Obama at U.N. Calls Non-Muslims Who Equate Islam With Terror “Ignorant”

AFBrancoThe-Sword-9122014We know that ISIL — which emerged out of the chaos of Iraq and Syria — depends on perpetual war to survive. But we also know that they gain adherents because of a poisonous ideology. So part of our job, together, is to work to reject such extremism that infects too many of our young people. Part of that effort must be a continued rejection by Muslims of those who distort Islam to preach intolerance and promote violence, and it must also a rejection by non-Muslims of the ignorance that equates Islam with terror. (Applause.)

This work will take time. There are no easy answers to Syria. And there are no simple answers to the changes that are taking place in much of the Middle East and North Africa. But so many families need help right now; they don’t have time. And that’s why the United States is increasing the number of refugees who we welcome within our borders. That’s why we will continue to be the largest donor of assistance to support those refugees. And today we are launching new efforts to ensure that our people and our businesses, our universities and our NGOs can help as well — because in the faces of suffering families, our nation of immigrants sees ourselves. – President Barack Hussein Obama, Speech to the U.N. General Assembly, 9/27/2015

Gosh, Scooter. I have no idea how Americans could have ever associated Islam with Radical Islamic Terrorism.

After all, those were Southern Baptists who killed over 3,000 Americans on September 11, 2001, weren’t they?

What does the Islamic Book of Faith, the Koran (Quran) say about “killing in the Name of the Prophet (Mohammed)”?

  • Quran (4:76) – “Those who believe fight in the cause of Allah…”
  • Quran (4:89) – “They but wish that ye should reject Faith, as they do, and thus be on the same footing (as they): But take not friends from their ranks until they flee in the way of Allah (From what is forbidden). But if they turn renegades, seize them and slay them wherever ye find them; and (in any case) take no friends or helpers from their ranks.”
  • Quran (4:95) – “Not equal are those believers who sit (at home) and receive no hurt, and those who strive and fight in the cause of Allah with their goods and their persons. Allah hath granted a grade higher to those who strive and fight with their goods and persons than to those who sit (at home). Unto all (in Faith) Hath Allah promised good: But those who strive and fight Hath He distinguished above those who sit (at home) by a special reward,-”  This passage criticizes “peaceful” Muslims who do not join in the violence, letting them know that they are less worthy in Allah’s eyes.  It also demolishes the modern myth that “Jihad” doesn’t mean holy war in the Quran, but rather a spiritual struggle.  Not only is the Arabic word used in this passage, but it is clearly not referring to anything spiritual, since the physically disabled are given exemption.  (The Hadith reveals the context of the passage to be in response to a blind man’s protest that he is unable to engage in Jihad and this is reflected in other translations of the verse).
  • Quran (4:104) – “And be not weak hearted in pursuit of the enemy; if you suffer pain, then surely they (too) suffer pain as you suffer pain…”  Is pursuing an injured and retreating enemy really an act of self-defense?
  • Quran (5:33) – “The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His messenger and strive to make mischief in the land is only this, that they should be murdered or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite sides or they should be imprisoned; this shall be as a disgrace for them in this world, and in the hereafter they shall have a grievous chastisement”
  • Quran (8:12) – “I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them”  No reasonable person would interpret this to mean a spiritual struggle.

Concerning taking in those Syrian Refugees, Scooter…have you been paying attention to what is happening in Germany?

As attacks on Christians in asylum seeker centres increase and religious groups clash, Jörg Radek says (Syrian) refugees should be separately accommodated based on their faith

Christian and Muslim refugees should be housed separately in Germany to minimise tensions following growing levels of violence at asylum seeker shelters, a police chief has urged.

Jörg Radek, deputy head of Germany’s police union, said migrants should be divided, following increasing numbers of attacks on Christians in refugee centres.

“I think housing separated according to religion makes perfect sense,” Jörg Radek, deputy head of Germany’s police union, told German newspaper Die Welt, particularly for Muslims and Christians.

Two separate clashes erupted between refugees on Sunday at a temporary migrant shelter in Kassel-Calden in northern Germany left 14 people injured, police said.

While you were pontificating platitudes to the U.N., Scooter, out here in the Real World, a Quinnipiac University poll showed that 53 percent of American voters do not want those 10,000 Syrian refugees, that you bragged to your Muslim buddies at the U.N. about bringing here, anywhere near our shores.

On September 25, 2012, Obama appeared before the United Nations General Assembly, to address the circumstances of the massacre at the U.S.Embassy Compound, located in Benghazi, Libya. Here are the words he spoke, before representatives of the entire world:

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

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

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

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

Let that sink in for a moment.

In these waning days of Obama’s tenure as President of the United States, the bridle has come off the horse, or in Petulant President Pantywaist’s case, the jackass.

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

 Meanwhile, at the same time he was pontificating before the United Nations as the self-determined World’s Advocate for Islam, he and his Administration have done and are doing everything possible to minimize the role of Christianity, the “Faith of Our Fathers”, in the day-to-day lives of Americans.

Obama is truly our first anti-American President.

Until He Comes,

KJ

While Obama Goes to UN to Brag on His Foreign Policy, Iran, Iran, Syria, and Russia Agree to Share Military Intelligence

AFBrancoObamaISIS922014Today, President Barack Hussein Obama will appear before the General Assembly of the United Nations. Among the topics which he will pontificate on, will be his Foreign Policy Goals for the next year.

Obama’s Foreign Policy of “Smart Power”! has worked so well, so far, heck, he might as well give the rest of our Middle Eastern enemies nuclear capability while he’s at it.

Msn.com reports that

The Iraqi military announced Sunday that it had agreed to share intelligence about the Islamic State with Russia, the Syrian government and Iran, an agreement that caught the Obama administration off guard. The Iraqi military said in a statement that the new agreement was necessary because thousands of volunteers who have joined the Islamic State have come from Russia. Asked if he welcomed the accord, Secretary of State John Kerry said it was important that the United States and Russia coordinate.

“I think the critical thing is that all of the efforts need to be coordinated,” Mr. Kerry said at the start of a meeting in New York with Sergey V. Lavrov, the Russian foreign minister. “This is not yet coordinated. I think we have concerns about how we’re going to go forward, but that’s precisely what we’re meeting on to talk about now.”

Get Today’s Headlines by E-Mail Each Morning From The New York Times 

As Russia has engaged in a military buildup at an air base near Latakia in Syria, President Vladimir V. Putin has sought to assemble his own coalition against the Islamic State, one that includes the Syrian government and Iran.

The effort, which Mr. Putin is expected to underscore in his speech at the United Nations on Monday, appears designed to increase Russia’s influence over efforts to resolve the Syrian conflict. It not only puts Russia in a position to support President Bashar al-Assad militarily, but it could enable the Kremlin to influence the choice of a successor if Mr. Assad were eventually to leave power.

With about 3,500 American advisers, trainers and other military personnel in his country, Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi of Iraq has cast himself as a vital member of the United States-led coalition to combat the Islamic State, and has not joined the Russian-led coalition.

But Iraq has also quietly enabled the Russian military buildup in Syria and has cooperated with Iran, from which it receives military support. While Bulgaria closed its airspace to Russian transport planes headed to Syria at the request of the United States, Iraq has allowed the Russian flights to use its airspace. Virtually all of the Russian transport planes that have flown weapons and equipment to the air base near Latakia have crossed through Iraqi and Iranian airspace.

“We did not violate any of our commitments toward the international community,” Ibrahim al-Jaafari, Iraq’s foreign minister, said when he was asked about the Russian flights during a Friday appearance at the Council on Foreign Relations.

Iraq is buying aircraft and other weapons from Russia. But American concerns that Mr. Putin might be trying to draw Iraq into the Russia-led coalition grew last week when a group of Russian military officers were observed in Baghdad.

Russia did not provide advance notice to the Obama administration of its decision to deploy attack planes, fighter aircraft, tanks and other military equipment near Latakia.

Asked about the purpose of the agreement announced by the Iraqi military Sunday, Mr. Lavrov said it was to “coordinate the efforts against ISIL,” using an acronym for the Islamic State.

Mr. Kerry, however, stressed that there was much to be done if the two sides were to effectively coordinate.

“Our presidents will be meeting tomorrow,” Mr. Kerry said. “This is the beginning of a genuine effort to see if there is a way to de-conflict, but also to find a way forward that will be effective in keeping a united, secular Syria that can be at peace and stable again without foreign troops present, and that’s our hope.”

A senior State Department official, who briefed reporters after Mr. Kerry’s meeting with Mr. Lavrov on the condition of anonymity, said that the two diplomats had not discussed the new Iraqi intelligence accord. “We’re just at the beginning of trying to understand what the Russians’ intentions are in Syria, in Iraq, and to try to see if there are mutually beneficial ways forward here,” said the official. “We’ve got a long way to go in that conversation.”

Evidently, this potential formation of a new “Axis of Evil” was not a part of the “historic agreement” brokered by Secretary Kerry and his Iranian son-in-law’s father, John Kerry’s counterpart in the Iranian Government, which will effectively give Iran carte blanche to build as many nuclear bombs as they want to, with 24 days before any inspections, which they themselves will carry out.

I wish my mother would have given me 24 days to clean my room when I was growing up.

But, I digress…

Hold on a minute…I thought that Scooter’s brilliant plan to prosecute the “War Against ISIS” by remote control, was going to wipe those barbarians off the face of the Earth. Gosh.

Could it be that those of us who said that there would have to be “Boots on the Ground”, because ISIS is nomadic and bombing runs would be ineffective, were exactly right?

Well now. Imagine that.

Do you remember when the powers-that-be in the Administration decided that from now on acts of Islamic Terrorism would be called “man-caused disasters”? That went over like a lead balloon.   However, have you noticed that the Administration and their Main Stream Media sycophants are still extremely reticent to identify guys named Mohammed as Muslim or Islamic Terrorists? 

Why is that?  They had no problem identifying Timothy McVeigh. 

See what playing nice in the arena of Foreign Policy with these barbarians has accomplished during the past almost seven years???  The entire Middle East is on the verge of becoming a Caliphate, surrounding Israel,  (Please pray for Israel, by the way.) and Islamic Terrorists are on the cusp of having nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons.

This is Smart Power?

Until He Comes,

KJ

Pope Francis, Sharia Law, and the U.S. Constitution: Comparing Plowshares to Scimitars [A KJ Sunday Morning Op Ed]

American Christianity 2The past week, Pope Francis paid a visit to the United States of America.

During his visit, while addressing the Congress of the United States of America, he basically said that we have an “obligation” to take in the Syrian Refugees, among them Radical Muslims, who are presently rioting in Europe.

Pope Francis, like other Liberals, has been pushing a false equivalency, in equating Islam to Christianity, for a while now.

Back in June, The Washington Times reported that

On Monday, the Bishop Of Rome addressed Catholic followers regarding the dire importance of exhibiting religious tolerance. During his hour-long speech, a smiling Pope Francis was quoted telling the Vatican’s guests that the Koran, and the spiritual teachings contained therein, are just as valid as the Holy Bible.

“Jesus Christ, Mohammed, Jehovah, Allah. These are all names employed to describe an entity that is distinctly the same across the world. For centuries, blood has been needlessly shed because of the desire to segregate our faiths. This, however, should be the very concept which unites us as people, as nations, and as a world bound by faith. Together, we can bring about an unprecedented age of peace, all we need to achieve such a state is respect each others beliefs, for we are all children of God regardless of the name we choose to address him by. We can accomplish miraculous things in the world by merging our faiths, and the time for such a movement is now. No longer shall we slaughter our neighbors over differences in reference to their God.”

The pontiff drew harsh criticisms in December (2014) after photos of the 78-year-old Catholic leader was released depicting Pope Francis kissing a Koran. The Muslim Holy Book was given to Francis during a meeting with Muslim leaders after a lengthy Muslim prayer held at the Vatican.

Last February 5th, after President Barack Hussein Obama’s incendiary and decidedly anti-Christian remarks at the National Prayer Breakfast, Reverend Franklin Graham spoke truth to power:

Today at the National Prayer Breakfast, the President implied that what ISIS is doing is equivalent to what happened over 1000 years ago during the Crusades and the Inquisition. Mr. President–Many people in history have used the name of Jesus Christ to accomplish evil things for their own desires. But Jesus taught peace, love and forgiveness. He came to give His life for the sins of mankind, not to take life. Mohammad on the contrary was a warrior and killed many innocent people. True followers of Christ emulate Christ—true followers of Mohammed emulate Mohammed.

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

Recently, Republican Presidential Candidate Hopeful, Dr. Ben Carson, got a lot of attention from hang-wringing Liberals in the Main Stream Media, the Democratic Party and among the Vichy Republicans, also, when he said that a Muslim should never be President of the United States of America., because Sharia Law in incompatible with The United States Constitution.

He was absolutely right.

The Center For Security Policy issued the following PDF, ” “Sharia Law Vs. The Constitution”,

Article VI: The Constitution is the supreme law of the land

  • Constitution: Article VI: “This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby”
  • Shariah: “The source of legal rulings for all acts of those who are morally responsible is Allah.” (a1.1, Umdat al-salik or The Reliance of the Traveller, commonly accepted work of Shariah jurisprudence); “There is only one law which ought to be followed, and that is the Sharia.” (Seyed Qutb); “Islam wishes to destroy all states and governments anywhere on the face of the earth which are opposed to the ideology and program of Islam regardless of the country or the nation which rules it. The purpose of Islam is to set up a State on the basis of its own ideology and program.” (Seyed Abul A’ala Maududi)

First Amendment: Freedom of religion

  • Constitution: First Amendment: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof ”
  • Shariah: “Those who reject Islam must be killed. If they turn back (from Islam), take hold of them and kill them wherever you find them.” Quran 4:89 ; “Whoever changed his [Islamic] religion, then kill him” Sahih al-Bukhari, 9:84:57.  In historic and modern Shariah states, Shariah law enforces dhimmi status (second-class citizen, apartheid-type laws) on nonMuslims, prohibiting them from observing their religious practices publicly, building or repairing churches, raising their voices during prayer or ringing church bells; if dhimmi laws are violated in the Shariah State, penalties are those used for prisoners of war: death, slavery, release or ransom.(o9.14, o11.0-o11.11, Umdat al-salik).

First Amendment: Freedom of speech   

  • Constitution: First Amendment: Congress shall not abridge “the freedom of speech.”  
  • Shariah: Speech defaming Islam or Muhammad is considered “blasphemy” and is punishable by death or imprisonment.

First Amendment: Freedom to dissent

  • Constitution: First Amendment: “Congress cannot take away the right of the people “to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” 
  •  Shariah: Non-Muslims are not to harbor any hostility toward the Islamic state or give comfort to those who disagree with Islamic government.

Second Amendment: Right to self-defense

  • Constitution: Second Amendment: “The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” 
  • Shariah: Under historic and modern dhimmi laws, non-Muslims cannot possess swords, firearms or weapons of any kind.

Fifth, Sixth and Seventh Amendments: Right to due process and fair trial

  • Constitution: Fifth Amendment: “no person shall be held to answer for a capital or otherwise infamous crime… without due process of law.”  Sixth Amendment: guarantees a “public trial by an impartial jury.”  Seventh Amendment: “the right of trial by jury shall be preserved.”
  • Shariah: Hadith Sahih al-Bukhari: Muhammad said, “No Muslim should be killed for killing a Kafir (infidel).”  Non-Muslims are prohibited from testifying against Muslims.  A woman’s testimony is equal to half of a man’s.

Eighth Amendment: No cruel and unusual punishment 

  • Constitution: Eighth Amendment: “nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.”
  • Shariah: Under Shariah punishments are barbaric: “Cut off the hands of thieves, whether they are male or female, as punishment for what they have done – a deterrent from Allah.” Quran 5:38; A raped woman is punished:”The woman and the man guilty of adultery or fornication – flog each of them with a hundred stripes” (Sura 24:2).

Fourteenth Amendment: Right to equal protection and due process 

  • Constitution:  Fourteenth Amendment: “No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. “
  • Shariah: Under dhimmi laws enforced in modern Shariah states, Jews, Christians and other non-Muslims are not equal to Muslims before the law.  Under Shariah law, women, girls, apostates, homosexuals and “blasphemers” are all denied equality under the law. 

Given this incompatibility between Sharia Law and the Constitution of the United States of America, which our Freedom and our System of Laws are based upon, if given the choice, which would Muslims currently living in the Land of the Free and the home of the Brave choose to be faithful to?

Back on June 23, 2015, the Center for Security Policy released the following findings for a poll they took of 600 Muslims, who current live in America.

The numbers of potential jihadists among the majority of Muslims who appear not to be sympathetic to such notions raise a number of public policy choices that warrant careful consideration and urgent debate, including: the necessity for enhanced surveillance of Muslim communities; refugee resettlement, asylum and other immigration programs that are swelling their numbers and density; and the viability of so-called “countering violent extremism” initiatives that are supposed to stymie radicalization within those communities.

Overall, the survey, which was conducted by The Polling Company for the Center for Security Policy (CSP), suggests that a substantial number of Muslims living in the United States see the country very differently than does the population overall.  The sentiments of the latter were sampled in late May in another CSP-commissioned Polling Company nationwide survey.

According to the just-released survey of Muslims, a majority (51%) agreed that “Muslims in America should have the choice of being governed according to shariah.”  When that question was put to the broader U.S. population, the overwhelming majority held that shariah should not displace the U.S. Constitution (86% to 2%).

More than half (51%) of U.S. Muslims polled also believe either that they should have the choice of American or shariah courts, or that they should have their own tribunals to apply shariah. Only 39% of those polled said that Muslims in the U.S. should be subject to American courts.

These notions were powerfully rejected by the broader population according to the Center’s earlier national survey.  It found by a margin of 92%-2% that Muslims should be subject to the same courts as other citizens, rather than have their own courts and tribunals here in the U.S.

Even more troubling, is the fact that nearly a quarter of the Muslims polled believed that, “It is legitimate to use violence to punish those who give offense to Islam by, for example, portraying the prophet Mohammed.”

By contrast, the broader survey found that a 63% majority of those sampled said that “the freedom to engage in expression that offends Muslims or anybody else is guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution and cannot be restricted.”

Nearly one-fifth of Muslim respondents said that the use of violence in the United States is justified in order to make shariah the law of the land in this country.

In conclusion, I am not saying that every Muslim is on a jihad against “the infidels”, and, wish to invade our Sovereign Nation and over-throw our Government.

However, there is a difference between being an average Christian American and a Muslim, living in America.

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

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

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

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

For Liberals, including Pope Francis, to deny that, is disingenuous at best, and just plain dangerous at worst.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Cryin’ John Boehner to Go Sobbing Into the Sunset. That’s a Good Start.

thLKOAET0PYesterday, Cryin’ John Boehner, the Vichy (Moderate) Republican who assumed the mantle of Speaker of the House of Representatives, after the Conservative-powered Political Tsunami, known as the Mid-term Elections of 2010, announced his resignation yesterday, effective at the end of October.

Hallelujah. And don’t let the screen door hit ya where the Good Lord split ya, O Spine of Jello.

Here is some information you may not have known about the Speaker of the House, courtesy of sourcewatch.org, from a blog I wrote in March of 2013

In 1981 Boehner served on the board of trustees of Union Township, Butler County, Ohio. In 1984, he served as president of the township board of trustees.

Boehner served as a Ohio state representative from 1985 to 1990. In 1990, when U.S. Rep. Donald “Buz” Lukens (R-Ohio) was caught in a sex scandal involving a minor, Boehner challenged Lukens in the Republican primary and defeated the incumbent, while also upsetting the district’s former representative, Tom Kindness, who Boehner declared had abandoned his district to become a lobbyist. Boehner went on to victory in the 1990 general election and began serving in the U.S. House of Representatives the 102nd Congress.

He was a member of the Gang of Seven, a group of seven freshmen Republicans who assailed the Democratic leadership with accusations of corruption and arrogance over the misuse of the House Bank. According to a 1992 San Francisco Chronicle article the Gang “set the match to the bank scandal that has now engulfed the House, blackened its leadership and sparked a ‘spontaneous political combustion’ that many analysts say will fuel a record turnover in Congress.” (San Francisco Chronicle, 3/30/02)

Boehner told the Cleveland Plain Dealer: “I came as a reformer. But when people in charge don’t want to reform – the only way…is revolution.” (Cleveland Plain Dealer, 2/15/93)

The banking scandal involved 355 members, Democrats and Republicans, writing 8,331 overdrafts to the bank. The Gang pounced on the issue and forced the Democrats into a corner and eventually led to the tidal wave Republican Revolution of 1994.

Boehner came to Congress as one of the most pro-business, anti-government members in 1990. He advocated a flat tax and abolition of whole government agencies including the Department of Education and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA).

Boehner quickly rose to the fourth highest position in the Republican leadership – Republican Conference Chairman – after chairing Newt Gingrich’s 1994 run for the Minority Leader post.

Boehner was on of the principal architects of the Contract With America. He also championed the 1996 Freedom to Farm Act.

When Newt Gingrich resigned his post as Speaker in the wake of the GOPs loss of seats in the 1998 election Boehner’s leadership post was challenged by J.C. Watts, the only black Republican congressman. Boehner lost to Watts 121-93.

In 2001 Boehner was named the Chairman of the House Education and Workforce Committee where he would oversee numerous agencies that he planned on abolishing in the early 1990s. Boehner worked diligently to pass [[President Bush]]’s No Child Left Behind Act, reaching across the aisle as a conference committee chairman to work with Democrat George Miller (D).

Boehner has also been a strong supporter of school vouchers for private and religious schools and helped to push through the school voucher program for the District of Columbia.

Boehner has repeatedly tried to get a pension reform bill, favored by business leaders, passed by Congress. It has passed the House multiple times, but has consistently failed in the Senate.

Boehner was elected House Majority Leader on February 2, 2006, following Tom DeLay’s departure because of a criminal indictment.

There was brief controversy on the first ballot for Majority Leader. The first count showed more votes cast than Republicans present at the Conference meeting.[22] However, this turned out to be due to a misunderstanding on whether or not Congressman Luis Fortune was allowed to vote on leadership.

Boehner campaigned as a reform candidate who could help the House Republicans cleanse and recover from the political damage caused by charges of ethics violations, corruption and money laundering leveled against prominent conservatives such as DeLay and disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff, in spite of his own ties to Abramoff.

He bested fellow candidates Rep. Roy Blunt of Missouri and Rep. John Shadegg of Arizona, even though he was considered an underdog candidate to House Majority Whip Blunt. It was the most contested election among House Republicans since 1998. Boehner received 122 votes compared to 109 by Blunt in a run-off vote. Rep. Shadegg dropped out of the race after a loss in the first round of voting and his supporters backed Boehner.

Blunt kept his previous position as Majority Whip, the No. 3 leadership position in the House. Boehner has a strong pro-business reputation but the social conservatives in the GOP are questioning his commitment to their values. According to the Washington Post “From illegal immigration to sanctions on China to an overhaul of the pension system, Boehner, as chairman of the House Committee on Education and the Workforce, took ardently pro-business positions that were contrary to those of many in his party. Religious conservatives — examining his voting record — see him as a policymaker driven by small-government economic concerns, not theirs….. [He opposes] a tough illegal immigration bill that passed in December [2005] with overwhelming Republican support over Boehner’s opposition. One provision in the bill would mandate that every business verify the legality of every employee through the federal terrorism watch list and a database of Social Security numbers. For the bill’s authors, the measure is central to choking off illegal immigrants’ employment opportunities. To business groups and Boehner, it is unworkable.” Feb 12, 2006

Boehner has since backtracked on his reform platform, stalling on lobbying and ethics reform proposals put forward by Rules Committee Chairman David Dreier (R-CA). Boehner stated on “Fox New Sunday” that Congress may be overreacting to the current lobbying scandal and voiced his opposition to a proposed congressional travel ban and a ban of earmark projects. The Washington Post writes that Boehner’s ascension to the Majority Leader post “make[s] it less likely that the more far-reaching proposals to restructure lobbying will become law.”  Boehner called the travel ban proposal “childish” in another interview.

Boehner is one of the top recipients of private travel, ranking 7th out of 638 members and former members at American Radio Works Power Trips. His trip totals cost $157,603.85.

So, why is Boehner vacating his cushy, phone-baloney job?

Perhaps he hears footsteps behind him, leading to the embarrassment of being fired.

Foxnews.com reports that

Most Republicans feel betrayed by their party — and show their displeasure by supporting outsiders over establishment candidates in the GOP presidential race. 

Real-estate mogul Donald Trump and retired neurosurgeon Ben Carson are the favorites in the Republican race in the latest Fox News national poll on the 2016 election.  Neither has held elected office before and yet the two of them — together with businesswoman Carly Fiorina — capture the support of more than half of GOP primary voters.

On the Democratic side, support for Vice President Joe Biden — who is still considering a run — has almost doubled since August.  But make no mistake: Hillary Clinton remains the frontrunner. 

Trump stays on top with 26 percent among GOP primary voters, followed by Carson at 18 percent.  Fiorina and Florida Sen. Marco Rubio are next, tied at 9 percent.  All four have gained ground. After the August Fox News debate, Trump had 25 percent, while Carson had 12 percent, Fiorina 5 percent and Rubio 4 percent. 

Trump holds his leader status even though he was once again rated in the poll as having done the worst job in the debate. Fiorina, Rubio and Carson receive positive marks for their performances.

The appeal of outsiders comes from significant dissatisfaction with the party establishment:  62 percent of Republican primary voters feel “betrayed” by politicians in their party, and another 66 percent say the recent Republican majorities in Washington have failed to do all they could to block or reverse President Obama’s agenda.  For comparison, 40 percent of Democratic primary voters feel betrayed by their party.  

Frustration with party leaders has been a recurring theme for one sitting GOP senator in the race, Ted Cruz of Texas, who is next in the poll at eight percent.  He was at 10 percent in August. 

Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush garners seven percent, a new low for him in the Fox News poll.  He had 15 percent support as recently as early August. 

New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie is up a couple of ticks to five percent and Ohio Gov. John Kasich gets four percent.  Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee receives three percent and Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul two percent.  All other candidates receive one percent or less. 

The favorites among white evangelical Christians voting in the Republican primary are Trump (29 percent), Carson (21 percent) and Cruz (12 percent).

The top picks among self-described “very” conservatives voting in the GOP primary are Carson (23 percent), Trump (22 percent), Cruz (13 percent) and Rubio (11 percent).

Straight talk is part of Trump’s outsider appeal — but does he go too far?  Not for GOP primary voters: 65 percent of them say Trump just tells it like it is, compared to 30 percent who think he is “too mean and blunt” to be president.  Trump’s style may be a liability in the general election, though. Overall, 49 percent of voters find him too mean and blunt, while 44 percent say we need his directness. 

Moderate Republicans have been a barrier to Republican victory for as long as I can remember. Like Quakers, Establishment Republicans seem to believe that passive resistance and reaching out to their sworn enemies, friends, is the way to defeat those who oppose you.

It has been especially bad since Boehner gained the Speakership in January of 2011, as the House and Senate Republican Leadership apparently cherish their friendship with the Democrats more than they do the wishes of the folks back home. Yes, they talk a good game, but so did Jon Lovitz in those “Liar Sketches” during the old days of Saturday Night Live, back when that show was actually funny.

Yeah,  my wife Morgan Fairchild. Yeah, that’s it. That’s the ticket!

In 1975, Ronald Wilson Reagan gave a speech which sums up our present situation and how we need to handle the Republican Party leadership, quite well.

Americans are hungry to feel once again a sense of mission and greatness.

I don ‘t know about you, but I am impatient with those Republicans who after the last election rushed into print saying, “We must broaden the base of our party” — when what they meant was to fuzz up and blur even more the differences between ourselves and our opponents.

It was a feeling that there was not a sufficient difference now between the parties that kept a majority of the voters away from the polls. When have we ever advocated a closed-door policy? Who has ever been barred from participating?

Our people look for a cause to believe in. Is it a third party we need, or is it a new and revitalized second party, raising a banner of no pale pastels, but bold colors which make it unmistakably clear where we stand on all of the issues troubling the people?

Let us show that we stand for fiscal integrity and sound money and above all for an end to deficit spending, with ultimate retirement of the national debt.

Let us also include a permanent limit on the percentage of the people’s earnings government can take without their consent.

Let our banner proclaim a genuine tax reform that will begin by simplifying the income tax so that workers can compute their obligation without having to employ legal help.

And let it provide indexing — adjusting the brackets to the cost of living — so that an increase in salary merely to keep pace with inflation does not move the taxpayer into a surtax bracket. Failure to provide this means an increase in government’s share and would make the worker worse off than he was before he got the raise.

Let our banner proclaim our belief in a free market as the greatest provider for the people. Let us also call for an end to the nit-picking, the harassment and over-regulation of business and industry which restricts expansion and our ability to compete in world markets.

Let us explore ways to ward off socialism, not by increasing government’s coercive power, but by increasing participation by the people in the ownership of our industrial machine.

Our banner must recognize the responsibility of government to protect the law-abiding, holding those who commit misdeeds personally accountable.

And we must make it plain to international adventurers that our love of peace stops short of “peace at any price.”

We will maintain whatever level of strength is necessary to preserve our free way of life.

A political party cannot be all things to all people. It must represent certain fundamental beliefs which must not be compromised to political expediency, or simply to swell its numbers.

I do not believe I have proposed anything that is contrary to what has been considered Republican principle. It is at the same time the very basis of conservatism. It is time to reassert that principle and raise it to full view. And if there are those who cannot subscribe to these principles, then let them go their way.

I believe that the Republican Party is stuck in a cycle in which their desire to protect their own hindquarters and cushy “jobs” have lead to a self-imposed isolation from the very American Citizens who were responsible for their having those cushy “jobs” in the first place.

I believe that average Americans, like you and me, have the power to relieve them of the burden of such a stressful job, and send others to Washington, who will listen to their “bosses”.

Just as Ronaldus Magnus said those 39 years ago, it is time to “let them go their way”.

Cryin’ John Boehner’s “resignation” is a good start.

It’s time for Mitch “The Turtle” McConnell to pack his bags, as well.

Until He Comes, 

KJ

Pope Francis Speaks to Congress, Urges “Compassion” For “Immigrants”

untitled (3)Francis spoke to Congress, yesterday.

The Daily Mail reports that

Pope Francis delivered a stinging blow to nativist conservatives bent on keeping illegal immigrants and Middle Eastern refugees out of the United States, saying Thursday in a landmark address to Congress that Americans should show compassion to immigrants of all stripes.

‘When the stranger in our midst appeals to us, we must not repeat the sins and the errors of the past,’ the Roman Catholic pontiff said. ‘We must resolve now to live as nobly and as justly as possible, as we educate new generations not to turn their back on our “neighbors” and everything around us.’

Speaking in English – a language he has learned only recently – Francis also dropped coded messages to conservatives about gay marriage and abortion, and made an impassioned plea for a left-leaning approach to capital punishment in an unprecedented visit to Capitol Hill by a sitting Pope.

‘I cannot hide my concern for the family, which is threatened, perhaps as never before, from within and without,’ Francis told a packed House chamber filled with legislators, Supreme Court justices and multiple presidential candidates.

‘Fundamental relationships are being called into question, as is the very basis of marriage and the family.’ 

And without mentioning abortion by name – or the name of the embattled domestic Planned Parenthood organization – Francis told lawmakers that the ‘Golden Rule … reminds us of our responsibility to protect and defend human life at every stage of its development.’

Francis spoke calmly but emphatically, never raising his voice as presidents often do in their State of the Union addresses to joint congressional sessions.

He was greeted by polite applause at certain points – particularly when he began reciting the Golden Rule but was interrupted before he could finish – ‘do unto others as you would have done unto you.’

Also, notably, applause broke out after these words: ‘The Golden Rule reminds us of our responsibility to protect and defend human life at every stage of development.’ 

But the applause was never raucous, a sign that members heeded party leaders’ directive not to applaud effusively or ‘glad-handle’ Francis if they got close to him.

Behind him on the raised speaker’s dais, close watchers got a different show during the speech, as both Vice President Joe Biden and House Speaker John Boehner – both well-known emotional men – proved to be almost as watchable.

Throughout the speech, Biden gravely nodded his head and looked down as if in serious thought. But Boehner appeared to tear up at several points, and was openly crying later on the Speaker’s Balcony after the address.

Francis’s speech was sprinkled with references to American history, as the pontiff repeatedly referenced and occasionally quoted from President Abraham Lincoln, civil rights icon Martin Luther King Jr., Catholic Worker Movement founder Dorothy Day and Cistercerian monk Thomas Merton.

The pontiff made clear his firmness on the sanctity of human life, not only the veiled reference to abortion but also his opposition to the death penalty. 

 Biden, a Roman Catholic who co-presided over the Joint Session of Congress as the constitutionally appointed president of the U.S. Senate, caused a stir this week by declaring that he believes life begins at conception.

But it’s Francis’ comments about immigrants that will be most sharply felt as the U.S. deals with the twin crises of Syrian refugees and an immigrant invasion from Mexico and Central America, both of which the Obama administration has taken steps to pacify by loosening America’s borders as a show of compassion.

‘Thousands of persons are led to travel north in search of a better life for themselves and for their loved ones in search of greater opportunities’ in in North America, he said. ‘Is this not what we want for our own children?’

‘We must not be taken aback by their numbers, but rather view them as persons, seeing their faces and listening to their stories, trying to respond as best we can to their situation. To respond in a way which is always humane, just and fraternal.’

WIthout naming Syria, the Muslim faith, the ISIS terror army, or any of the European nations that have hedged their bets again welcoming the tide of migrants displaced by Islamist armies, Francis noted ‘a refugee crisis of a magnitude not seen since the Second World War.’

‘This presents us with great challenges and many hard decisions,’ he said. 

Ultimately the shepherd of more than 1.2 billion Catholics counseled adherence to a Biblical do-unto-others philosophy.

‘Let us treat others with the same passion and compassion with which we want to be treated,’ he implored Congress. ‘Let us seek for others the same possibilities which we seek for ourselves. Let us help others to grow, as we would like to be helped ourselves.’

‘In a word, if we want security, let us give security; if we want life, let us give life; if we want opportunities, let us provide opportunities. The yardstick we use for others will be the yardstick which time will use for us.’ 

Francis did warn against religious fundamentalism of the type that drew ISIS into the fight that has displaced an estimated 4 million Syrians, mostly young men.

‘Our world is increasingly a place of violent conflict, hatred and brutal atrocities, committed even in the name of God and of religion,’ he said. 

‘We know that no religion is immune from forms of individual delusion or ideological extremism. This means that we must be especially attentive to every type of fundamentalism, whether religious or of any other kind.’

Since this happens to be my blog, please allow me to state the following, as I believe it to be:

Friends have asked me if I believe that Christ would be in favor of this “Social Justice” movement that has consumed some churches in America, replacing Christian Doctrine with a Modern Liberal Political Agenda. No. I do not believe that Jesus would be a part of the social justice movement. His was and is a soul-saving movement. One that still brings hundreds of thousand of people to individual salvation on this terrestrial ball every day. A movement that, in fact, was embraced by the founders of this cherished land.

Regarding his comments concerning “immigrants”, the Pope left out a very important word: ILLEGAL.

The last bipartisan U.S. Commission on Immigration Reform happened during President ill “Bubba” Clinton’s tenure. Bubba appointed former congresswoman and Democratic icon Barbara Jordan as its chair. Jordan came from humble beginnings to become a lawyer and the first Southern black woman elected to the House of Representatives. A DEMOCRAT, she was a leader in the civil rights movement, a professor of ethics, a recipient of the Presidential Medal of Freedom, and a world-class orator (two of her speeches are considered among the greatest of the 20th century). Her appointment gave the commission instant credibility. According to Jordan, she believed her responsibility as the head of the commission was to restore credibility to the U.S. immigration system. On the issue of illegal immigration, Jordan was very clear and succinct:

Unlawful immigration is unacceptable. Those who should not be here will be required to leave.

I understand that people want a better life for themselves and their children.  We are all immigrants in this land, except for American Indians, and they got here by crossing the Bering Straight.  But there is a huge difference between immigrating here legally and sneaking in illegally, between assimilating into an existing culture, and insisting on replacing a country’s existing culture with that of the country you left.

Do you want to have access to the blessings of American Citizenship, such as the right to attend our schools? Fine. Become an AMERICAN CITIZEN.

Regarding the Syrian “Refugees”:

Why did the Pope only concentrate on the Muslim Refugees from Syria? Why did he not mention the Christian Refugees from Syria, presently in our country, whom Obama is sending back to their home country to most certainly be killed?

And, why did he not mention Pastor Saeed, and the other three prisoners, being held unjustly in Iran, when Obam and Kerry are lauding their “Genbtleman’s Agreement” with that country of Muslim Barbarians, giving them nuclear capability?

With all due respect, sir, Christ threw the money changers out of the temple. He hated sin. Yes, he spent time with sinners…TO LEAD THEM TO REPENTENCE. JESUS CHRIST DID NOT CONDONE SIN. BREAKING THE  LAWS OF A SOVEREIGN NATION IS COMMITING A SIN.

So is entering a country to commit violent acts, in order to spread Islam throughout the world.

I’m just saying.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

The Irving “Clockmaker” Comes From a Family of Muslim Activists

th (29)Oh what a tangled web we weave, When first we practise to deceive! – Sir Walter Scott

Breitbart News reported yesterday that

Irving Mayor Beth Van Duyne appeared on The Blaze and was interviewed by Glenn Beck on Tuesday. During the interview, Beck put forward the idea that the incident involving the clock might be part of an orchestrated conspiracy of creeping Islamist jihad. He likened the incident to a dog whistle event for jihadists around the world. He speculated the incident could be part of Democratic efforts to turn Texas blue or for Muslims to have a “boogeyman” to gin up, Mediate reported.

The Irving mayor would not quite sign on to that theory but questioned the rapid attention the incident garnered from the White House.  “In fact,” Van Duyne responded, “I don’t even think the picture of the hoax bomb was released before [President Obama] tweeted out, ‘Cool clock, kid.’”

Jim Hansen with the Center for Security Policy sided with Beck and questioned why Ahmed would bring the clock to school in the first place.

Van Duyne implied there is more to the story than has been released. She said the Mohamed family should allow the school to release all of the information related to the incident. “This is one side of the story,” the mayor said, “but the other side of the story is not coming out.”

Beck asked Hansen if there was “Any doubt in your mind that this is really kind of the final throes of weakening us to the point to where we don’t ask any questions, to be ready for final confrontation? Total confrontation?”

“No,” Hanson replied. He continued, explaining that Mohamed was a “pawn” who had been put up to creating the incident.

Mohamed’s clock has been the subject of skeptical criticism, even from members of left media icons like Bill Maher and Richard Dawkins, according to Mediaite. On his show, Real Time with Bill Maher, the host became the surprising voice of reason, saying, “”Could we have a little perspective about this? Did the teacher really do the wrong thing?”

“What if it had been a bomb?” Maher continued, “So the teacher is supposed to see something that looks like a bomb and go, ‘Oh wait, this just might be my white privilege talking? I sure don’t want to be politically incorrect, so I’ll just let it go?’”

Breitbart Texas contacted the Irving Police Department. Spokesman Jame McLellan responded that the case surrounding the controversial clock is closed and no charges will be filed.

Why have the hairs on the back of this ol’ Southern Boy’s neck been standing up since the start of this convoluted mess?

Perhaps, it is just my old reporter’s instincts.

And, this time they paid off.

Last week, Pamela Gellar  reported that

In what has become one of the most egregious of the faked hate narratives, the bomb hoax clockster has a family with a history of supremacist stunts.

“One of the earliest instances of the standout citizen making national news was in 2011, when he sensationally stood up to an anti-Islamic pastor and defended the Koran as its defense attorney. That mock trial at a Florida church ended with the book’s burning, to ElHassan’s claimed shock. In an interview with the Washington Post at the time, the devoted Muslim said he’d take on Rev. Terry Jones’ challenge because the holy book teaches that Muslims should engage in peaceful dialogue with Christians.”

Also in 2011, ElHassan debated Robert Spencer on “Does Islam Respect Human Rights?” Clearly, he was trying to score against a famous “Islamophobe” and thus win a name for himself.  ElHassan has been looking for publicity and chances to fight against “Islamophobia” for a considerable period. Now he has seized it, going so far as to claim his son was “tortured” by school and law enforcement officials.

In February of 2015, the local mosque in Irving, Texas, set up a Sharia Law Tribunal, insisting that Sharia Law would trump Texas State Law in any case which they heard. Irving Mayor Beth Van Duyne stood against them, refusing to allow that to happen in her city.

During all of this, on February 23, 2015, the North Dallas Gazette reported that

Mohamed Elhassan Mohamed, born in Sudan in 1961 but long time resident of Irving, has announced plans to run for President of the African nation Sudan. The oldest of nine boys, he is now the father of seven children.

Mohamed’s journey in America has taken him from selling hot dogs on the street corners of New York City to driving cabs in Dallas before he went on to own a cab company. The company grew to 200 drivers in the ranks before he sold Jet Taxi to Yellow Cab.

His childhood in the African village was filled with hardships and struggles, but Mohamed aspired for more and gained his degree from Cairo University in Khartoum in philosophy.

Education has it’s benefits, but it is not a magic bullet to solve all problems, Mohamed shared, “My struggle did not decrease, but my ambition increased. I worked at Khartoum International airport as an employee of assistance clearance customs until I became the director of clearance customs, and the president of workers. Once I realized my dream was bigger than what Sudan had to offer I immigrated to America in the mid-1980’s.”

Unfortunately his degree was not accepted in America so he found himself selling hot dogs, candy, and newspapers in Manhattan.

“I realized this wasn’t enough for me, and I packed my bag and moved to Dallas, Texas y’all,” Mohamed shared.

And then, there’s the fact that his sister got suspended from school for threatening to blow it up.

According to Robert Spencer at judicialwatch.org

“I got suspended from school for three days from this stupid same district, from this girl saying I wanted to blow up the school, something I had nothing to do with…I got suspended and I didn’t do anything about it and so when I heard about Ahmed, I was so mad because it happened to me and I didn’t get to stand up.”

She had nothing to do with the threat and yet did nothing about being suspended? Where were her parents? If I had a child in school who was suspended over a false accusation, I’d be at the principal’s office in a matter of minutes. And would the school really suspend her on a hearsay accusation from one other girl — even in what The Daily Beast hysterically calls “a hotbed of Islamophobia”? It is unlikely, given the risk of complaints and even litigation from the parents, that they would have taken such a step without substantial evidence.

And so the plot thickens further. Why didn’t Ahmed’s father exploit this accusation in his ongoing quest to fight “Islamophobia”? Could it be because the accusation was true?

“‘Man, I Went Viral’: My Day With Ahmed Mohamed, the Most Famous Boy on Earth,” by Randy R. Potts, Daily Beast, September 17, 2015 (thanks to all who sent this in):

…After the MSNBC segment, Eyman and I sit down in the hallway where she says the same thing happened to her as Ahmed.

“I got suspended from school for three days from this stupid same district, from this girl saying I wanted to blow up the school, something I had nothing to do with.”

Eyman talks with the slightest lisp, almost imperceptible, but it becomes stronger as she gets emotional.

“I got suspended and I didn’t do anything about it and so when I heard about Ahmed, I was so mad because it happened to me and I didn’t get to stand up, so I’m making sure he’s standing up because it’s not right. So I’m not jealous, I’m kinda like—it’s like he’s standing for me.”

Eyman said her suspension was in her first year of middle school, “my first year of attempting middle school in America. I knew English, but the culture was different, the people were different.”

This part of Texas is a hotbed of Islamophobia. Irving Mayor Beth Van Duyne in March claimed Muslim clergy were “bypassing American courts” by offering to mediate disputes between worshippers according to Islamic law. Residents of Farmersville last month fought against creation of a Muslim cemetery in their town. Garland was the site of a “draw Muhammad” contest hosted by anti-Islam activist Pamela Geller that was subsequently attacked by two gunmen inspired by ISIS….

So, what does all of this mean?

As I’ve written before, this was a setup.

The young clockmaker’s father is a Muslim Activist, with a long history of getting his mug in front of the cameras. Add to that, the fact that Barack Hussein Obama sent his congratulations tweet out before the photo of the actual device made the national headlines, is suspicious at best, and condemning at worst.

This would not be the first stunt like this that Obama has pulled, in order to make the American public more comfortable with Muslims living among us.

However, this sort of covert White House-sponsored charade seems to be happening more and more, as Obama’s tenure as president draws to a close, and, thanks to the World Wide Web, it is not as easy for him to pull the wool over Americans eyes as it used to be.

Unfortunately, for all of those involved, this propaganda stunt has been revealed for all to see.

And, unfortunately, for the Dhimmi-in-Chief, the truth of the matter is, it does not make Obama look open minded and magnanimous, rather, it makes him look close minded and duplicitous.

Americans are a very accepting people, but that acceptance hinges on those coming into our society, pledging their loyalty to our nation, and having respect for our Traditional Values and American Way of life.

Obama’s attempt to turn the Great American melting pot into the Tower of Babel, in the name of “diversity”…and Democratic Voters….is beginning to fail more every day.

And, that is a good thing.

Until He Comes,

KJ

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

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

These two socialists walk into the White House…

Just kidding….or, am I?

The Washington Examiner reports that

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

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

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

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

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

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

Earnest said Francis’s story is similar.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Rush Limbaugh explained why, on his radio program yesterday…

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

He is the Supreme Pastor.

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

He is the Unifier of the People of God.

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

He is the Prime Witness to Faith.

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

Pope Francis is the first Pope who represents the Far Left Political Viewpoint.

Pope Francis seems more comfortable reaching out to Communist and Socialist countries, then he does to the Vatican’s Traditional Allies, those countries who enjoy strong economies, built upon freedom and a competitive marketplace.

I know that I may sound like an old cracker, but my generation was blessed with three very remarkable leaders: United States President Ronald Reagan, British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, and Pope John Paul II.

These three stood for everything that was good about freedom.

All three knew the dangers and corruption of the implementation of Marxist Theory through the governments of man.

Here is what the wonderful and gracious Pope John Paul II said about an out-of-control Nanny-State (Socialist) Government:

By intervening directly and depriving society of its responsibility, the Social Assistance State leads to a loss of human energies and an inordinate increase of public agencies, which are dominated more by bureaucratic thinking than by concern for serving their clients, and which are accompanied by an enormous increase in spending, In fact, it would appear that needs are best understood and satisfied by people who are closest to them who act as neighbors to those in need. It should be added that certain kinds of demands often call for a response which is not simply material but which is capable of perceiving the deeper human need.

And, while this present Pontiff is romancing the Palestinians, Pope John Paul II reached out to God’s Chosen People.

In 1994, John Paul II established full diplomatic ties between the Vatican and Israel. He said,

For the Jewish people who live in the State of Israel and who preserve in that land such precious testimonies to their history and their faith, we must ask for the desired security and the due tranquillity that are the prerogative of every nation . . .

Pope John Paul II also said…

The historical experience of socialist countries has sadly demonstrated that collectivism does not do away with alienation but rather increases it, adding to it a lack of basic necessities and economic inefficiency.

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

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

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

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

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

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

The world hungers for the Word of God.

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

 Until He Comes,

KJ

 

Kerry Says That 200,000 Syrian “Refugees” Will Be Brought to America (Whether We Want Them Here or Not)

Refugees-NRD-600Obama and his Administration are working feverishly to bring the Muslim Invasion, currently overrunning Europe, to our shores.

Fox News reports that

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

“We will now go up to 85,000 with at least 10,000 over the next year in Syria specifically. And in the next fiscal year we will target 100,000,” Kerry said.

In the fiscal year ending September 2015, the world’s biggest economy took in 70,000 refugees.

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

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

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

Yeah, about that “remarkable example”

German Chancellor Angela Merkel has called on other European heads of state to accept joint responsibility for the continent’s refugee crisis, as thousands more have poured into Austria aboard crowded buses and trains.Austrian police said 4,700 people entered the country on September 20 through the Nickelsdorf border post from Hungary. A day earlier, more than 10,000 people entered. 

Soldiers, police, and volunteers, meanwhile, were trying establish order on the Austrian border as about 7,000 people crowded the Nickelsdorf crossing.

The development comes after thousands of migrants, many lacking food and water, were trapped in Southeast Europe, in some cases for days, after countries began putting up barriers that blocked their passage to Western and Central Europe.

European leaders, who are sharply divided over what to do with the migrant influx, are hoping to find a credible response to the crisis at an emergency summit in the coming week.

Merkel on September 20 warned that Germany could not shelter those who were moving for economic reasons rather than to flee war or persecution.

“Germany is willing to help. But it is not just a German challenge, but one for all of Europe,” Merkel told a gathering of trade unionists. “Europe must act together and take on responsibility. Germany can’t shoulder this task alone.”

“We are a big country. We are a strong country. But to make out as if we alone can solve all the social problems of the world would not be realistic,” she said. 

The majority of the refugees and migrants are fleeing wars in Syria, Iraq, and Afghanistan, with the European Union receiving almost 250,000 asylum requests in April, May, and June. 

Meanwhile, nearly 30 refugees are missing off the Greek island of Lesbos, the latest boat sinking in Greece that has led to hundreds of deaths in recent months. 

The Greek coast guard said on September 20 that it had rescued 20 people by helicopter, but survivors said another 26 people had been about the boat.

More than 2,600 people have died among the nearly half million who have braved perilous trips across the Mediterranean to reach Europe so far this year.

As much as Obama and his Administration idealize the Democratic Socialists of Germany and the rest of Europe for their “remarkable example”, things are not as peachy, regarding the ongoing Muslim Invasion of Europe, as he and Kerry are attempting to make it sound.

The Daily Mail reports that

The EU logged 213,000 arrivals in April, May and June but only 44,000 of them were fleeing the Syrian civil war.

Campaigners and left-wing MPs have suggested the vast majority of migrants are from the war-torn state, accusing the Government of doing too little to help them.

‘This exposes the lie peddled in some quarters that vast numbers of those reaching Europe are from Syria,’ said David Davies, Tory MP for Monmouth. ‘Most people who are escaping the war will go to camps in Lebanon or Jordan.

‘Many of those who have opted to risk their lives to come to Europe have done so for economic reasons.’

Sir Bill Cash, a fellow Tory, said: ‘These figures make extremely disturbing reading. The whole argument has been made that this influx is all real refugees from Syria whereas this adds to the substantial evidence that there are a large number of economic migrants who are aiming for a better life.’

The figures from Eurostat, the EU’s official statistical agency, show that migration from April to June was running at double the level of the same period in 2014.

The number of Afghans lodging asylum claims is up four-fold, from 6,300 to 27,000. Another 17,700 claims were made by Albanians, whose country is at peace.

A further 13,900 applicants came from Iraq which, like Syria, is being torn apart by the Islamic State terror group.

This exposes the lie peddled in some quarters that vast numbers of those reaching Europe are from Syria.

Half a million migrants have arrived in Europe so far this year, with 156,000 coming in August alone. Rather than claiming asylum in the first safe EU country they reach, most head on toward wealthy northern states. The human cost of the crisis has been paid by the estimated 3,000 migrants who have drowned after putting their lives in the hands of people smugglers for the perilous crossing of the Mediterranean.

Risks being taken by many families were highlighted by the deaths of three-year-old Aylan Kurdi and his brother Galip, five, whose bodies were washed up on the tourist beach of Bodrum in Turkey earlier this month.

More than 250,000 migrants have reached Greece and Italy, where the authorities are close to breaking point.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel fuelled the chaos last month by declaring that any Syrian who reached the country could claim asylum.

When the numbers became uncontrollable Berlin shut its borders, throwing Austria, Hungary and other EU countries into turmoil.

Croatia has received 14,000 migrants in the past two days and was last night moving some to the Hungarian border.

Hungary is laying razor wire on the border having done the same on its border with Serbia.

Croatia has closed seven of eight road crossings to Serbia and ordered its border guards to redirect migrants to Hungary and Slovenia. The Hungarian government described this as ‘totally unacceptable’.

Violence broke out yesterday (Sunday) between Syrian and Afghan migrants fighting to board trains across Croatia.

And Slovenian riot police last (Sunday) night stood in the path of 200 migrants trying to enter from Croatia. Slovenian ministers say they will accept asylum seekers but send back anyone deemed to be an illegal immigrant.

Britain, which received 7,470 asylum applications between April and June, has come under fire for failing to join an EU scheme to spread 160,000 migrants between the 28 member states.

And, this garbage is what Obama and Kerry are so anxious to bring to our shores?

Why?

For the purpose of disruption? Or, does Obama envision new Democratic Voters, as he does with his unrelenting quest for amnesty for illegal aliens from South of the Border?

And, here’s a Million Drachma Question for ya: Why are the other Middle Eastern Countries not taking them in?

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

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

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

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

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

Until He Comes,

KJ

Deflection and Desperation: Liberals Attacking Trump for Refusing to Defend Obama

obamabowLast night, at the seldom-watched-anymore Annual Emmy Awards, out in Hollyweird, The self-important TV “stars” provided an example of just how concerned the Fashionable Left is, about the unpcoming Presidential Elections.

The Hollywood Reporter has the story…

It took about five minutes for Donald Trump to be mentioned during the 67th Primetime Emmy Awards on Sunday night.

Host Andy Samberg took a shot at the GOP presidential frontrunner during his opening monologue. 

“Donald Trump is running for president — to the delight of uncles everywhere,” Samberg joked.

“Sure, Donald Trump seems racist,” he added, ending his thought there.

The former host of The Apprentice was not in attendance at the Emmys.

Samberg also took a jab at one of the Democratic presidential candidates. 

“Is it just me, or does Bernie Sanders always look like his flight is delayed?” Samberg said. 

Trump was also zinged by Julia Louis Dreyfus during her acceptance speech after winning Best Actress in a Comedy Series.

“What a great honor it must be for you to honor me tonight. I’m so sorry. Donald Trump said that,” Dreyfus said. “It’s getting trickier and trickier to satirize this stuff.”

Comedians Keegan-Michael Key and Jordan Peele also took a shot at the GOP while presenting Best Reality Competition Program.

The former Comedy Central Duo went back-and-forth about a reality “where people can’t seem to say two words without throwing each other under the bus” and a reality “where a panel of millionaires fight like sharks to be chosen by average middle-class Americans,” and a reality “where nobody is there for the right reasons.” Then Peele deadpanned to the camera: “But enough about the Republican national debate.”

Aren’t you just blinded by their brilliance, boys and girls?

The Glitterati are not the only Liberals trying to stop Donald J. Trump.

The latest attempted “trap” involved Trump refusing to correct an attendee to one of his appearances (who may well have been a “plant”), who shouted out that Obama was a Muslim.

Yesterday, on ABC’s This Week with George Stephanopoulos, the former Clinton Administration member, and current Hillary Fanboy, now masquerading as a “Broadcast Journalist”, went after Trump during a one-on-one interview.

GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS, “THIS WEEK” HOST: Let’s get into this controversy over the last couple of days. I saw your tweets yesterday, you said you didn’t have a morally responsibility when that question came up about President Obama. But this is getting a lot of attention in part because you have raised questions like this in the past. So, for the record, was President Obama born in the United States?

DONALD TRUMP: Well, you know, I don’t get into, George, I’m talking about jobs, military, I don’t get into it. They asked the questions. Frankly, it’s no longer an interest to me. It’s something I don’t want to talk about. I want to talk about the vets and the military. I want to talk about jobs. I don’t get into that, George.

STEPHANOPOULOS The way to get behind it is answer yes or no —

TRUMP: That’s possible, but I don’t talk about it.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Even though you raised questions and you investigated this in the past —

TRUMP: Well, people thought I should have defended the president in terms of the question that was asked the other night. My attitude is, would he have done that for me? He’s been very capable of defending himself, believe me. So, we’ll see what happens. But I think the tweets really covered it cell. I actually was very interested because I got in hot water for not saying anything. First time it’s ever happened to me. This is something where I didn’t even say anything.

STEPHANOPOULOS: I take that point. But you raised these questions so often in the past, why can’t you say definitively yes or not? You raised it many times. And he’s not a Muslim.

TRUMP: George, you have raised the question. I haven’t raised the question. I don’t talk about it. But I don’t talk other people’s faith. Not appropriate for me to talk about somebody else’s faith.

STEPHANOPOULOS The other big premise of that question, he said, Muslims are a problem many this country, do you agree?

TRUMP: In some cases, George, we can say no, and you can be politically correct and say everything’s wonderful. Certainly it’s a problem. And there’s a problem —

STEPHANOPOULOS What is the problem specifically?

TRUMP: At the same time, we have fabulous people living here, Muslims, and they have done fantastically well, but certainly it’s a problem. You look around the world, it’s a problem. If I said no, not at all, people would laugh at me. Now, it might be the right thing to say. I don’t care what the right thing to say is, but certainly what’s happening with some Muslims and, you know, terrorism and everything else, it seems pretty much confined there. It’s a problem. We can say no, but it is.

Soon after I started this blog, I wrote the following post, on April 30, 2010. I titled it, “Obama: Muslim, Marxist, or Moron?”.

I believe that the answer is “ALL OF THE ABOVE”.

“As a child, Barack Hussein Obama attended a private Madrassa, err, school in Indonesia while living there with his Mom and Step-father.  As a grown man, Barack Hussein Obama attended Trinity Church in chicago, led by Pastor Jeremiah Wright for over 20 years.  It is a Black Liberation Theology Church.  They view Christ as a revolutionary liberator like Che.  They do not believe in the Resurrection.  They are often referred to as being Muslim-lite. For more information about Black Liberation Theorlogy, please visit luoamerican.com.

But, is Obama a Muslim?  Here is a 10 minute video that has gone viral on youtube.com that may help you answer that question for yourself.

Regarding his political beliefs, he gave America a huge clue during the campaign when he spoke to a plumber named Joe during a campaign stop in Ohio:

And, during a Financial Reform Rally, on Wednesday April 28th, 2010, Scooter’s mask slipped off again:

We’re not, we’re not trying to push financial reform because we begrudge success that’s fairly earned. I mean, I do think at a certain point you’ve made enough money. But, you know, part of the American way is, you know, you can just keep on making it if you’re providing a good product or providing good service. We don’t want people to stop, ah, fulfilling the core responsibilities of the financial system to help grow our economy.

As opposed to the original remarks, written on the teleprompter:

Now, we’re not doing this to punish these firms or begrudge success that’s fairly earned. We don’t want to stop them from fulfilling their responsibility to help grow our economy.

Now you know why he takes his teleprompter wherever he goes.

Our mutual value is for us the value of our mutual objects.
Hence for us man himself is mutually of no value.
Karl Marx, Comment on James Mill (1844)

Through his background, as carefully hidden as it is, and his words and actions since becoming Leader of the (for now) Free World, Obama has revealed himself.  Some questions still remain:  How much did the Democratic Party know about this man and when did they know it?  The same goes for the sycophantic Main Stream Media.  They were all complicit in bringing this miserable excuse for a President of the United States to power…”

Liberals are desperate.

Their choice of potential Presidential Candidates are all a bunch of old, white, Professional Politicians from the Northeast, who are about as charming and personable as a bag of rattlesnakes.

Meanwhile, their current president has put the pedal to the medal in his quest to “rapidly change” and irreparably turn “The Shining City Upon a Hill”, into a combination of a Middle Eastern Caliphate, a “Democratic Socialist” European Nation, and a Third World Barrio.

I hate it when I’m right.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

The Great Divide Between Republicans and Democrats: What’s the Reason for It? (A KJ Sunday Morning Op Ed)

WashingtonPrayingNow, more than ever before in the history of America, there is a great divide between our two major Political Parties.

The Washington Post reports that

To the Democratic candidates, the 2016 presidential campaign is about shrinking the gap between rich and poor; combating climate change; and expanding voting rights, gay rights and workplace equality for women.

To listen to the Republican candidates is to hear an entirely different campaign — one that centers on defeating Islamic State terrorists, deterring a nuclear Iran, restricting abortion, and debating whether to deport illegal immigrants and construct a wall to keep them out.

At a political moment of pitched voter anxiety, candidates in both parties talk in dark, sometimes apocalyptic tones — but about different issues, as if they’re addressing two different countries.

“Republicans are from Mars, Democrats are from Venus,” Republican strategist Ari Fleischer said. “The gulf between the two parties has grown wider in the last decade, not smaller.”

For Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), vying for the Democratic nomination, it’s the corporate billionaire class that is destroying America by crushing the dreams and livelihoods of working people. For many Republicans, the rise of new threats abroad and cultural changes at home are destroying America by shaking its foundation.

Hillary Rodham Clinton, seen campaigning Sept. 7 in Hampton, Ill., focuses chiefly on economic and family issues in her stump speeches. (Melina Mara/The Washington Post)
The contrast was brought into sharp relief this week. Republicans sparred in a three-hour debate Wednesday over issues of national security, abortion and immigration, but had little to say about middle-class economic growth. On the campaign trail, Democrats focused on liberal economic and social agendas, but barely touched on terrorist threats and the cultural issues that have become conservative rallying cries.

David Winston, a Republican pollster unaligned in the presidential race, said the economy is the top issue for all voters. “Whenever the candidates are not talking about jobs and the economy, they’re off on the wrong topic,” he said.

Some difference in emphasis is to be expected, considering that each party’s base voters are animated by different issues. At this stage in the race, the candidates are playing to those bases in an attempt to win the nomination. But the gulf in the 2016 campaign has grown particularly noticeable.

Well. I know y’all will be shocked, but, this Christian American Conservative has a different take on the schism between America’s two main Political Parties than the Secular Northeastern Liberals at The Washington Post do.

And, it all comes down to keepin’ The Main Thing, The Main Thing.

At the Democratic National Convention of 2012, held before the Presidential Election of that year, in an Emergency Floor Vote, the Democrat Bosses “rectified” a  “mistake of omission” (or so they claimed).

Businessinsider.com reported the the story:

Democrats added mentions of the word “God” and recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital today in a testy vote that left angry delegates booing on the floor.

It took three votes to pass the resolution in what was an extremely tense and divided vote. The first two votes failed, but DNC chairman Antonio Villaraigosa declared that the resolution had passed by a two-thirds majority on the third vote.

[The teleprompter showed the results before the measure was declared “passed”!]

“I heard a lot from the other side,” said Kenneth McClintock, a superdelegate and Secretary of State of Puerto Rico. McClintock said Puerto Rico supported the resolution.

“I was surprised” that the vote was so testy, he added.

Republicans had blasted the Democrats’ original platform, which had taken out mentions of “God” and did not affirm Jerusalem as Israel’s capital.

And many delegates thought that the platform change was a direct response to some of the backlash, prompting some to worry that it will be more fodder for Republicans in the final months of the campaign.

“Conservatives are always going to criticize Democrats for not supporting Israel or not being religious enough, or whatever it is that day,” said Brandon Cooper, a delegate from Texas.

On cue, the Romney campaign released a statement from spokeswoman Andrea Saul:

“Mitt Romney has consistently stated his belief that Jerusalem is the capital of Israel. Although today’s voice vote at the Democratic National Convention was unclear, the Democratic Party has acknowledged Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. President Obama has repeatedly refused to say the same himself. Now is the time for President Obama to state in unequivocal terms whether or not he believes Jerusalem is Israel’s capital.”

nationalreview.com has reactions to that vote:

The video of a large number of Democrat delegates voting no — three times in a row — on identifying Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and adding God to the platform has already gone viral. But on the ground here in Charlotte, the platform vote seems not to have been to the delegates.

Kathy Sullivan, a New Hampshire delegate, wasn’t present for the vote. (Many of the delegates I spoke to weren’t, suggesting that there was little messaging done to the delegates on the issue beforehand.) But Sullivan, who says she supported changes, remarks that it’s the media, not the delegates, who are obsessing over the vote.

“I haven’t heard anybody talking about it other than the press,” she says, commenting that the delegates are instead speaking about “how great” Michelle Obama and Bill Clinton were. “No one at all has been talking about the platform. No one.”

Jared Barrett, a Tennessee delegate who was present for the vote, feels it may have been a mistake for Democrats to have made delegates vote at the same time on the two different changes.

“I started to think, maybe they should have separated the two, and voted on each one separately, rather than both together,” Barrett says. “I think people were in favor of putting God back in the platform,” he continues, saying that he felt “the opposition was coming from” those who didn’t agree with the Jerusalem decision.

At the time, he didn’t expect a lot of people would vote “no.” “I was surprised,” Barrett remarks. “I looked around, and I said wow, there’s a lot of no’s.”

Pennsylvania delegate Brian Sims, who wasn’t present for the vote, says he only knows what his decision was on one of the changes. “I don’t know how I would have voted on Jerusalem,” Sim says. “I know that I would have voted to put God back in the platform.”

Rhode Island delegate June Speakman arrived at the floor just as the vote was ending. She said she ultimately favored the changes because she felt it was appropriate to heed Obama’s wishes on the Democratic platform. Still, Speakman, who is agnostic, would have personally preferred God remain absent from the platform.

“In my opinion, my political party should not determine my position on God. That’s a private decision that I make and I don’t want anyone dictating it to me, my party, my government, anyone,” Speakman says.

“I would prefer that the official platform of my political party not contain references to God,” she adds, “because I consider those to be private decisions.”

As far as the controversy over whether there was in fact, enough voting yes — two-thirds are required — for the changes to the platform to be made, Barrett says from the floor, he had trouble hearing, but the vote “seemed like it was split, honestly.” But Barrett is fine with the outcome. “He heard what he heard,” Barrett says of Los Angeles mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, who is chairman of the convention and declared that the “yes” votes had it. “So I agree with it.”

Danny Anchondo, a delegate from Texas, would have voted for the changes if he had been presebt, but said he wasn’t bothered by the fact that so many Democrat delegates had voted against it.

“That’s one of the things that the Democratic party stands for,” he says, “the freedom to choose how you’re going to vote one way or another, and that’s a good part about it.

Only when the Democratic Hierarchy received a thunderous blowback from Jew and Gentile alike, did they call for the rigged Floor Vote, in an effort to protect the financial support for and electoral viability of President Barack Hussein Obama (mm mmm mmmm).

At the time, I wrote that, “the Democratic Party should be ashamed and embarrassed by the Way that they have allowed the  small, out-of-touch heathens known as the Far Left to gain total control of what once was a proud American Political Party, is now, seemingly, just a bunch of opportunistic un-American blasphemers.

However…it doesn’t seem to bother them at all…and, that’s pathetic.”

Over 70 years ago, a great American saw a moral and cultural decline beginning in our “Shining City on a Hill”…and he knew exactly who was behind it.

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

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

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

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

Paul Harvey, Good Day.

One of our Founding Fathers predicted the potential chaos which our Sovereign Nation would find ourselves in, if we ignored the laws and precepts of the One who gifted us with this Sacred Land.

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

Gentlemen,

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

We are given free will by our Creator…will to make choices and decisions on the direction of our lives. Being human, we often don’t make the right decisions and being human, those decisions have the potential to lead us down a dark path.

Whether is in reality or strictly in the close quarters of our own consciousness, the path we choose to follow is up to us. However, our parents, family, and friends can make a difference in our journey and I thank God that through His Grace I was given a Father who made sure that I received loving instruction in The Way in which I should go.

We still live in the greatest country on the face of the earth and we still have a responsibility to one another.

The Democratic Party, now under the control of the Far Left, have long since dismissed the reality of absolute morality, unchanging ethics, and the Sovereignty of the God of Abraham.

And, that is why the Silent Majority, comprised, to a great deal, of the over 70% of us average Americans, who proclaim Jesus Christ as our Personal Savior and beginning to rise up in protest of unconscionable, Democrat-led, relative morality and situational ethics. being pursued by the leaders of the Democratic Party, for Political Expediency’s sake.

The Light or the Darkness. The choice is up to each and every one of us.

Little children, you are from God and have overcome them, for he who is in you is greater than he who is in the world. 1 John 4:14 (ESV)

Until He Comes,

KJ