Category: Politics

The War Against Christianity: Billy Graham Predicts Persecution of the Church. Has It Started Already?

On By kingsjesterIn Christianity, Politics1 Comment

th1DXO5NI3Last night, some folks from my church, myself and my bride included, went to a friend’s house, and gave out hot dogs, chili dogs, water, apple cider, coffee, tea, kool-aid, and, of course, candy, to over 120 trick-or-treaters and their parents.

We also gave out a card, which simply said, “Jesus Loves Me”, which we had cut out and written ourselves, and, then,  hand-decorated with Christian Symbols.

That little action, which touched so many lives last night, was a part of our Constitutional Rights as American Citizens.

Could the right to spread the Gospel of Jesus Christ, one day, be taken completely away from Christian Americans?

Are we headed in that direction, as I write this Blog?

The Christian Post reports that

The Rev. Billy Graham has issued a written warning to America’s churches: “Prepare for persecution.”

The renowned preacher and founder of the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association penned a commentary that was posted on his website last week and is slated to appear in the November edition of Decision magazine.

In the magazine, Graham notes that the American church has been largely unfamiliar with persecution, writing that this “immunity to persecution that Christians in our country have experienced in the past two or three centuries is unusual.”

“As a whole, our nation does not know what privation is. We do not know what sacrifice is. We do not know what suffering is. Suppose persecution were to come to the church in America, as it has come in other countries,” wrote Graham.

“Since we have experienced little religious persecution in this country, it is likely that under pressure many would deny Christ. Those who shout the loudest about their faith may surrender soonest.”

Graham went on to list “five ways to fortify yourself so that you will be able to stand in that day.” These included making sure of one’s relationship to God, walking with God, regularly reading Scripture, praying always, and meditating on Christ.

“Today our nation ranks as the greatest power on the face of the Earth. But if we put our trust in armed might instead of Almighty God, the coming conflict could conceivably go against us,” continued Graham.

“History and the Bible indicate that mechanical and material might are insufficient in times of great crisis.”

For many years, some — especially in socially conservative circles — have argued that the United States is gradually marginalizing Christians.

They point to things like the censorship of manger scenes and Ten Commandments displays on government property and an inherent growth of secularism in media.

In recent years, Graham’s son, the Rev. Franklin Graham, has become an outspoken critic of what he believes to be growing hostility toward Christians in America.

Earlier in October, Franklin Graham wrote a Facebook post in which he viewed the shooting at Umpqua Community College in Roseburg, Oregon, as an example.

Chris Harper-Mercer opened fire on students at Umpqua, killing nine and wounding seven others before fatally shooting himself. Early reports indicated that he specifically targeted Christian students.

“Persecution and targeting of Christians isn’t just in Iran or the Middle East, it’s right here in America,” wrote Franklin Graham.

“The bold souls at Umpqua Community College who stood up to say they were followers of Jesus Christ were heinously gunned down with no mercy. Jesus said, ‘If they hate you, remember they hated me before they hated you,’ (John 15:18).”

When I step away from the other issues of the day, to write these articles about “The War Against Christianity” in our country, I catch a lot of flack from Liberals on the Internet, who insist that this “war” is just a figment of this ol’ white cracka’s imagination.

And then, something like the massacre of Christians at Umpqua Community College happens, and their skills of observation become reminiscent of the Statue of the Three Monkeys:

Hear no evil, See No Evil, Speak No Evil.

Even President Barack Hussein Obama refused to acknowledged that the gunman was targeting Christians.

That’s because in Modern American Society, Christians, even though we still comprise 70-75% of the population, are supposed to sit idly by and watch our country literally go to Hell in a handbasket.

That ain’t happenin’.

Modern American Liberals, in a desperate attempt to rewrite the Holy Scriptures, attempt to ascribe a Failed Modern Politcal Ideology to Him that was created by a man, 1,8000 years after Christ sacrificed Himself for OUR sins on the Old Rugged Cross.

This lame, erroneous argument of the Political Left, that the Son of God was a Socialist simply doesn’t fly.

Christine Rousselle, writing for thecollegeconservative.com, made the following astute observation…

While stumbling upon Facebook, I came across the following image:

Jesus+SocialismThe image is obviously in reference to the Biblical miracle of Jesus described in Matthew 14:13-21, Mark 6:31-44, Luke 9:10-17 and John 6:5-15 of feeding a large crowd using only five loaves of bread and two fish. While this feat may be impressive, it is not, as this image implies, socialism.

Let’s take a gander at the definition of socialism:

So•cial•ism (noun) \ˈsō-shə-ˌli-zəm\
1. Any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods
The key words in the definition of the term that completely negate any idea of Christ being a socialist are “governmental ownership.” Jesus, while being the Son of God and the King of the Jews, was not the government. People did not pay taxes to Jesus, for instance. Jesus may have had his own group of followers, but he was neither the head of any state nor the leader of any form of government. The prefect of Judea at the time of Christ’s life was Pontius Pilate, not Christ himself.

Furthermore, as the image suggests, the act of simply providing food for everyone in the crowd is not “socialism,” for a variety of reasons. First and foremost, the bread and fishes collected from the crowd were donated voluntarily, not taken by force from the people via governmental order. Taxes, on the other hand, are not voluntary.

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

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

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

Christ led and continues to lead us to repentance and PERSONAL SALVATION.

He did not work for the Government, nor did he SAVE THE COLLECTIVE.

So, why is God’s Church being persecuted?

Because strong Christian men and women remain the backbone of a successful society, raising their children in the way in which they should go: to be reverent, respectful, compassionate, caring,

…and doing what needs to be done…to help our fellow man…to the Glory and Edification of God…not the glory of the State.

 God’s Children stand in the way of things.

Now, where did I hear something like that before? Oh, yeah…

The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing. – Edmund Burke

Until He Comes,

KJ

Syrian Refugees Disappearing From German Camps. Is This What We Have to Look Forward to?

On By kingsjesterIn Politics1 Comment

Standing-Guard-600 (2)

Happy Halloween! Here’s something scary…

Back on September 21st, Fox News reported that

… (Secretary of State John) Kerry said the United States will take in more refugees worldwide in the next two years, including 10,000 Syrian asylum seekers in 2016.

“We will now go up to 85,000 with at least 10,000 over the next year in Syria specifically. And in the next fiscal year we

 will target 100,000,” Kerry said.In the fiscal year ending September 2015, the world’s biggest economy took in 70,000 refugees.

The White House had already announced last week that President Barack Obama had asked for at least 10,000 Syrian refugees to be admitted into the US in the next fiscal year.

Kerry praised Germany’s stance in welcoming a massive influx of asylum seekers as Europe grapples with its biggest migration crisis since World War II.

“Germany has set a remarkable example for its willingness to step up and deal with theses challenges,” Kerry said.

Yeah…about that “remarkable example”…

Yesterday, I received, from a friend, an interesting e-mail.

The writer is anonymous. Normally, I would not post something like this. However, if you will notice the “stilted” way in which is written, it certainly follows the pattern of the writing of someone for whom English is a second language.

A Female Physician in Munich, Germany sends a message to the world!

     Yesterday, at the hospital we had a meeting about how the situation here and at the other Munich hospitals is unsustainable. Clinics cannot handle emergencies, so they are starting to send everything to the hospitals.

     Many Muslims are refusing treatment by female staff and, we, women, are refusing to go among those animals, especially from Africa. Relations between the staff and migrants are going from bad to worse. Since last weekend, migrants going to the hospitals must be accompanied by police with K-9 units.

     Many migrants have AIDS, syphilis, open TB and many exotic diseases that we, in Europe, do not know how to treat them. If they receive a prescription in the pharmacy, they learn they have to pay cash. This leads to unbelievable outbursts, especially when it is about drugs for the children. They abandon the children with pharmacy staff with the words: “So, cure them here yourselves!” So the police are not just guarding the clinics and hospitals, but also large pharmacies.

     Truly we said openly: Where are all those who had welcomed in front of TV cameras, with signs at train stations?! Yes, for now, the border has been closed, but a million of them are already here and we will definitely not be able to get rid of them.

     Until now, the number of unemployed in Germany was 2.2 million. Now it will be at least 3.5 million. Most of these people are completely unemployable. A bare minimum of them have any education. What is more, their women usually do not work at all. I estimate that one in ten is pregnant. Hundreds of thousands of them have brought along infants and little kids under six, many emaciated and neglected. If this continues and German re-opens its borders, I’m going home to the Czech Republic. Nobody can keep me here in this situation, not even double the salary than at home. I went to Germany, not to Africa or the Middle East.

     Even the professor who heads our department told us how sad it makes him to see the cleaning woman, who for 800 Euros cleans every day for years, and then meets young men in the hallways who just wait with their hand outstretched, want everything for free, and when they don’t get it they throw a fit.

     I really don’t need this! But I’m afraid that if I return, that at some point it will be the same in the Czech Republic. If the Germans, with their nature cannot handle this, there in Czechia it would be total chaos. Nobody who has not come in contact with them has no idea what kind of animals they are, especially the ones from Africa, and how Muslims act superior to our staff, regarding their religious accommodation.

     For now, the local hospital staff has not come down with the diseases they brought here, but, with so many hundreds of patients every day – this is just a question of time.

     In a hospital near the Rhine, migrants attacked the staff with knives after they had handed over an 8-month-old on the brink of death, which they had dragged across half of Europe for three months. The child died in two days, despite having received top care at one of the best pediatric clinics in Germany. The physician had to undergo surgery and two nurses are laid up in the ICU. Nobody has been punished.

     The local press is forbidden to write about it, so we know about it through email. What would have happened to a German if he had stabbed a doctor and nurses with a knife? Or if he had flung his own syphilis-infected urine into a nurse’s face and so threatened her with infection? At a minimum he’d go straight to jail and later to court. With these people – so far, nothing has happened.

     And so I ask, where are all those greeters and receivers from the train stations? Sitting pretty at home, enjoying their non-profits and looking forward to more trains and their next batch of cash from acting like greeters at the stations. If it were up to me I would round up all these greeters and bring them here first to our hospital’s emergency ward, as attendants. Then, into one building with the migrants so they can look after them there themselves, without armed police, without police dogs who today are in every hospital here in Bavaria, and without medical help.

But, wait…there’s more.

Pamela Geller reported yesterday that

Earlier this week, I reported that refugee camps had begun to report that Muslims were disappearing — running off.  Nobody knows where to.

It’s spreading — to other camps. It’s become an epidemic. 7,000 migrants have left the Brandenburg shelters. Where are they going? Who is sheltering these illegals, many with ties to ISIS?

I have seen the future, brother, it is murder.

Die Welt is reporting this.

Thousands of refugees leave accommodation on their own

“They are simply not there anymore” – daily many refugees disappear from the first reception facilities without giving notice. This is a serious problem for the authorities.

Thousands of refugees leave accommodation on their own

“They are simply not there anymore” – daily many refugees disappear from the first reception facilities without giving notice. This is a serious problem for the authorities.

From the initial reception facilities in Brandenburg, refugees are increasingly heading on their own to relatives in Germany or abroad. Several hundred people disappear each week since the beginning of september without signing off, Ingo Decker, the spokesman of the Potsdam Ministry of the Interior said, answering an inquiry. “Eventually, these refugees are simply not there anymore.”, the spokesman said, and that sometimes they would come back or they would be picked up by the police.

On Wednesday alone, more than 600 people left the first reception facilities, Susan Fischer, the deputy ministry spokeswoman reported. According to official figures of the state government, more than 17,000 newcomers came into the country since the beginning of september. About 7800 have been accommodated in cities and communities, about 2700 people are still in the first reception facilities. It follows that at least 7000 people have left on their own. It is a serious problem for the authorities that many thousands of people are on their way on their own in the federal territory, Decker said. He also said that refugees might thus be registered multiple times as the registration is based on information given by the registrants, which almost always come without any papers. “The same guy that is Muhammad Ali here in Eisenhüttenstadt can be Ali Mohammed a little bit later in Hamburg”, Decker exemplified. The states must live with that for the time being, because a proper registration at the border is currently not in sight.

So…is this “situation” coming to America?

If so…it appears that we have a lot to look forward to.

Here’s a Million Drachma Question, that I have raised before,  for ya:

Why are the other Middle Eastern Countries not taking them in?

What do they know that we and the Europeans don’t?

I can answer those questions in three little words: “hijrah” and “taqujiyya”.

“Hijrah” refers to the undertaking of a pilgrimage to spread Islam to the World, such as undertaken by Mohammed between Mecca and Medina in 62 A.D., which is referred to as “The Start of the Muslim Era”.

“Taquiyya” is the Muslim Practice of purposeful lying to us “Infidels” in order to further the cause of Islam.

So, in case you are wondering, that, in a nutshell, is why informed Americans do not want 200,000 un-vetted Syrian “Refugees” brought here.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Iran to Berth Warships at Ports in the Atlantic Ocean…Some “Deal”. Smart Power!

On By kingsjesterIn Politics1 Comment

Israel-Tied-600-LIAnd you will hear of wars and rumors of wars. See that you are not alarmed, for this must take place, but the end is not yet. – Matthew 24:6 (ESV)

About that “Agreement of Iran” and how they are “co-operating”…

The Times of Israel reports that

Iran intends to dispatch “a fleet of warships” to the Atlantic Ocean shortly, the semi-state Fars news agency reported Thursday, quoting the regime’s navy chief.

“Our warships will soon berth at ports in the Atlantic Ocean,” Navy Commander Rear Admiral Habibollah Sayyari promised at a ceremony on Wednesday marking the return to port of Iranian warships that Fars said had taken part in joint drills with the Russian navy.

Sayyari said the Iranian vessels had been in the Caspian Sea and at the Russian port of Astrakhan. “The presence of Iranian warships in international ports shows the Iranian Navy’s prowess,” Fars quoted him saying.

Sayyari made a similar pledge to deploy warships in the Atlantic in early 2014. At the time, Iran promised to send its fleet close to American maritime borders as a counter to the US navy’s presence in the Gulf. But in April, the navy chief said the move had been canceled “due to a change in schedule.”

The US-Iran relationship remains tense and friction-filled, despite the US-led world powers’ deal with Iran, sealed in July, on curbing its nuclear program.

Iran’s supreme leader Ali Khamenei has repeatedly rejected any future talks on other issues, and ruled out normalization with the United States.

The former Iranian president Hashemi Rafsanjani was reported to have admitted this week that the country’s nuclear program was started with the intent of building a nuclear weapon, with the express consent and participation of Khamenei. “Our basic doctrine was peaceful usage of the nuclear technology although we never abandoned the idea that if one day we are threatened and it is imperative, we would have the capability for going the other path [to nuclear weapon] as well,” Rafsanjani reportedly said.

Regarding the “Agreement” which President Barack Hussein Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry reached with the Largest State Sponsor of Islamic terrorism in the World, Radio Free Europe Radio Liberty reported  on August 15th of this year that

Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei has said the Islamic republic’s opposition to the “arrogant” United States “will not change” despite a landmark nuclear agreement reached earlier this week with world powers.

The comments, broadcast live on state television on July 18, were greeted by chants of “Death to America” and “Death to Israel” at a ceremony at Tehran’s Mosala Mosque on the occasion of the Eid al-Fitr festival, which marks the end of Ramadan.

Meanwhile, U.S. President Barack Obama defended the accord amid skepticism from congressmen reviewing the deal.

Khamenei, who has the final say in all state affairs in Iran, said U.S. policy in the Middle East runs counter to Iran’s strategy and that Tehran will continue to support its allies in the region, including Lebanon’s Hizballah militant group and the regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

“Whether this [nuclear deal] is approved or disapproved, we won’t stop supporting our friends in the region,” he said. “The oppressed Palestinian nation, Yemen, Syria, Iraq, Bahrain, the honest resistance fighters in Lebanon and Palestine will enjoy our constant support.”

“Even after this deal our policy toward the arrogant U.S. will not change,” Khamenei added.

Khamenei maintained that Iran’s engagement with six world powers was solely to reach a nuclear deal that was in its national interest.

“We do not negotiate with the United States on various global, regional, or bilateral issues,” Khamenei said. “Sometimes — based on expedience — we have talked to them on exceptional matters, such as the nuclear issue, and it has not been only this one time.”

“U.S. policies in the region are 180 degrees in contrast to Iran’s policies,” he added.

Under the deal agreed in Vienna on July 14 after years of negotiations, sanctions against Tehran, which have hampered Iran’s economy, will be gradually removed in return for the Persian Gulf state accepting long-term curbs on its nuclear program. The talks involved Iran and the five veto-wielding Security Council members — the United States, Russia, China, Britain, and France — as well as Germany and the European Union.

Western countries accuse Iran of seeking to build nuclear weapons, a claim that Tehran denies.

Khamenei reiterated that position on July 18, mentioning a fatwa, or religious edict, he himself issued against any action seeking the bomb.

“The Americans say they stopped Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon,” he said. “They know it’s not true.”

There was another famous “bad deal” in history, made by a “World Leader”, who also sacrificed his country’s safety, in his purposeful obtuseness and naiveté.

The speech, “Peace in Our Time”, was delivered by British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain in 1938, in defense of the Munich Agreement, which he made with those infamous barbarians, German Chancellor Adolf Hitler and the National Socialist Party, or as the world came to call them, the Nazis, and Hitler’s good buddy, the Italian Fascist, Benito Mussolini.

The following is an excerpt:

…I would like to say a few words in respect of the various other participants, besides ourselves, in the Munich Agreement. After everything that has been said about the German Chancellor today and in the past, I do feel that the House ought to recognise the difficulty for a man in that position to take back such emphatic declarations as he had already made amidst the enthusiastic cheers of his supporters, and to recognise that in consenting, even though it were only at the last moment, to discuss with the representatives of other Powers those things which he had declared he had already decided once for all, was a real and a substantial contribution on his part. With regard to Signor Mussolini, . . . I think that Europe and the world have reason to be grateful to the head of the Italian government for his work in contributing to a peaceful solution.

In my view the strongest force of all, one which grew and took fresh shapes and forms every day war, the force not of any one individual, but was that unmistakable sense of unanimity among the peoples of the world that war must somehow be averted. The peoples of the British Empire were at one with those of Germany, of France and of Italy, and their anxiety, their intense desire for peace, pervaded the whole atmosphere of the conference, and I believe that that, and not threats, made possible the concessions that were made. I know the House will want to hear what I am sure it does not doubt, that throughout these discussions the Dominions, the Governments of the Dominions, have been kept in the closest touch with the march of events by telegraph and by personal contact, and I would like to say how greatly I was encouraged on each of the journeys I made to Germany by the knowledge that I went with the good wishes of the Governments of the Dominions. They shared all our anxieties and all our hopes. They rejoiced with us that peace was preserved, and with us they look forward to further efforts to consolidate what has been done.

Ever since I assumed my present office my main purpose has been to work for the pacification of Europe, for the removal of those suspicions and those animosities which have so long poisoned the air. The path which leads to appeasement is long and bristles with obstacles. The question of Czechoslovakia is the latest and perhaps the most dangerous. Now that we have got past it, I feel that it may be possible to make further progress along the road to sanity.

We all know what happened next:  World War II.

That’s what happens when you strike an “Gentlemen’s Agreement” with barbarians, liars, and madmen.

As I have written before, I believe that Obama’s zeal to leave some sort of enormous historical legacy has led to a purposeful naiveté and obtuseness on his part, not only to history, but also, to the present wishes and wellbeing of not only those who have be maimed, slaughtered, and who still live under these repressive regimes that he has dealt with, but, also, to the continued sovereignty and very existence of the United States of America.

The Mad Mullahs of Iran do not play by the Marquis of Queensbury Rules, like “civilized countries” do.

They only respect strength and resolve.

Unfortunately, Obama and Kerry showed them neither of those qualities, during their negotiations.

Hence, their continued rhetoric, the threatened dispatching of a fleet of warships.

…and, the faint sound of uncontrollable laughter.

God protect His Chosen People …and us.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

Republican Candidates Fight Each Other…and the Moderators…at CNBC Debate

On By kingsjesterIn Politics2 Comments

republican-debate-20161There were fireworks at the Republican Presidential Candidate Debate on CNBC, last night. However, a lot of the fireworks were not the kind that the network hoped for.

Realclearpolitics.com has the story…

At the Republican debate hosted by CNBC in Boulder, Colorado Wednesday night, presidential candidate Sen. Ted Cruz lambasted the moderators, particularly John Harwood of The New York Times, and the media for their treatment and characterization of himself and his competitors.

“The questions asked in this debate illustrate why the American people don’t trust the media,” Cruz at Wednesday’s Republican debate. “Everyone home tonight knows that the moderators have no intention of voting in a Republican primary.”

Cruz later went tete-a-tete with Harwood, a CNBC contributor, for cutting him off and wanting to move on.

“Congressional Republicans, Democrats and the White House are about to strike a compromise that would raise the debt limit, prevent a government shutdown, and calm financial markets of the fear that a Washington crisis is on the way. Does your opposition to it show you’re not the kind of problem-solver that American voters want?” CNBC anchor Carl Quintanilla asked the presidential candidate.

“Let me say something at the outset,” the Senator from Texas said. “The questions asked in this debate illustrate why the American people don’t trust the media.”

“This is not a cage match. And you look at the questions — Donald Trump, are you a comic book villain? Ben Carson, can you do math? John Kasich, will you insult two people over here? Marco Rubio, why don’t you resign? Jeb Bush, why have your numbers fallen? How about talking about the substantive issues,” Cruz said to commanding applause from the audience.

“Do we get credit for this one,” Quintanilla asked Cruz?

“And Carl, I’m not finished yet. The contrast with the Democratic debate, where every thought and question from the media was, which of you is more handsome and why?” Cruz asked and then paused to cough.

“You have 30 seconds left to answer should you choose to do so,” Quintanilla told the candidate.

“Let me be clear,” Cruz said. “The men and women on this stage have more ideas, more experience, more common sense, than ever participant in the Democratic debate. That debate reflected a debate between the Bolsheviks and the Mensheviks.”

“Nobody believes that the moderators have any intention of voting in a Republican primary,” Cruz said.

“The questions being asked shouldn’t be trying to get people to tear into each other, it should be what are your substantive solutions to people at home,” Cruz said before getting cut off.

“I asked you about the debt limit and got no answer,” Quintanilla said.

“You want an answer to that question?” Cruz asked. “I’d be happy to answer your question.”

Cruz was interrupted this time by John Harwood who said “we’re moving on.”

“Senator [Rand] Paul, I’ve got a question for you,” Harwood said in his attempt to move on.

“So you don’t actually want to hear the answer, John?” Cruz called out the anchor. “You don’t want to hear the answer, you just want to incite insults.”

“You used your time on something else,” a dismissive Harwood said.

“You’re not interested in an answer,” Cruz scolded.

“I’m interested in an answer from Senator Paul,” Harwood retorted.

Sen. Cruz was not the only one who was not pleased with the blatant hostility and bias of the CNBC Moderators…as businessinsider.com reports…

The audience at the third Republican presidential debate booed CNBC’s moderators Wednesday night when one challenged retired neurosurgeon Ben Carson about a controversial association.

Carson has been tied to Mannatech, a nutritional-supplement company based in Texas. He appeared in a promotional video and spoke at two conferences hosted by the company, whose supplements have come under fire.

“This is a company called Mannatech, a maker of nutritional supplement, with which you had a 10-year relationship. They offered claims that they could cure autism, cancer. They paid $7 million to settle a deceptive marketing lawsuit in Texas. And yet your involvement continued, why?” CNBC’s Carl Quintanilla asked Carson, also questioning whether it spoke to his “vetting process or judgment.”

Carson dismissed the question.

“That’s easy to answer. I didn’t have an involvement with them. Total propaganda. I did a couple speeches for them. I did speeches for other people — they were paid speeches. It is absolutely absurd to say that I had any kind of relationship with them. Do I take the product? Yes. I think it’s a good product,” he said.

The moderator then pointed out that Carson was on the company’s webpage. Carson said he didn’t give them permission to do that.

After the audience loudly booed the follow-up question, Carson simply said: “They know.”

The audience cheered.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Fox News is exactly what it claims to be: fair and balanced.

The Mainstream News Channels are so far up Obama’s and the Democratic Party’s backsides that they wouldn’t know the truth if it French-kissed them.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

With their performance last night, the CNBC Debate Moderators, while doing the will of their Masters at the Network and the Democratic Party, the self-proclaimed “Broadcast Journalists” allowed the entire country to witness them practice, on live television, their actual jobs: being junkyard dogs and purveyors of propaganda , in service to a political party and ideology, who once stood for the “Working Man and Woman”, but who now stand for the worst kind  of state-sponsored fascism, racial division exacerbated by the Rhetoric of Class Warfare, and greed-inspired socialism.

It was refreshing to see them called out by both the candidates and the audience.

It is time to take our country back.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Welcome to Iraqi-Nam! Obama Sends Troops to Fight ISIS. So Much For “No Boots on the Ground”.

On By kingsjesterIn Politics2 Comments

untitled (9)Have you ever played the “Gossip Game”?

We used to do it all the time on Church Youth Retreats. You line up a long row of chairs and sit your group down in them. Somebody whispers a sentence into the ear of the person in the first chair, who then whispers it in the ear of the person in the second chair, and so forth. By the time the sentence is whispered in the ear of the person in the last chair, it sounds nothing like the original sentence.

The message that Obama and his Administration communicated, over a year ago, about how they are going to prosecute the “limited engagement” against ISIS/ISIL reminded me, at the time, of the “Gossip Game”.

Let’s examine the Administration’s disjointed message, shall we?

To the Wayback Machine, Sherman!

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. 

Fast forward to the present.

As someone once famously said,

All of Barack Hussein Obama’s promises come with an expiration date.

It might have been Mooch (Michelle).

But, I digress…

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

NBC News reports that

Defense Secretary Ashton Carter said Tuesday that the U.S. will begin “direct action on the ground” against ISIS forces in Iraq and Syria, aiming to intensify pressure on the militants as progress against them remains elusive.”We won’t hold back from supporting capable partners in opportunistic attacks against ISIL, or conducting such missions directly whether by strikes from the air or direct action on the ground,” Carter said in testimony before the Senate Armed Services committee, using an alternative name for the militant group.

Carter pointed to last week’s rescue operation with Kurdish forces in northern Iraq to free hostages held by ISIS.

Carter and Pentagon officials initially refused to characterize the rescue operation as U.S. boots on the ground. However, Carter said last week that the military expects “more raids of this kind” and that the rescue mission “represents a continuation of our advise and assist mission.”

This may mean some American soldiers “will be in harm’s way, no question about it,” Carter said last week.advertisement
 
After months of denying that U.S. troops would be in any combat role in Iraq, Carter late last week in a response to a question posed by NBC News, also acknowledged that the situation U.S. soldiers found themselves in during the raid in Hawija was combat.

“This is combat and things are complicated,” Carter said.

During Tuesday’s Senate hearing, Carter said Wheeler “was killed in combat.”

White House deputy press secretary Eric Schultz on Tuesday said the administration has “no intention of long term ground combat”. He added that U.S. forces will continue to robustly train, advise and assist.

A feisty Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-South Carolina, said on Tuesday in the Senate Armed Services committee hearing that the U.S. effort in Syria is a “half-assed strategy at best,” and said that the U.S. is not doing a “damn thing” to bring down Syrian President Bashar Assad’s regime.

Carter on Tuesday pushed back against that notion.

Gen. Joseph Dunford, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, acknowledged that the “balance of forces” has tilted in Assad’s favor.

This is what happens when you have a President that is more interested in “fighting a war” against our country’s municipal police departments, and a disease which broke 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 manner in which the administration is attempting to “prosecute” a “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

 

 

Ole Miss Liberals Remove State Flag From Campus Because of Confederate Flag in Its Corner

On By kingsjesterIn Politics1 Comment

thB1USW3NQOn the wall beside my computer desk, hangs my family crest, which I shipped to my Daddy (Southern Colloquialism for male parental unit) in the summer of 1978, from an insignia shoppe in York, England.

This same family crest also hangs in the home of Jefferson Davis, distinguished Graduate of West Point Academy, and the President of the Confederate States of America.

I am a proud Southerner, living in the NW Corner of the state of Mississippi.

As a Christian American, I attend church on Sunday mornings with my brothers and sisters in Christ, both black and white.

American Progressives, both Democrat and Republican, continue to try to take advantage of the horrible church massacre in Charleston, SC, in order to accomplish something that they have been trying to do for years: minimize the South’s political clout and erase our uniqueness as a region, through the taking away of a symbol of our heritage, and, any traces of the historical aspects of the Confederate Side of the Civil War, as exemplified by the current mission of Outgoing Memphis Mayor AC Wharton and his minions on the City Council, to dig up Nathan Bedford Forrest and his wife, and move their bodies and a statue of the general, which all currently “reside” in a downtown park in the Medical Center.

The Alinsky-approved Tactics, currently being employed by Barack Obama and his Liberal minions on both sides of the aisle, are giving them, at best, a temporary victory, as shown by the results of a CNN poll, which shows that the opinion of Americans concerning the Confederate Flag remains unchanged in the last 15 years.

The poll shows that 57% of Americans see the flag more as a symbol of Southern pride than as a symbol of racism, about the same as in 2000 when 59% said they viewed it as a symbol of pride.

Why have Liberals shown such disrespect for this integral part of American History?

Modern American Liberals have no respect for any of our nation’s symbols of our heritage.

And now, that same cowardly, revisionist history has reared its ugly head in Oxford, Mississippi.

As they say (instead of “Once Upon a Time”) in Southern Fairy tales,

Y’all ain’t gonna believe this s@#t…

Foxnews.com reports that

The University of Mississippi took down the state flag from campus on Monday morning, heeding calls from students and administrators who said the inclusion of the Confederate symbol in one portion of the flag made it unfit to fly.

The flag, which was lowered and furled by the UM Police Department, is slated to be preserved in the University Archives, alongside student and faculty resolutions calling for its removal, according to aUniversity statement issued on Monday.

“The University of Mississippi community came to the realization years ago that the Confederate battle flag did not represent many of our core values, such as civility and respect for others,” Interim Chancellor Morris Stocks said in the statement. “Since that time, we have become a stronger and better university. We join other leaders in our state who are calling for a change in the state flag.”

The student senate voted 33-15-1 to take the flag down on Oct. 20 and, six days later, the banner came down, following similar recommendations from the Faculty Senate, the Graduate Student Council and the Staff Council.

More than 200 people took part in a remove-the-flag rally Oct. 16 on the Oxford campus. It was sponsored by the university chapter of the NAACP.

The University of Mississippi has struggled with Old South symbolism for decades. In 1962, deadly riots broke out when James Meredith was enrolled as the first black student, under court order. Ole Miss administrators have tried to distance the school from Confederate symbols. Sports teams are still called the Rebels, but the university several years ago retired the Colonel Rebel mascot — a white-haired old man some thought resembled a plantation owner. The university also banned sticks in the football stadium nearly 20 years ago, which eliminated most Confederate battle flags that fans carried.

“As Mississippi’s flagship university, we have a deep love and respect for our state,” Stocks said. “Because the flag remains Mississippi’s official banner, this was a hard decision. I understand the flag represents tradition and honor to some. But to others, the flag means that some members of the Ole Miss family are not welcomed or valued. That is why the university faculty, staff and leadership have united behind this student-led initiative.”

Since 1894, the Mississippi state flag has featured the Confederate insignia in the upper left quadrant. Three thick strips of blue, white and red, from top to bottom, compose the remainder of the flag. Residents chose to keep the flag during a 2001 statewide vote.

The Confederate flag became a contentious public issue following the shooting deaths of several black parishioners at a historic South Carolina church during an allegedly racially-motivated incident in June. The alleged shooter was pictured in online profiles posing with the Confederate flag, images which, in part, led to new calls for the symbol to be removed from various public locations.

Yesterday, Mississippi Governor Ed Bryant provided the following statement to the Jackson Clarion-Ledger:

Mississippians overwhelmingly voted in 2001 to adopt the current Mississippi state flag.  I believe publicly funded institutions should respect the law as it is written today. It clearly states ‘The state flag shall receive all the respect and ceremonious etiquette given the American flag.

Last Thursday, Governor Phil Bryant told reporters he did not think the university’s associated student body senate, who voted 33-15 with one abstention to request the removal of the flag from campus, had the “legal authority” to determine whether the flag flies, due to the fact that it was a public building.

Evidently, just like Liberal Trolls on Facebook, these spoiled Liberals at the University of Mississippi believe themselves to be “above it all”.

According to their yearly Financial Report, in 2014, the University of Mississippi (Ole Miss) received approximately $250,000 in State Appropriations.

Governor Bryant, here’s an idea:

If the students and faculty of Ole Miss are not proud enough of their state to fly the State Flag, they, evidently, don’t need the State of Mississippi’s support.

Withhold the State Appropriations until the State Flag is, once again, flown over the Campus of Ole Miss in Oxford, Mississippi.

Spoiled Brats always need to be taught a lesson.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Obama Defends “Black Lives Matter” Movement. Will Speak to National Police Chiefs’ Convention Tomorrow

On By kingsjesterIn Politics2 Comments

th30IL8Z61

Black Lives Matter is quickly turning into a new generation of Westboro Baptist Church. Protesting during the funeral of a fallen officer? Despicable. – CJ Pearson, Black American Conservative and Facebook Celebrity, 13 years old!

Tomorrow, the eyes of municipal police departments all over the nation will be trained on Chicago, IL.

TheBlaze.com reports that

During Black Lives Matter demonstrations in Chicago Saturday, one protester scaled a flagpole in front of a national police chiefs’ convention, took down the American flag —

— and replaced it with a flag that read “Unapologetically Black,” WLS-TV reported.

Most of the 66 arrests came when protesters staged a sit-in in the middle of the street, WLS reported, in order to disrupt the International Association of Chiefs of Police gathering.

More from WLS:

“What we’re looking for today is to have our voices heard, to show the coalition of voices, to show that black lives matter, to make our voices heard to this very powerful organization that sets policies,” protester Maria Hadden told the station. “We want less money for policing and more money for community services.”

Chicago Police Superintendent Garry McCarthy left the gathering to check on things outside, WLS said, then he returned to deliver his remarks.

“We’re in a tough time for policing right now and I believe we’re at a crossroads. I don’t think this climate has ever existed in the history of American policing,” he told the other chiefs. “But at the same time I honestly believe this scrutiny and this environment presents an opportunity for us.”

President Barack Obama will address the conference on Tuesday.

Ironically, President Barack Hussein Obama, last Thursday, proclaimed his support for the very same movement that disrupted the Chicago Conference.

FoxNews.com  has the story…

WASHINGTON –  Defending the Black Lives Matter movement, President Obama said Thursday the protests are giving voice to a problem happening only in African-American communities, adding, “We, as a society, particularly given our history, have to take this seriously.”

Obama said the movement, which sprung up after the deaths of unarmed black men in Florida, Missouri and elsewhere, quickly came to be viewed as being opposed to police and suggesting that other people’s lives don’t matter. Opponents have countered that “all lives matter.”

At  the conclusion of a White House forum on criminal justice, Obama said he wanted to make a final point about the nexus of race and the criminal justice system before launching into his defense of the movement. “I think everybody understands all lives matter,” Obama said. “I think the reason that the organizers used the phrase ‘Black Lives Matter’ was not because they were suggesting nobody else’s lives matter. Rather, what they were suggesting was there is a specific problem that’s happening in the African-American community that’s not happening in other communities.

“And that is a legitimate issue that we’ve got to address.”

Police relations with minority communities and the deaths of unarmed black men have been topics of great interest since the shootings of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin in 2012 in Florida and 18-year-old Michael Brown in 2014 in Ferguson, Missouri. Those deaths, and others of black women, have inspired protests around the country under the “Black Lives Matter” moniker.

Obama paired his defense of the Black Lives Matter movement with praise for police and other law enforcement officials. Some police groups have been unhappy with Obama’s response to the deaths of the unarmed black men. The president lately seems to be making the extra effort to publicly praise police officers for willingly taking on a dangerous assignment.

He did so while participating in a forum on drug abuse Wednesday in Charleston, West Virginia, and next week he’s scheduled to address the International Association of Chiefs of Police.

At the White House, Obama said there are specific concerns about whether blacks in certain areas are treated unfairly or are more frequently subjected to excessive force by police.

But the president said people should also “understand the overwhelming majority of law enforcement’s doing the right thing and wants to do the right thing” and “recognize that police officers have a really tough job and we’re sending them into really tough neighborhoods that sometimes are really dangerous and they’ve got to make split-second decisions.”

He said people shouldn’t be “too sanctimonious” about situations that can sometimes be ambiguous.

“But having said all that, we as a society, particularly given our history, have to take this seriously,” Obama said. “And one of the ways of avoiding the politics of this and losing the moment is everybody just stepping back for a second and understanding that the African-American community is not just making this up.”

“It’s not just something being politicized. It’s real and there’s a history behind it and we have to take it seriously,” he said.

In a separate development, the Black Lives Matter organization on Thursday rejected a town hall-style forum it had been offered by the Democratic National Committee, in lieu of a sanctioned debate it had requested. The group said a town hall wouldn’t “sufficiently respond to the concerns raised by our members.” The DNC said it has approved only six debates, and all have been scheduled.

Is it just me, or do you also remember that we are supposed to be living under the first post-racial president?

It sure does not seem that way. Ever since Obama got into office, all I have heard from him is the Rhetoric of Racial Division and Class Warfare.

It reminded me of all the historical conflicts which I used to read about, during the course in college which I took, titled “The Rhetoric of Social Protest“.

Karl Marx knew long ago that all you needed to do to touch the heart of the common man was to convince him of a shared struggle.

Vladimir Lenin took this a step further, by using the concept of a shared struggle to convince the Bolsheviks to help him overthrow the Czar of Russia and murder him and his family during the Russian Revolution.

Forgive me for stating the obvious, but fiery rhetoric spoken by a national leader has consequences.

President Barack Hussein Obama is as responsible for what happened in Ferguson, New York, and Baltimore as any thug wannabe in those cities.

However, he is not alone in his responsibility.

Also responsible are the black political leaders, who make their living and get their 15 minutes of fame by exacerbating racially-divided situations. Their silence speaks volumes.

For example, by the Mayor of Baltimore, purposely giving carte blanche to the rioters to destroy her city by ordering the police to stand down, she, like the Roman Emperor Nero, lit the match that has set her kingdom ablaze.

I remember, as a 9 year old in Memphis, Tennessee, watching my parents’ black and white television as the National Guard was called into action on the night that Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was assassinated.

I remember after that Civil Defense Announcement that President Lyndon Johnson come on national television to make the announcement of Dr. King’s death. I remember a feeling of helplessness and of fear, as a nine-year-old, that I had not felt before.

It wasn’t just the fact that we were living in Midtown Memphis, that made me afraid.

It wasn’t just the fact of the out-of-control violence itself, that caused my consternation.

It was watching my beloved Hometown on the verge of going up in flames.

And now, 46 years later, Memphis is the #2 Most Dangerous City in America, as ranked by the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

Words can hurt or words can heal.

A President who was supposed to bridge the Racial Divide in this nation…has, instead, widened it.

And, with every divisive word he speaks, further creates a chasm that has created a gaping hole in the fabric of American Society.

Words mean things.

Until He Comes,

KJ

The War Against Christianity: Sublimating Christianity For The “Will Of The State”

On By kingsjesterIn Christianity, Politics3 Comments

American Christianity 2What is Fascism? Per merriam-webster.com, it is a

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

Remember this definition as you read the following…

Christianpost.com reports that

Three California churches have filed a complaint against the state over a recently implemented health insurance provision mandating the coverage of elective abortions.

Foothill Church of Glendora, Calvary Chapel in Chino, and Shepherd of the Hills Church in Porter Ranch filed the complaint last Friday in U.S. District Court. The suit, filed against the director of the California Department of Managed Health Care, seeks injunctive relief from the abortion mandate.

“Plaintiffs believe, as a matter of religious conviction, that it would be sinful and immoral for them intentionally to pay for, participate in, facilitate, or otherwise support abortion, which they believe destroys innocent human life,” reads the complaint.

(Photo: Reuters/Robert Galbraith)California Democratic gubernatorial candidate Jerry Brown speaks at a news conference following his debate with his Republican opponent Meg Whitman at Dominican University in San Rafael, California, October 12, 2010.
“Because federal law requires plaintiffs to offer health insurance to their employees, the mandate illegally and unconstitutionally coerces plaintiffs to violate their religious beliefs under threat of heavy fines and penalties.”

In August 2014, the DMHC sent an official letter to Anthem Blue Cross and Kaiser Permanente stating that insurance companies in California could not restrict abortion coverage.In their letter, DMHC stated that “it erroneously approved or did not object to such discriminatory language in some evidence of coverage filings.”

“The purpose of this letter is to remind plans that the Knox-Keene Health Care Service Plan Act of 1975 (Knox Keene Act) requires the provision of basic healthcare services,” read the DMHC letter.

“… [T]he California Constitution prohibits health plans from discriminating against women who choose to terminate a pregnancy. Thus, all health plans must treat maternity services and legal abortion neutrally.”

DMHC’s declaration that abortion coverage cannot be limited came in response to two Catholic academic institutions, Loyola Marymount University and Santa Clara University, seeking a reprieve for their insurance coverage regarding abortion.

In response to the announcement, the Life Legal Defense Foundation and the Alliance Defending Freedom sent the DMHC a letter of protest to the change.

“DMHC cannot deny approval to or otherwise penalize a health insurance plan for failing to provide coverage of some or all abortions and remain in compliance with the Weldon Amendment,” read the letter.

“In its failed lawsuit against the amendment, California admitted that all of its departments are subject to the amendment due to some of those departments receiving over $40 billion in federal funds for programs in the areas of education, health, and employment.”

The ADF is representing the three churches in their complaint. ADF Senior Legal Counsel Erik Stanley said in a statement last week that congregations “should not be forced to pay for the killing of innocent human life.”

“The government has no right to demand that church health insurance plans contain coverage for abortion – something that violates these churches’ most sincerely held religious beliefs. California is violating the Constitution by strong-arming churches into having this coverage in their plans,” Stanley said.

There continues to be a lot of debate on Facebook Political Pages concerning whether Christians must sublimate our faith to the “Will of the State”.

The Kim Davis Case in Kentucky, in which two lesbians from Ohio, came into the County Clerk Office of Kim Davis, a known Evangelical Christian, elected by Christians, and demanded that she issue a Marriage License to them. Even though, there was another county clerk office a scant 15 minutes away from that location. Ms. Davis refused to issue one, on the grounds that it violates the tenets of her faith and God’s Holy Word. Cameras and lawyers swiftly following, as the “Gay Mafia” did its thing, attempting to bully Ms. Davis into sublimating her faith for the “Will of the State” and the appeasement of the god of popular culture.

Eventually, it was settled that the license would be issued, but, Ms. David would not and could not be forced to personally issue a Marriage License to a homosexual couple.

Others in the office would do it, instead.

On January 1, 2014, in a post titled, “The Hobby Lobby Decision: The First Amendment Holds. Religious Freedom Stands.”, I reported the following…

The Supreme Court, in a in a 5-4 ruling, found that “closely held” businesses do not have to provide contraception to their employees, if the ownership of said company opposes birth control on the grounds that it conflicts with the Religious Beliefs.

In other words, if you want to behave like Sandra Fluke, and if I am a business owner of a “closely held” business, I cannot be forced by the Obama Administration to provide your “protection”, either before or after that “special moment”.

The Supreme Court, in a in a 5-4 ruling, found that “closely held” businesses do not have to provide contraception to their employees, if the ownership of said company opposes birth control on the grounds that it conflicts with the Religious Beliefs.

In other words, if you want to behave like Sandra Fluke, and if I am a business owner of a “closely held” business, I cannot be forced by the Obama Administration to provide your “protection”, either before or after that “special moment”.

Rush Limbaugh, per usual made an excellent point on his nationally-syndicated radio program, yesterday:

…the thinking everywhere on the left, is either Obama’s gonna pay for it from his stash like they think exists in Detroit, or the insurance company will be forced to pay for it. But they won’t pay for it, they’ll just bill it back to Hobby Lobby. (interruption) No, the principle stands, that’s the point. When all this is said and done, the Supreme Court still ruled that the federal government cannot make a “closely held” corporation violate its own personal religious beliefs. I’m gonna have to double-check this, but I really do think that in that sense we’ve not had a ruling this direct in that regard before, whatever the issue was. I think I saw that somewhere this morning in the mounds of show prep that I was going through.

Look, it means here that Obama cannot unilaterally dictate how religion is to be practiced via laws or regulations or executive orders. It means that the First Amendment is not a casual plaything for cavalier statists whether in the executive branch or whether in Congress. There also was another ruling on the union’s and whether or not parents and nannies taking care of their own loved ones at home can be forced to pay union dues, and that was rejected, too. The headline says: “Sweeping Loss for Unions.” Oh, horrible, the Supreme Court just dealt a devastating blow to public unions. But this one really is kind of narrow. But the principle still stands.

What is really important, yet really small in this case, is that even after the Hobby Lobby decision, women can still go to Target or Walmart and buy a month’s worth of conception for nine dollars. What’s kind of being overlooked here in all this — and we did look at it in great detail on the previous occasion on this program — is that somehow we’ve gotten to the point where women should not have to pay for their own birth control. Somebody else is gonna pay for it, no matter how much they want, no matter how often they want it, no matter for what reason, somebody else is going to pay for it. That’s the root of all this. The employer should pay it, the insurance company will pay it, but in no way in 2014 America are women going to being pay for it, even though you can go to Target or Walmart and get a month’s supply for nine bucks.

So the ruling does not apply to, say, an Exxon or a General Motors. That’s not a “closely held” corporation. But the Christian owners of Hobby Lobby cannot be forced to fund the contraception mandate. Their liberty was defended here, no matter how narrow the left wants to say the ruling was, no matter what the practical application is, when it’s all over the First Amendment was enforced, or maybe reinforced today.

What applies to a closely held organization, most certainly applies to a Faith-sponsored Organization.

On March 8, 1983, President Ronald Wilson Reagan gave a speech to the National Association of Evangelicals, which came to be know as the “Evil Empire Speech”. Here is an excerpt:

Well, I’m pleased to be here today with you who are keeping America great by keeping her good. Only through your work and prayers and those of millions of others can we hope to survive this perilous century and keep alive this experiment in liberty, this last, best hope of man.

I want you to know that this administration is motivated by a political philosophy that sees the greatness of America in you, her people, and in your families, churches, neighborhoods, communities–the institutions that foster and nourish values like concern for others and respect for the rule of law under God.

 Now, I don’t have to tell you that this puts us in opposition to, or at least out of step with, a–a prevailing attitude of many who have turned to a modern-day secularism, discarding the tried and time-tested values upon which our very civilization is based. No matter how well intentioned, their value system is radically different from that of most Americans. And while they proclaim that they’re freeing us from superstitions of the past, they’ve taken upon themselves the job of superintending us by government rule and regulation. Sometimes their voices are louder than ours, but they are not yet a majority. [Applause]

An example of that vocal superiority is evident in a controversy now going on in Washington. And since I’m involved, I’ve been waiting to hear from the parents of young America. How far are they willing to go in giving to government their prerogatives as parents?

Let me state the case as briefly and simply as I can. An organization of citizens, sincerely motivated, deeply concerned about the increase in illegitimate births and abortions involving girls well below the age of consent, some time ago established a nationwide network of clinics to offer help to these girls and, hopefully, alleviate this situation. Now, again, let me say, I do not fault their intent. However, in their well-intentioned effort, these clinics decided to provide advice and birth control drugs and devices to underage girls without the knowledge of their parents.

For some years now, the federal government has helped with funds to subsidize these clinics. In providing for this, the Congress decreed that every effort would be made to maximize parental participation. Nevertheless, the drugs and devices are prescribed without getting parental consent or giving notification after they’ve done so. Girls termed “sexually active”–and that has replaced the word “promiscuous”–are given this help in order to prevent illegitimate worth/birth (quickly corrects himself) eh or abortion.

Well, we have ordered clinics receiving federal funds to notify the parents such help has been given. [Applause] One of the nation’s leading newspapers has created the term “squeal rule” in editorializing against us for doing this, and we’re being criticized for violating the privacy of young people. A judge has recently granted an injunction against an enforcement of our rule. I’ve watched TV panel shows discuss this issue, seen columnists pontificating on our error, but no one seems to mention morality as playing a part in the subject of sex. [Applause]

Is all of Judeo-Christian tradition wrong? Are we to believe that something so sacred can be looked upon as a purely physical thing with no potential for emotional and psychological harm? And isn’t it the parents’ right to give counsel and advice to keep their children from making mistakes that may affect their entire lives? [Slight crescendo of voice and emphasis–Long Applause]

Many of us in government would like to know what parents think about this intrusion in their family by government. We’re going to fight in the courts. The right of parents and the rights of family take precedence over those of Washington-based bureaucrats and social engineers. [Applause]

But the fight against parental notification is really only one example of many attempts to water down traditional values and even abrogate the original terms of American democracy. Freedom prospers when religion is vibrant and the rule of law under God is acknowledged. [Applause] When our founding fathers passed the First Amendment, they sought to protect churches from government interference. They never intended to construct a wall of hostility between government and the concept of religious belief itself.

Truth is still truth.

Regardless of the recent law-making by the United States Supreme Court (whose job is to interpret the laws, not make them) Americans’ First Amendment Rights still stand.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Considering what is happening in the world around us, thanks in a large part to Obama’s failed Foreign Policy, if America keeps on the path we seem to be headed on, we will find out why America is not mentioned in the Book of Revelation.

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

Until He Comes,

KJ

The Benghazi Hearings: American Families Still Wait For The Truth About Their Sons’ Sacrifice

On By kingsjesterIn Politics2 Comments

benghaziwhitehouseIt’s been a little over three years since you lost your child. Yes, you know that they were an adult, but they were still your child…and you loved them very much.

Yes, it’s been a little over three years, but in some ways it seems like yesterday that you received that call. That call that no parent should have to hear. A call telling you that your child had been murdered…in the service of his country. Murdered by Radical Muslims, on the other side of the world.

When you asked those who are supposed to know, what happened to your child, they hemmed and hawed, saying that it had something to do with a video on the Internet, that you had never even heard of, much less seen.

Your beloved child, murdered because of some stupid video? That doesn’t even seen possible.

As time went on, you came under siege by reporters and government officials alike. The reporters wanted to interview you, so that their ratings would go up. The authorities, while not overtly threatening you, or anything like that, basically gave you the cold shoulder, keeping their little game of hide and seek with the facts of your child’s death going on, as if you were not entitled to a clear picture of what actually happened.

Don’t they understand what you’re still going through? You lost your child…your son. A son you nursed through all the ups and downs of growing up, who you proudly watched as he decided that he wanted to be of service to his country.

And still, nobody will tell you the truth of what happened to him.

After what seemed like an eternity, a congressman named Darrel Issa reached out to you. He told you that he was holding Congressional Hearings to get to the bottom of this whole disgraceful business. So, you make the trip to Washington, DC, and patiently wait your turn to testify before Issa and the Congressional Committee.

Finally, after all those months, there you were. You took the stand after they called your name. As you were about to tell your story, all the Democratic Representatives in the room, except for two, excused themselves from the meeting, imperiously above listening to a commoner, an American Parent, still grieving over the loss of their child, so savagely murdered, tell their story.

You watched them as they walked out…

Carolyn Maloney

Danny Davis

Eleanor Holmes Norton

Gerald E. Connolly

Jim Cooper

John Tierney

Mark Pocan

Matt Cartwright

Michelle Lujan Grisham

Peter Welch

Stephen Lynch

Steven Horsford

Tammy Duckworth

Tony Cardenas

William Lacy Clay

Two of them actually stayed to hear your story, Ranking Member Elijah Cummings and Rep. Jackie Speier.

And, now, after watching the one in charge of the Benghazi Embassy, Former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, imperiously lie to the latest House Committee, under Trey Gowdy, you’re wondering if this reliving of your grief and anguish, was all worth it.

…as your grief becomes unbearable…again.

Foxnews.com has the story…

Michael Ingmire watched as Hillary Clinton was grilled for 11 hours Thursday about the 2012 attack in Benghazi that left his nephew and three other Americans dead and saw not a future president, but a “serial liar.”

As a congressional panel pressed the former Secretary of State over the attack on the consulate facility in the Libyan city, Ingmire, uncle of Sean Smith, and relatives of former Navy SEALs Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty watched from their homes, hoping Clinton’s testimony would yield answers about why additional security was not granted and why she initially blamed the attack on a YouTube video instead of a coordinated act of terrorism.

“The thing that was shocking – one of the pinnacle moments – was the revelation she told her family there was a terrorist attack while she told America something else,” Smith’s uncle, Michael Ingmire, told FoxNews.com. “Mrs. Clinton is a serial liar.”

Smith, an information officer, and Woods, a former Navy SEAL, died along with Doherty and U.S. ambassador Chris Stevens when Islamic militants stormed the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi and set it ablaze before attacking a nearby CIA compound with machine guns and rockets.

Stevens, the first U.S. Ambassador killed in the line of duty since 1979, had repeatedly asked the State Department for increased security at the consulate prior to the attack but his requests were not granted. 

In the hours following the attacks, the Obama administration learned they were carefully planned assaults by Al Qaeda-related militants but Clinton and others would go on to tell a different tale: an anti-Muslim YouTube video caused spontaneous protests and angry mobs were to blame for the attacks.

“So if there’s no evidence for a video-inspired protest, then where did the false narrative start?” Ohio Republican Rep. Jim Jordan asked Clinton during the hearing Thursday.

“It started with you, Madam Secretary,” he said. “You could live with a protest about a video, that won’t hurt you, but a terror attack would.”

Clinton rejected Jordan’s claim, describing the situation in the hours after the attack as “fluid” and the details unclear.

“I am sorry that it doesn’t fit your narrative congressman, I can only tell you what the facts are,” Clinton said.

During the marathon hours of questioning — which Democrats claim was a partisan attack on the Democratic presidential frontrunner — Clinton said Stevens understood the risks involved and that his requests for additional security never crossed her desk.

“Those requests for security were rightly reviewed by the security professionals,” Clinton told the committee. “I did not see them. I did not approve them. I did not deny them.”

Clinton also described Stevens as a friend, saying the 52-year-old ambassador “understood that most people in Libya or anywhere reject the extremists’ argument that violence can ever be a path to dignity or justice.”

“I knew and admired Chris Stevens,” she said in her opening remarks Thursday. “He was one of our nation’s most accomplished diplomats. Chris’ mother liked to say he had ‘sand in his shoes,’ because he was always moving, always working, especially in the Middle East that he came to know so well.”

But Clinton’s closeness to Stevens was called into question by Rep Susan Brooks, R-Ill., who asked: “Did you ever personally speak to him after you swore him in in May? Yes or no please.”

“Yes, I believe I did,” Clinton replied. “I don’t recall.”

Ingmire described Clinton’s choice of words about Stevens as jarring. 

“How could she say ‘Chris thought this’ and ‘Chris felt that’ when she basically had nothing to do with him?” Ingmire said. 

Tyrone Woods’ father, Charles, recalled meeting Clinton when his son’s body arrived at Andrews Air Force Base two days after the attacks. 

“I gave Hillary a hug and shook her hand and she said, ‘We are going to have the filmmaker arrested who was responsible for the death of your son,” Woods said, reading the account from his journal. 

“That was a complete bald-faced lie,” he told FoxNews.com Friday. “The day after the attack, she was talking to the Prime Minister of Egypt and she said the attack in Libya had nothing to do with the video.” 

Smith’s mother, Patricia, gave a similar account, saying she was told by the administration “it was a video when they knew it was not a video.”

“They told me lies,” she said Friday. “My son told me the night before that he has been asking for security and he hasn’t heard anything.” 

Over three years later, the truth as to why the Obama Administration sacrificed the lives of those four Brave Americans, for the sake of political expediency, on that horrible night in Benghazi, is still not known. Americans have their suspicions. Suspicions that were not allayed any by the Cackling hen appearing before, thanks to her fellow Democrats, what turned into a Dog and Pony Showb, last Thursday on Capitol Hill.

Remember the oft-quoted speech by President Obama at the UN General Assembly, in which he proclaimed that

…The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam?

Since that night in Benghazi, the Radical Muslim-fueled violence know as “Arab Spring” has proceeded “right on schedule”, with SRussia and America now on the brink of a war, with Syrian’s Muslim President Assad now in its cross-hairs. 

President Obama has made speeches in support of and sent advanced weaponry to the “Syrian Rebels”, whose majority are card-carrying members of the Muslim Terrorist Group, al Qaeda, perpetrators of the largest Terrorist Attack ever on American Soil, on 9/11/01, and the attack on the Benghazi Compound.

Fortunately, Americans refused to support Obama’s mission to aid these Terrorists.

Our memories of those two faithful days, 11 years apart, and average Americans’ wish for justice for those 3,000 and 4 Americans, savagely murdered by the “followers of the prophet”, take precedence over any trumped-up concern over any slander of his name.

…and, Hillary Clinton’s Political Future.

There are American Families who deserve the truth.

Until Christ Comes,

KJ

The Benghazi Hearings: E-mails Prove Clinton LIED As To How Four Brave Americans DIED.

On By kingsjesterIn Politics2 Comments

Laughing-H-600-LIYesterday, Former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, appeared before the House Select Committee on Benghazi, chaired by the inestimable Trey Gowdy.

Yesterday morning, Hillary’s duplicitous nature was clearly revealed, for all the world to see.

Liar, liar. Pants suit on fire.

Breitbart.com reports that

Hillary Clinton sent an email to her daughter, Chelsea, on Sept. 11, 2012 in which she asserted that an al-Qaida-like group was responsible for the terrorist attacks in Benghazi, it was revealed on Thursday during the former secretary of state’s testimony to the House Select Committee on Benghazi.

The email, which was revealed by Ohio Rep. Jim Jordan, indicates that Clinton knew early on that the attacks which left four Americans dead was carried out by terrorists. But as Jordan pointed out, Clinton and others in the Obama administration had already begun crafting the narrative that the attack was spontaneous and that the attackers were motivated by a YouTube video many Muslims found offensive.

In the email cited by Jordan, Clinton responded to daughter Chelsea, who emailed under the pseudonym Diane Reynolds.

“Two of our officers were killed in Benghazi by an Al Queda-like [sic] group,” Clinton wrote.

But shortly before the email, after it was revealed that Ambassador Chris Stevens had been murdered in the onslaught, Clinton implied that the YouTube video had served as a motive.

“Some have sought to justify this vicious behavior as a response to inflammatory material posted to the Internet,” Clinton said in a statement shortly after Stevens’ death.

The Obama administration continued for days after the attack to claim that the YouTube video — entitled “Innocence of Muslims” — had sparked protests which turned violent. Critics of the administration’s handling of the response to the attack assert that the YouTube video was used as political cover to protect Obama ahead of his re-election bid. Obama had been on the campaign trail insisting that he had destroyed al-Qaida.

Jordan compared Clinton’s disparate positions, asserting that she “knew the truth” but insisted on casting some blame on the video.

“You tell the American people one thing, you tell your family an entirely different story,” Jordan said.

He also cited a call Clinton made the night of the attack to Mohammed Magariaf, who was then the president of Libya. According to a transcript of the call, Clinton acknowledged that the al-Qaida affiliated group Ansar al-Sharia was “claiming responsibility” for the attack.

And in a phone call with Egyptian Prime Minister Hisham Kandil the next day, Clinton said “we know the attack in Libya had nothing to do with the film. It was a planned attack, not a protest.”

The administration’s claim that the YouTube video played a part in the Benghazi attack reached its pinnacle on Sept. 16, 2012, when then-U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice asserted as much on several Sunday morning talk shows.

And emails show that Clinton’s aides at the State Department showed no disagreement with Rice’s statements, in which she called the video “very offensive.”

Clinton’s State Department aide, Jake Sullivan, sent his boss an email that same day indicating that Rice’s comments were in line with Clinton’s views.

“She did make clear our view that this started spontaneously and then evolved,” Sullivan wrote.

He backtracked off of that position the next week, however. In a Sept. 24, 2012 email, he assured Clinton: “You never said spontaneous or characterized the motives.”

“State Department experts knew the truth, you knew the truth, but that’s not what the American people got,” Jordan said Thursday, during his tense exchange with Clinton.

“There was a lot of conflicting information that we were trying to make sense of,” Clinton said, defending her conflicting positions.

That did not stop the lie from growing…exponentially.

On September 25, 2012, United States President, Barack Hussein Obama , spoke before the United Nations General Assembly, blaming that same un-watched youtube.com video, for the massacre of 4 brave Americans, on the night of September 11, 2012, at the Benghazi , Libya, U.S. Embassy Compound,

…In every culture, those who love freedom for themselves must ask themselves how much they’re willing to tolerate freedom for others. And that is what we saw play out in the last two weeks, where a crude and disgusting video sparked outrage throughout the Muslim world. Now, I have made it clear that the United States government had nothing to do with this video, and I believe its message must be rejected by all who respect our common humanity. It is an insult not only to Muslims, but to America as well.

For as the city outside these walls makes clear, we are a country that has welcomed people of every race and every faith. We are home to Muslims who worship across our country. We not only respect the freedom of religion, we have laws that protect individuals from being harmed because of how they look or what they believe.

We understand why people take offense to this video because millions of our citizens are among them. I know there are some who ask why don’t we just ban such a video. The answer is enshrined in our laws. Our Constitution protects the right to practice free speech.

Let’s spring forward a little bit to the 2012 Vice-Presidential Debate, where the folllowing statements were made by the one, the only Jar Jar Biden:

MS. RADDATZ: What were you first told about the attack? Why were people talking about protests? When people in the consulate first saw armed men attacking with guns, there were no protesters. Why did that go on for weeks?

VICE PRESIDENT BIDEN: Because that’s exactly what we were told —

MS. RADDATZ: By who?

VICE PRESIDENT BIDEN: — by the intelligence community. The intelligence community told us that. As they learned more facts about exactly what happened, they changed their assessment. That’s why there’s also an investigation headed by Tom Pickering, a leading diplomat in the — from the Reagan years, who is doing an investigation as to whether or not there were any lapses, what the lapses were, so that they will never happen again. But —

MS. RADDATZ: And they wanted more security there.

VICE PRESIDENT BIDEN: Well, we weren’t told they wanted more security again. We did not know they wanted more security again. And by the way, at the time we were told exactly — we said exactly what the intelligence community told us that they knew. That was the assessment. And as the intelligence community changed their view, we made it clear they changed their view. That’s why I said, we will get to the bottom of this.

Biden lied, too.

What the Benghazi Hearings showed yesterday, was a pathological predilection for dishonesty, insincerity, and inappropriateness, not only on the part of Former Secretary of State, Hillary Rodham Clinton,  but the whole Obama Administration, as well, from the top on down.

They all knew that the cause of the attacks was not some stupid Youtube Video, but a full-blown Muslim Terrorist Attack.

However, for the sake of Political Expediency…and the re-election of President Barack Hussein Obama and the legacy of his rapidly-failing Foreign Policy, known as Smart Power!, they had to quickly come up with an excuse for their liability in the deaths of those four brave Americans.

And now, Hillary Rodham Clinton, with her Oscar-worthy Performance in front of the House Committee yesterday, which including circuitous answers to Yes or No Questions and inappropriate smirks, accompanied by cackling laughter, has proven completely true and accurate as to what I and my fellow Conservative Americans have said about her all along:

She is a sociopath, who envisions herself to be smarter than everybody else, above the law, and White House-bound, because, “it’s her turn”.

The only place that she should be bound, at least in this life, is jail.

Her final destination promises to be a more Southern Locale…and infinitely hotter.

Until He Comes,

KJ