Tag: Barack Hussein Obama

Obama Embraces Another Enemy of America: Cuba

On By kingsjesterIn PoliticsLeave a comment

Obama-Shrinks-2The President of the United States, Barack Hussein Obama, is now walking arm in arm with a “fellow traveler”: Raul Castro.

The Daily Mail reports that

President Barack Obama declared the end of America’s ‘outdated approach’ to Cuba Wednesday, announcing the re-establishment of diplomatic relations as well as economic and travel ties with the communist island – a historic shift in U.S. policy that aims to bring an end to a half-century of Cold War enmity.

‘Isolation has not worked,’ Obama said in remarks from the White House. ‘It’s time for a new approach.’

‘We will begin to normalize relations’ between the U.S. and Cuba, he added.

‘We will end an outdated approach that, for decades, has failed to advance our interests.’

As Obama spoke, Cuban President Raul Castro was addressing his own nation from Havana. Obama and Castro spoke by phone for more than 45 minutes Tuesday, the first substantive presidential-level discussion between the U.S. and Cuba since 1961.

Wednesday’s announcement followed more than a year of secret talks between the U.S. and Cuba. The re-establishment of diplomatic ties was accompanied by Cuba’s release of American Alan Gross and the swap of a U.S. spy held in Cuba for three Cubans jailed in Florida.

Gross, 65, arrived back in the U.S. shortly before Obama addressed the nation. Gross was released after more than five years in prison. He was accompanied by his wife, Judy, along with several U.S. lawmakers.

As part of resuming diplomatic relations with Cuba, the U.S. will soon reopen an embassy in the capital of Havana and carry out high-level exchanges and visits between the governments. The U.S. is also easing travel bans to Cuba, including for family visits, official U.S. government business and educational activities. Tourist travel remains banned

Yesterday, ABC News reported that…

The release of Alan Gross, the American contractor imprisoned in Cuba for more than five years, “set a price on the head of every American abroad,” Sen.Marco Rubio, R-Florida, said in an interview today.

“I would love for there to be normal relations with Cuba, but for that to happen, Cuba has to be normal, and it’s not. It is a brutal dictatorship,” Rubio, who is a Cuban-American, told ABC News’ Jeff Zeleny. “Now dictatorships know that if they take an American, they may be able to get unilateral policy concessions.”

According to Rubio, the Obama administration’s intention to restore diplomatic relations with Cuba is “terrible for the Cuban people.”

The Cuban government won’t allow free elections, political parties, or freedom of the press “just because people can buy Coca Cola,” said the Florida Republican, who is often mentioned as a potential 2016 presidential candidate. He added, “Five years from now, Cuba will still be a dictatorship — but a much more profitable one.”

“I think this has now made it even harder to achieve the sort of democracy in Cuba that you find virtually everywhere else in this hemisphere,” Rubio said.

Rubio called President Obama the “worst negotiator” of “my lifetime.”

“He’ll give up everything in exchange for nothing,” Rubio said. “What have the Cubans agreed to do?”

“The United States today, under this president, has opened up relationships with the most brutal dictatorship this hemisphere has known for the better part of 50 years. And all it’s done is it’s sent a signal to others fighting for democracy in the region and around the world that the US is not a reliable partner when it comes to fighting for democracy,” he said.

Senator Rubio hit it right on the head.

As with all of his Foreign Affairs dealings, such as those with our mortal enemy Iran and the rest of the Radical Muslims in the Middle East, Obama once again yesterday, displayed a dangerous naivete in regards to the way that the world actually works.

Obama has just spat in the face of every Cuban-American, who, at the risk of their very lives, fled the tyranny of Fidel Castro’s Cuba, to reach our American shores, and freedom.

As I was sitting down to write this blog, my mind flashed to the classic movie, “The Godfather Part II”, where Michael Corleone takes over for his father and tries to get something started for his family down in Cuba.

Unfortunately for Michael, it was right before the Cuban Revolution, when the Communists took over the island, spoiling the Mafia’s plan of turning it into another Las Vegas.

In fact, one memorable scene in that movie, occurs the night of the Revolution, when the president of Cuba and his family beat a hasty retreat, leaving their party guests, there to celebrate the New Year, on their own.

During the madness of the revolution, with the Revolutionaries knocking on the palace door, Michael grabs his brother , Fredo, and kisses him full on the mouth, telling him,

I know it was you, Fredo. You broke my heart.

Later, in the movie, Michael has his own brother, Fredo, killed for betraying their family.

Of course, I am NOT in any way suggesting any sort of violence toward President Obama, but, with every new slap against our country and her citizens, by this Petulant President, Impeachment, to me now, sounds like a pretty good idea after all.

Until He Comes,

KJ

The Imperious Presidency: An Executive Order By Any Other Name…

On By kingsjesterIn Politics1 Comment

obamaburningconstitutionAnother Liberal Defense for Petulant President Pantywaist’s Imperious Presidency has been shot to Blazes.

USA Today reports that…

President Obama has issued a form of executive action known as the presidential memorandum more often than any other president in history — using it to take unilateral action even as he has signed fewer executive orders.

When these two forms of directives are taken together, Obama is on track to take more high-level executive actions than any president since Harry Truman battled the “Do Nothing Congress” almost seven decades ago, according to a USA TODAY review of presidential documents.

Obama has issued executive orders to give federal employees the day after Christmas off, to impose economic sanctions and to determine how national secrets are classified. He’s used presidential memoranda to make policy on gun control, immigration and labor regulations. Tuesday, he used a memorandum to declare Bristol Bay, Alaska, off-limits to oil and gas exploration.

Like executive orders, presidential memoranda don’t require action by Congress. They have the same force of law as executive orders and often have consequences just as far-reaching. And some of the most significant actions of the Obama presidency have come not by executive order but by presidential memoranda.

Obama has made prolific use of memoranda despite his own claims that he’s used his executive power less than other presidents. “The truth is, even with all the actions I’ve taken this year, I’m issuing executive orders at the lowest rate in more than 100 years,” Obama said in a speech in Austin last July. “So it’s not clear how it is that Republicans didn’t seem to mind when President Bush took more executive actions than I did.”

Obama has issued 195 executive orders as of Tuesday. Published alongside them in the Federal Register are 198 presidential memoranda — all of which carry the same legal force as executive orders.

He’s already signed 33% more presidential memoranda in less than six years than Bush did in eight. He’s also issued 45% more than the last Democratic president, Bill Clinton, who assertively used memoranda to signal what kinds of regulations he wanted federal agencies to adopt.

Obama is not the first president to use memoranda to accomplish policy aims. But at this point in his presidency, he’s the first to use them more often than executive orders.

“There’s been a lot of discussion about executive orders in his presidency, and of course by sheer numbers he’s had fewer than other presidents. So the White House and its defenders can say, ‘He can’t be abusing his executive authority; he’s hardly using any orders,” said Andrew Rudalevige, a presidency scholar at Bowdoin College. “But if you look at these other vehicles, he has been aggressive in his use of executive power.”

Evidently, OUR Constitution doesn’t matter a hill of beans to the Manchurian President. Ladies and gentlemen, the Great One, Mark Levin, is right: We have an imperial president:

I’m not into imperial presidents who act imperial and speak imperial and Obama forgets there’s a Constitution. Yes, he keeps telling us he won reelection. Congratulations, but guess what? The Constitution wasn’t up for election, it’s not up for a referendum. He has to comply with it, too.

He was sent back to Washington, but he’s got a strict list of rules that he has to follow as president. When he gets up there and starts saying, if Congress doesn’t do this, I’m going to do this unilaterally, it violates separation of power a lot of the times.

…What the hell is this? He was elected president. Congratulations. This guy makes Richard Nixon look like a man who followed the law all the time. I think we have an imperial president, he sounds imperial, he’s arrogant as hell and I’m furious about this and I’m going to tell you why. We are a magnificent country. We don’t need to be turned upside down. We don’t need to run from crisis to crisis to crisis. He’s bankrupting this country.

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

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

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

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

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

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

President Obama has been on a mission during his presidency to circumvent the system of checks and balances which Our Founding Fathers have so wisely put in place, in order to prevent exactly what our imperial president is attempting to do.

Therefore, one can say that the president’s actions, concerning the issuance of “Memoranda”, are no less than tyrannical.

What did our Founding Fathers have to say about Tyranny?

The liberties of our country, the freedoms of our civil Constitution are worth defending at all hazards; it is our duty to defend them against all attacks. We have received them as a fair inheritance from our worthy ancestors. They purchased them for us with toil and danger and expense of treasure and blood. It will bring a mark of everlasting infamy on the present generation – enlightened as it is – if we should suffer them to be wrested from us by violence without a struggle, or to be cheated out of them by the artifices of designing men. –Samuel Adams

Resistance to tyrants is obedience to God.- Thomas Jefferson

And, this final quote, which is amazingly prophetic:

Single acts of tyranny may be ascribed to the accidental opinion of a day; but a series of oppressions, begun at a distinguished period and pursued unalterably through every change of ministers, too plainly prove a deliberate, systematic plan of reducing [a people] to slavery.- Thomas Jefferson

If you haven’t noticed, there has been an explosion of Conservative Bloggers during the Obama Administration. There is a reason for this.

Just as Benjamin Franklin (Poor Richard’s Almanac) and Thomas Paine (Common Sense) used their biting wit, as communicated by the Written Word, to fight tyranny in their time, so are “Citizen Bloggers” using the power of the Written Word once again, this time magnified in scope a thousand-fold by the power of the Internet, to fight an Imperious President.

Because…

All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. – Edmund Burke

Until He Comes,

KJ

Senate Approves Nomination of Gun Control/Obamacare Advocate For Surgeon General

On By kingsjesterIn PoliticsLeave a comment

vivek murthyFor those who have not figured it out by now, let ol’ KJ clue you in: Everything that President Obama does has a political purpose. Political expediency always outweighs any concern he may have for the best thing to do for America.

The choosing of his latest cabinet member is not the exception to that rule, as Fox News reports…

The Senate on Monday approved President Obama’s nomination of Dr. Vivek Murthy to serve as U.S. surgeon general, despite opposition from Republicans and some Democrats over his support for gun control and past statements that gun violence is a public health issue.

Murthy, 37, a physician at Boston’s Brigham and Women’s Hospital and instructor at Harvard Medical School, won confirmation on a vote of 51-43. He’s a co-founder of Doctors for America, a group that has pushed for affordable health care and supports Obama’s health care law.

Sen. John Barrasso, R-Wyo., said most of Murthy’s career has been spent as an activist focused on gun control and other political issues, rather than on treating patients. “Americans don’t want a surgeon general who might use this position of trust to promote his own personal campaign against the Second Amendment of the Constitution,” Barrasso said.

Supporters said Murthy is well-qualified and noted his promise not to use the position as a bully pulpit for gun control.

The nation has been without a Senate-confirmed surgeon general since July 2013. The surgeon general does not set policy but is an advocate for the people’s health.

Murthy’s confirmation “makes us better positioned to save lives around the world and protect the American people here at home,” President Barack Obama said in a statement. Murthy “will also help us build on the progress we’ve made combatting Ebola, both in our country and at its source” in West Africa.

Murthy’s confirmation represented a rare defeat for the National Rifle Association, which told senators that a vote for Murthy would be scored against them when they rate lawmakers’ votes during election campaigns.

Senate Majority Whip Richard Durbin, D-Ill., said Murthy has been “pilloried and excoriated” by the NRA and its supporters for his backing of stricter gun laws, including an assault weapons ban, and statements that gun violence is a public health issue.

Murthy has made clear he is not “aspiring to be the leading doctor in America to engage in a political debate, but rather to engage in public health debates about obesity and tobacco and things that make a dramatic difference to the lives of so many people who live in this country,” Durbin said.

Murthy expressed support for gun control in a letter to Congress after the Newtown, Connecticut, school shooting.

His nomination was endorsed by more than 100 health organizations, including the American College of Physicians, the American Heart Association and the American Diabetes Association.

On February 28, 2014, the National Rifle Association’s Institute for Legislative Action posted the following information about Dr. Murthy on their website:

In 2008, Dr. Murthy co-founded the organization “Doctors for Obama” in order to support the presidential campaign of then-Senator Barack Obama and his plans for health care reform. A year later, the group changed its name to “Doctors for America.”

In his capacity as president of “Doctors for America,” Dr. Murthy has offered his support for a wide array of gun control policies that have been repeatedly rejected by the American people and their elected representatives.

A recent letter sent to Congress by “Doctors for America,” and signed by Dr. Murthy, urges mandatory licensing “for anyone purchasing guns and ammunition–including mandatory firearm safety training and testing.” Under Dr. Murthy’s scheme, further regulations would place “limits on the purchase of ammunition,” and establish a “mandatory waiting period of at least 48 hours.”

In the letter, Dr. Murthy also advocates for a “federal ban on the sale” of popular semi-automatic firearms and their ammunition, and proposes a “buyback” of these popular types of firearms to “reduce the number… that are currently in circulation.” Even some of the most ardent anti-gun researchers, along with the Department of Justice, have admitted the futility of gun “buyback” programs.

Another of Dr. Murthy’s proposals would strip vital privacy protections put in place to protect firearm owners and prevent the fracturing of physician-patient relationships. The letter, for example, calls for removing “the provision in the Affordable Care Act and other federal policies that prohibit physicians from documenting gun ownership.” While some advocates of the ACA had argued the provision prohibiting such documentation was unnecessary, given that the ACA had nothing to do with guns, Dr. Murthy obviously sees the ACA as playing a role in gun control.

And, in late 2012 and early 2013, Dr. Murthy took to his personal Twitter account to promote his gun control beliefs, including a statement on October 16, 2012, that “Guns are a health care issue.”

Under Dr. Murthy’s leadership, a 2013 Doctors for America petition urged Congress to “immediately” pass a ban on popular semi-automatic firearms and their magazines. Doctors for America also signed on in support of Sen. Dianne Feinstein’s expansive “Assault Weapons Ban of 2013.”

The American people deserve a Surgeon General who will carry out the mission of the office unmotivated by political or ideological goals. Given Dr. Murthy’s lengthy history of hostility towards the right to keep and bear arms, along with his calls for the full weight of the federal government’s health apparatus to be used to target lawful gun ownership, there is strong reason to believe that he would use the influence of the Surgeon General’s office to promote gun control. Simply put, confirmation of Dr. Murthy is a prescription for disaster for America’s gun owners.

The NRA could very well be right.

While the Affordable Care Act does not require physicians to ask their patients if they own a gun, Liberal Doctors often do. In fact, Liberal Pediatricians ask children if their parents have firearms in the house.

Luckily, Americans are still well within their Constitutional Rights to tell these Liberal Doctors that it is none of their business. However, what’s going to happen, now that an anti-gun activist has become the Surgeon General of the United States of America?

The greatest United States President in my lifetime, Ronald Wilson Reagan, said the following about Gun Control:

You won’t get gun control by disarming law-abiding citizens. There’s only one way to get real gun control: Disarm the thugs and the criminals, lock them up and if you don’t actually throw away the key, at least lose it for a long time… It’s a nasty truth, but those who seek to inflict harm are not fazed by gun controllers. I happen to know this from personal experience.

Unfortunately, we have a president who encourages riots and demonstrations on the behalf of fallen criminals.

So, that being said, why would a United States President push so hard for Gun Control?

…Unless his purpose was to control law-abiding citizens.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

Of Truffles, Terrorism, and TRIA

On By kingsjesterIn Christianity, PoliticsLeave a comment

AFBranco12142014As I write today’s blog, an Islamic gunman is holding anywhere from 13-50 hostages captive in a Sydney, Australia Lindt Truffle Shop.

In a related story, recently, the President of the United States, Barack Hussein Obama, appeared in front of the General Assembly of the United Nations, and spoke the following words…

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

Uh huh, Scooter.

Meanwhile, this past week, Obama and his Liberal Vanguard have hit the airwaves and the Internet, shouting until they are blue in the face that we should treat any Muslim Terrorists we may have captured “the way we would want to be treated”…no water boarding allowed, no matter the cost in American lives.

Meanwhile, behind the scenes…

Bloomberg Businessweek reports that

If you’ve already bought tickets for Super Bowl XLIX or are looking forward to watching it with your friends and family, you may be surprised to learn that there is a chance it might not be played. Congress first needs to make a decision on renewing a piece of legislation that you possibly never have heard of: TRIA—the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act.

TRIA was signed into law in 2002 in the aftermath of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, establishing a risk-sharing partnership between the federal government and the insurance industry that made terrorism insurance widely available to U.S. businesses—among them, organizers of sporting events. Without federal support, most insurers had been unwilling to offer coverage. TRIA was renewed in 2005 and in 2007. It is set to expire on Dec. 31 unless Congress renews it. With two weeks until the deadline, the clock is ticking.

You may think: No way that the Super Bowl can be canceled! Think again. A few years ago FIFA, organizer of the World Cup, could not find insurers to cover the final game of the 2006 tournament at a cost it judged reasonable. FIFA was eventually able to structure a special financial instrument so the game could go on, but this took several months.

There is considerable money at stake for the organizers of Super Bowl and for NBC, which will televise the game. No insurance, no game.  It is thus not surprising that the NFL has joined with other professional sports leagues and 80 business groups nationwide to form the Coalition to Insure Against Terrorism (CIAT) to urge Congress to fund reauthorization of the TRIA legislation.

A bit of background on why insurers changed their view of terrorism coverage after 9/11 provides the relevant context. Before 9/11, insurers included terrorism coverage in all commercial policies without charging for it because the risk was below their threshold level of concern. But after paying $44 billion in claims for 9/11—at that time the most costly disaster in the history of insurance—most insurers excluded terrorism from commercial policies.

The absence of terrorism coverage halted large construction projects around the country because financial institutions were concerned about the viability of their loans. Their fears resembled the concern that organizations such as FIFA and the NFL have with respect to their own liability.

TRIA addresses the insurance supply problem. Under the program, the federal government provides a financial back-up for insurers by covering a portion of insured losses above $27.5 billion, up to $100 billion, giving the insurance industry some certainty as to its maximum exposure. In return, insurers are required to offer terrorism coverage to all business clients, which can decide to purchase coverage or not. About 60 percent of large businesses carry terrorism insurance, indicating strong demand for it.

Unless TRIA is reauthorized during the next two weeks, insurers will have the right to cancel terrorism insurance policies after Jan. 1. They are likely to do so for fear of insolvency should a massive terrorist attack take place with no government backup. By law, only insurance companies offering workers’ compensation insurance must include terrorism peril in their policies, whether or not TRIA is renewed. 

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, practices.

The son of America’s Pastor, Reverend Billy Graham, spoke frankly and honestly about “The Religion of Peace “.

Last week, Reverend Franklin Graham told Christian Today that his own views on Islam remained the same as in 2001.

“I have not changed my opinion at all.” He said he looked at Islamic State, at the Taliban and Boko Haram and thought: “This is Islam. It has not been hijacked by radicals. This is the faith, this is the religion. It is what it is. It speaks for itself.”

He added: “I think it is very important that we do all that we can to try to share God’s love with Muslims because they have no hope outside of dying in Jihad. I want them to know, you do not have to die for God. God died for us. He sent His Son to die for us. We do not have to kill ourselves to please God. I want them to know that they can have eternal life.”

Islam itself had not changed at all in 1500 years, he added. “It is the same. It is a religion of war.”

He said he was “sad” that Muslims in the Washington cathedral had “turned their back on the Cross” to worship “another God”. Graham said: “The God of Islam is not the same God of the Judeo-Christian faith. “The God that we worship in Christianity is a God that has a Son. To Islam, that is blasphemy, to say that God has a son. Therefore, they do not worship the God that we worship.”

Rev. Graham, of course, is spot on.

Islam and Christianity present two very different Deities, who may share some similarities, but who have different identities and ultimately different standards. For the President of the United States of America, Barack Hussein Obama and the rest of today’s Liberals 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.

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

However…

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”.

If unchecked, their naivete in the name of Political Correctness will be the death of us all.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

 

Christmas in America: Bless Be the Ties That Bind

On By kingsjesterIn Christianity, PoliticsLeave a comment

WashingtonPrayingAs the days grow shorter, until the special night when Christians around the world celebrate the arrival in our fallen world of the Son of God, I have noticed, once again, a concerted effort by the “Smartest People in the Room” to attempt to turn Christmas in America into a Secular Holiday, as if convincing themselves that the Triune God had nothing at all to do with our Sovereign Nation’s Founding.

For example. the 44th President of these United States, Barack Hussein Obama, (mm mmm mmmm), said the following, as he spoke at the National Christmas Tree Lighting Ceremony on December 4, 2014:

While this story may be a Christian one, its lesson is universal.  It speaks to the hope we share as a people.  And it represents a tradition that we celebrate as a country –- a tradition that has come to represent more than any one holiday or religion, but a season of brotherhood and generosity to our fellow citizens.

It’s that spirit of unity that we must remember as we light the National Christmas Tree –- a tree that will shine its light far beyond our city and our shores to every American around the world.

Mr. President, does the Muslim Brotherhood celebrate Christmas? The closest they would come would be sticking a Christian American’s head on top of a palm tree.

John Quincy Adams was the sixth President of the United States of America. He said the following about our Country’s relationship to Christianity:

My hopes of a future life are all founded upon the Gospel of Christ and I cannot cavil or quibble away [evade or object to]. . . . the whole tenor of His conduct by which He sometimes positively asserted and at others countenances [permits] His disciples in asserting that He was God.6

The hope of a Christian is inseparable from his faith. Whoever believes in the Divine inspiration of the Holy Scriptures must hope that the religion of Jesus shall prevail throughout the earth. Never since the foundation of the world have the prospects of mankind been more encouraging to that hope than they appear to be at the present time. And may the associated distribution of the Bible proceed and prosper till the Lord shall have made “bare His holy arm in the eyes of all the nations, and all the ends of the earth shall see the salvation of our God” [Isaiah 52:10].7

In the chain of human events, the birthday of the nation is indissolubly linked with the birthday of the Savior. The Declaration of Independence laid the cornerstone of human government upon the first precepts of Christianity.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. – The Declaration of Independence, July 4, 1776

From adherents.com

There were 95 Senators and Representatives in the First Federal Congress. If one combines the total number of signatures on the Declaration, the Articles of Confederation and the Constitution with the non-signing Constitutional Convention delegates, and then adds to that sum the number of congressmen in the First Federal Congress, one obtains a total of 238 “slots” or “positions” in these groups which one can classify as “Founding Fathers” of the United States. Because 40 individuals had multiple roles (they signed multiple documents and/or also served in the First Federal Congress), there are 204 unique individuals in this group of “Founding Fathers.” These are the people who did one or more of the following:

– signed the Declaration of Independence
– signed the Articles of Confederation
– attended the Constitutional Convention of 1787
– signed the Constitution of the United States of America
– served as Senators in the First Federal Congress (1789-1791)
– served as U.S. Representatives in the First Federal Congress

The religious affiliations of these individuals are summarized below. Obviously this is a very restrictive set of names, and does not include everyone who could be considered an “American Founding Father.” But most of the major figures that people generally think of in this context are included using these criteria, including George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Samuel Adams, Benjamin Franklin, John Adams, John Hancock, James Madison, Alexander Hamilton and more.

Religious Affiliation
of U.S. Founding Fathers		 # of
Founding
Fathers		 % of
Founding
Fathers
Episcopalian/Anglican 88 54.7%
Presbyterian 30 18.6%
Congregationalist 27 16.8%
Quaker 7 4.3%
Dutch Reformed/German Reformed 6 3.7%
Lutheran 5 3.1%
Catholic 3 1.9%
Huguenot 3 1.9%
Unitarian 3 1.9%
Methodist 2 1.2%
Calvinist 1 0.6%
unknown 43  %
TOTAL 204

 

Christmas and Christianity have been a part of of our national fabric since our Sovereign Nation was born. Here are would a couple of our more Modern Presidents said about Christmas in America”

Since returning home, I have been reading again in our family Bible some of the passages which foretold this night. . . . We miss the spirit of Christmas if we consider the Incarnation as an indistinct and doubtful, far-off event unrelated to our present problems. We miss the purport of Christ’s birth if we do not accept it as a living link which joins us together in spirit as children of the ever-living and true God. In love alone – the love of God and the love of man – will be found the solution of all the ills which afflict the world today. – President Harry S. Truman, Christmas Eve Address to the Nation, 1949

“Christmas is also a time to remember the treasures of our own history. We remember one Christmas in particular, 1776, our first year as a nation. The Revolutionary War had been going badly. But George Washington’s faith, courage, and leadership would turn the tide of history our way. On Christmas night he led a band of ragged soldiers across the Delaware River through driving snow to a victory that saved the cause of independence. It’s said that their route of march was stained by bloody footprints, but their spirit never faltered and their will could not be crushed. The image of George Washington kneeling in prayer in the snow is one of the most famous in American history. He personified a people who knew it was not enough to depend on their own courage and goodness; they must also seek help from God, their Father and Preserver.” (1983)

“For the past few years in this great house, I’ve thought of our first real Christmas as a nation. It was the dark and freezing Christmas of 1776, when General Washington and his troops crossed the Delaware. They and Providence gave our nation its first Christmas gift—a victory that brought us closer to liberty, the condition in which God meant man to flourish.” (1984) President Ronald Wilson Reagan

So, why do we celebrate this time of year? Is it the hustle and bustle? Is is the greed and avarice of the commercialization of a Secular Holiday?

It is to honor and celebrate

ONE SOLITARY LIFE

He was born in an obscure village, the son of a peasant woman.

He grew up in another village, where he worked in a carpenter’s shop until he was thirty. Then for three years he became a wandering preacher.

He never wrote a book. He never held an office. He never had a family or owned a house. He didn’t go to college. He never visited a big city. He never travelled two hundred miles from the place where he was born. He did none of those things one usually associates with greatness.

He had no credentials but himself.

He was only thirty-three when the tide of public opinion turned against him. His friends ran away. He was turned over to his enemies and went through a mockery of a trial. He was executed by the state. While he was dying, his executioners gambled for his clothing, the only property he had on earth. When he was dead he was laid in a borrowed grave through the pity of a friend.

Twenty centuries have come and gone, and today he is the central figure of the human race and the leader of mankind’s progress. All the armies that ever marched, all the navies that ever sailed, all the parliaments that ever sat, all the kings that ever reigned, put together, have not affected the life of man on this earth as much as that One Solitary Life.

***The preceding essay was part of a sermon by Dr James Allan Francis in “The Real Jesus and Other Sermons” © 1926 by the Judson Press of Philadelphia (pp 123-124 titled “Arise Sir Knight!”).

Until He Comes Again,

KJ

The “Cromnibus” Bill: Palin Reacts. Coburn Retires. “Vichy Republicans” Surrender…Again

On By kingsjesterIn Politics2 Comments

palin-newsweekTo know how to reach a destination, you must first know where you are. Without oversight — effective, vigorous oversight — you’ll never solve anything. You cannot write a bill to fix an agency unless you have an understanding of the problem. And you can only know this by conducting oversight, asking the tough questions, holding the bureaucrats accountable, find out what works and what doesn’t and know what has already been done. Effective oversight is an effective tool to expose government overreach and wasteful spending, but it also markedly exposes where we lose our liberty and our essential freedoms. True debates about national priorities would come about if we did effective oversight. It is the senate, once hailed as the world’s greatest deliberative body, where these differences should be argued. Our differences should be resolved through civil discourse so they’re not settled in the street. Just as the constitution provides for majority rule in our democracy while protecting the rights of the individual, the senate must return to the principles to gain the trust of the electorate. And it can. – Retiring US Senator Dr. Tom Coburn

Breitbart News asked Former Alaska GovernorSarah Palin what she thought ofSpeaker of the House John Boehner’s recent actoions in facilitating the passage of the Government-Funding “Cromnibus” Bill

1. What do you think of Speaker Boehner having President Obama ‘whip votes’ from the White House in order to pass this bill?
It stinks to high heaven. Did arrogant politicians not get the memo that Obama’s agenda was decisively defeated in last month’s historic midterm landslide? Good Lord, America said loud and clear not just “no” but “hell no” to Obama’s failed policies. Americans who pay attention said absolutely no to Obama’s amnesty for illegal aliens. 

We also said no to the mother-of-all unfunded mandates, Obamacare, and voters believed promises that they would ratchet down the $18 trillion debt. Well, our bad for apathetically trusting politicians. No, on second thought, it’s not “our bad.” Some of us warned and worked hard to elect candidates who would buck the status quo. Many conscientious Americans did all they could to open the eyes of low-information voters. It was tough going up against Obama’s lapdogs in the media and the power liberals have to play their politics of personal destruction against commonsense conservatives. 

But really how out-of-touch do these politicians have to be to misunderstand our recent mandate to stop Barack Obama’s fundamental transformation of the greatest nation on earth? 

2. Only 162 Republicans voted for this bill–a bill that will take decision making away from a Republican controlled Congress in 4 weeks–does that strike you as outrageous?

It’s baffling really. The Republican Leadership in the House just flipped American voters the bird by sidelining the new Congress we just elected. I want the names of all 162 yahoos who would squander the opportunity to respect the will of the people and get America on the right track. Please print their names so we can ask them, “What the heck are you thinking?!”

And thank you to the 67 House Republicans who did vote no. Let’s remind everyone of their names also.

3. Do you believe that the 162 Republicans that voted for the bill will face a backlash by conservatives?

Hope so! I’ll do my part and I call upon every citizen to do their civic duty to save our country. It’s easy; understand RINO season opens soon and don’t hold back. 

4. Do you believe that Speaker Boehner working with President Obama effectively tried to ‘nullify’ the sweeping Republican victory in the 2014 mid-terms?

That’s the result thus far, so yes. This is an example of the GOP establishment campaigning one way and then governing another. It’s quite nauseating. They promised they would do everything in their power to stop Obama’s executive amnesty – I heard their darn campaign speeches promising to do so! – and yet when they have the power to do so (power that we the voters just gave them) they tacitly endorse Obama’s failed agenda. They’re shining that boot that liberals have on the neck of our economy. They’re carrying Barack Obama’s water even more so than Nancy Pelosi if you can believe it. 

5. Do you think John Boehner should be re-elected Speaker of the House given his actions over the pass few days? 

Constitutional conservatives who understand government’s balance of power and the grave danger in Obama’s lawlessness, and those of us who want smart and principled leadership, should be perplexed and disappointed if stale leadership is re-elected, considering that the midterm election was all about “the status quo has got to go.” It’s time for new energy and steel-spined commitment to stop Obama’s bizarre behavior against this country! Surely there are more of us than not who know that our Founders’ memory, our vets, and our children deserve better that what we’re underneath today. Keep the faith that there are more of us than there are of them who think broken campaign promises and a broken government are just dandy. 

Boehner has to be the biggest blooming idiot of a Congressman that I have ever seen.

Boehner and his fellow Vichy Republicans believe that the American people want them to acquiesce to Obama and the Democrats, giving them everything they want, in the spirit of “compromise”.

That is NOT what Dr. Coburn was so eloquently speaking of, in his retirement speech on the Floor of the Senate.

The Vichy Republicans believe that, by presenting themselves as “Democrat-Life”, and possibly running Jeb Bush as their Presidential Candidate, they will be remembered fondly at the voting booth in November of 2016.

Oh, we will remember them all right. But not in the way they want us to. We will not remember them as leaders. Oh, no. Rather, Americans Conservatives will remember them with all of the fondness that the French Resistance remembered the Nazi collaborators, or Vichy French, after World War II.

What slays me is the fact that the Establishment Republicans seem to be quite content, in their moderately left-leaning stupor, to be totally oblivious and tone deaf of their Conservative Base, average hard working middle-class Americans like you and me, even after we left no doubt as to the way we feel about the direction which the country is taking, through the political tsunami, which was the 2014 Mid-Term Election.

They keep on making bad choices.

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 during the Obama Administration, 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 they were 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 “Moderate”, i.e. “Establishment” Wing of 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, exercised our power, a little over a month ago, 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”.

Until He Comes, 

KJ

KJ’s Letter to Santa

On By kingsjesterIn PoliticsLeave a comment

Santa and Obama 121014During the Christmas Season, chances are, if you have children or grandchildren, like I do, you will eventually have to ask them what they want for Christmas. 30 minutes and 4 sheets of paper later, you might regret that you have. However, your regret will be short-lived, as you see their eyes light up on Christmas morning.

As I contemplate sitting down with my 7 year old grandson, and asking him what he wants Santa to bring him, I have wondered the same thing about myself.

So, as I am wont to do, I decided to share my letter to Santa with you, my faithful readers.

Dear Santa Claus,

This is KJ, but you already knew that didn’t you? I realize, at 56 years young, that I am a little bit old to be writing you this letter. However, there is something deep in my heart that I really, really want.

Santa, all I really want for Christmas from you, is a real American President.

You see, Santa, ever since January of 2009, I have watched my beloved country go downhill faster then a ride on the old Zippin Pippin at the MidSouth Fairgrounds.

In their excitement to do something historic, the American people voted into office an untried, unfettered, and unconscionable Former Senator from the State of Illinois, who learned about politics at the feet of crooked politicians in Chicago, in their back rooms.

This fellow that I am speaking of, Barack Hussein Obama, was first thrust into the national spotlight at the 2004 Democratic National Convention, where he delivered the keynote address.

Now I am certain that the Democratic National Committee vetted this young man, but their avarice in wanting to control our nation and through our nation, the world, pushed aside any misgivings they had about the qualifications that he would bring to the table.

Santa, I certainly hope that you have these brilliant Democratic geniuses on your naughty list.

From the moment Barack Hussein Obama assumed the mantle of the presidency, he showed a complete disconnect from the traditional faith and values of the overwhelming majority of the American People.

He referred to the unborn as a punishment. He apologized for our country to our enemies. Heck, he not only apologized to our enemies, he appeared before thousands of them at the University of Cairo, Egypt, praising their “rich cultural accomplishments” in a speech delivered to the Muslim World.

To this day, he acts like he cares more for the rights of the savages who want to destroy us, then he does for the lives of our Brightest and Best who are serving under him and for the safety of the American people.

During the last 8 years, Obama has been alienating our allies and embracing our enemies. And, he has the nerve to call this failed diplomacy “Smart Power”.

In fact, if it was up to Obama, he would probably have you deliver Nerf Guns, with which to arm our military against the Radical Mohammedans.

Meanwhile, back home, our economy has gone into the tank faster than last year’s fruitcake. Over 37.2% of our workforce are not participating in it, anymore. While Obama and his fellow liberals give all sorts of excuses for this fact, they refuse to admit that it has hurt our economy.

Oh, also, over 1/6th of our nation remains on some form of Food Stamps.

And yet, Obama is signing an Executive Order granting Amnesty to those who are here illegally, giving them all of the rights and “government benefits” of being an American Citizen, without “burdening” them with the responsibility of loyalty to our nation.

Meanwhile, instead of trying to bring us together, to work as a nation to improve things, Obama seems more focused on trying to divide us by the color of our skin.

By the use of his Attorney General and Department of Justice as some sort of Civil Rights National Police Force, Obama has widened the gap between the races, completely ignoring the dream of Martin Luther King, Jr.

Instead of encouraging young black men to take personal responsibility for the babies they have fathered, and pull themselves up by their boot straps, and seek employment, Obama instead has offered his power as President of the United States to create a “national pacifier” in”government benefits” which these young men can grab, becoming trapped in a life of dependence, instead of a life of economic freedom.

At the same time, Obama has encouraged demonstrations and riots over the death of two young black men, who had criminal records, and who died unfortunately, in the middle of being arrested.

Are all these things which I have outlined for you, the actions of a President of the United States of America, Santa?

I think not.

Rather, they are the actions of someone who is either so far over his head that he resembles Phillippe Cousteau walking on the ocean floor, or somebody who was raised to hate the very country that he is now leaving, and is now doing his dead-level best to bring America to her knees.

Either way, could you please replace him with an American President?

I have been a good boy this year. My wife and the still small voice of my Creator, within me, will not let me do otherwise.

May God bless you and Mrs. Claus.

And may God bless us, everyone.

P.S. If I catch you kissing Grandma again this year, it will be you and me, Bubba. You got that? (Just kidding.)

Until He Comes,

KJ

Obama Set To Betray CIA…and Embolden Our Enemies

On By kingsjesterIn PoliticsLeave a comment

AFBrancoObamaElevator9142014The President of the United States of America, Barack Hussein Obama, will today commit, in the interest of appeasing our enemies, what could rightly be considered an act of treason.

Fox News reports that

The White House on Monday backed the release of a long-anticipated report on the CIA’s interrogation techniques, despite warnings from within the administration and from lawmakers that it could lead to a backlash against Americans around the world. 

Press Secretary Josh Earnest said the administration has been preparing “for months” for the report’s release, which is expected late Tuesday morning.

There are some indications … that the release of the report could lead to a greater risk that is posed to U.S. facilities and individuals all around the world,” Earnest acknowledged. “So, the administration has taken the prudent steps to ensure that the proper security precautions are in place at U.S. facilities around the globe.” 

Earnest said the administration still “strongly supports the release of this declassified summary of the report.” 

Nevertheless, Secretary of State John Kerry last week asked the Senate Intelligence Committee to “consider” the timing of the release. 

On Sunday, a top Republican lawmaker warned the release could cause “violence and deaths.” 

And U.S. officials separately confirmed to Fox News that an advisory has been sent urging U.S. personnel overseas to reassess security measures in anticipation of the release. The message directs all overseas posts, including those used by CIA personnel, to “review their security posture” for a “range of reactions that might occur.” 

A similar statement was being sent to military combatant commands to assess their readiness. Pentagon spokesman Col. Steve Warren said Monday the combatant commands have been urged to “take appropriate force protection measures within their areas of responsibility.” 

Asked whether the CIA report ought to be released, Warren said that is a “higher-level policy decision,” but added “there is certainly the possibility the release of this report could cause unrest.” 

In Washington, House Intelligence Committee Chairman Rep. Mike Rogers, R-Mich., said America’s allies are predicting “this will cause violence and deaths.” He said U.S. intelligence agencies and foreign governments have said privately that the release of the Senate intelligence panel report on CIA interrogations a decade ago will be used by extremists to incite violence that is likely to cost lives. 

“I think this is a terrible idea,” Rogers said Sunday on CNN’s “State of the Union.” “Foreign leaders have approached the government and said, ‘You do this, this will cause violence and deaths.’ Our own intelligence community has assessed that this will cause violence and deaths.” 

Rogers is regularly briefed on intelligence assessments. He questioned why the report needed to become public, given that the Justice Department investigated and filed no criminal charges. 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

However, Obama’s naivete is not the only factor behind the dangerously stupid move he is making today.

Obama has never liked the Military Industrial Complex. After all, he is disciple of Karl Marx and Saul Alinsky. Additionally, Obama spent his youth going to a Muslim school in Indonesia, where he was surrounded by children of wealthy Muslims, whose parents were part of the establishment in Jakarta.

Because of his political ideology and the time he spent among Jakarta’s Upper Crust, Obama is very naive, or at least, he seems to be, about those Muslims who aren’t as cultured as he and his friends were. In fact, he seems to be quite ignorant about the Muslim practice of taquiyya, in which it is permissible for Muslims to lie to infidels in order to achieve their mission.

Could Obama’s “Coalition of the Unwilling”, consisting of Middle Eastern Muslims, who are still carrying out actions against their fellow travelers, in ISIS, be practicing taquiyya? Could it be that arming the Syrian rebels was a very stupid thing to do? Could it be that it is time for Obama to quit this halfway waging of War and to go ahead and send in ground troops and take care of business ourselves?

Could it be that his halfway efforts in combating ISIS are a result of him cherishing the Mohammedans above the American Citizens whom he is supposed to be protecting?

Is it possible, as evidenced by his release of this inflammatory information concerning the CIA’s treatment of Muslim Terrorists, that Obama would rather negotiate with barbarians from a position of apologetic servitude, than deal with them from a position of strength?

The answer to all of the above questions is…YES.

May God protect us.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Majority of Americans Believe That Obama Has Worsened Race Relations

On By kingsjesterIn Politics1 Comment

Obama-Shrinks-2“This [Racism] is something that’s deeply rooted in our society, deeply rooted in our history. But the two things that will allow us to solve it: Number one: Is the understanding that we have made progress and so it’s important to recognize that as painful as these instances are, we can’t equate what’s happening now with what was happening 50 years ago. If you talk to your parents, grandparents, uncles, they’ll tell you that things are better,” – President of the United States Barack Hussein Obama, Black Entertainment Television, “BET News Presents: A Conversation with President Barack Obama”, to air tonight, December 8, 2014 at 5:00 p.m. Central.

Isn’t it awfully TIRESOME and TACKY to have a President of the United States of America who views everything in terms of RACE?

Bloomberg.com reports that

President Barack Obama had hoped his historic election would ease race relations, yet a majority of Americans, 53 percent, say the interactions between the white and black communities have deteriorated since he took office, according to a newBloomberg Politics poll. Those divisions are laid bare in the split reactions to the decisions by two grand juries not to indict white police officers who killed unarmed black men in Ferguson, Mo., and Staten Island, N.Y.

Both times, protesters responded with outrage and politicians called for federal investigations. Yet Americans don’t think of the cases as a matched set of injustices, the poll found. A majority agreed with the Ferguson decision, while most objected to the conclusion in the Staten Island death, which was captured on video. The divergent opinions—52 percent agreed on Ferguson compared with 25 percent who approved of the Staten Island outcome—add to an ongoing discussion that was inflamed when Officer Daniel Pantaleo was seen in the July video putting what appeared to be a chokehold on Eric Garner, a 43-year-old man suspected of selling untaxed cigarettes. Garner could be heard saying, “I can’t breathe,” and died of a heart attack in what a medical examiner ruled a homicide. The grand jury decision not to charge Pantaleo came just 12 days after a similar panel in Ferguson declined to charge Officer Darren Wilson, who in August shot to death 18-year-old Michael Brown. That altercation was not captured on video, and the prosecutor presented evidence of a physical confrontation between the two men before the fatal shots were fired. 

The Bloomberg survey shows a gulf between how whites and blacks view the incidents. Ninety percent of African Americans thought the grand jury should have indicted in the Staten Island death. Just over half of the white people polled felt that way. On Ferguson, 89 percent of blacks disagreed with the grand jury, while just 25 percent of whites did. The smaller sample size of black adults changes the margin of error of their response on the grand jury questions to plus or minus 6.5 percentage points.

The poll of 1,001 U.S. adults was conducted Dec. 3-5 by Selzer & Company of Des Moines, Iowa, and the poll for the full sample has a margin of error of plus or minus 3.1 percentage points.

In the six years since his election as the nation’s first black president, Obama has addressed race just a handful of times. He delivered his most personal remarks after an unarmed 17-year-old boy was gunned down in Florida by a man who found him to be suspicious, and then again when that man, George Zimmerman, was acquitted of any crime. “You know, when Trayvon Martin was first shot, I said that this could have been my son. Another way of saying that is, Trayvon Martin could have been me 35 years ago.”

Obama has also weighed in on the deaths of both Brown and Garner. And the Justice Department is reviewing the two incidents, as well. Yet Obama has not gone to Missouri or New York. To Griessel, that’s a problem. “He should have gone to Ferguson and very bluntly said, ‘I don’t want any violence here. Let’s show people that we can accept verdicts we don’t like,’” he said. “The destruction just makes people more prejudice than they already are.”

Obama also nodded to the symbolic power of his rise to the presidency in the opening line of his victory speech on Nov. 4, 2008. “If there is anyone out there who still doubts that America is a place where all things are possible, who still wonders if the dream of our founders is alive in our time, who still questions the power of democracy, tonight is your answer.”

Yeah, buddy. Ol’ Scooter had his Game Face on that night, for sure.

However, as I found out in affairs of the heart, a long time ago…

Beauty is only skip deep, but, ugly goes all the way to the bone.

For over 20 years, Obama sat under the former American Black Muslim, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, at the Trinity Church of Christ, a “Black Liberation Theology” Church.

What is “Black Liberation Theology”? I’m glad you asked.

The chief architect of black liberation theology was James Cone, author of Black Theology and Black Power. One of the tasks of this movement, according to Cone, is to analyze the nature of the gospel of Jesus Christ in light of the experience of blacks who have long been victimized by white oppressors. According to black liberation theology, the inherent racism of white people precludes them from being able to recognize the humanity of nonwhites; moreover, their white supremacist orientation allegedly results in the establishment of a “white theology” that is irrevocably disconnected from the black experience. Consequently, liberation theologians contend that blacks need their own, race-specific theology to affirm their identity and their worth.

“What we need,” says Cone, “is the divine love as expressed in Black Power, which is the power of Black people to destroy their oppressors here and now by any means at their disposal. Unless God is participating in this holy activity, we must reject his love.” Observing that America was founded for white people, Cone calls for “the destruction of whiteness, which is the source of human misery in the world.” He advocates the use of Marxism as a tool of social analysis to help Christians to see “how things really are.”

Another prominent exponent of black liberation theology is the Ivy League professor Cornel West, who calls for “a serious dialogue between Black theologians and Marxist thinkers” — a dialogue that centers on the possibility of “mutually arrived-at political action.”

In the past, Obama has credited a sermon of Mr. Wright’s, “The Audacity of Hope,” with drawing him to what he identified back in 2008 as, “Christianity”.

On Page 293 of his first book,  “Dreams for My Father,” Obama recounts Wright’s “The Audacity of Hope” sermon.

Obama quotes this passage:

It is this world, a world where cruise ships throw away more food in a day than most residents of Port-au-Prince see in a year, where white folks’ greed runs a world in need, apartheid in one hemisphere, apathy in another hemisphere…That’s the world! On which hope sits!

In fact, Wright had so influenced the young Illinois Senator that Obama made the phrase “The Audacity of Hope” the title of his second book.

However, right before he announced his presidential campaign, Obama started to put distance between himself and his pastor of over 20 years, cancelling plans for him to deliver the Convocation Prayer at the campaign’s formal announcement.

The president has been physically distancing himself from Rev. Wright ever since.

Can you say hypocrisy, boys and girls? Sure you can.

It turns out that the man who was billed as our first “Post-Racial President” has done nothing but divide the races even further.

And, that’s not what any nation’s leader does…much less an AMERICAN PRESIDENT…unless…it is intentional.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Muslim Sympathizer-in-Chief About To Sanction Israel?

On By kingsjesterIn PoliticsLeave a comment

americanisraelilapelpinPresident Barack Hussein Obama’s distressing pattern of alienating our friends and embracing our enemies may be about to achieve a new high…err…low.

Freebeacon.com reports that

The Obama administration is refusing to discuss reports that emerged early Thursday claiming that the White House is considering imposing sanctions on Israel for continuing construction on Jewish homes in Jerusalem.

State Department spokeswoman Marie Harf dodged several questions on Thursday when confronted with reports that the administration had held secret internal meetings to discuss taking action against Israel for its ongoing building in East Jerusalem.

The classified meetings were reportedly held several weeks ago and included officials from both the State Department and White House, according to the Israeli daily Ha’aretz, which firstreported on the meetings.

The possibility of sanctioning Israel for its ongoing construction sends a signal that the Obama administration is willing to go further in its denunciations of Israel then any previous White House.

At the same time, the White House is vigorously pushing Congress against passing new sanctions on Iran.

When asked to address the reports Thursday afternoon, Harf declined to take a stance.

“I’m obviously not going to comment one way or another on reported internal deliberations,” she said. “We’ve made clear our position on settlement activity publicly and that hasn’t changed.”

When pressed to address whether the White House has reached a point at which it believes its harsh rhetoric against Israel is not enough, Harf again demurred, stating that she would not “address hypotheticals.”

A White House National Security Council (NSC) official also would not comment on the report when contacted Thursday by the Washington Free Beacon.

News of the supposed meeting leaked to the press though Israeli officials who were apparently apprised of the discussion.

Senior Israeli officials told Haaretz “that White House officials held a classified discussion a few weeks ago about the possibility of taking active measures against the settlements,” according to the report.

The discussion about levying sanctions on Israel reportedly began after Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s October meeting at the White House and the subsequent battle between Washington and Jerusalem over settlement construction.

The thought of the White House leveling sanctions on Israel as it works to lessen those already imposed on Iran prompted consternation on Capitol Hill and throughout the pro-Israel world.

One senior congressional aide who works on the issue of Israel expressed shock that a White House could even discuss such action.

“If these reports are true, this would mark a new era of unprecedented hostility from the White House against our strongest ally in the Middle East,” the source said. “It’s impossible not to notice the irony of the administration mulling sanctions on Israel while threatening to veto new sanctions against Iran.”

The aide added: “The president should be forewarned that taking such action against Israel would yield tremendous pushback from Congress.”

Those in the pro-Israel world expressed a similar view when reached for comment.

“Even this administration, which has been historically hostile to our Israeli allies, even as they worked overtime to bomb the enemies of Iranian proxies across the Middle East, could not possibly be so aggressively committed to undermining our alliances as to levy sanctions against Israel at the same time they’re lifting them on Iran,” said one senior official with a pro-Israel organization who agreed to speak only on background.

Others took a more critical view.

“The Obama administration is against sanctions on Iran, but for them on Israel,” said Noah Pollak, executive director of the pro-Israel organization Emergency Committee for Israel. “Is [White House deputy national security adviser] Ben Rhodes wearing a green headband to work these days?”

One of the perks of having written over 1,600 blogs, is that , sometime over the last 4 years, chances are I have gathered some pertinent background information on the subject I am writing today’s Blog on. This time, I hit the jackpot.

Per wnd.com, posted 11/11/2008:

Hamas held a meeting in the Gaza Strip several months ago with aides to President-elect Barack Obama, but the terror group was asked to keep the contacts secret until after last week’s elections, according to a senior Hamas official.

Ahmed Yousef, Hamas’ chief political adviser in Gaza, told the leading Al-Hayat Arabic-language newspaper Hamas has maintained regular communication with Obama aides that even continued during the past week.

“We were in contact with a number of Obama’s aides through the Internet, and later met with some of them in Gaza, but they advised us not to come out with any statements, as they may have a negative effect on his election campaign and be used by Republican candidate John McCain (to attack Obama),” Yousuf told Al-Hayat.

Yousuf said Hamas’ contact with Obama’s advisers was ongoing, adding that relations were maintained after Obama’s electoral victory last Tuesday.

Then, on 6/25/10, ynet news.com reported:

A senior Hamas figure said Friday that official and unofficial US sources have asked the Islamist group to refrain from making any statements regarding contacts with Washington, this following reports that a senior American official is due to arrive in an Arab country in the coming days to relay a telegram from the Obama Administration.

The Hamas figure told the London-based Al-Quds Al-Arabi newspaper that the Americans fear discussing the talks publicly would “rouse the Jewish lobby and other pressure groups in the US and cause them to pressure the administration to suspend all talks with Hamas.”

The Hamas figure, who is close to Ismail Haniyeh, the prime minister of the government in Gaza, added, “This is a sensitive subject. The Americans don’t want anyone to comment on it because this would catch the attention of pressure groups (in the US) and cause problems.”

He said Hamas’ exiled leadership in Damascus is overseeing the contacts behind closed doors.

On May 22, 2011, President Obama said,

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

A deeper place? As in piled higher and deeper?

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

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

Until He Comes,

KJ