If I Were a Socialist U.S. President…[December 2014 Edition]

obamamywork

**In respectful honor and memory of the late, great Paul Harvey, an American Original, (September 4, 1918 – February 28, 2009)**

Prologue: Back in January of this year, I wrote a blog describing what I would do, if “I were a Socialist U.S. President”. I have since decided to add to it, since things have further spiraled out of control since my original post.

If I were a Socialist U.S. President…

I would begin to plant seeds during my Inaugural Address, concerning the disparity between the Haves and the Have-nots. In other words, I would intentionally begin to divide the nation through the use of Racial Animus and Class Warfare.

Also, during that address I would push for a National Healthcare System, regardless of the fact that such a monstrous entity has never worked, anywhere it has been tried.

I would preach about hope and change, but like all Marxists, I would be hoping to bring subjugation and looking to “radically change” a nation, all in the name of “Fairness and Equality”.

The first thing I would do, when I took office, would be to send money around the world, to finance abortions. In this way, I would show the world that there is a new boss in the United States, who wants to radically change the Shining City on a Hill into just another country.

Next, I would push for the passage of an outrageous spending bill that would actually be a cover for paying back political favors.

I would invite the already-sycophantic Main Stream Media to come to the White House for closed-door meetings, where I would tell them to “get with the program”, if they wanted to receive any news stories from this White House at all.

I would makes speeches about how marvelous a Government-run National Healthcare  System would be, making hollow promises like,

If you like your insurance, you can keep your insurance. if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor.

all the while knowing that I was lying my hindquarters off.

Once I got my slaves in the Congress to pass this nation-changing National Healthcare Law, I would put the pedal to the metal and continuously push for other outrageous and expensive programs designed to grow the central government.

I would convince Americans that growing the central government is the only solution to a rapidly failing economy and that being unemployed and unable to provide for your family is actually a “fun-cation”.

And, while Americans were suffering through this Economic Depression, I would rant and rave about “Income Inequality”, while my family and I would take frequent vacations, costing the taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars, and throw lavish private parties at the White House, in a manner reminiscent of the old Soviet Union’s Politburo.

Realizing that the Heartland of America was still Conservative in nature, I would reach out to those Americans who believe themselves to be a mistreated minority. I would reach out to those on the fringes of society. Those Americans, who because of poor upbringing, poor education, or simply making bad decisions concerning their lives, now consider themselves deprived of the American Dream.

These people would compose about 47 percent of the population. They would be my core supporters, much like Nikolai Lenin and the Bolsheviks.

Having done a miserable job in my First Term as President, I would promise these Bolsheviks that if reelected, I would be their Santa Claus.

And, I would continue to blame my predecessor for the wretched state of the economy, even though, by now, it would be my responsibility.

Once I was reelected, there would be no stopping me. It would not matter to me what the popularity polls said, I would continue to claim that those who provide Americans with jobs were “the evil 1%” and identify their success in creating the Greatest Economic System in the World, as the “real reason” for the Economic Depression that America was in.

I would change the Moderate political stances which I “supposedly” held during the campaign for my first election as President, and show my true colors, following a political path pursuant to my true Far Left Radical Political Ideology.

I would alienate Conservative Christians living in America’s Heartland by vilifying them as “Bitter Clingers”, marginalizing them throughout my presidency.

I would push for “gay marriage” and the legalization of marijuana. Through redefining the definition of the family unit, and eliminating Christianity from everyday American Life, I will eliminate the “backbone” of the nation…the two main barriers that will keep me from radically changing America into a socialist nation. By legalizing marijuana, I will succeed in dumbing down the population and eliminating their desire to succeed as individuals, making them even more subservient and reliant on the Almighty State for their very existence, thus creating a new “Proletariat”.

Regarding Foreign Policy, I would bow in deference to other world leaders, demonstrating to them and the rest of the world, that I do not believe that the United States of America, whom I am supposed to be the Biggest Advocate for, is exceptional in any way.

I would not negotiate with America’s Enemies from a position of strength. Instead, I would blindly trust those who have sworn to kill us, even if they are on the threshold of building a nuclear bomb, simply because I identify with their Political Ideology, which masquerades as a religion.

I would pull out of still turbulent areas in the Middle East, encouraging the Barbaric Forces of Radical Islam to move in and conquer the very cities where our Brightest and Best sacrificed their lives in service to America.

On the 70th Anniversary of D-Day, I would sit at a solemn International Memorial Service, smacking my gum like a cow chews his cud, as if I was behind the bench at a Chicago Bulls Basketball Game, dishonoring our fallen and enraging our allies.

In other words, I would embrace America’s Enemies, and alienate America’s Friends.

I would use the finest military in the world as a subject for Social Engineering Experiments, ending “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” and moving women into combat positions, even though their lack of physical strength would endanger the American Soldiers they are fighting beside.

I would remove God from the Air Force Oath and forbid soldiers from speaking about Christ to others. I would also begin Military Training which would identify Evangelicals as “Terrorists”.

I would trade 5 Murderous Muslim Terrorist Generals, for one useless, traitorous, American Army Deserter, who was discharged in 2006 from the Coast Guard for Psychological Issues, who later converted to the Religious/Political Ideology of his Captors, and whose Father’s Youtube Account praised the same Radical Muslims and their Political Ideology which poses as a religion, just because I wish to make a Political Point about closing the prison in which the enemies of our country were being held.

While I am at it, I would allow my wife to place the military on a diet plan that is similar to the one which would already be failing in America’s Public Schools.

I would use the Judicial System, The Department of Justice, the NSA, and  Internal Revenue Service as my Palace Guard, using Activist judges to overturn the will of the people and harassing political opposition through uncalled-for Tax Audits.

I would use unmanned drones and blimps for unwarranted surveillance on American Citizens.

I would push for Gun Confiscation, calling it “Gun Control”, in the “name of the children”, all the while supporting the murder of the unborn in their mothers’ wombs, because having a baby is “a punishment”.

Because, after all, as Vladimir Lenin said,

One man with a gun can control 100 without one. 

I would imperiously announce that if Congress did not pass the laws that I wanted them to pass, I would go around them and rule by Executive Order.

I would open our Southern Borders, bypassing our immigration laws, encouraging millions of illegal aliens to enter our nation, including unaccompanied minors, spurred on by propaganda intentionally leaked to their Latin American Home Nations in support of this Mexican Munchkin Migration.

All the while, pushing Congress for “Immigration Reform”, i.e., “Amnesty”, in order to assure that my Political Party would hold onto their Political Power, in order to finish the intentional “Radical Change” of the Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave.

And, if Congress refused to follow my wishes, I would attempt to grant Amnesty through “Executive Order”, bypassing the System of Checks and Blances that America’s Founding Fathers put into place, so long ago, in or5der to avoid a monarchy, such as they rebelled against.

Finally, if I were a Socialist U.S. President, I would blame others for my incompetency. I would portray myself as a victim of a Capitalist System and a Racist Ideology that was still prevalent in a nation that was too narrow-minded to allow me to lead them to a Socialist Paradise., even though my wife and I were worth millions or dollars, I was the President of the United States of America, and we took numerous vacations and went on “fact-finding missions” at the expense of the American Taxpayers.

Of course, that could never happen HERE, could it?

Norman Matoon Thomas (1884-1968) was a six-time Presidential Candidate  representing the Socialist Party of America.  In a campaign interview in 1948, he said the following:

The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism. But under the name of ‘liberalism’ they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist program, until one day America will be a Socialist nation, without knowing how it happened.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Judicial Activism Vs. Freedom of Religion: Using Judges to Overturn the Will of the People

American ChristianityIf you had been out of the country for a while and then came back, you would think that the role of America’s Third Branch of Government, the Judiciary, had changed from ruling on the law of the land to striking down Popular Votes by American Citizens.

According to Founding Father Alexander Hamilton, in this Federalist Paper, Americans have nothing to fear from the Judiciary when they act alone. It’s when they act in concert with another Government branch, that Americans need to be afraid.

From The Federalist #78

Whoever attentively considers the different departments of power must perceive, that, in a government in which they are separated from each other, the judiciary, from the nature of its functions, will always be the least dangerous to the political rights of the Constitution; because it will be least in a capacity to annoy or injure them. The Executive not only dispenses the honors, but holds the sword of the community. The legislature not only commands the purse, but prescribes the rules by which the duties and rights of every citizen are to be regulated. The judiciary, on the contrary, has no influence over either the sword or the purse; no direction either of the strength or of the wealth of the society; and can take no active resolution whatever. It may truly be said to have neither FORCE nor WILL, but merely judgment; and must ultimately depend upon the aid of the executive arm even for the efficacy of its judgments.

This simple view of the matter suggests several important consequences. It proves incontestably, that the judiciary is beyond comparison the weakest of the three departments of power1; that it can never attack with success either of the other two; and that all possible care is requisite to enable it to defend itself against their attacks. It equally proves, that though individual oppression may now and then proceed from the courts of justice, the general liberty of the people can never be endangered from that quarter; I mean so long as the judiciary remains truly distinct from both the legislature and the Executive. For I agree, that “there is no liberty, if the power of judging be not separated from the legislative and executive powers.”2 And it proves, in the last place, that as liberty can have nothing to fear from the judiciary alone, but would have every thing to fear from its union with either of the other departments; that as all the effects of such a union must ensue from a dependence of the former on the latter, notwithstanding a nominal and apparent separation; that as, from the natural feebleness of the judiciary, it is in continual jeopardy of being overpowered, awed, or influenced by its co-ordinate branches; and that as nothing can contribute so much to its firmness and independence as permanency in office, this quality may therefore be justly regarded as an indispensable ingredient in its constitution, and, in a great measure, as the citadel of the public justice and the public security.

Do you think that Hamilton foresaw the rise of Activist Judges, whose sole purpose, working in concert with an out-of-control Administration, is to carry out the re-engineering of American Society, under the guise of “equality”?

The great American Economist and Conservative Pundit (who just happens to be Black) Dr. Thomas Sowell, wrote the following in a paper on the subject of Judicial Activism:

The claim that judicial activism is necessary to rescue us from bondage to the past– from having the writers of the Constitution “rule us from the grave”– defies both logic and history. There is no contest between the living and the dead. The contest is between those living individuals who wish to see control of change in judicial hands and those who wish to see it in other hands. There has been no argument that either statutory or constitutional laws are not to change. The only meaningful question is: Who is to change them? The reiterated emphasis on change, like the reiterated emphasis on morality, argues what is not at issue and glides over what is crucially at issue: Why are judges the authorized instrument? The original cognitive meaning of laws– constitutional or statutory– is important, not out of deference to the dead, but because that is the agreed‑upon meaning among the living, until they choose to make an open and explicit change– not have one foisted on them by the verbal sleight-of‑hand of judges.

Existing social philosophies and political alignments cannot be presupposed in discussions of long-run questions, such as constitutional interpretation. Even within the judiciary, differences in “substantive values” have been drastic over time, and by no means negligible even at a given time. The belief that a constitutional structure can be maintained while jurists with radically different visions make “substantive choices” within it seems dangerously similar to a belief that one can slide half-way down a slippery slope. The argument for judicial activism must stand or fall in general and enduring terms, not simply on whether some current political or social creed is considered so superior to competing creeds as to justify judges’ decisions in its favor. It is ultimately not a question of the relative merits of particular political or social creeds but of the long-run consequences of opening the floodgates to the generic principle of constitutional decisions based on “substantive values.” Once you have opened the floodgates, you cannot tell the water where to go.

What must be rejected is precisely the general principle that judges’ “substantive values” should govern constitutional decisions. Nor is anything fundamentally changed by saying that judges are only agents of general moral ideas, rather than their own personal inclinations. If the Constitution does not enact Herbert Spencer’s “”A Theory of Justice”.

As any American with half a brain has figured out by now, the purpose of using the Judiciary to overthrow the will of the American People who voted against “Gay Marriage” is to reinforce the notion that the average American is prejudicial is nature and, that allowing homosexuals the use of the word “marriage” is a matter of “Civil Rights”, not social re-engineering brought about by the desire of the Gay Mafia and their Progressive Supporters to redefine the American Family Unit. 

Because the overwhelming majority of Americans still profess a belief in Jesus Christ as their personal Savior, there was no way that Gay Activists would ever win a popular vote in the majority of American States, and fulfill their quest to have same-sex relationships classified as normal through the use of the word signifying the Holy Sacrament of Marriage.

Therefore, through the usurpation of the People’s will by Activist Judges, they are succeeding in realizing the overturning of popular votes against “gay marriage” in several states.

However, if I am any judge as to the reaction of average Christian Americans, they will continue to fail in their quest for “acceptance” of their sexually deviant behavior.

Christian Americans, as shown through our overwhelming support of Duck Dynasty’s Phil Robertson, are still clinging to our traditional American Faith and Values, and no Liberal Judge, backed by a Progressive (i.e., Liberal) Government will push us off of the Solid Rock on which we stand.

We’ve read The Book. We know how all of this ends.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Grammy Awards Promote Gay Marriage

gay marriageLast night, during the live Grammy Awards Program on CBS, the once-enjoyable musical awards program’s Liberal Producers decided that they would turn a musical segment into a political one.

The Hollywood Reporter has the story:

Macklemore & Ryan Lewis’ “Same Love” anthem became the theme song for 33 newlyweds during the 56th Grammy Awards on Sunday night.

The gay and straight weddings were officiated by Queen Latifah while the hit song about equality was performed by the rap duo with Madonna hitting the stage with them, along with Mary Lambert and jazz artist Trombone Shorty.

PHOTOS: Grammys 2014: Red Carpet Arrivals

“This song is not a love song for some of us but for all of us,” said Latifah as she introduced the special segment.

The mass of couples exchanged rings at the same time as the singer pronounced them wed while Madonna emerged to sing her classic “Open Your Heart.”

The Material Girl changed into a white Ralph Lauren suit for the ground-breaking performance after wearing a dramatic black tux on the carpet.

At the end of the historical television moment, Ringo Starr was overheard saying to Paul McCartney, “Let’s all renew our vows.” McCartney then shook the hands of every couple that walked by.

GLAAD President Sarah Kate Ellis celebrated the event, telling The Hollywood Reporter in an exclusive statement.

“When such a critically acclaimed and popular rap artist puts marriage equality center stage at one of the biggest events of the year, it is the latest in a long line of signs that our nation not only accepts, but celebrates the love and commitment of gay couples today,” said Ellis (who is married to Kristen Henderson of the band Antigone Rising).

“Macklemore and Ryan Lewis aren’t only talented musicians, but are setting the bar high for our allies around the country today.”

GLAAD also tweeted its support of the equal rights awareness performance earlier in the evening, saying: “Congrats to #LGBT allies @macklemore and@RyanLewis! #GRAMMYs.”

When asked by Ryan Seacrest about the groundbreaking event before the show, Madonna stumbled over her words, saying: “I was told not to say anything”.

Of course, she was. 

On Saturday, I posted a Blog titled, “If I Were a Socialist U.S. President”. One of the statements I made was

Through redefining the definition of the family unit, and eliminating Christianity from everyday American Life, I will eliminate the “backbone” of the nation…the two main barriers that will keep me from radically changing America into a socialist nation.

I also wrote,

I would preach about hope and change, but like all Marxists, I would be hoping to bring subjugation and looking to “radically change” a nation, all in the name of “Fairness and Equality”.

Obama and his one-minded collective are desperately trying to desensitize Americans regarding the Hot Button Issue of “gay marriage”. Even though, those who practice the sexually deviant behavior of homosexuality only compose around 3% of our population, those advocating defiling of the sacrament of marriage would like us to all believe that they number many,many more. And, those who rig polls for a living would like us to believe that the majority of Americans believe it is okay for homosexuals to imitate the union of a heterosexual couple.

If that were the case, 31 states would not still ban “gay Marriage”. And, “Activist Judges” would not have had to overturn the will of the people in Utah and California.

In their desperation, Liberals have even tried to rewrite God’s Word regarding Homosexuality, labeling anyone who does not agree with them, into a “Hater”.

Remember the hoopla before Christmas concerning Duck Commander Phil Robertson’s paraphrasing of the 1st Corinthians passage concerning Homosexuality?

After combative CNN commentator Ben Ferguson called out Piers Morgan attacked the topic on one of his shows. His guests were Conservative Talk show Host Ben Ferguson, Liberal Bloviator Dr. Mark Lamont HJill, and Biblical Scholar Dr. Michael Brown.

To say that things did not go well for England’s Worst Export, is an understatement.

Here’s a slightly redacted transcript:

Morgan: Let me ask you this, sir. As a Christian man, can you point to a single public utterance by Jesus Christ—the Christ in Christianity—about gay people or about a gay lifestyle? Can you name one single thing, derogatory or otherwise?

Ferguson: Go to Sodom and Gomorra for goodness sakes!

Brown: I’ll name three for your Piers. Number one, in Matthew 5, Jesus said he didn’t come to abolish the Torah but to fulfill. He takes the sexual morals of the Torah to a higher level. Number two, in Matthew 15, he says all sexual acts committed outside of marriage defile a human being. And in Matthew 19 he says marriage as God intended it is the union of one man and one woman for life.

Look, Jesus did not address wife-beating or heroin-shooting, but we don’t use that argument for silence. But in point of fact, he as a first century Jew, of course he reinforced these things. And Piers, I’d encourage you to restudy what scripture says. We should love our neighbors as our self, but that doesn’t mean we approve everything of our neighbor.

At this point, Hill interjected, arguing that there are “several problems with that interpretation.”

Hill: One, the New Testament absolutely does offer the words and the voice of Jesus, and he very explicitly does not talk about being gay. And even the scripture you cited about marriage is very different than talking about being gay…

Brown reminded Hill of Christ’s assertion that “marriage is one man and one woman,” but Hill moved on to attempt to address Brown’s statement about Christ’s reinforcement of Old Testament law.

Hill: If you’re saying he’s confirming the Old Testament, well, the Old Testament is far from clear around gay marriage or around gay acts.

Brown: Are you sure about that?

Hill: …The book of Leviticus, according to most biblical scholars, is not about being gay. If you’re talking about the story of Sodom and Gomorrah for example. It’s really about being inhospitable to neighbors, it’s about prostitution, it’s about many other things…

Brown: Hebrew scholarship is my background, I have a PhD in Semitic languages… Leviticus 18 is quite explicit: For a man to lie with a man is contrary to what God intended. The rectum is part of the disposal system. It’s not meant for sexuality. God designed a man to be with a woman. That’s pretty obvious, not hateful to say it. That’s obvious. And, really, the Hebrew scriptures are clear on this, sir.

Liberals, in their belief that they are “the smartest people in the room”, often find themselves slapped down by their own conceit.

I believe that just as Hollywood paid the price at the Box Office for trying to push movies degrading America’s Fighting Men and Women, so will the Music Industry receive a backlash from their antics last night.

And, it will be a result of them believing their own propaganda.

Until He Comes,

KJ

If I Were a Socialist U.S. President…

obamamywork

**In respectful honor and memory of the late, great Paul Harvey, an American Original, (September 4, 1918 – February 28, 2009)**

If I were a Socialist U.S. President…

I would begin to plant seeds during my Inaugural Address, concerning the disparity between the Haves and the Have-nots. In other words, I would intentionally begin to divide the nation through the use of Class Warfare.

Also, during that address I would push for a National Healthcare System, regardless of the fact that such a monstrous entity has never worked, anywhere it has been tried.

I would preach about hope and change, but like all Marxists, I would be hoping to bring subjugation and looking to “radically change” a nation, all in the name of “Fairness and Equality”.

The first thing I would do, when I took office, would be to send money around the world, to finance abortions. In this way, I would show the world that there is a new boss in the United States, who wants to radically change the Shining City on a Hill into just another country.

Next, I would push for the passage of an outrageous spending bill that would actually be a cover for paying back political favors.

I would invite the already-sycophantic Main Stream Media to come to the White House for closed-door meetings, where I would tell them to “get with the program”, if they wanted to receive any news stories from this White House at all.

I would makes speeches about how marvelous a Government-run National Healthcare  System would be, making hollow promises like,

If you like your insurance, you can keep your insurance. if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor.

all the while knowing that I was lying my hindquarters off.

Once I got my slaves in the Congress to pass this nation-changing National Healthcare Law, I would put the pedal to the metal and continuously push for other outrageous and expensive programs designed to grow the central government.

I would convince Americans that growing the central government is the only solution to a rapidly failing economy and that being unemployed and unable to provide for your family is actually a “fun-cation”.

And, while Americans were suffering through this Economic Depression, I would rant and rave about “Income Inequality”, while my family and I would take frequent vacations, costing the taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars, and throw lavish private parties at the White House, in a manner reminiscent of the old Soviet Union’s Politburo.

Realizing that the Heartland of America was still Conservative in nature, I would reach out to those Americans who believe themselves to be a mistreated minority. I would reach out to those on the fringes of society. Those Americans, who because of poor upbringing, poor education, or simply making bad decisions concerning their lives, now consider themselves deprived of the American Dream.

These people would compose about 47 percent of the population. They would be my core supporters, much like Nikolai Lenin and the Bolsheviks.

Having done a miserable job in my First Term as President, I would promise these Bolsheviks that if reelected, I would be their Santa Claus.

And, I would continue to blame my predecessor for the wretched state of the economy, even though, by now, it would be my responsibility.

Once I was reelected, there would be no stopping me. It would not matter to me what the popularity polls said, I would continue to claim that those who provide Americans with jobs were “the evil 1%” and identify their success in creating the Greatest Economic System in the World, as the “real reason” for the Economic Depression that America was in.

I would change the Moderate political stances which I “supposedly” held during the campaign for my first election as President, and show my true colors, following a political path pursuant to my true Far Left Radical Political Ideology.

I would alienate Conservative Christians living in America’s Heartland by vilifying them as “Bitter Clingers”, marginalizing them throughout my presidency.

I would push for “gay marriage” and the legalization of marijuana. Through redefining the definition of the family unit, and eliminating Christianity from everyday American Life, I will eliminate the “backbone” of the nation…the two main barriers that will keep me from radically changing America into a socialist nation. By legalizing marijuana, I will succeed in dumbing down the population and eliminating their desire to succeed as individuals, making them even more subservient and reliant on the Almighty State for their very existence, thus creating a new “Proletariat”.

Regarding Foreign Policy, I would bow in deference to other world leaders, demonstrating to them and the rest of the world, that I do not believe that the United States of America, whom I am supposed to be the Biggest Advocate for, is exceptional in any way.

I would not negotiate with America’s Enemies from a position of strength. Instead, I would blindly trust those who have sworn to kill us, even if they are on the threshold of building a nuclear bomb, simply because I identify with their Political Ideology, which masquerades as a religion.

In other words, I would embrace America’s Enemies, and alienate America’s Friends.

I would use the finest military in the world as a subject for Social Engineering Experiments, ending “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” and moving women into combat positions, even though their lack of physical strength would endanger the American Soldiers they are fighting beside.

I would remove God from the Air Force Oath and forbid soldiers from speaking about Christ to others. I would also begin Military Training which would identify Evangelicals as “Terrorists”.

While I am at it, I would allow my wife to place the military on a diet plan that is similar to the one which would already be failing in America’s Public Schools.

I would use the Judicial System, The Department of Justice, the NSA, and  Internal Revenue Service as my Palace Guard, using Activist judges to overturn the will of the people and harassing political opposition through uncalled-for Tax Audits.

I would use unmanned drones and blimps for unwarranted surveillance on American Citizens.

I would imperiously announce that if Congress did not pass the laws that I wanted them to pass, I would go around them and rule by Executive Order.

Finally, if I were a Socialist U.S. President, I would blame others for my incompetency. I would portray myself as a victim of a Capitalist System and a Racist Ideology that was still prevalent in a nation that was too narrow-minded to allow me to lead them to a Socialist Paradise.

Of course, that could never happen HERE, could it?

Norman Matoon Thomas (1884-1968) was a six-time Presidential Candidate  representing the Socialist Party of America.  In a campaign interview in 1948, he said the following:

The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism. But under the name of ‘liberalism’ they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist program, until one day America will be a Socialist nation, without knowing how it happened.

Until He Comes,

KJ

“Gay Marriage” to be Performed on Float in Rose Parade.

gay marriageNew Year’s Day, before all of the great College Football Bowl Games begin, Americans will be gathering in front of their televisions to watch an Annual American Tradition, The Tournament of Roses Parade.

This year, as with everything else, Liberals have decided to turn a parade meant for entertainment, into a political message.

LATimes.com reports that

The AIDS Healthcare Foundation’s float, “Living the Dream: Love Is the Best Protection,” was created to celebrate victories in 2013 for gay marriage advocates, including Supreme Court decisions upholding the repeal of California’s Proposition 8 and striking down a key part of the Defense of Marriage Act.

Foundation spokesman Ged Kenslea said the organization supports legally sanctioning same-sex marriage because it encourages more stable relationships among gay men as well as behavior that will prevent the spread of HIV.

“We believe that marriage saves lives,” he said.

The Pasadena Tournament of Roses has received complaints from people opposing the wedding. Some took to the organization’s Facebook page to voice their anger.

“I am a 79 year old Los Angeles native and have not missed a parade since I was about 4 years old. I have watched my LAST one due to your decision to allow this unbiblical, gay marriage to take place on one of your floats,” one man wrote.

Others expressed concern about the event not being suited for families that may tune in to watch the annual New Year’s Day celebration. The popular float parade is watched by people around the world.

“2 gay men in a ‘wedding’ ceremony is highly offensive to me and millions of Americans,” one wrote. “I can’t think of many things LESS appropriate for families and especially children. It’s completely the wrong venue for a stunt like this.”

A separate Facebook page has also been started called “Boycott the 2014 Rose Parade,” with more than 1,600 “likes” as of Sunday. A post reads: “Gay ‘marriage’ is still illegal in over 30 states. Why would the Tournament of Roses promote something illegal like that?”

In a statement released to the Los Angeles Times, the Pasadena Tournament of Roses said it is “pleased” to have the foundation participate in this year’s event.

“It is the organization’s third entry in three years tied to their mission of delivering medical services and advocacy in fighting AIDS worldwide,” says the statement.

“Like all of our sponsors and float designers, AHF continues to help make the Rose Parade a premier event through original and creative expressions that connect to parade themes — as this float does.”

Kenslea said he thinks the wedding is the perfect way to honor the parade’s theme of “Dreams Come True,” by showing the dream of lesbians and gay men realized. He said that the couple was chosen from 15 others who wanted the chance to wed on the float.

You would have thought that the Rose Parade Officials would have been paying attention during the A&E/Duck Dynasty Dust-up. Evidently, they didn’t.

Ralph E. Shaffer, a professor emeritus of history at Cal Poly Pomona, disagreed, saying the wedding is an “in your face” act that might make people angrier toward gays. Shaffer, noting there will be several kisses between LeClair and his intended, Aubrey loots, added, “The problem is going to be the wedding kiss … I don’t know what the response is going to be.” he said.

AHF President Michael Weinstein said there was no political statement intended, and protesters should respect “the law of the land”:

There are as many opinions in the world as there are people, but our motivation is to validate the love that exists between same-sex couples and what we believe is the importance of validating these relationships in terms of protecting, particularly gay men from HIV and other STDs. We think the more we promote stable, long-term relationships, the better it will be.

Tournament of Roses officials stated, “Like all of our sponsors and float designers, AHF continues to help make the Rose Parade a premier event through original and creative expressions that connect to parade themes — as this float does.”

Oh, bull. A float sponsored by Kellogg’s featuring animated birdies, made out of rose petals, singing, “Oh, What a Beautiful Morning” is an “original and creative expression”. Two men french kissing in a sham of a sacred ceremony on top of a float in the Rose Parade, while Grandma, Bubba, and little 5 year old Cindy Lou, are watching them on television in Tyler, Texas, is a POLITICAL STATEMENT.

Within the past year, Americans have watched as Activist Judges have overthrown referendums against “Gay Marriage”, which were passed in the overwhelming majority of states by popular vote, in an exercise of the will of the people.

While comparing the plight of homosexuals who wish their sexual preference to be treated as “normal” through the use of the word “marriage” to the horrible abuse which Black Americans suffered in their struggle for Civil Rights, these Activist Judges have set out to change American culture through legislative fiat in the name of “Equality”.

However, just as A&E found out, the American public has their own ideas as to what is morally right and just.

And, by making itself no longer “family viewing” for average Americans out here in the Heartland, Rose Parade Officials are shooting themselves in their own foot, in order to make a POLITICAL STATEMENT.

Until He Comes,

KJ

America’s Culture War: Of Pedophilia and “Gay” Apparel

American FreedomWhile our nation’s attention has been focused on the all-out political assault of this Administration and their Progressive Lackeys on our Healthcare, Health Insurance, and our very rights as American Citizens, the Slippery Slope which our nation has been plummeting down since the ascension of The Lightbringer to the Throne of the Regime in January of 2009, just became even steeper…if that’s possible.

According to The Washington Times,

Pedophilia is not a “sexual orientation,” and erroneous use of that phrase will be corrected soon in its new manual on mental illnesses, the American Psychiatric Association said Thursday.

The APA’s statement came in response to media inquiries, including from The Washington Times, about an uproar on the Internet that the APA had designated pedophilia as a sexual orientation in its new Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, known as DSM-5 or DSM-V.

About a week ago, a blog called NeonTommy, produced at Annenberg Digital News at the University of Southern California, said the APA had drawn a “very distinct line” between pedophilia and pedophilic disorder in its new manual.

According to the DSM-5, pedophilia “refers to a sexual orientation or profession of sexual preference devoid of consummation, whereas pedophilic disorder is defined as a compulsion and is used in reference to individuals who act on their sexuality,” NeonTommy wrote.

The item was picked up and circulated on countless other Internet sites. Many bloggers bashed the APA for “mainstreaming” deviance and capitulating to pro-pedophile groups. Others tied it to gay issues — one wag wrote that it was “time to change the LGBT letterhead to LGBT&P.”

The APA said in its statement that “‘sexual orientation’ is not a term used in the diagnostic criteria for pedophilic disorder and its use in the DSM-5 text discussion is an error and should read ‘sexual interest.’”

“In fact, APA considers pedophilic disorder a ‘paraphilia,’ not a ‘sexual orientation.’ This error will be corrected in the electronic version of DSM-5 and the next printing of the manual,” the organization said. The error appeared on page 698, said a spokeswoman.

It added: “APA stands firmly behind efforts to criminally prosecute those who sexually abuse and exploit children and adolescents. We also support continued efforts to develop treatments for those with pedophilic disorder with the goal of preventing future acts of abuse.”

The DSM-5 was released in May. For several years prior to that, major discussions were held about the pedophilia category.

In the end, however, only a small change was made: “Pedophilia” was changed to “pedophilic disorder,” to conform to other disorders in chapter on paraphilias, the APA said. The “diagnostic criteria essentially remained the same as in DSM-IV-TR,” it added.

To be diagnosed with a paraphilic disorder, DSM-5 requires that people “feel personal distress” about their atypical sexual interest or have a desire or behavior that harms another person or involves “unwilling” persons or “persons unable to give legal consent.”

Whoa. Hold on there, Slim.

Now, I realize that I’m just an ignorant old soon-to-be 55-year-old white male with a Bachelor’s Degree, including 3 Psychology and 2 Sociology courses, but…if performing unspeakable acts on innocent children is all you ever think about, THAT IS YOUR SEXUAL ORIENTATION. 

Calling it an “Interest” is parsing words in the self-serving interest of notoriety, Political Correctness, and the continued normalization of Deviant Behavior.

This is, in reality, nothing new. When I was in college, in the late 1970s, in my”Introduction to Sociology Textbook”, in the chapter on Deviant Behavior, both Homosexuality and Pedophilia were classified as such.

Then as time went on, and more and more practitioners of the ‘alternate lifestyle, got their doctorates in Sociology and Psychology, Homosexuality was re-classified as a “Sexual Preference”, and not a “Deviant Behavior”.

This trend of acceptance has continued, until now, you have a movement by Homosexual Activists and their Progressive  Accomplices to re-define the word “marriage”, which has been defined as the intimate spiritual, familial bond between a man and a woman, since Biblical Times. And, even though the overwhelming majority of states in our country have voted against “Gay Marriage”, the movement for re-definition continued, aided by self-serving politicians and activist judges.

Everyone is so “gay” sensitive, that Hallmark has even changed the lyrics to a classic Christmas Carol, afraid that Americans won’t buy a silly little ornament, as Fox News reports…

 The ornament, which was reportedly designed by Matt Johnson, a keepsake artist, was described on Hallmark’s website as an ornament that can “make your tree’s outfit complete.”

“With its catchy phrase, Don we now our FUN apparel! everyone will be in on the joke,” the website’s description reads.

 The company, which is more known for apolitical greeting cards wishing a boss a happy retirement, issued a statement to media outlets explaining the history of the song dating back to the 1880s, a time “when “gay” meant festive or merry.”

“Today it has multiple meanings, which we thought could leave our intent open to misinterpretation,” the statement said. “The trend of wearing festively decorated Christmas sweaters to parties is all about fun, and this ornament is intended to play into that, so the planning team decided to say what we meant: “fun.” That’s the spirit we intended and the spirit in which we hope ornament buyers will take it.”

In reality, fewer than 5 % of Americans are Homosexual. If you believe the pundits, or what you see every night on television, you may have thought that the number was much higher than that.

The name of the game is perception.

If a person thinks that a group has a huge number of participants, than the more likely than person is to think that the groups activities or, more presence is not a deviation, but rather, normal and thriving.

Plus, when you remove society’s labels and categorization of an activity, as the APA did with pedophiles, substituting a kinder and gentler description of the “condition” which causes their morally abhorrent “activities”, you make the violation of innocent children “more acceptable” tin popular culture.

Remember Roman Polanski and his supporters, like Whoopi Goldberg?

It wasn’t “rape-rape”.

Now, you may think that I have gone off my meds this morning, but, I believe that the “Slippery Slope” argument, which Reagan Conservatives, such as this ol’ Cracka, have been making, regarding “Gay Marriage” leading to the erosion of American Culture and the acceptance of other forms of Deviant Behavior, has been, if not proven, strengthened by the actions of the APA, this week.

Keep praying, Americans.

For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the cosmic powers over this present darkness, against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly places. (Ephesians 6:12 (ESV)

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

The War Against Christianity: The “Gay Mafia” Vs. Elaine Photography

gay marriageSuppose that you are a small business owner, who just happens to be a Christian, and you own a doughnut shop. Through your door walks a young man, positively reeking of marijuana usage, cursing at the top of his voice to someone on the other end of his cell phone, with his pants “saggin'” half-way down his rear,showing his boxers to everyone who sees him..

Do you have the right to to refuse service and ask him to leave?

Most Americans would say that you do.

In fact, according to RasmussenReports.com, the overwhelming majority of Americans believe that free exercise of religion extends to how you run your business.

For example, if a Christian wedding photographer who has deeply held religious beliefs opposing same-sex marriage is asked to work a same-sex wedding ceremony, 85% of American Adults believe he has the right to say no. A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that only eight percent (8%) disagree even as the courts are hearing such challenges.

That being said, have you heard about what happened in New Mexico?

Last Thursday, the Supreme Court of New Mexico decided that a small business, Elaine Photography,  violated the New Mexico Human Rights Act (NMHRA).

The judge ruled that their refusal to phtograph the “gay wedding” of  Vanessa Willockand her “partner”, violated the act, which “prohibits a public accommodation from refusing to offer its services to a person based on that person’s sexual orientation”.

According to Justice Richard C. Bosson, the case “provokes reflection on what this nation is all about, its promise of fairness, liberty, equality of opportunity, and justice.” He also said that the case “teaches that at some point in our lives all of us must compromise, if only a little, to accommodate the contrasting values of others. A multicultural, pluralistic society, one of our nation’s strengths, demands no less.”

Bosson wrote in his ruling that the owners of Elane Photography, Jonathan and Elaine Huguenin, “are free to think, to say, to believe, as they wish” Nevertheless, in the “world of the marketplace, of commerce, of public accommodation, the Huguenins have to channel their conduct, not their beliefs, so as to leave space for other Americans who believe something different.”

Doing so, Bosson wrote, is “the price of citizenship.”

The ruling upholds a grant of summary judgment for Willock against Elane Photography by New Mexico’s Second Judicial District Court and holds that Elane Photography’s free speech rights were not violated. The case was first decided by the New Mexico Human Rights Council, which ordered Elane Photography to pay Willock $6,637.94 in attorneys fees and costs. Elane Photography appealed to the Second Judicial District Court based on the court’s original and appellate jurisdiction.

The Hugueins were made an example of because they stood strong in their Christian Faith. They believe that a marriage consists of one man and one woman.

Guess what? New Mexico law agrees: it has no legal same-sex civil unions or same-sex marriages.

And, you know the kicker? There were other photographers in the Albuquerque area who could have photographed the ceremony.

The Free Exercise Clause,found in the First Amendment to the Constitution, protects our absolute freedom of belief. According to our Founding Fathers, religious liberty is a natural right.

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.

The First Amendment ensures that all people have an equality of rights to practice their faith. Although it was originally written to apply to actions of the federal government, it was incorporated into state governments through the Fourteenth Amendment by the Supreme Court in the case Cantwell v. Connecticut (1940).

The Free Exercise Clause was a direct descendant of the English Bill of Rights, the Virginia Declaration of Rights, and the Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom. The English Bill of Rights expanded religious freedom for Protestants who did not attend the Church of England, but not for Catholics or non-Christians. The Virginia Declaration of Rights held that “all men are equally entitled to the free exercise of religion.” The Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom asserts that “all men shall be free to profess, and by argument to maintain, their opinion in matters of religion.

The First Amendment also guarantees all Americans the right to Freedom of Association.

All Americans, including us Christians, may peacefully assemble with whomever we choose, whether it’s in a church building on a Sunday morning, or a church-sponsored small group in someone’s home on a Tuesday night.

As Americans, we have the right to practice our faith 7 days a week, at home, in our community, and in our business.

This activist judge, as in the case of the homosexual activist judge in California overruling the vote of the people, who had voted against allowing gay marriage in that state, overstepped his bounds, trumping the Free Exercise Clause for the sake of Popular Culture and his own Political Ideology.

Remember when the whole gay marriage brouhaha started being the cause celebre for Gay Activists and their Liberal supporters? They went around assuring us that they would not force anyone, whether small businesses or churches, to be involved in the organization or performance of their phony “marriage” rituals.

They lied.

As I, and others have insisted all along, this is a political movement, spearheaded by a political ideology, whose express purpose is the remake the fabric of our society. They wish to make what was once considered deviant behavior by both popular culture and academia, by the use of the word “marriage”, “normal”.

Ask the Roman Empire how that worked out for them.

Heck, ask Modern European Nations, who have put God in a box in their “enlightened” societies, how things are working out for them, as a Modern version of the Barbarian Hordes who destroyed Rome, radical Muslims, install Sharia Law in their countries,

American churches and their leadership will be sued, next, and forced to perform gay marriage rituals or pay an exorbitant fine. 

Don’t be surprised if a ruling comes down from the Halls of Power that preaching against Homosexuality as a sin, becomes a “Hate Crime”.

America’s free-fall down the oft-referenced “Slippery Slope” of Relative Morality and Situation Ethics has kicked into high gear.

Caligula’s Horse approves.

Until He Comes,

KJ

An American Snapshot: The End of Shame

facepalm1Sitting here at my computer, I have been attempting to put all of the events which have been happening in America in the past week into some logical semblance of order, and attach a nice pink bow on them ( After the Supreme Court Ruling last Wednesday, can I say that?) in an attempt to make some sense out of them.

All the factors I have considered, lead me to one conclusion: Our Society has lost its sense of shame.

Please allow me to let you in on my thought process and perhaps you will agree with me.

Let us start with our nation’s Chief Executive Officer, Barack Hussein Obama. Scooter, Mooch, and the girls are currently in the middle of a whirlwind tour of Africa and the subcontinent. (I don’t know what that means, but, Cab Calloway said it while announcing the Blues Brothers in the first movie, and I thought it was kind of cool.) During the trip, paid for by us American Taxpayers, Obama is being greeted by the local populace (I was going to say native populace, but, I did not want to be accused of being another Paul Deen.) wearing “Welcome Home, Obama” t-shirts! (I couldn’t have said it better, myself.)

While over there, our Petulant President, during a press conference with the President of Senegal, said that African Nations needed to lighten up and embrace homosexuality. Needless to say, Obama’s proclamation was received about as well as Rosanne Barr at a Southern Gospel Festival. His Main Stream Media Minions are referring to the event as a “slip” and a “teachable moment”.

I call it shameless.

While we are one the subject of the “alternative lifestyle”, average Americans are still shaking our heads over the decision of the Supreme Court to take away the sovereignty of California Voters to decide whether of not to allow Homosexuals to “marry” in their state. The Supremes (Without Diana Ross) decided to “Stop in the Name of Love”, and uphold the decision of a Homosexual Appeals Court Judge. (No bias there, huh?)

Liberals called the ruling the greatest thing since sliced bread and the opening of a doorway, leading to the “normalization” of homosexuality in America. I call it the possible beginning of the Fall of the Greatest Country on the Face of the Earth. Shameless.

Meanwhile, over in the Senate, the Gang of Eight’s “Immigration Reform” Bill (Say it with me, boys and girls, AMNESTY) passed through the Senate in a landslide, with 14 Vichy Republicans, siding with their fellow DC Country Club Members. All those goobers called it “Bi-partisanship”.

I called it shameless.

Also, this week, the murder trial of George Zimmerman began. After the opening statements, the Prosecution called their “star” witness, a Miss Rachel Jeantel. She turned out to be a young woman,whose life consists of smoking pot, getting drunk, massacring the Queen’s English, and sending out vulgar tweets, blaming us white crackers for everything from her sorry state of existence to painful rectal itch.

While on the stand, Jeantel was caught in lies several times, insisting that “cracker” was not a racial term. (Right. And, 50 cent is a musical genius.) It was also learned, while she was giving her testimony, that Jeantel, a High School Senior, did not write a letter that she was supposed to have. In fact, the High School Senior cannot read or write Cursive….and can barely read or write anything at all. When she finished her testimony, she took her seat beside Trayvon Martin’s mother, who hired a lawyer after his death, to explore the “merchandising” of her dead son. (Hoodies! Get your Hoodies, here!)

It is very evident that Zimmerman is being railroaded. A witness on Friday collaborated Zimmerman’s account of the event, stating that Zimmerman was pinned to the sidewalk by Trayvon, who was “hitting him in the face with martial-art type blows”. (That doesn’t sound like the innocent 12 year old , whose picture has been circulated by his family. That sound more like the 17 year old thug, who had been suspended from school 30 times for smoking dope and breaking in lockers with the tolls he kept in his school bag.)

The reason for the screw job that Zimmerman is going through, is the initial protests lead by the Justice Brothers, Revs. Jackson and Sharpton, who never saw a camera that they didn’t like. The Prosecutor overreacted, and over-charged Zimmerman. Now, the Prosecution is trapped into going through with the Dog and Pony Show, because a certain element of Miami’s Black Population has threatened to riot, if Zimmerman is acquitted.

The Liberals are attempting to justify this farce by claiming that it is recuppence for past injustices.

I call it shameless.

Finally, there’s the crucifixion of Paula Deen, as “Interview With a Vampire” Novelist Anne Rice referred to the whole Bloody mess.

Paula Deen, successful chef, entrepreneur, and Food Network Star, is being sued, along with her brother, by a former employee of her restaurant in Savannah, GA. Under oath, she admitted that she had used the “N” word, before….a long time ago. She also admitted that she once thought that the idea of having an Old South, Antebellum Wedding, with Black waiters dressed in black tuxedos with white shirts, like the house “slaves” wore during that era, would look pretty cool.

I’m shocked. Shocked, I tell you. (If I were to remark that those guys would look awfully spiffy in Black Tie and Tails, would that make me a RAAACIIIST?)

Hollywood must feel the same way, because I recently saw Garrett Morris, of Saturday Night Live fame [“Our top story tonight…”], playing a butler in a episode of Psych, dressed in the exact same manner as Ms. Deen described.

Anyway, now every corporation she is currently involved with, from Chinese-held Smithfield Hams to Harrah’s Casinos, have dropped her as if she was George Wallace (before his change of heart) re-incarnated.

Either she is actually the Wicked Witch of the West, away from the public eye, or all these corporations have grievously overreacted, so as to not have their profit margins affected by their association with her.

(Since Ms. Deen is a Democrat, who voted for Barack Hussein Obama twice (mm mmm mmmm), I would probably go with the second option.)

I am sure they call it “good business”.

I call it shameless.

Evidently, the majority of Americans agree with me, because Ms. Deen’s cookbooks occupy the top spot on amazon.com.

What has happened to America? 

Why are all of these jaw-dropping events, which would have been unthinkable a few decades ago, suddenly coalescing into a hurricane of senses – overwhelming shamelessness?

Mark Twain once said,

Man is the only animal that blushes – or needs to.

Perhaps, in this society of vanishing morals and situational ethics, perhaps we have lost our ability to feel shame and therefore, to blush.

We need to figure out a way to regain that ability, or, our nation will become a footnote in history.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Gay Wednesday, or, How to Change the Fabric of American Society in One Fell Swoop

gay marriageIn my post yesterday, I warned that what the Supreme Court was about to do, could possibly change the fabric of our society.

God in Heaven, I hate it when I’m right.

The robed ones yesterday destroyed the uniqueness of the marriage bed between man and wife, and the sovereignty of a state’s voters, all in one fell swoop.

First, the Court ruled that the part of the Defense of Marriage Act denying equal benefits to homosexual “married” couples was “unconstitutional” in their eyes, so they struck down that codicil.

Now, homosexual couples who have been “married” in states which allow that doppelganger of a “sacrament”, are entitled to all the governmental benefits that normal married couples enjoy.

In the second ruling of the day, the highest court in the land ruled that the ruling by a Gay Appeals Judge, which negated the results of a popular vote on the  California Referendum on Proposition 8, would stand, basically pulling a Pontius Pilate, killing the sovereignty of Californians to decide their own fate, in regards as to whether or not to allow Homosexual Marriage in their state.

You see, the good citizens of California stood up on their hind legs and voted against allowing homosexuals to imitate the oldest sacred ceremony known to mankind.

And, Lord knows , we can’t allow Americans to decide for themselves, can we? If you think I’m joking, remember Chief Justice “Benedict Arnold” Roberts’ ruling on Obamacare?

Of course, the Prevaricator-in-Chief thought that yesterday was the most wonderful thing  he had heard, since his next door neighborhood Frank Marshall Davis used to regale him with tales of his pedophiliac conquests.

In fact, he called a homosexual couple to congratulate them on live TV.

Funny…just 18 months ago, ol’ Scooter was saying,

I believe marriage is between a man and a woman. I am not in favor of gay marriage. But when you start playing around with constitutions, just to prohibit somebody who cares about another person, it just seems to me that’s not what America’s about. Usually, our constitutions expand liberties, they don’t contract them.

So, was Obama lying then, or is he lying now?

Yes.

Now, there are those who will argue that these are just small steps and what happened yesterday is no big hairy deal. There are also those who believe that yesterday was the greatest day in the history of the world.

Side note: It wasn’t. That day will be when we hear a trumpet sound above us…and, it won’t be Doc Severenson. But, I digress…

Normalization of this deviant behavior has already happened to our Brightest and Best, with the overturning of DADT.

Just the other day, the four-star idiots in the Pentagon declared that our country is now safer with openly gay members in our military.

Safer from what? Inter-service pregnancies?

Now that homosexual activists know that they can overturn the will of the people of a state, if the Liberal State Government does not support their citizens in a legal defense of sovereignty, all bets are off.

Like Gov. Moonbean (Jerry Brown) of California, all it takes is one Liberal weasel of a State Governor to overturn an anti-Homosexual Marriage Vote in any state in the Union, if the state’s gay activists are willing to take their action all the way to the Supreme Court, if necessary.

Here is another thing that makes me wanna hurl, cry, and bang my head against the wall, all at the same time:

The National Cathedral in Washington, DC rang its steeple bells in celebration when the rulings were announced.

What part of God’s Word do they believe supports Homosexual Marriage? What book of the Bible is that found? 1st Babylonians?

Genesis 2:21-25 states:

So the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and while he slept took one of his ribs and closed up its place with flesh. And the rib that the LORD God had taken from the man he made into a woman and brought her to the man. Then the man said, “This at last is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man.” Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh.

We’ve come a long way, baby…and, it appears that our country is beginning a descent down the ol’ porcelain receptacle, a societal voyage not unlike the one Ancient Rome experienced.

In Paul’s letter to the Romans, Chapter 1, Verses 24-27, he writes, concerning the Roman Empire’s depravity,

24 Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves, 25 because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever! Amen.26 For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; 27 and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error.

That is where we stand, Americans.

Grab those who matter to you and hold them tight. I am afraid that there are dark times ahead…and we are well on the way to finding out why America is not mentioned in the Book of  Revelation.

Until He comes,

KJ

Do Americans Fear Our Own Government?

obamabiggovernmentIn America of 2013, what do you think that Americans fear the most? Our enemies from without or within?

One might think, with the New Boston Massacre fresh on their minds, that Americans would fear the uncertainty of where the terrorists would attack next.

Unfortunately, “one” would be wrong.

A Fox News survey polling a random national sample of 619 registered voters the day after the bombing found despite the tragic event, those interviewed responded very differently than following 9/11.

For the first time since a similar question was asked in May 2001, more Americans answered “no” to the question, “Would you be willing to give up some of your personal freedom in order to reduce the threat of terrorism?”

Of those surveyed on April 16, 2013, 45 percent answered no to the question, compared to 43 percent answering yes.

In May 2001, before 9/11, the balance was similar, with 40 percent answering no to 33 percent answering yes.

But following the terrorist attacks of 9/11, the numbers flipped dramatically, to 71 percent agreeing to sacrifice personal freedom to reduce the threat of terrorism.

Subsequent polls asking the same question in 2002, 2005 and 2006 found Americans consistently willing to give up freedom in exchange for security. Yet the numbers were declining from 71 percent following 9/11 to only 54 percent by May 2006.

Now, it would seem, the famous quote widely attributed to Benjamin Franklin – “They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety” – is holding more sway with Americans than it has in over a dozen years.

A similar poll sampling 588 adults, conducted on April 17 and 18 for the Washington Post, also discovered the change in attitude.

“Which worries you more,” the Post asked, “that the government will not go far enough to investigate terrorism because of concerns about constitutional rights, or that it will go too far in compromising constitutional rights in order to investigate terrorism?”

The poll found 48 percent of respondents worry the government will go too far, compared to 41 percent who worry it won’t go far enough.

And similar to the Fox News poll, the Post found the worry to be a fresh development, as only 44 percent worried the government would go too far in January 2006 and only 27 percent worried the government would go too far in January 2010.

Ronald Reagan once famously said,

The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, ‘I’m from the government and I’m here to help.’

Ronaldus Magnus was a prophet.

On October 23rd of last year. Rep. Eric Cantor issued his Majority Leader’s Report, in which he wrote…

There is no excuse for this continuous disregard of legislative authority and the Constitutionally-required separation of powers. In some instances, President Obama attempted to garner legislative authority, failed and then acted unilaterally in defiance. In other instances, the President never even sought to find consensus and instead ignored Congress and its authority from the outset. In speeches, the President has proudly acknowledged that he has acted without Congress, contending that he has no other alternative.

This is no way to govern. The President has set a precedent that even his supporters should find troubling. After all, what would now prevent a subsequent President, with opposite policy predilections, from bypassing the checks on his own authority and enacting his own policies in this same manner? The Founding Fathers wisely gave the President many powers, but making law was not one of them. They understood that laws should not be made by one individual acting alone, but rather through elected representatives working to achieve consensus.

House Republicans have acted to prevent and overturn the President’s harmful actions in order to return economic growth, opportunity and certainty to the American people and American job creators. However, the majority of the bills the House has passed are sitting idly in the Democrat-led Senate, without any action on the part of Democratic Leader Harry Reid or President Obama.

Throughout our nation’s history, presidents have sought common ground and achieved legislative success with opposing party leaders. Many of the laws circumvented in this report were achieved in that manner. Congressional authority must not be disregarded to suit political interests, create unpopular regulations and to avoid the hard work of bipartisan negotiation that has been a hallmark of our Republic since its inception.

Little did Rep. Cantor know that Obama was just getting started.

Just as average Americans feared, after re-election Obama has put “the pedal to the metal” in his pursuit of  his mission to “radically change” the greatest country on the face of the Earth.

Just look at the issues he been attempting to push down the our throats: Gun Confiscation, Homosexual Marriage, and Amnesty, or, as the Administration and all their Liberal allies euphemistically refer to these issues: Gun Control, Gay Marriage, and Immigration Reform.

And, it does not appear that Obama is going to take “NO” for an answer.

Just yesterday, Sen. Joe Manchin told Chris Wallace on Fox News Sunday that he and the rest of the Liberals and RINOs (but, I repeat myself) in the Senate are going to continue in their efforts to make it possible for this Administration to confiscate law-abiding Americans guns, even though their most recent attempt failed miserably.

Look at Homosexual Marriage. This summer the Supreme Court will have to make a ruling on it, even though 39 states have already voted against allowing it, including California, whose vote was overruled by a Homosexual Judge.

No “Judicial Activism” there, huh?

Finally, as far as the Gang of Eight, including the naive Sen. Mario Rubio’s, efforts at “Immigration Reform” are concerned, all the country, except, evidently him, knows that it is nothing but a ploy to create 33 million new Democratic Voters.

It is not surprising then, that these polls show that Americans are more afraid of our own government than we are of any external threat that we face in today’s dangerous and oft-times confusing world.

Americans, even after everything we’ve gone through, since Reagan was President, still know the difference between public servants and hack politicians, between freedom and oppression, and between right and wrong.

I believe that the strength of our nation, lies not at 1600 Pennsylvania, Avenue in Washington, DC, nor up on Capitol Hill.

Ronald Reagan said it best: 

Above all, we must realize that no arsenal, or no weapon in the arsenals of the world, is so formidable as the will and moral courage of free men and women. It is a weapon our adversaries in today’s world do not have.

That applies to all of those who seek to take away our FREEDOM…foreign or domestic.

Until He Comes,

KJ