Syrian Muslim “Refugees” Accepted, Syrian Christians Not…While Obama Decides If Their Mass Murder is “Genocide” Or Not

th (57)While Americans were enjoying the pomp and pageantry of Superbowl 50 last night, Christians, halfway around the world, continued to fight against a mass genocide, while the President of the United States of America, continues to turn a deaf ear to their pleas for help.

CNSNews.com reports that

The number of Syrian refugees being resettled in the United States continues to climb slowly, but of the 576 admitted since last November’s Paris terrorist attack, only two (0.3 percent) are Christians.The two Christians are an Orthodox man and a Greek Orthodox man, according to State Department Refugee Processing Center data.

Meanwhile, 560 Sunni Muslims (97.2 percent), three Shi’ite Muslims, and 10 others identified simply as “Moslem” have been admitted over the same period. One last Syrian male refugee is identified as “other religion.”

Of the Sunnis admitted, 289 (51.6 percent) are male, 271 (48.4 percent) are female. Two of the Shi’ites are male, one if female, and of the 10 “Moslems,” seven are male and three are female.

When the Syrian civil war began almost five years ago Christians accounted for approximately 10 percent of the Syrian population. The European Parliament estimates that more than 700,000 Christians have fled their homeland since then.

The Nov. 13 attack in the French capital, which cost 130 lives, stoked fresh fears that the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS/ISIL) terrorist group is using refugee admission programs as a way to access Western countries.

The small number of Christians among those admitted since the ISIS attack mirrors the proportion admitted into the U.S. since the beginning of fiscal year 2016, on Oct. 1 – seven Christians (0.8 percent) out of a total of 867 refugees. The seven are three Catholics (two males, one female), two Orthodox males, one Greek Orthodox male, and one described simply as “Christian.”

The rest of the 867 admitted so far in FY 2016 comprise 846 Sunnis (97.5 percent) – of whom 443 (52.4 percent) are males and 403 (47.6 percent) are females – as well as the three Shi’ites (0.3 percent), 10 “Moslems” (1.1 percent), and one (0.1 percent) described as having “no religion.”The Obama administration plans to admit 10,000 Syrian

refugees during FY 2016.Since the civil war in Syria began — with anti-government protests and a violent crackdown in March 2011 – the U.S. has admitted a total of 2,740 Syrian refugees. Of that number, 55 (2.0 percent) are Christians and 2,565 (93.6 percent) are Sunni Muslims.

The rest are 70 “Moslems,” 16 Shi’ites, eight Jehovah’s Witnesses, six Zoroastrians, two Baha’i, one Yazidi, seven “other religion,” seven “no religion” and three atheists.

Of the total 2,740 Syrian refugees admitted since March 2011, 743 (27.1 percent) are men aged between 14 and 50.

If you were the President of the United States of America, which would be more important to you: saving innocent lives or the definition of a word?

TheBlaze.com reports that

White House press secretary Josh Earnest said Thursday that Obama administration attorneys are researching whether the violence the Islamic State is committing against Christians meets the legal definition of genocide.

A reporter, citing the atrocities and murders in Iraq and Syria, asked Earnest, “Why won’t the Obama administration call this genocide, Christian genocide?” 

Earnest responded that the term genocide has “legal ramifications.”

“There are lawyers considering whether or not that term can be properly applied in this scenario,” Earnest said. “What is clear and what is undeniable and what the president has now said twice in the last 24 hours is that we know that there are religious minorities in Iraq and in Syria, including Christians, that are being targeted by ISIL terrorists because of their religion and that attack on religious minorities is an attack on all people of faith and it is important for all of us to stand up and speak out about it.”

On Wednesday, Obama denounced attacks on people of faith while speaking at the Islamic Society of Baltimore and repeated the sentiment Thursday morning at the National Prayer Breakfast.

Many have insisted the large-scale murder of Christians by the Islamic State is clearly genocide.

The reluctance by the Obama administration is most likely based on obligations under the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, Travis Weber, director of the Center for Religious Liberty at the Family Research Council, said.

“If they don’t think there is enough evidence of genocide against Christians and Yazidis, I’m not sure what they’re waiting for,” Weber told TheBlaze. “This is based on a political fear. There is moral and legal weight behind calling it genocide. Under the treaty, parties must prevent and punish genocide. This is the reason for the Clinton administration’s reluctance to act in Rwanda.”

Citing the treaty, Weber said the Islamic State’s slaughter and torture of Christians meet the treaty’s criteria for genocide, which include any of the following:

● Killing members of the group

● Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group

● Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part

● Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group

● Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group

At the White House press briefing, the reporter followed, “The distinction of genocide provides people persecuted with the ability to come to the United States seeking refuge. When will this happen?”

Earnest said the terminology doesn’t change the administration’s serious response in combatting the Islamic State.

“This is an open question and one that continues to be considered by administration lawyers,” Earnest said. “I can tell you that the president was quite blunt in talking about the responsibility that all people of faith have in standing up for individuals who are targeted for their faith, particularly religious minorities and particularly the people who are marginalized because of their minority status based on the religion they practice.”

Earnest noted that the Islamic State has also targeted Yazidis and Shia Muslims.

“This administration has worked hard to try to protect religious minorities who are being victimized by ISIL. There is no doubt that Christians are among those who have been and are being targeted,” Earnest said. “As it relates to the specific use of this word — the decision to apply this term to this situation is an important one, it has significant consequences and it matters for a whole variety of reasons both legal and moral. But it doesn’t change our response. The fact is that this administration has been aggressive even though that term has not been applied in trying to protect religious minorities who are victims or potential victims of violence.”

As a recent Gallup Poll affirmed, Christianity, the Faith of our Fathers, remains the faith of the overwhelming majority of Americans, consisting of over 75% of our population.

In July of 2009, in a stadium located at the University of the Egypt in Cairo, President Barack Hussein Obama, in a speech to the “Muslim World”, apologized to tens of thousands of adherents  to Islam and spoke to them in glowing terms of their “rich cultural heritage” and their “contributions to the growth of United States of America”.

Yeah, our first president, Mohammed Washington, that’s the ticket.

Now, before I begin my analysis, I want you to understand that I am NOT saying that every Muslim in the world is taking part in a jihad against United States of America.

However, those were not Southern Baptists, who massacred the citizens of Paris, France or San Bernadino, California.

Additionally, the mass murderers known as ISIS, are not Evangelical Christians, no matter how hard desperate Liberals might try to compare us to Radical Muslims.

“Now are you going to accept Jesus Christ as your personal Savior or am I going to have to behead you?” said no Evangelical Christian American, ever.

No, boys and girls, ISIS is a bunch of Muslim Barbarians…period.

For President Barack Hussein Obama to attempt to prosecute the War Against ISIS by remote control, with apparently no military strategy in place at all, is one the silliest things I’ve ever seen in my life.

As has been noted by several military analysts, eventually, Obama is going to have to put a “substantial number” of troops on the ground. That is, additional troops to the troops which he already has on the ground in the role of  “military advisors”.

Obama’s bombing runs have done minimal damage, at best.

The fact of the matter is, you cannot bomb buildings and expect to kill your enemy, when the enemy is a guerrilla force, which  does not stay in any building for any period of time. Just like their Nomadic Barbaric Ancestors, these guerrillas keep moving, regrouping, and attacking.

Obama had hoped that his “Coalition of the Unwilling”, the Middle Eastern Muslim Nations , who reluctantly agreed to support Obama against ISIS, would be willing to be his “boots on the ground” and would lay down their lives for him.

I am still trying to figure out how Obama could have possibly thought that those who think of us as the Great Satan, would lay down their lives for us.

Of course, Obama also thinks that if  Iran promises not to build a nuke, they won’t build it.

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

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

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

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

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

This situation, that France is dealing with, and that we will be facing, with a possible Invasion Force, disguised as “Syrian Refugees”, can be traced back to Obama’s premature evacuation of Iraq.

It is no secret that Barack Hussein Obama is a vain and petulant man. It is also no secret that he was a Far Left Radical in his collegiate days and his early political career, only moving to the middle of the political spectrum while he was campaigning for the presidency.

That being said, my Daddy always told me that when you do something, don’t do it halfway. Give it your best effort or don’t do it at all, or else you will come up short. That is what is happening with this war against the Islamic radicals in Iraq.

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

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

Could Obama’s “Coalition of the Unwilling”, consisting of Middle Eastern Muslims, be practicing taquiyya? Could it be that arming the Syrian “Rebels” was a very stupid thing to do? Could these “Syrian Refugees” actually be a Radical Muslim Invasion Force? Could it be that it is time for Obama to quit this halfway waging of War and to go ahead and send in ground troops and take care of business ourselves?

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

So, to answer my earlier question…Why is United States President Barack Hussein Obama refusing to grant asylum to persecuted Christians and Yazidis?

As demonstrated in his trip to that Baltimore Mosque last week, which has direct ties to the Muslim Brotherhood,

Obama is loathe to admit the atrocities perpetrated in the name of Allah.

And yet, he blasts Christian Americans at every opportunity, concerning our reluctance to accept these unvetted “Muslim Refugees”.

The acceptance of persecuted Middle Eastern Christians would shed further light on those atrocities.

And, Obama simply will not allow that.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Living Under the “Tyranny of the Minority”

WashingtonPrayingAs I was trying to choose what to write about on this cold and wet Mississippi Sunday Morning after Christmas, a hard, cold fact struck my simple mind:  We are living in a country that continues to suffer under the tyranny of a minority. 

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

76 % of Americans still self-identify as being Christians.

And yet, we are under attack daily, from the Main Stream Media, Cable and Satellite Television Programs, Social Media, and the current President of the United States of America and his Administration.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Rev. Graham was spot on.

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

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

Their reaction has hardly been unexpected.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The Eight Per Centers (Atheists) and young and/or misinformed Liberals, who replied to my blogs, insisted 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.

Unfortunately for them, The First Amendment to the Constitution still holds.

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

So,  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 your lack of faith…which, is actually a faith unto itself.

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

God of our Fathers, whose almighty hand
leads forth in beauty all the starry band
of shining worlds in splendor through the skies,
our grateful songs before thy throne arise.

Until He Comes,

KJ

The War Against Christianity: Living Under The Tyranny of the Minority

American Christianity 2As I was trying to choose what to write about on this hot, Mississippi Morning, a hard, cold fact struck my simple mind:  We are living in a country that continues to suffer under the tyranny of a minority. 

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

76 % of Americans still self-identify as being Christians.

And yet, we are under attack daily, from the Main Stream Media, Cable and Satellite Television Programs, Social Media, and the current President of the United States of America and his Administration.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Rev. Graham is spot on.

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

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

Their reaction has hardly been unexpected.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The Eight Per Centers (Atheists) and young and/or misinformed Liberals, who replied to my blogs, insisted that Crosses and other Chrstian symbols have no place in the Public Square.  They wish for Christians to remain unseen and unheard from, worshiping in private.

Unfortunately for them, The First Amendment to the Constitution still holds.

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

So,  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 your lack of faith…which, is actually a faith unto itself.

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

God of our Fathers, whose almighty hand
leads forth in beauty all the starry band
of shining worlds in splendor through the skies,
our grateful songs before thy throne arise.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Reagan Conservatism Still Rules

Are Americans more Socially Conservative or Fiscally Conservative?

Gallup reported on an interesting poll, back on May 25th.

Americans are more than twice as likely to identify themselves as conservative rather than liberal on economic issues, 46% to 20%. The gap is narrower on social issues, but conservatives still outnumber liberals, 38% to 28%.

These results are based on Gallup’s annual Values and Beliefs poll, conducted May 3-6. Since 2001, the poll has asked Americans to say whether they are liberal, moderate, or conservative on “economic” and, separately, “social” issues. The interpretation of what qualifies as social or economic issues is left to the respondent, given that the question does not define or provide examples of these types of issues.

In the same poll, on Gallup’s standard measure of ideology — not asked in reference to any set of issues — 41% identified themselves as conservatives, 33% as moderates, and 23% as liberals. Those figures are similar to what Gallup typically finds when it asks people to identify their ideology.

Thus, compared with the standard measure of ideology, slightly more Americans say they are economically conservative and slightly fewer say they are socially conservative. Also, significantly more Americans say they are socially liberal than identify their basic ideology as liberal.

Over the last four years, an average of 48% of Americans have said they are conservative on economic issues, including a high of 51% in May 2010. From 2001-2008, an average of 42% said they were economically conservative. This increase in economic conservatism has been coupled with a decline in the percentage who say they are moderate on economic issues. There has also been a slight increase in the percentage of Americans identifying as economic liberals, to a high of 20% this year.

The changes in self-identified economic conservatism coincide with the economic downturn and President Barack Obama’s time in office. But because the jump occurred between 2008 and 2009, and Americans were already concerned about the economy in 2008, the change in presidential administrations from Bush to Obama may be the bigger factor.

The major shift in Americans’ identification on social issues in recent years has been a decline in the percentage who say they are moderate, from 39% as recently as 2005 to 31% today. There have been roughly equal increases in the percentage of self-identified social liberals (four percentage points) and social conservatives (three points) today compared with 2005.

For the most part, Americans fall on the same ideological side on economic and social issues. Sixty-one percent are conservative, moderate, or liberal on both dimensions, with the largest percentage, 31%, conservative on both. Fifteen percent are liberal on both social and economic issues, and 15% are moderate on both.

The bulk of those who are not consistent say they are economically conservative and socially moderate (11%), or economically moderate and socially liberal (10%). Only 4% are liberal on one dimension and conservative on the other, with most of those being economically conservative and socially liberal.

More Americans identify as economic conservatives than as social conservatives or conservatives in general. And that tendency has increased in the last four years, perhaps due to President Obama’s economic agenda. This suggests that a conservative economic message from Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney may resonate with voters this year.

Americans are also more likely to say they are conservative than liberal or moderate on social issues, underscoring the conclusion that the conservative label has more appeal in the United States today than either the moderate or the liberal label.

Also, the moderate label seems to be losing some of its appeal in recent years, as Americans have become less likely to say they are moderate on both social and economic issues. The movement away from the moderate label may be another example of the increasing polarization of U.S. politics.

Throughout the Republican Primary and now on the eve on the Convention, there has been a concerted effort by Romney “supporters” on the internet to try to discourage, insult, and downright mock the beliefs of Reagan (Social) Conservatives.

As a matter of fact, if you read what they are still writing on Conservative websites, one would think that we Reagan Conservatives are outnumbered by “Fiscal” Conservatives and Moderates, when, at least according to this survey, that ain’t necessarily so.

The fact that people are becoming more polarized is interesting.  People are taking a stand, one way or another.

Where do you stand?

Do you stand with those who feel no compunction at all about ending an innocent life in its Mother’s womb. while babbling some nonsense about the baby not being human or being some sort of “punishment”?

Do you stand with those who believe that a nanny-state Federal Government can take care of you better than you can take care of yourself and your family?

Do you stand with those who would take away law-abiding citizens’ firearms in the naive belief that somehow an unarmed populace is safer from outlaws and psychos than a populace who is trained in the use of firearms and carrying?

Finally, do you stand with those who believe that the schemes and plans thought up by limited men overrule those created by a limitless God?

You see, what 92% of Americans have already figured out for themselves, is no matter where you go, you can’t run away from the reach of God.

Just ask the RNC what happened to the first day of their Convention.