Biden to Announce Gun Control Executive Orders and Legislation Today…What 2nd Amendment?

FoxNews.com reports that

President Biden will announce gun control measures on Thursday that an administration official described as an initial set of actions aimed at addressing all forms of gun violence.

The president will detail several initiatives to be achieved through a mix of executive and legislative action, the official told reporters.

Biden will call on the Department of Justice to issue proposed rules to stop the proliferation of so-called “ghost guns” within 30 days. Ghost guns refer to kits that allow the recipient to assemble the firearm using provided parts. These guns do not have commercial serial numbers and are difficult to track.

The Justice Department will be given 60 days to issue a separate rule on stabilizing braces, which can turn a pistol into a more accurate weapon that fires like a rifle. Sixty days will also be provided for the DOJ to develop model “red flag” legislation that would allow friends and family members to identify an individual as a potential danger, thereby temporarily preventing the person from accessing a firearm.

The president will also highlight the steps his administration is taking to invest in community violence interventions and call on the DOJ to issue a firearms trafficking report.

The administration official said while Biden will call on Congress to act – including on closing loopholes in the background check system – he will not wait.

“Gun violence takes lives and leaves a lasting legacy of trauma in communities every single day in this country, even when it is not on the nightly news,” the White House said in a statement.

The administration official told reporters on Wednesday that Biden is concerned about all forms of gun violence, not only mass shootings but also domestic violence and forms of community violence that disproportionately affect Black and Brown communities.

Biden’s actions follow three recent mass shootings, and the administration official suggested there could be additional actions in the weeks and months to come.

Chipman, who is a gun owner himself, has said he backs regulations that save lives but do not take firearms away from law-abiding citizens.

The administration official confirmed on Wednesday night that Chipman was selected to enforce gun laws while also respecting Second Amendment rights.

ATF is a law enforcement agency within the Department of Justice that strives to safeguard the public from criminal organizations and activity, including the illegal use and trafficking of firearms.

During the Democratic Primary Candidates Debates last year, Candidate Joe Biden said,

“150 million people have been killed since 2007 when Bernie (Sanders) voted to exempt the gun manufacturers from liability, more than all the wars, including Vietnam from that point on.”

The heavily inflated figure misrepresented gun deaths in America since 2007. From 2007 to 2017, the number of firearm deaths in the U.S. was 373,663. This number includes both violent firearm deaths and unintentional or accidental deaths, according to the Center for American Progress, an organization that promotes progressive values.

More in line with Biden’s figures, an analysis of FBI statistics by the Center found that from 2008 through 2017, more than 1.5 million aggravated assaults involved a firearm, with rates varying significantly across the states.

“If I’m elected, NRA [the National Rifle Association], I’m coming for you and gun manufacturers, I’m gonna take you on and I’m gonna beat you,” Biden said.

For years, Democrat politicians like the Dummy From Delaware have been on a crusade to pass stricter and stricter gun control laws, literally foaming at the mouth to take the right to own guns, guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution, away from average law-abiding Americans.

I have always wondered why they have never attempted to get tough with those who break our laws by committing gun violence, instead of trying to take away our Constitutional Right to be able to defend ourselves.

Was it just naiveté on the part of Democrats …or something else?

And then…the Democrats built a wall around our nation’s Capitol.

And, I wondered no more.

Today’s Democrat Elite have allowed their own arrogance to blossom into totalitarianism.

Their zeal to radically change our Constitutional Republic into just another Democratic Socialist failure of a country, like those in Europe and South America, has led them to no longer wish to hear any other political opinions except their own.

The Democrats, led by the Biden-Harris Administration, through their push for continued lockdowns, expanded “Unemployment” payments, flooding our Southern Border with illegal aliens, and now, attempting to abridge our Second Amendment Rights, are employing a political strategy designed to turn America into a country whose people have restricted liberty given to them by an all-powerful Central Government, instead of by “Our Creator”.

Sound familiar?

Sure, Sleepy Joe is going to tell us today that this is not an abridgement of our Second Amendment Rights.

And, Germany’s National Socialist Party told the European Jews that they were simply going to be “relocated”.

The name of the game, boys and girls, is ‘CONTROL”.

Give the Democrats an inch and they will take a mile.

Those who have come before us did not give up their lives on the field of battle while preserving our liberty for us to willingly give it away to a demented doddering old fool issuing Executive Orders written by his Handlers.

 Those whom we have elected to represent us in Washington MUST fight for our American Freedoms.

Or, we need to boot them out and replace them with those who will.

Until He Comes,

KJ

DONATIONS ARE WELCOME AND APPRECIATED.

One-Time
Monthly
Yearly

Make a one-time donation

Make a monthly donation

Make a yearly donation

Choose an amount

$5.00
$15.00
$100.00
$5.00
$15.00
$100.00
$5.00
$15.00
$100.00

Or enter a custom amount

$

Your contribution is appreciated.

Your contribution is appreciated.

Your contribution is appreciated.

DonateDonate monthlyDonate yearly

Biden Calls for a 3 Month National Mask Mandate…Trump: “All Americans Must Have Their Freedoms”

bad-taste-cdn-600

FoxNews.com reports that

President Trump accused presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden of attempting “to politicize a pandemic” following his call Thursday for a nationwide mask mandate to slow the spread of coronavirus.

During an evening press briefing, Trump told Biden to “stop playing politics with the virus.”

Trump argued that Biden’s approach was “regressive, unscientific and bad for our country.” He accused the former vice president of opposing Trump administration policies that proved effective, such as travel bans, even as he pushes for a mask mandate that fails to take into account how the pandemic was impacting specific communities.

“At every turn, Biden has been wrong about the virus, ignoring the scientific evidence and putting left-wing politics before facts,” Trump said at the briefing. “Sleepy Joe opposed both the China and Europe travel bans. He opposed the China travel ban that I instituted very early and the Europe ban I instituted quite early.”

Trump’s remarks came hours after Biden appeared alongside Democratic presidential running mate Kamala Harris ahead of a virtual fundraiser in Wilmington, Del. At the event, Biden called for a nationwide mask mandate, pushing governors to require masks in all states for at least the next three months.

Biden cited estimates saying a mask mandate would save at least 40,000 lives over the three-month period. Biden and Harris did not take questions at the event.

”Wearing the mask is less about you contracting the virus,” Biden said. “It’s about preventing other people from getting sick.”

Trump accused Biden of pushing for a federal mask mandate that would overstep the bounds of the office and infringe on the rights of Americans.

“All Americans must have their freedoms. I trust the American people and their governors very much,” Trump said. “Joe doesn’t know too much.”

Sleepy Joe has it backwards. (I know that you’re shocked.)

Americans have been told that the purpose of wearing a mask in public it to prevent others from spreading the disease to you.

The President is right.

Joe’s demand for a nationwide mask mandate is not medicinal.

It is political.

It is about controlling something, alright…but it is not the Chinese Coronavirus which Joe and the rest of the Democrat Elite want to control.

It is the lives of average Americans.

If Americans were forced to wear masks from coast to coast, every day, in every situation, individual isolation and non-communication would be even more prevalent than it is now.

There are grandparents who have not seen their “children” or their grandchildren since the entire nation was placed in a lockdown.

Some businesses have still not reopened.

And, instead of helping them to reopen and helping average Americans, Congress has run away from Washington D.C., leaving as fast as a bunch of barflies trying to avoid paying their tab at closing time.

But, I digress…

So, why do “Groping” Joe and “Heels Up” Harris want every single American to wear a mask for a duration of three months? What is so special about that duration of time?

Let’s think about that for a moment, boys and girls.

What happens in 3 months from now?

You guessed it, the 2020 Presidential Election.

Just as they have been doing, the Democrats are attempting to sway the election by making Americans afraid to leave the safety of their homes to go vote on November 3, 2020.

Their hope is that average Americans, “Deplorables”, if you will, will stay at home and vote by mail.

Why?

Because it is far easier for the Democrats to commit voter Fraud that way.

It’s hard to “lose ballets” in car trucks.

It’s easy to lose them in the mail.

Voting in person is our Constitutional Right.

If the Democrats believe that Americans will so easily surrender their freedom by going along with a nationwide mask mandate, they have greatly underestimated the will of average Americans living between the coasts.

They have learned noting from the night of November 8, 2016.

It is time for average Americans to teach them another lesson.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Administration in Talks About Winding Down the Coronavirus Task Force, Trump: “We Can’t Keep Our Country Closed for Five Years”…Let’s Roll!

07-curve-li-600

Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn’t pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same. – President Ronald Reagan

FoxNews.com reports that

The Trump administration is in talks over potentially winding down the coronavirus task force, even as the number of COVID-19 cases continues to grow in the U.S. and as sectors of the economy begin to reopen.

President Trump defended the talks Tuesday while speaking to the media in Phoenix, Ariz., where he was touring a mask production facility, saying his advisers were continuing to examine the virus “very closely,” and the doctors on the task force would continue to make their voices heard. He also said, “We can’t keep our country closed for the next five years… We’ve learned a lot about the coronavirus.”

The president also denied his message was, “mission accomplished.”

Vice President Pence, who has led the task force, said Tuesday that White House officials were “having conversations” about finishing up the group’s business and, instead, having “agencies take over the work” — specifically mentioning the Federal Emergency Management Agency [FEMA]. Pence said, though, that the earliest the agencies could take over the group’s responsibilities would be Memorial Day or early June, if the task force itself were to be discontinued.

A White House official told Fox News the White House has been shifting focus toward re-opening the country, as outlined in Phase 1 of the administration’s “Opening Up America Again” guidelines. The official said it would be an ongoing shift over the next several weeks.

The official told Fox News that doctors will continue to play an “important advisory role” in the process, as the administration has aimed to “make sure medical guidelines are kept up to date” and Americans are able to safely return to work. The official stressed that doctors were not being removed from the equation and called any reports reflecting that “false.”

The official told Fox News that members of the task force will continue to provide input, but the group will not be meeting as regularly as they had been at the outset of the pandemic. The official added that the White House’s focus was shifting towards vaccines, therapeutics, testing and re-opening the economy.

The task force, according to the official, was always meant to be a temporary arrangement. The official stressed that experts will continue to provide input, even while not meeting each day.

The task force has included Dr. Anthony Fauci, the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases; Dr. Deborah Birx, who served as the U.S. Global AIDS coordinator under both the Trump and Obama administrations; U.S. Surgeon General Jerome Adams; Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar; Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Administrator Seema Verma; Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Director Robert Redfield and more.

The task force had delivered near-daily briefings from the White House for nearly two months, sometimes lasting for more than an hour, providing updates on the impact of the coronavirus and the Trump administration’s response.

But, those briefings also became a source of controversy.

Trump led many of them, taking criticism for spending chunks of time touting his administration’s accomplishments and sparring with some of the media. Perhaps the most controversial moment came last month when Trump seemingly suggested that a product as simple as household disinfectant potentially could be used for treatment in humans for coronavirus.

The president later said he was just being “sarcastic.” But, Lysol and even the Environmental Protection Agency [EPA] put out statements reminding people that disinfectants should not be ingested or injected into the human body. Shortly afterward, the White House stopped hosting the briefings on a regular basis.

I personally believe that focusing the experts in the Coronavirus Task Force on a new mission of reopening America would be a great idea.

I firmly believe that, while no death from the virus has been unimportant, the estimates of death toll of the coronavirus were greatly overestimated.

It is time to tailor coronavirus safety restrictions to what is happening in different areas of the country, not just treat every region of America as if it was the sardine can that is New York City, where the homeless sleep in the subway and the mayor is a Communist.

Speaking for the state where I live, Mississippi, tomorrow, the governor is going to allow restaurants to reopen at 50% occupancy with tables 6 feet apart and is going to start allowing “drive-in church services”.

That’s an improvement, but, I still need a haircut and I can’t fellowship with my fellow believers while we are isolated in different cars.

“Virtual hugs” and waving hands emojis on Facebook just doesn’t cut it.

America, using common sense, HAS to return to some sense of normalcy before we lose our nation to the Far Left Democrats and their puppet governors, who want to turn us all into a Marist Proletariat so that they can grow rich and powerful as the Soviet Politboro was.

You think I am kidding?

Have you been watching the overstepping governors in the blue states as they trample our Constitution?

If you have been on any Facebook Political Pages, you will find Liberals cheering them on, oblivious of the trampling of the rights of American citizens.

Instead, that have been calling those Americans who entered the Michigan Capitol Building carrying legal firearms, thugs because they dared stand up against Gov. Whitmer.

President Trump is right.

“We can’t keep our country closed for the next five years.”

It is time to starting opening back up or else we will be playing right into the hands of those who would “radically change” our Constitutional Republic into a Marxist Nation.

President Ronald Reagan said,

Man is not free unless government is limited.

What we have witnessed through the overstepping of some of our states’ governors during the last two months has proven the Gipper to have been a prophet.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

 

 

Sacramento Registering Illegals to Vote in City School Board Election

jerry-brown-illegals-voting-678x381 (2)

Let’s pretend I broke into your house. When you discover me there, you insist I leave. But I say, “I’ve made all the beds, washed the dishes, did the laundry, and cleaned the floors; I’ve done all the work you don’t like to do. I’m hardworking and honest (except for breaking into your house). Not only must you let me stay, you must also add me to your insurance plan, educate my kids, and provide these benefits to my husband, too (he will do your yardwork, he’s honest and hardworking too–except for that breaking in part). If you try to force me out, I will call my friends who will picket your house and proclaim my right to be there! It’s only fair, because you have a nicer house than I do, and I’m trying to better myself. I’m hardworking and honest…except for, well, you know. I will live in your house, contributing only a fraction of the cost of my keep, and there is nothing you can do about it without being accused of selfishness and prejudice.

Oh yeah, I want you to learn my language so you can communicate with me.

Good plan…don’t you think?

Is this a behavior we should be rewarding?

While the Main Stream Media has centered the nations attention on castigating President Trump over his Press Conference with Russia’s Vladimir Putin, this happened…

The Sacramento Bee reports that

San Francisco began registering non-citizens, including undocumented immigrants, to register to vote Monday in the November election for the city school board, reported The San Francisco Chronicle.

The move follows passage of a 2016 ballot measure by San Francisco voters opening school elections to non-citizens who are over the age of 18, city residents and have children under age 19, reported the publication.

“This is no-brainer legislation,” Hillary Ronen, a San Francisco supervisor, told the Chronicle. “Why would we not want our parents invested in the education of their children?”

“We want to give immigrants the right to vote,” Norman Yee, also a county supervisor, told KGO.

But Harmeet Dhillon, who serves on the Republican National Committee, told the station she disagrees with those assessments.

“The reason I voted against it is that I think the right to vote is something that goes along with citizenship and should be,” Dhillon told KGO.

San Francisco became the first city in California to allow non-citizens to vote in local elections following passage of Measure N with 54 percent of the vote after two previous failed tries, reported KTVU.

There are concerns that the non-citizen voter registration rolls, which will be open, could be used to target people who entered the U.S. illegally, reported The San Francisco Examiner.

“Our immigrants, are they vulnerable? Absolutely,” Supervisor Sandra Lee Fewer told the publication. “But in San Francisco we stand strong together.”

President Donald Trump and California leaders have clashed repeatedly since the 2016 election over immigration enforcement, sanctuary cities and voter fraud allegations.

Community organizations, such as the Mission Economic Development Agency, plan to meet with non-citizens to inform them of the possible risks, the Examiner reported.

Chicago and some Maryland cities also allow non-citizen residents to vote in school board elections, reported KPIX.

Several cities in Massachusetts, including Cambridge, Amherst, Brookline and others, have at various times voted to allow non-citizens to vote in local elections, but those moves require legislation from state lawmakers to take effect, reported The Boston Globe.

The San Francisco measure allowing non-citizen voting expires in 2022 unless renewed by the board of supervisors, according to the Examiner.

The deadline to register to vote in San Francisco is Oct. 22 for the Nov. 6 election, according to the California Secretary of State’s Office.

Did you notice that every single one of those cities mentioned in the above article are Democratic Strongholds?

Why are the Democrats so desirous to give those who are in our Sovereign Nation illegally the Constitutional Right to vote, a right reserved for American Citizens?

And, why are they starting with local school board elections?

Remember the story of the frog in a pot of water on the stove?

The story goes that if you place a frog in a pot of water on the stove and slowly increase the heat of the burner that the pot is resting on, the frog will not make an effort to jump out. Instead, it will stay in the water until it boils to death.

That’s the same principle that the Democrats are using.

By starting out in local low profile elections, they are getting these communities used to the idea of allowing illegals to vote.

Before these communities know what’s happening, they will have illegals on their city council or Board of Aldermen. After that, they will have an illegal as the major of their city.

Once that is allowed to happen, it’s Katie bar the door.

The Democrats are so eager to allow illegals to vote in OUR elections because the “Democratic Socialism” which has become their party’s political ideology will be rejected in elections from local to national by the overwhelming majority of American Voters….and they will lose every election they enter.

However, those who are in our nation illegally will be more than happy to vote in these Democratic Socialist Candidates because they will be told and will believe that they will be getting a bunch of free stuff and they will be able to share in the American Dream.

It is a new version of the same pitch that the Democrats made to Black Americans when they launched their “Great Society” under President Lyndon Baines Johnson.

And, we see how well that worked out.

But, I digress…

Voting in American Elections is a Constitutional Right as prescribed by our Founding Fathers, to be exercised by American Citizens ONLY.

Our Founders gifted us with our American Liberty, won through the blood of patriots.

Liberty is Freedom with Responsibility.

Voting is the responsibility of all American Citizens of legal age.

It is also a PRIVILEGE…one which illegal immigrants have not earned.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

NFL Sunday: Pence Pawns Protesters…Jones Jolts Jocks…Fans Flee

Mike-Pence-NFL-protest-rtr-img

Well, another Sunday Afternoon in America, and another opportunity for NFL Players to show Americans their backsides.

Only this time, an American Leader kicked them in it.

FoxNews.com reports that

Vice President Mike Pence walked out on his home-state Indianapolis Colts Sunday when members of the opposing team kneeled for the national anthem, but a report that Colin Kaepernick, the player who started it all, will stand if given another shot in the NFL was quickly dialed back.

“I left today’s Colts game because @POTUS and I will not dignify any event that disrespects our soldiers, our Flag, or our National Anthem,” Pence tweeted.

Several San Francisco 49ers players kneeled for the anthem on Sunday in Indianapolis.

Pence later posted a statement which read, “I left today’s Colts game because President Trump and I will not dignify any event that disrespects our soldiers, our Flag, or our National Anthem. At a time when so many Americans are inspiring our nation with their courage, resolve, and resilience, now, more than ever, we should rally around our Flag and everything that unites us.” 

“While everyone is entitled to their own opinions, I don’t think it’s too much to ask NFL players to respect the Flag and our National Anthem,” he continued. “I stand with President Trump, I stand with our soldiers, and I will always stand for our Flag and National Anthem.” 

President Donald Trump later tweeted, “I asked @VP Pence to leave stadium if any players kneeled, disrespecting our country. I am proud of him and @SecondLady Karen.” 

Trump’s son Eric also took to Twitter Sunday, writing, “Vice President Pence is truly an amazing man! Thank you for standing up for our country and for the respect of our great flag! @VP” 

While a quarterback for the 49ers last year, Colin Kaepernick sat or kneeled during the national anthem last season to bring more attention to the killings of black men by police officers. The protests have grown this season.

Meanwhile, CBS Sports’ Jason La Canfora corrected his report that had claimed Kaepernick would stand during the national anthem if given a chance to play football in the NFL again. 

“Wanted to clarify one thing regarding @Kaepernick7. When I was asked about his whether or not he would sit or stand for anthem …” La Canfora tweeted after the report came out earlier Sunday. 

“Standing for Anthem wasn’t something that I spoke to Colin about,” the reporter added. “I relayed what had been reported about him standing in the future…”

“Reports about @Kaepernick7 standing for anthem had not been refuted,” La Canfora wrote. “However, I can’t say if they are true or not. Colin and I didn’t discuss.”

In another message, La Canfora said, “Colin would have to address any future demonstrations. I didn’t ask him if he would sit or stand. Our chat primarily about his will to play.”

“I know @Kaepernick7 is fully committed to playing football and helping those in need. What he would do during the Anthem I do not know,” he wrote.

The reporter added that Kaepernick has been living in New York and working out privately in New Jersey with the hope of signing with a team this season.

“After sitting down with Colin Kaepernick for several hours, @JasonLaCanfora says the QB is still actively trying to play in the NFL,” NFLonCBS tweeted Sunday, including a video. 

After sitting down with Colin Kaepernick for several hours, @JasonLaCanfora says the QB is still actively trying to play in the NFL. pic.twitter.com/R9qTIZ7EQl

— NFLonCBS (@NFLonCBS) October 8, 2017

“He’s not planning on kneeling, he’s going to donate all his jersey sales, and he’s planning on standing for the anthem, if given the opportunity,” La Canfora initially said in the video segment. 

On Sunday, Kaepernick’s girlfriend, radio personality Nessa Diab, took to Twitter. 

“The reports that Colin will stand for the anthem are completely false! He has never discussed this with anyone,” she posted. 

Kaepernick retweeted Diab’s message. 

Of course he did.

Meanwhile… per DallasNews.com

Cowboys owner Jerry Jones said after Sunday’s game against the Green Bay Packers that any Cowboy who “disrespects the flag” will not play.Said Jones:  “If there is anything disrespecting the flag, then we will not play. Period. We’re going to respect the flag and I’m going to create the perception of it. …

“I know this. We cannot in the NFL, in any way, give the implication that we tolerate disrespecting the flag. We cannot do that. I know the vice president did leave because in his opinion, the teams were. We know that there is a serious debate in this country about those issues. But there is no question in my mind that the National Football League and the Dallas Cowboys are going to stand up for the flag. Just so we’re clear.”

In response, the NFL Players Association issued the following statement…

NFL players are union members and part of the labor movement that has woven the fabric of America for generations. Our men and their families are also conscientious Americans who continue to be forces for good through our communities and some have decided to use their platform to peacefully raise awareness to issues that deserve attention.

It is a source of enormous pride that some of the best conversations about these issues have taken place in our locker rooms in a respectful, civil and thoughtful way that should serve as a model for how all of us can communicate with each other.  

We should not stifle these discussions and cannot allow our rights to become subservient to the very opinions our Constitution protects. That is what makes us the land of the free and home of the brave.  

Gentlemen, this is America.

You have the right to your opinion…an opinion that was limited to just a couple of you before November 8, 2016.

An opinion which has your base down 31% and which has caused you to drop to the position of the least favorite professional sport in America, trailing Major League Baseball and Professional Basketball.

Your opinion has also cost your league and the owners of your respective teams BIG money. Money which they had to give back to sponsors because of the NFL’s failure to meet promised revenue projections in order to secure lucrative advertisers’ partnerships.

That’s not even counting the empty stadium seats, which are so clearly visible that neither the league nor those televising the games can purposefully hide them anymore.

And, let’s not forget the stadium vendors and the peddlers of official NFL merchandise, such as jerseys and hats, which have been on display on Facebook as once loyal fans burn them in retribution for your on-field displays of your “Constitutional Right” to disrespect our flag and the playing of our National Anthem.

Now, Dallas Cowboys Owner Jerry Jones wants to “stop the bleeding” as he recognizes that moniker of “America’s Team” given to his NFL Franchise so many years ago, is no longer so, as Americans are finding something better to do on their Sunday Afternoons.

In my research for this post last night, after coming home from MY job, a real one, mind you, not a game we used to play with a Nerf Football in each other’s front yards,  I read where some of you were complaining that Vice-President Pence’s walking out after the 49s disrespected the flag and the national anthem was “staged”. Actually, he was there to watch a football game. Not a Political Demonstration.

You spoiled ungrateful brats protested our nation, so our nation’s Second-in-Command protested you right back.

Flipping off your fans, your Team Owners, and the majority of Americans, including those occupying the Halls of Power in Washington, DC, does not seem to be working out so well for you and your display of your “Constitutional Rights” while you are supposed to be a professional ON THE JOB, does it?

But, hey, no worries.

If you lose your jobs because of the decrease in revenue that your Political Demonstrations are causing, I’m sure that you “professionals” can find work.

After all, it is the time of year when companies are hiring “Seasonal Help”.

How do your guys look in a red suit and a white beard?

Repeat after me…

HO…HO…HO!

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

 

Supreme Court to Decide Whether Non-Citizens Have the “Constitutional Right” to Sue in American Courts

thels14hik

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. – Amendment IV, The United States Constitution

Foxnews.com reports that

The Supreme Court expressed sympathy Tuesday for the family of a Mexican teenager fatally shot from across the U.S.-Mexico line by a Border Patrol agent, but struggled to reach consensus on whether foreign nationals – like the teen’s relatives – can sue in American courts.

The divisions were on display during oral arguments for what has become a closely watched case, amid an escalating political debate in Washington over border security. The arguments were held the same day the Department of Homeland Security released new directives on immigration enforcement, and after a lower federal court blocked a separate executive action from President Trump on immigration and refugee restrictions.

Apart from renewed interest in the court’s consideration of immigration disputes, the case heard Tuesday also could have implications for other U.S. government actions taken overseas — including military drone strikes against suspected terrorists, and electronic surveillance over the Internet.

In the current dispute, 15-year-old Sergio Hernandez was just steps from the border on Mexican soil when he was killed in 2010 by Jesus Mesa Jr., an agent standing on the American side in El Paso, Texas.

The federal agent was not prosecuted, and the U.S. refused to extradite him to Mexico. The victim’s family says a civil action is now their only recourse for justice.

The issues for the court are whether the officer enjoys immunity from such claims of excessive force, and whether the victim enjoyed limited constitutional protections, even though he was not a U.S. citizen.

During a spirited, 70-minute public session at the high court, the eight justices appeared divided over just what kind of violations by the U.S. government against foreigners merit legal action, and whether courts should even get involved.

“This is one of the most sensitive areas of foreign affairs where the political branches should discuss with Mexico what the solution ought to be,” said Justice Anthony Kennedy. “This an urgent matter of separation of powers for us to respect the duty that the principle rule the executive and the legislative have with respect to foreign affairs.”

But Justice Sonia Sotomayor wondered, “Why should there not be a civil remedy to ensure that border police are complying with the Constitution? … Wouldn’t shooting potshots at Mexican citizens be shocking to the conscience?”

Both sides in the shooting incident offer differing accounts of what happened in June 2010, when Hernandez and three of his friends were spotted hanging around a concrete culvert along the Rio Grande waterway separating the two countries.

Video shot on a phone by a civilian shows the agent shooting Hernandez as the unarmed boy peeked out from behind a railroad trestle, 60 feet away.

Mesa’s lawyers and supporters say unreleased surveillance video shows the agent was under threat from rocks being thrown at him, and that he acted appropriately.

While Mesa was never prosecuted, other border agents have been in separate incidents, including Lonnie Swartz for second-degree murder in the 2012 death of a 16-year-old Mexican boy. The agent has pleaded not guilty and his trial is pending.

An outside report commissioned by U.S. Customs and Border Protection faulted the agency for not fully investigating 67 shootings incidents from 2010-2012.

Immigration rights activists in particular have criticized incidents along the often-unmarked border, which Justice Elena Kagan called a “no-man’s land”– where determining what happened and where can prove challenging.

Both sides agree had Hernandez been on U.S. soil at the time of the shooting — even illegally — the agent could be sued in civil court.

But Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said the real issue here concerns the actions of the agent himself.

“It’s the United States law operating on the United States official who’s acting inside the United States,” she said. “This case has, as far as the conduct is concerned, United States written all over it. There’s nothing about Mexico. The Border Patrol guard doesn’t take his orders from Mexico.”

But Chief Justice John Roberts repeatedly urged lawyers for Hernandez’s family to offer a standard on just when such claims can be pressed, offering a contemporary hypothetical.

“How do you analyze the case of a drone strike in Iraq where the plane is piloted from Nevada?” he asked.

Given the competing arguments at Tuesday’s public sessions, the court may find it difficult to articulate a clear standard even for similar cases occurring within shooting distance of the border. A 4-4 tie would not create any precedent, but would stop the Hernandez lawsuit from proceeding.

The family’s lawyer said after the arguments that the Trump administration’s controversial immigration policies make it imperative the courts step in.

“It intensifies the danger if there is no Constitution when the border agents interact with the folks they are trying to deport,” said Robert Hilliard. “There is going to be more of a need to have the executive’s conduct reviewed by the judiciary. Right now there is no checks on the executive. There’s no separation of powers.”

But the attorney for the border agent told Fox News that, if his side loses, public safety could be compromised if agents feared being subjected to lawsuits. “I think it would create a chilling effect for all those protecting our borders and our national security in times of critical incidents on when to act and when to protect themselves in times of peril,” Randolph Ortega said.

The case is Hernandez v. Mesa (15-118). A ruling is expected by June.

Placing the fact of the wasted life of a 16-year old aside, the question remains:

How can non-citizens possibly have “Constitutional Rights”?

The child’s parents are Mexican Citizens, residing in Mexico, as was their 16-year old son.

How can “their 4th Amendment Rights” have been violated?

They do not reside on American Soil, therefore the laws, which our Founding Fathers  established to protect our Sovereign Nation’s Citizens, do not apply to them.

Illegal Immigrants do not have Constitutional Rights, either. However, they have had them bestowed upon them by sympathetic courts, when they are involved in “trifling” legal matters. like, say, the MURDER of an American Citizen.

Legal Immigrants, on the other hand, earned their citizenship. They showed that they were willing to become a part of the Great American Melting Pot (from the Schoolhouse Rock video of the same name).

They demonstrated that, as the US Citizen and Immigration services states, that they were willing to…

Support the Constitution;
Renounce and abjure absolutely and entirely all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty of whom or which the applicant was before a subject or citizen;
Support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic;
Bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and
A. Bear arms on behalf of the United States when required by the law; or
B. Perform noncombatant service in the Armed Forces of the United States when required by the law; or
C. Perform work of national importance under civilian direction when required by the law.

Additionally, these legal immigrants also took the following oath:

I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty, of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen; that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I will bear arms on behalf of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform noncombatant service in the Armed Forces of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform work of national importance under civilian direction when required by the law; and that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; so help me God.

Perhaps, if the young man’s parents had raised him to be respectful of America’s Southern Border and the Americans who faithfully guard it, they would still have their son.

But, there I go again, expecting other nations to have our value systems and their people to exercise personal responsibility.

It’s far easier to disrespect a Sovereign Nation’s Borders and rely on the avarice and naiveté of those in the Judicial and  Legislative Branches of that country’s Governments to bestow those rights upon you, for the sake of Political Power.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Mike Pence, The Rights of the Unborn, and The “Pro-Life Generation”

gettyimages-506278824_0

I would tell you — the sanctity of life proceeds out of the belief that ancient principle where God says before you were formed in the womb I knew you, and so for my first time in public life, I sought to stand with great compassion for the sanctity of life. Society will be judged by how it defends its most vulnerable – the aged, the infirm, the disabled, and the unborn.- Republican Vice-Presidential Candidate Mike Pence, October 4, 2016

…The unborn person doesn’t have constitutional rights. Now, that doesn’t mean that we don’t do everything we possibly can in the vast majority of instances to, you know, help a mother who is carrying a child and wants to make sure that child will be healthy, to have appropriate medical support. It doesn’t mean that, you know, don’t do everything possible to try to fulfill your obligations. But it does not include sacrificing the woman’s right to make decisions. – Democratic Presidential Candidate Hillary Clinton, “Meet The Press”, April 3, 2016

CNSNews.com reports that

CEO of Planned Parenthood Cecile Richards says she doesn’t know at what point a baby receives constitutional rights.

On Tuesday, Doug Wagner of WHO Newsradio in Iowa discussed Hillary Clinton’s view that constitutional rights for the unborn don’t exist. He then asked Richards her thoughts on the issue.

Wagner said, “At what point does that child – or that unborn person, fetus – whatever you want to call it – at what point does that baby get the constitutional rights?”

“Well, I don’t really, actually – I don’t know that there’s an exact answer for that” Richards replied.

“Because what the point is (inaudible) that women have and there are, as you know, restrictions on women’s ability to terminate a pregnancy – and when they can, but until a pregnancy is viable they have the right to make that decision.”

“I think it really, honestly that’s not the problem we are facing in America,” Richards continued. “What we are facing in America is the fact that women in many states have fewer rights to access basic health care. And again, I think it’s really important that we be honest here about birth control.”

It should be no surprise to anyone that Hillary and those who support her, like Cecile Richards, who dismiss the humanity of the unborn, feel this way.

Hillary, like Obama, sincerely believes that she is the smartest person in any room that she happens to walk into. There is no room in her ego-filled heart and mind, for a Supreme Being.

Hillary, herself, believes that she is the sole arbiter of Right and Wrong in her life.

Have you ever tried to have a discussion with an ardent  pro-abortion supporter, either on Facebook or face-to-face?

You won’t hear these “Champions of Tolerance” call those innocent lives, babies, human beings, a life, a soul, a gift shouldn’t surprise anyone that a Far Left Radical Follower of Saul Alinsky, like Hillary Rodham Clinton, should call an unborn human being a gift from God, or anything remotely resembling something that they should feel remorse about killing.

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

From the scientific perspective, Dr. Carlo Bellieni, in his book “Dawn of the I: Pain, Memory, Desire, Dream of the Fetus,” writes:

As soon as it is born, the child shows in a scientifically demonstrable way that it recognizes its mother’s voice and distinguishes it from that of a stranger. Where has he learned that voice other than in the maternal womb?

There are also direct proofs. For example, we register how the movements and cardiac frequency of the fetus vary if we transmit unexpected sounds through the uterine wall. And we see that at first the fetus is startled, then it gets used to it, just like we do when we hear something that does not interest us.

In fact, the scientific evidence is immense. We cannot understand how it can be thought that it becomes a person at a certain point, perhaps when coming out of the uterus.

From the physical point of view, at the birth very little really changes: Air enters the lungs, the arrival of blood from the placenta is interrupted, the type of circulation of blood in the heart changes, and not much more.

As I often say, only blind faith in magic arts or some strange divinity can lead one to think that there is a “human” quality leap at a given moment — certainly not science.

Life begins at the moment of conception, and an abortion stops a beating heart.

There is no way around that.

However, I realize that referring to the act of abortion as “killing a baby” makes pro- abortion advocates lose their feeble minds.

Ask me if I care.

They have spent years and years trying to convince the gullible among us, that it is not really a human being growing inside the mothers womb. And, even if it is, it is a punishment or, at least, that’s what the President of the United States referred to an unwanted baby as.

In our “One Nation Under God” today, President Obama and his Administration continue their fight for the “right” to allow women to kill their babies in the womb. It is as simple as that.

However, boys and girls, there are other options for unwed mothers. For instance, there’s this wonderful thing called adoption, through which of woman who does not want to be a single mother, can give her unwanted baby to a couple who will love and cherish that human life, and raise it in the way in which it should go.

Have you ever thought about why Liberal Abortion Advocates like Hillary Clinton and Cecile Richards do not focus on that option, but instead advocates for the disposal of human life?

There is a simple and chilling exclamation:

Couples who want to adopt are responsible loving people who are less likely to run to Uncle Sugar for help in raising their child.

While women who seek abortions, tend to be of a lower economic strata and a more government- dependent lifestyle.

Like the purpose for passing the  national nightmare known as Obamacare, it all boils down to State Control of the populace.

In a State-Controlled Nation, there will be, by necessity, no room for the existence of individual conscience nor Religious Freedom. For in a state-controlled nation, the Central Government itself is god.

The good news is that Americans are fighting back against this “Culture of Death”.

Per TheHill.com, in a post published just this morning,

The most recent Marist Poll from this summer shows that a 53% majority of Americans support a strong pro-life policy of limiting abortions only to cases of rape, incest, or medical emergencies. An overwhelming 78% supermajority support, at a minimum, limiting abortion only to the first three months of pregnancy. Sixty-two of Americans oppose forcing taxpayers to foot the bill for abortions.

I believe that the Great American Silent Majority will the deciding factor in the Upcoming Presidential Election in November.

In the case of “Abortion On Demand”, average Americans have recognized the obvious.

As President Ronald Reagan observed, all those decades ago,

I’ve noticed that everyone who is for abortion has already been born.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

Obama: America’s Greatest Gun Salesman

“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” – the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America

The Washington Examiner reports that

Gun sales are on a pace to break last year’s record of more than 23 million, a boon to the U.S. industry and gun stores thanks to election-year worries about gun control and recent terror attacks, according to government figures and experts.

Under Obama, background checks for guns reached 141.4 million through the end of May, amounting to sales of about 52,600 a day, according to the FBI. Last year, the FBI conducted more than 23 million background checks, which are generally used to figure sales of new and used weapons.

Domestically, manufacturers have reported producing about 21,000 guns a day, or more than 46 million in Obama’s first six years in office.

And should Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton continue to best Republican Donald Trump in the polls, sales could hit new highs, according to industry experts.

Joining men in buying guns have been women, youths and now members of the LGBT community, especially after the terrorist slaying of 49 at an Orlando, Fla., gay nightclub this month.

Justin Anderson, marketing director for Hyatt Guns in Charlotte, N.C., one of the nation’s biggest gun shops, said Obama has been great for sales.

“The recent surge in gun buying is based on two variables: fear of government intrusion on Second Amendment rights, and, more importantly, people interested in personal protection,” Anderson told Secrets.

“Our sales have doubled across the board, not just in AR-style rifles, but also in small frame handguns and home defense shotguns. We saw this just after the San Bernardino shooting, as well. More and more people are coming to realize that their personal safety is at risk and their government cannot protect them,” he said, adding:

“This is likely the beginning of a long rise in gun sales leading up the election. Should Hillary Clinton take a significant lead, it will only boost these sales.”

No Doubt.

That is what Liberals have never understood, in their continuous quest to take away the Second Amendment rights of average Americans.

Average Americans will never surrender our Constitutional Right to defend ourselves and our families from enemies foreign and domestic.

What part of the words quote “shall not be infringed” do you Liberals not understand?

Let’s have a “serious conversation” about the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, found in the section known as the “Bill of Rights”.

Why did our Founding Fathers, in all their wisdom, include this Amendment?

Dr. Nelson Lund, Patrick Henry Professor of Constitutional Law and the Second Amendment at George Mason University, wrote the following in an article posted at Heritage.org

The Founding generation mistrusted standing armies. Many Americans believed, on the basis of English history and their colonial experience, that central governments are prone to use armies to oppress the people. One way to reduce that danger would be to permit the government to raise armies (consisting of full-time paid troops) only when needed to fight foreign adversaries. For other purposes, such as responding to sudden invasions or similar emergencies, the government might be restricted to using a militia, consisting of ordinary civilians who supply their own weapons and receive a bit of part-time, unpaid military training.

…Thus, the choice was between a variety of militias controlled by the individual states, which would likely be too weak and divided to protect the nation, and a unified militia under federal control, which almost by definition could not be expected to prevent federal tyranny. This conundrum could not be solved, and the [Constitutional] Convention did not purport to solve it. Instead, the Convention presumed that a militia would exist, but it gave Congress almost unfettered authority to regulate that militia, just as it gave the new federal government almost unfettered authority over the army and navy.

This massive shift of power from the states to the federal government generated one of the chief objections to the proposed Constitution. Anti-Federalists argued that federal control over the militia would take away from the states their principal means of defense against federal oppression and usurpation, and that European history demonstrated how serious the danger was. James Madison, for one, responded that such fears of federal oppression were overblown, in part because the new federal government was structured differently from European governments. But he also pointed out a decisive difference between America and Europe: the American people were armed and would therefore be almost impossible to subdue through military force, even if one assumed that the federal government would try to use an army to do so. In The Federalist No. 46, he wrote:

“Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate governments, to which the people are attached and by which the militia officers are appointed, forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition, more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of. Notwithstanding the military establishments in the several kingdoms of Europe, which are carried as far as the public resources will bear, the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms. And it is not certain that with this aid alone they would not be able to shake off their yokes.”

Implicit in the debate between the Federalists and Anti-Federalists were two shared assumptions: first, that the proposed new constitution gave the federal government almost total legal authority over the army and the militia; and second, that the federal government should not have any authority at all to disarm the citizenry. The disagreement between Federalists and Anti-Federalists was only over the narrower question of how effective an armed population could be in protecting liberty.

My purpose in reviewing history is quite simple:

Those who do not study history are doomed to repeat it.

Make no mistake, if President Barack Hussein Obama had his way, we would live in a country comprised of restrictive gun laws, which would be modeled after those in Europe.

And, as recent events have plainly shown, those restrictive gun laws have allowed Islamic Terrorists to kill innocent people unchallenged, because none of those innocent people were allowed to carry a weapon with which to defend themselves.

In fact, in some cases, even the police officers, who first arrived on the scene, were unarmed, and had to call for additional forces, thus giving the perpetrators more time to murder and maim the innocent.

One of our Founding Fathers, Dr. Benjamin Franklin, once wrote,

Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.

Like Dr. Franklin and the rest of those who have fought for our freedom, average Americans realize what Modern American Liberals, including the President, do not.

Until He Comes,

KJ

The War Against Christianity: Perceived “Constitutional Rights” and the “Tyranny of the Minority”

American Christianity 2Yesterday, a Facebook Friend of mine posted the following article from Breitbart.com, originally written on September 28, 2015:

As Pope Francis flew back to Rome, President Obama issued a stern warning to Christians, warning them their attempts to assert their religious liberty to oppose gay rights would fail.

“We affirm that we cherish our religious freedom and are profoundly respectful of religious traditions,” he insisted during a dramatic speech at a LGTB fundraiser in New York City on Sunday night, praising the progress made on gay rights under his administration. “But we also have to say clearly that our religious freedom doesn’t grant us the freedom to deny our fellow Americans their constitutional rights.”

The fundraiser for the Democratic National Committee was specifically billed as an “LGBT gala” held in New York City in coordination with Obama’s trip to the United Nations Assembly.

During his speech, Obama asserted that his administration was respecting what he described as “genuine concerns” of religious institutions but suggested that Republicans were using the issue just to earn more votes, as they did in 2004.

“America has left the leaders of the Republican Party behind,” he declared proudly.

He ridiculed Ben Carson for suggesting that “prison turns you gay” and added that another Republican candidate had boasted of his introduction of a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage, likely referring to Sen. Ted Cruz.

Alluding to Gov. Mike Huckabee, Obama mocked a candidate who said that “Americans should just disobey the Supreme Court’s ruling entirely.” 

“I’m sure he loves the Constitution — except for Article III,” Obama said mockingly. “And maybe the Equal Protection Amendment. And 14th Amendment, generally.”

Debbie Wasserman Shultz was in attendance at the fundraiser, and Star Trek’s George Takei also was expected to attend.

Obama proudly told the audience that he would not back down in his efforts to make progress for the LGBT community, and called for all of them to remain vigilant to hold the line on important legal gains in the country.

“What makes America special is, is that though sometimes we zig and zag, eventually hope wins out,” he said. “But it only wins out because folks like you put your shoulder behind the wheel and push it in that direction.”

Being one of the 75% of Americans who proclaim Jesus Christ as their Pesonal Savior, that still, small voice inside me immediately said

Wait a minute!

A cold, hard fact had once again struck my simple mind:

We are living in a country that is suffering under the tyranny of a minority. 

Not a racial minority, mind you, but an ideological one.

For a long time now, at least for 7 years, we have been under attack daily, from the Main Stream Media, Cable and Satellite Television Programs, Social Media, and the current President of the United States of America and his Administration.

As Rev. Franklin Graham, the head of Samaritan’s Purse and the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association, declared in the August-September 2014 Edition of Decision Magazine, “Heaven is not for cowards!”

“Christians cannot ignore parts of God’s Word because they are unpopular or cause division. Our commission is to proclaim Christ and all He stands for,” wrote Graham.

“This is what the church’s presence in the world is all about. We cannot sincerely proclaim the truth of God’s love while ignoring what He hates, and God hates sin.”

Graham also stressed the need for “godly courage” and for Christians to speak out against abortion and homosexuality.

“We are soldiers in God’s army, and we cannot stand down on biblical issues out of fear of being labeled a homophobe or judge,” wrote Graham.

“People make judgments every day. The world’s system passes judgments accepted by governments and citizens. But the world considers Christian judgment to be biased, judgmental and intolerant,” he added.

In a column published in the July-August edition of Decision magazine, the head of Samaritan’s Purse and the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association, declared that “Heaven is not for cowards!”

“Christians cannot ignore parts of God’s Word because they are unpopular or cause division. Our commission is to proclaim Christ and all He stands for,” wrote Graham.

“This is what the church’s presence in the world is all about. We cannot sincerely proclaim the truth of God’s love while ignoring what He hates, and God hates sin.”

Graham also stressed the need for “godly courage” and for Christians to speak out against abortion and homosexuality.

“We are soldiers in God’s army, and we cannot stand down on biblical issues out of fear of being labeled a homophobe or judge,” wrote Graham.

“People make judgments every day. The world’s system passes judgments accepted by governments and citizens. But the world considers Christian judgment to be biased, judgmental and intolerant,” he added.

Rev. Graham was spot on.

I can testify from personal experience, having caught flack for sticking to my Christian American Conservative Principles, since beginning my daily posts on this blog in April of 2010.

My posts, concerning American Christianity, seem to “touch a nerve” in both Liberals and Atheists, alike. (But, in at least some cases, I repeat myself.)

Their reaction has hardly been unexpected.

Of course, one of the Hot Button Issues, which those Liberals and Atheists who responded, over the years, immediately denied, was that our Founding Fathers were Christians and that our country was founded on a Judeo-Christian Belief System.

Evidently, they had never read anything, except what their like-minded, non-believing soothsayers, allowed them to.  Or else, they would have read historical documents like President George Washington’s Thanksgiving Day Proclamation, written on November 1, 1777, and found at wallbuilders.com:

The committee appointed to prepare a recommendation to the several states, to set apart a day of public thanksgiving, brought in a report; which was taken into consideration, and agreed to as follows:

Forasmuch as it is the indispensable duty of all men to adore the superintending providence of Almighty God; to acknowledge with gratitude their obligation to him for benefits received, and to implore such farther blessings as they stand in need of; and it having pleased him in his abundant mercy not only to continue to us the innumerable bounties of his common providence, but also smile upon us in the prosecution of a just and necessary war, for the defense and establishment of our unalienable rights and liberties; particularly in that he hath been pleased in so great a measure to prosper the means used for the support of our troops and to crown our arms with most signal success:

It is therefore recommended to the legislative or executive powers of these United States, to set apart Thursday, the 18th day of December next, for solemn thanksgiving and praise; that with one heart and one voice the good people may express the grateful feelings of their hearts, and consecrate themselves to the service of their divine benefactor; and that together with their sincere acknowledgments and offerings, they may join the penitent confession of their manifold sins, whereby they had forfeited every favor, and their humble and earnest supplication that it may please God, through the merits of Jesus Christ, mercifully to forgive and blot them out of remembrance; that it may please him graciously to afford his blessings on the governments of these states respectively, and prosper the public council of the whole; to inspire our commanders both by land and sea, and all under them, with that wisdom and fortitude which may render them fit instruments, under the providence of Almighty God, to secure for these United States the greatest of all blessings, independence and peace; that it may please him to prosper the trade and manufactures of the people and the labor of the husbandman, that our land may yield its increase; to take schools and seminaries of education, so necessary for cultivating the principles of true liberty, virtue and piety, under his nurturing hand, and to prosper the means of religion for the promotion and enlargement of that kingdom which consisteth in righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Ghost.

And it is further recommended, that servile labor, and such recreation as, though at other times innocent, may be unbecoming the purpose of this appointment, be omitted on so solemn an occasion.

Of course, the Poster Boy for the claim by Liberal/Atheist responders, concerning the Founders’ lack of  Christianity, is Thomas Jefferson.

Atheists like to bring up the fact that he wrote a version of the Bible which left out Christ’s miracles.  What they are reluctant to do, though, is explain why he wrote his book that way.  David Barton explains on wallbuilders.com:

The reader [of a newspaper article which Barton is replying to], as do many others, claimed that Jefferson omitted all miraculous events of Jesus from his “Bible.” Rarely do those who make this claim let Jefferson speak for himself. Jefferson’s own words explain that his intent for that book was not for it to be a “Bible,” but rather for it to be a primer for the Indians on the teachings of Christ (which is why Jefferson titled that work, “The Life and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth”). What Jefferson did was to take the “red letter” portions of the New Testament and publish these teachings in order to introduce the Indians to Christian morality. And as President of the United States, Jefferson signed a treaty with the Kaskaskia tribe wherein he provided—at the government’s expense—Christian missionaries to the Indians. In fact, Jefferson himself declared, “I am a real Christian, that is to say, a disciple of the doctrines of Jesus.” While many might question this claim, the fact remains that Jefferson called himself a Christian, not a deist.

Atheist Activists and young and/or misinformed Liberals, who replied to my blogs, insisted that Crosses and other Chrstian symbols have no place in the Public Square.

With Obama as their champion, they have pushed and pushed to eliminate the practice of American Christianity and the Traditional American Morality and Ethics which go with it from Everyday American Life, attempting to regulate Christians’ role in American Society as remaining unseen and unheard from, worshiping in private, on Sunday mornings, only.

Or, as Actor and Professional Wrestler Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson would say, Obama and his minions want American Christians to

Sit down, shut up, and know your role!

Unfortunately for them and the Lame Duck President (Praise God!), the First Amendment to the Constitution still holds.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

So,  they can all wish for a unicorn to magically appear in their backyards…but that ain’t gonna happen, either.

As a free nation, all you who are non-believers, or have, turned your backs on the Christian Faith in which you were raised,  to worship popular culture, instead, have every right to your lack of faith…which, is actually a faith unto itself.

And, the overwhelming majority in this country, Christian Americans, will continue to exercise ours.

No matter what Liberal Supreme Court Justices may “legislate”.

And, Dress-wearing Billy can use the Boys/Men’s Restrooms and Locker Rooms like the rest of us Biological Males.

Because, from observing the feelings of the overwhelming majority as a Christian American Husband, Dad, Father-in-law, and Grandpa,

Obama’s attempting to countermand orders which came from Someone way above his pay grade.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Obama to Tell SCOTUS That He has the Power to Make Illegals Eligible for “Earned-Benefit” Programs, Like Social Security

th (8)Did you know that there is a case in front of the United States States Supreme Court, in which President Barack Hussein Obama is arguing that he has the Constitutional Power to tell millions of illegal aliens, who are violating the laws of our Sovereign Nation, that he will not enforce that law against them now, in order for them to continue to violate that law in the future and that he will enable them to be eligible for federal benefit programs for which they are not currently eligible, because they are, in fact, breaking our laws?

Well, through his mouthpiece, Solicitor General Donald Verrilli, that is exactly what Obama is  telling the Supreme Court exactly this right now.

Terrence P. Jeffrey, writing for CNSNews.com, reports that

…The solicitor general calls what Obama is doing “prosecutorial discretion.”

He argues that under this particular type of “prosecutorial discretion,” the executive can make millions of people in this country illegally, eligible for Social Security, disability and Medicare.

On April 18, the Supreme Court will hear arguments in the case. Entitled United States v. Texas, it pits President Obama against not only the Lone Star State, but also a majority of the states, which have joined in the litigation against the administration.

At issue is the policy the administration calls Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents, which would allow aliens in this country illegally who are parents of citizens or lawful permanent residents to stay in the United States.

“The Executive Branch unilaterally created a program — known as DAPA — that contravenes Congress’s complex statutory framework for determining when an alien may lawfully enter, remain in, and work in the country,” the attorney general and solicitor general of Texas explained in a brief submitted to the Supreme Court on behalf of the states seeking to block the policy.

“DAPA would deem over four million unlawfully present aliens as ‘lawfully present’ and eligible for work authorization,” says the Texas brief. “And ‘lawful presence’ is an immigration classification established by Congress that is necessary for valuable benefits, such as Medicare and Social Security.”

In the administration’s brief, the solicitor general admits that the president’s DAPA program does not convert people illegally in the United States into legal immigrants. He further asserts that the administration at any time can decide to go ahead and remove these aliens from the country.

“Deferred action does not confer lawful immigration status or provide any defense to removal,” he says. “An alien with deferred action remains removable at any time and DHS has absolute discretion to revoke deferred action unilaterally, without notice or process.”

Despite this, he argues, the administration can authorize aliens here illegally on “deferred action” to legally work in the United States.

“Without the ability to work lawfully, individuals with deferred action would have no way to lawfully make ends meet while present here,” says the administration’s brief.

Nonetheless, the solicitor general stresses that “deferred action” does not make an illegal immigrant eligible for federal welfare.

“In general,” he says, “only ‘qualified’ aliens are eligible to participate in federal public benefit programs, and deferred action does not make an alien ‘qualified.’… Aliens with deferred action thus cannot receive food stamps, Supplemental Security Income, temporary aid for needy families, and many other federal benefits.”

But, he says, aliens here illegally with deferred action will be eligible for “earned-benefit programs.”

“A non-qualified alien is not categorically barred, however, from participating in certain federal earned-benefit programs associated with lawfully working in the United States — the Social Security retirement and disability, Medicare, and railroad-worker programs — so long as the alien is ‘lawfully present in the United States as determined by the (Secretary),'” says the solicitor general.

The “secretary” here is the secretary of Homeland Security.

“An alien with deferred action is considered ‘lawfully present’ for these purposes,” says the solicitor general.

So, as explained to the Supreme Court by Obama’s solicitor general, when DHS grants an alien here illegally “deferred action” under the president’s DAPA policy, that alien is not given “lawful immigration status” and can be removed from the country “at any time.” However, according to the solicitor general, that alien will be authorized to work in the United States and will be “considered ‘lawfully present'” for purposes of being eligible for “the Social Security retirement and disability, Medicare, and railroad-worker programs.”

The U.S. Constitution imposes this straightforward mandate on the president: “(H)e shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed.”

When the Supreme Court agreed in January to hear U.S. v. Texas, it made a telling request. It asked the parties to argue whether Obama’s DAPA policy “violates the Take Care Clause of the Constitution.”

So, you ask, what is the “Take Care Clause”?

According to Heritage.org,

The Take Care Clause (also known as the Faithful Execution Clause) is best read as a duty that qualifies the President’s executive power. By virtue of his executive power, the President may execute the lawful and control the lawful execution of others. Under the Take Care Clause, however, the President must exercise his law-execution power to “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed.”

So, by giving an individual, who has broken our laws, by entering our Sovereign Nation illegally, Federal benefits, reserved to provide for the welfare of actual American Citizens, Obama is “taking care” of dutifully executing our Nation’s Laws?

Sure, he is.

And Rosie O’Donnell has a “bikini body”. (Let that image settle in for a moment.)

Is breaking into our country, something that should be rewarded?

No.

What makes the current influx of illegal immigrants exempt from the rules and regulations that every other generation of immigrants to this country had to abide by in order to become legal citizens of the greatest nation in the world? By being here illegally, they are not entitled to the same rights as natural-born or naturalized American citizens.

And, yet, even as I write this, they are in our hospitals, taking advantage of our charity and the finest health care system in the world, and driving our streets, with either forged drivers licenses or those obtained from states who have acquiesced and given them to these “undocumented workers”.

This is in no way a human rights issue. Freedom is God-given, and with freedom comes responsibility. With citizenship comes responsibility, like paying taxes and making your own way.

My concerns about all of Obama’s, the Democrats’ and the Vichy Republicans’ coddling of the illegal aliens and the often-proposed “Path to Citizenship” business, can be divided into three bullet points. (Hey, I’m a Former VP of Marketing. What do you expect?)

1. Patriotism – Will these new “citizens” be willing to fly our flag above theirs? Will they be willing, if called upon, to serve in our Armed Forces, at home or abroad? Will they love this country, more than the one they left?

2. Loyalty – When these “new Americans” achieve the right to vote, are they all going to vote Democrat, so that they can receive more FREE STUFF? Is the Republican Party shooting themselves in both feet by pushing an outcome which will simply add new Democratic Voters? As I asked in the first point, will they honestly embrace our sovereign nation as their new home? Or, will they remain loyal to Mexico?

3.  Immigration – Are we rewarding illegal behavior, while at the same time, insulting all of the brave souls who have come here legally, seeking a better life for themselves and their families?

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.

I’m all for assisting anyone in becoming a legal citizen of the United States, if that is their wish.  But, it must be done the right way, and they must accept responsibility for their illegal entry, show a willingness to learn our language, and embrace our American way of life, including respecting the American Flag.

Like the rest of his Far Left Brothers and Sisters, Barack Hussein Obama exhibits the symptoms of a disease that I’ve noticed that most of the Far Left exhibit: Narcissistic-Reality-Denial-Over-Educated-Beyond-Their-Intelligence Syndrome. The patient tends to rely on his self-assumed superior intellect, denying the reality of the world around him to the point of forsaking both his allegiance to and concern for the people of the country that has provided him with both his livelihood and his well-being.

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

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

In Obama’s Case, Americans must send a clear rejection of his Presidency, when we vote in a new President of the United States of America, this November.

Y’know…at the rate that this educated-beyond-his-intelligence, imperious, golf-playing, gum-smacking buffoon keeps obviously running our nation into the ground, I fully expect him, one day soon, to respond to an economic question at one of his almost non-existent press conferences by answering:

Let them eat arugula!

Until He Comes,

KJ