Posts Tagged ‘social justice’

Christianity, Socialism, and the Future of the USA (A KJ Sunday Morning Reflection)

July 30, 2017

Washington-Praying

I began writing my daily articles in April of 2010.

Over seven years later, the struggle to prevent Liberals from rewriting our nation’s history continues.

As does the fight to keep the greed and avarice of those promoting the installment of Marxist Theory in our political, medical, and religious institutions from consuming our nation in a fire of self-destruction, as it has those before us.

Friends have asked me if I believe that Christ would be in favor of the “Social Justice” movement that has infiltrated some churches in America, replacing Christian Doctrine with a Modern Liberal Political Agenda.

In order for you to understand how I and the overwhelming majority of Americans living here in the Heartland feel about that question, I believe you first need a working knowledge as to whom Jesus was.

As some of you know, I was born and raised in Memphis, Tennessee. The following piece was written in 1912 by the editor of the Commercial Appeal in Memphis, Tennessee, C.P.J. Mooney. Since then, it has remained so popular, that the newspaper has published it on their Op Ed page every year at Christmas.

JESUS, THE PERFECT MAN

There is no other character in history like that of Jesus.

As a preacher, as a doer of things, and as a philosopher, no man ever had the sweep and the vision of Jesus.

A human analysis of the human actions of Jesus brings to view a rule of life that is amazing in its perfect detail.

The system of ethics Jesus taught during His Earthly sojourn 2,000 years ago was true then, has been true in every century since and will be true forever.

Plato was a great thinker and learned in his age, but his teachings did not stand the test of time. In big things and in little things time and human experience have shown that he erred.

Marcus Aurelius touched the reflective mind of the world, but he was as cold and austere as brown marble. …

Thomas a Kempis’ Imitation of Christ is a thing of rare beauty and sympathy, but it is, as its name indicates, only an imitation.

Sir Thomas More’s Utopia is yet a dream that cannot be realized.

Lord Bacon writing on chemistry and medicine under the glasses of the man working in a 20th century laboratory is puerile.

The world’s most learned doctors until 150 years ago gave dragon’s blood and ground tails of lizards and shells of eggs for certain ailments. The great surgeons a hundred years ago bled a man if he were wounded.

Napoleon had the world at his feet for four years, and when he died the world was going on its way as if he had never lived.

JESUS TAUGHT little as to property because He knew there were things of more importance than property. He measured property and life, the body and soul, at their exact relative value. He taught much more as to character, because character is of more importance than dollars.

Other men taught us to develop systems of government. Jesus taught so as to perfect the minds of men. Jesus looked to the soul, while other men dwelled on material things.

After the experience of 2,000 years no man can find a flaw in the governmental system outlined by Jesus.

Czar and kaiser, president and socialist, give to its complete merit their admiration.

No man today, no matter whether he follows the doctrine of Mill, Marx or George as to property, can find a false principle in Jesus’s theory of property.

In the duty of a man to his fellow, no sociologist has ever approximated the perfection of the doctrine laid down by Jesus in His Sermon on the Mount.

Not all the investigations of chemists, not all the discoveries of explorers, not all the experiences of rulers, not all the historical facts that go to make up the sum of human knowledge on this day in 1912 are in contradiction to one word uttered or one principle laid down by Jesus.

The human experiences of 2,000 years show that Jesus never made a mistake. Jesus never uttered a doctrine that was true at that time and then became obsolete.

Jesus spoke the truth, and the truth is eternal.

History has no record of any other man leading a perfect life or doing everything in logical order. Jesus is the only person whose every action and whose every utterance strike a true note in the heart and mind of every man born of woman. He never said a foolish thing, never did a foolish act and never dissembled.

No poet, no dreamer, no philosopher loved humanity with all the love that Jesus bore toward all men.

WHO, THEN, was Jesus?

He could not have been merely a man, for there never was a man who had two consecutive thoughts absolute in truthful perfection.

Jesus must have been what Christendom proclaims Him to be — a divine being — or He could not have been what He was. No mind but an infinite mind could have left behind those things which Jesus gave the world as a heritage.

No, I do not believe that Jesus would be a part of the social justice movement. His was and is a soul-saving movement. One that still brings hundreds of thousand of people to individual salvation on this terrestrial ball every day. A movement that, in fact, was embraced by the founders of this cherished land.

In a opinion piece for ChristianPost.com, Christian Talk Show Host Julie Roys gave the following Five Reasons that Socialism itself is not based on  the teachings of Jesus Christ.

1. Socialism is Based on a Materialistic Worldview

According to socialists like Bernie Sanders, the greatest problem in the world is the unequal distribution of wealth.

His website declares: “The issue of wealth and income inequality is the great moral issue of our time, it is the great economic issue of our time, and it is the great political issue of our time.”

This betrays a fundamentally materialistic worldview, which is the basis of socialism.

To socialists, all that really exists is the material world.

2. Socialism Punishes Virtue

Socialists want to distribute wealth to individuals according to their need, regardless of virtue.

As Karl Marx, famously said, “From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.”

However, whenever any institution provides aid, it runs the risk of removing God-designed rewards and consequences. It can punish those who are industrious by making them pay for those who are not. And, it can reward those who aren’t industrious by giving them the fruits of another man’s labor. This is precisely what socialism does.

Interestingly, Marx mooched off others his whole life, and failed to provide for his wife and children.

As Aristotle once noted, “Men start revolutionary changes for reasons connected with their private lives.”

The Bible teaches that aid should be tied to responsibility. First, anyone who refuses to work should be refused aid.

3. Socialism Endorses Stealing

Barack Obama once defended his socialist policies to a little girl by saying, “We’ve got to make sure that people who have more money help the people who have less money. If you had a whole pizza, and your friend had no pizza, would you give him a slice?”

That sounds pretty Christian, right? What Christian wouldn’t endorse sharing your abundance with someone who has nothing? However, Obama wasn’t endorsing people voluntarily sharing their wealth with others; he was endorsing the government forcibly taking a piece of the pie from one person and giving it to someone else. Put another way, that’s saying that if you have three cars and your neighbor has none, the government has a right to take your car and give it to your neighbor. That’s not Christian; that’s stealing!

But, socialists don’t believe in private property. And, some Christian socialists actually assert that the Bible doesn’t either. That’s preposterous.

Both the Old Testament and New Testament unequivocally affirm private property. We can’t even obey the eighth commandment to not steal, unless we accept the notion of private ownership. Nor, can we steward our money as the Bible commands if the state owns our money, not us.

4. Socialism Encourages Envy and Class Warfare

Socialists demonize the rich, blaming all of society’s problems on them.

Bernie Sanders once posted to his Facebook Page: “Let us wage a moral and political war against the billionaires and corporate leaders on Wall Street and elsewhere, whose policies and greed are destroying the middle class of America.”

Here, Sanders is mimicking Karl Marx, who viewed history as a series of class struggles between the rich and the poor — and advocated overthrowing the ruling class.

Scripture strongly warns the rich and powerful not to oppress the poor.

In fact, Proverbs 14:31 says, “Whoever oppresses the poor shows contempt for his maker . . .”

But, Sanders — and other Leftists, including Hillary Clinton — go far beyond decrying specific acts of injustice. They basically condemn an entire class of people simply for possessing wealth. And, they encourage those who are poor to overthrow them. In fact, Clinton once said the U.S. economy required a “toppling” of the wealthiest 1%.

The rich are not causing all the problems in American society. People like Bill Gates are not acquiring wealth by stealing from the masses. They’re creating great products, which produce wealth, and actually provide jobs for many people. But, even if they were exploiting the poor, nowhere does Scripture support the have-nots demanding money from the haves. Instead, it teaches that we should not covet (Exodus 20:17) and should be content in all circumstances (Phil. 4:11-13). 

5. Socialism Seeks to Destroy Marriage & Family

A little known fact about socialism is that, from its beginning, it has sought to destroy marriage and family. Grove City Professor Paul Kengor explains this in detail in his book, Takedown: From Communists to Progressives, How the Left Has Sabotaged Marriage and Family. Essentially, what socialism seeks is for the state to replace the family. That way, it can indoctrinate children in its Leftist way of thinking, and remove from them any notions of God and religion.

Friedrich Engels, co-author with Marx of the “The Communist Manifesto,” once wrote that the society he envisioned would be one where “the single family ceases to be the economic unit of society. Private housekeeping is transformed into a social industry. The care and education of the children becomes a public affair.”

Similarly today, Bernie Sanders calls for a “revolution” in childcare and for the government to provide early childhood education beginning with children as young as six-weeks-old. And, he’s a proud supporter of gay marriage — what Kengor calls “communism’s Trojan Horse” to secure the final takedown of traditional marriage.

To socialists, what Bernie describes is a utopia. But, to Christians, it’s a dystopia. That’s because there’s nothing Christian about socialism — and there’s absolutely no way Jesus would ever support it.

America was not founded to be a Socialist Nation.

The following is courtesy of adherents.com:

There were 56 signers of the Declaration of Independence. There were 48 signers of the Articles of Confederation. All 55 delegates who participated in the Constitutional Convention of 1787 are regarded as Founding Fathers, in fact, they are often regarded as the Founding Fathers because it is this group that actually debated, drafted and signed the U.S. Constitution, which is the basis for the country’s political and legal system. Only 39 delegates actually signed the document, however, meaning there were 16 non-signing delegates – individuals who were Constitutional Convention delegates but were not signers of the Constitution.

There were 95 Senators and Representatives in the First Federal Congress. If one combines the total number of signatures on the Declaration, the Articles of Confederation and the Constitution with the non-signing Constitutional Convention delegates, and then adds to that sum the number of congressmen in the First Federal Congress, one obtains a total of 238 “slots” or “positions” in these groups which one can classify as “Founding Fathers” of the United States. Because 40 individuals had multiple roles (they signed multiple documents and/or also served in the First Federal Congress), there are 204 unique individuals in this group of “Founding Fathers.” These are the people who did one or more of the following:

– signed the Declaration of Independence
– signed the Articles of Confederation
– attended the Constitutional Convention of 1787
– signed the Constitution of the United States of America
– served as Senators in the First Federal Congress (1789-1791)
– served as U.S. Representatives in the First Federal Congress

The religious affiliations of these individuals are summarized below. Obviously this is a very restrictive set of names, and does not include everyone who could be considered an “American Founding Father.” But most of the major figures that people generally think of in this context are included using these criteria, including George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Samuel Adams, Benjamin Franklin, John Adams, John Hancock, James Madison, Alexander Hamilton and more.

Courtesy adherents.com

Religious Affiliation of U.S. Founding Fathers

# of Founding Fathers/% of Founding Fathers

Episcopalian/Anglican 88 54.7%
Presbyterian 30 18.6%
Congregationalist 27 16.8%
Quaker 7 4.3%
Dutch Reformed/German Reformed 6 3.7%
Lutheran 5 3.1%
Catholic 3 1.9%
Huguenot 3 1.9%
Unitarian 3 1.9%
Methodist 2 1.2%
Calvinist 1 0.6%
TOTAL 204

The Founding Fathers were, I do not doubt, aware of the following passage:

Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom. – 2 Corinthians 3:17

The Liberals and Atheists who reply to my blogs on Facebook and other Internet Sites insist that Crosses and other Christian symbols have no place in the Public Square.  They wish for Christians to remain unseen and unheard from, worshiping in private, and for Christian Americans to  “compromise” our Faith…i.e., shut up about Homosexual Marriage and other sins,  being used as political expediencies to further an agenda to “radically change” America into something that it was never meant to be.

Well,  y’all can wish for a unicorn to magically appear in your backyard…but that ain’t gonna happen, either.

As a free nation, all you who are non-believers have every right to exercise your faith.

However, as Orthodox Rabbi Daniel Lapin of the Jewish Policy Center clearly explains:

[I] understand that I live . . . in a Christian nation, albeit one where I can follow my faith as long as it doesn’t conflict with the nation’s principles. The same option is open to all Americans and will be available only as long as this nation’s Christian roots are acknowledged and honored.

…Without a vibrant and vital Christianity, America is doomed, and without America, the west is doomed. Which is why I, an Orthodox Jewish rabbi, devoted to Jewish survival, the Torah, and Israel am so terrified of American Christianity caving in. God help Jews if America ever becomes a post-Christian society! Just think of Europe!

Is the Rabbi prophetic? I pray that he isn’t.

I have, however, noticed in the last few years, a propensity among those who have not been raised in a Christian home, to be intolerant toward those who have…as witnessed in public forms, ranging from Collegiate Classrooms to Facebook Political Pages.

Americans’ Christian Faith, of which approximately 3/4ths of us, according to Gallup, still anchor our lives around, has been the Solid Rock upon which our nation was built. To deny that, is to deny reality, to re-write history, and, to, quite frankly, endanger “the Shining City on a Hill”.

As President Ronald Reagan said,

If we ever forget that we are One Nation Under God, then we will be a nation gone under. 

Isn’t it interesting that those among us who claim to be the most tolerant are actually the least tolerant of all?

And, those who claim to be champions of “personal freedom” are enemies of the religious freedom secured for us in the United States Constitution?

Watch the political maneuvering up on Capitol Hill and see who talks about Freedom and Responsibility and who talks about the right of “citizens”, both legal and illegal, to “free stuff” like “socialized medicine”.

Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them. – Matthew 7:20

Until He Comes,

KJ
Advertisements

The War on Christianity: America’s Past and Future: Nicholas Kristof Claims that Christ was a Social Justice Warror.

April 2, 2017

bible-american-flag1

In their ongoing quest to rewrite history and remake this country into a Godless State, a small minority of pitiful, bitter, little creatures refuse to acknowledge the hand of “Our Creator” in the Birth of our Nation and the forging of our Constitutional Republic and the Precious Gift He gave us of our American Freedom.

For example, ChristianPost.com posted the following story back in Jnuary of 2015…

A national atheist organization is demanding that the chancellor of Troy University in Alabama apologize for sending a 98-second video to students that says Democracy works in America not because of government enforcement or because people believe they’re accountable to society, but because they know they’re “accountable to God.”

“Atheists are overwhelmingly ethical and upstanding people. It is not true that religion is necessary to keep people from becoming criminals,” wrote Americans Atheists’ President David Silverman in an open letter sent to Jack Hawkins Jr. on New Year’s Eve. “In fact, in the United States, in states with the highest percentages of atheists, the murder rate is lower than average. In the most-religious stateas, the murder rate is higher than average.”

Silverman, who disagrees with the opinions shared in Hawkins’ email and video that was sent to staff and students, has called for the chancellor to give “a public apology to the student, and other atheists whom you have disparaged with the video you included in your email.”

“American Atheists will be hosting its annual national convention the first weekend in April at the Peabody Hotel in Memphis,” continued Silverman. “We invite you to attend any or all of the events to experience for yourself what atheism and atheists are like. We believe that personal experience helps fight ignorance so we invite you to be our special guest.”

At the center of the controversy is the YouTube video about democracy, which was posted by the J. Reuben Clark Law Society on March 5, 2014.

In the 98-second video, Harvard Business School professor Clay Christensen states that American democracy works because of the strong religious component in American society.

Christensen cites remarks he received from a Chinese economist and Marxist whom he had befriended at Harvard.

“In your past most Americans attended a church or a synagogue every week and they were taught there by people who they respected,” said Christensen, quoting his unnamed friend.

“My friend went on to say that ‘Americans followed these rules because they had come to believe that they weren’t just accountable to society, they were accountable to God.’”

As of Friday, the video garnered over 484,000 views, more than 2,200 likes and 400 dislikes, as well as over 638 comments of varying opinions.

According to American Atheists, Hawkins’ email message to students and staff related to the video and provided a link to it.

“As we approach a new year I am reminded of the blessings we enjoy within a democracy which is the envy of the world,” wrote Hawkins. “For your pleasure — and as a reminder — I am sharing with you a 90 second video which speaks to America’s greatness and its vulnerability.”

Whether the American Atheists were actually serious in their ignorance back then, or they were simply trying to garner publicity for an upcoming convention in my hometown of Memphis, Tennessee, they couldn’t be more wrong, as to the role our Creator played and plays in this Grand Experiment, known as the United States of America.

From adherents.com:

There were 95 Senators and Representatives in the First Federal Congress. If one combines the total number of signatures on the Declaration, the Articles of Confederation and the Constitution with the non-signing Constitutional Convention delegates, and then adds to that sum the number of congressmen in the First Federal Congress, one obtains a total of 238 “slots” or “positions” in these groups which one can classify as “Founding Fathers” of the United States. Because 40 individuals had multiple roles (they signed multiple documents and/or also served in the First Federal Congress), there are 204 unique individuals in this group of “Founding Fathers.” These are the people who did one or more of the following:

– signed the Declaration of Independence
– signed the Articles of Confederation
– attended the Constitutional Convention of 1787
– signed the Constitution of the United States of America
– served as Senators in the First Federal Congress (1789-1791)
– served as U.S. Representatives in the First Federal Congress

The religious affiliations of these individuals are summarized below. Obviously this is a very restrictive set of names, and does not include everyone who could be considered an “American Founding Father.” But most of the major figures that people generally think of in this context are included using these criteria, including George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Samuel Adams, Benjamin Franklin, John Adams, John Hancock, James Madison, Alexander Hamilton and more.

Religious Affiliation
of U.S. Founding Fathers
# of
Founding
Fathers
% of
Founding
Fathers
Episcopalian/Anglican 88 54.7%
Presbyterian 30 18.6%
Congregationalist 27 16.8%
Quaker 7 4.3%
Dutch Reformed/German Reformed 6 3.7%
Lutheran 5 3.1%
Catholic 3 1.9%
Huguenot 3 1.9%
Unitarian 3 1.9%
Methodist 2 1.2%
Calvinist 1 0.6%
unknown 43  %
TOTAL 204

Here are some quotes about God and Christianity from 3 Presidents of the United States, whom you might recognize:

John Quincy Adams

My hopes of a future life are all founded upon the Gospel of Christ and I cannot cavil or quibble away [evade or object to]. . . . the whole tenor of His conduct by which He sometimes positively asserted and at others countenances [permits] His disciples in asserting that He was God.

The hope of a Christian is inseparable from his faith. Whoever believes in the Divine inspiration of the Holy Scriptures must hope that the religion of Jesus shall prevail throughout the earth. Never since the foundation of the world have the prospects of mankind been more encouraging to that hope than they appear to be at the present time. And may the associated distribution of the Bible proceed and prosper till the Lord shall have made “bare His holy arm in the eyes of all the nations, and all the ends of the earth shall see the salvation of our God” [Isaiah 52:10].

In the chain of human events, the birthday of the nation is indissolubly linked with the birthday of the Savior. The Declaration of Independence laid the cornerstone of human government upon the first precepts of Christianity.

Thomas Jefferson

The doctrines of Jesus are simple, and tend all to the happiness of man.

The practice of morality being necessary for the well being of society, He [God] has taken care to impress its precepts so indelibly on our hearts that they shall not be effaced by the subtleties of our brain. We all agree in the obligation of the moral principles of Jesus and nowhere will they be found delivered in greater purity than in His discourses.

I am a Christian in the only sense in which He wished anyone to be: sincerely attached to His doctrines in preference to all others.

I am a real Christian – that is to say, a disciple of the doctrines of Jesus Christ.

George Washington

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.

Gallup Polls continue to show that a little less than 3/4 of Americans proclaim Jesus Christ as their Personal Savior and half of Americans attend Religious Services on a regular basis.

Recently, Nicholas Kristof of the failing New York Times wrote an article in which he suggested that Jesus Christ was a Social Justice Warrior, and would have been a supporter of Obamacare.

In an article found on thecollegeconservative.com, Christine Rosselle writes

Jesus performing a miracle was not an act of the government and therefore cannot be an act of socialism, even if the result of the miracle bears a resemblance in passing to the goals of a socialized state. Jesus may have healed various people for “free,” but this cannot be considered “socialized medicine.” In actuality, the act was the effective use of a private charity (Jesus himself), the polar opposite of socialism.

In a perfectly socialized state, the government would provide for the needs of the people, whether it is healthcare, food, schooling, etc. There would be collective ownership of everything. Jesus did not advocate this. On the contrary, the Bible advocates strong individual charity and charity via the church—not the government forcibly collecting large sums of taxes and confiscating private property in order to aid the poor. Had a socialized government been the one distributing the five loaves and two fishes to the crowd that day, it is certainly plausible that many people would have gone home hungry.

Jesus Christ was many things, but he definitely was not a socialist.

Wasn’t it just back in 2012 that the Democratic National Convention took any references to God out of their Party Platform and were booed long and loud by those attending their convention which they tried to put God back in there?

For them to declare that God is on their side in the Obamacare argument proves that thy really don’t known Him at all.

Until He Comes,

KJ

A KJ Sunday Morning Reflection: Social Justice and Democrat Promises…Paving the Road to You-Know-Where

August 21, 2016

untitled (87)Sundays, for many of us, are a time of reflection, as we think about the world around us, and the blessings which God has given us, including our family, friends, our jobs, and the privilege of living in the greatest country on the face of the God’s Green Earth.

As we go through the current Presidential Campaign Season, we, as Americans, need to pay close attention to what the candidates are saying, for the sake of our Children’s and grandchildren’s futures.

This past week, Susan Stamper brown wrote the following article, found on Christianpost.com…

Apparently, the Democratic Party’s latest strategy to win the White House in 2016 is “Let’s pretend to be religious.”

Now it’s all about Hillary’s faith, according to Democratic Party Vice Presidential hopeful Tim Kaine, who told a group in New Orleans that Hillary Clinton’s faith is at the “root of everything she does.” That’s quite a statement, considering all the years she’s been in the public’s eye.

Most likely, though, Kaine was referring to Hillary’s attachment to the “Social Gospel.” The Social Gospel is a cheap counterfeit for the real thing that liberals conjured up to promote socialism and at the same time relieve people from any guilt associated with living life according to their own standards, not God’s.

The Social Gospel crowd concentrates on scriptures that instruct us to help the poor and feed the hungry. They ignore the ones where Jesus told those he helped and fed to “go and sin no more.”

But, here’s the rub. If liberals really wanted to do things the right way, they’d do it themselves and not pass personal responsibility off to the government. Jesus never said governments are an acceptable replacement for lazy, no-good followers who refuse to do what he asks.

Obviously, Kaine was trying to paint Hillary in a softer, nicer light while at the same time courting right-leaning anti-Trump evangelicals. It’s a political ploy.

In May, Slate magazine ran a piece by Ruth Graham, “Can the Christian Left Be a Real Political Force?” — suggesting that Donald Trump’s rise in the GOP makes 2016 the perfect opportunity for the Democrat Party to win over anti-Trump evangelicals if they can find a way to lop their horns and replace them with halos to make them look like the “party of God.”

What the author, Tim Kaine and Democrat Party strategists fail to understand is that anti-Trump conservative Christians would never vote for Hillary. Nor will they be tricked by those bearing faux religion in the name of politics.

Graham did her best to make a case for liberal Christianity, writing: “It must first be said that despite the empty pews, there’s reason to believe that liberal Christianity has been dormant, not dead.”

In reality, those empty pews are what happens when we do things our way and cherry-pick the Gospel. A a Pew poll rolled out last year backs that statement finding that mainline church denominations embracing the Social Gospel like Hillary Clinton’s Methodist denomination are in decline across the United States. In sharp contrast, the same Pew poll found that conservative Christian churches are vibrantly alive and growing.

The Slate magazine author accidentally answers why “liberal Christianity” is little more than an oxymoron when she wrote: “There’s a cost associated with membership … churches that ask more from their followers tend to be stronger … Many progressive churches, by contrast barely demand a pinky toe … They don’t pressure me when I skip; the sermons rarely suggest it matters whether I believe the creeds … By contrast, when I visit conservative churches … they feel alive: People are there because they think it matters for their everyday lives and for their eternal souls.”

Those churches “feel alive” because they are … alive. It’s impossible to be truly excited about something that isn’t there. And it’ll never be there if it’s about politics rather than a personal, saving faith.

Graham concludes: “If there is to be a resurgent Christian left, it will need to learn a trick or two from the very movement [conservative Christian] that overtook it a generation ago.”

Tricks cannot revive that which never existed in the first place.

As C.S. Lewis wrote: “Once you have made the World an end, and faith a means … it makes very little difference what kind of worldly end he is pursuing.”

It’s a slippery slope, that road to Hell we’re headed, that American politics has deteriorated to this.

I also do not believe that Jesus would be a part of the Social Justice movement, advocated by the Far left Radicals of the Democratic Party, including Presidential Candidate Hillary Clinton. His was and is a soul-saving movement. One that still brings hundreds of thousand of people to individual salvation on this terrestrial ball every day. A movement that, in fact, was embraced by the founders of this cherished land.

The Social justice Movement is an offshoot of Marxist Theory, named for the radical who conceived it, Karl Marx. it’s basic tenet states,

From each according to his ability to each according to his need.

The modern translation, provided for us by Sitting President Barack Hussein Obama, during his 2008 Presidential Campaign, is that working Americans need to “share the wealth”.

That, boys and girls, is “Socialism” and, in Marxist Theory, Socialism is the step before Communism.

A simple definition of Socialism describes it as

a political and economic theory of social organization that advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.

In a recent opinion piece for ChristianPost.com, Christian Talk Show Host Julie Roys gave the following Five Reasons that Socialism itself is not based on  the teachings of Jesus Christ.

1. Socialism is Based on a Materialistic Worldview

According to socialists like Bernie Sanders, the greatest problem in the world is the unequal distribution of wealth.

His website declares: “The issue of wealth and income inequality is the great moral issue of our time, it is the great economic issue of our time, and it is the great political issue of our time.”

This betrays a fundamentally materialistic worldview, which is the basis of socialism.

To socialists, all that really exists is the material world.

2. Socialism Punishes Virtue

Socialists want to distribute wealth to individuals according to their need, regardless of virtue.

As Karl Marx, famously said, “From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.”

However, whenever any institution provides aid, it runs the risk of removing God-designed rewards and consequences. It can punish those who are industrious by making them pay for those who are not. And, it can reward those who aren’t industrious by giving them the fruits of another man’s labor. This is precisely what socialism does.

Interestingly, Marx mooched off others his whole life, and failed to provide for his wife and children.

As Aristotle once noted, “Men start revolutionary changes for reasons connected with their private lives.”

The Bible teaches that aid should be tied to responsibility. First, anyone who refuses to work should be refused aid.

3. Socialism Endorses Stealing

Barack Obama once defended his socialist policies to a little girl by saying, “We’ve got to make sure that people who have more money help the people who have less money. If you had a whole pizza, and your friend had no pizza, would you give him a slice?”

That sounds pretty Christian, right? What Christian wouldn’t endorse sharing your abundance with someone who has nothing? However, Obama wasn’t endorsing people voluntarily sharing their wealth with others; he was endorsing the government forcibly taking a piece of the pie from one person and giving it to someone else. Put another way, that’s saying that if you have three cars and your neighbor has none, the government has a right to take your car and give it to your neighbor. That’s not Christian; that’s stealing!

But, socialists don’t believe in private property. And, some Christian socialists actually assert that the Bible doesn’t either. That’s preposterous.

Both the Old Testament and New Testament unequivocally affirm private property. We can’t even obey the eighth commandment to not steal, unless we accept the notion of private ownership. Nor, can we steward our money as the Bible commands if the state owns our money, not us.

4. Socialism Encourages Envy and Class Warfare

Socialists demonize the rich, blaming all of society’s problems on them.

Bernie Sanders once posted to his Facebook Page: “Let us wage a moral and political war against the billionaires and corporate leaders on Wall Street and elsewhere, whose policies and greed are destroying the middle class of America.”

Here, Sanders is mimicking Karl Marx, who viewed history as a series of class struggles between the rich and the poor — and advocated overthrowing the ruling class.

Scripture strongly warns the rich and powerful not to oppress the poor.

In fact, Proverbs 14:31 says, “Whoever oppresses the poor shows contempt for his maker . . .”

But, Sanders — and other Leftists, including Hillary Clinton — go far beyond decrying specific acts of injustice. They basically condemn an entire class of people simply for possessing wealth. And, they encourage those who are poor to overthrow them. In fact, Clinton once said the U.S. economy required a “toppling” of the wealthiest 1%.

The rich are not causing all the problems in American society. People like Bill Gates are not acquiring wealth by stealing from the masses. They’re creating great products, which produce wealth, and actually provide jobs for many people. But, even if they were exploiting the poor, nowhere does Scripture support the have-nots demanding money from the haves. Instead, it teaches that we should not covet (Exodus 20:17) and should be content in all circumstances (Phil. 4:11-13). 

5. Socialism Seeks to Destroy Marriage & Family

A little known fact about socialism is that, from its beginning, it has sought to destroy marriage and family. Grove City Professor Paul Kengor explains this in detail in his book, Takedown: From Communists to Progressives, How the Left Has Sabotaged Marriage and Family. Essentially, what socialism seeks is for the state to replace the family. That way, it can indoctrinate children in its Leftist way of thinking, and remove from them any notions of God and religion.

Friedrich Engels, co-author with Marx of the “The Communist Manifesto,” once wrote that the society he envisioned would be one where “the single family ceases to be the economic unit of society. Private housekeeping is transformed into a social industry. The care and education of the children becomes a public affair.”

Similarly today, Bernie Sanders calls for a “revolution” in childcare and for the government to provide early childhood education beginning with children as young as six-weeks-old. And, he’s a proud supporter of gay marriage — what Kengor calls “communism’s Trojan Horse” to secure the final takedown of traditional marriage.

To socialists, what Bernie describes is a utopia. But, to Christians, it’s a dystopia. That’s because there’s nothing Christian about socialism — and there’s absolutely no way Jesus would ever support it.

America was not founded to be a Socialist Nation.

The following is courtesy of adherents.com:

There were 56 signers of the Declaration of Independence. There were 48 signers of the Articles of Confederation. All 55 delegates who participated in the Constitutional Convention of 1787 are regarded as Founding Fathers, in fact, they are often regarded as the Founding Fathers because it is this group that actually debated, drafted and signed the U.S. Constitution, which is the basis for the country’s political and legal system. Only 39 delegates actually signed the document, however, meaning there were 16 non-signing delegates – individuals who were Constitutional Convention delegates but were not signers of the Constitution.

There were 95 Senators and Representatives in the First Federal Congress. If one combines the total number of signatures on the Declaration, the Articles of Confederation and the Constitution with the non-signing Constitutional Convention delegates, and then adds to that sum the number of congressmen in the First Federal Congress, one obtains a total of 238 “slots” or “positions” in these groups which one can classify as “Founding Fathers” of the United States. Because 40 individuals had multiple roles (they signed multiple documents and/or also served in the First Federal Congress), there are 204 unique individuals in this group of “Founding Fathers.” These are the people who did one or more of the following:

– signed the Declaration of Independence
– signed the Articles of Confederation
– attended the Constitutional Convention of 1787
– signed the Constitution of the United States of America
– served as Senators in the First Federal Congress (1789-1791)
– served as U.S. Representatives in the First Federal Congress

The religious affiliations of these individuals are summarized below. Obviously this is a very restrictive set of names, and does not include everyone who could be considered an “American Founding Father.” But most of the major figures that people generally think of in this context are included using these criteria, including George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Samuel Adams, Benjamin Franklin, John Adams, John Hancock, James Madison, Alexander Hamilton and more.

Courtesy adherents.com

Religious Affiliation of U.S. Founding Fathers

# of Founding Fathers/% of Founding Fathers

Episcopalian/Anglican 88 54.7%
Presbyterian 30 18.6%
Congregationalist 27 16.8%
Quaker 7 4.3%
Dutch Reformed/German Reformed 6 3.7%
Lutheran 5 3.1%
Catholic 3 1.9%
Huguenot 3 1.9%
Unitarian 3 1.9%
Methodist 2 1.2%
Calvinist 1 0.6%
TOTAL 204

The Founding Fathers were, I do not doubt, aware of the following passage:

Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom. – 2 Corinthians 3:17

The Liberals and Atheists who reply to my blogs on Facebook and other Internet Sites insist that Crosses and other Christian symbols have no place in the Public Square.  They wish for Christians to remain unseen and unheard from, worshiping in private, and for Christian Americans to  “compromise” our Faith (i.e., shut up about Homosexual Marriage and other sins,  being used as political expediencies to further an agenda to “radically change” America into something that it was never meant to be.

Well,  y’all can wish for a unicorn to magically appear in your backyard…but that ain’t gonna happen, either.

As a free nation, all you who are non-believers have every right to exercise your faith.

However, as Orthodox Rabbi Daniel Lapin of the Jewish Policy Center clearly explains:

[I] understand that I live . . . in a Christian nation, albeit one where I can follow my faith as long as it doesn’t conflict with the nation’s principles. The same option is open to all Americans and will be available only as long as this nation’s Christian roots are acknowledged and honored.

…Without a vibrant and vital Christianity, America is doomed, and without America, the west is doomed. Which is why I, an Orthodox Jewish rabbi, devoted to Jewish survival, the Torah, and Israel am so terrified of American Christianity caving in. God help Jews if America ever becomes a post-Christian society! Just think of Europe!

Is the Rabbi prophetic? I pray that he isn’t.

I have, however, noticed in the last few years, a propensity among those who have not been raised in a Christian home, to be intolerant toward those who have….staring with the individual who sits at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue in Washington, DC.

Americans’ Christian Faith, of which approximately 3/4ths of us, according to Gallup, still anchor our lives around, has been the Solid Rock upon which our nation was built. To deny that, is to deny reality, to re-write history, and, to, quite frankly, endanger “the Shining City on a Hill”.

As President Ronald Reagan said,

If we ever forget that we are One Nation Under God, then we will be a nation gone under. 

Isn’t it interesting that those among us who claim to be the most tolerant are actually the least tolerant of all?

And, those who claim to be champions of “personal freedom” are enemies of the religious freedom secured for us in the United States Constitution?

Watch the next two and one half months leading up to the Presidential Election in November and see who talks about Freedom and Responsibility and who talks about the right of “citizens”, both legal and illegal, to “free stuff”.

Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them. – Matthew 7:20

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

 

 

Christianity, Socialism, “Social Justice”, and the Future of the USA

July 17, 2016

th0MSCP94RI began writing my daily articles in April of 2010.

Over six years later, the struggle to prevent Liberals from rewriting our nation’s history continues.

As does the fight to keep the greed and avarice of those promoting the installment of Marxist Theory in both our political and religious institutions from consuming our nation in a fire of self-destruction, as it has those before us.

Friends have asked me if I believe that Christ would be in favor of the “Social Justice” movement that has infiltrated some churches in America, replacing Christian Doctrine with a Modern Liberal Political Agenda.

In order for you to understand how I and the overwhelming majority of Americans living here in the Heartland feel about that question, I believe you first need a working knowledge as to whom Jesus was.

As some of you know, I was born and raised in Memphis, Tennessee. The following piece was written in 1912 by the editor of the Commercial Appeal in Memphis, Tennessee, C.P.J. Mooney. Since then, it has remained so popular, that the newspaper has published it on their Op Ed page every year at Christmas.

JESUS, THE PERFECT MAN

There is no other character in history like that of Jesus.

As a preacher, as a doer of things, and as a philosopher, no man ever had the sweep and the vision of Jesus.

A human analysis of the human actions of Jesus brings to view a rule of life that is amazing in its perfect detail.

The system of ethics Jesus taught during His Earthly sojourn 2,000 years ago was true then, has been true in every century since and will be true forever.

Plato was a great thinker and learned in his age, but his teachings did not stand the test of time. In big things and in little things time and human experience have shown that he erred.

Marcus Aurelius touched the reflective mind of the world, but he was as cold and austere as brown marble. …

Thomas a Kempis’ Imitation of Christ is a thing of rare beauty and sympathy, but it is, as its name indicates, only an imitation.

Sir Thomas More’s Utopia is yet a dream that cannot be realized.

Lord Bacon writing on chemistry and medicine under the glasses of the man working in a 20th century laboratory is puerile.

The world’s most learned doctors until 150 years ago gave dragon’s blood and ground tails of lizards and shells of eggs for certain ailments. The great surgeons a hundred years ago bled a man if he were wounded.

Napoleon had the world at his feet for four years, and when he died the world was going on its way as if he had never lived.

JESUS TAUGHT little as to property because He knew there were things of more importance than property. He measured property and life, the body and soul, at their exact relative value. He taught much more as to character, because character is of more importance than dollars.

Other men taught us to develop systems of government. Jesus taught so as to perfect the minds of men. Jesus looked to the soul, while other men dwelled on material things.

After the experience of 2,000 years no man can find a flaw in the governmental system outlined by Jesus.

Czar and kaiser, president and socialist, give to its complete merit their admiration.

No man today, no matter whether he follows the doctrine of Mill, Marx or George as to property, can find a false principle in Jesus’s theory of property.

In the duty of a man to his fellow, no sociologist has ever approximated the perfection of the doctrine laid down by Jesus in His Sermon on the Mount.

Not all the investigations of chemists, not all the discoveries of explorers, not all the experiences of rulers, not all the historical facts that go to make up the sum of human knowledge on this day in 1912 are in contradiction to one word uttered or one principle laid down by Jesus.

The human experiences of 2,000 years show that Jesus never made a mistake. Jesus never uttered a doctrine that was true at that time and then became obsolete.

Jesus spoke the truth, and the truth is eternal.

History has no record of any other man leading a perfect life or doing everything in logical order. Jesus is the only person whose every action and whose every utterance strike a true note in the heart and mind of every man born of woman. He never said a foolish thing, never did a foolish act and never dissembled.

No poet, no dreamer, no philosopher loved humanity with all the love that Jesus bore toward all men.

WHO, THEN, was Jesus?

He could not have been merely a man, for there never was a man who had two consecutive thoughts absolute in truthful perfection.

Jesus must have been what Christendom proclaims Him to be — a divine being — or He could not have been what He was. No mind but an infinite mind could have left behind those things which Jesus gave the world as a heritage.

No, I do not believe that Jesus would be a part of the social justice movement. His was and is a soul-saving movement. One that still brings hundreds of thousand of people to individual salvation on this terrestrial ball every day. A movement that, in fact, was embraced by the founders of this cherished land.

In a recent opinion piece for ChristianPost.com, Christian Talk Show Host Julie Roys gave the following Five Reasons that Socialism itself is not based on  the teachings of Jesus Christ.

1. Socialism is Based on a Materialistic Worldview

According to socialists like Bernie Sanders, the greatest problem in the world is the unequal distribution of wealth.

His website declares: “The issue of wealth and income inequality is the great moral issue of our time, it is the great economic issue of our time, and it is the great political issue of our time.”

This betrays a fundamentally materialistic worldview, which is the basis of socialism.

To socialists, all that really exists is the material world.

2. Socialism Punishes Virtue

Socialists want to distribute wealth to individuals according to their need, regardless of virtue.

As Karl Marx, famously said, “From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.”

However, whenever any institution provides aid, it runs the risk of removing God-designed rewards and consequences. It can punish those who are industrious by making them pay for those who are not. And, it can reward those who aren’t industrious by giving them the fruits of another man’s labor. This is precisely what socialism does.

Interestingly, Marx mooched off others his whole life, and failed to provide for his wife and children.

As Aristotle once noted, “Men start revolutionary changes for reasons connected with their private lives.”

The Bible teaches that aid should be tied to responsibility. First, anyone who refuses to work should be refused aid.

3. Socialism Endorses Stealing

Barack Obama once defended his socialist policies to a little girl by saying, “We’ve got to make sure that people who have more money help the people who have less money. If you had a whole pizza, and your friend had no pizza, would you give him a slice?”

That sounds pretty Christian, right? What Christian wouldn’t endorse sharing your abundance with someone who has nothing? However, Obama wasn’t endorsing people voluntarily sharing their wealth with others; he was endorsing the government forcibly taking a piece of the pie from one person and giving it to someone else. Put another way, that’s saying that if you have three cars and your neighbor has none, the government has a right to take your car and give it to your neighbor. That’s not Christian; that’s stealing!

But, socialists don’t believe in private property. And, some Christian socialists actually assert that the Bible doesn’t either. That’s preposterous.

Both the Old Testament and New Testament unequivocally affirm private property. We can’t even obey the eighth commandment to not steal, unless we accept the notion of private ownership. Nor, can we steward our money as the Bible commands if the state owns our money, not us.

4. Socialism Encourages Envy and Class Warfare

Socialists demonize the rich, blaming all of society’s problems on them.

Bernie Sanders once posted to his Facebook Page: “Let us wage a moral and political war against the billionaires and corporate leaders on Wall Street and elsewhere, whose policies and greed are destroying the middle class of America.”

Here, Sanders is mimicking Karl Marx, who viewed history as a series of class struggles between the rich and the poor — and advocated overthrowing the ruling class.

Scripture strongly warns the rich and powerful not to oppress the poor.

In fact, Proverbs 14:31 says, “Whoever oppresses the poor shows contempt for his maker . . .”

But, Sanders — and other Leftists, including Hillary Clinton — go far beyond decrying specific acts of injustice. They basically condemn an entire class of people simply for possessing wealth. And, they encourage those who are poor to overthrow them. In fact, Clinton once said the U.S. economy required a “toppling” of the wealthiest 1%.

The rich are not causing all the problems in American society. People like Bill Gates are not acquiring wealth by stealing from the masses. They’re creating great products, which produce wealth, and actually provide jobs for many people. But, even if they were exploiting the poor, nowhere does Scripture support the have-nots demanding money from the haves. Instead, it teaches that we should not covet (Exodus 20:17) and should be content in all circumstances (Phil. 4:11-13). 

5. Socialism Seeks to Destroy Marriage & Family

A little known fact about socialism is that, from its beginning, it has sought to destroy marriage and family. Grove City Professor Paul Kengor explains this in detail in his book, Takedown: From Communists to Progressives, How the Left Has Sabotaged Marriage and Family. Essentially, what socialism seeks is for the state to replace the family. That way, it can indoctrinate children in its Leftist way of thinking, and remove from them any notions of God and religion.

Friedrich Engels, co-author with Marx of the “The Communist Manifesto,” once wrote that the society he envisioned would be one where “the single family ceases to be the economic unit of society. Private housekeeping is transformed into a social industry. The care and education of the children becomes a public affair.”

Similarly today, Bernie Sanders calls for a “revolution” in childcare and for the government to provide early childhood education beginning with children as young as six-weeks-old. And, he’s a proud supporter of gay marriage — what Kengor calls “communism’s Trojan Horse” to secure the final takedown of traditional marriage.

To socialists, what Bernie describes is a utopia. But, to Christians, it’s a dystopia. That’s because there’s nothing Christian about socialism — and there’s absolutely no way Jesus would ever support it.

America was not founded to be a Socialist Nation.

The following is courtesy of adherents.com:

There were 56 signers of the Declaration of Independence. There were 48 signers of the Articles of Confederation. All 55 delegates who participated in the Constitutional Convention of 1787 are regarded as Founding Fathers, in fact, they are often regarded as the Founding Fathers because it is this group that actually debated, drafted and signed the U.S. Constitution, which is the basis for the country’s political and legal system. Only 39 delegates actually signed the document, however, meaning there were 16 non-signing delegates – individuals who were Constitutional Convention delegates but were not signers of the Constitution.

There were 95 Senators and Representatives in the First Federal Congress. If one combines the total number of signatures on the Declaration, the Articles of Confederation and the Constitution with the non-signing Constitutional Convention delegates, and then adds to that sum the number of congressmen in the First Federal Congress, one obtains a total of 238 “slots” or “positions” in these groups which one can classify as “Founding Fathers” of the United States. Because 40 individuals had multiple roles (they signed multiple documents and/or also served in the First Federal Congress), there are 204 unique individuals in this group of “Founding Fathers.” These are the people who did one or more of the following:

– signed the Declaration of Independence
– signed the Articles of Confederation
– attended the Constitutional Convention of 1787
– signed the Constitution of the United States of America
– served as Senators in the First Federal Congress (1789-1791)
– served as U.S. Representatives in the First Federal Congress

The religious affiliations of these individuals are summarized below. Obviously this is a very restrictive set of names, and does not include everyone who could be considered an “American Founding Father.” But most of the major figures that people generally think of in this context are included using these criteria, including George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Samuel Adams, Benjamin Franklin, John Adams, John Hancock, James Madison, Alexander Hamilton and more.

Courtesy adherents.com

Religious Affiliation of U.S. Founding Fathers

# of Founding Fathers/% of Founding Fathers

Episcopalian/Anglican 88 54.7%
Presbyterian 30 18.6%
Congregationalist 27 16.8%
Quaker 7 4.3%
Dutch Reformed/German Reformed 6 3.7%
Lutheran 5 3.1%
Catholic 3 1.9%
Huguenot 3 1.9%
Unitarian 3 1.9%
Methodist 2 1.2%
Calvinist 1 0.6%
TOTAL 204

The Founding Fathers were, I do not doubt, aware of the following passage:

Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom. – 2 Corinthians 3:17

The Liberals and Atheists who reply to my blogs on Facebook and other Internet Sites insist that Crosses and other Christian symbols have no place in the Public Square.  They wish for Christians to remain unseen and unheard from, worshiping in private, and for Christian Americans to  “compromise” our Faith (i.e., shut up about Homosexual Marriage and other sins,  being used as political expediencies to further an agenda to “radically change” America into something that it was never meant to be.

Well,  y’all can wish for a unicorn to magically appear in your backyard…but that ain’t gonna happen, either.

As a free nation, all you who are non-believers have every right to exercise your faith.

However, as Orthodox Rabbi Daniel Lapin of the Jewish Policy Center clearly explains:

[I] understand that I live . . . in a Christian nation, albeit one where I can follow my faith as long as it doesn’t conflict with the nation’s principles. The same option is open to all Americans and will be available only as long as this nation’s Christian roots are acknowledged and honored.

…Without a vibrant and vital Christianity, America is doomed, and without America, the west is doomed. Which is why I, an Orthodox Jewish rabbi, devoted to Jewish survival, the Torah, and Israel am so terrified of American Christianity caving in. God help Jews if America ever becomes a post-Christian society! Just think of Europe!

Is the Rabbi prophetic? I pray that he isn’t.

I have, however, noticed in the last few years, a propensity among those who have not been raised in a Christian home, to be intolerant toward those who have….staring with the individual who sits at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue in Washington, DC.

Americans’ Christian Faith, of which approximately 3/4ths of us, according to Gallup, still anchor our lives around, has been the Solid Rock upon which our nation was built. To deny that, is to deny reality, to re-write history, and, to, quite frankly, endanger “the Shining City on a Hill”.

As President Ronald Reagan said,

If we ever forget that we are One Nation Under God, then we will be a nation gone under. 

Isn’t it interesting that those among us who claim to be the most tolerant are actually the least tolerant of all?

And, those who claim to be champions of “personal freedom” are enemies of the religious freedom secured for us in the United States Constitution?

Watch the upcoming National Political Conventions and see who talks about Freedom and Responsibility and who talks about the right of “citizens”, both legal and illegal, to “free stuff”.

Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them. – Matthew 7:20

Until He Comes,

KJ

Obama’s “Sharing The (Our) Wealth”: “Little Pink Houses For You And Me”

March 29, 2016

untitled (41)From the get-go, President Barack Hussein Obama’s motto has been “Share the Wealth”. Not his, of course, but, ours.

This “Quest for Equality”, i.e., lack of individualism, i.e., forming a collective society, if you will, springs from his love for the teachings of Karl Marx and Saul Alinsky, and his upbringing within an American Communist Family, which led to his association with people who wanted, with all their hearts to “radically change” America…by any means necessary.

Obama wants to limit our freedom…by making our choices for us.

And, by taking away individual achievement.

For example, last June, thehill.com reported that

The Obama administration is moving forward with regulations designed to help diversify America’s wealthier neighborhoods, drawing fire from critics who decry the proposal as executive overreach in search of an “unrealistic utopia.”

A final Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) rule due out this month is aimed at ending decades of deep-rooted segregation around the country.

The regulations would use grant money as an incentive for communities to build affordable housing in more affluent areas while also taking steps to upgrade poorer areas with better schools, parks, libraries, grocery stores and transportation routes as part of a gentrification of those communities.

“HUD is working with communities across the country to fulfill the promise of equal opportunity for all,” a HUD spokeswoman said. “The proposed policy seeks to break down barriers to access to opportunity in communities supported by HUD funds.”

It’s a tough sell for some conservatives. Among them is Rep. Paul Gosar (R-Ariz.), who argued that the administration “shouldn’t be holding hostage grant monies aimed at community improvement based on its unrealistic utopian ideas of what every community should resemble.”

“American citizens and communities should be free to choose where they would like to live and not be subject to federal neighborhood engineering at the behest of an overreaching federal government,” said Gosar, who is leading an effort in the House to block the regulations.

Civil rights advocates, meanwhile, are praising the plan, arguing that it is needed to break through decades-old barriers that keep poor and minority families trapped in hardscrabble neighborhoods.

Now, that plan is becoming a reality.

CNSNews.com reports that

The Obama administration has started its push to expand low-income housing into “higher opportunity areas.”

The Department of Housing and Urban Development last week announced a “landmark” settlement agreement with Baltimore County that will serve as a catalyst to “promote housing mobility” and “address residential segregation.”

The goal is to move low- and very-low-income people out of the city and into the suburbs.

“Every person deserves a fair shot at opportunity, and that starts with a decent, safe, and affordable place to call home,” HUD Secretary Julián Castro said in the March 15 announcement. “This agreement sets Baltimore County on a path to stronger, more inclusive communities where everyone can enjoy equal access to opportunity.”

The agreement stems from a complaint filed with HUD in 2011 by the Baltimore County branch of the NAACP; a fair housing group; and three individuals who claimed Baltimore County had failed to “affirmatively further fair housing.”

To settle that complaint, HUD is requiring Baltimore County to spend $30 million ($3 million annually for ten years) to create 1,000 affordable housing units, either through new construction or rehabilitation.

The units will be geographically dispersed in “neighborhoods that provide access to opportunity.” The 46-page settlement includes a chart (Exhibit F) listing the 116 relatively affluent census tracts surrounding Baltimore City where most of the 1,000 housing units must be located.

At least 500 of the units must have three or more bedrooms to accommodate families with children; and at least one-third of the units must be accessible and made available to people with disabilities.

The housing units must be completed over a period of 12 years.

In addition, the county must provide 2,000 Housing Choice Vouchers to help families gain access to “higher opportunity neighborhoods.”

The county must “proactively market the units to potential tenants who are least likely to apply, including African Americans families and families with a member who has a disability.”

The county must, within 180 days, introduce (and keep trying to pass) legislation that prohibits housing discrimination based on a person’s lawful source of income. This means a landlord can’t refuse someone housing if he or she plans to pay the rent with Social Security or other public assistance instead of a paycheck (job!).

And finally, under the settlement agreement, the county must pay $150,000 to the three individuals who complained to HUD in 2011.

“Government-Funded Upward Mobility”?

Are we still in America?

How does that work in cities that are already 90% minority population, like Detroit or Memphis?

As Charles Barkley pointed out a while back, Racism is not just a one-way street. How do you think that these cities go this way? Not all of their white citizens moved out because they wanted to.

Why is this happening? How did we get here?

Back in the 60s, President Lyndon Johnson (whose big hand I once shook, at his ranch, as a little boy, after his presidential term) and the Democrats, brought forth a plan, called “the Great Society”. It was decided, in order to ensure that everyone would have an equal opportunity in America, that Uncle Sugar would step in to fill in the gaps.

Two seminal pieces of legislation were passed.

First, the Civil Rights Bill that JFK promised to sign, before his assassination, was passed into law. This Act banned discrimination based on race and gender in employment and ending segregation in all public facilities.

It also helped to cement in stone, American Minorities’ loyalty to the Democratic Party, which continues to this day.

The second bill that LBJ signed into law was the sweeping ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT OF 1964. It created the Office of Economic Opportunity whose stated purpose was to attack the roots of American poverty. A Job Corps was then established to provide vocational training.

A preschool program designed to help disadvantaged students arrive at kindergarten ready to learn, named HEADSTART, was then established. Then came VOLUNTEERS IN SERVICE TO AMERICA (VISTA), which was set up as a domestic Peace Corps. Schools in impoverished American regions would now receive volunteer teaching attention. Federal funds were sent to struggling communities to attack unemployment and illiteracy.

What Johnson told Americans, as he campaigned in 1964, was that the establishment of this “Great Society” was going to eliminate the problems of America’s poor.

It had the opposite effect.

The Great Society created a dependent class, which, instead of diminishing as it’s members joined the workforce, increased from generation to generation, relying on the federal government to provide their every need.

Uncle Sugar became Mother, Father, Preacher, and Doctor to generations of Americans. This “plantation mentality” continues to this day.

Instead of moving forward, by exercising the self-reliance that Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. preached so well, the people I saw, while working in a State Employment Office, 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.

Since August of 2014, the results of LBJ’s “Great Society” have been the lead story in seemingly, every television newscast, on every newspaper front page, and on every internet news/political website.

But, I digress…

On a Sunday, in October of 2008, outside of Toledo, Ohio, Democratic Presidential Nominee Obama met a plumber named Joe Wurzelbacher. Joe, who owned his own plumbing company, dared to ask Obama about his proposed tax hikes. In fact, he told Obama that he did not want to pay higher taxes, he was already paying enough. Obama told him,

Now, I respect the disagreement. I just want you to be clear – it’s not that I want to punish your success – I just want to make sure that everybody who is behind you – that they’ve got a chance at success too.”

…I think when you spread the wealth around, it’s good for everybody.

Evidently, the “fairness” Obama seeks, includes making everyone’s housing “fair”, too.

And, so, in the name of “Social Justice”, “Democratic Socialism” is being put in place in the “Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave”.

No Individual Achievement allowed.

No American Exceptionalism to ever be spoken off.

No individuality allowed in the Proletariat.

Welcome to the USSA, “komrades!”

Until He Comes,

KJ

Pope Visits White Obama. White House Compares Obama to Pope. “Social Justice” Abounds.

September 23, 2015

th (28)Today’s top news story reminds me of a joke…

These two socialists walk into the White House…

Just kidding….or, am I?

The Washington Examiner reports that

Pope Francis and President Obama have both dedicated their lives to helping the less fortunate, and that commonality will be central to their meeting Wednesday during the pope’s first visit to the United States, a White House spokesman said hours before Obama left to greet the pontiff as he landed at Andrews Air Force Base Tuesday afternoon.

“[B]oth men have talked, quite publicly, about their commitment to social justice,” White House spokesman Josh Earnest said in previewing their Oval Office meeting scheduled for Wednesday morning. “And both men have dedicated their, not just their careers, but their lives, to that effort.”

“Certainly the kind of commitment that we’ve seen from Pope Francis is unique and singular,” Earnest allowed “but I think the values that both men live out have some common ground.”

Earnest talked about how Obama turned down high-paying jobs upon graduating law school to instead work in Chicago’s poor South Side, and how Francis is known for advocating on behalf of impoverished communities in his home country of Argentina before ascending through the Roman Catholic Church’s ranks.

When it comes to internet history, Faulkner said it best: ‘The past isn’t over. It isn’t even past.’

“And you know, the president actually worked quite closely with other Catholics in that community, and the president has talked about that quite a bit … this has been a value that has animated the president’s career choices since he was a young man.”

Earnest said Francis’s story is similar.

“[P]rior to rising through the leadership ranks of the Catholic Church … Pope Francis earned a reputation in Latin America [as being someone] willing to roll up his sleeves” to help the less fortunate, “particularly those who were economically destitute,” Earnest said.

Earnest said many in the administration are looking forward to greeting Francis because they feel they are working toward the same goals.

They’re “animated by the same kinds of values that animate the pope,” Earnest said about White House staffers. “And I think that’s why the opportunity to have Pope Francis, somebody who shares those values, here in this building tomorrow, makes for a really special day.”

A crowd of 15,000 is expected to welcome Francis at a ceremony on the White House lawn Wednesday morning.

According to press reports, several hundred people were on hand at Maryland’s Andrews Air Force Base to watch “Shepherd One” land and cheer the pope as he deplaned.

“We love Francis, yes we do,” people reportedly chanted. “We love Francis, how about you?”

In addition to Obama, First Lady Michelle, Vice President Joe Biden his wife Jill, and their extended families, nearly 20 other dignitaries were on hand at Andrews, including all of the Washington and Baltimore areas’ Catholic bishops.

“Ho, ho, hey, hey, welcome to the USA,” the larger crowd chanted, welcoming Francis on his first trip ever to the United States.

Interesting. Why are Obama and his Liberal Minions embracing “Il Papa”, when they have done everything in their power to minimalize the role of our Christian Faith in the day-to-day lives of Americans?

Rush Limbaugh explained why, on his radio program yesterday…

It’s a political thing.  It’s rooted in political power. It’s rooted in money.  They have this utter contempt, the American left.  What do you think the reasons they object to Southern culture really is about?  It’s those pro-lifers and gun nuts and those Bible thumpers, people that drive old pickups.  They get to the church parking lot Saturday night to get a good spot for the sermon the next day.  They speak with utter contempt of all this.  And who are they embracing? 

So why are they embracing a man more powerful than they are who stands for everything they supposedly oppose.  They must think something is different about this guy.  We’ve already read that Obama plans to hide the advancement of his agenda behind the pope.  We know that’s gonna happen.  That’s why what Josh Earnest just said insults my intelligence. 

You know, I don’t have any patience for that.  Just lie to me, just tell me, look at my face and tell me you’re gonna lie to me instead of trying to get me to believe your lie, because it just insults my intelligence. (imitating Earnest) “Oh, no, these are not two political figures meeting.  No, no, no.  These are two men who hold similar views about life and are simply meeting to try to find common ground.”  Right.  That’s why Obama is making sure that we’ve got a nun that’s pro-abortion, that we’ve got lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgendered Catholics showing up. 

By the way, apparently the Vatican let it be known that they were not happy with this guest lest.  I don’t know what’s become of it.  My guess is Obama doesn’t give a rear end what the Vatican thinks.  You talk about hypocrites or irony.  But what it shows is they’ll sidle up to anybody if it’ll help ’em disguise their agenda in order to advance it. I mean, what could be better for them?  Here you have these anti-religion zealots known as your modern-day Democrats, and here comes Pope Francis, first ever trip to America, and because he has said a couple of things that arouses them — and make no mistake, when the pope starts talking about anti-capitalism, they get all hot and bothered, excited. 

So they’ll sacrifice what they really believe, these phony baloney, plastic banana, good-time rock ‘n’ rollers to hide behind this guy and make it look like his agenda is theirs.  And in the process, if anything, make it look like this pope is abandoning his own church in favor of the liberal church.  If not abandoning, then what would be the word?  Drastically restructuring his own organization to fit with theirs.  That’s a definite narrative that they’re going to try to promulgate out there. 

But I just think it’s phony as it can be.  I mean, this is a party that raises money and gets elected on their outright utter contempt for religious people, now welcoming the man who represents an organization they despise and are trying to undermine.  And make no mistake, any time you hear some Democrat or member of the media or some liberal activist just anywhere demand that the church moderate its tone or demand that the church modernize and realize that women today have many more needs than the church is meeting.  Women today want abortions, and they want to be able to have access to church sponsored and paid-for contraception, and it’s up to the church to moderate and modernize and modify its beliefs in order to be more in touch and have more in common with average, normal people.

If they think a religious leader is doing that, then of course they will embrace.  They’ll embrace anybody they think is willfully, willingly doing damage to an organization they despise.  I’m not exaggerating this.  They hold the Catholic Church in contempt.  Why do you think Catholic charities and so forth are spelled out in Obamacare? The Democrat Party and Obama would love to nullify the Catholic Church and its opposition to things that are doctrinal.  Oh, man, if they can get the church to change its doctrine, oh, man, if they could pull that off, that’d be even better to ’em than subverting the Constitution.  That would be a bigger success story to them than subverting the Constitution. 

Per usual, the Godfather of Political Talk Radio is spot on.

According to the website, churchauthority.org, the Pope has three main duties:

He is the Supreme Pastor.

That means that he represents Christ’s love and concern for every single individual. That is why the Pope’s priority lies in getting to know people, understanding how they live, listening to their interests and sharing their sufferings and their joys. On no account should the Pope allow his contact with ordinary people to be obstructed by a multitude of administrative duties.

He is the Unifier of the People of God.

Because of the international character of the Church, this will create many demands. The good of the world-wide Church and the autonomy of local Churches need to be balanced. That is why the Pope should guide and inspire the Central Synod of Bishops so that it can efficiently work out agreements and general Church policies.

He is the Prime Witness to Faith.

This includes both preaching [= announcing the message to non-Christians] and teaching [= explaining an element of Christ’s message in today’s context]. On very rare occasions the Pope is the main exponent of the infallible understanding of faith [=inerrancy] that is carried by the whole people of God. The Pope can only do so after listening to the People of God and discerning the faith they carry in their hearts.

Pope Francis is the first Pope who 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.

I do not believe that Jesus would be a part of the Social Justice Movement, which is so popular among Liberal Churches, today. His was and is a soul-saving movement. One that still brings hundreds of thousand of people to individual salvation on this terrestrial ball every day. A movement that, in fact, was embraced by the founders of this cherished land.

Dr. Albert Mohler, President of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, once said:

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

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

Pope Francis is presently doing the World’s Catholics a great disservice.

The current Pope’s embracing of certain aspects of Socialism, “Climate Change”, and the other erroneous, secular philosophies of the Far Left, dilutes his effectiveness as an Emmissary of God and the Head of the Catholic Church.

The world hungers for the Word of God.

Mankind needs to hear of God’s Love for them as individuals, not the machinations and limitations of man, as detailed in Marxist Theory.

 Until He Comes,

KJ

 

Obama Creates Database of Americans’ Personal Information for Administering “Racial and Economic” Justice

July 19, 2015

AFBrancoObamaElevator9142014Today, as the nation reflects on the happenings of the last week, which saw the President of the United States give our mortal enemy, Iran, the key to our nuclear annihilation, and later, watched him wish a “Happy Ramadan” to adherents of the same Political Ideology masquerading as a religion, as the Terrorist who killed 5 of our Brightest and Best in cold blood, on the same day as the massacre, we now find out that, in the name of “fairness” and “social justice, that Barack Hussein Obama has committed an unprecedented invasion of our privacy, compiling a database, by which to fulfill his dream of “radically changing” America.

The New York Post reports that

A key part of President Obama’s legacy will be the fed’s unprecedented collection of sensitive data on Americans by race. The government is prying into our most personal information at the most local levels, all for the purpose of “racial and economic justice.”

Unbeknown to most Americans, Obama’s racial bean counters are furiously mining data on their health, home loans, credit cards, places of work, neighborhoods, even how their kids are disciplined in school — all to document “inequalities” between minorities and whites.

This Orwellian-style stockpile of statistics includes a vast and permanent network of discrimination databases, which Obama already is using to make “disparate impact” cases against: banks that don’t make enough prime loans to minorities; schools that suspend too many blacks; cities that don’t offer enough Section 8 and other low-income housing for minorities; and employers who turn down African-Americans for jobs due to criminal backgrounds.

Big Brother Barack wants the databases operational before he leaves office, and much of the data in them will be posted online.

So civil-rights attorneys and urban activist groups will be able to exploit them to show patterns of “racial disparities” and “segregation,” even if no other evidence of discrimination exists.

Obama is presiding over the largest consolidation of personal data in US history.
HOUSING DATABASE

The granddaddy of them all is the Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing database, which the Department of Housing and Urban Development rolled out earlier this month to racially balance the nation, ZIP code by ZIP code. It will map every US neighborhood by four racial groups — white, Asian, black or African-American, and Hispanic/Latino — and publish “geospatial data” pinpointing racial imbalances.

The agency proposes using nonwhite populations of 50% or higher as the threshold for classifying segregated areas.

Federally funded cities deemed overly segregated will be pressured to change their zoning laws to allow construction of more subsidized housing in affluent areas in the suburbs, and relocate inner-city minorities to those predominantly white areas. HUD’s maps, which use dots to show the racial distribution or density in residential areas, will be used to select affordable-housing sites.

HUD plans to drill down to an even more granular level, detailing the proximity of black residents to transportation sites, good schools, parks and even supermarkets. If the agency’s social engineers rule the distance between blacks and these suburban “amenities” is too far, municipalities must find ways to close the gap or forfeit federal grant money and face possible lawsuits for housing discrimination.

Civil-rights groups will have access to the agency’s sophisticated mapping software, and will participate in city plans to re-engineer neighborhoods under new community outreach requirements.

“By opening this data to everybody, everyone in a community can weigh in,” Obama said. “If you want affordable housing nearby, now you’ll have the data you need to make your case.”

Mortgage database

Meanwhile, the Federal Housing Finance Agency, headed by former Congressional Black Caucus leader Mel Watt, is building its own database for racially balancing home loans. The so-called National Mortgage Database Project will compile 16 years of lending data, broken down by race, and hold everything from individual credit scores and employment records.

Mortgage contracts won’t be the only financial records vacuumed up by the database. According to federal documents, the repository will include “all credit lines,” from credit cards to student loans to car loans — anything reported to credit bureaus. This is even more information than the IRS collects.

The FHFA will also pry into your personal assets and debts and whether you have any bankruptcies. The agency even wants to know the square footage and lot size of your home, as well as your interest rate.

FHFA will share the info with Obama’s brainchild, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, which acts more like a civil-rights agency, aggressively investigating lenders for racial bias.

The FHFA has offered no clear explanation as to why the government wants to sweep up so much sensitive information on Americans, other than stating it’s for “research” and “policymaking.”

However, CFPB Director Richard Cordray was more forthcoming, explaining in a recent talk to the radical California-based Greenlining Institute: “We will be better able to identify possible discriminatory lending patterns.”

Credit database

CFPB is separately amassing a database to monitor ordinary citizens’ credit-card transactions. It hopes to vacuum up some 900 million credit-card accounts — all sorted by race — representing roughly 85% of the US credit-card market. Why? To sniff out “disparities” in interest rates, charge-offs and collections.

Employment database

CFPB also just finalized a rule requiring all regulated banks to report data on minority hiring to an Office of Minority and Women Inclusion. It will collect reams of employment data, broken down by race, to police diversity on Wall Street as part of yet another fishing expedition.

School database

Through its mandatory Civil Rights Data Collection project, the Education Department is gathering information on student suspensions and expulsions, by race, from every public school district in the country. Districts that show disparities in discipline will be targeted for reform.

Those that don’t comply will be punished. Several already have been f.orced to revise their discipline policies, which has led to violent disruptions in classrooms.

Obama’s educrats want to know how many blacks versus whites are enrolled in gifted-and-talented and advanced placement classes.

Schools that show blacks and Latinos under-enrolled in such curricula, to an undefined “statistically significant degree,” could open themselves up to investigation and lawsuits by the department’s Civil Rights Office.

Count on a flood of private lawsuits to piggyback federal discrimination claims, as civil-rights lawyers use the new federal discipline data in their legal strategies against the supposedly racist US school system.

Even if no one has complained about discrimination, even if there is no other evidence of racism, the numbers themselves will “prove” that things are unfair.

Such databases have never before existed. Obama is presiding over the largest consolidation of personal data in US history. He is creating a diversity police state where government race cops and civil-rights lawyers will micromanage demographic outcomes in virtually every aspect of society.

The first black president, quite brilliantly, has built a quasi-reparations infrastructure perpetually fed by racial data that will outlast his administration.

My late father was one of thousands of brave young American men, who landed on the beaches of Normandy , France on June 6, 1944, in the military operation which broke the backs of the Nazis, leading to the end of World War II,  now known as D-Day.

World War II was in a war against Fascism.

What is Fascism? Per merriam-webster.com, it is a

political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition.

Ladies and gentlemen, I firmly believe that America is now fighting a new war against fascism.

It’s not a war that is being fought with guns and bullets, But instead with state referendums, Congressional votes, Executive Orders, and judicial activism.

And, it’s not our Brightest and Best who are dying on this field of battle, but rather, it is our Constitutional Freedoms which are dying an ignoble death, pierced by the arrows of socialism and political correctness.

By now, there’s some out there in the audience saying, “Oh Lord, the crazy old cracker’s overreacting again.”

No, Skippy, I’m not.

If you try to talk to a Liberal about this New Fascism, they will deny that there is any Fascism going on at all. In fact, they will tell you that this is “the will of the people” and they will site Democratically-stacked push polls in order to back their opinion up.

When you ask Liberals if , for example, “homosexual marriage” is the “will of the people”, why did voters in the overwhelming majority of states, including California, vote against it? And, if there is “no Fascism”, what do you call the fact that 2% of the population had to have activist judges, all the way up to the Supreme Court, overturn the actual will of the people in order to get their way, in their attempt to redefine a word that has meant the same thing since time immemorial?

In response, you will usually see their eyes glaze over, like a deer in the headlights, or experience a dramatic pause in posting, if you are on the Internet.

Liberals can not legitimately defend the suppression of the Constitutional Rights of Americans.

Fascism, in any form, remains indefensible.

The Godfather of Conservative Talk Radio, Rush Limbaugh, once said the following,

You know as well as I do that people are scared to death to tell you what they really think. The left has politicized everything — everything — to the point that people are afraid to go against what they know to be political correctness, which is nothing more than liberal fascism, nothing more than censorship.

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 through Obamacare, every single piece of legislation has been designed to further the Far Left’s agenda.

Remember when Obama was campaigning so hard to get the Affordable Health Care Act passed?

He always used people as props for his speeches, whether it was just normal people or people dressed in white coats like doctors.

When he was trying to get gun control passed, he used the parents from the Newtown Massacre in Connecticut as human props to try to get his repressive agenda passed.

The use of human props is an old propaganda trick, which was used by Joseph Goebbels to make his boss Adolf Hitler seem like a man of the people who really cared about the German citizenry.

The use of propaganda to further the aims of fascist governments is an old and effective method of camouflaging fascism, which Obama’s handlers realize all too well.

In addition to the use of human props during a speech, another strategy used in a propaganda campaign is to select an enemy and target them with the aid of a sympathetic press behind you.

During Hitler’s rise to power, the German Press demonized European Jews, betraying them as evil and money grubbing…painting them as being different from normal German citizens. It was this classification of the European Jews as the enemy that almost led to the extinction of them in that horrible attempted genocide, known as the Holocaust.

Now, in the early 21st century, the Far Left, the Democratic Party, and the Obama Administration (but, I repeat myself) are using propaganda, racial division, and class warfare to isolate and demonize average Americans, who through hard work, have risen to a high station in life or through their strong Christian faith and love of their country refuse to follow a popular culture- worshiping Administration, when it issues Executive Orders or has its Democratic Congress pass legislation which clearly contradicts the Word of God and the Judeo-Christian Belief System upon which America was built.

Obama’s Database will be used to further his dreams of a nation based on the theories of Karl Marx and Saul Alinsky, not the Constitutional Republic envisioned by our Founding Fathers.

If America keeps on the path we seem to be headed on, we will find out why America is not mentioned in the Book of Revelation.

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

Until He Comes,

KJ

The Great Disconnect: The Whole, Ugly Truth About Barack Hussein Obama

February 22, 2015

PROLOGUE:

This past week, the Former Mayor of New York City, Rudy Giuliani, has set the entire country buzzing, concerning his statements about the 44th President of these United States, Barack Hussein Obama.

American Liberals are positively apoplectic over the statements that “Hizzoner” has made. So much so, that he has received death threats over them.

Reason being…they’re absolutely true!!!

Beginning the morning of June 30th, 2010, I posted a 4 part series, titled “The Great Disconnect” about the current President of these United States, Barack Hussein Obama. ( And no, Liberals. Using Obama’s middle name does not make me a RAAACIIIST. You guys sang about it . mm mmm mmmm)

As we watch his second term continue to self-destruct, while his Signature Legislation, Obamacare, does its impression of the “sinking of the Titanic”, the President of the United States , shows more concerned about the well-being of Islamic Terrorists than he is about the American Citizens he is supposed to be protecting, and, previously unseen diseases strike down our citizens, I believe that now, more than ever, as we watch the Leader of the Free World become more and more desperate to save “his legacy”, it is appropriate to review who Barack Hussein Obama is, beginning with his early life, including those who influenced and guided him, and ending with his speech at the 2004 Democrat National Convention, which led to Obama being anointed as the Democrat’s  new “messiah”.

Please share this “mini-novel” with your family and friends.

Oh…and HEY, RUDY!!! I SAID IT, FIRST!

Part 1 – The Beginning 

When Barack, 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 families in Jakarta.

The rags to riches fable (supported by a cast of thousands) of Barack Hussein Obama (mm mmm mmmm) begins like any other, with his parents, Ann Dunham and Barack Obama, Sr. They met in a Russian language class in 1960, right in the middle of that time of history known as the Cold War, when America and Russia were poised to start lobbing missiles at each other. In 1961 they were married and later that year Barack Hussein Obama, Jr. (peace be unto him) was born.

At age 10, he moved back to Hawaii and lived with his grandparents. As kids his age often do, young Barack eventually took up with a family friend named Frank, also known as Frank Marshall Davis.

Frank Marshall Davis (1905 – 1987) was an author, liberal activist, Stalinist agent, and self-admitted pedophile (Would you let your children hang around him?) . Davis was involved in Chicago’s South Side Community Art Center, “a meeting place for young African-American writers and artists during the 1940s”. Coming out of the New Deal Federal Art Project, the Art Center was a hangout for the “Culture Group,” a circle of Communist Party members and sympathizers including Richard Wright, Margaret Burroughs, Marion Perkins and Arna Bontemps. Another guy who hung out at the center was a young journalist named Vernon Jarrett. Davis and Jarrett worked together on the black run newspaper, the Chicago Defender. Vernon Jarrett is the father-in-law of Obama’s closest adviser and administration member, Valerie Jarrett.

Davis was in the FBI’s security index. This meant he could be arrested and detained in the event of a national emergency. Davis stated singer Paul Robeson, (He sang Ol’ Man River in the movie, Showboat.) a secret communist, was instrumental in helping him move to Hawaii.

Robeson suggested Davis contact Harry Bridges, head of the International Longshoremen and Workers’ Union, the most powerful labor union in Hawaii. Bridges then suggested that Davis get to know Koji Ariyoshi, Editor of the Honolulu Record, a newspaper that supported the policies of the Communist Party of the U.S.A.Bill Ayers, Bernadine Dorn

Robeson, Bridges and Ariyoshi were all Communist party operatives. Ariyoshi gave Davis a regular weekly column in the Honolulu Record entitled “Frankly Speaking.” When Davis’ column first appeared in May 1949, theRecord bragged that he was a member of the national executive board of the Civil Rights Congress, which had been named as a Communist subversive organization by Truman Attorney General Tom Clark.  While sponsored by the Civil Rights Congress, Davis signed a statement in defense of Gerhart Eisler, a notorious Comintern agent who escaped jail for passport fraud by fleeing to East Germany.O

I’m sure that Barry and Frank just talked “hoops” all the time, aren’t you?

At 19, Scooter enrolled at Occidental College.  Guess how he spent his time there?

From Obama’s Book, Dreams of My Father:

Political discussions, the kind at Occidental had once seemed so intense and purposeful, came to take on the flavor of the socialist conference I sometimes attended at Cooper Union.

And when he wasn’t going to socialist conferences, Obama hung out around campus and decided to make friends:

To avoid being mistaken for a sellout, I chose my friends carefully. The more politically active black students. The foreign students. The Chicanos. The Marxist professors and structural feminists and punk-rock performance poets.

In 1981, Obama left Occidental to attend Columbia University. During that year, Obama spent “about three weeks” visiting his former Occidental College roommate, Mohammed Hassan Chandoo and his family in Karachi, Pakistan, according to the account of Obama spokesman Bill Burton during the campaign.

Chandoo is now a financial consultant who was formerly a broker at Oppenheimer & Co. He  contributed to Obama’s campaign and helped raise more than $100,000 for him as a bundler.

Reviewing the early years of Obama’s life is very important.  Americans have noticed 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 trouble with Obama’s presidency.   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 is causing a great awakening. One of the main reasons Obama wants control of the internet is so we can’t communicate with each other and he can control the message.
It was announced on Monday that Obama will have his childhood portrayed in a movie by an Indonesian filmmaker. Director Damien Dematra stated that the movie will show how the diversity of culture in Jakarta influenced the president.
No need, Mr. Dematra.  We already know.
 
Sources:  examiner.com, conservapedia.com, foxnews.com, wor710.com
Part 2: Columbia, Community Organizing, and “Hahvahd”

Like several parts of Barack Hussein Obama’s (mm mmm mmmm) life story, little is known about his college experience.  He attended Occidental College in Los Angeles for two years before transferring to Columbia in 1981.  The move receives a small mention in Mr. Obama’s 1995 memoir, “Dreams from My Father”.   Instead, he devoted that chapter to his impressions of race and class struggles in New York.  I’m shocked.

An article in Columbia College Today, a publication of the university, reported that Scooter portrayed Columbia as a period of buckling down following a troubled adolescence.   Obama said that he did not socialize much, instead spending a lot of time in the library, “like a monk.”  Yeah, right.  He has also said that he was involved to some extent with the Black Students Organization.

Federal law limits the information that Columbia can release about Scooter’s time there. A spokesman for the university, Brian Connolly, confirmed that  Obama spent two years at Columbia College and graduated in 1983 with a major in political science.   He did not receive honors and specific information on his grades is sealed.   A program from the 1983 graduation ceremony lists him as a graduate.

The Los Angeles Times has reported that Obama studied, while at Columbia, under the late Edward Said, an Arafat devotee. That alone really does not mean a whole lot.  Said was a popular professor and hundreds of students took his comparative literature courses.   However, Scooter evidently maintained some sort of tie with Said.   A photo that made the Internet rounds before the election shows Obama talking to the professor at a 1998 Arab American community dinner in Chicago, where the Obamas and Saids were seated together.

Said knew a lot of radical operatives.   Among those radicals were Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn.  When they emerged from wherever they were hiding in the early 1980s (while Obama was attending Columbia), Ayers enrolled in education courses at Bank Street College, adjacent to Columbia in Morningside Heights.  He then earned his doctorate at Columbia’s Teachers College in 1987.  Said liked Ayers so much, he wrote a paragraph for the dust jacket of the bomber’s 2001 book, Fugitive Days, in which Ayers brags about being a part of the Weather Underground.

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

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

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

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

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

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

So, after 3 years of Community Organizing, Obama enrolled in Harvard Law School at the age of 27.  The question is:  How did he get the money for this?  In my article Why Haven’t I Heard of Khalid Al-Monsour? ,  I attempted to answer that question:

President Obama attended Harvard Law School from 1988 – 1991.  The average tuition during that time was $25,000 per year.  It would have cost $75,000 to attend there for 3 years.  As president of the Harvard Law Review, he received no stipend from the school, according to Harvard spokesman Mike Armini in a interview with Newsmax.

If numbers cited by the Obama Presidential Campaign for Scooter”s student loans are accurate, that means that Obama came up with more than $32,000 over three years from sources other than loans to pay for tuition, room and board.  Hmmmmm.

Along with the funding issue, very little is known about Obama’s time at Harvard Law School,and his sycophants in the Liberal hierarchy, Main Stream Media,  and even Harvard Law School Administrators have done a remarkable job in running interference against anyone trying to find out about it.

From Jodi Kantor’s article at nytimes.com:

He arrived there as an unknown, Afro-wearing community organizer who had spent years searching for his identity; by the time he left, he had his first national news media exposure, a book contract and a shot of confidence from running the most powerful legal journal in the country.

During his time at Harvard, Obama met and started dating Michelle Robinson, the future First Lady.  I don’t know if he was attracted to her arms or not.

He also managed to get himself elected the first black president of the Harvard Law Review.

Bruce Spiva, a former review editor who now practices civil rights law in Washington, said that the law review is:

fairly disconnected from the breadth and the rough and tumble of real politics.  It’s an election among a closed group. It’s more like electing a pope.

As the president of the review, Scooter had to walk a delicate line. He served on the board of the Black Law Students Association, often speaking passionately about the hot topic of the week, but in a way that would not make white classmates defensive.   He kept away from fiery rhetoric.  He even did a spot-on impersonation of the Rev. Jesse Jackson when he came to speak on campus, according to Franklin Amanat, now a federal prosecutor in Brooklyn.  Obama’s  brashest public speaking moment came at a rally for faculty diversity, where he compared Professor Derrick Bell, who had resigned after agitating for greater faculty diversity,  to Rosa Parks.

Most of the time, young Scooter stayed away from the fiery rhetoric of campus debate, choosing safer topics for his speeches. At the black law students’ annual conference, he fervently told students to remember the obligations that came with their privileged education.

Barack Hussein Obama graduated Summa Cum Laude from Harvard Law School.  We don’t know anything about his actual courses or grades.   The records have been sealed.

Now, law degree in hand, Obama was ready to return to the Windy City.

During this period of Barack Hussein Obama’s (peace be upon him) life, we see the seeds planted during his childhood and teen-age years start to take root and grow into a full-fledged, Alinsky-inspired Socialist ideology.

In the next section, we’ll explore his adventures among the Chicago Liberal and Academic Elite and the path that led him to his first political campaign.

Sources:  nysun.com, nationalreview.com, nytimes.com

Part 3: The Chicago Ascent

In the summer of 1988, while still at Harvard, Barack Hussein Obama (mm mmm mmmm) landed a job as an intern in the Chicago office of the influential law firm of Sidley Austin. ( How does a first-year law student get an internship at such a prestigious law firm?)  He was dating Michelle Robinson, a young lawyer from a working-class family in the South Shore area of the South Side.  She also just happened to be his mentor at the firm. The lovebirds got married in 1990, and settled in the Hyde Park neighborhood on the South Side along the lakefront.  Built around the University of Chicago, both black and white  affluent families lived among the middle class and the poor.  Hyde Park boasts a strong base of independent voters who are committed to political reform, which influenced Obama’s political message.

He worked for seven months in 1992 on a voter registration and education project that helped elect Bill Clinton as president and Carol Moseley Braun as the state’s first African-American femalesenator.

You may have heard of it:  Project Vote.   In 2008,  Project Vote and ACORN were responsible for a voter registration drive targeting battleground states Obama needed to win the White House.

Though officially non-partisan, the ACORN/Project Vote voter drive focused on groups that they thought would vote Democratic in the presidential contest: African-American, young, Latino and low-income earners.  They referred to these groups as “historically underrepresented in elections” in a press release they issued, in an attempt to justify what they were doing.

ACORN/Project Vote operated voter registration drives in 21 states in 2008; including the battlegrounds Colorado, Florida, Michigan (since move to Obama) Minnesota, Missouri, Nevada, New Mexico, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.  They were very instrumental in Obama’s victory.

Also in 1992, Scooter went to work for Miner, Barnhill & Galland, a firm specializing in civil rights law and other forms of public advocacy.   Working there provided him with the opportunity to make many contacts in the Chicago Political Machine.   The longtime fire he had in his gut concerning a political career found inspiration through the changes being made in Chicago by Harold Washington, its black mayor.   African-Americans were finally getting the power and control that they hadn’t had before, and Obama decided that politics was the career for him.

Obama started another part-time gig in 1992.  Per the University of Chicago:

From 1992 until his election to the U.S. Senate in 2004, Barack Obama served as a professor in the Law School. He was a Lecturer from 1992 to 1996. He was a Senior Lecturer from 1996 to 2004, during which time he taught three courses per year. Senior Lecturers are considered to be members of the Law School faculty and are regarded as professors, although not full-time or tenure-track.

Why didn’t they just call him a Part-time Lecturer?

In 1995  “Bomber” Bill Ayers and his wife Bernadette Dohrn hosted a fund-raiser for Obama prior to Obama’s run for Alice Palmer’s seat in the state Senate  and Ayers donated $200 to Obama’s upcoming state Senate campaign.

In 1996 at age 34, he ran for the state Senate in dubious campaign that is barely known of, outside of Chicago.   Alice Palmer, the incumbent, had decided to run for Congress and supported Obama as her successor.   But after Palmer’s congressional campaign ran into trouble, she changed her mind and decided to run for re-election to the Illinois Senate after all. Obama refused to step aside and the melee ensued.  One of Scooter’s volunteers challenged whether Palmer’s nominating petitions were even legal.  Obama’s campaign pulled the same chicanery concerning the petitions of other candidates.  Palmer dropped out, and the other candidates were disqualified.   So,  Obama won unopposed in the Democratic primary—guaranteeing his victory in the general election.  This was truly an example of Chicago-style politics at it’s finest…or dirtiest.

Around this same time, at a Bill Clinton White House event, philanthropist Walter Annenberg announced that he was making a $500 million grant to cities across the nation to put towards the reform of public schools.   Bill Ayers was the head of the Chicago group that, with$49.2 million in hand,   formed the Chicago Annenberg Challenge.  The launch party in 1995 was attended by the governor of Illinois and the mayor of Chicago, as well as anybody was influential among the Chicago Political Elite.   Guess who the  first chairman of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge was?  You guessed.   Obama held the post until 1999.  At that time, he stepped down and remained on the board.   Bill Ayers worked closely with the Challenge as a leader of the newly formed Chicago School Reform Collaborative.

They also both served on the board of the charitable Woods Fund of Chicago from 1999 to 2002.   Just a “guy from the neighborhood”.  Huh, Scooter?

Additionally, Scooter served on the board of the Joyce Foundation from 1994 to 2002.  This foundation started as the financial back-up plan of a widow whose family had made millions in the lumber industry.

After her death, it was run by philanthropic people who increasingly dedicated their giving to Liberal causes, including gun control, environmentalism and school changes.  It has grown over the years until it is now bigger than the TIDES Foundation and actually funds it.

The Joyce Foundation in 2000 and 2001 provided the capital outlay to start the Chicago Climate Exchange. It started trading in 2003, and what it trades is, believe it or not, air.

What a coincidence, that, as president, pushing cap-and-trade is one of his highest priorities, huh?

While he served in the State Senate in Springfield, Illinois, Obama wrote more than 40 columns for his neighborhood Newspaper, The Hyde Park Herald.  He also received extensive coverage in the Chicago Defender, an over-one hundred year old newspaper of record serving Chicago’s black community.

Per Howard Kurtz, writing for weeklystandard.com, from an article published August 11-18, 2008:

What they [the newspaper articles] portray is a Barack Obama sharply at variance with the image of the post-racial, post-ideological, bipartisan, culture-war-shunning politician familiar from current media coverage and purveyed by the Obama campaign. As details of Obama’s early political career emerge into the light, his associations with such radical figures as Reverend Jeremiah Wright, Father Michael Pfleger, Reverend James Meeks, Bill Ayers, and Bernardine Dohrn look less like peculiar instances of personal misjudgment and more like intentional political partnerships. At his core, in other words, the politician chronicled here is profoundly race-conscious, exceedingly liberal, free-spending even in the face of looming state budget deficits, and partisan. Elected president, this man would presumably shift the country sharply to the left on all the key issues of the day-culture-war issues included. It’s no wonder Obama has passed over his Springfield years in relative silence.

You’re a prophet, Mr. Kurtz.

Obama remained in the Illinois State Senate until 2004, when he became the Democratic nominee for the United States Senate seat from Illinois.   We’ll examine this period of his life in the next section.

Sources:  usnews.com, suntimes.com, uchicago.edu, michellemalkin.com, pajamasmedia.com, weeklystandard.com

Part 4: Hittin’ The Big-Time

In 2004, Illinois State Senator Barack Hussein Obama (mm mmm mmmm) decided to run for The United States Senate.

In order to have a successful Senatorial campaign, Scooter  had to secure tremendous financial backing and be the recipient of astute political mentoring.  No problem.

It is now very well-known that George Soros, evil genius, major Democratic Party donor and anti-Israel crusader, has been a generous contributor to Barack Obama. However, not too many people know that a loophole in McCain-Feingold allowed Soros and his family members to be extremely generous in their support of Obama’s 2004 Senatorial campaign.

Obama had to run against Blair Hull in the primary and then Jack Ryan in the general (both multi-millionaires). Obama received huge donations from individuals, to so-called “millionaires exception.”  Usually,  individuals are limited to giving $2300 to candidates in federal elections, but if the candidates are running against millionaires, these limits do not apply and candidates are allowed to receive up to $12,000 from a single individual. Soros and his family gave Barack Obama $60,000. This does not count the money that Soros was funneled to so-called 527 groups (Moveon.org, for example) that have also been politically active; nor does it include money that Soros raised fromtapping a network of friends, business associates, and employees.

Besides garnering unlimited campaign funds, as the campaigns entered their closing rounds, the news ”happened to be” leaked to media outlets that both Hull and Ryan had “personal scandals” in their past. The timely release of this news wiped out both of their campaigns, leading to an easy victory for Obama in the primary and then in the general election.

The New York Times Magazine revealed that David Axelrod, Obama’s chief political and media adviser, may well have been behind the leak of the story that doomed the Hull candidacy as the primary reached its home stretch.  I’m shocked.

As he has shown over the years, Axelrod was right at home operating in this gray area, part idealist, part hired muscle. One can not bring up Axelrod’s name  in certain circles in Chicago without the matter of the Blair Hull divorce papers coming up. Approaching the 2004 Senate primary, it was clear that it was a two-man race: the millionaire liberal, Hull, leading in the polls, and Obama, who was the figurehead of an impressive grass-roots campaign. One month before the vote, The Chicago Tribune “just happened” to reveal, at the end of a long profile of Hull, that during a divorce proceeding, Hull’s second wife filed for an order of protection. This revelation proceeded to erupt into a full-fledged scandal.  This scandal destroyed Hull’s campaign and handed Obama an easy primary victory.

The Tribune reporter who wrote the story later admitted in print that the Obama camp had “worked aggressively behind the scenes” to push the story. However, a lot of folks in Chicago believe that Axelrod leaked the initial story. They will tell you that before signing on with Obama, Axelrod interviewed with Hull. They also point out that Obama’s TV ad campaign just happened to start at almost the same time. Axelrod swears up and down that “we had nothing to do with it” and that the campaign’s television ad schedule was in the works for a long time.

Axlerod’s explanation?

An aura grows up around you, and people assume everything emanates from you.

After Obama won the Primary, he was invited to deliver a speech at the 2004 Democratic Convention on July 27th in Boston, Massachusetts.

As the result of the now-legendary speech, Out of Many, One, Obama rose to national prominence, and his speech is regarded by Liberal pundits as one of the great political statements of the 21st century.  This speech thrust Obama into the national spotlight, and sycophants crowned him the new political prince of the Liberal Elite.

In an interview published on oprah.com on Nov. 1, 2004, the talk show queen asked Obama why he was chosen to speak at the 2004 Democratic Convention:

We won our primary in a way that shocked people.   (I’ll say.)  In a seven-person field, we got 53 percent of the vote. People’s assumption had been that if I won, I’d get 90 percent of the black vote, then maybe a little of the liberal white vote. We did win the black vote by 90 percent, but we also won the white vote—both on Chicago’s South Side and up north. That created a sense of hopefulness among Democrats. I debunked this notion that whites won’t vote for blacks. Or suburbanites won’t vote for city people. Or downstate Illinois won’t vote for upstate Illinois. That was the bedrock of my campaign: People may look different, talk different, and live in different places, but they’ve got some core values that they all care about and they all believe in. If you can speak to those values, people will respond—even if you have a funny name. (Brings a tear to the eye, doesn’t it?)

Barack Hussein Obama (Peace be upon him.) won the Senatorial election and went on to “serve” as a United States Senator from Illinois from 2005 – 2008.

Obama sponsored 121 bills as a senator, of which 115 never made it out of committee and 3 were successfully enacted.   He co-sponsored 506 bills during the same time period.

Barack Obama missed 314 (24%) of 1,300 roll call votes.  He did not have the option of voting “Present” as he did 130 times in the Illinois State Senate.

One and one half years after taking his seat in the U.S. Senate, Obama declared himself a candidate for the Democratic nomination as their representative in the 2008 Presidential Election.

And the rest, as they say, gentle readers, is history. 

Sources:  americanthinker.org, govtrack.us, oprah.com

EPILOGUE

Here we are…a country purposefully divided by a individual who wants to “spread the wealth around” and who proclaims that America is “not just a Christian Nation any more”.

The sad fact is Americans have elected…not once, but twice, a man who believes that America is not better than any other country in the world. In fact, his mission has been to turn us into “just another country”.

American Exceptionalism is anathema to him.

In Barack Hussein Obama’s country, every one is equal. That is to say, accomplishment is not rewarded, unless it is done for the good of the State.

Children are given medals and trophies for accomplishing nothing at all.

Christians are being harassed and abused, because there can be no other god, but the State.

What Obama does not understand is, no matter how hard you try, your arm’s too short to box with God. God always has the last word. And, he will in the situation America currently finds itself.

Keep the faith and stay the course, as our Founding Fathers did.

They fought against tyranny and oppression, also.

And, with God’s help, they won.

We will, too…God willing.

Until He Comes,

KJ

The Great Disconnect: The Whole, Ugly Truth About Barack Hussein Obama

December 31, 2014

PROLOGUE:

This New year’s Eve 2014, I’ve decided to “look back” and post one of my most popular blogs.

Beginning the morning of June 30th, 2010, I posted a 4 part series, titled “The Great Disconnect” about the current President of these United States, Barack Hussein Obama. ( And no, Liberals. Using Obama’s middle name does not make me a RAAACIIIST. You guys sang about it . mm mmm mmmm)

As we watch his second term continue to self-destruct, while his Signature Legislation, Obamacare, does its impression of the “sinking of the Titanic”, and, previously unseen diseases strike down our citizens, I believe that now, more than ever, as we watch the Leader of the Free World become more and more desperate to save “his legacy”, it is appropriate to review who Barack Hussein Obama is, beginning with his early life, including those who influenced and guided him, and ending with his speech at the 2004 Democrat National Convention, which led to Obama being anointed as the Democrat’s  new “messiah”.

Please share this “mini-novel” with your family and friends.

I hope it helps. – KJ

Part 1 – The Beginning 

When Barack, 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 families in Jakarta.

The rags to riches fable (supported by a cast of thousands) of Barack Hussein Obama (mm mmm mmmm) begins like any other, with his parents, Ann Dunham and Barack Obama, Sr. They met in a Russian language class in 1960, right in the middle of that time of history known as the Cold War, when America and Russia were poised to start lobbing missiles at each other. In 1961 they were married and later that year Barack Hussein Obama, Jr. (peace be unto him) was born.

At age 10, he moved back to Hawaii and lived with his grandparents. As kids his age often do, young Barack eventually took up with a family friend named Frank, also known as Frank Marshall Davis.

Frank Marshall Davis (1905 – 1987) was an author, liberal activist, Stalinist agent, and self-admitted pedophile (Would you let your children hang around him?) . Davis was involved in Chicago’s South Side Community Art Center, “a meeting place for young African-American writers and artists during the 1940s”. Coming out of the New Deal Federal Art Project, the Art Center was a hangout for the “Culture Group,” a circle of Communist Party members and sympathizers including Richard Wright, Margaret Burroughs, Marion Perkins and Arna Bontemps. Another guy who hung out at the center was a young journalist named Vernon Jarrett. Davis and Jarrett worked together on the black run newspaper, the Chicago Defender. Vernon Jarrett is the father-in-law of Obama’s closest adviser and administration member, Valerie Jarrett.

Davis was in the FBI’s security index. This meant he could be arrested and detained in the event of a national emergency. Davis stated singer Paul Robeson, (He sang Ol’ Man River in the movie, Showboat.) a secret communist, was instrumental in helping him move to Hawaii.

Robeson suggested Davis contact Harry Bridges, head of the International Longshoremen and Workers’ Union, the most powerful labor union in Hawaii. Bridges then suggested that Davis get to know Koji Ariyoshi, Editor of the Honolulu Record, a newspaper that supported the policies of the Communist Party of the U.S.A.Bill Ayers, Bernadine Dorn

Robeson, Bridges and Ariyoshi were all Communist party operatives. Ariyoshi gave Davis a regular weekly column in the Honolulu Record entitled “Frankly Speaking.” When Davis’ column first appeared in May 1949, theRecord bragged that he was a member of the national executive board of the Civil Rights Congress, which had been named as a Communist subversive organization by Truman Attorney General Tom Clark.  While sponsored by the Civil Rights Congress, Davis signed a statement in defense of Gerhart Eisler, a notorious Comintern agent who escaped jail for passport fraud by fleeing to East Germany.O

I’m sure that Barry and Frank just talked “hoops” all the time, aren’t you?

At 19, Scooter enrolled at Occidental College.  Guess how he spent his time there?

From Obama’s Book, Dreams of My Father:

Political discussions, the kind at Occidental had once seemed so intense and purposeful, came to take on the flavor of the socialist conference I sometimes attended at Cooper Union.

And when he wasn’t going to socialist conferences, Obama hung out around campus and decided to make friends:

To avoid being mistaken for a sellout, I chose my friends carefully. The more politically active black students. The foreign students. The Chicanos. The Marxist professors and structural feminists and punk-rock performance poets.

In 1981, Obama left Occidental to attend Columbia University. During that year, Obama spent “about three weeks” visiting his former Occidental College roommate, Mohammed Hassan Chandoo and his family in Karachi, Pakistan, according to the account of Obama spokesman Bill Burton during the campaign.

Chandoo is now a financial consultant who was formerly a broker at Oppenheimer & Co. He  contributed to Obama’s campaign and helped raise more than $100,000 for him as a bundler.

Reviewing the early years of Obama’s life is very important.  Americans have noticed 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 trouble with Obama’s presidency.   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 is causing a great awakening. One of the main reasons Obama wants control of the internet is so we can’t communicate with each other and he can control the message.
It was announced on Monday that Obama will have his childhood portrayed in a movie by an Indonesian filmmaker. Director Damien Dematra stated that the movie will show how the diversity of culture in Jakarta influenced the president.
No need, Mr. Dematra.  We already know.
 
Sources:  examiner.com, conservapedia.com, foxnews.com, wor710.com
Part 2: Columbia, Community Organizing, and “Hahvahd”

Like several parts of Barack Hussein Obama’s (mm mmm mmmm) life story, little is known about his college experience.  He attended Occidental College in Los Angeles for two years before transferring to Columbia in 1981.  The move receives a small mention in Mr. Obama’s 1995 memoir, “Dreams from My Father”.   Instead, he devoted that chapter to his impressions of race and class struggles in New York.  I’m shocked.

An article in Columbia College Today, a publication of the university, reported that Scooter portrayed Columbia as a period of buckling down following a troubled adolescence.   Obama said that he did not socialize much, instead spending a lot of time in the library, “like a monk.”  Yeah, right.  He has also said that he was involved to some extent with the Black Students Organization.

Federal law limits the information that Columbia can release about Scooter’s time there. A spokesman for the university, Brian Connolly, confirmed that  Obama spent two years at Columbia College and graduated in 1983 with a major in political science.   He did not receive honors and specific information on his grades is sealed.   A program from the 1983 graduation ceremony lists him as a graduate.

The Los Angeles Times has reported that Obama studied, while at Columbia, under the late Edward Said, an Arafat devotee. That alone really does not mean a whole lot.  Said was a popular professor and hundreds of students took his comparative literature courses.   However, Scooter evidently maintained some sort of tie with Said.   A photo that made the Internet rounds before the election shows Obama talking to the professor at a 1998 Arab American community dinner in Chicago, where the Obamas and Saids were seated together.

Said knew a lot of radical operatives.   Among those radicals were Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn.  When they emerged from wherever they were hiding in the early 1980s (while Obama was attending Columbia), Ayers enrolled in education courses at Bank Street College, adjacent to Columbia in Morningside Heights.  He then earned his doctorate at Columbia’s Teachers College in 1987.  Said liked Ayers so much, he wrote a paragraph for the dust jacket of the bomber’s 2001 book, Fugitive Days, in which Ayers brags about being a part of the Weather Underground.

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

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

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

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

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

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

So, after 3 years of Community Organizing, Obama enrolled in Harvard Law School at the age of 27.  The question is:  How did he get the money for this?  In my article Why Haven’t I Heard of Khalid Al-Monsour? ,  I attempted to answer that question:

President Obama attended Harvard Law School from 1988 – 1991.  The average tuition during that time was $25,000 per year.  It would have cost $75,000 to attend there for 3 years.  As president of the Harvard Law Review, he received no stipend from the school, according to Harvard spokesman Mike Armini in a interview with Newsmax.

If numbers cited by the Obama Presidential Campaign for Scooter”s student loans are accurate, that means that Obama came up with more than $32,000 over three years from sources other than loans to pay for tuition, room and board.  Hmmmmm.

Along with the funding issue, very little is known about Obama’s time at Harvard Law School,and his sycophants in the Liberal hierarchy, Main Stream Media,  and even Harvard Law School Administrators have done a remarkable job in running interference against anyone trying to find out about it.

From Jodi Kantor’s article at nytimes.com:

He arrived there as an unknown, Afro-wearing community organizer who had spent years searching for his identity; by the time he left, he had his first national news media exposure, a book contract and a shot of confidence from running the most powerful legal journal in the country.

During his time at Harvard, Obama met and started dating Michelle Robinson, the future First Lady.  I don’t know if he was attracted to her arms or not.

He also managed to get himself elected the first black president of the Harvard Law Review.

Bruce Spiva, a former review editor who now practices civil rights law in Washington, said that the law review is:

fairly disconnected from the breadth and the rough and tumble of real politics.  It’s an election among a closed group. It’s more like electing a pope.

As the president of the review, Scooter had to walk a delicate line. He served on the board of the Black Law Students Association, often speaking passionately about the hot topic of the week, but in a way that would not make white classmates defensive.   He kept away from fiery rhetoric.  He even did a spot-on impersonation of the Rev. Jesse Jackson when he came to speak on campus, according to Franklin Amanat, now a federal prosecutor in Brooklyn.  Obama’s  brashest public speaking moment came at a rally for faculty diversity, where he compared Professor Derrick Bell, who had resigned after agitating for greater faculty diversity,  to Rosa Parks.

Most of the time, young Scooter stayed away from the fiery rhetoric of campus debate, choosing safer topics for his speeches. At the black law students’ annual conference, he fervently told students to remember the obligations that came with their privileged education.

Barack Hussein Obama graduated Summa Cum Laude from Harvard Law School.  We don’t know anything about his actual courses or grades.   The records have been sealed.

Now, law degree in hand, Obama was ready to return to the Windy City.

During this period of Barack Hussein Obama’s (peace be upon him) life, we see the seeds planted during his childhood and teen-age years start to take root and grow into a full-fledged, Alinsky-inspired Socialist ideology.

In the next section, we’ll explore his adventures among the Chicago Liberal and Academic Elite and the path that led him to his first political campaign.

Sources:  nysun.com, nationalreview.com, nytimes.com

Part 3: The Chicago Ascent

In the summer of 1988, while still at Harvard, Barack Hussein Obama (mm mmm mmmm) landed a job as an intern in the Chicago office of the influential law firm of Sidley Austin. ( How does a first-year law student get an internship at such a prestigious law firm?)  He was dating Michelle Robinson, a young lawyer from a working-class family in the South Shore area of the South Side.  She also just happened to be his mentor at the firm. The lovebirds got married in 1990, and settled in the Hyde Park neighborhood on the South Side along the lakefront.  Built around the University of Chicago, both black and white  affluent families lived among the middle class and the poor.  Hyde Park boasts a strong base of independent voters who are committed to political reform, which influenced Obama’s political message.

He worked for seven months in 1992 on a voter registration and education project that helped elect Bill Clinton as president and Carol Moseley Braun as the state’s first African-American femalesenator.

You may have heard of it:  Project Vote.   In 2008,  Project Vote and ACORN were responsible for a voter registration drive targeting battleground states Obama needed to win the White House.

Though officially non-partisan, the ACORN/Project Vote voter drive focused on groups that they thought would vote Democratic in the presidential contest: African-American, young, Latino and low-income earners.  They referred to these groups as “historically underrepresented in elections” in a press release they issued, in an attempt to justify what they were doing.

ACORN/Project Vote operated voter registration drives in 21 states in 2008; including the battlegrounds Colorado, Florida, Michigan (since move to Obama) Minnesota, Missouri, Nevada, New Mexico, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.  They were very instrumental in Obama’s victory.

Also in 1992, Scooter went to work for Miner, Barnhill & Galland, a firm specializing in civil rights law and other forms of public advocacy.   Working there provided him with the opportunity to make many contacts in the Chicago Political Machine.   The longtime fire he had in his gut concerning a political career found inspiration through the changes being made in Chicago by Harold Washington, its black mayor.   African-Americans were finally getting the power and control that they hadn’t had before, and Obama decided that politics was the career for him.

Obama started another part-time gig in 1992.  Per the University of Chicago:

From 1992 until his election to the U.S. Senate in 2004, Barack Obama served as a professor in the Law School. He was a Lecturer from 1992 to 1996. He was a Senior Lecturer from 1996 to 2004, during which time he taught three courses per year. Senior Lecturers are considered to be members of the Law School faculty and are regarded as professors, although not full-time or tenure-track.

Why didn’t they just call him a Part-time Lecturer?

In 1995  “Bomber” Bill Ayers and his wife Bernadette Dohrn hosted a fund-raiser for Obama prior to Obama’s run for Alice Palmer’s seat in the state Senate  and Ayers donated $200 to Obama’s upcoming state Senate campaign.

In 1996 at age 34, he ran for the state Senate in dubious campaign that is barely known of, outside of Chicago.   Alice Palmer, the incumbent, had decided to run for Congress and supported Obama as her successor.   But after Palmer’s congressional campaign ran into trouble, she changed her mind and decided to run for re-election to the Illinois Senate after all. Obama refused to step aside and the melee ensued.  One of Scooter’s volunteers challenged whether Palmer’s nominating petitions were even legal.  Obama’s campaign pulled the same chicanery concerning the petitions of other candidates.  Palmer dropped out, and the other candidates were disqualified.   So,  Obama won unopposed in the Democratic primary—guaranteeing his victory in the general election.  This was truly an example of Chicago-style politics at it’s finest…or dirtiest.

Around this same time, at a Bill Clinton White House event, philanthropist Walter Annenberg announced that he was making a $500 million grant to cities across the nation to put towards the reform of public schools.   Bill Ayers was the head of the Chicago group that, with$49.2 million in hand,   formed the Chicago Annenberg Challenge.  The launch party in 1995 was attended by the governor of Illinois and the mayor of Chicago, as well as anybody was influential among the Chicago Political Elite.   Guess who the  first chairman of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge was?  You guessed.   Obama held the post until 1999.  At that time, he stepped down and remained on the board.   Bill Ayers worked closely with the Challenge as a leader of the newly formed Chicago School Reform Collaborative.

They also both served on the board of the charitable Woods Fund of Chicago from 1999 to 2002.   Just a “guy from the neighborhood”.  Huh, Scooter?

Additionally, Scooter served on the board of the Joyce Foundation from 1994 to 2002.  This foundation started as the financial back-up plan of a widow whose family had made millions in the lumber industry.

After her death, it was run by philanthropic people who increasingly dedicated their giving to Liberal causes, including gun control, environmentalism and school changes.  It has grown over the years until it is now bigger than the TIDES Foundation and actually funds it.

The Joyce Foundation in 2000 and 2001 provided the capital outlay to start the Chicago Climate Exchange. It started trading in 2003, and what it trades is, believe it or not, air.

What a coincidence, that, as president, pushing cap-and-trade is one of his highest priorities, huh?

While he served in the State Senate in Springfield, Illinois, Obama wrote more than 40 columns for his neighborhood Newspaper, The Hyde Park Herald.  He also received extensive coverage in the Chicago Defender, an over-one hundred year old newspaper of record serving Chicago’s black community.

Per Howard Kurtz, writing for weeklystandard.com, from an article published August 11-18, 2008:

What they [the newspaper articles] portray is a Barack Obama sharply at variance with the image of the post-racial, post-ideological, bipartisan, culture-war-shunning politician familiar from current media coverage and purveyed by the Obama campaign. As details of Obama’s early political career emerge into the light, his associations with such radical figures as Reverend Jeremiah Wright, Father Michael Pfleger, Reverend James Meeks, Bill Ayers, and Bernardine Dohrn look less like peculiar instances of personal misjudgment and more like intentional political partnerships. At his core, in other words, the politician chronicled here is profoundly race-conscious, exceedingly liberal, free-spending even in the face of looming state budget deficits, and partisan. Elected president, this man would presumably shift the country sharply to the left on all the key issues of the day-culture-war issues included. It’s no wonder Obama has passed over his Springfield years in relative silence.

You’re a prophet, Mr. Kurtz.

Obama remained in the Illinois State Senate until 2004, when he became the Democratic nominee for the United States Senate seat from Illinois.   We’ll examine this period of his life in the next section.

Sources:  usnews.com, suntimes.com, uchicago.edu, michellemalkin.com, pajamasmedia.com, weeklystandard.com

Part 4: Hittin’ The Big-Time

In 2004, Illinois State Senator Barack Hussein Obama (mm mmm mmmm) decided to run for The United States Senate.

In order to have a successful Senatorial campaign, Scooter  had to secure tremendous financial backing and be the recipient of astute political mentoring.  No problem.

It is now very well-known that George Soros, evil genius, major Democratic Party donor and anti-Israel crusader, has been a generous contributor to Barack Obama. However, not too many people know that a loophole in McCain-Feingold allowed Soros and his family members to be extremely generous in their support of Obama’s 2004 Senatorial campaign.

Obama had to run against Blair Hull in the primary and then Jack Ryan in the general (both multi-millionaires). Obama received huge donations from individuals, to so-called “millionaires exception.”  Usually,  individuals are limited to giving $2300 to candidates in federal elections, but if the candidates are running against millionaires, these limits do not apply and candidates are allowed to receive up to $12,000 from a single individual. Soros and his family gave Barack Obama $60,000. This does not count the money that Soros was funneled to so-called 527 groups (Moveon.org, for example) that have also been politically active; nor does it include money that Soros raised fromtapping a network of friends, business associates, and employees.

Besides garnering unlimited campaign funds, as the campaigns entered their closing rounds, the news ”happened to be” leaked to media outlets that both Hull and Ryan had “personal scandals” in their past. The timely release of this news wiped out both of their campaigns, leading to an easy victory for Obama in the primary and then in the general election.

The New York Times Magazine revealed that David Axelrod, Obama’s chief political and media adviser, may well have been behind the leak of the story that doomed the Hull candidacy as the primary reached its home stretch.  I’m shocked.

As he has shown over the years, Axelrod was right at home operating in this gray area, part idealist, part hired muscle. One can not bring up Axelrod’s name  in certain circles in Chicago without the matter of the Blair Hull divorce papers coming up. Approaching the 2004 Senate primary, it was clear that it was a two-man race: the millionaire liberal, Hull, leading in the polls, and Obama, who was the figurehead of an impressive grass-roots campaign. One month before the vote, The Chicago Tribune “just happened” to reveal, at the end of a long profile of Hull, that during a divorce proceeding, Hull’s second wife filed for an order of protection. This revelation proceeded to erupt into a full-fledged scandal.  This scandal destroyed Hull’s campaign and handed Obama an easy primary victory.

The Tribune reporter who wrote the story later admitted in print that the Obama camp had “worked aggressively behind the scenes” to push the story. However, a lot of folks in Chicago believe that Axelrod leaked the initial story. They will tell you that before signing on with Obama, Axelrod interviewed with Hull. They also point out that Obama’s TV ad campaign just happened to start at almost the same time. Axelrod swears up and down that “we had nothing to do with it” and that the campaign’s television ad schedule was in the works for a long time.

Axlerod’s explanation?

An aura grows up around you, and people assume everything emanates from you.

After Obama won the Primary, he was invited to deliver a speech at the 2004 Democratic Convention on July 27th in Boston, Massachusetts.

As the result of the now-legendary speech, Out of Many, One, Obama rose to national prominence, and his speech is regarded by Liberal pundits as one of the great political statements of the 21st century.  This speech thrust Obama into the national spotlight, and sycophants crowned him the new political prince of the Liberal Elite.

In an interview published on oprah.com on Nov. 1, 2004, the talk show queen asked Obama why he was chosen to speak at the 2004 Democratic Convention:

We won our primary in a way that shocked people.   (I’ll say.)  In a seven-person field, we got 53 percent of the vote. People’s assumption had been that if I won, I’d get 90 percent of the black vote, then maybe a little of the liberal white vote. We did win the black vote by 90 percent, but we also won the white vote—both on Chicago’s South Side and up north. That created a sense of hopefulness among Democrats. I debunked this notion that whites won’t vote for blacks. Or suburbanites won’t vote for city people. Or downstate Illinois won’t vote for upstate Illinois. That was the bedrock of my campaign: People may look different, talk different, and live in different places, but they’ve got some core values that they all care about and they all believe in. If you can speak to those values, people will respond—even if you have a funny name. (Brings a tear to the eye, doesn’t it?)

Barack Hussein Obama (Peace be upon him.) won the Senatorial election and went on to “serve” as a United States Senator from Illinois from 2005 – 2008.

Obama sponsored 121 bills as a senator, of which 115 never made it out of committee and 3 were successfully enacted.   He co-sponsored 506 bills during the same time period.

Barack Obama missed 314 (24%) of 1,300 roll call votes.  He did not have the option of voting “Present” as he did 130 times in the Illinois State Senate.

One and one half years after taking his seat in the U.S. Senate, Obama declared himself a candidate for the Democratic nomination as their representative in the 2008 Presidential Election.

And the rest, as they say, gentle readers, is history. 

Sources:  americanthinker.org, govtrack.us, oprah.com

EPILOGUE

Here we are…a country purposefully divided by a individual who wants to “spread the wealth around” and who proclaims that America is “not just a Christian Nation any more”.

The sad fact is Americans have elected…not once, but twice, a man who believes that America is not better than any other country in the world. In fact, his mission has been to turn us into “just another country”.

American Exceptionalism is anathema to him.

In Barack Hussein Obama’s country, every one is equal. That is to say, accomplishment is not rewarded, unless it is done for the good of the State.

Children are given medals and trophies for accomplishing nothing at all.

Christians are being harassed and abused, because there can be no other god, but the State.

What Obama does not understand is, no matter how hard you try, your arm’s too short to box with God. God always has the last word. And, he will in the situation America currently finds itself.

Keep the faith and stay the course, as our Founding Fathers did.

They fought against tyranny and oppression, also.

And, with God’s help, they won.

We will, too…God willing.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Eric Garner, Michael Brown, and the Dissolution of the Black American Family Unit

December 6, 2014

Black Crime Statistics Fox News 12614I posted the above statistics, in an effort to share some truth with you, this morning.

As a lifelong (56 years young) resident of the Memphis area, I continue to witness the dissolution of the once strong and proud Black American Family Unit.

I am also, as are most of you, bearing witness to Black and White Liberal Politicians making excuses for the out-of-control, self-inflicted genocide of 13% of America’s Population. as they blame it on “Racial Inequality”, while a Black Man sits behind a desk in the Oval Office at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, holding the most powerful leadership position in the Free World.

America’s Far Left Political Activists, including the President of the United States, are presently attempting, what is known in both sports and military strategy, as a “misdirection” play.

CNN.com reports that

Red tail lights snaked for hundreds of yards down an interstate in Oakland, California, as motorists stood still for protesters blocking traffic for a few minutes.

The marchers were making a statement about alleged unchecked police brutality and racially uneven justice in America on the third day of marches, sit-ins and die-ins over a grand jury decision in the death of African-American Eric Garner in Staten Island, New York.

Many people around the country have been as shocked by the decision not to indict Officer Daniel Pantaleo, who put Garner in a chokehold, as they have been horrified by the cell phone video of it that went viral.

The outrage has weighed heavily especially after the police shooting of unarmed teen Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri. When the jury announced it will not indict Pantaleo, protests dotted the American map.

A coast away in New York City, protesters attempted to block traffic on FDR Drive — a six-lane thoroughfare that hugs eastern Manhattan — and on the iron trellised Manhattan Bridge, which connects the island to Brooklyn.

But at the end of a long, cold, wet Friday, police had had enough and pulled up in detention buses. The sight of them alone was a deterrent to most protesters.

After a handful were arrested, the remaining group called it a night.

New York multitudes

Nowhere in the country have streets overflowed with as many outraged people as in New York City.

Friday’s crowds appeared to be smaller than previous nights’, as cold rain trickled down jackets and hats. But marchers were still passionate about being heard. Some passed out a list of demands to the media regarding Garner’s death.

All officers involved should be fired, they demanded, and a special prosecutor should investigate complaints of excessive force. The state legislature should make chokeholds punishable.

Earlier, Eric Garner’s daughter, Erica, told CNN’s “The Lead with Jake Tapper” that she wanted to see people punished for her father’s killing.

“Justice to me is basically doing what’s right,” she said. “I wouldn’t be happy with (Pantaleo) just losing his job or being suspended or still getting paid. I wouldn’t want that. I would want him to face time in jail.”

She said that anyone who contributed to her father’s death should go to prison.

Christmas tree die-ins

At Herald Square, where Broadway cuts an elegantly slanted path through streets and avenues to create a picturesque gathering place, protesters flooded Macy’s century old flagship store — a national historic landmark.

Store management allowed them to stage a die-in under the eyes of holiday shoppers and ceilings decked with Christmas cheer.

They marched up a few blocks to Times Square and blocked traffic for 10 minutes, then turned down 42nd Street chanting, “This is what democracy looks like.”

They stopped again in Bryant Park and encircled some shops. Many of the workers in those stores came out and, in support, raised their hands in the air.

The crowd set off up Sixth Avenue, traversing against the flow of yellow cabs and other cars. A cacophony of horns greeted them, and cab drivers held their hands out of their windows in approval.

Eric Garner had a criminal record that included more than 30 arrests dating back to 1980 on charges such as assault, resisting arrest, grand larceny. An official said the charges included multiple incidents in which he was arrested for selling unlicensed cigarettes.

This is a fact that has been scrubbed off of just about all Liberal Websites, including Wikipedia, literally overnight.

Why are these black Americans, along with their stupid white Liberal Brethren, glorifying a career criminal?

Simple. These Americans, unlike the majority of us, have grown up without appropriate parental guidance, i.e., no one teaching them “the way in which they should go”

Take Michael Brown, for example. Here’s a photo from Conservative Talk Show Host’s Ben Ferguson’s Facebook Page, that explains Big Mike’s affinity for “Thug Life”.

Michael Brown's Parents 12614

Back in the 60s, President Lyndon Johnson (whose big hand I once shook, at his ranch, as a little boy, after his presidential term) and the Democrats, brought forth a plan, called “the Great Society”. It was decided, in order to ensure that everyone would have an equal opportunity in America, that Uncle Sugar would step in to fill in the gaps.

Two seminal pieces of legislation were passed.

First, the Civil Rights Bill that JFK promised to sign, before his assassination, was passed into law. This Act banned discrimination based on race and gender in employment and ending segregation in all public facilities.

It also helped to cement in stone, minorities’ loyalty to the Democratic Party, which continues to this day.

The second bill that LBJ signed into law was the sweeping ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT OF 1964. It created the Office of Economic Opportunity whose stated purpose was to attack the roots of American poverty. A Job Corps was then established to provide vocational training.

A preschool program designed to help disadvantaged students arrive at kindergarten ready to learn, named HEADSTART, was then established. Then came VOLUNTEERS IN SERVICE TO AMERICA (VISTA), which was set up as a domestic Peace Corps. Schools in impoverished American regions would now receive volunteer teaching attention. Federal funds were sent to struggling communities to attack unemployment and illiteracy.

What Johnson told Americans, as he campaigned in 1964, was that the establishment of this “Great Society” was going to eliminate the problems of America’s poor.

It had the opposite effect

The Great Society created a dependent class, which, instead of diminishing as it’s members joined the workforce, increased from generation to generation, relying on the federal government to provide their every need.

Uncle Sugar became Mother, Father, Preacher, and Doctor to generations of Americans. This “plantation mentality” continues to this day.

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.

As a Republican, I am sure that it would have offended you, Dr. King, to hear the tenants of Marxism, i.e., “sharing the wealth” and Class Envy, being “preached” to the same Black Americans whom you tried so mightily to raise up and inspire.

This week,the results of LBJ’s “Great Society” have been the lead story in every television newscast, on every newspaper front page, and on every internet news/political website.

Dr King, 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 too 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), once again, in the aftermath of the death pf Career Criminal Eric Garner.

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

Until He Comes,

KJ