Author: kingsjester

64 year old Christian Conservative husband, father, and grandfather who has been writing since April 2010.

Obama, Israel, and Iran: Iran + Nuke = Boom!

On By kingsjesterIn Politics1 Comment

americanisraelilapelpinIsrael exists; it has a right to exist in peace behind secure and defensible borders; and it has a right to demand of its neighbors that they recognize those facts. I have personally followed and supported Israel’s heroic struggle for survival, ever since the founding of the State of Israel 34 years ago. In the pre-1967 borders Israel was barely 10 miles wide at its narrowest point. The bulk of Israel’s population lived within artillery range of hostile Arab armies. I am not about to ask Israel to live that way again. – U.S. President Ronald Wilson Reagan, Speech on United States Policy for Peace in the Middle East, September 1, 1982

It is well known, through his words and actions, that America’s current (P)resident Barack Hussein Obama, cares more for Israel’s enemies, than he does for God’s Chosen People. If it were up to Obama, Israel would be forced to give the nomadic people known as Palestinians, half of the land that the nation of Israel sits on. Not only that, but he and his talking horse, (at least he has the face of one) Secretary of State John F. Kerry,”negotiated”, and I use the term loosely, an agreement with the Mullahs of Iran, to stop building a nuclear bomb, in exchange for allowing them to continue their Uranium Enrichment, an agreement which makes about as much sense as Pee Wee Herman starring in the title role in the next “Terminator” movie.

In return, a new poll suggests that most Israelis trust “The Leader of the Free World” about as far as they could throw Moochelle.

According to new poll, a huge majority of Israelis do not trust President Obama with regard to Iran, and believe Obama will allow Iran to go nuclear. Only 22 percent of Israeli voters believed that Obama would “ensure that Iran does not achieve a nuclear weapon.”

Almost two-thirds of Israelis thought that statement was untrue, and 15 percent gave no answer. President Obama has just a 33 percent favorable rating in Israel, as opposed to a 50 percent disapproval rating. Even those who favor Obama are split evenly on whether or not he will prevent Iran from going nuclear.

That distrust of Obama is shared by Israel’s Prime Minister.

The Jerusalem Post reports that

The Iranian interim agreement that went into effect on Monday does not prevent Iran from implementing its intentions to create nuclear weapons, Prime Minister Netanyahu said in the Knesset.

Netanyahu, in a speech welcoming visiting Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper to the Knesset on Monday, said that the international community’s goal – one that has not yet been achieved — must be stopping the Iranians from gaining the capacity to build a nuclear weapon.

The prime minister likened the manufacturing of the fissile material needed to make a bomb to a train that must pass through three stops: the first stop of enriching uranium to 3.5 percent, the second stop of enriching uranium to 20 percent, and the final step of enriching uranium to 90 percent.

“The agreement in Geneva did away with the 20% stop, but left the train on its track and enables Iran to upgrade the locomotive by developing new centrifuges, so that when the day comes it can leap in a very short time to the final stop on an express track without stopping at an intermediary stop,” he said.

The final agreement that the world powers negotiates with Iran must take the “Iranian nuclear train off the tracks,” Netanyahu said, adding that Iran must not be allowed to have the capability to manufacture a bomb.

Netanyahu also said that the international community should be demanding of Iran – at a time when it is relieving sanctions and giving Teheran legitimization – that it end its calls for the destruction of Israel, and the arming of terrorist groups such as Hamas, Hezbollah and Islamic Jihad.

Fat chance, Bibi. Remember, these same Barbarian Nations who threaten your nation’s existence, are on the UN’s Security Council.

So, how much of Iran’s boasting about their ability to bult a nuke is fiction and how much of it is fact?

Olli Heinonen is the former deputy director of the International Atomic Energy Agency.

He was asked Sunday on Aaron Klein’s WABC Radio show about the timeframe in response to statements from Iran’s top nuclear negotiator, who boasted last week that Tehran can nix its deal with the West and resume enriching uranium to 20-percent levels within one day if it so desires.

Heinonen responded that if Iran wanted it would currently take the country “two, three weeks to have enough uranium hexafluoride high-enriched for one single weapon.”

He told Klein: “If [Iran] in reality [abrogates the deal] tomorrow, they still have quite a substantial stock of uranium hexafluoride, which is enriched to 20 percent. … And then technically, when Iran has committed to this month to certain parts of the processes in such a way these tandem cascades are not anymore connected with each other, you can indeed put them back in one day’s time.

“So if this all happens in the next, let’s say, weeks, this is really true. They can start to produce 20-percent enriched uranium,” he said. “Now, in order to go fast for Iran, it actually needs to make several such tandem cascades. Not just those in Natanz and Fordow [nuclear plants]. They have to put perhaps some 6,000 centrifuges to work in this kind of a mode.”

Continued the former IAEA director: “If they do that, which they can technically do, it will take certainly a little bit more than one night to do. But then once they have sorted it out, it would take about two, three weeks to have enough uranium hexafluoride high-enriched for one single weapon.”

On May 22, 2011, President Obama said,

A strong and secure Israel is in the national security interest of the United States not simply because we share strategic interests … America’s commitment to Israel’s security flows from a deeper place — and that’s the values we share.

A deeper place? As in piled higher and deeper?

Mr. President, if something happens to Israel, or Iran gets taken out by a preemptive strike from Israel, that blood is on your hands. 

And, if this treatment of God’s Chosen People continues, I am afraid we are going to find out why America is not mentioned in The Book of Revelation.

Until He Comes,

KJ

It is Not About Your Race, Mr. President. It is About the Content of Your Character.

On By kingsjesterIn Politics4 Comments

martin luther kingToday, a lot of Americans have the day off.  Why?  America is observing a national holiday in observance of a civil rights pioneer:

Martin Luther King, Jr., (January 15, 1929-April 4, 1968) was born Michael Luther King, Jr., but later had his name changed to Martin, to honor his grandfather.

On August 28, 1963, he directed the peaceful march on Washington, D.C., climaxed by his delivering of an address titled “l Have a Dream”, to 250,000 Americans, in front of the Lincoln Memorial:

I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: “We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal.” I have a dream that one day on the red hills of Georgia the sons of former slaves and the sons of former slaveowners will be able to sit down together at a table of brotherhood. I have a dream that one day even the state of Mississippi, a desert state, sweltering with the heat of injustice and oppression, will be transformed into an oasis of freedom and justice. I have a dream that my four children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character. I have a dream today.

Also during those years…

He conferred with President John F. Kennedy and campaigned for President Lyndon B. Johnson; he was arrested upwards of twenty times and assaulted at least four times; he was awarded five honorary degrees; was named Man of the Year by Time magazine in 1963; and became not only the symbolic leader of American blacks but also a world figure.

At the age of thirty-five, Martin Luther King, Jr., was the youngest man to have received the Nobel Peace Prize. When notified of his selection, he announced that he would turn over the prize money of $54,123 to the furtherance of the civil rights movement.

On The New Yorker Magazine’s website this weekend, is a nice bit of propaganda titled : “Going the Distance…On and Off the Road With Barack Obama”.  In this fluff piece, you will find the following paragraph:

Obama’s election was one of the great markers in the black freedom struggle. In the electoral realm, ironically, the country may be more racially divided than it has been in a generation. Obama lost among white voters in 2012 by a margin greater than any victor in American history. The popular opposition to the Administration comes largely from older whites who feel threatened, underemployed, overlooked, and disdained in a globalized economy and in an increasingly diverse country. Obama’s drop in the polls in 2013 was especially grave among white voters. “There’s no doubt that there’s some folks who just really dislike me because they don’t like the idea of a black President,” Obama said. “Now, the flip side of it is there are some black folks and maybe some white folks who really like me and give me the benefit of the doubt precisely because I’m a black President.” The latter group has been less in evidence of late.

It seems to me that President Obama’s philosophy seems to be the anti-thesis of what Dr. King was speaking about in front of the Lincoln Memorial, on that day so long ago.

Whereas Dr. King was envisioning a day where his children would be judged by the content of their character, President Obama, and his fawning sycophants in the Democrat Party and the Main Street Media believe that we should ignore his incompetency and give him high marks for simply being America’s first Black President.

Dr. King sought to be a Uniter. President Obama is a Divider.

On November 4, 2013, another famous American (who just happens to be Black), the distinguished Former Congressman Lt. Col. Allen West, wrote the following in an Op Ed for The Washington Times:

..Could it be that Obama believes he possesses the ultimate get-out-of-jail-free card?

As the first African-American president, Obama was supposed to represent a new era in race relations in our nation. America sought this historic moment as a means to cleanse itself of the horrors of its past, and it has provided him a cover that he, the Democratic Party and the mainstream media have all exploited.

When the Democrats introduced Barack Hussein Obama, a young man from Chicago, to America at the DNC convention in 2004, it was part of a grand strategy. The progressive socialists who have commandeered Democrat party knew that only with a carefully crafted image could they advance their ideology and agenda. America fell for it eagerly, electing the most liberal — that is, the most leftist, socialist — man in the Senate to the White House.

The get-out-of-jail-free card then was Obama’s skin color, and it remains so today. How often is criticism of failed policies met with cries of racism? Last week many commentators struggled not to say that Obama lied to the American people, but even the Washington Post couldn’t hide the fact.

Obama was not reelected by running on his record but by being “likeable,” and by demonizing his opposition and again. Americans, albeit by a slim majority, decided failed policies didn’t matter; abandoning Americans to die in a terrorist attack didn’t matter; deception and lying didn’t matter.

So, why are we surprised that in the first year of his second term we are getting more of the same?

The media and so many others have expended every effort to provide cover for Obama and his faults, policy failures, unconstitutional actions, and lies. The president is fully aware, and his arrogance and disdain for accountability are rooted in his recognition that America lacks the intestinal fortitude to hold him accountable, because of his skin color — his personal political get-out-of-jail-free card.

Sadly, not enough Americans paid heed to Dr. Martin Luther King’s hope that we would be a nation to judge not by the color of one’s skin, but by the content of one’s character. We are now at the risk of seeing our Republic being fundamentally transformed because we wanted to celebrate a historic moment.

As I wrap up today’s blog, allow me to share a vivid memory, of a life ended way too soon:

It’s the night of April 4, 1968.  A 9 (and almost 1/2) year old boy is watching a program on a black and white television set in his home in the mid-town area of Memphis, Tennessee.  Suddenly, the screen changes to the Civil Defense logo and he hears a voice saying:

Will all members of the National Guard, please report to the Armory and all police and fire personnel please report to their stations.

Normal programming resumed.  Then, all of the sudden, or so it seemed, President Lyndon Baines Johnson came on the television saying:

I come to you tonight with a heavy heart…

And everything changed.

However, some things have not.

It still comes down  to the content of one’s character.

Until He Comes,

KJ

America’s Culture War: This Encroaching Darkness

On By kingsjesterIn Christianity, Politics2 Comments

American FreedomFor we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the cosmic powers over this present darkness, against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly places. – Ephesians 6:12

Am I insane? (Don’t answer that.) Or, have you noticed that, beginning back in January of 2009, the doors of decency and Old Fashioned American Values began coming off at the hinges even faster than they were before?

The internet is abuzz everyday with the left’s banshee screams for Gun Control , the “enlightened ones” incessant cries for Marijuana Legalization and all of their drug-addled, naivete-laden arguments in favor of it, and the whining and strawman arguments associated with the push to change the definition of the word “marriage”, so that Adam and Steve may be viewed as “normal”, and live, as least for a couple or years, as “husband” and…err…umm…”husband”.

Globally, our allies are swiftly becoming our enemies, as this Administration embraces and panders to a Political Ideology masquerading as a religion, whose avid followers want to kill each and every one of us “infidels.” In fact, Obama and his Administration want our strongest ally, God’s Chosen People, Israel, to give up half of their country to a nomadic people, the Palestinians.

Meanwhile, in a related story, earthquakes and violent weather have become commonplace in our nation and “the smartest people in the room” can not figure out why.

All this mayhem continues to dominate the 24-hour News Cycle, as Americans, who have lost their jobs through no fault of their own, either continue the struggle to find employment, or simply give up.

Yet, this nation re-elected, as I referred to him once, “an anti-American, Muslim-sympathizing, political-pandering, class warfare-preaching, card-carrying Communist”.

Has God taken His hand of providence and protection off this country?

A man, who would be considered a cornball by the standards of today’s Socially-Liberal Fiscally Conservative Liberals, Moderates, and “Libertarians”, wrote a prophetic analysis of today’s current events.

This speech was broadcast by legendary ABC Radio commentator Paul Harvey on April 3, 1965:

If I were the Devil . . . I mean, if I were the Prince of Darkness, I would of course, want to engulf the whole earth in darkness. I would have a third of its real estate and four-fifths of its population, but I would not be happy until I had seized the ripest apple on the tree, so I should set about however necessary to take over the United States. I would begin with a campaign of whispers. With the wisdom of a serpent, I would whisper to you as I whispered to Eve: “Do as you please.” “Do as you please.” To the young, I would whisper, “The Bible is a myth.” I would convince them that man created God instead of the other way around. I would confide that what is bad is good, and what is good is “square”. In the ears of the young marrieds, I would whisper that work is debasing, that cocktail parties are good for you. I would caution them not to be extreme in religion, in patriotism, in moral conduct. And the old, I would teach to pray. I would teach them to say after me: “Our Father, which art in Washington” . . .

If I were the devil, I’d educate authors in how to make lurid literature exciting so that anything else would appear dull an uninteresting. I’d threaten T.V. with dirtier movies and vice versa. And then, if I were the devil, I’d get organized. I’d infiltrate unions and urge more loafing and less work, because idle hands usually work for me. I’d peddle narcotics to whom I could. I’d sell alcohol to ladies and gentlemen of distinction. And I’d tranquilize the rest with pills. If I were the devil, I would encourage schools to refine young intellects but neglect to discipline emotions . . . let those run wild. I would designate an atheist to front for me before the highest courts in the land and I would get preachers to say “she’s right.” With flattery and promises of power, I could get the courts to rule what I construe as against God and in favor of pornography, and thus, I would evict God from the courthouse, and then from the school house, and then from the houses of Congress and then, in His own churches I would substitute psychology for religion, and I would deify science because that way men would become smart enough to create super weapons but not wise enough to control them.

If I were Satan, I’d make the symbol of Easter an egg, and the symbol of Christmas, a bottle. If I were the devil, I would take from those who have and I would give to those who wanted, until I had killed the incentive of the ambitious. And then, my police state would force everybody back to work. Then, I could separate families, putting children in uniform, women in coal mines, and objectors in slave camps. In other words, if I were Satan, I’d just keep on doing what he’s doing.

Paul Harvey, Good Day.

John Adams, the second President of these United States, delivered the following message to the Officers of the First Brigade of the Third Division of the Militia of Massacusetts on October 11, 1798:

Gentleman,

While our country remains untainted with the principles and manners which are now producing desolation in so many parts of the world; while she continues sincere, and incapable of insidious and impious policy, we shall have the strongest reason to rejoice in the local destination assigned us by Providence. But should the people of America once become capable of that deep simulation towards one another, and towards foreign nations, which assumes the language of justice and moderation while it is practising iniquity and extravagance, and displays I have received from Major-General Hull and Brigadier, General Walker your unanimous address from Lexington, animated with a martial spirit, and expressed with a military dignity becoming your character and the memorable plains on which it was adopted. In the most captivating manner the charming pictures of candor, frankness, and sincerity, while it is rioting in rapine and insolence, this country will be the most miserable habitation in the World; because we have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge, or gallantry, would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.

The scripture I quoted at the beginning of today’s Blog is one of my favorites.  You see, both of these great Americans, Paul Harvey and John Adams, knew that there is spiritual warfare happening every moment of the day,  around each and every one of us.

Are the Powers of Darkness winning?

For example. if  you look at Horror Movies nowadays, all of them seem to seek to glorify the Powers of Darkness….and they seem to be very popular with young Americans.

Why is the Occult, including Satan and his Demons so fascinating to impressionable Americans?

Pastor Mark Driscoll of Mars Hill Church offers some background in answer to that question:

His knowledge, presence, and power are limited because he is an angelic being (a guardian cherub according to Ezekiel 28:14) created by God for the purpose of glorifying and serving God. However, he became proud in his heart and desired to be worshiped and exalted like God. So, he declared war on God and one-third of the angels joined his army to oppose God. Judged by God for his sin, the Serpent was then cast down to the earth (Isa. 14:11–23; Ezek. 28:1–19). Upon the earth he appeared as a serpent to tempt Adam and Eve by twisting God’s word and lying (Gen. 3:1–24). After successfully tempting Adam and Eve to sin, he was judged and cursed by God for his sin and told that Jesus would ultimately come to completely defeat him, though Jesus would suffer physical harm in their conflict (Gen. 3:14–15).

The motivation for all of the Serpent’s work is pride and self-glory instead of humility and God-glory (Ezek. 28:2; James 4:6–7). Subsequently, one of his most powerful allies in opposing God’s people is their own pride.

A lot of Americans have been raised to believe that they are their own God, and even some of them that were raised in the church have become victims of this popular culture. So, now, as God’s Word tells us, they want their “ears tickled”.

Were Paul Harvey and John Adams speaking about the situation we find our country in on January 19, 2014?

Do you see it? Or, is it just me?

Until He Comes,

KJ

In Celebration of Michelle Obama’s 50th Birthday: “50 Ways to Get Your ‘Mooch’ On”

On By kingsjesterIn Politics4 Comments

Michelle ObamaYou know, I guess it’s more interesting to imagine this conflicted situation here and a strong woman and a, you know, but that’s been an image that people have tried to paint of me since, you know, the day Barack announced, that I’m some angry black woman. – Michelle Obama, CBS This Morning, 1/11/12

Jake Tapper of ABC News reported the following on February 18, 2008:

Speaking in Milwaukee, Wisconsin today, would-be First Lady Michelle Obama said, “for the first time in my adult life I am proud of my country because it feels like hope is finally making a comeback.”

Then in Madison, she said, “For the first time in my adult lifetime, I’m really proud of my country, and not just because Barack has done well, but because I think people are hungry for change.”

Some conservatives out there seem to find Mrs. Obama’s quote offensive, wondering why a 44 year old woman never felt proud before today.

Asked for a response to the remark, Obama campaign spox Bill Burton said, “Of course Michelle is proud of her country, which is why she and Barack talk constantly about how their story wouldn’t be possible in any other nation on Earth. What she meant is that she’s really proud at this moment because for the first time in a long time, thousands of Americans who’ve never participated in politics before are coming out in record numbers to build a grassroots movement for change.”

To continue with the train of thought presented in my opening quotations from the First Lady of the United States of America,

Mrs Obama’s senior year undergraduate thesis at Princeton was entitled ‘Princeton-Educated Blacks and the Black Community’ and described her experience of being forced to remain ‘on the periphery’ of university life.

‘My experiences at Princeton have made me far more aware of my “blackness” than ever before,’ she wrote. ‘I have found that at Princeton, no matter how liberal and open-minded some of my white professors and classmates try to be toward me, I sometimes feel like a visitor on campus; as if I really don’t belong.

‘Regardless of the circumstances under which I interact with whites at Princeton, it often seems as if, to them, I will always be black first and a student second.’

In the March 10th, 2008 edition of The New Yorker, a 10 page article titled The Other Obama,  covering the future First Lady was published.  Here’s an excerpt:

Obama begins with a broad assessment of life in America in 2008, and life is not good: we’re a divided country, we’re a country that is “just downright mean,” we are “guided by fear,” we’re a nation of cynics, sloths, and complacents. “We have become a nation of struggling folks who are barely making it every day,” she said, as heads bobbed in the pews. “Folks are just jammed up, and it’s gotten worse over my lifetime. And, doggone it, I’m young. Forty-four!”

Now, for the life of me, I just can’t figure out how we raaaciiist “bitter clingers” in America’s Heartland ever came up with the notion that the First Lady of the United States of America is an “angry black woman”.  Can you?

Today is First Lady Michelle Obama’s 50th birthday.  In a blatant display of propaganda and worshipful zeal, ABC News has released a list of 50 suggestions for their beloved Queen as to how to celebrate the day. It includes

  • Dance to Beyonce
  • Move into a massive new house with your family and invite your mother to move in too
  • Make the cover of Vogue
  • Buy a Jason Wu dress
  • Hang out with your friend, Oprah
  • Roll your eyes at House Speaker John Boehner or the Danish prime minister
  • Hug, kiss and fist bump the President of the United States
  • ​Travel the world on Air Force One
  • ​Dine at Spiagga in Chicago
  • ​Hang out in Hawaii for an extra week as an early birthday gift

ABC News’ gift inspired me. I was ashamed that I have not given the First Lady anything…and, Lord knows, she certainly deserves something. So, in that spirit, here is my gift to the most beloved mate of a national leader since Eva Braun:

50 Ways to Get Your Mooch On (to the tune of “50 Ways to Leave Your Lover” by Paul Simon)

A young lady came up to

The First Lady

She said, “Like you I want to

get everything free”

‘Chelle said, “You’ve come to the right

person, baby”

I’ll teach you fifty ways

To get your “mooch” on

She said it’s easy if you put

your mind to it

By gaming the system 

you can get a lot of sh#t.

In Presidential Politics,

Taxpayers’ money you will get

And, if you’re a Democrat

if you’re caught, they will acquit

There are Fifty ways to get your ‘mooch’ on

[CHORUS:]

Go vay-cay in Spain, Jane

Get you some pearls, girl

Chow down on Wagyu,Sue

Pay attention to me

Just listen to ‘Chelle, Nell

You don’t need a brain cell

Marry The Prez, honey

And get it for free

She said I hope my rap

Is getting through to you

I am laying it out very plainly

These things that you should do

The girl said,” I am diggin’ this,

But, would please tell me some more 50 Ways”?

‘Chelle said. “Please take everything I’m telling you

and place it in your heart

Marrying a politician is

a great place to start”

And, then ‘Chelle left her

And she caught on to the game

‘Chelle did have 50 ways to get her “mooch” on

50 Ways to get her “mooch” on

CHORUS:

Go vay-cay in Spain, Jane

Get you some pearls, girl

Chow down on Wagyu,Sue

Pay attention to me

Just listen to ‘Chelle, Nell

You don’t need a brain cell

Marry The Prez, honey

And get it for free

Happy Birthday, Mrs. Obama….from a “downright mean” “bitter’clinger”.

May you have many more…just not anywhere near 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, Washington, DC.

Until He Comes,

KJ

In Defense of “Lone Survivor” and Our Brightest and Best: An Open Letter to Amy Nicholson From an Average American

On By kingsjesterIn Politics2 Comments

Lone SurvivorPREFACE:  Yesterday, as I was surfing the web at lunch, I came across a headline from TheBlaze.com, which stated that Glenn Beck had challenged a LA Times Writer to say what she had written about the more popular movie in America, the heroic tale of the self-sacrificing Navy Seals, led by Marcus Luttrell, who, except for Luttrell, all gave their lives in the call of duty, to the face of the “Lone Survivor” himself, Marcus Luttrell.

The writer in question is Amy Nocholson, an unabashedly Liberal hack.

In order for you to complete understand the epic rant which I am about to unleash, I chose to reprint the article in question in its entirety. I hope you have a strong stomach.

SYNOPIS:  Based on The New York Times bestselling true story of heroism, courage and survival, Lone Survivor tells the heroic, patriotic tale of four Navy SEALs, led by Marcus Luttrell,  on a covert mission to neutralize a high-level al-Qaeda operative who are ambushed by the enemy in the mountains of Afghanistan and are left to fight for their lives in one of the most valiant efforts of modern warfare.. Faced with an impossible moral decision, the small band is isolated from help and surrounded by a much larger force of Taliban ready for war. As they confront unthinkable odds together, the four men find reserves of strength and resilience as they stay in the fight to the finish.

THE ARTICLE: 

Here’s a movie that’ll flop in Kabul. Lone Survivor, the latest by Battleship director Peter Berg, is a jingoistic snuff film about a Navy SEAL squadron outgunned by the Taliban in the mountainous Kunar province. After four soldiers — played with muscles and machismo by Mark Wahlberg, Taylor Kitsch, Emile Hirsch and Ben Foster — get ID’d by Afghan goat herders, they’re in a race to climb to the top of the nearest summit and summon an airlift before these civilians can sprint to the nearest village and alert local leader Ahmad Shah. It doesn’t go well. 

Berg’s flick bleeds blood red, bone-fracture white, and bruise blue. It’s based on the memoir Lone Survivor: The Eyewitness Account of Operation Redwing and the Lost Heroes of SEAL Team 10 by sole evacuee Marcus Luttrell (played by Wahlberg) — and that’s only a spoiler if you’ve ignored the title. Luttrell didn’t exactly write his book. Rather than sitting in front of a word processor, he was back in action in Iraq. Instead, the United States Navy hired British novelist Patrick Robinson, who, among other embellishments, upped the number of enemy Taliban fighters from 10 to 200. Hey, whatever, man. Those aliens in Battleship weren’t real, either. 

Lone Survivor’s problems are more complex than its Rambo-esque exuberance for machine-gun fire. The near-wordless second half is a deadly dubstep of bullets and snare drums punctuated with the occasional curse. Here’s 90 seconds of dialogue transcribed in its entirety: “Goddamn, this sucks!” “Fuck you!” “Fuck!” “Damn, fucking burns!” This doesn’t help advance the plot, which can pretty much be summed up as: Don’t die. And the film actually gets worse when the guys open their mouths.

These four men were heroes. But these heroes were also men. As the film portrays them, their attitudes to the incredibly complex War on Terror, fought hillside by bloody hillside in the Afghan frontier with both U.S. and Taliban forces contributing to an unconscionably high civilian body count, were simple: Brown people bad, American people good. When the guys debate whether to kill the three goat herders who’ve stumbled onto their hiding place — a dilemma that, morality aside, could have been solved if any of them had recalled that middle school logic problem about the fox, the chicken, the feed, and the too-small boat — Foster grabs an unarmed teenager by the face and insists, “That’s death. Look at death.” And when the firefight starts, he bellows, “You can die for your country — I’m going to live for mine.”

We’re meant to cheer, not that anyone in my theater did. But there will be audiences who do, and I’m not entirely sure I’m comfortable with what they’re cheering for. This is death. Look at death. 

Berg is no dummy. He’s done the right thing by refusing to whitewash these guys as saints, although three of the four are depicted as devoted husbands and fiancées, and the fourth gets to be Mark Wahlberg. And Berg is justified in hoisting these guys up as real-life action stars, building his case with an opening montage of actual Navy SEAL training footage in which screaming instructors winnow a pack of athletes into an all-for-one-one-for-all band of badass brothers who, when forced to float in freezing ocean waves, link arms and sing “Silent Night.”

They were ready for action. “We wanted that fight at the highest volume,” Wahlberg says, “the loudest, coldest, darkest, most unpleasant of the unpleasant fights.” OK, but did the local villagers whom we see get caught in the crossfire want that fight? Each, like Wahlberg’s Luttrell, had families and friends and a full life, and each gets dispatched without a second thought.

I’d like to think that, on some level, Berg is questioning the sense of a film — and a foreign policy — that makes target practice of our magnificent teams of hard-bodied, hairy-chested, rootin’-tootin’, shootin’, parachutin’, double-cap-crimpin’ frogmen, these soldiers who decorate their bunks with baby pictures of themselves next to an American flag and are so nobly eager to sacrifice their lives for each other and their country. But the ammo doesn’t stop blasting long enough for their deaths to have weight. Instead, Lone Survivor just reads like a quasi-political exaggeration of a slasher film: the cellphones that don’t work, the rescuers just out of reach, the killers chasing our victims through the woods.

What are we meant to learn from this waste of life? Who is even to blame? All Lone Survivor offers is the queasiest apology of the year. Grunts a battered Wahlberg to his even more-battered best buddy, “I’m sorry that we didn’t kill more of these motherfuckers.” Replies his fellow soldier, “Oh, don’t be f!@king sorry. We’re going to kill way more of them.”

KJ’S RANT…err…RESPONSE:

Exactly when did Liberals lose their cotton-pickin’ minds?

Well, I believe that this present-day Liberal ungrateful insanity can be traced back to the 1960s. During the days of the Vietnam “Conflict”, even though Adult Liberals were opposed to the war, they were respectful of our Brightest and Best. It was Collegians and under who acted like a bunch of idiots, disrespecting our Armed Forces, and traditional American Values.

As this generation moved through Adulthood, their children had children, and produced the mindless zombies we confront everyday, who classify themselves as Liberals or “Socially-Liberal Libertarians”.

Ms. Nicholson is one of those zombies.

Please note her use of the word “Jingoistic” This is a derisive word which has been in vogue with Liberals for a while now to describe the emotion which normal Americans feel, called “Patriotism”.

Liberals, such as Ms. Nicholson, are selfish, cravenly creatures. They do not seem to, nor care to understand that they live in the greatest country on Earth. They are too narrow-minded to fathom the sacrifices which brave American men and women have made and are making, on their behalf.

Just as an infant  knows that if they cry loud enough, some one will pay attention to them and give them what they want, so do Liberals understand that if they are anti-American enough in their statements and actions, then they will receive the attention that they so crave from the rest of the “smartest people in the room.”

Ms. Nicholson, believing in her own “superior intelligence ” and “moral superiority”, decided to do a hatchet job on this movie and the brave men who protected her freedom to denigrate them in print.

Ms. Nicholson is representative of those same effete snobs who believe that any movie, such as the Box Office Bomb “Redacted”, which attacked our Armed Forces, will be a sure-fire hit, and then, cannot understand why such a movie is welcomed by the sound of crickets in America’s movie theaters.

I have ranted before that there is a Culture War going on in our country…one between the effete Liberal slobs, located in the Northeast and on the Left Coast, and average Americans, like you and me, struggling to cope with the consequences of their stupidity, here in the Heartland.

You and I would never disrepect our Fallen Warriors, like this ignorant hack has. We were raised right.

The respect we have for patriotic men of courage, like the Lone Survivor, the Patriot, Marcus Luttrell, and all of our Fallen Warriors, is immeasurable.

Ms. Nicholson, you haven’t got a clue.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Obama Declares Himself Big Kahuna… Announces He Will Rule By Royal Diktat

On By kingsjesterIn Politics3 Comments

obamakingOf all tyrannies a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive.- C. S. Lewis

On May 5, 2013 U.S. President Barack Obama gave the commencement address to the graduating class of The Ohio State University at Ohio Stadium in Columbus, Ohio.

Here is an excerpt:

Unfortunately, you’ve grown up hearing voices that incessantly warn of government as nothing more than some separate, sinister entity that’s at the root of all our problems. Some of these same voices also do their best to gum up the works. They’ll warn that tyranny always lurking just around the corner. You should reject these voices. Because what they suggest is that our brave, and creative, and unique experiment in self-rule is somehow just a sham with which we can’t be trusted.

We have never been a people who place all our faith in government to solve our problems. We shouldn’t want to. But we don’t think the government is the source of all our problems, either. Because we understand that this democracy is ours. And as citizens, we understand that it’s not about what America can do for us, it’s about what can be done by us, together, through the hard and frustrating but absolutely necessary work of self-government. And class of 2013, you have to be involved in that process. 

In other words,

Who are you gonna believe? Me…or your lyin’ eyes?

I wrote earlier this week about President Obama announcing that if Congress would not “work with him” (i.e., do things his way) , he would go around them and rule by diktat…err…Executive Orders.

You know what? I’ve got a phone and I’ve got a pen, and all I need to do is a bunch of executive orders and a bunch of executive actions, and I can take care of the it. I can take care of the inequality. I can take care of the unfairness. I don’t need Congress! I’m tired of waiting on Congress; I’m just gonna go do it.”

Well…yesterday, he met with Senate Democrats and gave them the same message.

News.yahoo.com reports that

President Barack Obama has told Senate Democrats he plans to use his executive authority to act in 2014 when Congress stands in his way.

Obama met with senators from his own party Wednesday at the White House. The White House says Obama and Democrats discussed proposals to raise the minimum wage and efforts to pass a comprehensive immigration overhaul. Education initiatives and jobs measures were also on the agenda.

The White House says Obama wants to work with Congress to make progress, but will also act on his own to get things done.

The meeting was the first such session of 2014 and comes two weeks before Obama is set to deliver his State of the Union address.

The senators left the White House without speaking to reporters.

I’ll just bet they did.

On his nationally syndicated radio program yesterday, the Godfather of Conservative Talk Radio, Maha Rushie, himself, spoke about Obama’s “Independence Proclamation”:

Executive orders to make things fair. He can do executive orders and executive actions to get rid of the unfairness. He’s gonna make this lousy country finally fair! … He’s got these Republicans standing in his way. “Okay, I’m gonna just start writing executive orders. “To hell with it! I’m gonna finally make everything fair.” Now, he might have a pen, and he might have a phone, but what he does not have is the constitutional power to run this country like a dictator…

…He’s a constitutional lawyer, and he should know better. But he doesn’t care. He doesn’t care about the Constitution. The Constitution is an impediment to Obama. The Constitution is not something to be respected — and it’s not just Obama, by the way. It’s to the vast majority of the intellectual, leftist elite. They really detest the Constitution, because it thwarts them. Some of you may not know this, but the United States Constitution was written to limit government power.

The US Constitution’s first 10 amendments specifically limit government’s power. Well, that’s not cool if you’re Obama or any of today’s liberal Democrats. That, to you, is shackles. They call that “a charter of negative liberties.” Stop and think of that. A document founded in the belief, the proclamation, the declaration, the primacy of individual liberty and freedom is considered “a charter of negative liberties.”

It’s something that gives the people individual primacy and freedom — and, to the left, that’s negative — and the reason they call it “a charter of negative liberties” is because it limits government. They don’t like that, and that’s what Obama was talking about, “You know, the heck with it!”

…Violating the Constitution — there’s no question about this, folks. It’s just a matter of whether people in power and who have the authority to do so want to stop it. Because if nobody’s gonna stop Obama, he’s gonna be able to keep doing it.

Per usual, Rush is right. Obama views himself as a crusader…and the smartest person in the room. Unfortunately for us Americans, he is neither.

Thomas Jefferson had some thoughts on the subject of tyranny:

Experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms of government those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny.

When the people fear the government, there is tyranny. When the government fears the people, there is liberty.

About that second quote: Perhaps the reason that 3 Congressional Democrats have retired in one week, and those Democrat Senators left their meeting with His Highness without saying a mumblin’ word, is the fact that Democratic Congresscritters with any common sense left, realize that the American People will not tolerate a tyrant who bypasses the System of Checks and Balances, which our Founders so wisely established to secure the continued existence of our country.

Democrats realize that the knockout blow that is coming with the Mid-Term Elections in  2014 will make 2010 look like a slap on the wrist.

Because, when it comes down to it, even the Democrats know that 

It’s not tyranny we desire; it’s a just, limited, federal government.- Alexander Hamilton

Until He Comes,

KJ

“Big Brother” to Be Spying on Americans Through Our Computers?

On By kingsjesterIn Politics3 Comments

obamabigbroWe don’t have a domestic spying program.

What we do have are some mechanisms where we can track a a phone number or an e-mail address that we know is connected to some sort of terrorist threat, and that information is useful. But what I said before, I want to make sure I repeat, and that is we should be skeptical about the potential encroachments on privacy. None of the revelations show that government has actually abused these powers, but they’re pretty significant powers. And I’ve been talking to Congress and civil libertarians and others about are there additional ways that we can make sure that people know that nobody is listening to your phone calls? – President Barack Hussein Obama, The Tonight Show With Jay Leno, August 6, 2014

Uh huh. 

The Guardian reported the following on Friday, August 9, 2013…

The National Security Agency has a secret backdoor into its vast databases under a legal authority enabling it to search for US citizens’ email and phone calls without a warrant, according to a top-secret document passed to the Guardian by Edward Snowden.

The previously undisclosed rule change allows NSA operatives to hunt for individual Americans’ communications using their name or other identifying information. Senator Ron Wyden told the Guardian that the law provides the NSA with a loophole potentially allowing “warrantless searches for the phone calls or emails of law-abiding Americans”.

The authority, approved in 2011, appears to contrast with repeated assurances from Barack Obama and senior intelligence officials to both Congress and the American public that the privacy of US citizens is protected from the NSA’s dragnet surveillance programs.

The intelligence data is being gathered under Section 702 of the of the Fisa Amendments Act (FAA), which gives the NSA authority to target without warrant the communications of foreign targets, who must be non-US citizens and outside the US at the point of collection.

Let’s look at a couple of stories which hit the news, yesterday. Which, although, on the surface,are seemingly unrelated, are quite thought-provoking when reviewed together.

The first story revolves around the fact that “Big Brother” has been spying on our enemies through their computers. The New York Times reports that

The National Security Agency has implanted software in nearly 100,000 computers around the world that allows the United States to conduct surveillance on those machines and can also create a digital highway for launching cyberattacks.

While most of the software is inserted by gaining access to computer networks, the N.S.A. has increasingly made use of a secret technology that enables it to enter and alter data in computers even if they are not connected to the Internet, according to N.S.A. documents, computer experts and American officials.

The technology, which the agency has used since at least 2008, relies on a covert channel of radio waves that can be transmitted from tiny circuit boards and USB cards inserted surreptitiously into the computers. In some cases, they are sent to a briefcase-size relay station that intelligence agencies can set up miles away from the target.

The radio frequency technology has helped solve one of the biggest problems facing American intelligence agencies for years: getting into computers that adversaries, and some American partners, have tried to make impervious to spying or cyberattack. In most cases, the radio frequency hardware must be physically inserted by a spy, a manufacturer or an unwitting user.

The N.S.A. calls its efforts more an act of “active defense” against foreign cyberattacks than a tool to go on the offensive. But when Chinese attackers place similar software on the computer systems of American companies or government agencies, American officials have protested, often at the presidential level.

Among the most frequent targets of the N.S.A. and its Pentagon partner, United States Cyber Command, have been units of the Chinese Army, which the United States has accused of launching regular digital probes and attacks on American industrial and military targets, usually to steal secrets or intellectual property. But the program, code-named Quantum, has also been successful in inserting software into Russian military networks and systems used by the Mexican police and drug cartels, trade institutions inside the European Union, and sometime partners against terrorism like Saudi Arabia, India and Pakistan, according to officials and an N.S.A. map that indicates sites of what the agency calls “computer network exploitation.”

The other story that caught my eye concerns the 44th President of these United States, Barack Hussein Obama (mm mmm mmmm) and an off-the-cuff remark he made, yesterday.

The CBS Affiliate in Washington, DC has the story…

Calling for “all hands on deck” to assist the economy, President Barack Obama is urging his Cabinet to identify ways to keep his administration relevant to people struggling in the up-and-down recovery.

With two weeks left before delivering an economy-focused State of the Union address to Congress, Obama is picking up the pace of his jobs message and demonstrating how he can advance his economic agenda administratively and through his ability to coax action from important interest groups.

“We’re not just going to be waiting for legislation in order to make sure that we’re providing Americans the kind of help they need. I’ve got a pen and I’ve got a phone,” Obama said Tuesday as he convened his first Cabinet meeting of the year.

Obama continued: ”And I can use that pen to sign executive orders and take executive actions and administrative actions that move the ball forward in helping to make sure our kids are getting the best education possible, making sure that our businesses are getting the kind of support and help they need to grow and advance, to make sure that people are getting the skills that they need to get those jobs that our businesses are creating.”

Okay. I can hear all the Liberal Trolls who read my Blog (slowly,. because of the big words) shrieking at the top of their lungs, “The president is talking about using Executive Powers to make make things better for normal folks and…and…to create jobs….and…and…to save families! He would not do anything to harm us! He loves us!”

Uh huh. Well, please ask Check Heath, Sr. how much POTUS loves him. Since 2008, he has received a Proctological Exam, courtesy of the Internal Revenue Service, no less than 6 times! His Crime? He’s Sarah Palin’s Dad.

Given Obama’s previous track record of using the IRS as his Palace Guard, I would say that the odds of Obama allowing the Computer-Invasive Technology to be used domestically are pretty good.

Everybody sing: 

Every step you take, every move you make, every vow you break, I’ll be watching you.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Declassified Documents Prove That Obama Knew the Truth About Benghazi As It Happened.

On By kingsjesterIn Politics5 Comments

BenghaziWhiteHouseOn September 11, 2012, 4 brave Americans, including US Ambassador to Libya, Chris Stephens, were savagely murdered on the grounds of the US Embassy Compound in Benghazi.

On September 25, 2012, United States President Barack Hussein Obama, appeared before the United Nations General Assembly, to address the circumstances of the massacre. Here are the words he spoke, before representatives of the entire world:

…At times, the conflicts arise along the fault lines of race or tribe; and often they arise from the difficulties of reconciling tradition and faith with the diversity and interdependence of the modern world. In every country, there are those who find different religious beliefs threatening; in every culture, those who love freedom for themselves must ask themselves how much they are willing to tolerate freedom for others.

That is what we saw play out in the last two weeks, as a crude and disgusting video sparked outrage throughout the Muslim world. Now, I have made it clear that the United States government had nothing to do with this video, and I believe its message must be rejected by all who respect our common humanity. It is an insult not only to Muslims, but to America as well – for as the city outside these walls makes clear, we are a country that has welcomed people of every race and every faith. We are home to Muslims who worship across our country. We not only respect the freedom of religion – we have laws that protect individuals from being harmed because of how they look or what they believe. We understand why people take offense to this video because millions of our citizens are among them.

…The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam. But to be credible, those who condemn that slander must also condemn the hate we see in the images of Jesus Christ that are desecrated, or churches that are destroyed, or the Holocaust that is denied. Let us condemn incitement against Sufi Muslims, and Shia pilgrims. It is time to heed the words of Gandhi: “Intolerance is itself a form of violence and an obstacle to the growth of a true democratic spirit.” Together, we must work towards a world where we are strengthened by our differences, and not defined by them. That is what America embodies. That’s the vision we will support.

When he gave this speech, in front of representatives of countries all over the world, Obama already knew that the murders of Ambassador Chris Stevens, Sean Smith, Glen Doherty, and Tyrone Woods were committed by Muslim Terrorists…members of al Qaeda.

Let that sink in for a moment.

The Leader of the Free World LIED.

Last night, James Rosen of Fox News reported that

Minutes after the American consulate in Benghazi came under assault on Sept. 11, 2012, the nation’s top civilian and uniformed defense officials — headed for a previously scheduled Oval Office session with President Obama — were informed that the event was a “terrorist attack,” declassified documents show. The new evidence raises the question of why the top military men, one of whom was a member of the president’s Cabinet, allowed him and other senior Obama administration officials to press a false narrative of the Benghazi attacks for two weeks afterward.

Gen. Carter Ham, who at the time was head of AFRICOM, the Defense Department combatant command with jurisdiction over Libya, told the House in classified testimony last year that it was him who broke the news about the unfolding situation in Benghazi to then-Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and Gen. Martin Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. The tense briefing — in which it was already known that U.S. Ambassador to Libya Christopher Stevens had been targeted and had gone missing — occurred just before the two senior officials departed the Pentagon for their session with the commander in chief.

According to declassified testimony obtained by Fox News, Ham — who was working out of his Pentagon office on the afternoon of Sept. 11 — said he learned about the assault on the consulate compound within 15 minutes of its commencement, at 9:42 p.m. Libya time, through a call he received from the AFRICOM Command Center.

“My first call was to General Dempsey, General Dempsey’s office, to say, ‘Hey, I am headed down the hall. I need to see him right away,'” Ham told lawmakers on the House Armed Services Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigation on June 26 of last year. “I told him what I knew. We immediately walked upstairs to meet with Secretary Panetta.”

Ham’s account of that fateful day was included in some 450 pages of testimony given by senior Pentagon officials in classified, closed-door hearings conducted last year by the Armed Services subcommittee. The testimony, given under “Top Secret” clearance and only declassified this month, presents a rare glimpse into how information during a crisis travels at the top echelons of America’s national security apparatus, all the way up to the president.

Also among those whose secret testimony was declassified was Dempsey, the first person Ham briefed about Benghazi. Ham told lawmakers he considered it a fortuitous “happenstance” that he was able to rope Dempsey and Panetta into one meeting, so that, as Ham put it, “they had the basic information as they headed across for the meeting at the White House.” Ham also told lawmakers he met with Panetta and Dempsey when they returned from their 30-minute session with President Obama on Sept. 11.

Armed Services Chairman Howard “Buck” McKeon, R-Calif., sitting in on the subcommittee’s hearing with Ham last June, reserved for himself an especially sensitive line of questioning: namely, whether senior Obama administration officials, in the very earliest stages of their knowledge of Benghazi, had any reason to believe that the assault grew spontaneously out of a demonstration over an anti-Islam video produced in America.

…”In your discussions with General Dempsey and Secretary Panetta,” McKeon asked, “was there any mention of a demonstration or was all discussion about an attack?” Ham initially testified that there was some “peripheral” discussion of this subject, but added “at that initial meeting, we knew that a U.S. facility had been attacked and was under attack, and we knew at that point that we had two individuals, Ambassador Stevens and Mr. [Sean] Smith, unaccounted for.”

…The day after the attacks, which marked the first killing of an American ambassador in the line of duty since 1979, Obama strode to the Rose Garden to comment on the loss, taking pains in his statement to say: “We reject all efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others.” As late as Sept. 24, during an appearance on the talk show “The View,” when asked directly by co-host Joy Behar if Benghazi had been “an act of terrorism,” the president hedged, saying: “Well, we’re still doing an investigation.”

The declassified transcripts show that beyond Ham, Panetta and Dempsey, other key officers and channels throughout the Pentagon and its combatant commands were similarly quick to label the incident a terrorist attack.

Remember when then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton finally appeared before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, last January, one month after being called?

Senator Ron Johnson interrogated her about the administration’s conflicting explanations for the Sept. 11th attack.

She rudely replied,

With all due respect, the fact is we had four dead Americans. Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk one night decided to go kill some Americans? What difference at this point does it make? It is our job to figure out what happened and do everything we can to prevent it from ever happening again, Senator.

Right off-hand, Hil, I can think of a way to ensure that the Dereliction of Duty and downright treasonous non-action which took place in the White House on the night of September 11, 2012, will never be repeated.

And, I quote:

The Constitution, Article II, Section 4:

The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

The Constitution, Article I, Section 3:

The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.

Judgment in Cases of Impeachments shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust, or Profit under the United States, but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment, and Punishment, according to Law.

The President of the United States and his Administration intentionally lied about the murders of American citizens to further their own Political/Religious Ideology and Political Machinations.

And, for this, both Obama and his Administration, who are supposed to be working for us, need to answer to us for their Dereliction of Duty and the sacrificing of 4 Brave Americans for Political Expediency.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Supreme Court to Rule on Obama’s Abuse of Executive Powers

On By kingsjesterIn Politics5 Comments

obamaburningconstitution…He [the President] shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.

The President shall have Power to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the End of their next Session. – Article II, Section 2 of the United States Constitution

TheHill.com reports that

Nothing less than the boundaries of executive power are at stake Monday as the Supreme Court considers whether President Obama violated the Constitution during his first term.

Oral arguments slated for Monday will center on a trio of recess appointments to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) that were deemed unconstitutional by lower courts.

If they uphold the decision, experts say the justices could endanger hundreds of NLRB decisions.

Even more significant are the ramifications for future presidents, with the court poised either to bolster or blunt the chief executive’s appointment powers.

“Rulings like this have implications that last for centuries,” said Michael Lotito, an employment and labor attorney and co-chairman of Littler Mendelson’s Workplace Policy Institute.

Presidents have for decades used recess appointment powers when the Senate is away to install judges and fill top federal vacancies that ordinarily would be subject to confirmation proceedings.

But with the disputed NLRB appointments, Obama became the first president to appoint nominees when the Senate was in a “pro-forma” session, when the upper chamber is briefly called to order and adjourned every few days.

The sessions are intended to prevent recess appointments, and usually only a handful of senators are present for them. In filling the NLRB posts, the Obama administration claims that the Senate is generally not available to conduct business during the sessions, so the president’s recess appointment power is in effect.

“The sham pro-forma sessions are nothing more than that,” said Catholic University law professor Victor Williams, who filed a brief backing the government’s position.

The impetus for recess appointments has faded now that Senate Democrats have changed their chamber’s rules to allow for a simple majority vote on presidential nominees. Nevertheless, the case could stunt Obama’s and future presidents’ authority when it comes to staffing administrations.

The case was brought by Noel Canning, an Oregon-based soft drink bottling and distribution company that challenged the appointments as unconstitutional.

In January of last year, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals agreed.

The appellate court ruling under now review at the Supreme Court found a narrow window for the president to make recess appointments. Under its decision, the president can only make such appointments when the Senate is in recess between sessions of Congress, and only if a vacancy occurred in that same time period.

That goes well against protocol adopted by past Democratic and Republican presidents. A Congressional Service Research report found 329 such appointments since 1981 that would not meet that criteria and would be ruled void if the appeals court decision was law.

Some see the fight against the labor board as a broader effort in which opponents have sought to stymie the Obama administration’s rules and regulations.

“I think the battle against the NLRB over the last few years has been a proxy war about the proper role and scope of government,” said Wilma Liebman, who served as chairwoman of the NLRB from January 2009 to August 2011.

Yesterday, on Fox News, Senator Ted Cruz said,

The pattern we’ve seen under President Obama, disregarding the law, is really one of the most troubling aspects of this presidency,” he said. “When he disagrees with the law…he simply refuses to comply with it.

He is exactly right. For instance, he had his Attorney General, Eric Holder, announce the other day that the Administration would not recognize the will of voters in Utah concerning their banning of Gay Marriage in that state. An activist judge had previously struck down the vote, only for the judge’s decision to be “stayed” by the Supreme Court.

An out-of-control Executive Branch is the antithesis of what the Founding Fathers had in mind when they created our Constitutional Republic. Those wise men created a government unlike any other on God’s green Earth, devising a government whose system of checks and balances would provide a natural defense against a megalomaniac assuming dictatorial powers and bypassing the Constritution, in the manner in which the current occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue most certainly has.

Just as we are facing today, our founders knew that we would face challenges as a nation.

Once they had won their Freedom, and formed their new nation, our Founding Fathers set upon the task of putting quill to paper, creating a Constitution, stating for all the world to know, the rights, given to them by their Creator, which they would put in place as the guidelines upon which they would carry this new nation to its destiny.

Outside Independence Hall, when the Constitutional Convention of 1787 ended, Mrs. Powel of Philadelphia asked Benjamin Franklin, “Well, Doctor, what have we got, a republic or a monarchy?” With no hesitation whatsoever, Franklin responded, “A republic, if you can keep it.”

A ruling today against Obama’s usurpation of Executive Powers will be a great step in ensuring that we keep our Constitutional Republic.

The accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands, whether of one, a few, or many, and whether hereditary, self-appointed, or elective, may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny. – James Madison

Until He Comes,

KJ

The Push For “Income Equality”: “From Each According to His Abilities, to Each According to His Needs”

On By kingsjesterIn PoliticsLeave a comment

Obama-Shrinks-2The capitalist maintains his rights as a purchaser when he tries to make the working-day as long as possible, and to make, whenever possible, two working-days out of one. On the other hand, the peculiar nature of the commodity sold implies a limit to its consumption by the purchaser, and the laborer maintains his right as seller when he wishes to reduce the working-day to one of definite normal duration. There is here, therefore, an antinomy, right against right, both equally bearing the seal of the law of exchanges. Between equal rights force decides. Hence is it that in the history of capitalist production, the determination of what is a working-day, presents itself as the result of a struggle, a struggle between collective capital, i.e., the class of capitalists, and collective labour, i.e., the working-class. – Marx, Das Kapital, an excerpt from the personal blog of Rick Bookstaber, Research Principal, Office of Financial Research, (an office created by the Dodd-Frank Law) May 7, 2012

For we, the people, understand that our country cannot succeed when a shrinking few do very well and a growing many barely make it. We believe that America’s prosperity must rest upon the broad shoulders of a rising middle class. We know that America thrives when every person can find independence and pride in their work; when the wages of honest labor liberate families from the brink of hardship. We are true to our creed when a little girl born into the bleakest poverty knows that she has the same chance to succeed as anybody else, because she is an American; she is free, and she is equal, not just in the eyes of God but also in our own. – Second Inaugural Address of Barack Hussein Obama, January 21, 2013

On December 4. 2013, before he and his family left for a $4 million dollar Holiday Vacation, paid for by the citizens of the United States of America, which First Lady Michelle Obama has yet to return from, President Barack Hussein Obama delivered a speech on “Income Inequality”  to a handpicked group from the George Soros-funded Center for American Progress. Here is an excerpt,

As values of community broke down, and competitive pressure increased, businesses lobbied Washington to weaken unions and the value of the minimum wage. As a trickle-down ideology became more prominent, taxes were slashed for the wealthiest, while investments in things that make us all richer, like schools and infrastructure, were allowed to wither. And for a certain period of time, we could ignore this weakening economic foundation, in part because more families were relying on two earners as women entered the workforce. We took on more debt financed by a juiced-up housing market. But when the music stopped, and the crisis hit, millions of families were stripped of whatever cushion they had left.

And the result is an economy that’s become profoundly unequal, and families that are more insecure. I’ll just give you a few statistics. Since 1979, when I graduated from high school, our productivity is up by more than 90 percent, but the income of the typical family has increased by less than eight percent. Since 1979, our economy has more than doubled in size, but most of that growth has flowed to a fortunate few.

The top 10 percent no longer takes in one-third of our income — it now takes half. Whereas in the past, the average CEO made about 20 to 30 times the income of the average worker, today’s CEO now makes 273 times more. And meanwhile, a family in the top 1 percent has a net worth 288 times higher than the typical family, which is a record for this country.

So the basic bargain at the heart of our economy has frayed. In fact, this trend towards growing inequality is not unique to America’s market economy. Across the developed world, inequality has increased. Some of you may have seen just last week, the Pope himself spoke about this at eloquent length. “How can it be,” he wrote, “that it is not a news item when an elderly homeless person dies of exposure, but it is news when the stock market loses two points?”

But this increasing inequality is most pronounced in our country, and it challenges the very essence of who we are as a people. Understand we’ve never begrudged success in America. We aspire to it. We admire folks who start new businesses, create jobs, and invent the products that enrich our lives. And we expect them to be rewarded handsomely for it. In fact, we’ve often accepted more income inequality than many other nations for one big reason — because we were convinced that America is a place where even if you’re born with nothing, with a little hard work you can improve your own situation over time and build something better to leave your kids. As Lincoln once said, “While we do not propose any war upon capital, we do wish to allow the humblest man an equal chance to get rich with everybody else.”

The problem is that alongside increased inequality, we’ve seen diminished levels of upward mobility in recent years. A child born in the top 20 percent has about a 2-in-3 chance of staying at or near the top. A child born into the bottom 20 percent has a less than 1-in-20 shot at making it to the top. He’s 10 times likelier to stay where he is. In fact, statistics show not only that our levels of income inequality rank near countries like Jamaica and Argentina, but that it is harder today for a child born here in America to improve her station in life than it is for children in most of our wealthy allies — countries like Canada or Germany or France. They have greater mobility than we do, not less.

The idea that so many children are born into poverty in the wealthiest nation on Earth is heartbreaking enough. But the idea that a child may never be able to escape that poverty because she lacks a decent education or health care, or a community that views her future as their own, that should offend all of us and it should compel us to action. We are a better country than this.

Dr. Thomas Sowell, the brilliant American Economist (who just happens to be black) wrote the following profound statement in an article titled ” “Who Are the ‘1 Percent’?”, posted on nationalreview,com, on August 1, 2012

All sorts of statements are made in politics and in the media as if that top 1 percent is an enduring class of people, rather than an ever-changing collection of individuals who have a spike in their income in a particular year for one reason or another. Turnover in other income brackets is also substantial.

There is nothing mysterious about this. Most people start out at the bottom, in entry-level jobs, and their incomes rise over time as they acquire more skills and experience.

Politicians and media talking heads love to refer to people who are in the bottom 20 percent in income in a given year as “the poor.” But, following the same individuals for 10 or 15 years usually shows the great majority of those individuals moving into higher income brackets.

The number who reach the top 20 percent greatly exceeds the number still stuck in the bottom 20 percent over the years. But such mundane facts cannot compete for attention with the moral melodramas conjured up by politicians and the media when they discuss “the rich” and “the poor.”

There are people who are genuinely rich and genuinely poor, in the sense of having very high or very low incomes for most, if not all, of their lives. But “the rich” and “the poor” in this sense are unlikely to add up to even 10 percent of the population.

Ironically, those who make the most noise about income disparities or poverty contribute greatly to policies that promote both. The welfare state enables millions of people to meet their needs with little or no income-earning work on their part.

Most of the economic resources used by people in the bottom 20 percent come from sources other than their own incomes. There are veritable armies of middle-class people who make their livings transferring resources, in a variety of ways, from those who created those resources to those who live off them.

These transferrers exist in both government and private social-welfare institutions. They have every incentive to promote dependency, from which they benefit both professionally and psychically, and to imagine that they are creating social benefits.

For different reasons, both politicians and the media have incentives to spread misconceptions with statistics. So long as we keep buying it, they will keep selling it.

With his “empire” and popularity rapidly tanking, Obama and his enablers have decided to ramp up the politic rhetoric used so well and so often by followers of Karl Marx and Saul Alinsky…and, not-so-coincidentally,  Community Organizers, as will:  the incendiary rhetoric of Class Warfare.

The harsh truth of the matter is the fact that America remains the Land of Opportunity…if you are willing, Pookie, to get your Cheetos-eating rear end up of the couch and work for it.

The Founding Fathers established a nation found on the principle that

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

“Income Equality” (i.e., Marxism) was never mentioned.

Until He Comes,

KJ