Category: Politics

The San Bernadino Massacre: Innocent Lives Lost, Constitutional Rights Threatened, and a Prediction Horribly Fulfilled

On By kingsjesterIn Politics1 Comment

wpid-fb_img_1435357963373.jpgYesterday, a nightmare, shared by the overwhelming majority of American Citizens, became a harsh, horrible, bloody reality.

The New York Daily News reports that

As California county workers mingled Wednesday morning at a holiday banquet, a pair of maniacs intent on murder barged in with guns blazing.The merciless masked killers, in matching military garb and body armor, executed 14 helpless victims and wounded 17 more at the Inland Regional Center in a lightning strike sparked by either a simple dispute — or terrorism, authorities said.

The mass murderers — a couple identified as Syed Rizwan Farook, 28, and Tashfeen Malik, 27,— were gunned down four hours later and 2 miles away when police pumped a fusillade of bullets into their fleeing SUV on a quiet residential San Bernardino street.

Cops said Farook and Malik were either married or dating.

One police officer was wounded in the wild gun battle that left the SUV shattered in the middle of the street. Its windshield was riddled with bullet holes, its tires shot out and its other windows blasted to pieces — a ghastly scene in a stunning day of violence.

A third person was captured as he fled from the scene of the afternoon gunfight, said San Bernardino Police Chief Jarrod Burguan. But the chief could not say if that person was linked to the earlier killings.The suspects had escaped the blood-spattered murder scene without swapping a single gunshot with the horde of law enforcement descending on the center, a social services facility for people with developmental disabilities.

Farook, an American citizen, worked for the San Bernardino County Department of Health for the past few years and had a young daughter, his shocked father told the Daily News.

“I haven’t heard anything,” the elder Syed Farook told The News before his son’s name became public. “He was very religious. He would go to work, come back, go to pray, come back. He’s Muslim.”

The shellshocked dad said his son worked as a health technician inspecting restaurants and hotels and graduated from La Sierra High School in Riverside in 2003.

Farook’s brother-in-law said he was in “shock” over what happened.

“I have no idea why he would do that, why would he do something like this,” Farhad Kahn said during a press conference hosted by the Council on American-Islamic Relations. “I have absolutely no idea. I am in shock myself.”

Kahn said he last spoke to Farook about a week before the massacre.

The FBI later rammed down the door and searched a home in nearby Redlands where Farook was living.

Neighbor Andrea (Annie) Larsen said Farook lived at the home with his wife, mother and small child.“They sounded really happy. I did notice there were lots of packages being dropped off and he was in the garage working on stuff. But that seemed normal to me. It’s Christmas and people are getting packages dropped off,” she said.

Asked if she now suspected that some of the packages might have been ammunition or other material related to the attack, Larsen said it was a scary thought.

“If I think out it like that, absolutely, it’s terrifying. I have hope in the world and hope in people, and it’s hard when that hope is challenged in such a terrifying way,” she said.

Co-workers said Farook had traveled to Saudi Arabia and returned with a new wife he met online, according to reports. The couple had a baby and appeared to be “living the American dream,” Patrick Baccari, a food inspector who shared a cubicle with Farook, told the Los Angeles Times.The slaughter inside the center marked the worst American mass killing since 26 people were executed three years ago at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn.

“These are people who came prepared,” Burguan, the police chief, said about the killers. “They were dressed and equipped in a way to show they were prepared . . . They came in with an intent to do something.”

The attackers left behind some sort of explosive device as they drove off, terrifying scores of office workers cowering in their wake.

The two slain killers were wearing “assault-style” clothes and carrying assault rifles and handguns when their bodies were pulled from the black SUV, the chief said. At least two of the guns were purchased legally, according to officials.

David Bowdich, head of the FBI’s Los Angeles office, said there were indications that terrorism was the motive — but said it was too soon to say so for sure.

“I am not willing to go down that road just yet,” he said. “We will go where the evidence takes us.”

Police said that Farook bolted from the holiday bash after arguing with another attendee, and then returned a short time later with his accomplice.

The massacre took mere minutes, another sign that the killers — each toting an assault-style weapon — marched inside “with a purpose,” said Burguan.

The trio disappeared into the San Bernardino sunshine immediately after the 11 a.m. shooting spree.

Their freedom was short-lived. The pursuit that left the pair dead and a cop injured began at Farook’s home in Redlands, where cops went after receiving a tip, the chief said.

Cops exchanged gunfire with the pair in the SUV before the wild shootout ended, less than 2 miles from the Inland center.

The morning began with the San Bernardino County Department of Health holding a holiday banquet inside the building, said Inland CEO Marybeth Field.

Terrified workers hid behind locked doors, lying facedown on their office floors, or crouched inside closets until they were led out by police who conducted a painstaking search of the property.

“People shot,” one of the trapped employees texted her dad. “In the office waiting for cops. Pray for us.”

…The Inland Center, which opened in 1971, assists individuals with developmental disabilities in Riverside and San Bernardino counties. Its staff of 670 people treats more than 30,000 clients.

Yesterday, while the majority of Americans watched, in abject horror, the story of this massacre unfold before their eyes, there were some among us, including the President of the United States, that were making their case for restricting our Constitutional rights, before the bodies were even cold.

Liberals, across the nation, as evidenced on the Internet, including, quite probably, the Dhimmi-in-Chief, himself, Barack Hussein Obama, were hoping that it was some sort of Right-wing Military Group.

However, it wasn’t.

This massacre was perpetrated by “devout adherents” to “the Religion of Peace”.

Why is it that Liberals are so dadgum naive about Islam? For example, let’s look for a moment at Barack Hussein Obama, President of these United States…

On October 21, 2014, Muslim Terrorists attacked the Canadian Parliament.

The next morning, I reported the following…

On September 24, 2014, Obama  spoke before the UN General Assembly. Joseph Curl, in an Op Ed for the Washington Times, titled “Obama’s Breathtaking Naivete at the United Nations” wrote,

“He asked delegates from nations across the world to mull this “central question of our global age: Whether we will solve our problems together, in a spirit of mutual interest and mutual respect, or whether we descend into the destructive rivalries of the past.”

His answer? “It’s time for a broader negotiation in the region in which major powers address their differences directly, honestly, and peacefully across the table from one another, rather than through gun-wielding proxies.”

Simply believing something doesn’t make it so. The president’s desire for a world in which nations talk openly about their true feelings, perhaps share a good cry together, and sing kumbaya around the campfire, is the height of naivete.

So is this passage of his speech: ” … the United States is not and never will be at war with Islam. Islam teaches peace. Muslims the world over aspire to live with dignity and a sense of justice. And when it comes to America and Islam, there is no us and them, there is only us.”

But Islam and the holy Koran on which Muslim militant groups like al Qaeda and the Islamic State base their actions do call for the extermination of all who do not follow Islam, do demand that followers kill anyone who leaves the religion, do subjugate women. For the record, the Koran contains more than 100 verses that call Muslims to war with nonbelievers.

Mr. Obama said in his speech that “all people of faith have a responsibility to lift up the value at the heart of all great religions: Do unto thy neighbor as you would do — you would have done unto yourself.” But that is not a cornerstone of Islam. Militant Muslims have a very different belief: “Fight in the name of your religion with those who disagree with you.” And that edict comes straight from their holiest book.

To the president, that ideology “will wilt and die if it is consistently exposed and confronted and refuted in the light of day.” Again, the callowness is astounding. While he urged the world, “especially Muslim communities,” to reject the ideology that underlies al Qaeda and the Islamic State, nothing will change the fact that cold-blooded killers are determined to destroy the West, wipe all infidels from the face of the earth and build a new caliphate based on strict adherence to Shariah law (which leans heavily toward beheadings, lashings, stonings).

The president let loose some passing platitudes — “right makes might,” “the only language understood by killers like this is the language of force” — but in the end Mr. Obama still labors under the delusion that the Islamic State group and its ilk have “perverted one of the world’s great religions.” He still rejects “any suggestion of a clash of civilizations” — despite al Qaeda’s and Islamic State’s express declaration of war against western civilization (and anyone who is not Muslim).

Obama, like every other Modern Liberal, American or Canadian, truly believes that there is no difference between Islam and any other religion, even Christianity, the religion which the overwhelming majority of the citizens of America, the country which he is supposed to be the advocate for, practices.

Islam and Christianity present two very different Deities, who may share some similarities, but who have different identities and ultimately different standards. To pretend they are the same is not only to be clueless of the faith of 76% of the citizens of this nation, but, to be ignorant of an integral part of our American Heritage, the legacy of Christian Faith, which America’s Founding Fathers bequeathed us.

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

However…

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

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

Like the Canadian Military and members of their Parliament, for example…

And, now the innocent victims of the massacre in San Bernadino, California.

Can what happened in Ottawa, Canada, happen in Washington, DC?

Well, aother idiot tried to bust into the White House, yesterday.

So, I would say, the answer is YES.”

Yesterday, at a “Holiday” (i.e., CHRISTMAS) Party for County Employees, the unthinkable became reality, as my prediction came true.

And, all President Obama can think to do, is take our guns away.

God protect us.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Escalation in Iraqi-Nam: Obama Sending Special Forces to Fight ISIS. So Much for “No Boots on the Ground”.

On By kingsjesterIn Politics3 Comments

Tuntitled (14)“This business will get out of control. It will get out of control and we’ll be lucky to live through it. – Admiral Josh Painter (Fred Thompson), “The Hunt For Red October”

Nationalreview.com reports that

President Obama is sending an “expeditionary force” of U.S. military special operators to carry out raids against ISIS in Iraq and Syria, a move that expands on their decision to send about 50 special operators to Syria to coordinate air strikes. “In full coordination with the Government of Iraq, we’re deploying a specialized expeditionary targeting force to assist Iraqi and Kurdish Peshmerga forces and put even more pressure on [ISIS],” Defense Secretary Ash Carter told the House Armed Services Committee in announcing the new deployment on Tuesday. Although the term “expeditionary force” evokes large-scale mobilizations such as those seen in World War II or the Iraq War, Carter outlined a more limited deployment. But his announcement still provoked questions about the legal basis for the move, and caused one Democrat to warn of the specter of nuclear war with Russia. In arguing for the additional force, Carter invoked the recent rescue of ISIS prisoners in Iraq and the raid in Syria that killed a top commander in charge of the terrorist group’s oil and gas operations. “Imagine . . . on a standing basis, being able when occasions arise . . . to conduct raids like that anywhere in the territory of Syria and Iraq. That is what we’re talking about.”

He couldn’t, however, claim the legal authority to make such a deployment under the terms of the 2001 legislation that authorized the use of military force (AUMF) in Afghanistan and Iraq — the only such congressional authorization on the books. “I can’t speak to [that],” Carter told Representative Bradley Byrne (R., Ala.).

White House press secretary Josh Earnest urged lawmakers to pass new legislation providing Obama with the explicit authority to counter ISIS. “This effort is serious, and should be the focus of serious debate,” Earnest told reporters during his Tuesday briefing. “It will take more than three weeks to pass an AUMF, but Congress, in each of these cases, must stop using the fact that these issues are difficult as an excuse for doing nothing.”

Carter got a hint of just how difficult it may be to sell Congress on such legislation when Representative Tulsi Gabbard (D., Hawaii) suggested that Obama’s decision to place American fighter jets equipped “to target Russian planes” on the border between Turkey and Syria, and his stated opposition to Russian-backed Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad, could lead the U.S. into a nuclear war with Vladimir Putin’s regime.

“Russia’s installation of their anti-aircraft missile-defense system increases that possibility of — whether it’s intentional or even an accidental event — where one side may shoot down the other side’s plane,” Gabbard told Carter. “And that’s really where the potential is for this devastating nuclear war.” Carter characterized the U.S. disagreement with Russia as a diplomatic problem, not a military danger. “We have a different view, a very different view from Russia about what would be constructive for them to do in Syria,” he said. “That’s not the same as the United States and Russia clashing.”

Once again, as he has in the 7 years since he took office, President Barack Hussein Obama is “leading from behind”.

The fact that Vladimir Putin has taken the lead in the Middle East is testimony to the dangerous, mass confusion that Obama’s failed Foreign Policy, euphemistically dubbed “Smart Power!” has turned out to be.

And, “Smart Power!” has illuminated the fact, once again, that ALL of Obama’s promises come with expiration dates.

September 11, 2014 – The New York Times reported that

After enduring harsh criticism for saying in a news conference two weeks ago that he did not have a strategy for dealing with ISIS in Syria, Mr. Obama sketched out a plan that will involve heightened American training and arming of moderate Syrian rebels to fight the militants. Saudi Arabia has agreed to provide bases for the training of those forces.

The White House has asked Congress to authorize the plan to train and equip rebels — something the Central Intelligence Agency has been doing covertly and on a much smaller scale — but Mr. Obama said he had the authority necessary to expand the broader campaign.

“These American forces will not have a combat mission — we will not get dragged into another ground war in Iraq,” Mr. Obama pledged, adding that the broader mission he was outlining for American military forces “will be different from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan; it will not involve American combat troops fighting on foreign soil.”

Setpember 16, 2014 – ABCnews.go.com reported that

American ground troops may be needed to battle Islamic State forces in the Middle East if President Barack Obama’s current strategy fails, the nation’s top military officer said Tuesday as Congress plunged into an election-year debate of Obama’s plan to expand airstrikes and train Syrian rebels.

A White House spokesman said quickly the president “will not” send ground forces into combat, but Gen. Martin Dempsey said Obama had personally told him to come back on a “case by case basis” if the military situation changed.

“To be clear, if we reach the point where I believe our advisers should accompany Iraqi troops on attacks against specific ISIL targets, I will recommend that to the president,” Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, declared in testimony to the Senate Armed Services Committee. He referred to the militants by an alternative name.

Pressed later by Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., the panel’s chairman, the four-star general said if Obama’s current approach isn’t enough to prevail, he might “go back to the president and make a recommendation that may include the use of ground forces.”

Dempsey’s testimony underscored the dilemma confronting many lawmakers as the House moves through its own debate on authorizing the Pentagon to implement the policy Obama announced last week. In Iraq on Tuesday, the U.S. continued its expanded military campaign, carrying out two airstrikes northwest of Irbil and three southwest of Baghdad.

After the hearing, Dempsey told reporters traveling with him to Paris that the Pentagon had concluded that about half of Iraq’s army was incapable of partnering effectively with the U.S. to roll back the Islamic State group’s territorial gains in western and northern Iraq, and the other half needs to be partially rebuilt with U.S. training and additional equipment.

September 17, 2014 – According to politico.com,

“U.S. ground troops will not be sent into combat in this conflict,” Kerry testified before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. “Instead, they will support Iraq forces on the ground as they fight for their country.”

…Kerry’s testimony comes as Congress races toward a critical vote to give the Obama administration the green light to arm and train moderate Syrian rebels against the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant.

The House is set to vote on the measure later Wednesday, with the Senate to take up the legislation later this week. The measure has run into considerable opposition from both the right and the left but is expected to pass before lawmakers left Washington until after the midterm elections.

President Barack Obama reiterated earlier Wednesday in a speech at MacDill Air Force Base in Tampa, Florida, that he will not send U.S. combat troops to fight ISIL in Iraq, following testimony from Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey that opened the door to that option earlier this week.

And later during the Foreign Relations hearing, Kerry declined to move off that position, despite questioning from Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), whom Kerry told: “I’m not going to engage in hypotheticals.”

“The president has made a judgment as commander-in-chief that that’s not in the cards,” Kerry said, referring to ground troops.

Shortly before the hearing began before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, protesters from the anti- war group Code Pink – a prevalent sight on the Hill in recent days as lawmakers engaged in debate about arming Syrian rebels – stood up, held signs and chanted “No more war!”

Deviating from his prepared remarks, Kerry turned his attention to the protesters, seated in the front row of the hearing room, and told them that while he was sympathetic to their opposition to war, if they believed in the broader mission of Code Pink, “then you ought to care about fighting ISIL.”

Stressing that the Islamic State was “killing and raping and mutilating women” and “making a mockery of a peaceful religion,” Kerry told the protesters: “There is no negotiation with ISIL.”

Foreign Relations Chairman Bob Menendez (D-N.J.) stressed that if the military campaign continues for an extended period of time – like he expects – lawmakers will need to pass a new authorization for the use of military force that focuses narrowly on ISIL. He signaled last week that the panel will begin drafting one.

“I am personally not comfortable with reliance on either the 2001 AUMF that relies on a thin theory that ISIL is associated with Al Qaeda, and certainly not the 2002 Iraq AUMF which relied on misinformation,” Menendez said.

Later as he questioned Kerry, Menendez told the secretary of state that “you’re going to need a new AUMF, and it’ll have to be more tailored.” Kerry responded that the administration would “welcome” it.

The panel’s top Republican, Sen. Bob Corker of Tennessee, expressed deep skepticism about the Obama administration’s strategy to fight Islamic State extremists, telling Kerry: “We know the Free Syrian Army can’t take on ISIL. You know that.”

“I do want us to deal with this,” Corker told Kerry “You’ve not laid it out in a way that meets that test.”

Later in the day on September 17, 2014 – According to FoxNews.com,

The White House acknowledged Wednesday that President Obama would consider putting U.S. troops in “forward-deployed positions” to advise Iraqi forces in the fight against the Islamic State — even while insisting U.S. troops would not be sent back into a “combat role” in Iraq. 

Obama and his top advisers appeared to be threading a needle as they carefully clarified how exactly U.S. troops might be used, a day after Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey opened the door to approving “U.S. military ground forces.” 

The White House continued to insist Wednesday that a “combat” role has in fact been ruled out, and that U.S. troops will not be engaging the Islamic State on the ground. 

Speaking at MacDill Air Force Base in Tampa, after visiting U.S. Central Command, Obama told troops: “I will not commit you and the rest of our Armed Forces to fighting another ground war in Iraq.” 

He vowed that the U.S. forces currently deployed to Iraq to advise Iraqi forces “will not have a combat mission.” Instead, he said, they will continue to support Iraqi forces on the ground, through a combination of U.S. air power, training assistance and other means. 

But shortly afterward, White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest clarified that Dempsey was talking about the possible need to put U.S. troops already in Iraq into “forward-deployed positions with Iraqi troops.” 

Earnest said that step has not yet been necessary, but if Dempsey asks to “forward deploy” American advisers, “the president said he would consider it on a case-by-case basis.” 

He said, in that scenario, U.S. troops “would be providing tactical advice to Iraqi security forces” or be in position to call in airstrikes. 

“They would not have a combat role. They would not be personally or directly engaging the enemy,” Earnest stressed. 

So, now, we will officially have “boots on the ground”, even though we already have “Military Advisors” in Iraq.

What is this? Leadership by ‘three blind men describing an elephant”?

This is what happens when you have a President more interested in “fighting a war” against a disease breaking out in his father’s home country, than protecting the country that he is supposed to be leading, from Muslim Terrorists.

Years ago, the local ABC Affiliate in Memphis used to run The Benny Hill Show at 10:30 p.m. on Saturdays. For those of you sheltered younger readers, Benny Hill was a wonderful British comedian and entertainer. “The Lad Himself” wrote a lot of his own hilarious  material, including such memorable characters as Cap’n Scuttle, and songs that would literally have you busting your gut in laughter. However, one of the things that Benny will forever be remembered for, happened at the end of every show, when one thing would lead to another, culminating in a rip-roaring chase scene, set to the saxophone-led accompaniment of the incomparable Boots Randolph’s “Yakety Sax”.

The chaotic, amateurish manner in which the administration has attempted to “prosecute” the limited war against the Muslim Terrorist Group, now numbering almost 32,000 members, known as ISIS or ISIL, is very reminiscent of a Benny Hill Show Chase Scene.

Except…there’s nothing funny about it.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Obama Apologizes For America Again, Ushers in the “Breakthrough Energy Coalition”. Shades of the Chicago Climate Exchange?

On By kingsjesterIn Politics1 Comment

GW-Summit-600-LIWell, Petulant President Pantywaist has apologized to other countries  on behalf of America…again.

And…just like every time before…no level-headed American asked him to.

The Times of India reports that

President Barack Obama told world leaders who gathered northeast of Paris on Monday for a climate conference that the United States is at least partly to blame for the life-threatening damage that environmental change has wrought, and he urged world leaders to join him in fixing the problem.

“I’ve come here personally, as the leader of the world’s largest economy and the second-largest emitter,” Obama said, “to say that the United States of America not only recognizes our role in creating this problem, we embrace our responsibility to do something about it.”

In a speech interrupted by repeated beeps warning that he had exceeded his time limit, Obama said in Le Bourget that the climate conference represented an important turning point in world history because the leaders attending the meeting now recognize the urgency of the problem.

“No nation — large or small, wealthy or poor — is immune,” he said.

The greatest threat to reaching a binding climate accord may be a loose coalition of developing nations, led by India, who argue that they should not be asked to limit their economic growth as a way of fixing a problem that was largely created by the others, and Obama conceded that point.

“We know the truth that many nations have contributed little to climate change but will be the first to feel its most destructive effects,” he said.

He promised money to help the poorest nations transition to economies that depend less on burning fossil fuels, but he said a delay was not acceptable.

“For I believe, in the words of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., that there is such a thing as being too late,” Obama said. “And when it comes to climate change, that hour is almost upon us.”

Obama also repeated an argument, lampooned by some Republicans, that the climate conference was a fitting response to the terrorist attacks that cost the lives of 130 people in and around Paris on Nov. 13.

“What greater rejection of those who would tear down our world than marshaling our best efforts to save it,” he said.

About 150 world leaders were expected to gather at the opening of the talks in a heavily guarded convention center as a show of encouragement and support for efforts to forge a historic agreement to jointly curb greenhouse-gas emissions, in an effort to stave off the worst effects of climate change.

Obama has staked much of his legacy on ensuring success here, spending much of the past year courting the leaders of China, India and other major emitters in hopes they would finally agree to slow their rapidly rising use of coal and other carbon-intensive fuels.

President Francois Hollande of France greeted Obama just eight hours after the two paid a surprise late-night visit to the Bataclan, the concert hall where dozens of people were killed on Nov. 13, as part of a coordinated series of attacks in and around Paris.

At the brief visit last night, Obama, Hollande and Anne Hidalgo, the mayor of Paris, each laid a white rose before standing in silence in front of the building for several minutes.

Shortly after his arrival, Obama met with President Xi Jinping of China in a meeting of the leaders of the world’s two largest carbon-polluting countries.

Citing climate change as “a huge challenge,” Xi said it was “very important for China and the United States to be firmly committed to the right direction of building a new model of major country relations,” including by “partnering with each other to help the climate conference deliver its expected targets.”

The Breakthrough Energy Coalition, a group of business and philanthropy leaders led by the Microsoft founder Bill Gates who have a combined total of $350 billion in private wealth, have pledged to invest in moving clean-energy technologies from laboratories to the marketplace.

About this “Breakthrough Energy Coalition”…

The Business Insider reports that

Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerberg, Jeff Bezos, and a roster of other high-profile tech figures are launching a new organisation designed to invest in renewable energy technologies. 

It is called the Breakthrough Energy Coalition, and says its aim is to create “a network of private capital committed to building a structure that will allow informed decisions to help accelerate the change to the advanced energy future our planet needs.”

Announced ahead of a major UN climate change conference in Paris this week, the coalition’s members say that enough isn’t being done from established organisations to drive forward research and investment into clean energy.

Writing on Facebook late Sunday night, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg said that “solving the clean energy problem is an essential part of building a better world … yet progress towards a sustainable energy system is too slow, and the current system doesn’t encourage the kind of innovation that will get us there faster.”

Likewise, the Coalition’s website says that “the existing system of basic research, clean energy investment, regulatory frameworks, and subsidies fails to sufficiently mobilize investment in truly transformative energy solutions for the future. We can’t wait for the system to change through normal cycles.”

In short: Established investors are moving much too slowly towards the renewable energy, and it’s too important to wait for that to sort itself out naturally.

Among the other “Investors” in this new “coalition” are the Puppetmaster himself, George Soros and fellow “Billionaire Philanthropist” Tom Steyer.

Which is interesting, because Breitbart.com’s Steve Milloy reported back on August 17th that

U.S. Securities and Exchange Act filings indicate that Soros has purchased an initial 1 million shares of Peabody Energy and 553,200 shares of Arch Coal, the two largest publicly traded U.S. coal companies. As pointed out last week, both companies have been driven perilously close to bankruptcy by the combination of President Obama’s “war on coal” and inexpensive natural gas brought on by the hydrofracturing revolution.

Under the hypothesis that not even socialists would leave trillions of dollars worth of a perfectly safe and clean energy source in the ground for the sake of the imaginary “climate crisis,” I posited that once the existing coal industry ownership was wiped out by President Obama’s regulatory onslaught, a new politically correct ownership would rehabilitate the fuel by contributing to Democrats.

Enter George Soros, a hardball investor and philanthropist to myriad left-wing causes, including the activist and “clean energy” rent-seeking movements that have helped take down the coal industry. In 2009, for example, Soros announced he would spend $1 billion in “clean energy” technology and create a San Francisco-based advocacy organization called the Climate Policy Initiative.

Less than a year ago the Soros’ Climate Policy Initiative issued a major report concluding that the world could save $1.8 trillion over the next two decades by transitioning away from coal. The report referred to coal reserves as “stranded assets” that were losing value as they were no longer needed.

What a difference a few months makes, especially when those months have seen coal company stocks fall to fire sale prices. So far the size of Soros’ coal investment seems so far relatively small (Peabody has 248 million shares of stock outstanding), but the reports available only cover up to the quarter ending on June 30.

It’s possible that Soros is only looking for a “dead cat bounce” from his Peabody and Arch Coal investments, but the companies together have provable coal reserves of about 11 billion tons, worth hundreds of billions of dollars. I doubt the shrewd Soros is looking to make just a few million dollars on these investments.

Soros isn’t the only leftist shark in the water.

There’s billionaire hedge fund operator Tom Steyer who committed to spend $100 million in 2014 to elect anti-coal, climate alarmist-friendly politicians. Though he failed miserably, he has re-upped for the same program in 2016. Yet Steyer’s dirty secret is that, despite his protestations of concern about the climate, he’s made a fortune from coal production in Indonesia over the past 15 years. It’s easy to imagine some Steyer-steered investment vehicle rescuing sinking coal companies under the guise of turning coal into “clean energy” business. Though the current coal industry trial and failed miserably to do re-brand itself as “clean,” with the right politics and the right payoffs, Steyer no doubt could pull off that trick.

Boys and girls, as the late, great Yogi Berra used to say, this may very well be

Deja vu…all over again.

The Chicago Climate Exchange was North America’s only voluntary, legally binding greenhouse gas reduction and trading system for emission sources and offset projects in North America and Brazil.

It all began with the Joyce Foundation.  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 capitol outlay to start the Chicago Climate Exchange. It started trading in 2003, and what it traded was, believe it or not, air.

Barack Obama served on the board of the Joyce Foundation from 1994 to 2002 . What a coincidence, that, as president, pushing cap-and-trade was one of his highest priorities, huh?

Back on 6/29/09, canadafreepress.com reported that

If we follow the time line on where Obama was during the funding of the Chicago Climate Exchange, he was still a lecturer at the University of Chicago Law School teaching constitutional law, with his law license becoming inactive a year later in 2002.

It may be interesting to note that the Chicago Climate Exchange in spite of its hype, is a veritable rat’s nest of cronyism. The largest shareholder in the Exchange is Goldman Sachs. Chicago Mayor Richard M. Daley is its honorary chairman, The Joyce Foundation, which funded the Exchange also funded money for John Ayers’ Chicago School Initiatives. John is the brother of William Ayers.

What a flap when it was discovered that the senator from Chicago had nursed on Saul Alinsky’s milk, had his political career launched at a coffee party held by domestic terrorist Bill Ayers, and sat for 20 years, uncomplaining in front of the “God-dam-America pulpit of resentment-challenged Jeremiah Wright.

Folk were naturally outraged that the empty suit who would go on to become TOTUS was spawned from such anti-American activism.

But the media should have been hollering, “Stop Thief!” instead.

The same Chicago Climate Exchange promoting public rip-off was funded by Obama before he was POTUS.

Even as man-made global warming is being exposed as a money-generating hoax, Obama is working feverishly to push the controversial cap-and-trade carbon reduction scheme through Congress.

Fortunately for our nation, Obama’s Cap and Trade Bill failed to leave the Senate in July of 2010, leading the Chicago Climate Exchange to close up shop in November of 2010.

However. to this very day, Obama is still relentlessly pursuing “Climate Change”, which the majority of Americans, in poll after poll, have stated is not a National Priority.

And, a group of Investors, among whose number are friends and benefactors of Obama, have formed another group, for the stated purpose of “Duty and Humanity”, in order to, as the Chicago Climate Exchange was going to, “assist in the fight against Climate Change”.

Coincidence?

I think not.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

Today’s Pop Music and American Society: From “All You Need Is Love” to Keying Your Boyfriend’s Car

On By kingsjesterIn Entertainment, Politics2 Comments

thBWVX9WHUMusic hath charms to soothe the savage breast,
To soften rocks, or bend a knotted oak. – William Congreve (1670-1729)

Can music also bring out the evil in mankind, as well?

On Thanksgiving Day, as I was watching the Macy’s Parade with my family, I suddenly realized that I did not know any of the performers lip syncing their songs on the floats, except for Pat Benatar (bless her heart).

Additionally, I heard at least one song that was entirely inappropriate for that family-friendly, nationally-televised event.

What is going on with Pop Music?

John Stonestreet, writing for his website, breakpoint.org, posted the following article on November 12, 2015…

Good guys are out of style. If you’ve been to the movies any time in the last decade, you know that Hollywood has replaced the superheroes of yore with antiheroes—depressed, broody, supposedly “relatable” characters with a past. Whether it’s the angst-filled teenage protagonists of “Twilight” or a black-suited Spiderman doing Travolta’s Saturday Night Fever strut, it’s become almost cliché to bring our heroes down to our level rather than aspiring to theirs.

With a handful of exceptions like Marvel’s Captain America, the entertainment industry just doesn’t create uncomplicated, morally straight characters anymore. Even Superman recently got a makeover. Director Zack Snyder’s reboot offered us a troubled Clark Kent in a bleak, visually desaturated film where the Man of Steel doesn’t hesitate to kill. And the same holds true in pop music, where artists who once sang about falling in love now storm on stage and sing about wrecking their ex’s life.

A quick glance over YouTube’s top music videos reveals a wall of singers grimacing, glowering, and growling at us. Heavy eye-shadow, aggressive postures, black clothing, red smoke, sneering expressions make it look like these performers—many of them young women—want to mug us instead of entertain us. Writing at the Daily Mail, Jo Tweedy asks the obvious question: Why do all of these singers look so angry?

Whether it’s Beyonce’s now-infamous Super Bowl halftime performance or Miley Cyrus’ descent into “Wrecking Ball” wrath, these performers “prove that rage is very much all the rage for pop stars.”

But it’s probably Taylor Swift, the 25-year-old country singer who took the pop scene by storm a few years back, who best illustrates how angry modern music has actually become. Swift started out a few years ago writing songs about unrequited love and teardrops on guitars. But in more recent hits like “Blank Space,” “Shake it Off,” and “I Knew You Were Trouble,” the music icon tells haters and potential heartbreakers to back off. “Boys only want love if it’s torture,” she complains, and warns would-be suitors that she’s “got a blank space” on her “long list of ex-lovers,” and would be glad to write in their names.

And then there’s her biggest new hit, “Bad Blood,” a breakup number accompanied by an especially warlike music video that won the VMA’s top honor last year. It features guns, explosions, rocket-launchers, even mixed martial arts. I’m not kidding. Swift herself looks every bit as angry as the Amazon that she plays.

“So why does white hot anger seem to be such a big feature for today’s stars when they’re on stage?” asks Tweedy. One London pop choreographer answered: “…the anger is simply a way of getting noticed,” a way of “trying to stand out,” she said. “[It’s a way of] saying, ‘…you will book me for that next job.’”

So, no surprise, a lot of it comes back to marketing and publicity. We saw this with the release of “Fifty Shades of Grey,” that sexy has taken a sadomasochistic turn in order to sell more books and movies.

But what if there’s more to it than just marketing? In “The Screwtape Letters,” C.S. Lewis’ professorial devil offers advice on how to get humans, especially men, to confuse aggression for beauty.

“…the felt evil is what [the patient] wants,” he explains. “It is the visible animality or sulkiness, or craft, or cruelty which he likes,” and which “play[s] on the raw nerve of his private obsession.”

And I can’t help wondering if on another level all this bad blood is due to the sexual revolution itself. Could it be that some pop stars—especially women—really do resent the way the industry has objectified and turned them into sex symbols? Attempting to tether human dignity to sexual freedom leaves many feeling as if they must be sexually aggressive to be known, and others as if their value is secondary to other’s desires. Either way, it helps explain why pop culture seems to be popping a gasket lately.

I remember the summer after I graduated college in December 1980. I bought a brand new 1981 Mazda GLC, had a Pioneer Tape Deck installed to play in all four hidden door speakers (a big thing back then), bought a cassette tape of “The Beatles Love Songs”, and played it until the tape broke.

Music has always affected my life and played a major part. I sang in church choirs, leading services, singing in quartets, and solo, for over 30 years and have played acoustic rhythm guitar since the age of 19…a long time ago.

Music can indeed soothe us. It can inspire us…in both good ways and in bad.

It has the power to bring us to our knees in worship of the Living God…or make our hands “clinch in fisteous rage” (American Pie, Don Mclean)

It can advise us to “treat her like a lady” or find us hanging out, “down on Main Street”.

At this time in our country’s history, when morality has become relative and ethics situational, we find our souls crying out for soothing, but instead, we find Pop Music and “so-called” Country Music, actually manufactured in New York City (pronounced like they do in the Pace Salsa Commercials), advocating meaningless one-night stands and encouraging the debasement of the human soul, instead of its ability to rise above any obstacle in its path that might hinder individual achievement.

With all of today’s over-produced, under-written Pop and Country-Pop Music flooding the airwaves of both broadcast and satellite radio, Americans my age wonder where all the great songwriters have gone to?

Where are the “Good Vibrations” that the young people of this generation so desperately need?

Evidently, even though “We Didn’t Start The Fire”, we have left them “Sittin’ On The Dock of The Bay”.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

 

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

On By kingsjesterIn Politics1 Comment

untitled (12)

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

The New York Times reports the following

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

There is a sucker born every minute.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

ROFL!

Until He Comes,

KJ

Liberals, Syrian “Refugees”, and the Colorado Planned Parenthood Attack

On By kingsjesterIn Christianity, Politics1 Comment

th (53)Another sociopath went on a killing spree in Colorado, yesterday.

Foxnews.com reports that

The gunman in Friday’s shooting at a Colorado Planned Parenthood Friday was identified by Colorado Springs police Saturday as Robert L. Dear.

Police said Dear is 57. They also released a mug photo.

The shooter is from North Carolina, an unidentified law enforcement official told AP. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because the official was not authorized to speak about the ongoing investigation.

Three people, including one police officer, were killed in Friday’s attack. The gunman was taken into custody after an hours-long standoff and shootout. Authorities have yet to determine a motive behind the shooting or whether the gunman had any connection to Planned Parenthood.

The University of Colorado in Colorado Springs police department identified the officer killed as Garrett Swasey, 44, a six-year veteran of the force. Nine other people, including five police officers, were shot and are in good condition, police said.

Buckley also said the unidentified man had brought “items” with him inside the building and left some outside, meaning officers had to make sure they were not “any kind of devices.”

The man apparently began his deadly spree at the Planned Parenthood building, although it was not clear if his motive was related to the organization.

“We don’t have any information on this individual’s mentality, or his ideas or ideology,” Buckley said.

After a brief lull, he began shooting again at police, who had gotten inside the building.

Buckley said there was no information indicating the gunman himself had been shot.

Multiple police vehicles and ambulances were parked outside the building in a snowstorm and 17 degree temperatures.

Police closed Centennial Boulevard in both directions and customers were locked down at a King Soopers grocery store and several nearby shops in the strip mall area. Buckley said officers were working through the process of releasing them.

Witnesses described a chaotic scene when the shooting first started.

Ozy Licano was in the two-story building’s parking lot when he saw someone crawling toward the clinic’s door. He tried to escape in his car when the gunman looked at him.

“He came out, and we looked each other in the eye, and he started aiming, and then he started shooting,” Licano said. “I saw two holes go right through my windshield as I was trying to quickly back up and he just kept shooting and I started bleeding.”

Licano drove away and took refuge at a nearby grocery store.

“He was aiming for my head,” he said of the gunman. “It’s just weird to stare in the face of someone like that. And he didn’t win.”

Denise Speller, manager at a nearby haircut salon, told the Gazette she heard 10 to 20 gunshots in the span of less than five minutes.

She said she saw a police cruiser and two officers outside near Chase Bank, not far from the Planned Parenthood facility. One of the officers appeared to fall to the ground and the other office knelt down to render aid, then tried to get the officer to safety behind the car, she said. Another officer told Speller to seek shelter inside the building.

“We’re still pretty freaked out,” Speller said by phone. “We can’t stop shaking. For now we’re stuck back here not knowing.”

Some people managed to escape the building and flee to a nearby bank. An armored vehicle was seen taking evacuees away from the clinic to ambulances waiting nearby.

With the immediate threat over, authorities swept the building and turned their attention to inspecting unspecified items the gunman left outside the building and carried inside in bags. They were concerned that he had planted improvised explosive devices meant to cause even more destruction. As of late Friday, police did not say what was found.

Yesterday, as this attack was in progress, Liberals on Internet Political Sites, including Facebook Pages, appeared to be as giddy as schoolgirls.

Finally, here was a sociopath, who would take Americans’ attention off the forced importation of ISIS to our shores by Obama and the United Nations, imnbedded within thousands of Syrian Refugees.

Additionally, this barbarian seemed to be purposefully attacking their Holy Temple of Molech, an Office of Planned Parenthood in Colorado.

As I have written time and time again, Liberals love to draw a false equivalency between the faith of 3/4ths of Americans, Christianity, and a political ideology, masquerading as a faith, Radical Islam

What “the Smartest People in the Room” refuse to comprehend is the fact that,

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

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

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

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

Speaking of which, how is the mass murder of over one million innocent American lives, every year, through abortion.  any different than the “Final Solution” of the Nazis, which sent 6 million Jews and 5 million gypsies to the gas chambers? 

Have you ever tried to have a discussion with an ardent  pro-abortion supporter, either on Facebook or face-to-face? You won’t hear these “Champions of Tolerance” call those innocent lives, babies, human beings, a life, a soul, a gift from God, or anything remotely resembling something that they should feel remorse about killing.

Heck, Pro-Abortionists are opposed to the taking of sonograms of the woman’s womb, before she has a abortion. They’re afraid that the “seed-carrier” will realize that IS a HUMAN BEING inside her, and will decide not to kill that baby.

It’s appropriate for all Americans to be upset over the actions of a sociopath, like Robert L. Dear.

My question is: What makes the ending of a human life, for the sake of convenience, any less horrible?

Heavenly Father, I  prayerfully ask that You comfort the family of that brave policeman who lost his life yesterday, and the families of the other  Americans, whom that sociopath murdered.

In Christ’s Name I pray,

Amen.

Until He Comes,

KJ

UN Involved in “Vetting” of Syrian “Refugees”. Obama Tells States That They Cannot Block Them.

On By kingsjesterIn Politics2 Comments

Syrian-Roulette-600-LAPresident Barack Hussein Obama loves false equivalencies.

Yesterday, thehill.com reported that

This Thanksgiving, President Obama is calling for Americans to lend a helping hand to another group of pilgrims fleeing persecution.

“Nearly four centuries after the Mayflower set sail, the world is still full of pilgrims – men and women who want nothing more than the chance for a safer, better future for themselves and their families,” Obama said in his weekly address Thursday. “What makes America is that we offer that chance.”

The president praised Americans who have offered to open their homes to refugees fleeing war-torn Syria. 
“One woman from Pennsylvania wrote to me to say, ‘Money is tight for us in my household. … But I have a guest room. I have a pantry full of food. We can do this,’ ” Obama said.
 
“Another woman from Florida told me her family’s history dates back to the Mayflower — and she said that welcoming others is part of ‘what it means to be an American,’ ” he added.
 
Obama called for citizens to put the “generosity” of America on full display by welcoming refugees into the country with arms wide open.

“I hope that you and your family have a wonderful Thanksgiving, surrounded by loved ones and full of joy and gratitude,” he said. “And together, may we all play our own small part in the American story, and write a next chapter that future generations can be thankful for.”
 
The House passed a measure earlier this month making it more difficult for Syrian refugees fleeing the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS) to enter the country.
 
Republicans have cast doubt on whether refugees can be properly vetted to ensure that they are not terrorists.
 
At least one assailant in the Nov. 13 Paris terrorist attack, in which 130 people were killed, is suspected of entering France posed as a migrant.

Point of Order, Mr. President:

The Pilgrims were Christians, not Muslims.

BIG difference.

The Pilgrims did not include a population made up of 70% of ultra-fit Military-looking young men with cell phones.

And, they did not riot their way across Europe before the Government of this country brought them here.

A couple of months ago, Ben Shapiro, writing for Breitbart News, asked and answered the following question…

Who Are These Refugees? That competition to accept refugees would be fine if we knew that the refugees plan on assimilating into Western notions of civilized society, and if we knew that they were indeed victims of radical Muslim atrocities. Unfortunately, we know neither. It is deeply suspicious that major Muslim countries that do not border Syria refuse to take in large numbers of refugees, except for Algeria and Egypt.

Turkey has taken in nearly two million refugees, according to the United Nations, and keeps the vast majority in refugee camps — a typical practice in a region that has kept Arab refugees from the 1948 war of Israeli independence in Arab-run camps for seven decades. Jordan, Lebanon and Iraq have taken in hundreds of thousands of refugees as well, but all border the chaotic, collapsing Syria, and thus have limited choice in the matter. Iran has taken in no refugees. Neither have Pakistan, Indonesia, or any of the other dozens of member states of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation. Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Kuwait and Bahrain all refused to take any refugees, and explicitly cited the risk of terrorists among the refugees, according to The Guardian (UK).

These fears are not without merit, as even Obama administration officials have acknowledged: back in February, director of the National Counterterrorism Center Nicholas Rasmussen called Syrian refugees “clearly a population of concern.” FBI Assistant Director Michael Steinbach explained, “Databases don’t [have] the information on those individuals, and that’s the concern. On Tuesday, State Department spokesman John Kirby told CNN’s Wolf Blitzer that terrorist infiltration was “a possibility. I mean, you can’t, you can’t dismiss that out of hand.” He then added, “Obviously, if you look at those images though, it’s pretty clear that the great majority of these people are innocent families.”

Actually, images show a disproportionate number of young males in crowds of refugees. And those images reflect statistical reality: according to the United Nations Human Rights Commission, Mediterranean Sea refugees are overwhelmingly male: just 13 percent are women, and just 15 percent are children. The other 72 percent are men. Compare that population to the refugees in the Middle East from the same conflicts: 49.5 percent male, and 50.5 percent female, with 38.5 percent under the age of 12. Those are wildly different populations.

It is also being reported that these “refugees” are leaving a trail of waste, human and otherwise, in their wake.

In other words, these guys believe that hygiene is a girl that they used to “date” back home.

So, what is the actual vetting process for these Syrian “Refugees”?

Nine days ago, the Ultra-Liberal BBC.com reported on the process.

After intense criticism that the United States was not doing its part to help with the migrant crisis afflicting Europe, the Obama administration announced in September that it wanted to resettle about 10,000 Syrian refugees in the US by the same time next year.

The decision was met with some fear that militants could exploit the refugee programme to gain entry into the US to carry out attacks.

After the attacks in Paris, which left 129 dead, and the news that one of the attackers may have entered Europe as a refugee, those fears have become amplified and spread to governors’ mansions across the country as well as the corridors of Congress.

Newly elected Speaker of the US House of Representatives Paul Ryan has now called for a “pause” in the US refugee program. He tweeted, “Our nation has always been welcoming, but we can’t let terrorists take advantage of our compassion.”

The process for a Syrian refugee to resettle in the US is long and arduous, involving numerous federal agencies and intense background checks.

Compared to Europe, where fingerprints and simple information are taken and migrants can resettle with little difficulty, US processes look very different and are much stricter.

It is a long road for a Syrian refugee coming to the US – so where does it start?

Step 1: Leaving home & arrival at UNHCR refugee camp
As cities, town and villages have been overrun, millions of Syrian people have become displaced both internally and externally.

But to be eligible for permanent resettlement in another country, displaced persons have to leave Syria and find a camp run by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), in a neighbouring country.

Many of these camps offer only the most basic living conditions.

Upon arrival at the camp, the displaced person registers as a refugee and is given the option to apply for resettlement.

Nothing is guaranteed at this point. Not every refugee will be referred by the UNHCR for resettlement.

Refugees are allowed to express an interest in particular countries, but the decision on resettlement is ultimately at the UNHCR’s discretion.

Step 2: UNHCR referral for resettlement
The UNHCR then determines which refugees for whom resettlement makes sense, a senior administration official said.

Certain refugees get recommended to the programme in the US.

The State Department takes over after a referral is made from the UNHCR, and the Department of Homeland Security decides whether an individual application is approved.

Certain indicators for why a refugee may be recommended for the US programme include: if he or she has a relative in the US or whether it is likely he or she will be welcomed by a certain community.

“With Syrians, we’ve benefitted from years of experience in vetting Iraqi refugee applicants,” one senior Obama administration official said. The screening is “robust since large-scale Iraqi processing in 2007.”

Step 3: Vetting process with US begins
If a refugee is cleared to be considered by the US, the process for approval is lengthy – 18-24 months, said one senior administration official.

Refugees are admitted at about a 50% acceptance rate after being subjected to “the most rigorous screening of any traveller to the US,” an official told reporters in a conference call.

That involves extensive in-person interviews about their experiences with conflict, as well as the collection of both biometric and biographic information that is cross-checked with the State Department, the Department of Homeland Security and in some cases, the Department of Defense.

Step 4: Resettlement
Ten thousand people have been referred for resettlement in the US, but the US has not processed their applications yet.

After 18-24 months, a refugee may then be sent to his or her new community.

The BBC spoke with one young man who resettled with his family outside of Louisville, Kentucky in September.

A local church organisation funded by the US government helped him land a job at a car factory. He wants to attend university in the US someday.

Like the organisation that helped this man, there are nine organisations that work with the federal government to place refugees across the US.

Funny how Obama and his Administration left out the part that the United Nations is playing in this whole “vetting” process, huh?

Considering the track record of the Security Council, I trust their judgment about as much as I would that of Miley Cyrus.

And, if you think that Obama is going to allow a delay of 18-24 months before allowing these Muslim “Refugees” to be relocated among us, I have two bridges over the Mississippi River at Memphis to sell you.

In a related matter, foxnews.com reports that

The Obama administration warned states over the Syrian refugee crisis Wednesday, telling them in a letter they do not have legal authority to refuse the refugees, and states that do not comply may be subject to enforcement action.

The letter, from the Office of Refugee Resettlement (OCR), told state resettlement officials that they may not deny benefits and services to refugees based on their country of origin or religion.

“Accordingly, states may not categorically deny ORR-funded benefits and services to Syrian refugees,” the letter, dated Wednesday, says. “Any state with such a policy would not be in compliance with the State Plan requirements, applicable statutes, and their own assurances, and could be subject to enforcement action, including suspension and termination.”

The letter went on to say that the 1964 Civil Rights Act prohibits discrimination based on race and national origin in all programs that receive federal financial assistance.

“Thus, it is not permissible to deny federally funded benefits such as Medicaid or TANF to refugees who otherwise meet the eligibility requirements,” the letter says.

The letter came after more than two dozen governors, mostly Republicans, announced they would resist efforts to resettle Syrian refugees in their states in light of the November 13 terrorist attacks in Paris, and fears that ISIS militants could use the controversial program to infiltrate the U.S.

As he did during the recent Iran Deal Fiasco, Obama has a nasty habit of going to the United Nations first and worrying about what THEY think, instead of doing his job as President of the United States of America, and, doing what is best for OUR COUNTRY.

Mr. President,

The United States of America is a Sovereign Nation, created by the blood, sweat, and tears of men and women, who rise above you in stature, honor, integrity, and courage to the point where you are not even fit enough to tie their boots.

To summarize, we are an “independent state”, completely independent and self-governing. We bow to no other country on God’s green Earth. We are beholden to no other nation. America stands on its own, with our own set of laws, The Constitution of the United States.

America is still the Greatest Nation on the Face of the Earth, despite all of your efforts to make us “just another country”.

Congress needs to tell Obama that the safety of our Sovereign Nation does not, and will never take second place to his Muslim Dhimmitude and purposeful naiveté.

Oh, and by the way, Mr. President, my family and I did not “discuss gun control”, yesterday. We played Yahtzee, instead.

Because thanking God for our Sovereign Nation, the greatest on the face of the Earth, and spending time with family and friends…not acquiescing to you and your failed political ideology, is what Thanksgiving Day is all about.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

Thanksgiving 2015: A Country In Debt To Our Creator

On By kingsjesterIn Christianity, PoliticsLeave a comment

Thanksgiving2013Thanksgiving Day.

Simply saying the words to myself brings back a flood of precious memories…memories of Thanksgivings past, as a child, surrounded by aunts, uncles, cousins, my sisters, and my Mother and Daddy…smells of sage dressing and oven-roasted turkey..followed by the feeling of having an over-stuffed stomach…all topped by the sounds of laughter and the sight of my aunts and uncles, all members of America’s Greatest Generation, being led in a penny-ante poker game after the Thanksgiving meal by my Daddy, the finest man I have ever known…all of them enjoying each other’s company as they reveled in the wonderful completeness of being a family.

Thanksgiving is a uniquely American Holiday…as unique as the nation which celebrates it.

In 1621, a small group of Plymouth colonists and Wampanoag Indians shared a feast celebrating the autumn harvest. This is acknowledged today as one of the first Thanksgiving celebrations in the colonies.

However, Thanksgiving is much more than this.

Thanksgiving is a day when Americans thank their Creator for the blessings they have received during the year, while holding hope and expectation in their hearts for the blessings yet to come.

The Father of Our Country expressed his thankfulness concerning God and America, when he announced this holiday in 1789:

Whereas it is the duty of all Nations to acknowledge the providence of almighty God, to obey his will, to be grateful for his benefits, and humbly to implore his protection and favor – and Whereas both Houses of Congress have by their joint Committee requested me “to recommend to the People of the United States a day of public thanksgiving and prayer to be observed by acknowledging with grateful hearts the many signal favors of Almighty God, especially by affording them an opportunity peaceably to establish a form of government for their safety and happiness.”

Now therefore I do recommend and assign Thursday the 26th day of November next to be devoted by the People of these States to the service of that great and glorious Being, who is the beneficent Author of all the good that was, that is, or that will be – That we may then all unite in rendering unto him our sincere and humble thanks – for his kind care and protection of the People of this country previous to their becoming a Nation – for the signal and manifold mercies, and the favorable interpositions of his providence, which we experienced in the course and conclusion of the late war –for the great degree of tranquillity, union, and plenty, which we have since enjoyed – for the peaceable and rational manner in which we have been enabled to establish constitutions of government for our safety and happiness, and particularly the national One now lately instituted, for the civil and religious liberty with which we are blessed, and the means we have of acquiring and diffusing useful knowledge; and in general for all the great and various favors which he hath been pleased to confer upon us.

And also that we may then unite in most humbly offering our prayers and supplications to the great Lord and Ruler of Nations and beseech him to pardon our national and other transgressions – to enable us all, whether in public or private stations, to perform our several and relative duties properly and punctually – to render our national government a blessing to all the People, by constantly being a government of wise, just, and constitutional laws, discreetly and faithfully executed and obeyed – to protect and guide all Sovereigns and Nations (especially such as have shewn kindness unto us) and to bless them with good government, peace, and concord – To promote the knowledge and practice of true religion and virtue, and the increase of science among them and Us – and generally to grant unto all mankind such a degree of temporal prosperity as he alone knows to be best.

Given under my hand at the City of New York the third day of October in the year of our Lord 1789. – United States President George Washington.

On October 3, 1863, in the middle of the darkness and strife of a Civil War, President Abraham Lincoln proclaimed the following…

By the President of the United States

A Proclamation

The year that is drawing toward its close has been filled with the blessings of fruitful fields and healthful skies. To these bounties, which are so constantly enjoyed that we are prone to forget the source from which they come, others have been added, which are of so extraordinary a nature that they cannot fail to penetrate and soften the heart which is habitually insensible to the ever-watchful providence of Almighty God.

In the midst of a civil war of unequaled magnitude and severity, which has sometimes seemed to foreign states to invite and provoke their aggressions, peace has been preserved with all nations, order has been maintained, the laws have been respected and obeyed, and harmony has prevailed everywhere, except in the theater of military conflict; while that theater has been greatly contracted by the advancing armies and navies of the Union.

Needful diversions of wealth and of strength from the fields of peaceful industry to the national defense have not arrested the plow, the shuttle, or the ship; the ax has enlarged the borders of our settlements, and the mines, as well of iron and coal as of the precious metals, have yielded even more abundantly than heretofore. Population has steadily increased, notwithstanding the waste that has been made in the camp, the siege, and the battlefield, and the country, rejoicing in the consciousness of augmented strength and vigor, is permitted to expect continuance of years with large increase of freedom.

No human counsel hath devised, nor hath any mortal hand worked out these great things. They are the gracious gifts of the Most High God, who while dealing with us in anger for our sins, hath nevertheless remembered mercy.

It has seemed to me fit and proper that they should be solemnly, reverently, and gratefully acknowledged as with one heart and one voice by the whole American people. I do, therefore, invite my fellow-citizens in every part of the United States, and also those who are at sea and those who are sojourning in foreign lands, to set apart and observe the last Thursday of November next as a Day of Thanksgiving and Praise to our beneficent Father who dwelleth in the heavens. And I recommend to them that, while offering up the ascriptions justly due to Him for such singular deliverances and blessings, they do also, with humble penitence for our national perverseness and disobedience, commend to His tender care all those who have become widows, orphans, mourners, or sufferers in the lamentable civil strife in which we are unavoidably engaged, and fervently implore the interposition of the Almighty hand to heal the wounds of the nation, and to restore it, as soon as may be consistent with the Divine purposes, to the full enjoyment of peace, harmony, tranquility, and union.

In testimony whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the seal of the United Stated States to be affixed.

Done at the city of Washington, this third day of October, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty-three, and of the Independence of the United States the eighty-eighth. 

Abraham Lincoln

The intestinal fortitude that is our heritage as Americans…along with that still, small voice which still resides in each and every one of us, will continue, I pray, to guide our nation, and spur us on, to stay vigilant and protect our American Freedom, just as my Parents’ Generation did, against the Axis of Evil.

This Thanksgiving Day 2015, I’m thankful for Americans who are still making a difference.  Americans who still love God and country, and stand on principle with their feet planted on a Solid Rock, and not on shifting sands.

They are the reason we remain, in spite of all that has befallen us in the last 7 years, the greatest country on Earth.

Happy Thanksgiving!

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

Trump Still in the Lead, Despite Both Political Parties’ and the Main Stream Media’s Best Efforts. Why?

On By kingsjesterIn PoliticsLeave a comment

Trump-n-CruzWell, the Republican Hopeful for that party’s Presidential Nomination, who, early on, was predicted to have flamed out by now, is still the torch-bearing front runner in the race.

And, all the pundits, both from the Mainstream Media and the Political Area, can’t, for the life of them, figure out why.

Fox News’ Howard Kurtz reports that

It hasn’t been a great few days for Donald Trump. And it doesn’t seem to matter.

The media refs are really savaging him after a couple of misstatements and missteps, even as they struggle to understand why he pays no penalty when they blow the whistle. What they don’t quite grasp is that their attacks only make him stronger.

This is not to let him off the hook for mistakes, just to recognize that Trump has completely rewritten the rule book, infuriating those who thought they enforced the rules. What’s more, some of the media attacks against the Republican front-runner are so virulent that they overshoot the mark, and possibly even backfire.

We have the New York Times editorial page accusing him of “racist lies.”

We have the Washington Post editorial page calling him a demagogue running a campaign of  “growing ugliness” and declaring: “The only way to beat a bully is to stand up to him.”

And it’s hard to imagine the Post running this column headline about almost anyone else: “Donald Trump’s Rally Carries Echo of Hitler’s Rise to Power.”
 
A Trump adviser tells me that the mainstream media, Republican elite and Washington establishment—lumping them all together—will do anything they can to take down his boss. And the people who like Trump, in this adviser’s view, instinctively believe the media don’t treat people fairly.

Trump isn’t exactly meticulous when it comes to fact-checking. No one has been able to confirm his recollection that he saw, on television, thousands of people in New Jersey cheering when the twin towers came down. But after the Washington Post’s fact-checker gave Trump’s claim four Pinnochios, he found a small measure of vindication in a 2001article in that very paper that said: “Law enforcement authorities detained and questioned a number of people who were allegedly seen celebrating the attacks and holding tailgate-style parties on rooftops while they watched the devastation on the other side of the river.” A “number of people” is not thousands, but Trump proudly quoted the piece at a rally.

The mainstream media, as Trump’s camp sees it, don’t want to report that some people across the country were happy about the devastation of 9/11.

Trump also stumbled by retweeting some racial murder statistics that turned out to be bogus and wildly inaccurate. When Bill O’Reilly chided him for that, Trump said, “Am I going to check every statistic?”

The press has finally learned, after repeatedly being burned, not to seize upon controversial or questionable comments to predict Trump’s demise. So there is an anguished search for larger explanations: His supporters don’t care if he tells the truth, he symbolizes the modern-day GOP, and on and on.

This comes from all sides, with conservative commentators who fear he’s hijacked the party even harsher on Trump than liberal ones.

But here’s the thing: Trump projects strength, and part of that is not backing down, even when it’s obvious he has misspoken. In the wake of the Paris attacks, he’s going up in the polls, while Ben Carson is slipping. Trump leads nationally. He leads in Iowa, even with Ted Cruz surging. He has a huge lead in New Hampshire. A big lead in South Carolina. A huge lead in Florida. And that is driving the pundits crazy.

So let’s look at this latest media wave. Here’s that New York Times editorial: “America has just lived through another presidential campaign week dominated by Donald Trump’s racist lies…

“Mr. Trump has distinguished himself as fastest to dive to the bottom. If it’s a lie too vile to utter aloud, count on Mr. Trump to say it, often. It wins him airtime, and retweets through the roof.”

And here’s a NYT news story: “No one ever expected Mr. Trump to turn himself into the issues expert of the Republican presidential field. Yet the verbal shortcuts and salesmanlike stretches that he has relied on for months — generalities used to dodge questions, and questionable recollections — are tripping him up as the tenor of the campaign has grown more serious.”
 
Salon blames the press for letting Trump get away with untrue statements:

“The mainstream political media has such a pathological dedication to the notion of balance and ‘objectivity’ that it often finds itself at a complete loss when it comes to dealing with someone like Trump. But the kind of filth that he and others are putting out has long since moved past the debatable stage. There is an Islamophobic crisis building in this country.”
 
It’s not hard to imagine Washington Post columnist Chris Cillizza wringing his hands as he writes:

“In elections and campaigns past, there would have been a price to pay for The Donald’s complete flouting of fact. It would have hurt him politically to just say things that aren’t true.”
 
The reason, he says, is that “trust in the media — in both parties but especially among conservatives who comprise Trump’s base — is at an all-time low. So, anything that a member of the media calls a ‘fact’ is inherently viewed as fishy (at best) by the people backing Trump. The media lies, we all know that, so why wouldn’t they lie about this, too? All the mainstream media cares about is serving as the political correctness police, so if this did happen then of course they would work to cover it up, right?”

I think Cillizza nails it. And those of us in the media have no one to blame but ourselves. Donald Trump didn’t cause our slide in credibility, even as he feasts off it. And we’ll still be working on earning back trust long after this campaign has faded into history.

The Main Stream Media have become victims of their own sensationalism…used against them.

Why do I believe that Donald J. Trump is still the frontrunner among all the Republican Presidential Candidates?

This brash, unabashedly American, business entrepreneur and quintessential showman has dominated the media for the past several years.

The popularity of his reality program on NBC and the catch phrase that came leaping out from it, “You’re fired!”, spread across America like wildfire.

Now, his Presidential Campaign continues to do the same.

It is not just his flamboyance that has caught the eye of Americans.

The fact is, after almost two terms of an Administration taking the great country in the world on a scenic tour of the Highway to Hell, Donald Trump is the only Republican Candidate shouting, “Hit the brakes, you idiots!”

Trump’s straightforwardness has struck a chord in the hearts of average Americans, tired of the wussification of America, being so relentlessly pushed by both modern political parties.

This is what I don’t understand about the Republican Establishment:

They run around telling everybody how Conservative they are, when in reality, they actually hold the same beliefs as Liberal Democrats.

Ronald Reagan gave a famous stump speech about the fact that the Republican Party at one time, needed “bold colors, not pale pastels”.

From what I’m seeing out of a lot of the Republicans right now, they’re not even presenting Americans with pale pastels.

…Except for Donald Trump.

They are showing their color to be Liberal Blue, while they claim to be Conservative Red.

It is almost as if they believe that the Political Tsunami, which resulted in Republicans holding both Houses of Congress, came about because they made themselves look like Democrats.

They need to come down off of Capitol Hill every now and then.

And, visit Realityville.

Average Americans, like you and me, living from paycheck to paycheck in America’s Heartland, do not need another Democratic Party.

If we wanted to continue to put up with their Liberal Stupidity, we would have left all of them in office.

Instead, last November, we showed them the door.

If Jeb Bush and the rest of the Vichy Republicans actually believe that they will win over the Mexican vote, or the rest of the Hispanic Vote, if by then those who are now illegal are allowed to vote, in 2016, then I have two bridges over the Mississippi River at Memphis to sell them.

The overwhelming majority of average Americans want Conservatives whose blood runs red, not Liberal squishes, who have more in common with the Democrats in the Northeast Corridor, than they do with average Americans in the Heartland.

If the Republican establishment does not come to that realization very soon, they will go down to defeat again in 2016.

They will never achieve victory by trying to push the Jello of “Liberal Moderation” up a hill.

In summation, the American people are tired of Political Correctness and anti-American political expediencies being forced down our throats by both political parties and trumpeted by their lackeys in the Main Stream Media.

Donald Trump, for all of his brashness and braggadocio, is a breath of free air and, quite frankly an anomaly. He’s not a professional politician. He is a businessman who wants to become a public servant.

Now, where did I hear that before?

Oh, yeah.

That’s the way the Founding Fathers envisioned our system of government, led by citizens, who served their term s as public servants…AND THEN WENT HOME.

But, I digress…

You know what tickles me the most about “The Donald”?

He reminds me of one of my favorite movie characters.

He actually has a backbone.

Just remember what ol’ Jack Burton does when the earth quakes, and the poison arrows fall from the sky, and the pillars of Heaven shake. Yeah, Jack Burton just looks that big ol’ storm right square in the eye and he says, “Give me your best shot, pal. I can take it.” – Jack Burton, Truck Driver (Kurt Russell) “Big Trouble in Little China”

…and that, boys and girls, is a refreshing change.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

 

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

On By kingsjesterIn PoliticsLeave a comment

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

The Washington Post reports that

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

And so it began.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

God protect us.

Until He Comes,

KJ