients, and which are accompanied by an enormous increase in spending, In fact, it would appear that needs are best understood and satisfied by people who are closest to them who act as neighbors to those in need. It should be added that certain kinds of demands often call for a response which is not simply material but which is capable of perceiving the deeper human need.

And, while this present Pontiff is romancing the Palestinians, Pope John Paul II reached out to God’s Chosen People.

In 1994, John Paul II established full diplomatic ties between the Vatican and Israel. He said,

For the Jewish people who live in the State of Israel and who preserve in that land such precious testimonies to their history and their faith, we must ask for the desired security and the due tranquillity that are the prerogative of every nation . . .

Pope John Paul II also said…

The historical experience of socialist countries has sadly demonstrated that collectivism does not do away with alienation but rather increases it, adding to it a lack of basic necessities and economic inefficiency.

Why is this present Pope supporting the enemies of Freedom…and of God’s Chosen People?

Being a peacemaker is one thing. Being an enabler of the Enemies of Freedom is quite another.

 Until He Comes,

KJ

Obama Vs. Fox News: Government-Controlled Media Vs. Freedom of Information

May 13, 2015

obamabillofrightsObama, through the recent powers granted to the Federal Communication Commission, is already trying to seize control of the Internet.

Now, he wants to seize control of Fox News.

According to Fox News,

At the Georgetown University discussion on Tuesday, Obama lamented how, sometimes, the poor are cast as “sponges” who don’t want to work. 

“I have to say that if you watch Fox News on a regular basis, it is a constant menu — they will find folks who make me mad,” Obama said. “I don’t know where they find them. They’re like, I don’t want to work, I just want a free Obama phone or whatever. … And very rarely do you hear an interview of a waitress — which is much more typical — who’s raising a couple of kids and is doing everything right but still can’t pay the bills.” 

Obama went on to call for a change in not only how GOP leaders in Congress “think” — but how the news media cover these issues: 

“We’re going to have to change how our body politic thinks, which means we’re going to have to change how the media reports on these issues and how people’s impressions of what it’s like to struggle in this economy looks like, and how budgets connect to that. And that’s a hard process because that requires a much broader conversation than typically we have on the nightly news.” 

The remark, while perhaps an off-the-cuff moment, only revived concerns about the federal government taking an uncomfortable interest in how the media reports. 

“No matter what bias you feel exists in any news outlet, the president, nor any other elected official should feel they have the right or ability to censor the media,” said Joseph Desilets, Republican strategist and managing partner at the D.C.-based political consulting firm 21st & Main. 

“Had George W. Bush made the same assertion, it would have been considered tyranny. The president doesn’t get to tell the media how to do its job. That’s outrageous,” said Tim Graham, director of the conservative Media Research Center and executive editor at NewsBusters. 

Only a year ago, the Federal Communications Commission scrapped plans to pursue a controversial study of American newsrooms. 

The study as originally proposed would have sent researchers into American newsrooms across the country to ask what critics called intrusive questions about editorial judgment and practices. The FCC eventually acknowledged some of those questions “overstepped the bounds of what is required,” and shelved a pilot study. The initial proposal for the study called for looking into issues like “perceived station bias” and “perceived responsiveness to underserved populations.” 

Graham, referring to Obama’s comments Tuesday, also said, “Obama can go after Fox because other news outlets don’t see it as an attack on them.”

For years, the Main Stream Media has been in bed with politicians and business moguls. While, touting objectivity, they have often fallen way short of that goal.

The Media really came into its own during the 80’s, with the advent of Cable Television, the Iranian Hostage Crisis, and the ascension and election of President Ronald Wilson Reagan. Their advocacy of all things Liberal became very apparent, as they attacked the greatest president of this generation, mercilessly, giving no quarter.

I believe that Reagan’s election was a wake up call to the MSM. They realized that, if let to their own devices, the American Public would elect a Conservative as president, every time. And, they just couldn’t have that. They were already in too deep to their Democratic, Progressive Masters.

So, America’s Media forsook their objectivity, choosing to help to shape current events, instead of just reporting on them, in an effort to produce outcomes which would be most beneficial to the Progressive Cause.

Now, in 2015, after propping up Barack Hussein Obama and getting him re-elected, their own hubris has given them an exaggerated sense of self-importance, as to their role in our society.

Their Achilles’ Heel , the before-mentioned hubris, blinded them to the potential of the upstart Fox News Channel, and that has been their undoing, much to Obama’s consternation.

Every night of the week, the Fox News Channel beats the mainstream outlets in popularity. There is a reason for that.

Fox News is exactly what it claims to be: fair and balanced. The mainstream news channels are so far up Obama’s backside that they wouldn’t know the truth if it French-kissed them.

Just as it was during the Russian Revolution, when Vladimir Leninn seized control of Russia from the Czar, and just as it was during the era of the National Socialist Party in Germany, when a former altar boy and house painter named Adolf Hitler took over, the first thing that totalitarian governments do is to take control of media, for propaganda purposes.

Through threats, coercion, and promises of reward, that is exactly what Obama did when he took office.

Of course, he did not have to try very hard. The Main Stream Media were already Obama Fanboys, their staff being made up of a majority of Liberals.

Heck, they were posting fictitious propaganda about Barack Hussein Obama, before he was even elected president.

The election of Barack Hussein Obama is the best thing that ever happened to the Fox News Channel. It has solidified their position as the Leader in Cable News.

And, the thing about it, is the fact that Fox News is not the only source by which Americans can obtain the truth about Obama and his administration. The New Media, the Internet, has proven to be an invaluable source for dissemination of information.

Principled reporters, such as the late Andrew Breitbart and Michelle Malkin, turned up the heat on both Obama and the MSM, by providing an alternative source through which Americans can receive news, unfiltered by those in the Halls of Power.

For the president of United States to engage in a personal battle against those who provide information which is detrimental to his plans, is not only petty, but totalitarian in nature.

Just as Barack Hussein Obama’s wife’s mask slipped off recently to reveal the racist underneath, during these last couple of years of his Presidency, Obama’s own mask of Political Moderation, has completely fallen off to reveal a Far Left Socialist, intent on changing America from an exceptional Constitutional Republic to just another Democratic Socialist Country, where all of our American Freedoms, including the Freedom of Information, will be sacrificed for the good of the State.

Until He Comes.

KJ

Baltimore Burning: Community Organizer-in-Chief Blames Police First…Again

April 28, 2015

th (5)From 1985 – 1988, President Barack Hussein Obama was a Community Organizer in Chicago. What does a Community Organizer do? I’m glad you asked.

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

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

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

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

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

Remember all of that as you read this…

Yahoo News has the story…

WASHINGTON (AP) — Urging Americans to “do some soul-searching,” President Barack Obama expressed deep frustration Tuesday over recurring black deaths at the hands of police, rioters responding with senseless violence and a society that will only “feign concern” without addressing the root causes.

“This is not new. It’s been going on for decades,” Obama said from the White House a day after rioting erupted 40 miles north in Baltimore following the funeral for Freddie Gray, who died of a spinal cord injury after being arrested.

Gray is the latest black man to die at the hands of police, prompting protests and calls for criminal justice reform. Some have criticized America’s first black president for not speaking out forcefully enough as he tries to avoid criticism of law enforcement, and he responded by calling the deaths “a slow-rolling crisis.”

“We have seen too many instances of what appears to be police officers interacting with individuals, primarily African-American, often poor, in ways that raise troubling questions. It comes up, it seems like, once a week now,” Obama said. He said although such cases aren’t unprecedented, there’s new awareness as a result of cameras and social media. “We shouldn’t pretend that it’s new.”

Still, Obama showed no sympathy for rioters, saying those who stole from businesses and burned buildings and cars should be treated as criminals. Obama said they distracted from days of peaceful protests focused on legitimate concerns “over the possibility that our laws were not applied evenly in the case of Mr. Gray and that accountability needs to exist.”

“There’s no excuse for the kind of violence that we saw yesterday,” Obama said. “It is counterproductive. When individuals get crowbars and start prying open doors to loot, they’re not protesting, they’re not making a statement, they’re stealing.”

But he also criticized a society that doesn’t do enough to uplift poor minority communities. He said the solution to deep-seeded problems that spur violence include early education, criminal justice reform and job training, while suggesting that kind of a response is out of reach with a Republican Congress. “I’m under no illusion that out of this Congress we’re going to get massive investments in urban communities,” Obama said.

“It’s too easy to ignore those problems or to treat them just as a law-and-order issue as opposed to a broader social issue,” Obama said.

The president spoke during a state visit with Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, at one point apologizing to his guest for taking nearly 15 minutes of their news conference to discuss it. “I felt pretty strongly about it,” he said.

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

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

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

His habit of first blaming Law Enforcement Officers, before he says anything about those actually breaking the law, exacerbates the Racial Division, which Obama has sown so deftly during his time in office, while being supported by the Democrat Party and their professional race-baiters, diminishes the presidency.

When Ronald Reagan was president, he was in the Oval Office by 7:00 a.m. every morning, in a coat and tie, because he felt like his being in shirt sleeves was unseemly for the highest office in the land.

Obama saunters into the Oval Office every day about 10 a.m. or so, in shirt sleeves. Quite frankly, I’m surprised that he doesn’t wear his golf shorts and an Izod golf shirt.

Going to college, back in the day, one of the books I had to read for a Business Communications Course was “The Peter Principle”, which states that everyone, in their chosen profession, rises to their level of incompetence.

Unfortunately, for average hard-working Americans, Obama’s level of competence ended in 1988.

And, he’s been Community Organizing ever since.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Army Morale Remains Low Under Obama

April 16, 2015

 

 

MILITARY CUTS, OBAMA CARTOONSWhen I read the following story’s headline, my first response was,

Well, duuh!

USA Today reports that

More than half of some 770,000 soldiers are pessimistic about their future in the military and nearly as many are unhappy in their jobs, despite a six-year, $287 million campaign to make troops more optimistic and resilient, findings obtained by USA TODAY show.

Twelve months of data through early 2015 show that 403,564 soldiers, or 52%, scored badly in the area of optimism, agreeing with statements such as “I rarely count on good things happening to me.” Forty-eight percent have little satisfaction in or commitment to their jobs.

The results stem from resiliency assessments that soldiers are required to take every year. In 2014, for the first time, the Army pulled data from those assessments to help commanders gauge the psychological and physical health of their troops.

The effort produced startlingly negative results. In addition to low optimism and job satisfaction, more than half reported poor nutrition and sleep, and only 14% said they are eating right and getting enough rest.

The Army began a program of positive psychology in 2009 in the midst of two wars and as suicide and mental illness were on the rise. To measure resiliency the Army created a confidential, online questionnaire that all soldiers, including the National Guard and Reserve, must fill out once a year.

Last year, Army scientists applied formulas to gauge service-wide morale based on the assessments. The results demonstrate that positive psychology “has not had much impact in terms of overall health,” says David Rudd, president of the University of Memphis who served on a scientific panel critical of the resiliency program.

The Army offered contradictory responses to the findings obtained by USA TODAY. Sharyn Saunders, chief of the Army Resiliency Directorate that produced the data, initially disavowed the results. “I’ve sat and looked at your numbers for quite some time and our team can’t figure out how your numbers came about,” she said in an interview in March.

However, when USA TODAY provided her the supporting Army documents this week, her office acknowledged the data but said the formulas used to produce them were obsolete. “We stand by our previous responses,” it said in a statement.

Subsequent to USA TODAY’s inquiry, the Army calculated new findings but lowered the threshold for a score to be a positive result. As a consequence, for example, only 9% of 704,000 score poorly in optimism.

The Army said the effort to use the questionnaire results to gauge morale Army-wide is experimental. “We continue to refine our methodologies and threshold values to get the most accurate results possible,” it said in the statement.

The Army’s effort to use positive psychology to make soldiers more resilient has been controversial since its inception in 2009. A blue-ribbon panel of scientists from the Institute of Medicine, part of the National Academy of Sciences, concluded last year that there is little or no evidence the program prevents mental illness. It argued there was no effort to test its efficacy before the Army embraced it . The panel cited research arguing that, in fact, the program could be harmful if it leaves soldiers with a false sense of resiliency.

The Army disputed the findings, pushing ahead with its positive psychology program that now costs more than $50 million a year. At least 2.45 million soldiers have taken a self-assessment test that is a crucial part of the resiliency training, and 28,000 GIs have been instructed on how to teach other soldiers the curriculum.

Back on November 12, 2007, then-Senator Barack Hussein Obama (D-IL) proclaimed,

I’ll be a President who ensures that America serves our men and women in uniform as well as they’ve served us, and that’s why I’m proud to have the support of these veterans advising me on the issues facing our troops and veterans.

After seven years of an Administration that has stretched our military to the breaking point, ignored deplorable conditions at some VA hospitals, and neglected the planning and preparation necessary to care for our returning heroes, America’s veterans deserve a President who will fight for them not just when it’s easy or convenient, but every hour of every day for the next four years.

An ounce of pretension is worth a pound of manure.

Obama is our Armed Forces Commander in-Chief (unfortunately). The responsibility for everything that happens to the men and women serving in our armed forces, in which some part of our federal government is involved, both during and after their service, falls on his shoulders and his alone.

Through his treatment of our Heroes as “ancillary” servants to be used for social experimentation and budget cutting, when he wants to use their money to further his socialization of America, Obama has placed our Armed Forces in an untenable situation.

Distinguished American Veteran, Former United States Representative Lt. Col. Allen B. West wrote the following, concerning Obama’s treatment of our Armed Forces:

Barack Hussein Obama cannot be seen as a Commander-in-Chief and I will never refer to him that way. His fundamental transformation of America means weakening our nation and leaving our Republic less secure. I can just imagine how appreciative and elated his Muslim Brotherhood friends are at this point, to include Turkey’s President Erdogan, as well as the mad mullahs in Iran.

Spot on.

I remember my ex-brother-in-law, Dave. My late step-sister met him at the USO in Memphis during the Vietnam War. David was a Polish Catholic from outside of Detroit, a Navy guy who received his training in the computers of the day, while in service to our country. When he got out, they got married and moved to Dearborn (now Dearbornistan), Michigan, where he got a job with Burroughs. I remember Dave, because he was always good to me, even though I was just a runt kid, 15 years younger than him. I remember him cleaning his service rifle, sitting on the living room floor of our house, and, making sure it was empty, allowing me to to hold it. At the time,I thought that was the coolest thing I had ever done.

I also remember John. John was a friend of my sister’s, who stayed with us, because of problems at home. As I have related before, my folks were the ones whom all my sister’s friends would talk to when they had trouble at home. John was great guy, as well, who wound up enlisting and serving in that “crazy Asian War”, as Kenny Rogers and Mel Tillis once referred to it in song.

I have related before about my own Daddy and my Uncles, and their service in World War II. I have also had friends that served over the years, and one who is still serving in the Air National Guard.

All of these men were/are Patriots. They enlisted out of duty to God and Country.

Our Brightest and Best, who wear the uniform today, are no less dedicated. They deserve to be treated with respect, not as pawns in a game of political expediency, whose rules including social experimentation, political correctness, and blatant disrespect by the Commander-in-Chief..

The greatest American President in my lifetime, Ronald Reagan, once said,

Of the four wars in my lifetime, none came about because the U.S. was too strong.

Reagan was a realist. He realized that, as President Theodore “Teddy” Roosevelt once advised, the best way to keep America safe, is to “Speak softly and carry a big stick”.

Unfortunately for us, we are presently suffering through a president who speaks like a wuss and carries a feather pillow, a Mexican Flag, and a prayer rug.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Saving America From Oblivion (A KJ Op Ed)

March 27, 2015

Obama-Shrinks-2Conservatives continued to outnumber moderates and liberals in the U.S. population in 2014, as they have since 2009. However, their 14-percentage-point edge over liberals last year, 38% vs. 24%, is the smallest in Gallup’s trends since 1992. The percentage of U.S. adults identifying themselves as politically conservative in 2014 was unchanged from 2013, as was the percentage of moderates, at 34%, while the percentage considering themselves liberal rose a percentage point for the third straight year. – Gallup.com

As I am wont to do, from time to time, this Saturday morning’s post is going to be an Opinion editorial, or an Op Ed.

When did America stop being the Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave…and start being the Land of the Restricted and the Home of the Apologetic?

Regardless of what your first thought probably is, this phenomenon did not originate with Barack Hussein Obama, it just intensified with him.

In American Politics, as far as anybody can remember, that is still alive and kicking, you have had those of a political ideology who were Pro-American and Gung Ho about all the things that this country stands for. And, on the other side, you had those of a political ideology who criticized everything that America stood for, and still stands, for to this day.

From those who believed that Communism would be great for America back in the 1950s, to those in the 1960’s, who wanted to “tune in, turn on, and drop out”, and spit on our returning Servicemen, to those of the 1970s who were naive pacifists like their President, Jimmy Carter, to those in the 1980s, who were part of the “Me Generation”, to those whom we call “Progressives” (a misnomer) or “Modern Liberals” in our present generation, there has always been a minority segment of American Society, who despise everything that this land, which was given us by the Almighty and was fought for and died for by those before us, stands for, while they reap all the benefits of America the Beautiful.

Hypocritical, No?

Back in simpler times, a lot of Americans had a bumper sticker that read

America… Love it or Leave it.

I’d love to have a bumper sticker that said,

America… Stand for her or shut up.

I guess that the reason that I’m speaking of this on this crisp March morning before Palm Sunday, is that I am fed up with our first anti-American President and all his sycophantic, unwitting minions, who cannot understand the peril that we are facing. It’s one thing to go around like an ostrich with your head in the sand, but it sure does limit your view of what is happening around you, while showing off your hindquarters to the rest of the world.

Unfortunately, that is exactly what is happening to our nation today.

The trouble with our Liberal friends is not that they’re ignorant; it’s just that they know so much that isn’t so. – Ronald Reagan

Modern American Liberals, from President Barack Hussein Obama on down the line,  believe intrinsically that they are the smartest people in any room that they walk into, an arrogance which blinds them to reality 99.9% of the time.

…foreign policy is the area where I am probably most confident that I know more and understand the world better than Sen. Clinton or Sen. McCain.”- Barack Hussein Obama, April 2008

Uh huh.

Lost in the fog of his own hubris, Obama, in his zeal to form what he believes to be a lasting agreement with the Rogue Barbaric Islamic State of Iran, which includes trusting them implicitly not to use the nuclear bomb, to blow us off the face of the earth, which he is going to allow them to have,  seriously believes that the Iranians will be faithful to this farce of an agreement. His own mistaken faith in his own “superior intellect” will not allow him to believe otherwise. In his quest to leave a legacy, other than the destruction of our country, as we know it,

President Obama’s foreign policy is one of saying, first of all, America’s just another nation with a flag. – Mitt Romney, 11/22/2011

Unfortunately, his domestic policy is no better than his foreign policy, which leaves the overwhelming majority of Americans with no sense of security in Obama’s ability to lead, whatsoever.

78% of Americans are worried about the direction of the nation’s economy in the next year – Fox News 2014 Midterm Elections Exit Poll

That is, those of us who do not have our heads placed firmly in the sand and our hindquarters sticking defiantly up in the air.

Fortunately, the number of Americans we’re walking around without blinders on, with a panoramic world view, and with their hindquarters exactly where they are supposed to be, is growing in number, as proven by the midterm elections of 2014.

Do not allow the members of a minority political ideology, which only comprises 24% of America’s population, convince you that everyone feels about America the way they do.

Liberals truly believe and shriek at the top of their lungs that calling out Obama on his ineptness and incompetency means that you are “against America”.

That is not the case.

Ask “Bubba”:

Obama, Bill Clinton said, “doesn’t know how to be president” and is “incompetent.”- “The Amateur”, Edward Klein, May, 2012

As certain as I am about the love of my 7-year old grandson, I possess that same certainty that the overwhelming majority of Americans are becoming very aware of the perilous situation, which this administration has placed us in.

This awareness will manifest itself in the upcoming months as we near the 2016 presidential election.

Whoever winds up as the Republican Presidential Candidate, must not only also possess that awareness, but must possess the oral skills to communicate that awareness and also, a passion to protect and serve the United States of America, a nation which he must love with all his heart.

That is what it will take to stop this “Shining City Upon a Hill”, from becoming a third-world barrio…and to continue our existence as a nation.

Until He Comes,

KJ

On the Eve of Destruction: Obama Gives Iran the Bomb

March 27, 2015

Peace-our-Time-600-LASince the ouster of the Shah, Iran has been a thorn in the side of the Free World, and, especially, the United States of America. Are you old enough to remember the Hostage Crisis? If not, here is a summary, courtesy of u-s-history.com:

On November 4, 1979, an angry mob of some 300 to 500 “students” who called themselves “Imam’s Disciples,” laid siege to the American Embassy in Teheran, Iran, to capture and hold hostage 66 U.S. citizens and diplomats. Although women and African-Americans were released a short time later, 51 hostages remained imprisoned for 444 days with another individual released because of illness midway through the ordeal.

…Upon the death of the shah in July [1980] (which neutralized one demand) and the Iraqi invasion of Iran in September (necessitating weapons acquisition), Iran became more amenable to reopening negotiations for the hostages’ release.

In the late stages of the presidential race with Ronald Reagan, Carter, given those new parameters, might have been able to bargain with the Iranians, which might have clinched the election for him. The 11th-hour heroics were dubbed an “October Surprise”* by the Reagan camp — something they did not want to see happen.

Allegations surfaced that William Casey, director of the Reagan campaign, and some CIA operatives, secretly met with Iranian officials in Europe to arrange for the hostages’ release, but not until after the election. If true, some observers aver, dealing with a hostile foreign government to achieve a domestic administration’s defeat would have been grounds for charges of treason.

Reagan won the election, partly because of the failure of the Carter administration to bring the hostages home. Within minutes of Reagan’s inauguration, the hostages were released.

And, now, all these years later, the 44th President of the United States of America, Barack Hussein Obama, is handing the Rogue State of Radical Muslim Barbarians the means of the destruction if the United States of America.

Schmuck.

The Washington Free Beacon reports that

The Obama administration is giving in to Iranian demands about the scope of its nuclear program as negotiators work to finalize a framework agreement in the coming days, according to sources familiar with the administration’s position in the negotiations.U.S. negotiators are said to have given up ground on demands that Iran be forced to disclose the full range of its nuclear activities at the outset of a nuclear deal, a concession experts say would gut the verification the Obama administration has vowed would stand as the crux of a deal with Iran.

Until recently, the Obama administration had maintained that it would guarantee oversight on Tehran’s program well into the future, and that it would take the necessary steps to ensure that oversight would be effective. The issue has now emerged as a key sticking point in the talks.

Concern from sources familiar with U.S. concessions in the talks comes amid reports that Iran could be permitted to continue running nuclear centrifuges at an underground site once suspected of housing illicit activities.

This type of concession would allow Iran to continue work related to its nuclear weapons program, even under the eye of international inspectors. If Iran removes inspectors—as it has in the past—it would be left with a nuclear infrastructure immune from a strike by Western forces.

“Once again, in the face of Iran’s intransigence, the U.S. is leading an effort to cave even more toward Iran—this time by whitewashing Tehran’s decades of lying about nuclear weapons work and current lack of cooperation with the [International Atomic Energy Agency],” said one Western source briefed on the talks but who was not permitted to speak on record.

With the White House pressing to finalize a deal, U.S. diplomats have moved further away from their demands that Iran be subjected to oversight over its nuclear infrastructure.

“Instead of ensuring that Iran answers all the outstanding questions about the past and current military dimensions of their nuclear work in order to obtain sanctions relief, the U.S. is now revising down what they need to do,” said the source.  “That is a terrible mistake—if we don’t have a baseline to judge their past work, we can’t tell if they are cheating in the future, and if they won’t answer now, before getting rewarded, why would they come clean in the future?”

The United States is now willing to let Iran keep many of its most controversial military sites closed to inspectors until international sanctions pressure has been lifted, according to sources.

This scenario has been criticized by nuclear experts, including David Albright, founder and president of the Institute for Science and International Security.

Albright told Congress in November that “a prerequisite for any comprehensive agreement is for the IAEA to know when Iran sought nuclear weapons, how far it got, what types it sought to develop, and how and where it did this work.”

“The IAEA needs a good baseline of Iran’s military nuclear activities, including the manufacturing of equipment for the program and any weaponization related studies, equipment, and locations,” Albright said.

One policy expert familiar with the concessions told the Washington Free Beacon that it would be difficult for the administration to justify greater concessions given the centrality of this issue in the broader debate.

“The Obama administration has gone all-in on the importance of verification,” said the source, who asked for anonymity because the administration has been known to retaliate against critics in the policy community. “But without knowing what the Iranians have it’s impossible for the IAEA to verify that they’ve given it up.”

A lesser emphasis is also being placed on Iran coming clean about its past efforts to build nuclear weapons. The Islamic Republic continues to stall United Nations efforts to determine the extent of its past weapons work, according to the Wall Street Journal.

By placing disclosure of Iran’s past military efforts on the back burner, the administration could harm the ability of outside inspectors to take full inventory of Iran’s nuclear know-how, according to sources familiar with the situation.

It also could jeopardize efforts to keep Iran at least one year away from building a bomb, sources said.

On the diplomatic front, greater concessions are fueling fears among U.S. allies that Iran will emerge from the negations as a stronger regional power.

United States President Barack Hussein Obama has proven himself to be more concerned about America’s Enemies than our Allies…and, more concerned about reaching out to Muslim Radicals than demanding the release of Christian American Pastor Saeed Abedina, who has been held captive by Iran since the summer of 2012.

Obama, Kerry, and the rest of his Liberal Dhimmi Cabal has shown where their loyalties unequivocally lie, with their braggadocio over this Chamberlain-esque “deal” that is now blowing up in his face, and placing our very nation in imminent danger..

And, they are not with our allies nor the safety of the citizens of the United States.

Iran has always been, since the ouster of the Shah, a rogue nation. They are a threat to every nation who stands in the way of their crazed Political Ideology, disguised as a “religion”.

Either due to naivete or simple over-estimation of their own intelligence, on the part of Obama and his Administration, as regards their “superior intellect”, to quote Fred Thompson, as Admiral Josh Painter, in the great movie “The Hunt for Red October”…

This business will get out of control. It will get out of control and we’ll be lucky to live through it.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 
 
 
 

Obama WH Sucks Up to Iran, Celebrates Iranian National Holiday

March 15, 2015

 

 

Peace-our-Time-600-LAPresident Barack Hussein Obama, who, in the name of “diversity”, once declared that we were no longer just a Christian Nation, last week, practiced what he preached, by celebrating the National Holiday of…IRAN!

TheHill.com reports that

The White House this week celebrated Nowruz, the Persian New Year most often observed by Iranians.

The festivities come amid tense negotiations between the White House and Tehran. President Obama hopes Iran will slow or stop its nuclear weapons program in exchange for removing economic sanctions.

First Lady Michelle Obama praised the holiday in remarks at the executive mansion Wednesday. The event featured a Persian dinner and a dance troop’s performance.

“I think it’s so fitting we’re holding this celebration here today,” Michelle Obama said. “One of the things I love about the White House is how it truly is the people’s house. It is a house that reflects the diversity of culture and traditions that make us who we are as a country. Nowruz is one of those traditions.”

The U.S. is targeting a tentative outline of the deal by the end of the month.

Britain, France, China, Germany and Russia are aiding America’s efforts, with talks resuming in Lausanne, Switzerland, next week.

A group of 47 GOP Senators revolted against President Obama’s strategy Monday, sending Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran’s Supreme Leader, an open letterpromising Congress will end any agreement it finds harms American interests.

Obama on Friday said he was “embarrassed” by the lawmaker’s actions. Khamenei, meanwhile, criticized it Thursday as proof of Western “tricks and deceptions” in the negotiations.

The first lady made no mention of Iran in Wednesday’s speech. She did praise the ancient festival as one of “family and community.”

“For more than 3,000 years, families and communities in the Middle East, Asia and all around the world — including here in the United States — have celebrated this holiday to mark the renewal of the Earth in springtime,” she said. “It’s to reflect on the year before and make new commitments to good health and prosperity in the year ahead.”

Nowruz marks the start of both spring and the beginning of the Persian calendar each year.

A central facet of Nowruz celebrations are “Haft Sin,” or “the seven S’s” in Persian. Participants display seven items (all beginning with “S” in Persian) as symbols of new hopes for the next year.

The first lady said Wednesday the White House has its own Haft Sin display this Nowruz. Example she cited included an apple for beauty, grass for rejuvenation and crushed berry spices for “the spice of life.”

Instead of negotiating from a position of strength, as Ronald Reagan did with Iran in 1980, Obama is sucking up to them.

Again, per TheHill.com,

Former United Nations Ambassador John Bolton said Saturday that President Obama is negotiating “an unprecedented act of surrender” with Iran in discussions over its nuclear weapons program.

“This deal is fundamentally flawed,” Bolton said at the South Carolina National Security Action Summit in West Columbia, S.C. “There really is no deal I’d trust Iran with. It is a regime determined to have nuclear weapons and this deal will give it to them.”

The Obama administration is hoping Iran will slow or stop its nuclear armaments research in exchange for removing economic sanctions. Britain, China, France, Germany and Russia are aiding U.S. efforts to bargain with Iran. The two sides will resume talks in Lausanne, Switzerland, next week.

… “The president coddles the Iranian ayatollah and attacks his own countrymen and our closest allies over this deal,” Bolton said Saturday. “The danger we hope to avoid is now imminent. This is just one example of how the President doesn’t care about America’s national security.”

…Bolton said Saturday that Obama’s eagerness for a deal would give Tehran a “free pass” for nuclear arms. He said American voters should thus make national security the central issue of 2016’s presidential elections.

“The gravest threat to our national security sits in the Oval Office,” Bolton said. “The next two years can’t pass swiftly enough. For God’s sake, let’s not make the same mistake in 2016.”

So, let me get this straight: President Pantywaist, dhimmi that he is, has not only, as I reported a while back, been secretly writing love letters to our sworn enemy, Iran, a Radical Muslim Rogue State, who is building a nuclear bomb, in order to wipe us off the face of the Earth, in an effort to recruit them to join us in our fight against ISIS, an Organization of Radical Muslims, who stated that they were going to plant their flag on top of the White House, last week, he authorized OUR Government to celebrate a National Holiday of our mortal enemy, Iran.

My Dear Lord.

Right now, in our nation, the political winds have shifted in an ugly direction for President Pantywaist and his political party, thanks to Obama’s lack of leadership. Political Partisanship has intensified to such an extent, that political pundits on both sides of the aisle, have labeled the situation between the parties, a “Civil War”.

Instead of seriously attempting to unite the country he is supposed to be serving and protecting, Obama, as exhibited by his behavior toward those 47 Congressmen, is acting like a petulant child, insisting that everybody play by his rules, or else, he will take his ball and go home, in defense of a country who sponsors Islamic Terrorism, with whom we have not had diplomatic relations since the Radical Muslims took over, after they revolted against the Moderate Government of the Shah in 1979.

What does he think that he is accomplishing through this Chamberlain-esque Negotiation Strategy? That is, other than helping them with their “Nuclear Enhancement Program”, so they can launch one at us quicker?

He negotiates with those who want to kill us, and gives ultimatums to his own countrymen.

Some observations…

1 The Iranian Government is not secular. It is the product of a fanatical political ideology, disguised as a “faith. The Ayatollahs rule Iran. The president and “secular Government” carry out their wishes, and are simply figureheads.

2. Nowhere in Obama’s Negotiations with Iran has he or Secretary of State John Kerry called for the halt of Uranium Enrichment in Iran. Infact, now, they’ve given them a timeline in which to complete it.

3. A Christian American Pastor, Saeed Abedini, has been held in jail by the Iranian Government, since the summer of 2012m as I recently reported. Why does the Obama Administration care more about negotiating appeasement with a hostile, barbaric Foreign Government, than securing the freedom of an American Christian Pastor?

Wars have been started for less than that.

President Reagan advised to “Trust, but Verify”.

Evidently, Obama’s message is to “Trust Islam…Limit American Christianity”.

As I have written before, this has the potential of not ending well.

He truly is our first Anti-American President.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Obama Blames the Police for Racial Unrest…Forgets About Personal Responsibility

March 7, 2015

AFBrancoBlackLeadereship12114I thought that the President of the United States of America was supposed to UNITE the country…not DIVIDE it.

Washingtonpost.com reports that…

In his first comments since the Justice Department released a report earlier this week detailing racial bias in the Ferguson, Mo., police department, President Obama called Friday for “collective action and mobilization” to resolve tensions between minority communities and law enforcement.

“I think that there are circumstances in which trust between communities and law enforcement have broken down, and individuals or entire departments may not have the training or the accountability to make sure that they’re protecting and serving all people and not just some,” he said on the Joe Madison Radio Show on Sirius XM Friday. “…I don’t think that is typical of what happens across the country, but it’s not an isolated incident.”

The Justice Department cleared officer Darren Wilson in a Ferguson, Mo., civil rights probe, but in a separate report, the agency accused the police department of bias and cited offensive e-mails. (The Washington Post)
Ahead of a commemoration of the civil rights movement this weekend in Selma, Ala., Obama later called the civil rights movement “an unfinished project,” pointing specifically to existing tensions in communities such as Ferguson, and in New York City.

“This was a quintessentially American moment,” he said on the Tom Joyner radio show of the march from Selma to Montgomery. “America at its best is about its capacity for change and not just denying problems but taking them head on. America at its best is also about ordinary people, we the people, making change.”

Obama added that too frequently people think of the civil rights movement as a distant, historic moment when in fact “this was just yesterday, basically.”

“Part of what I want Malia and Sasha to understand is that this an unfinished project,” Obama told Joyner. “There is work to be done right now. … It is a glorious task we are given to continually try to improve this country of ours. And we shouldn’t shy away from that work, and we shouldn’t be complacent about it.”

Breitbart.com reports that

On the eve of the commemoration of the 50th anniversary of the civil rights march in Selma, Alabama, the unemployment rate among African Americans remains more than twice that of white Americans and nearly twice the national average.

According to the latest jobs figures released Friday by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the African American unemployment rate for the month of February was 10.4 percent, compared to the white unemployment rate of 4.7 percent and national average of 5.5 percent.

The latest African American unemployment rate represents a slight uptick over the January figure of 10.3 percent. Whites experienced a slight decline in unemployment from January’s rate of 4.9 percent and the national average also dipped from 5.7 percent.

While the White House boasted about February’s job gains of 295,000 jobs and its 5.5 percent unemployment rate Friday morning, it did acknowledge the “unacceptably high” unemployment rates among African American and Hispanic populations.

In a statement about the jobs data Jason Furman, Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers, argued that while the African American and Hispanic unemployment is nearly down to pre-recession levels, it is still too high. He pointed to proposals from President Obama as efforts to help.

“This is why the President has proposed a number of policies—including the My Brother’s Keeper initiative for young men of color and tax relief for working families—to help reduce disparities in labor market outcomes,” Furman said.

Obama, the nation’s first African American president, and a number of lawmakers will be in Selma on this weekend to mark the 50th anniversary of the march.

Do you remember a couple of weeks ago, when a silly little Obama Spokeswoman claimed that the reason that the Radical Islamists, known as ISIS, were killing innocent Christians and Muslims over in the Middle East because they “needed Jobs”?

Well, I realize that I’m just an ig’nant old cracka’, living down here in the Bible Belt, but, it occurs to me that if the Ferguson and the New York City Rioters (paid and unpaid…thank you, George Soros)had jobs, they would not have been “so mistreated ” at the hands of those mean ol’ Police Officers (White, Black, Asian, and Hispanic).

So, perhaps the President of the United States should focus his attention to giving “his people” (which are actually supposed to be all of us)to educational training and cultural impetus to exercise personal responsibility, in order to gain employment, be men and women, support their families, and thrive as Americans.

A couple of years ago, I worked at our county’s State Employment Center Office.

While at the Employment Office, I was able to observe Americans, both Black and White, down on their luck, struggling to find work and survive in this economy. Unfortunately, the overwhelming majority of “unemployed ” who came to this particular office were Black.

I saw Black American Families whose existence living on the Government Dole, had become generational.

It is these people whom Obama and the Democrats have hypnotized into believing that Uncle Sugar loves them, and is their only solution to surviving a stifling existence.

They are so, so wrong.

The strength and vitality of America does not come from the benevolence of a Nanny-state Federal Government.

As the greatest American President of my lifetime, Ronald Reagan said:

The nine words you never want to hear are: I’m from the Government and I’m here to help.

Being enslaved to the Government Dole steals one’s ambition. It takes away any impetus or desire to create a better life for yourself and your family, to challenge yourself to pick yourself up by your bootstraps and pursue the American Dream. It makes you reliant on a politically motivated spider’s web full of government bureaucrats who view you and your family as job security.

I watched American citizens trapped in this web of government bureaucracy, so numbed of any initiative that they once had, that they seemed offended that they actually had to prove that they inquired about three jobs that week in order to keep their “benefits”. Others seemed puzzled that they had to search through the state data base and pick out a job that they wanted to talk to an interviewer about receiving a referral to, and weren’t just simply handed a job when they walked through the door.

Instead of moving forward, by exercising the self-reliance that Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. preached so well, these people I saw, were content on being “taken care of” by Uncle Sugar, as if being held down by their own poor, miserable circumstance, was a good thing.

Dr. King, as we approach the Anniversary of the Selma March, I am sorry to tell you that racism and injustice is still going on in America. Unfortunately, it will not end any time soon, There are two many race-baiters profiting off of it.

Including, the President of the United States.

The part of your magnificent speech about “the content of their character” has been purposefully ignored by the professional race-baiters and assorted politicians (but, I repeat myself) all this past week.

Dr. King, your call for self-reliance took a back seat to their self-serving agenda, a long time ago.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

Net Neutrality: Fascism By Any Other Name…

February 24, 2015

image

 

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

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

TheHill.com reports that

A Democrat on the Federal Communications Commission wants to narrow the scope of new net neutrality rules that are set for a vote on Thursday, The Hill has learned.

Mignon Clyburn, one of three Democrats on the FCC, has asked Chairman Tom Wheeler to roll back some of the restrictions before the full commission votes on them, FCC officials said.

The request — which Wheeler has yet to respond to — puts the chairman in the awkward position of having to either roll back his proposals, or defend the tough rules and convince Clyburn to back down.

It’s an ironic spot for Wheeler, who for months was considered to be favoring weaker rules than those pushed for by his fellow Democrats, before he reversed himself about backing tougher restrictions on Internet service providers.

Wheeler will need the votes of both Clyburn and Democratic Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel to pass the rules since the two Republicans on the commission are expected to vote against anything he proposes.  

Clyburn’s changes would leave in place the central and most controversial component of Wheeler’s rules — the notion that broadband Internet service should be reclassified so that it can be treated as a “telecommunications” service under Title II of the Communications Act, similar to utilities like phone lines.

Proponents of net neutrality have said that move is the surest way to prevent Internet service providers from interfering with people’s access to the Web.

However, she wants to eliminate a new legal category of “broadband subscriber access services,” which was created as an additional point of legal authority for the FCC to monitor the ways that companies hand off traffic on the back end of the Internet.

Those deals, known as “interconnection” arrangements, became a point of contention last year, when Netflix accused Comcast and other companies of erecting “Internet tolls” before easily passing Web traffic from one network to another.

The initial plan sought by Wheeler would allow the FCC to investigate and take action against deals that are “not just and reasonable,” according to a fact sheetreleased by the FCC earlier this month.

Eliminating the new legal category could make it trickier for the FCC to police those arrangements, said the FCC officials, who were granted anonymity in order to speak freely about the ongoing negotiations. 

Other FCC officials have previously said that the broader act of reclassifying broadband Internet service would, in and of itself, give the commission enough powers to oversee interconnection deals. That opinion has been backed up by lawyers at Google, among others, who made the argument to FCC officials last week.

Clyburn’s changes also would replace a new standard for Internet service providers’ conduct, which was meant to act as a catchall rule for any future behavior that might abuse consumers. That standard would be swapped out with potentially narrower language from 2010 rules that prevented “unreasonable discrimination.” A federal court tossed out those 2010 rules early last year, setting the stage for the FCC to write new rules. 

The full text of the rules will not be revealed to the public until after the FCC’s vote on Thursday morning.

So, what exactly does “Net Neutrality” mean to average Americans, like you and me?

Rush Limbaugh breaks it down for us, as only he can…

Do you own a website, do you operate a website?  If Obama gets his way, you’re gonna have to get a license for it just like radio and TV stations get licenses, because the Internet is gonna be subject to regulation under Title II like broadcast facilities are.  Cable is not, but over the air broadcast — But they can’t wait to regulate the Internet, folks, they just can’t wait. 

There’s too much freedom out there.  There’s too many people, quote, unquote, “out of control” on the Internet, and Obama and the Democrats have gotta get it controlled.  And the way they’re doing it is capitalizing on the stupidity of young people.  Maybe “stupidity” is the wrong word.  Ignorance and lack of information resulting from they haven’t lived long enough to know. 

The way net neutrality is being sold to Millennials is — and I read these tech bloggers, these little guys. I read ’em, they hate their cable providers. They hate their web service providers, Internet service, they hate ’em.  Just like you were made to hate Big Oil and just like you were made to hate Big Tobacco. Just like you’ve been oriented to hate Big Anything, Big Retail, big box retail like Walmart.  The Democrats’ enemies list now includes all of the telecommunications companies and the Internet service providers.

The way Obama is targeting support, gaining support from young people on this, is he’s got them confused that what he’s gonna do with net neutrality is punish the people they hate.  Does this sound familiar?  They’re gonna go after Comcast, Time Warner, any other telecommunications, cell provider, Internet service, they’re gonna really hammer ’em, and they’re gonna make sure that they don’t overcharge.  Then they’re gonna make sure they provide equal access to high speed.  The big, rich people aren’t gonna get any more access to high speed than people who can’t afford it are, and the government’s gonna take care of it, and the government’s gonna punish, and government’s gonna make people behave right.

The government’s gonna make it all fair.  The government’s gonna make it all equal.  And that’s what they’ve been led to believe.  The same government that has, right in front of these little people, these young people’s faces, blown up the health care system. The same government that has made a mockery of HealthCare.gov. The same government that has messed up and on the verge of totally destroying, under the guise of transforming it, the best health care system in the world.

Liberals can not legitimately defend this suppression of the First Amendment Rights of Christian Americans.

This is fascism, boys and girls, pure and simple.

Fascism, in any form, remains indefensible, especially when it’s done in the name of “making things fair.”

When Barack Hussein Obama assumed the position of President of the United States, the Far Left became empowered. Obama’s handlers saw the opportunity to “radically change” America into a Democratic Socialist Republic. You know, the kind of government that is currently failing over in Europe.

Every piece of legislation that Barack Hussein Obama has tried to get passed, has been designed to either overtly or covertly limit our freedom.

From the stimulus bill on up to this Thursday’s vote, every single piece of legislation and every overt and covert action by Obama and his Administration has been designed to further the Far Left’s agenda.

Alinsky and Marx would be proud.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Obama’s “Compromise” With Iran to Allow Bomb

February 23, 2015

image

Do you remember when you were a child, and your parents told you to pick your friends carefully because you are judged by the company that you keep?

Evidently, Stanley Ann Dunham and Barack Obama, Sr. never took young Barry aside and gave him that bit of advice.

Look at Barack Hussein Obama’s career, from his days as a community organizer to now, and look at the company he kept and is keeping.

Back in his days of community organizing, Obama hung out with the movers and shakers of Chicago politics, professional politicians who are known for their shady backroom dealing.

Then, he worked at the Annenberg Foundation with Former Weatherman, Bomber Bill Ayers

When he got into the Illinois Senate, he continued these relationships, and built new ones with fellow travelers. That is, politicians who thought the same way that he did and who never saw a situation that they could not take advantage of.

Then, when he came to the United States Senate, he and his handlers made sure that he was around the right sort of people who could further his political career. Of course, this took the seat of importance away from those whom he was supposed to be representing from his home district.

After his election to the highest office in this land, Obama has made poor choice after poor choice , in terms of whom to embrace as a friend among four and leadership, and whom to alienate.

As I have said many times, Obama alienates our friends and embraces our enemies.

There is a reason that the greatest president in my lifetime, Ronald Wilson Reagan, always advised to

Trust, but verify.

Reagan knew that in the game of world politics, those who wish to harm us, are masters at being duplicitous.

Our enemies will lie to us at every opportunity to gain an advantage over us, because they fear the kind of American Will and Courage, which freed the world in World War II.

Ronaldus Magnus’ warning continues to echo as loud as it ever did, some 30+ years later.

However, the individual who now sits behind the desk in the Oval Office, refuses to verify the intentions of those whom he remains so steadfast in attempting to befriend.

For example, the Radical Islamic Leadership in Iran.

Yahoo.com reports that

Edging toward a historic compromise, the U.S. and Iran reported progress Monday on a deal that would clamp down on Tehran’s nuclear activities for at least 10 years but then slowly ease restrictions on programs that could be used to make atomic arms.

Officials said there were still obstacles to overcome before a March 31 deadline, and any deal will face harsh opposition in both countries. It also would be sure to further strain already-tense U.S. relations with Israel, whose leaders oppose any agreement that doesn’t end Iran’s nuclear ambitions.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is expected to strongly criticize the deal in an address before Congress next week.

Still, a comprehensive pact could ease 35 years of U.S-Iranian enmity — and seems within reach for the first time in more than a decade of negotiations.

“We made progress,” U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry said as he bade farewell to members of the American delegation at the table with Iran. More discussions between Iran and the six nations engaging it were set for next Monday, a senior U.S. official said.

Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif said the sides found “a better understanding” at the negotiating table.

Western officials familiar with the talks cited movement but also described the discussions as a moving target, meaning changes in any one area would have repercussions for other parts of the negotiation.

The core idea would be to reward Iran for good behavior over the last years of any agreement, gradually lifting constraints on its uranium enrichment and slowly easing economic sanctions.

Iran says it does not want nuclear arms and needs enrichment only for energy, medical and scientific purposes, but the U.S. fears Tehran could re-engineer the program to produce the fissile core of a nuclear weapon.

The U.S. initially sought restrictions lasting up to 20 years; Iran has pushed for less than a decade. The prospective deal appears to be somewhere in the middle.

One variation being discussed would place at least a 10-year regime of strict controls on Iran’s uranium enrichment. If Iran complied, the restrictions would be gradually lifted over the final five years.

One issue critics are certain to focus on: Once the deal expired, Iran could theoretically ramp up enrichment to whatever level it wanted.

Experts say Iran already could produce the equivalent of one weapon’s worth of enriched uranium with its present operating 10,000 centrifuges. Several officials spoke of 6,500 centrifuges as a potential point of compromise, with the U.S. trying to restrict them to Iran’s mainstay IR-1 model instead of more advanced machines.

However, Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, said last year that his country needed to increase its output equivalent to at least 190,000 of its present-day centrifuges.

Under a possible agreement, Iran also would be forced to ship out most of the enriched uranium it produced or change it to a form that would be difficult to convert for weapons use. It takes about one ton of low-enriched uranium to process into a nuclear weapon, and officials said that Tehran could be restricted to an enriched stockpile of no more than about 700 pounds.

The officials represent different countries among the six world powers negotiating with Iran — the United States, Britain, China, France, Germany and Russia. They spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to talk publicly about the negotiations.

Formal relations between the U.S. and Iran, severed during the Iranian revolution and hostage crisis in 1979, have progressively improved since moderate Iranian President Hassan Rouhani took office in 2013. Further reconciliation would help the West in a region where Iran holds considerable sway and the U.S. is increasingly involved in the struggle against Islamic extremists.

But even if the two sides agree to a preliminary deal in March and a follow-up pact in June, such a two-phase arrangement will face fierce criticism from Congress and Israel, both of which will argue it fails to significantly curb Tehran’s nuclear weapons potential.

Israel was already weighing in.

Defense Minister Moshe Yaalon warned that such a deal would represent “a great danger” to the Western world and said it “will allow Iran to become a nuclear threshold state.”

In Washington, President Barack Obama has been trying to keep Congress from passing new sanctions against Iran that he says could scuttle further diplomacy and rekindle the threat of a new Mideast war.

Iranian hardliners fearing a sellout of their country’s nuclear program may also pressure Rouhani, although he appears secure as long as a deal is supported by Khamenei.

The U.N’s International Atomic Energy Agency would have responsibility for monitoring, and any deal would depend on technical safeguards rather than Iranian guarantees.

Yeah, right. Good luck with that.

We’re screwed.

Iran has always been, since the ouster of the Shah, a rogue nation. They are a threat to every nation who stands in the way of their crazed Political Ideology, disguised as a “religion”.

Either due to naivete or simple over-estimation of their own intelligence, on the part of Obama and his Administration, as regards their “superior intellect”, to quote Fred Thompson, as Admiral Josh Painter, in the great movie “The Hunt for Red October”…

This business will get out of control. It will get out of control and we’ll be lucky to live through it.

Until He Comes,

KJ


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,665 other followers