Paul Ryan and the Omnibus Bill: Second Verse, Same as the First?

On By kingsjesterIn Politics1 Comment

paul-ryan-beard-547x350 (2)Late Tuesday night, Speaker of the House unveiled the new Omnibus Bill.

Reaction, shall we say, is “mixed”.

Politico.com reports that

The House Freedom Caucus hates the massive government-funding bill: Spending levels are billions of dollars higher than what conservatives wanted, and at least two top policy priorities — language addressing Syrian refugees and so-called sanctity of life — were cut.

But unlike past fiscal battles, when lawmakers took shots at GOP leaders and tried to tank bills, this time conservatives are largely holding their fire. Even as they vow to oppose the package, many are still praising Speaker Paul Ryan’s handling of the $1.1 trillion spending bill and $680 billion in tax breaks.

“In terms of the process, I can tell you I’ve had more meaningful conversations with the speaker and leadership in the last couple of weeks than I think I have in the last couple of years,” said Rep. Mark Meadows (R-N.C.), who instigated the revolt against Speaker John Boehner that led to Boehner’s resignation this fall. “I would give it an A-plus in terms of trying to reach out to the rank and file.”

Virginia Republican Dave Brat, a Freedom Caucus member who also sits on the budget panel, said Ryan has also gained support because he has been “credible on regular order” — Congress-speak for empowering committees and rank-and-file members — and has already teed up the budget process for the beginning of 2016, a starting point unheard of in recent years.

“The end product here is just cleaning the barn; it’s a disaster,” Brat said of the spending and tax deal. “We’re breaking our pledge on the budget caps to the American people, we’ve lost fiscal discipline, and we’re throwing it all on the next generation.”

But in the same breath, Brat praised Ryan: “Not only is he saying the right things, he is lining it up to do the right things … and then leadership can’t hijack the budget at the end of the year and throw the kitchen sink, which we just did.”

Praise from members of the conservative flank is a sign that they believe Ryan (R-Wis.) is trying to chart a new course in his nascent speakership. The conservatives feel more included in the process and said Ryan’s staff has been vocal about wanting their feedback. But the lawmakers are also planning to watch the speaker closely in 2016, when they say he’ll have more control over the appropriations process and Boehner can’t be blamed.

To be sure, members of the House Freedom Caucus have little positive to say about the omnibus that will fund the government through 2016. The House is expected to pass the government funding measure Friday with significant help from Democratic lawmakers.

“It’s pretty bad,” said Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), Freedom Caucus chairman. “How can you not put the refugee issue in there? It makes so much sense. We were clear that if that goes in and [we get] something pretty good on the pro-life [provisions they wanted], we thought we could get a number of us [to vote in favor]. But that’s not going to happen.”

Jordan led an effort Wednesday to amend the omnibus package to strip out a cybersecurity provision that many conservatives oppose and also include Syrian refugee language. Ryan has said the omnibus is not open for changes.

One Republican priority — lifting a four-decade-old ban on U.S. oil exports — has received some praise from conservatives as a potential job creator. But it wasn’t enough to win many of them over.

Rep. Tim Huelskamp (R-Kan.) said the lifting of the oil export ban is a good thing, but “there are about $1.3 trillion” other reasons to vote against the omnibus.

“[It’s a] very big deal for my district, but I didn’t have a single call about it,” Huelskamp said. “The calls are coming in about Syria. Calls are coming in about life issues. Calls are coming about everything else. Somebody on K Street wanted that, but Main Street didn’t.”

Lawmakers like Arizona Rep. Matt Salmon oppose it because language to increase the vetting standards for Syrian and Iraqi nationals looking to come to the U.S. as refugees was dropped. Rep. Justin Amash (R-Mich.) objected to the cybersecurity language, which was added at the last minute. Other Freedom Caucus members pushed for a series of provisions opposing abortion rights that weren’t included.

But the blame for the final product, conservatives say, rests on Boehner and Senate Democrats. Ryan just inherited the mess, they argue.

Instead, they focus on other promises the Wisconsin Republican made when he took the job.

“Paul made some pretty sustainable commitments about things we’ll do next year: a major overhaul of our tax system, welfare reform, replacing Obamacare,” Salmon said. “These are major things. If we do those things and define clearly what we stand for, that’s the best we can hope for.”

Now, I realize that Paul Ryan, sporting his new “man-beard”, just took over as Speaker of the House, after Cryin’ John Boehner got the heck out of Dodge.

And, it is going to take a while for Ryan to straighten out the mess that the spineless Boehner left him.

Additionally, Ryan has made promises that the Conservative Members of the House of Representatives seem to be excited about.

The key word is “PROMISES”.

To paraphrase the current batch of Geico Commercials,

Politicians promise. That’s what they do.

By the way, did you catch in that article, that the Vichy Republicans still want to “replace” Obamacare?

That would be like CBS deciding to replace the rapidly-taking  Stephen Colbert with Alec Baldwin.

It would still be horrible.

At least one Congressman gets it, per Breitbart.com…

Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) slammed the immigration implications of the year-end spending bill Wednesday, saying the omnibus represents a “betrayal” of voters that fully funds President Obama’s immigration agenda while also increasing the number of low-skilled foreign guest workers allowed. 

“The more than 2,000 page year-end funding bill contains a dramatic change to federal immigration law that would increase by as much as four-fold the number of low-wage foreign workers provided to employers under the controversial H-2B visa program, beyond what is currently allowed,” Sessions said in a statement.

The foreign nationals who enter the U.S. on H-2B visas come for low-skilled nonagricultural jobs and work in hotels, construction, landscaping and the like, jobs, Sessions argued, that millions of Americans would like to have.

“At a time of record immigration – with a full 83 percent of the electorate wanting immigration frozen or reduced – the GOP-led Congress is about to deliver Obama a four-fold increase to one of the most controversial foreign worker programs.  The result?  Higher unemployment and lower wages for Americans,” Sessions continued.

He further quoted the Economic Policy Institute’s conclusion that “wages were stagnant or declining for workers in all of the top 15 H-2B occupations between 2004 and 2014,” and that unemployment increased in all but 15 H-2B occupations between those same years. Further, he quoted EPI, “Flat and declining wages coupled with such high unemployment rates over such a long period of time suggest a loose labor market—an over-supply of workers rather than an under-supply.’”

The provision to vastly increase the number of H-2B visas was included in the $1.1 trillion omnibus spending bill released in the early morning hours of Wednesday. The House is slated to vote on he bill Friday.

According to Sessions, the American people elected Republicans to the majority in Congress in 2014 as a rejection of the Obama administration’s immigration policies.

“That loyalty has been repaid with betrayal,” he said.

In addition to the increase in H-2B visa allowances, Sessions pointed to the lack of conditions placed on the President’s request for increased refugee admissions, meaning Obama could bring in as many refugees — who are immediately eligible for welfare once admitted— as he desires.

”This will ensure that at least 170,000 green card, refugee and asylum approvals are issued to migrants from Muslim countries over just the next 12 months,” Sessions said.

The Alabama lawmaker continued, recalling that in his capacity as the chairman of the Subcommittee on Immigration and the National Interest, he send a list of proposals for the omnibus to appropriators intended to “improve immigration enforcement and block presidential lawlessness.” While those proposals were not included, funding for Obama’s refugee effort was.

“The bill also funds sanctuary cities, allows the President to continue issuing visas to countries that refuse to repatriate violent criminal aliens, and funds the President’s ongoing lawless immigration actions – including his unimpeded 2012 executive amnesty for alien youth,” Sessions argued.

Sessions added, “As feared, the effect is to fund the President’s entire immigration agenda.”

He concluded by highlighting the recent frustration Republican voters have voiced, saying that “GOP voters are in open rebellion” because of this bill.

”They have come to believe that their party’s elites are not only uninterested in defending their interests but – as with this legislation, and fast-tracking the President’s international trade pact – openly hostile to them,” he said. ”This legislation represents a further disenfranchisement of the American voter.”

And, boys and girls, that is while “outsiders” are leading the pack of Republican Presidential Candidate Hopefuls.

Americans, such as myself, out here in “Flyover Country”, or as we call it, “America’s Heartland”, are tired of the Republicans, whom we voted into office in the last two Midterm Elections, giving them control of BOTH Houses of Congress, acting like Democrats, exhibiting fiscal irresponsibility, possessing a disdain for their constituents’ concern about Social Issues, and acting with impunity, forgetting who gave them their cushy jobs.

Their deaf arrogance provided the opportunity for a entrepreneur and showman, with no political experience whatsoever, to vault to the top of the Republican Primary.

Trump is playing both the Main Stream Media and the Republican Elite like he is Charlie Daniels and they are the fiddle.

And, in second place, is a Senator, who is actually championing the viewpoint of average Americans.

Ted Cruz is sharper than a Ginsu Knife and his momentum is peaking at just the right time.

As we move toward the Presidential Election of 2016, those Republicans who believe that they can maintain status quo, appear to be heading toward a traumatic shock which will rival the sight of Cailyn Jenner in a bikini.

Strap yourselves in, boys and girls. It’s going to be a bumpy ride.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

Republican Debate Aftermath: It’s Time for the Party to Embrace “Bold Colors” and Dump “Pale Pastels”

On By kingsjesterIn Politics1 Comment

conservative1The last Republican Presidential Primary Debate was held last night on CNN.,,and things got a little heated.

Foxnews.com reports that

The rivalry between Sens. Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio flared Tuesday at the final Republican primary debate of the year, as all the leading GOP candidates battled to show their tough-on-terror credentials.

Donald Trump, as in past debates, sparred sharply with his rivals on stage over his controversial proposals, notably his call to ban Muslims from entering the country. But the changing dynamics in the race appeared to drive frequent clashes between the senators from Texas and Florida – who are now battling to be the Trump alternative in the race as Ben Carson slides in the polls.

With the terror attacks in Paris and San Bernardino, Calif., refocusing the race squarely on security issues, Cruz from the outset tried to sound a tough message against radical Islam.

“We will utterly destroy ISIS,” Cruz vowed, later adding: “ISIS and radical Islamic terrorism will face no more determined foe than I will be.”

But he repeatedly was challenged by Rubio over his Senate positions – including for legislation reining in NSA metadata collection. Rubio accused Cruz of helping take away a “valuable tool” for security officials, while Cruz said: “Marco knows what he’s saying isn’t true.”

Rubio later cited a budget vote by Cruz to say: “You can’t carpet bomb ISIS if you don’t have planes and bombs to attack them with.”

New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie used the arguing to contrast his own executive experience against the senators’ legislative history. He described their jobs as “endless debates about how many angels on the head of a pin from people who have never had to make a consequential decision.”

But Rubio and Cruz returned to the fray later on as they tried to cast each other as soft on illegal immigration. “I led the fight against [Rubio’s] legalization-amnesty bill,” Cruz charged.

Some analysts had expected the tensions Tuesday to flare between Trump and Cruz, as the Texas senator surpasses Trump in Iowa polls and is surging nationally. But Cruz avoided taking on Trump in favor of Rubio – he even jokingly backed Trump’s plan to build a border wall.

“We will build a wall that works, and I’ll get Donald Trump to pay for it,” Cruz said.

Later on, Trump backed off comments where he said Cruz acted in Congress like “a bit of a maniac.” Trump said Tuesday, “He’s just fine, don’t worry about it.”

Instead, Trump took heat mostly from former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, who slammed Trump’s plan to ban Muslims from entering the United States as “not a serious proposal.”  

“He’s a chaos candidate, and he’d be a chaos president,” Bush said.

Trump fired back that “Jeb doesn’t really believe I’m unhinged” and only went after him because he’s “failed in this campaign.”

The Trump-Bush acrimony simmered throughout the debate, with Bush later telling Trump he can’t “insult your way to the presidency,” and Trump once again reminding Bush that his poll numbers have plummeted while Trump is leading.

Whether Bush’s attacks will help the struggling candidate remains to be seen. Perhaps more consequential is whether Rubio or Cruz can present himself as more capable of taking on the country’s security challenges.

All the leading candidates, though, focused on the terror threat throughout the CNN-hosted primary debate Tuesday night in Las Vegas – an event held just hours after Los Angeles closed its school system over a terror threat.

Citing that closure, which is now thought to have been prompted by a hoax threat, Christie said children will be going back to school filled with anxiety. And he said the country’s overall security environment has been hurt by President Obama and Hillary Clinton’s policies.

“America has been betrayed,” he said.

Christie cited his experience as a federal prosecutor, and governor, in saying that under a Christie presidency, “America will be safe.”

Carson also dismissed “PC” concerns about some of his own plans for taking on the terror threat.

“We are at war … We need to be on a war footing,” Carson said, while later making an argument against toppling foreign dictators. He compared the situation to being on a plane, where passengers in an emergency are advised to use oxygen masks themselves before helping others.

“We need oxygen right Citing that closure, which is now thought to have been prompted by a hoax threat, Christie said children will be going back to school filled with anxiety. And he said the country’s overall security environment now,” Carson said, adding the government needs to think of the needs of the American people before solving everyone else’s problems.

Trump also sparred at times with other lower-polling candidates.

As before, Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul questioned Trump’s policy proposals, including to restrict the Internet to clamp down on ISIS’ social media use. “Do you believe in the Constitution?” Paul said of Trump supporters. Trump clarified he’s only talking about restricting the Internet in parts of Iraq and Syria.

And when Trump suggested that the money spent toppling Mideast dictators could have been better spent on building America’s roads and bridges, former HP CEO Carly Fiorina compared him to Obama.

“That’s exactly what President Obama has said. I’m amazed to hear that from a Republican presidential candidate,” she said.
Ohio Gov. John Kasich also took issue with suggestions from Cruz and Trump that the priority in Syria is not to remove Bashar Assad.

“We can’t back off of this,” Kasich said. “He must go.”

CNN also hosted a debate Tuesday for the second-tier GOP candidates — former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum, South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham and former New York Gov. George Pataki. Graham was particularly critical of Trump’s Muslim ban plan at that debate, accusing him of declaring war on Islam and delivering a “coup” for ISIS.

About the scourge known as “Political Correctness”…it definitely was one of the topics for discussion last night…

Candidates in the GOP presidential primary debate Tuesday said “political correctness” has contributed to the rise of attacks by Islamic extremists in the U.S. and other Western countries.

“Political correctness is killing people,” Texas Sen. Ted Cruz said.

He and several of the other candidates suggested in the CNN debate that fear of offending Muslims has resulted in the U.S. intelligence community failing to aggressively find the “radicalized” members who commit terror acts.

Cruz, surging in recent polls to challenge front-running Donald Trump, also criticized the Department of Homeland Security. He suggested the agency failed to vet social media well enough to learn that the female Muslim attacker in the deadly San Bernardino, Calif., shootings this month wanted to commit jihad.  

Trump, who after the Dec. 2 massacre proposed a temporary ban on Muslims coming into the United States, has said repeatedly that he will not hew to political correctness, especially on issues of national security.  

Candidate Rick Santorum, a former U.S. senator from Pennsylvania, in the earlier, second-tier debate said, “We’ve defunded and tied the hands behind the backs of our intelligence agencies because of political correctness.”

You will notice that Senator Ted Cruz and Billionaire Entrepreneur Donald J. Trump have backed off going after reach other…at least, for now.

They realize that now is not the time, politically speaking.

Now is the time to narrow the field.

The Republican Party needs to encourage some of the lower-tier candidates to ease on out of the Primary Race.

Especially the one whom they were backing…Jeb Bush.

They are not helping what, at this point, appears to be the inevitable fact that the next President of the United States will be a Republican.

The problem for the Republican Establishment, is that is will not be one of them.

The public wants new ideas. We are tired of dancing to the Washington Two-Step.

That is the reason for the popularity of Trump and Cruz. They have been saying the things that Americans have been wanting to hear for some time now.

That is the reason that they are the Leaders in the Republican Primary.

Contrast them to the candidates whom the Democrats are offering: old white folks from the Northeast Corridor, one who is as crooked as a dog’s hind leg and the other, a demented old socialist, who resembles Doc Emmett Brown from “Back to the Future”.

The “Vichy Republicans” as I refer to them, are looking a Gift Horse in the mouth.

They are positioned to sweep the nation, on the way to placing their candidate in the Oval Office, buoyed by a Grassroots Movement, the likes of has not been seen since the 1980 Presidential Election, which put into office the greatest president in my lifetime, Ronald Wilson Reagan.

All the Republicans have to do to be successful is something that they seem to have forgotten how to do, since they themselves were swept into Congressional Power in the 2010 and 2012 Mid-Term Elections.

They need to pay attention and actually listen to the voters who gave them their cushy jobs.

The need to stop backing the wrong “horse”.

As Ronald Reagan, himself, said, at CPAC in 1975,

It is time to raise a banner of BOLD COLORS! Not PALE PASTELS!

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

 

 

 

Bergdahl to Face Court Martial for Desertion. Like Father, Like Son.

On By kingsjesterIn Politics1 Comment

untitled (15)It appears that the Army Deserter that President Barack Hussein Obama welcomed home, as if he were a conquering here, may actually receive the punishment he so richly deserves.

Foxnews.com reports that

Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl’s high-profile desertion case was referred for trial by court-martial on Monday, in a blow to his defense team which had urged a lower-level referral.

Bergdahl was released from captivity last year in exchange for five Taliban detainees from Guantanamo Bay. He was later charged with desertion and misbehavior before the enemy, accused of abandoning his post before he was captured.

U.S. Army Forces Command announced Monday that both charges are being referred to a general court-martial.

An arraignment hearing date at Fort Bragg, N.C., has not yet been set.

Eugene Fidell, Bergdahl’s attorney, said the convening authority did not follow the advice of the preliminary hearing officer who had recommended Bergdahl’s case be moved only to a special misdemeanor-level military court.

Fidell said in a statement Monday that he had hoped the case would not go in this direction.

Bergdahl, of Hailey, Idaho, was held by the Taliban for nearly five years after he walked off his post in Afghanistan on June 30, 2009.

The trade of five Taliban leaders for his release fueled tensions between the Obama administration and Congress, as some lawmakers said they were not properly informed of the deal — and said the trade itself raised security concerns.

Last week, Republicans on the House Armed Services Committee released a 98-page report that concluded the administration violated the law by not giving Congress a 30-day notice on the transfer of Guantanamo detainees to Qatar.

The desertion case, meanwhile, has created an uncomfortable situation for the administration. National Security Adviser Susan Rice said last year that Bergdahl served with “honor and distinction,” and Obama appeared in the Rose Garden with Bergdahl’s parents to discuss his release.

Let’s review the story of the father and son team of traitors, known as the Bergdahls, shall we?

Per The New York Post,

“I’m thinking of joining the Army,” he told his folks after ­already having signed up.

Bergdahl’s dream was to help Afghan villagers rebuild their lives and learn to defend themselves, his dad told the magazine.

“The whole ‘COIN’ thing,” Bob explained, referring to America’s strategy of counter-insurgency. “We were given a fictitious picture, an artificially created picture of what we were doing in ­Afghanistan,” the dad said.

Bowe Bergdahl would detail his disillusionment with the Afghanistan campaign in an email to his parents three days before he went missing.

“I am sorry for everything here,” he wrote. “These people need help, yet what they get is the most conceited country in the world telling them that they are nothing and that they are stupid.”

Bergdahl also complained about fellow soldiers. The battalion commander was a “conceited old fool,” he said, and the only “decent” sergeants, planning to leave the platoon “as soon as they can,” told the privates — Bergdahl then among them — “to do the same.”

“I am ashamed to be an American. And the title of US soldier is just the lie of fools,” he concluded. “I am sorry for everything. The horror that is America is disgusting.”

Bob Bergdahl responded in an email: “OBEY YOUR CONSCIENCE!”

The Sunday after Obama made the trade, Bob Bergdahl gave special praise to Allah in Pharsi for his son’s release, for which he received a special hug from his fellow dhimmi, President Barack Hussein Obama.

Walid Shoebat is a Palestinian American Christian, who converted from Islam.

On his website, shoebat.com, he posted the following about the Patriarch of the Bergdahls…

The “basmallah” [Praise to Allah] is the Islamic expression for victory and only indicates that Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl’s father is a Muslim.

Think that the man is acting as “Muslim” for a stealth operation to rescue his son who is already in good hands in Germany? And what is with the long beard and trimmed mustache?

No this is not a bum, biker, or a Santa Clause fan. When one gives the basmallah, trims his mustache and elongates his beard, it’s the first sign of a convert to Islam, just as that an ex-Muslim putting on a cross and saying, “In the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit,” is evidence enough of conversion to Christianity. But there is much more we obtained on this stealth jihadist.

But first, Obama’s smile says much. Obama has never declared the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, and has no real testimony of converting to Christianity, as his pastor Jeremiah Wright stated:

I made it easy for him to come to an understanding of who Jesus Christ is and not feel that he was turning his back on his Islamic friends and his Islamic traditions and his understanding of Islam

EVIDENCE THAT BERGDAHL CONVERTED TO JIHADI ISLAM

We were first hit with news from Brietbart that the Taliban said that Robert Bowe Bergdahl’s son, Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl, converted to Islam, changed his name to Abdullah, and even trained the Taliban in bomb making techniques.

And like father like son, the young Bergdahl, also trims his mustache and extends his beard…

But is it the speech with the Basmallah, the beard and the trimmed mustache, the testimonies from his colleagues on his desertion, that confirm our suspicion that these men are Jihadi converts?

Hardly.

What no one in the media captured was Robert Bowe Bergdahl’s favorites on his Youtube account.

It reveals a dark mind, a collector of a litany of ‘terrorist favorites’, videos from training on how to become Muslim Jihadist to urging American troops to desert and even favorite speeches by confirmed terrorists like Shaykh Anwar al-Awlaki, condemning America as a terrorist state:

Bergdahl’s Youtube account’s favorites list has an anti-American Anwar al-Awlaki video. Notice Bergdahl’s name above the list, showing that it is indeed his account

On one of the videos Bergdahl subscribes to a Jihadi message titled, “Duaa (prayer).”

But prayer for what? His son’s release only? Hardly, its for the release of the terrorists in American captivity. The prayer begins in Arabic, as Shoebat.com translates:

O Allah, release our prisoners, the Muslim prisoners, and send them back to our families in peace!

One would think that Bergdahl does not understand what is said in Arabic? Think again, he comments himself stating:

“Al-Hamdu Lillah, Ameen, Ameen May the duas of the ummah be heard and may Allah free my son from captivity! بِسْمِ اللَّهِ الرَّحْمَٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ إِيَّاكَ نَعْبُدُ وَإِيَّاكَ نَسْتَعِينُ”

English:

Praise be to Allah, Amen, Amen, my prayers for all the Muslim Nation (ummah) be heard and may Allah free my son from captivity. In the name of Allah most merciful most beneficient, it is thee whom I worship, it is thee whom I seek refuge.

He types perfect Arabic and announces he is Muslim, “thee [Allah] I worship …”

Another favorite is a lecture from Mufti Ismail Menk, who identifies himself as a Muslim scholar titled “Qualities Of A True Worshipper”. Menk was also a favorite of Boston bombing suspect Dzhokar Tsarnaev.

Another video favorited by Bergdahl, is a Muslim jihadist terrorist video uploaded by the Afghan Islamic Emirate (the same group the 5 terrorists, who Obama helped released and who Bergdahl praisingly communicated with, were a part of) on August 5, 2013, in which a verse from the Koran is chanted:

Fight them, so that there will be no mischief, and the religion will be all Allah’s (Surah 39)

So, how, in the name of the Continental Congress, did President Barack Hussein Obama get the idea that he could get by with trading one spineless little traitor for five dangerous Radical Muslim Terrorists?

On September 22nd of 2010, I wrote about a disease that I’ve noticed that most of the Far Left exhibit: Narcissistic-Reality-Denial-Over-Educated-Beyond-Their-Intelligence Syndrome. The patient tends to rely on his self-assumed superior intellect, denying the reality of the world around him to the point of forsaking both his allegiance to and concern for the people of the country that has provided him with both his livelihood and his well-being.

This syndrome seems to be extremely pernicious in academic and political figures. The patient actually believes that he is an expert on everything, to the point where he can write and distribute instructional theses to seasoned professionals while lecturing them in a didactic manner.

This syndrome causes patients to contradict themselves once they have committed others’ lives to a cause or mission. It is all a part of the denial of reality, along with a self-imposed aloofness caused by feelings of superiority.

Additionally, I have noticed that this disease, causes those in power to take for granted and, to even consciously undermine, our Best and Brightest.

Hence this idiotic trade, which as all of its Muslim and anti-American layers were revealed, turned out to be intentionally treasonous.

Obama has always thought of our Armed Forces as a “Political Tool” to be used to achieve his Political Goals.

So, what goal was Obama trying to accomplish by trading those 5 murderous Afghani Muslim Terrorist Leaders for an Army Deserter…who happens to also be a Muslim-Sympathizer?

Was his goal to take our attention away from the Veterans Administration Scandal?

Was this simply a step in his quest to close down Gitmo?

Or, with Bob Bergdahl being a Muslim Convert and Bowe being a Muslim Sympathizer, was this an Islamic thing?

I don’t know, but Obama actions placed American Travelers, civilian and military, in worldwide danger.

The only treatment for Narcissistic-Reality-Denial-Over-Educated-Beyond-Their-Intelligence Syndrome at this time is “refudiation” and isolation. The people who are being affected by these individuals must, in a clear and over-whelming manner, let the patient know that they do not accept their attitude or actions and to fix the mess that the narcissist made.

And, because of that, let Bergdahl’s Military Trial for Desertion commence.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Obama Tries to Assure Americans About His ISIS Plan. Nobody’s Buying What He Is Selling.

On By kingsjesterIn Politics1 Comment

AFBrancoRadicalIslamUnicorn21215President Barack Hussein Obama’s “plan” for for combating ISIS by “Leading From Behind” and Executive Orders pushing Gun Control is reminiscent of the old Johnny Mathis/Deniece Williams’ song, “Too Much, Too Little, Too Late”.

Foxnews.com reports that

President Obama this week will visit the Pentagon and the National Counterterrorism Center, high-profile stops to try to allay Americans’ concerns about the growing domestic and global terror threat posed by the Islamic State (ISIS).

On Monday, Obama will visit the Pentagon where he is expected to further explain his plan to stop the extremist group. But he is not expected to announce any significant strategy changes.

The event follows his Dec. 6 Oval Office address that critics say didn’t reassure the public and failed to provide an updated strategy to stop ISIS.

The address came four days after the San Bernardino, Calif. terror attacks in which 14 people were fatally shot and 21 others were wounded.

The Obama administration says this week’s visits will also serve as further warning that the rhetoric of frontrunner GOP presidential candidate Donald Trump could embolden extremists looking to pull the United States into a war with Islam.

“Terrorists like ISIL are trying to divide us along lines of religion and background,” Obama said Saturday in his weekly radio and Internet address, using an acronym for the extremist group. “That’s how they stoke fear. That’s how they recruit.”

In the coming week, he said, “we’ll move forward on all fronts.”

The visits also follow the Paris suicide bombing attacks last month, for which ISIS claimed responsibility and in which 130 people were killed.

Seven in 10 Americans rated the risk of a terrorist attack in the U.S. as at least somewhat  high, according to an Associated Press-GfK poll.

That was a sharp increase from the 5 in 10 who said that in January. U.S. officials have insisted there are no specific, credible threats to the country.

But the apparent lack of warning before the San Bernardino attack has fueled concerns about whether the U.S. has a handle on potential attacks, especially during high-profile times such as the end-of-year holidays.

A Muslim husband-wife team carried out the deadly Dec. 2 attack at a holiday party.

FBI Director James Comey told Capitol Hill lawmakers Wednesday that each was radicalized on their own at least two years ago and bonded over online talk of “jihad” and “martyrdom.”

Investigators originally suspected wife Tashfeen Malik, 29, radicalized her husband after she came to the U.S. in July 2014 on a fiancée visa. But they now believe Syed Farook, 28, was already committed to radical Islam before they met.

In addition, Malik got the visa despite apparently expressing her desire on social media to commit jihad.

Obama’s trip to the Pentagon marks a rare meeting outside the White House by his National Security Council and will be followed by a public update about the fight against ISIS.

White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest said Obama does not intend to announce any major changes in approach.

“If there’s an opportunity for us to intensify efforts behind one aspect of our strategy, then that is something that he wants his team to be prepared to do,” Earnest said.

On Thursday, at the National Counterterrorism Center, which analyzes intelligence at its facility in suburban Virginia, Obama plans to address reporters after a briefing by intelligence and security agencies on threat assessments.

Obama receives a similar briefing each year before the holidays.

Concerns about extremism emanating from the Middle East have taken center stage in the presidential race.

Obama has tried to use his bully pulpit as a counterpoint to GOP front-runner Trump and his widely condemned proposal to bar Muslims from entering the U.S., and to push back on other politicians insisting on halting resettlement of Syrian refugees in the U.S.

The White House has also scheduled a conference call Monday with religious leaders about ways to fight discrimination and promote religious tolerance.

And Obama is to speak Tuesday at the National Archives Museum, where 31 immigrants from Iraq, Ethiopia, Uganda and 23 other nations will be sworn in as U.S. citizens. He plans to use that occasion to reframe the national conversation about immigrants around the country’s founding values of tolerance and freedom.

Despite Obama’s reassurances, Republicans say Obama has failed to grasp the severity of the risk.

Rep. Will Hurd, R-Texas, said the threat from ISIS and other terrorist groups presents “a clear and present danger to the United States.””We can’t contain this threat. We have to defeat it,” Hurd said in the weekly GOP address. “To defeat ISIS, we have to be in this for the longhaul.”

Jennifer Rubin, who writes “The Right Turn Blog” for The Washington Post, published the following column on December 7th…

The latest CNN/ORC poll tells the story: By a margin of 57 to 40 percent, Americans disapprove of President Obama’s handling of foreign policy. With regard to handling the Islamic State, they disapprove by a remarkable 64 to 33 percent. The same lopsided margin (60 to 38 percent) disapproves of his handling of terrorism and thinks the war in Iraq and Syria is going badly. Sixty-eight percent think we have not been aggressive enough, only 4 percent think we have been too aggressive in our military response and a robust 53 percent favor sending ground troops. Finally, 61 percent of Americans think it is at least somewhat likely we will have a terrorist attack in the next few weeks.

Obama’s perfunctory and vapid speech last night is unlikely to improve matters. We therefore have a public prepared to face up to our threats and a commander in chief who is not. There is, in effect, a consensus of no confidence in the president.

And who can blame the public? Nearly everything Obama has said about our threats is wrong. To recount:

“The war in Afghanistan is winding down. Al Qaeda has been decimated.”

“The long war in Iraq will come to an end by the end of this year.” (2011)

“A decade of war is now ending.”

“The analogy we use around here sometimes [for the Islamic State], and I think is accurate, is if a J.V. team puts on Lakers uniforms, that doesn’t make them Kobe Bryant.”

“In Iraq and Syria, American leadership, including our military power, is stopping (the Islamic State’s) advance.”

“It is entirely legitimate for the American people to be deeply concern when you have a bunch of violent, vicious zealots who behead people or randomly shot a bunch of folks in a Deli in Paris.”

“I don’t think [the Islamic State is] gaining strength. What is true, from the start our goal has been first to contain and we have contained them.”

“It is possible that [that San Bernardino, Calif., shooting] was terrorist-related, but we don’t know. It’s also possible that this was workplace-related.” (Dec. 3)
The president has consistently ignored and underplayed the strength of our enemies. He has continually insisted that whatever he is doing has worked or is working. He has mocked critics, falsely accusing them of having no alternative or wanting a massive ground war. He has slashed our military and agreed to restrict the National Security Agency metadata program that his own advisers say was working.

And so now, when the enemy has spread to multiple countries, struck the West repeatedly and recruited tens of thousands of fighters, Obama asks us to have confidence in his approach. Why in the world would we?

Indeed.

As I have reported before, Obama’s affinity for the followers of Mohammed, is interfering with his duties as President of the United States of America.

When Barack Obama, Jr. was 3-years-old, his parents divorced.  Obama only saw his father one time after that.  Dad moved to Kenya and his mother married an Indonesian man, Lolo Soetoro.  From ages six to 10, Barack Obama, Jr., attended a private school for well-off Islamic families in Jakarta.

Obama once said in a New York Times article posted March 3, 2007:

“I was a little Jakarta street kid,” he said in a wide-ranging interview in his office (excerpts are on my blog, http://www.nytimes.com/ontheground). He once got in trouble for making faces during Koran study classes in his elementary school, but a president is less likely to stereotype Muslims as fanatics — and more likely to be aware of their nationalism — if he once studied the Koran with them.

Mr. Obama recalled the opening lines of the Arabic call to prayer, reciting them with a first-rate accent. In a remark that seemed delightfully uncalculated (it’ll give Alabama voters heart attacks), Mr. Obama described the call to prayer as “one of the prettiest sounds on Earth at sunset.”

On October2. 2008, Rick Moran wrote the following article for americanthinker.org…

Just  how much in donations from foreign countries is pouring into the Obama campaign coffers is a question one FEC auditor would like to have answered. The problem is that evidently, his bosses at the FEC are refusing to move on the charges which would almost certainly require them to ask the Justice Department and the FBI to look into the matter. This would, their reasoning goes, take on the appearance of a “criminal investigation” and would impact the coming election.

The anonymous investigator (who won’t reveal his name for fear of retribution) says that “I can’t get anyone to move. I believe we are looking at a hijacking of our political system that makes the Clinton and Gore fundraising scandals pale in comparison. And no one here wants to touch it.”

The American Spectator’s Washington Prowler writes:

The analyst, who declines to be identified for fear of retribution, says that on four different occasions in the past three months, he sought to open formal investigations into the Obama campaign’s fundraising techniques, but those investigations have been discouraged. “Without formal approval, I can’t get the resources I need, manpower, that kind of thing. This is a huge undertaking.” And the analyst says that he believes that campaign finance violations have occurred.

The Obama campaign has already had to deal with several FEC complaints about fraudulent donors and illegal foreign contributions, and the FEC says it has no record that those complaints have been resolved or closed. As well, the Obama campaign has been cagey at times about the means by which it has made its historic fundraising hauls, which now total almost $500 million for the election cycle. The Hillary Clinton campaign raised questions about the huge amount of e-retail sales the Obama campaign was making for such things as t-shirts and other campaign paraphernalia, and how such sales were being tracked and used for fundraising purposes. While the profits of those items counted against the $2,300 personal donation limit, there have always been lingering questions about the e-retail system.

“The question has always been, if you buy a $25 t-shirt and you go back to that purchaser eight or nine times with email appeals for $200 or $500 donations, and you have people donating like that all the time, at what point does the campaign bother to check if the FEC limit has been exceeded?” says a former Clinton campaign fundraiser. “There are enough of us from the 1992 and 1996 and 2000 races around to know that many of these kinds of violations never get caught until after the election has been won or lost.

Obama was forced to return $33,500 to a pair of Palestinian brothers who bought T-Shirts on the campaign’s website – a clear violation of FEC rules and the law. The campaign claims to have returned the money but the brothers deny they have received a refund. There have also been numerous questions about other donations that appear to come from the Middle East – not surprising given Obama’s connections to Tony Rezko (whose Middle East connections are mindblowing), Nadhmi Auchi, and other wealthy Arabs who might see an Obama presidency in a favorable light.

Then there was the curious case of a supposedly home grown video that was produced by a PR firm in Los Angeles owned by a huge, left wing, French media conglomerate. The money for the film and for the PR firm evidently came from Europeans.

There is little doubt that foreigners are licking their chops at the prospect of an inexperienced, naive, weak American president who will subsume American interests and cater to the whims of the UN while deferring the big questions to the Europeans. This isn’t even taking into account Obama’s strange policy toward Israel (where he says one thing but all his advisors say exactly the opposite) and the belief among Muslims that because he grew up in Indonesia, he will not be as forceful in prosecuting the war on terror.

There are dozens of reasons foreigners are pulling for Obama to win. There is little doubt that money from overseas is pouring into the Obama campaign.

And it is a dead certainty that the FEC won’t do a damn thing about it until after the election.

They never did.

In September of 2010, pewforum.org, published the following…

A substantial and growing number of Americans say that Barack Obama is a Muslim, while the proportion saying he is a Christian has declined. More than a year and a half into his presidency, a plurality of the public says they do not know what religion Obama follows.

A new national survey by the Pew Research Center finds that nearly one-in-five Americans (18%) now say Obama is a Muslim, up from 11% in March 2009. Only about one-third of adults (34%) say Obama is a Christian, down sharply from 48% in 2009. Fully 43% say they do not know what Obama’s religion is. The survey was completed in early August, before Obama’s recent comments about the proposed construction of a mosque near the site of the former World Trade Center.

The view that Obama is a Muslim is more widespread among his political opponents than among his backers. Roughly a third of conservative Republicans (34%) say Obama is a Muslim, as do 30% of those who disapprove of Obama’s job performance. But even among many of his supporters and allies, less than half now say Obama is a Christian. Among Democrats, for instance, 46% say Obama is a Christian, down from 55% in March 2009.

The belief that Obama is a Muslim has increased most sharply among Republicans (up 14 points since 2009), especially conservative Republicans (up 16 points). But the number of independents who say Obama is a Muslim has also increased significantly (up eight points). There has been little change in the number of Democrats who say Obama is a Muslim, but fewer Democrats today say he is a Christian (down nine points since 2009).

When asked how they learned about Obama’s religion in an open-ended question, 60% of those who say Obama is a Muslim cite the media. Among specific media sources, television (at 16%) is mentioned most frequently. About one-in-ten (11%) of those who say Obama is a Muslim say they learned of this through Obama’s own words and behavior.

Americans out here in “Flyover Country”, otherwise known as America’s Heartland, have long memories…and we believe that a man’s actions speak louder than his words.

Obama’s speech to “The Muslim World” at the University of Cairo, in July of 2009, still resonates with us…as does his words and lack of action after the Benghazi Massacre.

Now, as I have previously written, when he spoke to the nation after the San Bernadino Massacre, Obama removed all doubt as to his stance, as regarding Islam.

To paraphrase a popular old saying, from here in the Heartland,

If he acts like a Muslim Sympathizer, talks like a Muslim Sympathizer, and passes Executive Orders like a Muslim Sympathizer…he’s a Muslim Sympathizer.

And, we are so screwed.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

 

Sunday Morning Thoughts: Christian Americans, Modern Liberals, and the War That Dare Not Be Named (At Least By the President)

On By kingsjesterIn Christianity, PoliticsLeave a comment

th1DXO5NI3As I sit down to write today’s blog, our country finds itself  under attack, by enemies foreign and domestic, with the responsible of protecting our very lives falling on the shoulders of a president, who it reticent to even properly identify those who was to destroy us.

President Barack Hussein Obama is in a trap of his own making. It started with his Speech to the Muslim World at the University of Cairo, shortly after his first Inauguration as President, in which he sounded like a subservient dhimmi.

In the years that followed, his genteel Foreign Policy toward the Barbarians of the Muslim World, known as “Smart Power!”, led to a never-ending Radical Islamic Revolution in the Middle East, known as Arab Spring, through which Moderate Muslim Dictators were replaced by Radical Muslim Dictators. It also led to the increased threat of the extermination of Israel, and the changing of NASA into a Muslim Outreach Program.

The sixth President of the United States of America, John Quincy Adams, wrote the following about the nature of Islam:

THE ESSENCE OF HIS [MUHAMMAD’S] DOCTRINE WAS VIOLENCE AND LUST: TO EXALT THE BRUTAL OVER THE SPIRITUAL PART OF HUMAN NATURE [Adams’ capital letters]… Between these two religions, thus contrasted in their characters, a war of twelve hundred years has already raged. The war is yet flagrant… While the merciless and dissolute dogmas of the false prophet shall furnish motives to human action, there can never be peace upon earth, and goodwill towards men…The precept of the Koran is, perpetual war against all who deny, that Mahomet is the prophet of God. The vanquished may purchase their lives, by the payment of tribute; the victorious may be appeased by a false and delusive promise of peace; and the faithful follower of the prophet, may submit to the imperious necessities of defeat: but the command to propagate the Moslem creed by the sword is always obligatory, when it can be made effective. The commands of the prophet may be performed alike, by fraud, or by force.

In contrast, our present Petulant President Pantywaist will not even call Radical Islam by its name, as exhibited most recently by his reluctance to identify the San Bernadino Massacre as the work of Radical Islamists.

He has already proclaimed that we are not at war with Islam.

So, how can America win this war against Radical Islam, if the President of our country will not even admit that we are in one?

And, what are we, as Christian Americans, supposed to do?

First off…while I have met some very nice American Muslims, I have also been inside a mosque where I was looked at as if they wanted to take a scimitar to my neck.

If Moderate Muslims are not behind their radical brethren’s eternal jihad against us infidels, they need to get their mugs in front of the cable news networks’ TV cameras and say so…because all I see representing them when I turn on the news, are the abrasive members of CAIR, blaming America for all the world’s troubles.

Which is ironic, because the President of the United States of America is demonstrably Islam’s biggest supporter in this country, as so aptly proven by his refusal to participate in January’ssslast weekend’s March Against Radical Islam, led by 50 World Leaders, in Paris France.

Secondly, why are American liberals so naively defending these barbarians?

Are they so contrary, as to not realize that Radical Islam punishes every single social issue that American Liberals so “righteously” defend in this nation?

The maddening thing is that every time you challenge liberals on this fact, they try to equate radical Islam with American Christianity.

Then, these self-proclaimed “Biblical Pundits” attempt to tell you what the Bible says that you should do, as a Christian, misinterpreting scripture and drawing false equivalencies.

Frankly, the ignorance of these Pharisee-like Liberals blows my mind.

Richard D. Land, noted theologian, and Executive Editor of the Christian Post, authored the following op ed:

How do you balance Christian compassion for the very real suffering Syrian refugees with the God-ordained duty of the divinely ordained civil magistrate to protect the innocent and punish evil doers? (Romans 13: 1-7). 

Any decent person would want to help. Christians are mandated by their Savior to do something.

However, when it comes to welcoming Syrian refugees into the United States, it is also necessary to give attention to the obligations and responsibilities the government and citizenry have to demonstrate compassion for the innocent Americans who may be endangered by allowing possible terrorists into the U.S. disguised as refugees.

ISIS has acknowledged that they intend to do just that. And, having infiltrated into America, they will rapidly duplicate the dastardly deeds in our cities that they perpetrated in Paris.

We have an obligation, and a duty, to show compassion to every man, woman, and child in America by not putting them at needless risk or in harm’s way. Individual Christians may say that they are willing to take the risk to their personal safety in order to alleviate the suffering of these poor people. The problem is that you are not just putting your life at risk; you are putting your fellow Americans’ lives at risk without their consent.

The plight of the refugees is heartbreaking. However, so is the death of American children from terrorist attacks (remember the children killed and maimed in the Boston marathon bombing?).

Christians are certainly free, and may feel obligated, to disregard their own safety in order to minister to others in distress. However, they do not have the right to make the decision to endanger others without their permission.

An example that makes this point is the distinction I made several years ago in an article I was asked to write on whether Christians could practice agape love, i.e. the sacrificial, turn-the-other-cheek love that is a fruit of the Holy Spirit in redeemed people’s lives, in their business activities.

My conclusion was that they should if possible, but that they were more free morally and ethically to practice the heightened risks associated with agape love if it was their own business and the business and resources they were exposing to increased risk were their own and not their employer’s. They did not have the right to expose their employer’s business and resources to such increased risk without expressed permission to do so. Frankly, I think practicing an agape business ethic would be a great business model that would earn you great respect and repeat business. Nevertheless, you don’t have the right to make that decision while risking other people’s wellbeing rather than just your own without their expressed approval.

Fortunately, in the case of the Syrian refugees we don’t have to accept an “either/or” solution.

As a nation we can show compassion by providing the refugees a “safe zone” in their own homeland, guaranteed by American air and military power. We can also offer to reach into our national treasury, to help feed, clothe and house these unfortunate people in their safe zone, in refugee camps, or help relocate them in adjacent countries like Egypt and Turkey.

If someone feels led to show compassion more directly, they can make personal financial contributions and in other ways assist the refugees. They could work or volunteer for one of the private nonprofit organizations that provide humanitarian assistance. They could even volunteer to go overseas personally and minister directly to the refugees.

However, we cannot currently properly vet such people (according to the FBI director) to separate the good guys from the bad guys. It should also be remembered that at least a significant plurality of these refugees are young, unaccompanied men. In such a circumstance it would be criminally irresponsible for our federal government to ignore its duty to show compassion to its own citizens in order to extend the compassion of refugee status in the United States to the Syrian refugees.

It should be remembered that being “compassionate” includes being compassionate to all concerned, both those who are here in the U.S. as well as those who want to come. Being compassionate does not require, or even allow us, to voluntarily expose our neighbors’ jugular veins to those who would do them harm without our neighbors’ prior expressed permission.

Consequently, the Congress and the President must exercise their constitutional duty and suspend the resettlement of any Syrian refugees in the U.S. until they can be properly and safely vetted, which will probably require the prior defeat of ISIS.

I hang out…a lot…on Facebook Political Pages.

To expound on what I said earlier,

I am fascinated by the fact, that thanks to the use of supposedly Facebook-illegal “sockpuppets” or Phony Profiles, self proclaimed Internet “Pundits” and Tough Guys, living in their Mom’s Basement, can be whoever and whatever they want to be.

During the last several weeks, I have come across several Liberals and self-described “Independents” (i.e., Liberals too embarrassed to be identified as such or who think that they are fooling Conservatives by not identifying themselves as Liberals), who, having never had any use for the God of Abraham and his Holy Scripture before, are now “Christian Pundits”, who insist that all of us Christian Americans, who are opposed to bringing ISIS into our midst, as a “bunch of hypocrites”.

My father led me to Christ. He landed on Normandy Beach, on D-Day, as a Master Sergeant of an Army Engineering Unit. He was the finest man I have ever known.

God’s Holy Word tells us

To every thing there is a season, and a time to every purpose under the heaven: – Ecclesiastes 3:1

Regarding the so-called Syrian “Refugees”, the overwhelming majority of which are military-looking ultra-fit men with cell phones,…

I am sick of how Liberals all the sudden have such an interest in the Bible and what Christ has to say in a feeble attempt at trying to use the faith of three quarters of Americans to prove their political point.

Hey Liberals, when you’re yanking a baby’s head out from their mothers womb with a pair of tongs, do you give a rat’s butt about the God of Abraham and the tenets of Christianity, then?

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

Until He Comes,

KJ

The San Bernadino Massacre, Barack Hussein Obama, and Misplaced Priorities

On By kingsjesterIn Politics1 Comment

O-Casino-600-LIAs the FBI continues its investigation of the horrible massacre, perpetrated by Radical Islamists in San Bernadino, California, some new and distressing information has been brought to light.

Foxnews.com reports that

The former neighbor of San Bernardino gunman Syed Rizwan Farook reportedly spoke to regulars at his job about “sleeper cells just waiting” to attack the United States.

A frequent customer at Morgan’s Tavern, where Enrique Marquez worked, told The New York Times on Friday that nobody took Marquez seriously when he spoke of terror attacks and had no clue he was involved in the massacre at an Inland Regional Center office building that left 14 people dead.

“We took it as a joke. When you look at the kid and talk to him, no one would take him seriously about that,” Nick Rodriguez told The Times.

Federal authorities are expected to bring charges against Marquez, 24, who supplied Farook at least two of the weapons used in the attack. He legally purchased the AR-15 rifles Farook and his wife Tashfeen Malik used on their killing spree on Dec. 2. He will likely be indicted after spending hours talking to investigators about Farook and Malik.

Authorities believe Farook and Marquez discussed executing an attack somewhere in the Los Angeles area in 2012, but decided not to go through with it after four people were arrested in nearby Riverside County in an unrelated terror case. Investigators believe Marquez bought the rifles and gave them or sold them to Farook in preparation for that planned attack. It’s unclear what the target of the attack would’ve been. 

It was not immediately clear what specific charges Marquez would face, but Fox News has learned that he is the only person expected to be indicted anytime soon in connection with the attack. However, authorities say that other subjects are being monitored.

Marquez began speaking with federal authorities after they raided his mother’s home over the weekend. Right after the shootings, Marquez called his mother to say he was safe, but that he wouldn’t be coming home, neighbor Lorena Aguirre told the Associated Press. He later checked into a mental health facility. It’s unclear where he is now.

Marquez is also related to Farook by marriage, having wed the sister-in-law of the gunman’s older brother, state records show. The Associated Press reported that Marquez and and his bride, Mariya Chernykh listed their address on the marriage license at the same Corona home where Syed Raheel and Tatiana Farook live. Viviana Ramirez, a friend of Marquez, told the Los Angeles Times that Marquez rarely spoke about his family or his marriage.

Azmi Hasan, the mosque’s facilities manager, said Wednesday that he understood Marquez had converted to Islam, but said he was not a member of that mosque. Marquez had only worshipped there three to four times over seven years, said Hasan, who hadn’t seen him in about four years.

Marquez had a security guard license in California for several years, but it expired last year. He had worked at Wal-Mart since May, but has since been fired, spokesman Brian Nick told the Associated Press.

He spoke of wanting to join the military, a fellow student at Riverside Community College told the Los Angeles Times. His brother-in-law, Raheel Farook, is a Navy veteran, serving from 2003 to 2007 and earning the Global War on Terrorism Expeditionary Medal and the Global War on Terrorism Service Medal, among other awards.

Investigators were also examining the digital footprint left by the shooters, who tried to destroy their computer hard drives and cell phones prior to carrying out the attack. Investigators tell Fox News the data that has been recovered shows that Farook posted multiple messages online expressing support for Islamist groups like Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas, while also expressing hatred for Israel. Investigators have also expressed concern that Farook may have been in contact with other terror groups.

Authorities used dive teams to search a lake in San Bernardino on Thursday and Friday. Investigators apparently found something in the lake, but have not announced what the object was. Investigators are looking for a hard drive that may have been dumped in the lake, a law enforcement official briefed on the investigation told The Associated Press.

The FBI investigation into the mass shooting has been one of the most comprehensive in the bureau’s recent history. Law enforcement sources tell Fox News that more than 300 interviews related to the shooting have taken place in the U.S. An FBI team has also been dispatched to Europe as part of the investigation.

So, Terrorist “Sleeper Cells”, are standing by to perpetrate “Man-caused Disasters” on our Sovereign Nation” and its citizens.

Why is this happening?

It all starts at the top.

As we journey through this Quixotic Quest, known as our everyday lives, we come across windmills, which we must tilt with daily, known as “priorities”.

Priorities are unique, perplexing things, as they vary from individual to individual.

For those of us between employment, it is finding a meaningful, well-paying job, so that we may provide for our families. For other Americans, it could be the care of their elderly loved ones. For others, their priority may be to climb the Corporate Ladder at their place of employment.

For the parents of 30-year-old Liberals and “puff puff” “l”ibertarians, it may be that their priority is to get their slacker of a “kid” to move out of the basement.

But, I digress…

Barack Hussein Obama (mm mmm mmmm), the 44th President of these United States, has a problem.

(No, I don’t mean his overbearing wife, Mooch, and her desire to build shopping carts, which will tell us what “healthy” foods to buy. That’s a subject for another blog. Besides, it takes that heifer two trips to haul a.. …well, you know.)

Obama’s problem is one of MISPLACED PRIORITIES.

This problem started the very first time he took the Oath of Office, which clearly outlines his duties as President of the United States of America…

I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States.

Let’s examine the President’s MISPLACED PRIORITIES by using the three words which I underlined in the Oath of Office as topic headings, shall we?

To begin with, let’s examine the word PRESERVE.

It is a conflict of interest to swear to “preserve” a country which you have already promised to “radically change”.

As we have discovered, since Obama’s First Inauguration, all those long years ago, Obama has no intention of “preserving” the Land of our Founding Fathers and of hard-working Patriotic Americans, who sacrificed so much, for this Shining City Upon a Hill.

That includes his on-going attempt to strip Americans of our Second Amendment Right, by implementing more “Gun Control Laws” by Executive Order.

Because, after all, Muslim Terrorists’ number one priority is to obey our laws.

Yes, Mrs. Obama. Those before us, sacrificed “All this for a flag.”

Then, there is Obama’s Domestic Policy, in keeping with his promise to “radically change” this country, which has resulted in over 92,000,000 Americans  “dropping out” of our Work Force, because they cannot find meaningful jobs in a stagnant economy, controlled by a huge all-powerful Central Government, who rewards the slackers, by giving them FREE STUFF from cradle to grave and punishes those Entrepreneurial Americans who actually hire Americans,with onerous tax burdens, slifling competitiveness and creativity, literally bringing to a halt America’s Engine of Economic Growth.

And, finally, under this “PRESERVE” heading, there is Obama and his Administration’s misplaced priority of establishing a “Tyranny of the Minority”, when it comes to imposing the immorality and situational ethics of a very small minority of Americans on the overwhelming majority of the rest of us, through the use of “Push Polls” perpetuated by the sycophantic Main Stream Media and Liberal Activist Judges, including the Supreme Court of the United States of America, whose sole purpose, seemingly, is to further Obama’s original promise to “radically change” our country, including the definition of a word which has meant the same thing for thousands of years.

Next, Obama swore an oath to PROTECT America.

Obama started his presidency by bowing in front of  America’s enemies, during his World Apology Tour.

No President of the United States has every effectively protected our nation from a POSITION OF WEAKNESS.

Ask Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton, whose milksop endeavors in Foreign Policy led to increased attacks by the Radical Adherents of the “Religion of Peace’, otherwise known as Muslim Terrorism, or as Obama’s staff immediately renamed these wanton acts of violence, “Man-caused Disasters”, like the subject of this blog, which are increasing in frequency on our very shores.

Also, how can you “protect” a nation whose Southern Border is WIDE OPEN, presently allowing entrance to our Sovereign Nation by our enemies and virulent disease, alike?

By allowing the ongoing Illegal Alien Invasion and the resettlement of the Syrian “Refugees”, Obama is saying to the world,

Hey, C’mon in! Our Estados Unidos es tu Estados Unidos! Sit a spell. Unstrap your sidearm. Take us over.

And, that leads us to our final topic heading, DEFEND.

How can the Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave be defended by a President and his Administration who are so naive that they actually believe that they can effectively defend our Soverien Nation by cutting down our Military to pre-World War II Levels?

Our soldiers have been, even as I write this, being handed, their “pink slips” in the field. (And, no, I am not talking about the repeal of DADT. Our Brightest and Best have been receiving “Termination Notices” while on Active Duty).

Brilliant, huh?

Former Congressman and retired Lt. Col. Allen B. West thought so, too. He wrote that

For Obama and [Secretary of Defense Chuck] Hagel to believe taking the US Army down to pre-World War II levels is a smart decision evidences their abject stupidity in comprehending the global conflagrations in which we are embroiled — the enemy has a vote. This whole inane statement about “pivoting to the Asian-Pacific rim” is more empty rhetoric as we decimate our US Naval strength while China builds theirs.

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

I realize that I could have grown this Blog exponentially, by listing all of Obama’s MISPLACED PRIORITIES en masse.

However, I believe that simplicity in communication is the best way to get one’s point across.

The point I have been attempting to maker today, is a rather simplistic one, in deference to the Liberals whom I know read this blog on a daily basis, attempting to catch me in some sort of “lie”, which only they can see.

Obama’s MISPLACED PRIORITIES have not only tarnished this Shining City Upon a Hill, but it has endangered the continued existence of America and her citizens, with every day this past week, bringing a new example of Obama’s deliberate ineptness and shallow behavior, in the poor fulfillment of his Oath of Office, to the degree to which average Americans are concerned about their children’s’ and grandchildren’ sfuture.

Obama has failed miserably in his sworn duties as President of the United States.

But, then again, perhaps the only promise he intended to keep, was to “radically change” America.

…for the worse.

God protect us.

Until He Comes,

KJ

The San Bernadino Massacre: Islam, Christianity, “Radicalization”, and Personal Responsibility

On By kingsjesterIn Christianity, Politics1 Comment

islam-cartoon (2)It appears that the Radical Islamists , who massacred all of those innocent Americans in San Bernadino, California, had even bigger plans than they were able to complete.

The Los Angeles Times reports that

An examination of digital equipment recovered from the home of the couple who killed 14 people in San Bernardino last week has led FBI investigators to believe the shooters were planning an even larger assault, according to federal government sources.Investigators on Thursday continued to search for digital footprints left by Syed Rizwan Farook and Tashfeen Malik, scouring a downtown San Bernardino lake for electronic items, including a hard drive that the couple was hoping to destroy, sources told The Times.

Farook and Malik were in the final planning stages of an assault on a location or building that housed a lot more people than the Inland Regional Center, possibly a nearby school or college, according to federal sources familiar with the widening investigation.

Investigators have based that conclusion on evidence left behind on Farook and Malik’s computers and digital devices, not all of which the couple were able to destroy before they were killed in a firefight with police, the sources said.

Images of San Bernardino-area schools were found on a cellphone belonging to Farook, according to a law enforcement source. But the source cautioned that Farook may have had a legitimate reason to have the images because his work as a county health inspector involved checking on school dining facilities.

On Thursday, one of the federal government sources told The Times that Farook asked his friend and neighbor, Enrique Marquez, to buy two military-style rifles used in the attacks because he feared he “wouldn’t pass a background check” if he attempted to acquire the weapons on his own. The rifles were bought at a local gun store, the source said.

The timing of the rifle purchases is significant to FBI investigators. Another federal government source previously told The Times that Farook may have been considering a separate terror plot in 2011 or 2012.

Farook was self-radicalizing around that time, FBI Director James Comey said, and met Malik soon after, eventually escorting her to the United States. Farook was a practicing Muslim. Marquez converted to Islam around the time he purchased the weapons, sources have told The Times.

FBI agents believe Farook abandoned his plans to launch the earlier attack after a law enforcement task force arrested three men in Chino in November 2012. The men were later convicted of charges related to providing material support to terrorists and plotting to kill Americans in Afghanistan. A fourth man arrested in Afghanistan also was convicted in the scheme.

Marquez has emerged as a central figure in the investigation. The FBI had been conducting interviews with 24-year-old, who checked himself into a mental health facility after the attacks.

The former Wal-Mart security guard has waived his Miranda rights and cooperated with the inquiry, and it was Marquez who told FBI agents about Farook’s earlier plans, according to one of the government sources, who also requested anonymity.

“They were talking generally about something, but I don’t think it made it to anything specific,” one of the sources said of the earlier plot. “I don’t think it got to a time or a place.”

The source said it remains unclear whether Marquez had any involvement in the planning of the shooting or had any prior knowledge that an attack was pending.

Marquez, a cycling enthusiast who wanted to join the U.S. Navy, was a longtime friend and neighbor of Farook. He also married the sister of Farook’s sister-in-law last year, although the circumstances of the union are now under investigation, a government official previously told The Times.

There was no paperwork transferring ownership of the assault rifles from Marquez to Farook, as required by California law, government officials told The Times.

Hours after the shooting, Marquez posted a cryptic message on his Facebook page.

“I’m. Very sorry guys,” the message read. “It was a pleasure.”

Bowdich on Thursday declined to answer questions about Marquez, who has not been charged with a crime.

There is a phrase going around Facebook right now that states that

Not all Muslims are Terrorists, but, all Terrorists are Muslim.

I would add a codicil to that…

Everyone is responsible for their own actions.

In keeping with that thought, Rush Limbaugh, the Godfather of Conservative Talk Radio, made the following salient point, as he often does, does his nationally syndicated radio program, yesterday…

Everybody is now saying, “Oh, yeah, the San Bernardino Two? They were ‘radicalized.'”  Marco Rubio was talking about it last night on Megyn Kelly’s show on Fox.  Everybody. I mean, the FBI did it. Obama did it. Everybody’s talking about, “They were radicalized,” and it’s almost… I’m starting to pickup on the fact that it’s almost like that makes them a victim or victims.  “Oh, yes! This nice, loving young couple happened to meet on a dating website, and they fell immediately in love, and they made great plans to come to America and start trying to access the American dream — and then they got ‘radicalized.’ “Yeah, they were just the nicest couple.  People looked at ’em and thought how wonderful and beautiful their children were gonna be. They were just the sweetest pair, the kind of people you;d love to have come over for a bridge party and maybe blow the place up later.” I’m sorry. “They might come over for a bridge party, maybe have dinner, go to a ball game — and then they got ‘radicalized.'”  Like, what? Brainwashed? Like they were victimized? Like it’s not really their fault?  I don’t care how it happens, is the point.  They’re terrorists.  They’re extremists.

They’re radicals.  They’re militant.  They are murderers.  They are active, knowing participants.  They are responsible, and this term, “They were radicalized,” is almost — depending the people using it — an attempt to distance them from what they actually did.  It was almost like, “Yeah, they were just driving along, walking along, living their lives, and then? And then! They were radicalized.  They were brainwashed, and then they were programmed to go to the United States –, particularly San Bernardino, California — and blow up a government building.”

And that’s not how it happened.  So it’s more than a pet peeve.  I’m just telling you, folks, be very wary of this, ’cause that’s, I think, what the purpose of using the term “radicalized” is.  The longer this goes on, the effort’s gonna be made in the media and in the Democrat Party to try to tell you that these two were actually not responsible.  They were programmed.  They were ordered. They were brainwashed, Manchurian Candidate-type people.  It’s an effort to soften your opinion of them, and I just don’t think that should happen.

First off…while I have met some very nice American Muslims, I have also been inside a mosque where I was looked at as if they wanted to take a scimitar to my neck.

If Moderate Muslims are not behind their radical brethren’s eternal jihad against us infidels, they need to get their mugs in front of the cable news networks’ TV cameras and say so…because all I see representing them when I turn on the news, are the abrasive members of CAIR, blaming America for all the world’s troubles.

Secondly, why are American liberals so naively defending these barbarians?

Are they so contrary, as to not realize that Radical Islam punishes every single social issue that American Liberals so “righteously” defend in this nation?

The maddening thing is that every time you challenge liberals on this fact, they try to equate radical Islam with American Christianity.

Frankly, the ignorance of these young Liberals blows my mind.

Recently, I have heard and read from some of this “Me, First Generation” that there is not any difference between American Christianity and Radical Islam. Quite frankly, that’s like saying that there’s no difference between an in-ground swimming pool and a garden hose.

In Islam, the way to “walk with God and escape his judgement on that final day of judgment” is through ‘falah’, which means self-effort or positive achievement. The faithful must submit to God and follow all of his laws as found in the Koran. Judgment day in Islam involves some sort of measurement of what the believer has done wrong and what they have done right. And, even then, you might not be let into heaven if Allah decides you’re not good enough.

This is the direct opposite of Christianity.

According to the Bible, no man can ever be good enough to deserve God’s favor, to win God’s heaven, because from birth we have Free Will. This Free Will may cause us to reject God and live our lives our own way. That’s why it was necessary for Jesus Christ to die for our sins, covering us in His blood of the New Covenant.

God’s Word tells us that what we need is not ‘falah,’ but faith. To have faith in, to trust, to rely on Jesus and his death as as “the expiation for our sins”. Those who have been Saved by Jesus Christ can be sure that in the future God will welcome them into heaven with wide open arms, because they have been washed by His blood.

Older Americans, such as myself, actually see radical Islam and Sharia law for what it is.

Why is that?

I believe that it is because of the old adage,

With age comes wisdom.

Older Americans can remember when the Shah of Iran was deposed and the Radical Mullahs took over the nation, holding Americans hostage, under the ineffectual American President Jimmy Carter, for 444 days.

The only reason that those hostages were not killed and were let go, was the inauguration of President Ronald Wilson Reagan.

The only thing that these barbarians fear is strength, as the leader of Jordan has demonstrated.

Older Americans were raised differently than this current generation, for the most part. We were raised to understand Christianity’s place, as the stitching, in the fabric of our nation.

It is a legacy which our fathers and their fathers, bequeathed to us, along with the courage to stand up for our beliefs.

This latest generation, seems to be more interested in watching a woman who takes a bath in fruit loops, interviewing the President of the United States, than they are about what is actually happening in our nation.

This generation’s predilection for situational ethics, relative morality, and all-encompassing political correctness, is reminiscent of the cattle who are led up the ramp to the slaughter house.

They go through their lives, content in their ignorance, until the blade falls.

Unfortunately, this is the generation that we are leaving our country to.

It is time for them to wake up, grow up, and stand up. .before it’s too late.

Until He Comes,

KJ

The Trump Backlash: Huma “The Proud Muslim” and Her “Troubling Familial Affiliations”

On By kingsjesterIn PoliticsLeave a comment

Huma-Abedin-and-Hillary-Clinton-620x436Well, for the last few days, the popular thing among “The Smartest People in the Room” has been to stand up to Republican Presidential Hopeful Donald J. Trump’s suggestion to pause all Muslim Immigration into the United States of America, until our government figures out how to ensure that ISIS will not embed themselves among innocent Muslims.

Hillary’s “Right-Hand Woman” and Gal-Pal Huma Abedin (Mrs. Anthony Weiner) recently decided to join the Peanut Gallery, as Fox News Reports…

Huma Abedin, the longtime confidant to Democratic presidential front-runner Hillary Clinton, took aim at Donald Trump’s proposal to ban Muslims from entering the United States in an email with the subject line: “I’m a proud Muslim.”

“Donald Trump is leading in every national poll to be the Republican nominee for president. And earlier today, he released his latest policy proposal: to ban all Muslims from entering our country,” wrote Ms. Abedin, in an email Monday evening to Mrs. Clinton’s supporters. “I’m a proud Muslim — but you don’t have to share my faith to share my disgust.”

Of course, that was a strictly political move.

Breitbart.com reports that

Democratic presidential frontrunner Hillary Clinton is seizing on Donald Trump’s proposal to ban all Muslim entry into the U.S. with a fundraising email featuring long-time aide Huma Abedin, who is Muslim.

The email reads, in part: “I’m a proud Muslim–but you don’t have to share my faith to share my disgust.” The email is noteworthy for two reasons: first, that it acknowledges Abedin’s faith at all; and second, that it features Abedin, who is not only under ethical criticism but also suspected of radical ties.

In 2008, then-Sen. Barack Obama was terrified of having his campaign associated with Islam, lest it trigger what his aides feared might be a Muslim backlash. In June 2008, Ben Smith (then of Politico) reported: “Two Muslim women at Barack Obama’s rally in Detroit on Monday were barred from sitting behind the podium by campaign volunteers seeking to prevent the women’s headscarves from appearing in photographs or on television with the candidate.” (The campaign later apologized to them.)

The Clinton campaign, in fact, even sought to capitalize on anti-Muslim sentiment by circulating a photograph of Obama wearing a headscarf on a visit to Kenya. (The candidate herself claimed not to “know anything about it.”)

Democrats have come a long way, from trying to appease anti-Muslim sentiment in their own party to using Muslims to fundraise from their supporters.

However, Huma Abedin is an odd choice. A “proud Muslim” would not marry a Jew–much less scandal-plagued former Rep. Anthony Weiner–given that Islamic law prevents women from marrying non-Muslims. Stranger still, Huma Abedin’s mother Saleha is reported to be part of the Muslim Brotherhood, which is not only “proud” but radical, and violent.

In addition, Huma Abedin was recently investigated for embezzlement, and has been accused of failing to provide complete financial disclosure to the State Department, as well as working for a private contractor on the side.

Not exactly a proud record–except in Clintonland.

Let’s look a little closer at Ms. Abedin’s background, and her “troubling Familial Affiliations”, shall we?

According to discoverthenetworks.org,

Huma Abedin was born in 1976 in Kalamazoo, Michigan. Her father, Syed Abedin (1928-1993), was an Indian-born scholar who had worked as a visiting professor at Saudi Arabia’s King Abdulaziz University in the early Seventies. 

[She is]

  • Daughter of Saleha Mahmood Abedin, a pro-Sharia sociologist with ties to numerous Islamist organizations including the Muslim Brotherhood
  • Longtime assistant to Hillary Clinton
    Wife of former congressman Anthony Weiner
  • Longtime former employee of the Institute of Muslim Minority Affairs, which shares the Muslim Brotherhood’s goal of establishing Islamic supremacy and Sharia Law worldwide.

…From 1997 until sometime before early 1999, Abedin, while still interning at the White House, was an executive board member of George Washington University’s (GWU) Muslim Students Association (MSA), heading the organization’s “Social Committee.”

It is noteworthy that in 2001-02, soon after Abedin left that executive board, the chaplain and “spritual guide” of GWU’s MSA was Anwar al-Awlaki, the al Qaeda operative who ministered to some of the men who were among the 9/11 hijackers. Another chaplain at GWU’s MSA (from at least October 1999 through April 2002) was Mohamed Omeish, who headed the International Islamic Relief Organization, which has been tied to the funding of al Qaeda. Omeish’s brother, Esam, headed the Muslim American Society, the Muslim Brotherhood’s quasi-official branch in the United States. Both Omeish brothers were closely associated with Abdurahman Alamoudi, who would later be convicted and incarcerated on terrorism charges.

From 1996-2008, Abedin was employed by the Institute of Muslim Minority Affairs (IMMA) as the assistant editor of its in-house publication, the Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs (JMMA). At least the first seven of those years overlapped with the al Qaeda-affiliated Abdullah Omar Naseef’s active presence at IMMA. Abedin’s last six years at the Institute (2002-2008) were spent as a JMMA editorial board member; for one of those years, 2003, Naseef and Abedin served together on that board.

Abedin went on maternity leave after giving birth to a baby boy in early December 2011. When she returned to work in June 2012, the State Department granted her an arrangement that allowed her to do outside consulting work as a “special government employee,” even as she remained a top advisor in the Department. Abedin did not disclose on her financial report either the arrangement or the$135,000 she earned from it, in violation of a law mandating that public officials disclose significant sources of income. Abedin’s outside clients included the U.S. State Department, Hillary Clinton, the William Jefferson Clinton Foundation, and Teneo (a firm co-founded by Doug Band, a former counselor for Bill Clinton). Good-government groups warned of the potential conflict-of-interest inherent in an arangement where a government employee maintains private clients.

In June 2012, five Republican lawmakers (most prominently, Michele Bachmann) sent letters to the inspectors general at the Departments of Homeland Security, Justice, and State, asking that they investigate whether the Muslim Brotherhood was gaining undue influence over U.S. government officials. One letter, noting that Huma Abedin’s position with Hillary Clinton “affords her routine access to the secretary [of state] and to policymaking,” expressed concern over the fact that Abedin “has three family members—her late father, mother and her brother—connected to Muslim Brotherhood operatives and/or organizations.” Some other prominent Republicans such as John McCain and John Boehner disavowed the concerns articulated in the letters.

On February 1, 2013—Hillary Clinton’s final day as Secretary of State—Abedinresigned her post as Mrs. Clinton’s deputy chief of staff. Yet she would continue to serve as a close aide to Clinton. 

On March 1, 2013, Abedin was tapped to run Clinton’s post-State Department transition team, comprised of a six-person “transition office” located in Washington.

Huma Abedin’s brother, Hassan Abedin, has ties to the Muslim Brotherhood and is currently an associate editor with the JMMA. Hassan was once a fellow at the Oxford Center for Islamic Studies, at a time when the Center’s board included such Brotherhood-affiliated figures as Yusuf al-Qaradawi and Abdullah Omar Naseef.

Huma’s sister, Heba Abedin (formerly known as “Heba A. Khaled”), is an assistant editor with JMMA, where she served alongside Huma prior to the latter’s departure.

Speaking straight from the heart, as an American citizen, I remain offended, that during the time of Hillary Clinton’s tenure as Secretary of State, that someone with direct ties to our sworn enemies, the Muslim Brotherhood, had access to the highest level of Top Secret Information contained in our State Department.

And, the thing is, she not only had access through her job as Assistant to Secretary of State Clinton, she also had access to government information through pillow talk with her husband, then-Congressman and “Professional Sexter” Anthony Weiner.

And, being the “proud Muslim” that she has proclaimed herself to be, it is a certainty that this information found its way to those “troubling Familial Affiliations”.

Which brings up a troubling question:

What if the Obama Administration and their minions are shouting down Donald J., Trump, because they knew “what was going on” all along

…and simply did not care?

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

Donald J. Trump, White House Hypocrisy, and the Immigration Act of 1924

On By kingsjesterIn Politics4 Comments

Rising-NRD-600The hang-wringing and blowback from the suggestion by Donald J. Trump to implement a pause in the immigration of Muslims to the United States of America, has been everything that the consummate showman now doubt hoped for…and more.

White House Spokesperson Josh Earnest was positively apoplectic at yesterday’s Daily Press Conference, as Breitbart.com reports…

President Barack Obama’s spokesman angrily lashed out at Donald Trump for proposing a ban on Muslim immigration to the United States, and accused him of “offensive bluster” and “grotesque and offensive” language.

“The fact is, that what Donald Trump said yesterday disqualifies him from serving as president,” spokesman Josh Earnest said, suggesting to reporters that his words were fundamentally anti-American.

Earnest denounced Trump’s “carnival barker routine” which included “outright lies” and mocked the Republican frontrunner for having “fake hair.” He said:

The Trump campaign, for months now, has had a dustbin of history-like quality to it, from the vacuous sloganeering to the outright lies to even the fake hair, the whole carnival barker routine that we’ve seen for some time now.
Earnest also denounced other Republicans for continuing to say that they would support the nominee of the Republican party even it was Donald Trump.

Earnest suggested the Republican Party is racist for failing to denounce Trump’s presidential campaign, and he reminded reporters that House Majority Whip Rep. Steve Scalise (R-LA)
once called himself “David Duke without the baggage.” He said:

“Earlier this year, House Republicans elected to their leadership somebody who famously bragged to a reporter that he’s David Duke without the baggage.”

“They should say right now that they will not support him for president,” Earnest said, as he called Trump’s proposal “morally reprehensible.”

Earnest said Republicans leaders should:

“Say right now that they would not support Donald Trump for president. What he said is disqualifying and any Republican who’s too fearful of the Republican base to admit it has no business serving as president either. OK?”

When asked why the White House had decided to weigh in on Trump’s hair, Earnest defended the topic as an important part of the campaign.

“Well I guess I was describing why it would be easy for people to dismiss the Trump campaign as not particularly serious,” he said.

“Because of his hair?” one reporter asked in disbelief.

“Well because he’s got a rather outrageous appearance, that’s the hallmark of his campaign and his identity, though, that’s the point I’m trying to cite there,” he said.

“How do you know that it’s fake?” asked a second reporter.

“Well I guess I’m happy to be fact checked,” Earnest replied.

Suspending immigration is not a new concept.

It’s been done before…for over 40 years.

The following information is courtesy of u-s-history.com…

During the Harding administration, a stop-gap immigration measure was passed by Congress in 1921 for the purpose of slowing the flood of immigrants entering the United States.

A more thorough law was signed by President Coolidge in May 1924. It provided for the following:

The quota for immigrants entering the U.S. was set at two percent of the total of any given nation`s residents in the U.S. as reported in the 1890 census;
after July 1, 1927, the two percent rule was to be replaced by an overall cap of 150,000 immigrants annually and quotas determined by “national origins” as revealed in the 1920 census.

College students, professors and ministers were exempted from the quotas. Initially immigration from the other Americas was allowed, but measures were quickly developed to deny legal entry to Mexican laborers.

The clear aim of this law was to restrict the entry of immigrants from Southern and Eastern Europe, while welcoming relatively large numbers of newcomers from Britain, Ireland, and Northern Europe.

The 1921 law had used the 1910 census to determine the base for the quotas; by changing to the 1890 census when fewer Italians or Bulgarians lived in the U.S., more of the “dangerous` and “different” elements were kept out. This legislation reflected discriminatory sentiments that had surfaced earlier during the Red Scare of 1919-20.

Total
Entering U.S.
Country of Origin
Great
Britain
Eastern
Europe*
Italy
1920
430,001
38,471
3,913
95,145
1921
805,228
51,142
32,793
222,260
1922
309,556
25,153
12,244
40,319
1923
522,919
45,759
16,082
46,674
1924
706,896
59,490
13,173
56,246
1925
294,314
27,172
1,566
6,203
1926
304,488
25,528
1,596
8,253
*Romania, Bulgaria and Turkey.
U.S. Bureau of the Census, Historical Statistics of the United States, Colonial Times to 1957 (Washington, D.C., 1960), p. 56.

A provision in the 1924 law barred entry to those ineligible for citizenship — effectively ending the immigration of all Asians into the United States and undermining the earlier “Gentlemen`s Agreement” with Japan. Efforts by Secretary of State Hughes to change this provision were not successful and actually inflamed the passions of the anti-Japanese press, which was especially strong on the West Coast.

Heated protests were issued by the Japanese government and a citizen committed seppuku outside the American embassy in Tokyo. May 26, the effective date of the legislation, was declared a day of national humiliation in Japan, adding another in a growing list of grievances against the U.S.

(The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 upheld the national origins quota system established by the Immigration Act of 1924, reinforcing these quotas.)

In 1965, the Hart-Cellar Act abolished the national origins quota system that had structured America`s immigration policy since the 1920`s, replacing it with a preference system that emphasized immigrants` skills and family relationships with citizens or residents of the United States.

Additionally, in April of 1980, during the Iranian Hostage Crisis, President Jimmy Carter cancelled all visas issued to Iranians for entry into the United States and warned that they would be revalidated only for “compelling and proven humanitarian reasons or where the national interest requires.”

So, what Trump proposed has been done before

Evidently, no one ever told Obama and his Administration that when you point your finger at someone, there are 4 other fingers pointing back at you.

On January 7th of this year, Abraham H. Miller wrote the following blog, featured on thehill.com…

At the end of World War II, the Jewish survivors of Europe’s Holocaust found that nearly every door was closed to them. “Tell Me Where Can I Go?” was a popular Yiddish song at the time. Decades later, the Christians of the Middle East face the same problem, and the Obama administration is keeping the door shut.

America is about to accept 9000 Syrian Muslims, refugees of the brutal war between the Assad regime and its Sunni opposition, which includes ISIS, Al Qaeda, and various other militias. That number is predicted to increase each year.  There are no Christian refugees that will be admitted.

Why? Because the Department of State is adhering with all the rigidity of a Soviet era bureaucracy to the rule that only people at risk from massacres launched by the regime qualify for refugee status. The rapes of Christian women and the butchery of Christian children do not count. No matter how moved Americans were this Christmas season by the plight of their fellow Christ followers in Syria and Iraq, no matter how horrific the visuals of beheadings, enslavement, and mass murder, the Christians fleeing death do not engender the compassion of this president.

The Christians are being raped, tortured, and murdered by militias, not by the Syrian government. This technicality condemns them to continue to be victims without hope. And this technicality is being adhered to with all the tenacity with which President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s State Department manipulated quotas and created subterfuges  to keep out the Jews fleeing the oppression of Nazi Germany. Obama no more wants the Middle East’s Christian refugees than Roosevelt wanted Europe’s Jewish refugees.

We have seen in the last several weeks that President Obama has no difficulty using his “phone and his pen,” as he dramatically boasts, to circumvent the law. When it comes to immigration, he had no difficulty enacting an amnesty that a federal judge  subsequently ruled unconstitutional. He has had no problem circumventing Congress to change the relationship with Cuba. This president has shown that he will push back on the constraints of law when he wants to get something done.

But there are not even such constraints when it comes to the Middle East’s Christians fleeing the brutality of ISIS and Al Qaeda. The Department of State chooses to adhere to a definition of refugees as people persecuted by their own government. What difference does it make which army imperils the lives of innocent Christians?  Christians are still be slaughtered for being Christian, and their government is incapable of protecting them. Does some group have to come along—as Jewish groups did during the Holocaust—and sardonically guarantee that these are real human beings?

The Christians would barely have to be vetted for ties to terror organizations, which by their very nature do not take Christians. Meanwhile, there is the uncomfortable issue that among the Sunni refugees there are some in league with the Sunni terror militias. And beyond that there is the equally uncomfortable question of the acculturation of segments of the Muslim community.

That our Muslim neighbors are as worthy of being good Americans as anyone else is not an issue. That a highly active and prominent minority in the Muslim community seeks to transform America is an issue and one that cannot be overlooked, when taking in Muslim refugees.  Will they be vetted for seeking the transformation of America through jihad?

Whether the recent violence in Australia, the murder of two New York policemen, the Boston Marathon bombings, the growing list of victims of honor killings in Western societies, the forced closing of streets in Paris for Muslim prayers, the Muslim no-go and Sharia patrol areas of Britain, the rape of infidel women in Sweden, or the call by Council on Islamic American Relations that Islam is not in America to be another religion but to transform America, there is a Muslim problem. That it is not a problem precipitated by a majority of Muslims does not lessen its dangers.

No doubt the majority of the Muslim refugees will become good American citizens, but the real concern is that a significant minority will not. Yet, the Middle East Christians, even as a minority, do not pose remotely the same kind of threat.

With Christmas fresh in our minds, it is time for all people of good will to say to the Obama administration that telling Christians awaiting death that there is no room for them in the inn is not only unacceptable, it is also, to use President Obama’s own words, “not who we are.” This season, Christians  need to make their voice heard. They should not act as the Jews did, waiting for a president who had no intention of doing anything, to do something.

If you were watching Saturday morning cartoons in 1977 on ABC, you would have seen this Schoolhouse Rock musical cartoon titled The Great American Melting Pot.  It extolled the unique greatness of  our American heritage.
For a while now, that heritage has been under attack.
The Immigration Act of 1924 was passed because America had experienced an overwhelming flood of immigrants, which strained the resources of our nation.
This act allowed all of these immigrants to be assimilated into American Society and to actually become Americans, in thought, word, deed, and LOYALTY.
An Liberal President Jimmy Carter stopped Iranians from immigrating, because, just like the situation we faced today with Radical Islam, we were AT WAR.
As the article from thehill.com shows, Obama and his Administration are themselves being restrictive in whom they allow to immigrate to America.
The only reason that they are mad at Donald J. Trump is that he is attempting to thwart their plans to rapidly import thousands of Muslims, and potential Democrat Voters, into our country.
Like all Liberals, they remain oblivious of their own hypocrisy.
Until He Comes,
KJ

Separating the Wolves from the Lambs: Trump Issues Press Release Calling for a Pause in Islamic Immigration. Hand-Wringing Ensues.

On By kingsjesterIn Christianity, Politics2 Comments

Orphans-NRD-600Yesterday, the following Press Release appeared on the official Facebook Page of Republican Presidential Candidate Hopeful Donald J. Trump…

(New York, NY) December 7th, 2015, — Donald J. Trump is calling for a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country’s representatives can figure out what is going on. According to Pew Research, among others, there is great hatred towards Americans by large segments of the Muslim population. Most recently, a poll from the Center for Security Policy released data showing “25% of those polled agreed that violence against Americans here in the United States is justified as a part of the global jihad” and 51% of those polled, “agreed that Muslims in America should have the choice of being governed according to Shariah.” Shariah authorizes such atrocities as murder against non-believers who won’t convert, beheadings and more unthinkable acts that pose great harm to Americans, especially women.

Mr. Trump stated, “Without looking at the various polling data, it is obvious to anybody the hatred is beyond comprehension. Where this hatred comes from and why we will have to determine. Until we are able to determine and understand this problem and the dangerous threat it poses, our country cannot be the victims of horrendous attacks by people that believe only in Jihad, and have no sense of reason or respect for human life. If I win the election for President, we are going to Make America Great Again.” – Donald J. Trump

Dr. Russell Moore, the President of the Southern Baptist convention, wrote the following in his blog, excerpts of which were released in the Washington Post, in order to make a Liberal Point.

The governing authorities have a responsibility, given by God, to protect the population from violence, and to punish the evildoers who perpetrate such violence (Rom. 13:1-7). The governing powers, as with every earthly power, have a limited authority. The government cannot exalt itself as a lord over the conscience, a god over the soul.

The United States government should fight, and fight hard, against radical Islamic jihadism. The government should close the borders to anyone suspected of even a passing involvement with any radical cell or terrorist network. But the government should not penalize law-abiding people, especially those who are American citizens, for holding their religious convictions.

Muslims are an unpopular group these days. And I would argue that non-violent Muslim leaders have a responsibility to call out terror and violence and jihad. At the same time, those of us who are Christians ought to stand up for religious liberty not just when our rights are violated but on behalf of others too.

Make no mistake. A government that can shut down mosques simply because they are mosques can shut down Bible studies because they are Bible studies. A government that can close the borders to all Muslims simply on the basis of their religious belief can do the same thing for evangelical Christians. A government that issues ID badges for Muslims simply because they are Muslims can, in the fullness of time, demand the same for Christians because we are Christians.

We are in a time of war, and we should respond as those in a time of war. But we must never lose in a time of war precious freedoms purchased through the blood of patriots in years past. We must have security and we must have order. But we must not trade soul freedom for an illusion of winning.

Dr. Moore makes a good point, given the proven anti-Christian Viewpoint of the Obama Administration.

However…

During the whole Syrian Refugee Controversy, I have come across several Liberals and self-described “Independents” (i.e., Liberals too embarrassed to be identified as such or who think that they are fooling Conservatives by not identifying themselves as Liberals), who, having never had any use for the God of Abraham and his Holy Scripture before, are now “Christian Pundits”, who insist that all of us Christian Americans, who are opposed to bringing ISIS into our midst, as a “bunch of hypocrites”.

My father led me to Christ. He landed on Normandy Beach, on D-Day, as a Master Sergeant of an Army Engineering Unit. He was the finest man I have ever known.

God’s Holy Word tells us

To every thing there is a season, and a time to every purpose under the heaven: – Ecclesiastes 3:1

Regarding the so-called Syrian “Refugees”, the overwhelming majority of which are military-looking ultra-fit men with cell phones…

I am sick of how Liberals all the sudden have such an interest in the Bible and what Christ has to say in a feeble attempt at trying to use the faith of three quarters of Americans to prove their political point.

Hey Liberals, when you’re yanking a baby’s head out from their mothers womb with a pair of tongs, do you give a rat’s butt about the God of Abraham and the tenets of Christianity, then?

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

Dr. Moore, Christian American Conservatives, including members of the Denomination of which you are the President, are exercising Discernment.

We are not living in fear.

Now, there is no doubt that Donald Trump is a showman.

He is flamboyant and he knows how to work the media.

There are times when Trump does not seem to possess that same little gatekeeper in his head that the rest of us have.

He says things out loud that most of us will only think about saying.

This is a prime example.

I am certain that his Press Release is causing a lot of hand wringing at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue in Washington DC, especially after University of Chicago “Guest lecturer”, President Barack Hussein Obama, gave his Sunday night lecture to Americans, telling us not to be a bunch of bigots.

However, when you look at what Trump is actually saying, and the reasons that he is saying it, he brings up a solid point.

The wife of the couple who were responsible for the massacre in San Bernardino, California WAS VETTED by our government. And, she turned out to be a Muslim terrorist.

Just yesterday, officials admitted that it is a very strong possibility that Islamic State Members will embed themselves in the Syrian refugees, whom Obama is hell bent on bringing into our country.

Now, the number of the Syrian Refugees are going to total in the tens of thousands.

The San Bernardino Massacre proved that the Obama administration cannot properly vet a single Radical Islamist entering our country with one other person.

How in the world are they in going to properly vet tens of thousands of Muslims?

Let’s reflect upon the stats featured in Trump’s Press Release for a moment.

25% of those surveyed said that they approved of violent acts being perpetrated here in America in the name of global jihad. 25% of just 10,000 refugees would be 2500.

Are we willing to take the chance of that large of a number of potentially violent individuals being relocated into our country?

It only takes one individual strapped up with explosives to take out 100 people.

The other stat that the release gave was that 51% of those polled would like to see Sharia law here in America.

As I have written before, Sharia law is not compatible with the United States Constitution.

Not even close.

Trump is not saying to completely eliminate legal immigration of Muslim people to our country forever.

I believe that all he is calling for is for the Obama Administration to stop for a moment and make sure of what is going on here. Trump is correct. Trump is blunt.

And, often, he comes off as a bull in a china shop.

However, that does not mean that he is not making a salient point.

What happened in San Bernardino, regardless of what President Barack Hussein Obama said on Sunday night, is not about gun control. It is about the radical adherence to a political ideology, disguised as a religion.

A political ideology, with a violent past, and a violent present.

And, until our government can figure out how to separate the Jihadist from the innocent, perhaps they need to take heed of what Candidate Trump suggested yesterday.

Until He Comes,

KJ