Socialism in America Vs. the Real “Reason for the Season”

washington

I began writing my daily articles in April of 2010.

Over nine and one-half years later, the struggle to prevent Liberals from rewriting our nation’s history continues…as does the fight to keep the greed and avarice of those promoting the installment of Marxist Theory in our political, medical, and religious institutions from consuming our nation in a fire of self-destruction, as it has other nations before us.

As we Americans prepare to celebrate this most holy of nights, I can’t help to think about the “Reason for the Season” and the “State of the Union” as it relates to Jesus Christ.

Friends have asked me if I believe that Christ would be in favor of the “Social Justice” movement that has infiltrated some churches in America, replacing Christian Doctrine with a Modern Liberal Political Agenda.

In order for you to understand how I and the overwhelming majority of Americans living here in the Heartland feel about that question, I believe you first need a working knowledge as to whom Jesus was.

As some of you know, I was born and raised in Memphis, Tennessee. The following piece was written in 1912 by the editor of the Commercial Appeal in Memphis, Tennessee, C.P.J. Mooney. Since then, it has remained so popular, that the newspaper has published it on their Op Ed page every year at Christmas.

JESUS, THE PERFECT MAN

There is no other character in history like that of Jesus.

As a preacher, as a doer of things, and as a philosopher, no man ever had the sweep and the vision of Jesus.

A human analysis of the human actions of Jesus brings to view a rule of life that is amazing in its perfect detail.

The system of ethics Jesus taught during His Earthly sojourn 2,000 years ago was true then, has been true in every century since and will be true forever.

Plato was a great thinker and learned in his age, but his teachings did not stand the test of time. In big things and in little things time and human experience have shown that he erred.

Marcus Aurelius touched the reflective mind of the world, but he was as cold and austere as brown marble. …

Thomas a Kempis’ Imitation of Christ is a thing of rare beauty and sympathy, but it is, as its name indicates, only an imitation.

Sir Thomas More’s Utopia is yet a dream that cannot be realized.

Lord Bacon writing on chemistry and medicine under the glasses of the man working in a 20th century laboratory is puerile.

The world’s most learned doctors until 150 years ago gave dragon’s blood and ground tails of lizards and shells of eggs for certain ailments. The great surgeons a hundred years ago bled a man if he were wounded.

Napoleon had the world at his feet for four years, and when he died the world was going on its way as if he had never lived.

JESUS TAUGHT little as to property because He knew there were things of more importance than property. He measured property and life, the body and soul, at their exact relative value. He taught much more as to character, because character is of more importance than dollars.

Other men taught us to develop systems of government. Jesus taught so as to perfect the minds of men. Jesus looked to the soul, while other men dwelled on material things.

After the experience of 2,000 years no man can find a flaw in the governmental system outlined by Jesus.

Czar and kaiser, president and socialist, give to its complete merit their admiration.

No man today, no matter whether he follows the doctrine of Mill, Marx or George as to property, can find a false principle in Jesus’s theory of property.

In the duty of a man to his fellow, no sociologist has ever approximated the perfection of the doctrine laid down by Jesus in His Sermon on the Mount.

Not all the investigations of chemists, not all the discoveries of explorers, not all the experiences of rulers, not all the historical facts that go to make up the sum of human knowledge on this day in 1912 are in contradiction to one word uttered or one principle laid down by Jesus.

The human experiences of 2,000 years show that Jesus never made a mistake. Jesus never uttered a doctrine that was true at that time and then became obsolete.

Jesus spoke the truth, and the truth is eternal.

History has no record of any other man leading a perfect life or doing everything in logical order. Jesus is the only person whose every action and whose every utterance strike a true note in the heart and mind of every man born of woman. He never said a foolish thing, never did a foolish act and never dissembled.

No poet, no dreamer, no philosopher loved humanity with all the love that Jesus bore toward all men.

WHO, THEN, was Jesus?

He could not have been merely a man, for there never was a man who had two consecutive thoughts absolute in truthful perfection.

Jesus must have been what Christendom proclaims Him to be — a divine being — or He could not have been what He was. No mind but an infinite mind could have left behind those things which Jesus gave the world as a heritage.

No, I do not believe that Jesus would be a part of the social justice movement. His was and is a soul-saving movement. One that still brings hundreds of thousand of people to individual salvation on this terrestrial ball every day. A movement that, in fact, was embraced by the founders of this cherished land.

In a opinion piece for ChristianPost.com, Christian Talk Show Host Julie Roys gave the following Five Reasons that Socialism itself is not based on the teachings of Jesus Christ.

1. Socialism is Based on a Materialistic Worldview

According to socialists like Bernie Sanders, the greatest problem in the world is the unequal distribution of wealth.

His website declares: “The issue of wealth and income inequality is the great moral issue of our time, it is the great economic issue of our time, and it is the great political issue of our time.”

This betrays a fundamentally materialistic worldview, which is the basis of socialism.

To socialists, all that really exists is the material world.

2. Socialism Punishes Virtue

Socialists want to distribute wealth to individuals according to their need, regardless of virtue.

As Karl Marx, famously said, “From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.”

However, whenever any institution provides aid, it runs the risk of removing God-designed rewards and consequences. It can punish those who are industrious by making them pay for those who are not. And, it can reward those who aren’t industrious by giving them the fruits of another man’s labor. This is precisely what socialism does.

Interestingly, Marx mooched off others his whole life, and failed to provide for his wife and children.

As Aristotle once noted, “Men start revolutionary changes for reasons connected with their private lives.”

The Bible teaches that aid should be tied to responsibility. First, anyone who refuses to work should be refused aid.

3. Socialism Endorses Stealing

Barack Obama once defended his socialist policies to a little girl by saying, “We’ve got to make sure that people who have more money help the people who have less money. If you had a whole pizza, and your friend had no pizza, would you give him a slice?”

That sounds pretty Christian, right? What Christian wouldn’t endorse sharing your abundance with someone who has nothing? However, Obama wasn’t endorsing people voluntarily sharing their wealth with others; he was endorsing the government forcibly taking a piece of the pie from one person and giving it to someone else. Put another way, that’s saying that if you have three cars and your neighbor has none, the government has a right to take your car and give it to your neighbor. That’s not Christian; that’s stealing!

But, socialists don’t believe in private property. And, some Christian socialists actually assert that the Bible doesn’t either. That’s preposterous.

Both the Old Testament and New Testament unequivocally affirm private property. We can’t even obey the eighth commandment to not steal, unless we accept the notion of private ownership. Nor, can we steward our money as the Bible commands if the state owns our money, not us.

4. Socialism Encourages Envy and Class Warfare

Socialists demonize the rich, blaming all of society’s problems on them.

Bernie Sanders once posted to his Facebook Page: “Let us wage a moral and political war against the billionaires and corporate leaders on Wall Street and elsewhere, whose policies and greed are destroying the middle class of America.”

Here, Sanders is mimicking Karl Marx, who viewed history as a series of class struggles between the rich and the poor — and advocated overthrowing the ruling class.

Scripture strongly warns the rich and powerful not to oppress the poor.

In fact, Proverbs 14:31 says, “Whoever oppresses the poor shows contempt for his maker . . .”

But, Sanders — and other Leftists, including Hillary Clinton — go far beyond decrying specific acts of injustice. They basically condemn an entire class of people simply for possessing wealth. And, they encourage those who are poor to overthrow them. In fact, Clinton once said the U.S. economy required a “toppling” of the wealthiest 1%.

The rich are not causing all the problems in American society. People like Bill Gates are not acquiring wealth by stealing from the masses. They’re creating great products, which produce wealth, and actually provide jobs for many people. But, even if they were exploiting the poor, nowhere does Scripture support the have-nots demanding money from the haves. Instead, it teaches that we should not covet (Exodus 20:17) and should be content in all circumstances (Phil. 4:11-13).

5. Socialism Seeks to Destroy Marriage & Family

A little known fact about socialism is that, from its beginning, it has sought to destroy marriage and family. Grove City Professor Paul Kengor explains this in detail in his book, Takedown: From Communists to Progressives, How the Left Has Sabotaged Marriage and Family. Essentially, what socialism seeks is for the state to replace the family. That way, it can indoctrinate children in its Leftist way of thinking, and remove from them any notions of God and religion.

Friedrich Engels, co-author with Marx of the “The Communist Manifesto,” once wrote that the society he envisioned would be one where “the single family ceases to be the economic unit of society. Private housekeeping is transformed into a social industry. The care and education of the children becomes a public affair.”

Similarly today, Bernie Sanders calls for a “revolution” in childcare and for the government to provide early childhood education beginning with children as young as six-weeks-old. And, he’s a proud supporter of gay marriage — what Kengor calls “communism’s Trojan Horse” to secure the final takedown of traditional marriage.

To socialists, what Bernie describes is a utopia. But, to Christians, it’s a dystopia. That’s because there’s nothing Christian about socialism — and there’s absolutely no way Jesus would ever support it.

America was not founded to be a Socialist Nation.

The following is courtesy of adherents.com:

There were 56 signers of the Declaration of Independence. There were 48 signers of the Articles of Confederation. All 55 delegates who participated in the Constitutional Convention of 1787 are regarded as Founding Fathers, in fact, they are often regarded as the Founding Fathers because it is this group that actually debated, drafted and signed the U.S. Constitution, which is the basis for the country’s political and legal system. Only 39 delegates actually signed the document, however, meaning there were 16 non-signing delegates – individuals who were Constitutional Convention delegates but were not signers of the Constitution.

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.

Courtesy adherents.com

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%
TOTAL 204

The Founding Fathers were, without a doubt, aware of the following passage:

Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom. – 2 Corinthians 3:17

The Liberals and Atheists who reply to my daily articles, after they view them on SpartaReport.com, my personal blog site, and on Facebook, insist that Crosses and other Christian symbols have no place in the Public Square. They wish for Christians to remain unseen and unheard from, worshiping in private, and for Christian Americans to “compromise” our Faith…i.e., shut up about Homosexual Marriage and other sins, being used as political expediencies to further an agenda to “radically change” America into something that it was never meant to be.

Well, y’all can wish for a unicorn to magically appear in your backyard…but that ain’t gonna happen, either.

As a free nation, all you who are non-believers have every right to exercise your faith.

However, as Orthodox Rabbi Daniel Lapin of the Jewish Policy Center clearly explains:

[I] understand that I live . . . in a Christian nation, albeit one where I can follow my faith as long as it doesn’t conflict with the nation’s principles. The same option is open to all Americans and will be available only as long as this nation’s Christian roots are acknowledged and honored.

…Without a vibrant and vital Christianity, America is doomed, and without America, the west is doomed. Which is why I, an Orthodox Jewish rabbi, devoted to Jewish survival, the Torah, and Israel am so terrified of American Christianity caving in. God help Jews if America ever becomes a post-Christian society! Just think of Europe!

Is the Rabbi prophetic? I pray that he isn’t.

I have, however, noticed in the last few years, a propensity among those who have not been raised in a Christian home, to be intolerant toward those who have…as witnessed in public forms, ranging from Collegiate Classrooms to Facebook Political Pages.

Americans’ Christian Faith, of which approximately 3/4ths of us, according to Gallup, still anchor our lives around, has been the Solid Rock upon which our nation was built. To deny that, is to deny reality, to re-write history, and, to, quite frankly, endanger “the Shining City on a Hill”.

To put it bluntly…

The “Reason for the Season” is The Reason American Exists.

As President Ronald Reagan said,

If we ever forget that we are One Nation Under God, then we will be a nation gone under.

That being said, isn’t it interesting that those among us who claim to be the most tolerant are actually the least tolerant of all?

And, those who claim to be champions of “personal freedom” are enemies of the religious freedom secured for us in the United States Constitution?

When the Democrats took over the House of Representatives we watched the Republicans talked about Freedom and Responsibility and the Democrats who talk about the right of “citizens”, both legal and illegal, to “free stuff” like “socialized medicine”, while their absolute disdain for average Americans and their visceral hatred of President Donald J. Trump tore apart the country, leading them to vote for Impeachment over nothing at all.

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

In closing, be of good cheer and remember the words of a great old Christmas Hymn…

There is a Great Joy a’coming!

Until He Comes,

KJ

Socialism in America Vs. the Real “Reason for the Season”

washington

I began writing my daily articles in April of 2010.

Over eight and one-half years later, the struggle to prevent Liberals from rewriting our nation’s history continues…as does the fight to keep the greed and avarice of those promoting the installment of Marxist Theory in our political, medical, and religious institutions from consuming our nation in a fire of self-destruction, as it has other nations before us.

As we Americans begin to get our Christmas Decorations out of their boxes and tubs and start buying presents for family and friends, I can’t help to think about the “Reason for the Season” and the “State of the Union” as it relates to Jesus Christ.

Friends have asked me if I believe that Christ would be in favor of the “Social Justice” movement that has infiltrated some churches in America, replacing Christian Doctrine with a Modern Liberal Political Agenda.

In order for you to understand how I and the overwhelming majority of Americans living here in the Heartland feel about that question, I believe you first need a working knowledge as to whom Jesus was.

As some of you know, I was born and raised in Memphis, Tennessee. The following piece was written in 1912 by the editor of the Commercial Appeal in Memphis, Tennessee, C.P.J. Mooney. Since then, it has remained so popular, that the newspaper has published it on their Op Ed page every year at Christmas.

JESUS, THE PERFECT MAN

There is no other character in history like that of Jesus.

As a preacher, as a doer of things, and as a philosopher, no man ever had the sweep and the vision of Jesus.

A human analysis of the human actions of Jesus brings to view a rule of life that is amazing in its perfect detail.

The system of ethics Jesus taught during His Earthly sojourn 2,000 years ago was true then, has been true in every century since and will be true forever.

Plato was a great thinker and learned in his age, but his teachings did not stand the test of time. In big things and in little things time and human experience have shown that he erred.

Marcus Aurelius touched the reflective mind of the world, but he was as cold and austere as brown marble. …

Thomas a Kempis’ Imitation of Christ is a thing of rare beauty and sympathy, but it is, as its name indicates, only an imitation.

Sir Thomas More’s Utopia is yet a dream that cannot be realized.

Lord Bacon writing on chemistry and medicine under the glasses of the man working in a 20th century laboratory is puerile.

The world’s most learned doctors until 150 years ago gave dragon’s blood and ground tails of lizards and shells of eggs for certain ailments. The great surgeons a hundred years ago bled a man if he were wounded.

Napoleon had the world at his feet for four years, and when he died the world was going on its way as if he had never lived.

JESUS TAUGHT little as to property because He knew there were things of more importance than property. He measured property and life, the body and soul, at their exact relative value. He taught much more as to character, because character is of more importance than dollars.

Other men taught us to develop systems of government. Jesus taught so as to perfect the minds of men. Jesus looked to the soul, while other men dwelled on material things.

After the experience of 2,000 years no man can find a flaw in the governmental system outlined by Jesus.

Czar and kaiser, president and socialist, give to its complete merit their admiration.

No man today, no matter whether he follows the doctrine of Mill, Marx or George as to property, can find a false principle in Jesus’s theory of property.

In the duty of a man to his fellow, no sociologist has ever approximated the perfection of the doctrine laid down by Jesus in His Sermon on the Mount.

Not all the investigations of chemists, not all the discoveries of explorers, not all the experiences of rulers, not all the historical facts that go to make up the sum of human knowledge on this day in 1912 are in contradiction to one word uttered or one principle laid down by Jesus.

The human experiences of 2,000 years show that Jesus never made a mistake. Jesus never uttered a doctrine that was true at that time and then became obsolete.

Jesus spoke the truth, and the truth is eternal.

History has no record of any other man leading a perfect life or doing everything in logical order. Jesus is the only person whose every action and whose every utterance strike a true note in the heart and mind of every man born of woman. He never said a foolish thing, never did a foolish act and never dissembled.

No poet, no dreamer, no philosopher loved humanity with all the love that Jesus bore toward all men.

WHO, THEN, was Jesus?

He could not have been merely a man, for there never was a man who had two consecutive thoughts absolute in truthful perfection.

Jesus must have been what Christendom proclaims Him to be — a divine being — or He could not have been what He was. No mind but an infinite mind could have left behind those things which Jesus gave the world as a heritage.

No, I do not believe that Jesus would be a part of the social justice movement. His was and is a soul-saving movement. One that still brings hundreds of thousand of people to individual salvation on this terrestrial ball every day. A movement that, in fact, was embraced by the founders of this cherished land.

In a opinion piece for ChristianPost.com, Christian Talk Show Host Julie Roys gave the following Five Reasons that Socialism itself is not based on  the teachings of Jesus Christ.

1. Socialism is Based on a Materialistic Worldview

According to socialists like Bernie Sanders, the greatest problem in the world is the unequal distribution of wealth.

His website declares: “The issue of wealth and income inequality is the great moral issue of our time, it is the great economic issue of our time, and it is the great political issue of our time.”

This betrays a fundamentally materialistic worldview, which is the basis of socialism.

To socialists, all that really exists is the material world.

2. Socialism Punishes Virtue

Socialists want to distribute wealth to individuals according to their need, regardless of virtue.

As Karl Marx, famously said, “From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.”

However, whenever any institution provides aid, it runs the risk of removing God-designed rewards and consequences. It can punish those who are industrious by making them pay for those who are not. And, it can reward those who aren’t industrious by giving them the fruits of another man’s labor. This is precisely what socialism does.

Interestingly, Marx mooched off others his whole life, and failed to provide for his wife and children.

As Aristotle once noted, “Men start revolutionary changes for reasons connected with their private lives.”

The Bible teaches that aid should be tied to responsibility. First, anyone who refuses to work should be refused aid.

3. Socialism Endorses Stealing

Barack Obama once defended his socialist policies to a little girl by saying, “We’ve got to make sure that people who have more money help the people who have less money. If you had a whole pizza, and your friend had no pizza, would you give him a slice?”

That sounds pretty Christian, right? What Christian wouldn’t endorse sharing your abundance with someone who has nothing? However, Obama wasn’t endorsing people voluntarily sharing their wealth with others; he was endorsing the government forcibly taking a piece of the pie from one person and giving it to someone else. Put another way, that’s saying that if you have three cars and your neighbor has none, the government has a right to take your car and give it to your neighbor. That’s not Christian; that’s stealing!

But, socialists don’t believe in private property. And, some Christian socialists actually assert that the Bible doesn’t either. That’s preposterous.

Both the Old Testament and New Testament unequivocally affirm private property. We can’t even obey the eighth commandment to not steal, unless we accept the notion of private ownership. Nor, can we steward our money as the Bible commands if the state owns our money, not us.

4. Socialism Encourages Envy and Class Warfare

Socialists demonize the rich, blaming all of society’s problems on them.

Bernie Sanders once posted to his Facebook Page: “Let us wage a moral and political war against the billionaires and corporate leaders on Wall Street and elsewhere, whose policies and greed are destroying the middle class of America.”

Here, Sanders is mimicking Karl Marx, who viewed history as a series of class struggles between the rich and the poor — and advocated overthrowing the ruling class.

Scripture strongly warns the rich and powerful not to oppress the poor.

In fact, Proverbs 14:31 says, “Whoever oppresses the poor shows contempt for his maker . . .”

But, Sanders — and other Leftists, including Hillary Clinton — go far beyond decrying specific acts of injustice. They basically condemn an entire class of people simply for possessing wealth. And, they encourage those who are poor to overthrow them. In fact, Clinton once said the U.S. economy required a “toppling” of the wealthiest 1%.

The rich are not causing all the problems in American society. People like Bill Gates are not acquiring wealth by stealing from the masses. They’re creating great products, which produce wealth, and actually provide jobs for many people. But, even if they were exploiting the poor, nowhere does Scripture support the have-nots demanding money from the haves. Instead, it teaches that we should not covet (Exodus 20:17) and should be content in all circumstances (Phil. 4:11-13). 

5. Socialism Seeks to Destroy Marriage & Family

A little known fact about socialism is that, from its beginning, it has sought to destroy marriage and family. Grove City Professor Paul Kengor explains this in detail in his book, Takedown: From Communists to Progressives, How the Left Has Sabotaged Marriage and Family. Essentially, what socialism seeks is for the state to replace the family. That way, it can indoctrinate children in its Leftist way of thinking, and remove from them any notions of God and religion.

Friedrich Engels, co-author with Marx of the “The Communist Manifesto,” once wrote that the society he envisioned would be one where “the single family ceases to be the economic unit of society. Private housekeeping is transformed into a social industry. The care and education of the children becomes a public affair.”

Similarly today, Bernie Sanders calls for a “revolution” in childcare and for the government to provide early childhood education beginning with children as young as six-weeks-old. And, he’s a proud supporter of gay marriage — what Kengor calls “communism’s Trojan Horse” to secure the final takedown of traditional marriage.

To socialists, what Bernie describes is a utopia. But, to Christians, it’s a dystopia. That’s because there’s nothing Christian about socialism — and there’s absolutely no way Jesus would ever support it.

America was not founded to be a Socialist Nation.

The following is courtesy of adherents.com:

There were 56 signers of the Declaration of Independence. There were 48 signers of the Articles of Confederation. All 55 delegates who participated in the Constitutional Convention of 1787 are regarded as Founding Fathers, in fact, they are often regarded as the Founding Fathers because it is this group that actually debated, drafted and signed the U.S. Constitution, which is the basis for the country’s political and legal system. Only 39 delegates actually signed the document, however, meaning there were 16 non-signing delegates – individuals who were Constitutional Convention delegates but were not signers of the Constitution.

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.

Courtesy adherents.com

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%
TOTAL 204

The Founding Fathers were, without a doubt, aware of the following passage:

Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom. – 2 Corinthians 3:17

The Liberals and Atheists who reply to my daily articles, after they view them on SpartaReport.com, my personal blog site, and on Facebook, insist that Crosses and other Christian symbols have no place in the Public Square.  They wish for Christians to remain unseen and unheard from, worshiping in private, and for Christian Americans to  “compromise” our Faith…i.e., shut up about Homosexual Marriage and other sins,  being used as political expediencies to further an agenda to “radically change” America into something that it was never meant to be.

Well,  y’all can wish for a unicorn to magically appear in your backyard…but that ain’t gonna happen, either.

As a free nation, all you who are non-believers have every right to exercise your faith.

However, as Orthodox Rabbi Daniel Lapin of the Jewish Policy Center clearly explains:

[I] understand that I live . . . in a Christian nation, albeit one where I can follow my faith as long as it doesn’t conflict with the nation’s principles. The same option is open to all Americans and will be available only as long as this nation’s Christian roots are acknowledged and honored.

…Without a vibrant and vital Christianity, America is doomed, and without America, the west is doomed. Which is why I, an Orthodox Jewish rabbi, devoted to Jewish survival, the Torah, and Israel am so terrified of American Christianity caving in. God help Jews if America ever becomes a post-Christian society! Just think of Europe!

Is the Rabbi prophetic? I pray that he isn’t.

I have, however, noticed in the last few years, a propensity among those who have not been raised in a Christian home, to be intolerant toward those who have…as witnessed in public forms, ranging from Collegiate Classrooms to Facebook Political Pages.

Americans’ Christian Faith, of which approximately 3/4ths of us, according to Gallup, still anchor our lives around, has been the Solid Rock upon which our nation was built. To deny that, is to deny reality, to re-write history, and, to, quite frankly, endanger “the Shining City on a Hill”.

To put it bluntly…

The “Reason for the Season” is The Reason American Exists.

As President Ronald Reagan said,

If we ever forget that we are One Nation Under God, then we will be a nation gone under. 

That being said, isn’t it interesting that those among us who claim to be the most tolerant are actually the least tolerant of all?

And, those who claim to be champions of “personal freedom” are enemies of the religious freedom secured for us in the United States Constitution?

Watch the political maneuvering up on Capitol Hill after the Democrats take over the House of Representatives and see who talks about Freedom and Responsibility and who talks about the right of “citizens”, both legal and illegal, to “free stuff” like “socialized medicine”.

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

In closing, be of good cheer and remember the words of a great old Christmas Hymn…

There is a Great Joy a’coming!

 

Until He Comes,

KJ

Stocks are Soaring: Why Americans are so Optimistic (A KJ Analysis)

up-staged-nrd-600-a

Money won’t create success, the freedom to make it will. – Nelson Mandela

CNBC.com reports that

The election of Donald Trump has brought with it a surge in optimism in the United States over the economy and stocks not seen in years. The CNBC All-America Economic Survey for the fourth quarter found that the percentage of Americans who believe the economy will get better in the next year jumped an unprecedented 17 points to 42 percent, compared with before the election. It’s the highest level since President Barack Obama was first elected in 2008.

The surge was powered by Republicans and independents reversing their outlooks. Republicans swung from deeply pessimistic, with just 15 percent saying the economy would improve in the next year, to strongly optimistic, with 74 percent believing in an economic upswing. Optimism among independents doubled but it fell by more than half for Democrats. Just 16 percent think the economy will improve.

“We’re looking at America moving into a more positive era with regard to economic expectations,” said Micah Roberts, vice president at Public Opinion Strategies, which serves as the Republican pollster for the CNBC survey. “No doubt the election of Donald Trump has ushered that in. “The poll of 800 adults around the country was conducted Dec. 2 to 5, and has a margin of error of 3.5 percentage points. Hart Research Associates served as the Democratic pollsters.

A majority of Americans tell CNBC they are “comfortable and prepared to support” a Trump presidency. The 56 percent of respondents who now back the president-elect represent a sharp change from the 43 percent who were asked the question just before the election in November by NBC News and The Wall Street Journal. The percentage is driven by 91 percent of Republicans supporting Trump but also 54 percent of independents and even 23 percent of Democrats.The survey showed a rise in optimism when it comes to several key economic gauges. Americans now look for higher wage gains next year and bigger increases in their housing prices.

The post-election surge in major stock market indexes also has buoyed feelings about equities, with 40 percent saying now is a good time to invest, up 10 points from before the election. Again, Democrats became somewhat more negative on stocks while Republicans grew significantly more optimistic.

Those differences are also clear in the choice for what Americans believe is the best investment right now. While real estate remains the top choice for the third straight year, stocks gained the most ground at the expense of gold, real estate and Treasurys. Driving the change: the shine is off gold for Republicans and they, along with independents, have grown more favorable toward equities.

Nearly every demographic, except the poor and Democrats, now has a net positive view about investing in stocks.

But the survey shows the president-elect has his work cut out for him. Asked which one or two items Trump should focus on first, a 40 percent plurality answered, “Keeping U.S. jobs from going overseas.” All other priorities were far back and it was the top choice for all parties, but especially the GOP.

“Among Republicans, there’s keeping jobs from going overseas and then there’s everything else — it’s really all about jobs and keeping jobs in the U.S.,” said Democratic pollster Jay Campbell with Hart.

The second-most popular priority was increasing the minimum wage, which has strong support from Democrats and independents. The conundrum for the incoming president is that keeping jobs from moving overseas could, in some cases, mean lower wages for Americans. Coming in third among priorities was reducing the deficit, a strong choice among Republicans and independents, followed by funding infrastructure, boosted by Democrats and independents. Again, these two priorities are potentially in conflict since infrastructure spending would boost the deficit.

A potential warning to the president-elect comes from two priorities he has discussed at length, business tax cuts and deregulation. Both come in far down the list among priorities for the public, with modest independent support and little backing from Democrats.

Why are the majority of Americans so optimistic?

Perhaps it’s because, after Inauguration Day 2017, the Washington Status Quo no longer applies to the Leadership of our Sovereign Country.

There will be no racially-divisive rhetoric, no allusions to the Marxism Axioms revolving around Class Warfare, no self-deification, such as

This was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal.

By the way, how’s that “Hope and Change” workin’ out for ya?

But, I digress…

Instead, we will hear from a man who genuinely LOVES America and her people, instead of viewing us all as racist, misogynist, xenophobes.

And, therein lies the secret of Donald J. Trump’s success.

What Trump did, with his refusal early in his campaign to “act more presidential”, was to implement a strategy.

Trump has always been a “people person”.

That is the reason that, when he was still a contributor to Fox News, he would speak to everyone in the building, from the maintenance crew, on up the ladder.

As Sam Walton, the Founder of Walmart, knew, you don’t inspire people by acting imperious and above it all.

“Mr. Sam”, until his health would no longer allow him to do so, would travel to Walmart Stores in his old pickup truck, with a tie and a baseball cap on, visiting the employees, in order to find out how his stores were doing.

He knew that the only way to be successful and to stay in touch with the public, was to be out among them, and speak to them honestly and directly, as one would speak to a friend.

Just as President-elect Trump is doing by way of his “Thank You” Tour and his Daily Tweets to the American People..

The Political Establishment, of both parties, lost that concept, a long time ago.

Bypassing the borders to communication, historically determined by both political parties and the Main Stream Media, is a concept which I first witnessed being employed by a Presidential Candidate in the 1980 Presidential Election, named Ronald Wilson Reagan.

While I am not comparing the two, I am noting that this strategy has proved effective for both men.

As the polls have shown, Trump struck a resonant chord in the hearts of Average Americans, living here in the part of America, which the snobbish Political Elites refer to as “Flyover Country”, but which we refer to as “America’s Heartland”, or, quite simply, “HOME”.

Why is Donald J. Trump so popular with average Americans?

The reason is very simple: WE WERE ANGRY AND WE FELT THAT NO ONE IN WASHINGTON, D.C.WAS LISTENING TO US.

Our palpable anger was one which had been building since January of 2009, when a Lightweight, who has as much in common with average Americans as a Martian would, was inaugurated as President of the United States of America.

That anger, a result of his anti-American actions and resulting policies, which have affected Americans’ daily lives, was then exacerbated by the Republican Elite, who, in their desire to “reach across the aisle” and “go along to get along”, intentionally distanced themselves from those who elected them to Congress in the first place.

Meanwhile, average Americans, like you and me, remained mired up to our necks in an abysmal swamp of bills and taxes, living paycheck-to-paycheck, afraid to make a move, for fearing of drowning in an ocean of debt.

Seemingly forgotten, in all of the forgotten promises, made by Barack Hussein Obama, were the over-94 million Americans, who were no longer, largely through no fault of their own, participating in our Workforce.

You want to talk about anger and frustration?

Try looking for work, when you are over 55 years of age.

Anger has played an important part in the forging of this great country.

It was anger that formed our country….an anger over being held captive to “Taxation Without Representation”…an anger which, as a prime example of history repeating itself, led Americans to choose a Citizen Statesman for their next President over a Professional Politician.

It is this anger, which also propelled Donald J. Trump to his victory in the Republican Primary Race…and those who prefer the Washingtonian Status Quo knew it.

That is why the Republican Establishment, at least some of them, wound up hitching a ride on “The Trump Train”.

If they had not accepted the reality of his Primary Victory, and the fact that Americans are angry, they would have gone down to defeat again in 2016.

They would have never achieved victory by once again trying to push the Jello of “Liberal Moderation” up a hill.

Hence, the failed campaign of Jeb! Bush.

In summation, the American people were tired of Political Correctness and anti-American political expediencies being forced down our throats by both political parties and trumpeted by their lackeys in the Main Stream Media.

Donald Trump, for all of his brashness and braggadocio, was a breath of free air and, quite frankly an anomaly. He’s not a professional politician. He is a businessman who wanted to become a public servant.

And now, the American People have given him the opportunity of a lifetime.

And, so far, through what he has accomplished even before taking the Oath of Office, he has demonstrated that he is up to the challenge.

A quote attributed to Helen Keller states that

Optimism is the faith that leads to achievement. Nothing can be done without hope and confidence.

It that is the case, then Americans are going to truly enjoy the next four years.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Obama, Cuba, Che Guevara, and Donald Trump: The Hyprocrisy of the Left

obama-cubaWe are calling on Cuba to unleash the potential of 11 million Cubans by ending unnecessary restrictions on their political, social, and economic activities.  In that spirit, we should not allow U.S. sanctions to add to the burden of Cuban citizens that we seek to help. – President Barack Hussein Obama, December 17, 2014

Those who cannot remember the past are doomed to repeat it. – George Satayana

USA Today reports that

Just hours before President Obama landed Sunday in Cuba for his historic visit to the communist island, Cuban authorities arrested more than 50 dissidents who were marching to demand improved human rights.

Members of the group, known as the Ladies in White, are used to the routine. They march each Sunday after Mass at a church in a suburb of Havana called Miramar and usually get arrested and detained for hours or days.

Some in the group thought Cuban authorities would back off this Sunday out of respect for Obama’s visit. Berta Soler, one of the founding members who has been marching since 2003, said while walking to the church Sunday morning that maybe they would be allowed to protest without getting arrested.

“Everything looks good so far,” she said.

Despite dozens of international reporters in town for Obama’s trip, the group was quickly rounded up in buses and police cars.

“For us, it’s very important that we do this so President Obama knows that there are women here fighting for the liberty of political prisoners,” Soler said before being arrested. “And he needs to know that we are here being repressed simply for exercising our right to express ourselves and manifest in a non-violent way.”

Obama’s three-day trip to Cuba is to highlight the new relationship between the Cold War foes. After more than five decades of political and economic isolation, the two nations announced in December 2014 that they would re-establish diplomatic relations. Embassies have since reopened in Havana and Washington, U.S. cellphones can be used in Cuba, U.S. airlines are planning direct flights to the island, and several U.S. companies have struck deals to trade with Cuba.

Obama is expected to embrace those changes during his trip, but the issue of human rights has been the most difficult negotiating point leading up to his visit. Secretary of State John Kerry was supposed to visit the island ahead of Obama’s trip but canceled because of disagreements over whom he could meet with.

The White House has said that Obama will meet with a group of dissidents on Tuesday, but several have said they’re unsure whether they’ll be able to attend.

Guillermo Farinas, a leading voice in Cuba’s civil rights movement who is part of the group that could meet Obama, is camped out at a friend’s house this week because he said Cuban authorities have ordered him to be on house arrest. He said many other dissidents like him are being blockaded in their homes ahead of Obama’s visit. Because of that, he said Obama has a “moral responsibility” to strongly criticize Cuba’s human rights record and push the government to improve before the U.S. further expands its relationship with Cuba.

“The most important thing for us is that President Obama doesn’t allow the Cuban government to use his visit to create an image of complicity with the actions of the totalitarian regime,” Farinas said.

The Cuban government declined to comment on Farinas’ claim that he and other dissidents were under house arrest.

Don’t hold your breath, Senor Farinas.

Didn’t you know? Being a Marxist is cool.

Just ask the Liberal American Millennials walking around with their Che Guevara t-shirts on.

They remember Che differently than I am sure that you and those of your countrymen that are seeking freedom from tyranny do.

If these members of the “Young and Dumb” had actually read a book, they would burn those stupid t-shirts.

Cuban children are taught in state-run schools that Che was a doctor, even though he had no medical degree.

They are taught that he was a kind soul who cared for the poor and the oppressed, and a brave guerrilla leader who helped to liberate the downtrodden Cuban People from the oppressive tyrant Batista.

And, Jack the Ripper was a surgeon who made House Calls.

Humberto Fontova’s “Exposing the Real Che Guevara” paints a vivid picture of the real Che Guevara:

In his biography of Che, Fontova quotes a Cuban exile who is identified by the pseudonym of “Charlie Bravo”

I’d loved to have seen those Sorbonne and Berkeley and Berlin student protesters with their ‘groovy’ Che posters try their ‘anti-authority’ grandstanding in Cuba at the time. I’d love to have seen Che and his goons get their hands on them. They’d have gotten a quick lesson about the ‘fascism’ they were constantly complaining about—and firsthand. They would have quickly found themselves sweating and gasping from forced labor in Castro’s and Che’s concentration camps, or jabbed in the butt by ‘groovy’ bayonets when they dared slow down and perhaps getting their teeth shattered by a ‘groovy’ machine-gun butt if they adopted the same attitude in front of Che’s militia as they adopted in front of those campus cops.

In the instruction to that book, Fontova writes that,

If Cuban Americans strike you as too passionate, over the top, even a little crazy, there is a reason. Practically every day, we turn on our televisions or go out to the street only to see the image of the very man who trained the secret police to murder our relatives—thousands of men, women, and boys. This man committed many of these murders with his own hands. And yet we see him celebrated everywhere as the quintessence of humanity, progress, and compassion.

So, while their President and his family were jetting to Cuba, on Air Force One, on the American Taxpayer’s dime, celebrating the “Progressive Freedom” that only Marxism can bring (that’s sarcasm, boys and girls), America’s Che Worshippers were back home, wearing their Che T-shirts, brandishing posters proclaiming American Businessman, Entrepreneur, and Leading Republican Primary Candidate Donald J. Trump a “fascist”, and a modern “Hitler”, while blocking roads, jumping on people’s cars, and marching lockstep on the streets of New York City, in scenes reminiscent of the Cuban Revolution.

United States President Ronald Reagan once said,

How do you tell a communist? Well, it’s someone who reads Marx and Lenin. And how do you tell an anti-Communist? It’s someone who understands Marx and Lenin.

What we are witnessing among the Far Left Power Brokers, and their “Young and Dumb Foot Soldiers”, is a purposeful obtuseness, as to both our Constitutional Rights and the harsh reality of Marxism.

History repeats itself.

Irony is embarrassed.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A KJ Op Ed: Vetting The Republican Candidates – Going After the Wrong “Enemy”

ctax=Campaigns^Expose^Viewers^Placement%2035743%20-%20Viewer (2) Sward-StoneFor those of us Conservatives, who are considering which candidate to vote for in the 2016 presidential Election, our cup runneth over.

We literally have a smorgasbord of candidates, who are still campaigning, less than 10 months from the big day.

And, therein lies the problem.

While candidates seem to be more interested in attacking each other, than the Democrats, potential Republican Voters are following suit, and attacking each other, all over the World Wide Web.

To quote the Master of Malapropisms, the late, great Yogi Berra,

It’s deja vu, all over again.

During the Presidential Elections of 2008 and 2012, while we were busy “vetting” the Republican Candidates, in search of their “bonafides”, Liberal Democrats were solidly behind their Great Black Hope”, the “Clean and Articulate” (Biden’s words, not mine) Barack Hussein Obama, which resulted in an unvetted, untested, incompetent, petulant, anti-American metrosexual assuming the role of “Leader of the Free World”.

Why have we and why are we “eating our own”?

  • Unlike the present-day version of the Democrat Party, which has moved to the Far Left of the Political Spectrum, Republicans, both Conservative and “Moderate”, still think for themselves. We all have our own opinion on the criteria necessary for a successful American President. Democrats, like the Proletariat of the old Soviet Union, possess a “Hive-Mind” mentality, voting en masse for whoever is deemed “good for the Party”.
  • There is a Generational Gap, in regards to morality and ethical behavior, which is a determining factor as to each Republican’s own definition of “Conservatism”, which is a determining factor as to whom their candidate of choice will be. For example, in my case, as a 57-year old Reagan Conservative, I judge Presidential Primary Candidates, and those who vote for them, by the following criteria, as defined by Matt Barber

Ronald Reagan often spoke of a “three-legged stool” that undergirds true conservatism. The legs are represented by a strong defense, strong free-market economic policies and strong social values. For the stool to remain upright, it must be supported by all three legs. If you snap off even one leg, the stool collapses under its own weight.

A Republican, for instance, who is conservative on social and national defense issues but liberal on fiscal issues is not a Reagan conservative. He is a quasi-conservative socialist.

A Republican who is conservative on fiscal and social issues but liberal on national defense issues is not a Reagan conservative. He is a quasi-conservative dove.

By the same token, a Republican who is conservative on fiscal and national defense issues but liberal on social issues – such as abortion, so-called gay rights or the Second Amendment – is not a Reagan conservative. He is a socio-liberal libertarian.

Put another way: A Republican who is one part William F. Buckley Jr., one part Oliver North and one part Rachel Maddow is no true conservative. He is – well, I’m not exactly sure what he is, but it ain’t pretty. 

  • Another problem, which Republican voters are facing, is the fact that there are no Perfect Candidates. Ronald Reagan is not running for President. Each of the Top Tier Candidates all have their own  good points. Unfortunately, they all have their weak points, as well, just like we voters do. Voters support those candidates whose stance of the important issues most closely resembles their own, a fact which helps to explain why Trump and Cruz are leading the pack.
  • Our defensiveness toward the Republican Candidates comes from the fact that the Republican Establishment has, in several instances, abandoned and betrayed those who placed them in office: average American Voters, living out here in the heartland (or, as those up in the Halls of Power refer to it as, “Flyover Country”). The reaction of Republican Voters in this Primary Season, is, above all else, a repudiation of betrayal of the Republican-held House and Senate. While compromise is, indeed, a part of Washington Politics, capitulation to the opposition party is not. Because of the actions of the Republican Establishment, average Americans have become hyper-vigilant to discrepancies in what a candidate says in the present, and, their actions in the past.

And that, gentle reader, is why we, as Conservatives and potential voters for the Republican Candidate, are allowing the Main Stream Media to lead us around by the nose, “vetting” our candidates, by cause more consternation and infighting, than a bunch of texting teenage girls on Prom Night.

Because of our concerns that whoever winds up as the Republican Candidate for the Office of President of the United States of America represent US, the average American Voter, we are literally, presently, at war with one another, mirroring the infighting going on between the candidates, using the platforms given to us via Political Websites and Facebook Pages.

While vetting the candidates through the use of the New Media is a good thing, it must not be used to tear down each other and destroy our opportunity to undo the damage that years of “Progressive” Political Control in DC has done to our country.

Our mission, now, as Americans, is to decide our own destiny. 

We must not let the Political Elite, on BOTH sides of the aisle, nor the Main Stream Media, pick our candidate for us.

Ronald Reagan once said,

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.

A charge to keep WE have.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

 

 

 

U.S. Navy Captured, Iran Frees American Prisoners, Gets $100 Billion Back and Nuclear Capability: America Gets Conned. Thanks, Obama

Missing-Piece-600-LIThe late, great Jerry Reed once sang a song about a fellow who got a divorce, titled, “She Got the Gold Mine. I Got the Shaft.”

As Obama and his minions celebrate their deal with Iran, Americans with common sense are feeling like that fellow in Jerry’s song.

The New York Times reports that

VIENNA — The United States and European nations lifted oil and financial sanctions on Iran and released roughly $100 billion of its assets after international inspectors concluded that the country had followed through on promises to dismantle large sections of its nuclear program.

This came at the end of a day of high drama that played out in a diplomatic dance across Europe and the Middle East, just hours after Tehran and Washington swapped long-held prisoners.

Five Americans, including a Washington Post reporter, Jason Rezaian, were released by Iran hours before the nuclear accord was implemented. The detention of one of the released Americans, Matthew Trevithick, who had been engaged in language studies in Tehran when he was arrested, according to his family, had never been publicly announced.

Early on Sunday, a senior United States official confirmed that “our detained U.S. citizens have been released and that those who wished to depart Iran have left.” The Washington Post also released a statement confirming that Mr. Rezaian and his wife, Yeganeh Salehi, had left Iran.

“Iran has undertaken significant steps that many people — and I do mean many — doubted would ever come to pass,” Secretary of State John Kerry said Saturday evening at the headquarters of the International Atomic Energy Agency, which earlier issued a report detailing how Iran had shipped 98 percent of its fuel to Russia, dismantled more than 12,000 centrifuges so they could not enrich uranium, and poured cement into the core of a reactor designed to produce plutonium.

But Mr. Kerry was clearly energized by the release of the Americans, an issue he took up on the edges of almost every nuclear negotiation, and pursued in separate, secret talks that many involved in the nuclear issue were only vaguely aware were happening.

The release of the “unjustly detained” Americans, as Mr. Kerry put it, came at some cost: Seven Iranians, either convicted or charged with breaking American embargoes, were released in the prisoner swap, and 14 others were removed from international wanted lists. Many of the presidential candidates, including Senator Marco Rubio of Florida and Donald J. Trump, denounced the swap as a sign of weakness, and they have long promised to review or withdraw from the nuclear agreement.

They particularly object to the release of about $100 billion in frozen assets — mostly from past oil sales — that Iran will now control, and the end of American and European restrictions on trade that had been imposed as part of the American-led effort to stop the program. It was not only sanctions that forced Iran to the table: the United States and Israel also developed one of the world’s most sophisticated cyberweapons to destroy the centrifuges that Iran has now been dismantling.

With the start of the so-called implementation day, the day that the accord goes fully into operation, the structures are finally in place for Tehran to re-engage with the world after decades of isolation.

But even in a week that started with the release of 10 sailors who drifted into Iranian waters — the Defense Department still has not provided an explanation of how that happened — and ended with a prisoner swap that seemed drawn from the pages of the Cold War, it was far from clear whether Tehran would choose to re-engage — at least very quickly.

In Tehran and Washington, political battles are still being fought over the merits and dangers of moving toward normal interchanges between two countries that have been avowed adversaries for more than three decades. But Mr. Kerry suggested that the nuclear deal had broken the cycle of hostility, enabling the secret negotiations that led up to the hostage swap. It was far from a sure thing: Just weeks ago, Iran was demanding the release of nearly 20 Iranians convicted or indicted in the United States; an administration official said that number had been whittled down to seven, but even that still rankled some.

“Critics will continue to attack the deal for giving away too much to Tehran,” said R. Nicholas Burns, who started the sanctions against Iran that were lifted Saturday as the No. 3 official in the State Department during the George W. Bush administration. “But the fact that Iran’s nuclear ambitions will be effectively frozen for the next 10 to 15 years is a real advantage for us,” he said, adding that “it was achieved by tough-minded diplomacy and not war.”

Still Mr. Burns, who now teaches diplomacy at Harvard and has advised Hillary Clinton, a Democratic candidate for president, argued that recent encounters with Iran — including its ballistic missile tests and its propping up of President Bashar al Assad of Syria, “demonstrate how complicated our relationship with Iran will continue to be.” He urged President Obama to issue new sanctions against Iran this weekend for the ballistic missile tests — a violation of United Nations Security Council resolutions — to demonstrate that he will keep up the pressure.

A copy of the proposed sanction leaked three weeks ago, and the Obama administration pulled it back — perhaps to avoid torpedoing the prisoner swap and the completion of the nuclear deal. Negotiations to win the release of Mr. Rezaian, who had covered the nuclear talks before he was imprisoned on vague charges, were an open secret: Mr. Kerry often alluded to the fact that he was working on the issue behind the scenes.

First off, Praise God that the hostages, including Pastor Saeed, are free!

However, money talks and BS walks.

About those “tough negotiations”…

The Middle East Media Research Institute reports that

Iranian officials recently began to reveal details from the nuclear negotiations with the U.S. since their early stages. Their statements indicate that the U.S. initiated secret negotiations with Iran not after President Hassan Rohani, of the pragmatic camp, was elected in 2013, but rather in 2011-2012, in the era of radical president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.[1] The disclosures also indicate that, already at that time, Iran received from the U.S. administration a letter recognizing its right to enrich uranium on its own soil. Hossein Sheikh Al-Islam, an advisor to the Majlis speaker, specified that the letter had come from John Kerry, then a senator and head of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Iranian vice president and top negotiator Ali Akbar Salehi said that Kerry, while still a senator, had been appointed by President Obama to handle the nuclear contacts with Iran.

Now, why would Obama have Kerry, who was not even Secretary of State, yet, have secret “nuclear contacts” with Ahmadinejad and the Mad Mullahs?

Simple. Family ties.

Courtesy of AllenB.West.com

You not might be aware that in 2009, the daughter of Secretary of State John Kerry, Dr. Vanessa Bradford Kerry, John Kerry’s younger daughter by his first wife, married an Iranian-American physician named Dr. Brian (Behrooz) Vala Nahed.

Of course you’re not aware of it.

Brian (Behrooz) Nahed is son of Nooshin and Reza Vala Nahid of Los Angeles. Brian’s Persian birth name is “Behrooz Vala Nahid” but it is now shortened and Americanized in the media to “Brian Nahed.” At the time his engagement to Bradford Kerry, there was rarely any mention of Nahed’s Persian/Iranian ancestry, and even the official wedding announcement in the October 2009 issue of New York Times carefully avoids any reference to Dr. Nahed (Nahid)’s birthplace (which is uncommon in wedding announcements) and starts his biography from his college years.

Gosh, I wonder why??

Gee, do you think Secretary Kerry should have recused himself from the negotiations with Iran at the very outset because of his long-standing relationship to his Iranian counter-part, Mohammad Javad Zarif? Let me explain.

Zarif is the current minister of foreign affairs in the Rouhani administration and has held various significant diplomatic and cabinet posts since the 1990s. He was Kerry’s chief counterpart in the nuclear deal negotiations.

Secretary Kerry and Zarif first met over a decade ago at a dinner party hosted by George Soros at his Manhattan penthouse. What a surprise. I have to say, connecting the dots gets more and more frightening.

But it gets even worse. Guess who was the best man at the 2009 wedding between Kerry’s daughter Vanessa and Behrouz Vala Nahed? Javad Zarif’s son.

Does this bother anyone at all?

Apparently Kerry only revealed his daughter’s marriage to an Iranian-American once he had taken over as Secretary of State. But the subject never came up in his Senate confirmation hearing, either because Kerry never disclosed it, or because his former colleagues were “too polite” to bring it up.

Polite? Somehow the words “Iran” and “nuclear capability” just do not go with the word “polite”.

The 44th President of the United States of America, Barack Hussein Obama, has purposely and surreptitiously handed a Rogue State of Radical Muslim Barbarians the means of the destruction of both the United States of America and  our staunch ally, Israel.

Why is the President of these United States, Barack Hussein Obama, trusting Iran, an enemy of freedom, to stand by its “Agreement” to refrain from nuking the United States of America and Israel?

He just gave them everything they wanted: their money, nuclear capability, and acquiescence by the Government of the United States of America.

Here’s a question for you:

What if a condition of the Iran Prisoner Swap Agreement and the closure of the “Iran Deal” was that we humble ourselves by allowing our Navy Personnel to be captured and used as propaganda?

Iran remains our mortal enemy, who wants every single American Infidel beheaded, and, who, to this day, refers to this sacred land as “The Great Satan”.

It is well known, that a young Obama, after his mother wed a quite well-off fellow from Indonesia, attended a Madrassa, or Muslim School, in Jakarta.

I believe that the time he spent among “the religion of peace” in his youth, and the 20 years he spent under the “Reformed Muslim” (Liberation Theology) teachings of “ex”-American Muslim, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, molded and cemented his attitude toward Muslims.

Obama innately trusts Muslims…even radical ones.

Obama, Kerry, and the rest of his Liberal Dhimmi Cabal has shown where their loyalties unequivocally lie, with their braggadocio over this Chamberlain-esque “deal” that is destined to not only blow up in their faces, but also “where alabaster cities gleam, undimmed by human tears” and in the heart of the Holy Land, itself.

Obama’s concern is not with our allies nor the safety of the citizens and the military of the United States of America.

Obama, as he always has been, is concerned with himself and leaving a marvelous legacy as president.

Giving Iran the means to “kill the infidels” will definitely cement Obama’s Legacy…if there is anyone left to remember it.

Iran has always been, since the ouster of the Shah, a rogue nation. They are a threat to every nation who stands in the way of their crazed Political Ideology, disguised as a “religion”.

Either due to naiveté or simple over-estimation of their own intelligence, on the part of Obama and his Administration, as regards their “superior intellect”, to quote Fred Thompson, as Admiral Josh Painter, in the great movie “The Hunt for Red October”…

This business will get out of control. It will get out of control and we’ll be lucky to live through it.

Obama has screwed both God’s Chosen People and the nation which he is sworn to protect…for the sake of his own ego’s contentment.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

Modern American Liberals Continue to Deny Radical Islam Exists

untitled (17)As regards the existence and motivation of the sociopathic, barbaric followers of Radical Islam, Modern American Liberals, time and time again, are proving that denial is not just a river in Egypt.

According to Breitbart.com,

The Muslim man who said Islam motivated him to shoot a police officer does not represent the teachings of Islam, Philadelphia Mayor Jim Kenney stated in a press conference on Friday afternoon, following an attempted execution by a man who had reportedly pledged to the Islamic State.
A 33-year-old Philadelphia policeman, Jesse Hartnett, was ambushed late Thursday when Edward Archer, a Muslim man, reportedly tried to execute him while he was sitting in his police vehicle. Images from the incident show a man dressed in Muslim attire firing off a reported 13 rounds at officer Hartnett. The police officer was hit three times, but did not suffer life threatening injuries and is expected to recover fully, reports said.

According to Philadelphia Police Commissioner Richard Ross, the suspect said he had committed the attempted execution in the name of the Islamic State, the jihadi terrorist insurgent group that controls territory in the Middle East.

“According to him [the shooter], police bend laws that are contrary to the teachings of the Quran,” said Commissioner Ross.

Mayor Kenney, who was inaugurated last week, took a strikingly different tone when coming to the podium.

He began by expressing his well-wishes for the officer who the Muslim man attempted to execute, but then spent the latter part of his statement distancing Islam from the shooter, who claimed he was carrying out the shooting for Islam.

“In no way shape or form does anyone in this room believe that Islam or the teaching of Islam has anything to do with what you’ve seen on the screen,” said Mayor Kenney.

“That is abhorrent. It’s just terrible and it does not represent this religion [Islam] in any way shape or form or any of its teachings,” he added. “This is a criminal with a stolen gun who tried to kill one of our officers. It has nothing to do with being a Muslim or following the Islamic faith.”

He also took to Twitter, expressing a similar statement:

“Last night’s shooting had nothing to do with any faith. It was a violent assault by a criminal. I urge all Philadelphians to stand together.”

Kenney, a Catholic, received his bachelor’s degree from La Salle University, and it remains unclear where his religious expertise concerning Islam derives from.

While running for office, Kenney consistently reached out to the Muslim community for support.

In July, he signed a “pledge to combat bigotry” at the Al-Aqsa Islamic Society. The pledge was created by the Arab American Institute, an anti-Israel organization that seeks to promote Arab politicians for higher office. In signing the pledge, Kenney, agreed to combat criticism of Islam, and to “speak out” against ‘Islamophobia.’

Gosh, Mr. Mayor. I have no idea why the overwhelming majority of Americans identify the political ideology masquerading as a religion, known as Islam, with those who self-identify as “Radical Islamists”.

Just kidding…

Pay attention, Mr. Mayor….

The Washington Free Beacon reports that

Following the discovery of a terrorist cell in Texas allegedly operated by an Iraqi who entered the United States as a refugee, the Washington Free Beacon has learned of an additional 41 individuals who have been implicated in terrorist plots in the United States since 2014, bringing the total number of terrorists discovered since that time to 113, according to information provided by Congressional sources.

Since August, however, the Obama administration has stonewalled Congressional efforts to obtain more detailed immigration histories of these individuals, prompting frustration on Capitol Hill and accusation that the administration is covering up these histories to avoid exposing flaws in the U.S. screening process.

The disclosure of these additional 41 individuals linked to terror operations—many already identified as immigrants, others’ immigration histories shrouded in secrecy—has stoked further concerns about flaws in the U.S. screening process and is likely to prompt further congressional inquiry into Obama administration efforts to withhold details about these suspects, sources said.

As the number of legal immigrants connected to terrorism continues to grow, the Obama administration has sought to quash congressional inquiries and rally its allies behind an effort to fund efforts to boost the number of immigrants and refugees from the Middle East.

Many of these immigrants have been caught by authorities planning terrorist attacks on American soil, while others were found to be involved in efforts to provide funding and material to ISIS, according to an internal list of migrant terrorists codified by congressional sources and viewed by the Free Beacon.

“A growing number of foreign-born terrorists are being identified operating within the United States, and yet the Administration will not provide any information about their immigrant histories,” said one senior congressional source apprised of the issue. “And one can only imagine that for every identified terrorist, there are many more individuals around them who are radicalized, extreme or otherwise detracting from American society in ways beyond the threat of terrorism alone.”

As congressional calls for increased screening methods go mostly ignored, local authorities are dealing with an uptick in terror-related crimes committed by legal immigrants.

On Thursday, the Justice Department accused two Iraqi refugees legally in the U.S. of conspiring to provide support to ISIS.

Omar Faraj Saeed Al Hardan, a 24-year-old Palestinian born Iraqi refugee who had been living in Texas, was charged with aiding ISIS. The man had been granted legal permanent residence in Houston in 2011, though it was later determined that he “swore untruthfully on his formal application when applying to become a naturalized U.S. citizen,” according to the Justice Department.

Aws Mohammed Younis Al-Jayab, also a Palestinian born Iraqi, allegedly “traveled overseas to fight alongside terrorist organizations and lied to U.S. authorities about his activities,” according to the Justice Department

Al-Jayab entered the U.S. as a refugee in 2012 and later travelled back to Syria, where it is believed that he resumed “fighting with various terrorist organizations,” according to the charges.

Late Thursday, a Philadelphia police officer was reportedly ambushed by an assailant sporting “Muslim garb and wearing a mask,” according to local reports.

Additional information viewed by the Free Beacon outlines another 20 previously unknown individuals brought up on similar terrorism-related charges in 2015 alone.

Those who have been charged were legally residing in the U.S. after entering from countries such as Egypt, Uzbekistan, Albania, Pakistan, and Syria, according to information provided by Congressional sources.

“The terrorism-related arrests of two more Iraqi refugees on American soil proves once again our screening process is weak and needs to be updated,” Sen. Mark Kirk (R., Ill,) said in a statement Friday.

With incidents and indictments of this nature continuing to rise, critics of the Obama administration’s immigration policy are expressing concern about a last-minute funding effort in 2015 to fully fund refugee resettlement and visa programs.

These priorities, which were granted full funding as part of a yearly spending bill approved by Congress last year, will permit around 170,000 new migrants from Muslim-majority countries to enter the United States in 2016, according to the Senate’s immigration subcommittee.

“The omnibus gave the green light for the administration to continue this failed immigration policy over the objections of the electorate,” the senior Congressional source quoted above said.

The Senate continues to uncover dozens of cases in which individuals accused of terrorism entered the country legally.

“Preventing and responding to these acts is an effort encompassing thousands of federal agents and attorneys and billions of dollars: In effect, we are voluntarily admitting individuals at risk for terrorism and then, on the back end, trying to stop them from carrying out their violent designs,” Sen. Jeff Sessions (R., Ala.) warned last year as Congress considered the spending bill.

In trying to figure out the hesitance of Modern American Liberals to identify the motivation of Radical Islamist Terrorists, my mind, unique space between my ears that it is, flashed back to this famous scene between the late great Rodney Dangerfield, and the late , great Sam Kinison, in the movie Back to School. Kinison is a history professor, and Dangerfield is the successful businessman father of an under-achieving freshman, who decides to go back to school, to be there for his son.

rodneysamKinison: You remember that thing we had about thirty years ago… called the Korean conflict?

Yeah. Where we failed to achieve victory.

How come we didn’t cross the 38th parallel…and push those rice-eaters back to the Great Wall of China…and take it apart brick by brick…and nuke them back into the f!@#in’ stone age forever?

How come? Tell me? Why? Say it! Say it!

Dangerfield: All right, I’ll say it.

‘Cause Truman was too much of a p!@sy wimp…to let MacArthur go in and blow out those commie b!@#ards!

Kinison: Good answer. Good answer. I like the way you think.  I’m gonna be watching you.

For anybody with more than 2 working brain cells, (and, I know that leaves out a lot of Liberals) once the brothers were initially identified as Muslims, it was game over.

So, why have Liberals, in the MSM, and elsewhere, been so afraid to call Muslim Terrorists, Muslim Terrorists?

Is it because of that heinous practice, known as Political Correctness?

We’ve all been a victim of it. And, it’s not just the Liberals who practice it.

A while back, a young Libertarian lady, who just happens to be Black, had posted an article in a Facebook Page for Conservatives and Libertarians, featuring Patti Davis, the Liberal (and crazy) daughter of Former President Ronald Reagan. Davis had come out as the moral arbiter of some issue, and I pointed out that she was not fit to be the “moral arbiter” in any situation, as, to torque off her Dad, and make a political statement, she had posed topless for the cover of Playboy in 1994 with a Black guy, standing behind her, cupping her…umm…chest.

Both the young lady and her husband, who happens to be White, jumped on me, like I was some sort of RAAACIIIST, because I stated the obvious.

archiesammyTimes were different, back in ’94. Just as they were different back in the 70s, when Bud Yorkin and Norman Lear created All in the Family, starring the great American actor, Carroll O’Connor. The misadventures of Archie Bunker and his family could not be a hit today. Our tolerant American Liberals (and others) would not allow it. And, the lessons learned from that ground-breaking television series would be lost.

Perhaps, the reticence by the Media to identify the religious/political ideology of the two brothers is something else: loyalty to President Barack Hussein Obama.

They have a lot invested in The Lightbringer. They have campaigned endlessly for him, and the majority of “Broadcast Journalists” share his vision for a Socialist Utopia America. Additionally, the White House has been known to send e-mails and make telephone calls to these bastions of journalistic integrity, when they want something swept under the Oval Office rug.

The fact that these murdering terrorists were Muslims, does not reflect well on our dhimmi President. In fact, it proves that Smart Power! is anything, but.

Additionally, the fact that these barbarians infiltrated France in the first place,and killed all the innocent people that they did, shows the folly of relaxing our already-porous Immigration Laws and the danger to human live of strict Gun Control Laws.

Even as these barbarous acts unfolded in France and the  Radical Muslims of ISIS continue their genocidal jihad against Christians in Iraq, I continue to hear and read from some of this “Me, First Generation” that there is not any difference between American Christianity and Radical Islam. Quite frankly, that’s like saying that there’s no difference between Mister Rogers and Ted Bundy (look them up, children).

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

This is the direct opposite of Christianity.

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

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

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

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”.

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

In the case of the barbarians of al Qaeda, ISIS, and the rest of the Muslim Brotherhood, it has turned them into doppelgangers of the Nazi Butchers of Dachau.

For Liberals to deny that, and to refuse to identify Islamic Terrorism, when it rears its ugly head, is disingenuous at best, and just plain out-and-out lying at worst.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Obama’s Gun Control EO: A Matter of Distraction and Control

guncontrolAccording to the pollsters over at gallup.com, Gun Control is only considered an Important National Issue by 2% of America’s Population.

Unfortunately for the continuation of our Second Amendment Rights, one of those individuals in that 2% is Barack Hussein Obama, the President of the United States of America.

CNN.com reports that

The Obama administration will announce a series of executive actions on Tuesday to combat gun violence in the U.S.Among other things, the actions would expand mandatory background checks for some private sales. The administration would also provide more funding for mental health treatment, FBI staff and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco Firearms and Explosives agents.

“These are not only recommendations that are well within my legal authority and the executive branch,” Obama told reporters gathered Monday in the Oval Office. “But they are also ones that the overwhelming majority of the American people, including gun owners, support and believe in.”

With Attorney General Loretta Lynch by his side, the President said he planned to roll out the new restrictions, aimed at combating a wave of recent shootings, in the coming days. He will hold a town hall on the topic Thursday that will air on CNN and is expected to make it a focus next week during his final State of the Union address.

Republicans in Congress and on the presidential campaign trail have blasted any attempt by the White House to crack down on gun rules.

 “Pretty soon you won’t be able to get guns,” Donald Trump told CNN’s Chris Cuomo Monday during an interview on “New Day.” “It’s another step in the way of not getting guns.”

House Speaker Paul Ryan called out the President’s “dismissiveness” toward the Second Amendment as well as Congress.

“While we don’t yet know the details of the plan, the President is at minimum subverting the legislative branch, and potentially overturning its will,” Ryan said in a statement Monday. “His proposals to restrict gun rights were debated by the United States Senate, and they were rejected. No President should be able to reverse legislative failure by executive fiat, not even incrementally.”

Over the weekend, Democratic presidential front-runner Hillary Clinton told Radio Iowa she applauded the President’s new push, but warned any executive action was likely to fall short the comprehensive reform favored by most in her party.

“We’ve got to act,” she said, “but I don’t think that’s enough and I think we’re going to have to keep pushing forward on the political front and I intend to do that, to take on the gun lobby and to work with responsible gun owners.”

On the trail Monday, Clinton again said she backed the President’s efforts, but warned that voting a Republican into office in 2017 would effectively undo any progress that followed.

The most sweeping action currently being considered, an executive order defining who’s “engaged in the business” of selling guns, would immediately require some private dealers to obtain a license and begin conducting background checks.

But efforts to even partially close the so-called “gun show loophole” are sure to prompt a rash of challenges in court. The resulting rulings and subsequent appeals are likely to drag on well beyond the end of this administration.

Obama’s plan has already drawn heated criticism from Republicans, especially among the party’s presidential candidates.

Gun “Control” (i.e., confiscation) has been a priority of Obama’s since he took office.

And, of course, as Sir Isaac Newton observed,

For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.

The Washington Free Beacon reports that

The FBI processed a record number of firearms-related background checks last year, indicating that more guns were sold in 2015 than in any previous year in American history.

More than 23 million checks were processed through the National Instant Background Check System in 2015, an all-time record.

The all-time record for yearly sales comes after May, June, July, August, September, October, November, and December 2015 each set sales records for their respective months. In December the FBI conducted 3,314,594 checks, an increase of more than half a million checks over the previous single-month record set in December 2012.

The number of FBI background checks is widely considered to be the most reliable gauge of how many firearms were sold in a given month because background checks are required on all sales made through federally licensed firearms dealers. However, the checks do not provide an exhaustive representation of gun sales. Checks are not required on sales between private parties in most states, and a single background check may cover the purchase of multiple firearms by the same person at once.

Additionally, some states perform the checks on those who apply for gun-carry permits.

The record gun sales came as Democrats moved to implement new gun control measures at the federal, state, and local levels. Hillary Clinton, the leading candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination, said that the Supreme Court’s decision in the District of Columbia v. Heller gun rights case was “wrong” and she and President Barack Obama praised Australian-style gun confiscation.

Gov. Terry McAuliffe of Virginia (D.) issued an executive order imposing new gun control measures and the Democrat-controlled city council of Seattle imposed a new tax on guns and ammunition.

Gun rights activists say that Democrats’ new aggressive posture on gun control contributed to 2015’s record sales.

“A day has not gone by without a major media assault on gun rights or an Obama administration call for new additional restrictions on gun ownership,” said Alan Gottlieb of the Second Amendment Foundation. “Americans have voted with their dollars and bought record levels of guns and ammunition.”

In the second half of the year, terrorist attacks in Paris and San Bernardino, California drove gun and ammunition sales even higher. Some dealers reported seeing their business triple in the wake of the attacks, cautioning that the spike was drying up supply in some areas.

Gun rights activists believe that sales will continue to set records in the new year.

In Obama’s zeal to grab our guns, there is an “inconvenient truth” that he and his minions always fail to mention:

A 1997 Justice Department survey of more than 18,000 state and federal convicts revealed the truth:

• 39.6% of criminals obtained a gun from a friend or family member
• 39.2% of criminals obtained a gun on the street or from an illegal source
• 0.7% of criminals purchased a gun at a gun show
• 1% of criminals purchased a gun at a flea market
• 3.8% of criminals purchased a gun from a pawn shop
• 8.3% of criminals actually bought their guns from retail outlets

This fact remains unchanged to this day.

And, Obama and his Administration are quite aware of these numbers.

So, why attempt to restrict the gun ownership of law-abiding Americans?

As I observed yesterday,

Have you ever watched a mother, when their toddler bumps their head on a table, attempt to distract their child, by pretending to spank the table, while saying, “Bad Table”?

That, in a nutshell, is what President Barack Hussein Obama is attempting to do by writing Executive Orders, in an attempt to limit the Constitutional Right of American Citizens to own guns.

By creating new restrictions, instead of enforcing gun laws which are already in place, Obama is shifting the blame from the Radical Islamic Terrorists and those who operate outside of the law to America and her citizens.

Restricting private ownership of firearms by a country’s citizens is nothing new.

Back on January 13, 2013 while researching another post on the subject of Gun Control, I found some truth from a very unexpected source: Pravda.

(That’s pretty bad when Pravda is telling the truth and America’s Main Stream Media is not. But, I digress…)

Before the Revolution in 1918, Russia was one of the most heavily armed societies on Earth.

This well armed population was what allowed the various White factions to rise up, no matter how disorganized politically and militarily they were in 1918 and wage a savage civil war against the Reds. It should be noted that many of these armies were armed peasants, villagers, farmers and merchants, protecting their own. If it had not been for Washington’s clandestine support of and for the Reds, history would have gone quite differently.

Moscow fell, for example, not from a lack of weapons to defend it, but from the lying guile of the Reds. Ten thousand Reds took Moscow and were opposed only by some few hundreds of officer cadets and their instructors. Even then the battle was fierce and losses high. However, in the city alone, at that time, lived over 30,000 military officers (both active and retired), all with their own issued weapons and ammunition, plus tens of thousands of other citizens who were armed. The Soviets promised to leave them all alone if they did not intervene. They did not and for that were asked afterwards to come register themselves and their weapons: where they were promptly shot.

Of course being savages, murderers and liars does not mean being stupid and the Reds learned from their Civil War experience. One of the first things they did was to disarm the population. From that point, mass repression, mass arrests, mass deportations, mass murder, mass starvation were all a safe game for the powers that were. The worst they had to fear was a pitchfork in the guts or a knife in the back or the occasional hunting rifle. Not much for soldiers.

To this day, with the Soviet Union now dead 21 years, with a whole generation born and raised to adulthood without the SU, we are still denied our basic and traditional rights to self defense. Why? We are told that everyone would just start shooting each other and crime would be everywhere….but criminals are still armed and still murdering and too often, especially in the far regions, those criminals wear the uniforms of the police. The fact that everyone would start shooting is also laughable when statistics are examined.

While President Putin pushes through reforms, the local authorities, especially in our vast hinterland, do not feel they need to act like they work for the people. They do as they please, a tyrannical class who knows they have absolutely nothing to fear from a relatively unarmed population. This in turn breeds not respect but absolute contempt and often enough, criminal abuse.

For those of us fighting for our traditional rights, the US 2nd Amendment is a rare light in an ever darkening room. Governments will use the excuse of trying to protect the people from maniacs and crime, but are in reality, it is the bureaucrats protecting their power and position. In all cases where guns are banned, gun crime continues and often increases. As for maniacs, be it nuts with cars (NYC, Chapel Hill NC), swords (Japan), knives (China) or home made bombs (everywhere), insane people strike. They throw acid (Pakistan, UK), they throw fire bombs (France), they attack. What is worse, is, that the best way to stop a maniac is not psychology or jail or “talking to them”, it is a bullet in the head, that is why they are a maniac, because they are incapable of living in reality or stopping themselves.

The excuse that people will start shooting each other is also plain and silly. So it is our politicians saying that our society is full of incapable adolescents who can never be trusted? Then, please explain how we can trust them or the police, who themselves grew up and came from the same culture?

No it is about power and a total power over the people. There is a lot of desire to bad mouth the Tsar, particularly by the Communists, who claim he was a tyrant, and yet under him we were armed and under the progressives disarmed. Do not be fooled by a belief that progressives, leftists hate guns. Oh, no, they do not. What they hate is guns in the hands of those who are not marching in lock step of their ideology. They hate guns in the hands of those who think for themselves and do not obey without question. They hate guns in those whom they have slated for a barrel to the back of the ear.

So, do not fall for the false promises and do not extinguish the light that is left to allow humanity a measure of self respect.

Russian Marxist Revolutionary Vladimir Lenin said:

One man with a gun can control 100 without one.

Obama’s Gun Control Executive Order which he will issue today is not about the safety of American Citizens.

It is about distraction and control.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

 

Obama to Issue Gun Control Executive Orders Next Week…What “Checks and Balances”?

1722924_1319321378127988_8942781069457189654_nFreedom 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. – Ronald Reagan

The Washington Post reports that

HONOLULU — President Obama will press ahead with a set of executive actions on guns next week despite growing concerns in the United States over terrorism that have dampened some Americans’ enthusiasm for tighter firearms restrictions.

The president will meet Monday with Attorney General Loretta E. Lynch to finalize a series of new gun control measures and will announce his package of proposals soon after, according to several individuals who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the plan is not yet public.

One of the main proposals Obama is poised to adopt would require some unlicensed gun dealers to get licenses and conduct background checks on potential buyers. The change is aimed at occasional dealers, including some who sell online frequently or rent tables at gun shows but do not have a storefront.

Obama began examining how he could tighten the nation’s gun rules after October’s mass shooting at Umpqua Community College in Roseburg, Ore. Administration lawyers have spent months reviewing various proposals to make sure they can withstand legal challenges.

The idea of requiring informal gun dealers to obtain a license from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives and of conducting background checks came up two years ago when White House officials drafted a proposal for dealers who sell at least 50 guns annually.

The idea was shelved because of legal concerns but gained new momentum after the Roseburg shooting. At that point, Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton said she would pursue such a requirement by executive action if elected. Administration officials gave the proposal another look and determined it could be done in a way that was legally defensible.

The White House review has been conducted in relative secrecy, soliciting input from gun safety groups without specifying which policies the administration might ultimately adopt. In the past month, Obama has met with former representative Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz.), who was gravely injured in a 2011 mass shooting, and her husband, Mark Kelly, and with former New York City mayor Michael R. Bloomberg and the president of Everytown for Gun Safety, which Bloomberg helped start.

In Obama’s weekly radio address, released a day earlier than usual, the president said he was moving unilaterally because Congress had failed to address the growing problem of gun violence.

“A few months ago, I directed my team at the White House to look into any new actions I can take to help reduce gun violence,” he said. “And on Monday, I’ll meet with our attorney general, Loretta Lynch, to discuss our options.

“Because I get too many letters from parents, and teachers, and kids to sit around and do nothing,” Obama continued. “I get letters from responsible gun owners who grieve with us every time these tragedies happen; who share my belief that the Second Amendment guarantees a right to bear arms; and who share my belief we can protect that right while keeping an irresponsible, dangerous few from inflicting harm on a massive scale.”

In reviewing its options, the administration has shut out congressional Republicans, who joined with some Democrats in helping block legislation to expand background checks after the 2012 mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn.

“The administration has not communicated with us, and we have not been briefed,” Doug ­Andres, a spokesman for House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.), said in an email. “We will consider options once we have information, but what seems apparent is none of these ideas would have prevented the recent atrocities. Our focus should be on the consistent causes of these acts — mental illnesses and terrorism — rather than infringing on law-abiding Americans’ constitutional rights.”

While most Republican presidential candidates did not provide immediate reaction to Obama’s announcement, they are expected to talk about it in the coming days. Former Florida governor Jeb Bush is scheduled to attend a gun show in Orlando on Sunday, where he will discuss the high marks he has received from the National Rifle Association.

Catherine Frazier, a spokeswoman for Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Tex.), said that “President Obama is trying to distract Americans from his failure to address the true threat of radical Islamic terrorism, and instead going after the rights of law-abiding American citizens — it is complete lunacy. If Ted Cruz is elected president, the lawlessness will end on Day One, and Americans’ personal liberties will be restored and protected.”

Obama will make his case for additional gun restrictions in a number of forums in the coming month, according to aides, including during his Jan. 12 State of the Union address.

While beefing up background checks has strong support — a Quinnipiac University poll in December found that 89 percent of Americans supported checks for purchases at gun shows and for online sales — Obama’s actions also come as Americans have grown more fearful about the prospect of terrorist strikes and are expressing an openness to having ordinary citizens carry guns.

A Washington Post/ABC News poll conducted last month in the wake of the San Bernardino, Calif., terrorist shootings, for example, found that 53 percent of respondents opposed a ban on assault weapons ban, a record high. When asked which is the better reaction to terrorism, 47 percent said encouraging more people to carry guns legally, while 42 percent preferred enacting stricter gun control laws.

Why are Obama, his Administration, and their “fellow travelers” so intent over getting our guns?

If they cared so much about our nation’s children, their supposed reason for gun confiscation, they would not be pro-abortion, which has murdered 56 million children.

David Mamet, in an  article for The Daily Beast, published on January 27, 2013, wrote the following:

…where in the Constitution is it written that the Government is in charge of determining “needs”? And note that the president did not say “I have more money than I need,” but “You and I have more than we need.” Who elected him to speak for another citizen?

It is not the constitutional prerogative of the Government to determine needs. One person may need (or want) more leisure, another more work; one more adventure, another more security, and so on. It is this diversity that makes a country, indeed a state, a city, a church, or a family, healthy. “One-size-fits-all,” and that size determined by the State has a name, and that name is “slavery.”

The Founding Fathers, far from being ideologues, were not even politicians. They were an assortment of businessmen, writers, teachers, planters; men, in short, who knew something of the world, which is to say, of Human Nature. Their struggle to draft a set of rules acceptable to each other was based on the assumption that we human beings, in the mass, are no damned good—that we are biddable, easily confused, and that we may easily be motivated by a Politician, which is to say, a huckster, mounting a soapbox and inflaming our passions.

The Constitution’s drafters did not require a wag to teach them that power corrupts: they had experienced it in the person of King George. The American secession was announced by reference to his abuses of power: “He has obstructed the administration of Justice … he has made Judges dependant on his will alone … He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our Constitution, and unacknowledged by our Laws … He has erected a multitude of new offices, and sent hither swarms of officers to harass out people and to eat out their substance … imposed taxes upon us without our consent… [He has] fundamentally altered the forms of our government.”

…The police do not exist to protect the individual. They exist to cordon off the crime scene and attempt to apprehend the criminal. We individuals are guaranteed by the Constitution the right to self-defense. This right is not the Government’s to “award” us. They have never been granted it.

The so-called assault weapons ban is a hoax. It is a political appeal to the ignorant. The guns it supposedly banned have been illegal (as above) for 78 years. Did the ban make them “more” illegal? The ban addresses only the appearance of weapons, not their operation.

Will increased cosmetic measures make anyone safer? They, like all efforts at disarmament, will put the citizenry more at risk. Disarmament rests on the assumption that all people are good, and, basically, want the same things.

But if all people were basically good, why would we, increasingly, pass more and more elaborate laws?

The individual is not only best qualified to provide his own personal defense, he is the only one qualified to do so: and his right to do so is guaranteed by the Constitution.

President Obama seems to understand the Constitution as a “set of suggestions.” I cannot endorse his performance in office, but he wins my respect for taking those steps he deems necessary to ensure the safety of his family. Why would he want to prohibit me from doing the same?

Why, indeed? The Communist Leader, Vladimir Lenin ,answered that question very succinctly:

One man with a gun can control 100 without one.

Now, I am not one prone to conspiracy theories, but I question the timing of the whole thing. I believe that all of this “solution” was already prepared, and Obama and his sycophants were just waiting for the appropriate trigger mechanism to begin their push for gun confiscation. Unfortunately, the Islamic Terrorist Attack in San Bernadino, California provided them the excuse that they were waiting for.

So now, even as I write this, there are Executive Orders, sitting on the president’s desk, waiting to be signed.

This should come as no surprise to anyone. He has stated, numerous times, that if Congress will not give him what he wants, he will go around them.

Yes, our Founding Fathers put in a System of Checks and Balances. However, that system relies on the willingness of politicians to enforce them.

Unfortunately, in 2016, we have a bunch of professional politicians, who are too afraid of being thrown off of the Gravy Train, to tell the Conductor he’s on the wrong track. When the new Speaker of the House just recently demonstrated his willingness to be a doppelganger of the previous Vichy Republican in that position, by getting the Omnibus Bill passed, he left no doubt as to the state of his intestinal fortitude.

Hurry up, November.

Until He Comes, 

KJ

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

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

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

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

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

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

The Christian Post reports that

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

That ain’t happenin’.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

So, why is God’s Church being persecuted?

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

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

 God’s Children stand in the way of things.

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

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

Until He Comes,

KJ