Tag: Obama

The most divisive president in U.S. History.

Sequestration? What Sequestration? Obama Gives OUR Money to Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood.

On By kingsjesterIn Politics1 Comment

michelleobama2The Sequester has kicked in and Obama and his minions are still whining about how badly Sequestration with hurt our country. Evidently, great humanitarian that Obama is, he does not want to see his friends in Egyptian’s Musalim Brotherhood “hurting” as bad as we are.

U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry on Sunday rewarded Egypt for President Mohammed Morsi’s pledges of political and economic reforms by releasing $250 million in American aid to support the country’s “future as a democracy.”

Yet Kerry also served notice that the Obama administration will keep close watch on how Morsi, who came to power in June as Egypt’s first freely elected president, honors his commitment and that additional U.S. assistance would depend on it.

“The path to that future has clearly been difficult and much work remains,” Kerry said in a statement after wrapping up two days of meetings in Egypt, a deeply divided country in the wake of the revolution that ousted longtime President Hosni Mubarak.

Egypt is trying to meet conditions to close on a $4.8 billion loan package from the International Monetary Fund. An agreement would unlock more of the $1 billion in U.S. assistance promised by President Barack Obama last year and set to begin flowing with Kerry’s announcement.

“The United States can and wants to do more,” Kerry said. “Reaching an agreement with the IMF will require further effort on the part of the Egyptian government and broad support for reform by all Egyptians. When Egypt takes the difficult steps to strengthen its economy and build political unity and justice, we will work with our Congress at home on additional support.”

Kerry cited Egypt’s “extreme needs” and Morsi’s “assurances that he plans to complete the IMF process” when he told the president that the U.S. would provide $190 million of a long-term $450 million pledge “in a good-faith effort to spur reform and help the Egyptian people at this difficult time.” The release of the rest of the $450 million and the other $550 million tranche of the $1 billion that Obama announced will be tied to successful reforms, officials said.

Separately, the top U.S. diplomat announced $60 million for a new fund for “direct support of key engines of democratic change,” including Egypt’s entrepreneurs and its young people. Kerry held out the prospect of U.S. assistance to this fund climbing to $300 million over time.

Recapping his meetings with political figures, business leaders and representatives of outside groups, Kerry said he heard of their “deep concern about the political course of their country, the need to strengthen human rights protections, justice and the rule of law, and their fundamental anxiety about the economic future of Egypt.”

Those issues came up in “a very candid and constructive manner” during Kerry’s talks with Morsi.

“It is clear that more hard work and compromise will be required to restore unity, political stability and economic health to Egypt,” Kerry said.Ever since November 22nd, when President Morsi issued a declaration that granted him broad powers above the reach of any court, Egypt has become increasingly tense and politically fractured. After Morsi’s declaration, a Brotherhood-dominated constituent assembly rushed to finish a draft of a new constitution. More than a quarter of the assembly members resigned in protest, and there were clear violations of protocol, but the document was rammed through in a sixteen-hour voting session. Despite months of work, some articles were introduced only in that final session. The result is a slippery foundation for the future: a number of basic rights—including freedom of the press, due process for justice, and equality for women and minorities—aren’t adequately protected.

We’ve already seen just how unstable the Muslim Brotherhood-lead Egyptian Government is. On December 24th, 2012, the New Yorker Magazine reported that

…Ever since November 22nd, when President Morsi issued a declaration that granted him broad powers above the reach of any court, Egypt has become increasingly tense and politically fractured. After Morsi’s declaration, a Brotherhood-dominated constituent assembly rushed to finish a draft of a new constitution. More than a quarter of the assembly members resigned in protest, and there were clear violations of protocol, but the document was rammed through in a sixteen-hour voting session. Despite months of work, some articles were introduced only in that final session. The result is a slippery foundation for the future: a number of basic rights—including freedom of the press, due process for justice, and equality for women and minorities—aren’t adequately protected.

But the most revealing moment of the crisis occurred a week and a half ago. With protesters camped outside the Presidential Palace, in Cairo, Brotherhood members led a group of men who attacked peaceful demonstrators and tore down their tents. The violence kicked off an evening of escalating counterattacks; in the end, nine people died and more than a thousand were injured, with both sides sustaining heavy casualties. Some protesters, women among them, were detained and tortured by civilian groups that included members of the Brotherhood. Morsi, in a clumsy and dishonest speech to the nation, blamed it all on “thugs” and a “fifth column” organized by the remnants of Hosni Mubarak’s regime. But there was no question who had started the fighting. It was the first clearly documented case of political violence in more than fifty years of Muslim Brotherhood activity in Egypt.

Nonviolence has always been a point of pride for the organization. Some of its offshoot groups, like Hamas, have engaged in terrorism, but the Brotherhood never endorsed acts of violence in Egypt, despite decades of oppression under Mubarak that included the imprisonment of most of its leaders. That restraint, however, like the talk of coöperation, seems to have evaporated with the first taste of power. Sometimes an organization is nonviolent on principle, and sometimes it is nonviolent simply because it finds itself in a position of weakness.

For many Egyptians, it’s been a depressing month. The military seems to be aligned with Morsi, at least for the moment, and the country lacks a strong and coherent political alternative to the Brotherhood. Nevertheless, there are some reasons for optimism. The public response has been impressive, with tens of thousands of peaceful protesters surrounding the palace on many nights. These crowds are largely middle class, but they comprise people from all walks of life, including many who identify themselves as former supporters of Morsi. There are more women than usual. And expectations have changed since the beginning of the revolution. For almost two years, the media have operated with a freedom that never existed under Mubarak, and Egypt has held essentially fair elections for both parliament and the Presidency. Such progress remains fragile, but at least certain demands are being established.

Meanwhile, the Brotherhood has failed to evolve in the wake of the revolution. Traditionally, the organization’s strengths have been local religious training and charity work, which have made it effective at mobilizing grassroots support for elections. But for decades it was banned from full participation in Egypt’s government, so it has never been tested in the more subtle and complicated aspects of national politics. The leadership is dominated by people from technical fields: of the eighteen members of the Brotherhood’s Guidance Bureau, fifteen are doctors, engineers, or scientists. Their careers may not have taught them the arts of negotiation and compromise, and Morsi, an engineer by training, has shown no real flexibility in response to the unfolding crisis. Eight of his advisers and aides have resigned in the past three weeks. From the outside, it’s hard to distinguish between calculation and incompetence. On Sunday evening, the government suddenly announced major tax increases for a wide variety of goods, including gasoline, electricity, cooking oil, cigarettes, and alcohol—hardly a savvy move in a country with a ravaged economy and an ongoing political crisis. Later that night, after the decree had inspired a mad rush on Cairo liquor stores, Morsi cancelled it with a message posted on his Facebook page at 2:13 a.m.

The Brotherhood has “a huge ability to withstand negotiations that never reach anything,” Gaber Gad Nassar, one of the most prominent members who quit the constituent assembly, said last week. Nassar is a professor of constitutional law at Cairo University, and his analysis could be seen as either deeply pessimistic or perversely optimistic, depending on the tone of your inshallah. “They are extremely keen to take over power and use it,” he said. “However, the biggest problem they face is the lack of talent qualified to do that.” Critics have always made this point—that the worst thing that could happen to the Brotherhood might be a rise to power, because then their weaknesses would be exposed. But this is small consolation in Cairo. The world is full of bad regimes that survive just because they hurt others more than they hurt themselves. ♦

This Administration is having a hissy fit, claiming that they are not able to adequately fund our own government, while at the same time, they are giving money to an organization which is the Godfather of Muslim Terrorists Groups and hates our nation with an unholy passion.

Are Obama, Secretary of State Kerry, and the rest of the idiots in this administration tone deaf or dangerously stupid?

I vote for tone deaf and dangerously stupid. God help us.

Until He comes,

KJ

The Sequestration Apocalypse is Upon Us! We’re Doomed! …Or Something…

On By kingsjesterIn Politics4 Comments

chickenlittleToday is the day when the world as we know it is supposed to end, according to Obama and his minions.

The Washington Times reported yesterday that

The law mandating the so-called sequester cuts requires the president to sign an order for the across-the-board spending reductions to begin. White House press secretary Jay Carney said unless the parties reach a deal, Mr. Obama would sign such an order sometime before midnight.

“11:59 and 59 seconds, because he’s ever hopeful,” Mr. Carney joked.

The likelihood of the sequester cuts taking effect grew Thursday as both sides repeated their intractable negotiating positions. The White House said it would not accept spending cuts without revenue increases from eliminating certain tax breaks. Republican leaders said they will not agree to raising more tax revenue, and called on the administration to commit to real spending cuts.SEE RELATED: Looking for budget cuts? GOP suggests checking out Obamacare

“I’m happy to work with the president,” said Mr. Boehner, Ohio Republican. “But the House has done its job.”

The House passed two measures last year that would have replaced the sequester, for example, by sparing the Defense Department from cuts and instead targeting programs such as food stamps. Senate Democrats refused to consider the measures.

Senate Republicans failed in an attempt Thursday to approve a measure that would have given Mr. Obama more discretion in how to impose the cuts. The White House said it would have vetoed the plan.

“No amount of flexibility changes the fact that these severe cuts threaten thousands of middle-class jobs and slash vital services for children, seniors and our troops and military families,” Mr. Carney said.

Mr. Obama is seeking as much as $580 billion in new tax revenue by closing loopholes for mostly wealthy individuals and ending tax breaks for oil companies and others.

Just who is responsible for Sequestration?

“The sequester is not something that I’ve proposed. It is something that Congress has proposed.”

— President Obama, in the third presidential debate, Oct. 22, 2012

The president seems to have a selective memory. Per The Washington Post:

The battle over raising the debt ceiling consumed Washington in the summer of 2011, with Republicans refusing to agree to raise it unless spending was cut by an equivalent amount. Obama pressed but failed to get an agreement on raising revenue as part of the package.Woodward’s book details the efforts to come up with an enforcement mechanism that would make sure the cuts took place — and virtually every mention shows this was a White House gambit.

Here is a short summary of how it went down:

The White House proposed the idea of a compulsory trigger, with Sperling calling it an “automatic sequester,” though initially it was to include tax revenue, not just spending cuts. Boehner was “nervous” about using it as a budget tool.

Once tax increases were off the table, the White House staff came up with a sequestration plan that only had spending cuts and sold Harry Reid on the idea.

This is the third reference to the White House putting together the plan for sequester. Granted, they are using language from a congressional law from a quarter-century earlier, but that seems a thin reed on which to say this came from Congress. In fact, Lew had been a policy advisor to then House Speaker Tip O’Neill from 1979 to 1987, and so was familiar with the law.

Republicans agreed to the White House proposal for a sequester.

Republicans had to work through the night to understand the White House proposal.

Of course, the fact that Obama actually proposed the sequester, is the reason they are attacking Bob Woodward.  Obama, his administration, and the sycophantic Left want that fact buried as deeply as possible.

After reading this, is there any doubt that the most transparent Administration in American History has a believability problem, per foxnews.com?

Earlier this month President Barack Obama praised his administration as “the most transparent administration in history.”

American voters disagree.

A new Fox News poll finds that 37 percent of voters think the Obama administration is less open and transparent than previous administrations, and another 35 percent say it is about as transparent as others.

Twenty-six percent agree President Obama has met a 2008 presidential campaign commitment to openness and that his administration is more transparent than others.

The issue rose to the surface again last week when the White House press corps was shut out from watching President Obama play golf with Tiger Woods. Prior to that reporters had been questioning the openness of the administration on weightier issues, such as the Benghazi attack on U.S. diplomats.

The differing views of the administration’s transparency have a strong partisan bias.

By a 38 percentage-point margin, Democrats say Obama has been more transparent than previous presidents, while Republicans say it has been less open by a 58-point margin. Among independents, 14 percent say Obama has been more open, 40 percent say less open and 45 percent say it’s been about the same as others.

By contrast, by a 62-29 percent margin, voters say media coverage of Washington and the White House is focusing more on silly issues of little importance for the country than serious issues of great importance.

And, that’s why, way back in 2009, I nicknamed Obama “The Petulant President”.

I wonder if he will throw a Presidential Temper Tantrum at 12:01 a.m. Saturday, if he does not get his way today?

As we say in Dixie, ol’ Scooter is

All hat. No cattle.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Shame and Sequestration

On By kingsjesterIn Politics3 Comments

rush3Yesterday, the Godfather of Conservative Talk Radio, Rush Limbaugh, while speaking on the subject of sequestration, said,

Ladies and gentlemen, for the first time in my life, I am ashamed of my country. To be watching all of this, to be treated like this, to have our common sense and intelligence insulted the way it’s being insulted? It just makes me ashamed. Seriously, man. Here we get worked up over $44 billion. That’s the total amount of money that will not be spent that was scheduled to be spent this year. In truth, we’re gonna spend more this year than we spent last year.

We’re just not gonna spend as much as was projected. It’s all baseline budgeting. There is no real cut below a baseline of zero. There just isn’t. Yet here they come, sucking us in, roping us in. Panic here, fear there: Crisis, destruction, no meat inspection, no cops, no teachers, no firefighters, no air traffic control. I’m sorry, my days of getting roped into all this are over. We have the media playing along with all this. The ruling class of both parties play along with all this. It’s insulting. I don’t know how else to describe it.

I’m into my 25th year.

I can’t tell you the number of times this has happened. This hit me yesterday. I’ve said the same things over and over for 25 years. Whether the Clinton presidency or the Obama presidency, whether it’s a Pelosi speakership or Tom Foley (who was speaker when I started), it’s the same stuff. It’s the same threats. It’s the same arguments over and over. Nothing ever changes! We just keep spending more money. We create more dependency, we get more and more irresponsible from one crisis to the next, all of them manufactured.

Except for the real crisis, which nobody ever addresses, and that is: We can’t afford any of this.

What’s happening here, folks, is we are being played for fools and being suckered — suckered into supporting the never-ending expansion of government, the wholesale destruction of the private economy. Everybody who joins in this debate under the premise that Obama puts forth, as well as debating the politics of this nonsense, is just being used to cover up what’s actually going on. Now, what’s going on is no great conspiracy. It’s no mystery. We’re spending much more money than we have.

The government is getting inexorably larger.

It’s less and less efficient at accomplishing anything. We’re creating more and more dependents. We’re robbing people of their dignity and humanity and of their opportunity to realize their dreams as they turn their lives over to the government. It’s like a never-ending cycle. The government makes the private sector smaller. There are fewer job opportunities. There’s less money in the private sector, less opportunity to accrue wealth. Income taxes and others threaten to go higher; they do go higher.

It all adds up to the government growing, the private sector shrinking, freedom being lost ever so slowly, and nobody ever talks about stopping this. Everybody gets sucked into debating the crisis of the moment according to the terms of the moment, without any context and relationship to the past and a knowable future and a relevant perusal of the present. These little debates take place within their own little universe, as though they’re unaffected by things that have happened in the past.

So if  sequestration actually happens, will the world as we know it come to an end? Hardly.

Back in September of 2012, fcw.com posted the following information:

The Obama administration has released its mandated report on how sequestration may be implemented, outlining in a nearly 400-page document detailed plans for cutting federal spending by $1.2 trillion.

The Office of Management and Budget released the report Sept. 14, a week later than the deadline set by the Sequestration Transparency Act. It includes line-by-line detail on more than 1,200 budget accounts, breaking down what is exempt from sequestration and what’s not.

Per the report, sequestration is estimated to result in a 9.4 percent cut in non-exempt defense discretionary funding, and 8.2 percent in non-defense, non-exempt discretionary funding. It would also cut 2 percent to Medicare, 7.6 percent to other non-exempt non-defense mandatory programs, and 10 percent to non-exempt, mandatory defense programs.

In the report and in a conference call with reporters, senior administration officials underscored their opposition to sequestration, which comes from the Budget Control Act of 2011. A “supercommittee” was chosen to hammer out agreed-on cuts, and when it failed to do so near the end of 2011, sequestration became the next step.

The last time America experienced a government shutdown was in 1995, when

…A wily Clinton politically outmaneuvered then-Speaker Newt Gingrich to turn the 20-day shutdown into a bruising PR defeat for the year-old Republican majority.

While Clinton had to eventually sacrifice on substance and put forward a budget that reflected much of what Gingrich and the Republicans wanted, he had set the narrative for his reelection campaign the next year: Clinton the moderate versus the radical Republicans in Congress.

That media narrative, combined with independent Ross Perot siphoning away mostly Republican votes in swing states, helped Clinton capture an 8-point victory in November of 1996.

Just who is responsible for Sequestration?

“The sequester is not something that I’ve proposed. It is something that Congress has proposed.”

— President Obama, in the third presidential debate, Oct. 22, 2012

The president seems to have a selective memory. Per The Washington Post:

The battle over raising the debt ceiling consumed Washington in the summer of 2011, with Republicans refusing to agree to raise it unless spending was cut by an equivalent amount. Obama pressed but failed to get an agreement on raising revenue as part of the package. Woodward’s book details the efforts to come up with an enforcement mechanism that would make sure the cuts took place — and virtually every mention shows this was a White House gambit.

Here is a short summary of how it went down:

The White House proposed the idea of a compulsory trigger, with Sperling calling it an “automatic sequester,” though initially it was to include tax revenue, not just spending cuts. Boehner was “nervous” about using it as a budget tool.

Once tax increases were off the table, the White House staff came up with a sequestration plan that only had spending cuts and sold Harry Reid on the idea.

This is the third reference to the White House putting together the plan for sequester. Granted, they are using language from a congressional law from a quarter-century earlier, but that seems a thin reed on which to say this came from Congress. In fact, Lew had been a policy advisor to then House Speaker Tip O’Neill from 1979 to 1987, and so was familiar with the law.

Republicans agreed to the White House proposal for a sequester.

Republicans had to work through the night to understand the White House proposal.

Of course, the Republicans eventually caved and agreed to raise the debt ceiling…and, so here we are.

Obama is trying to pull a Clinton. The problem is…he’s not Slick Willie.

He does not have the people skills, or the ruthlessness of a Hillary to back him up.

Additionally, the New Media was not as prevalent back then. 

Knowing the Republican Establishment, they will probably cave at the last minute, once again, on their quest to become Democrat-Lite.

Which would be a pretty stupid move, considering they did not come up with the idea in the first place.

Until He Comes, 

KJ

Governor Chris Christie Wildly Popular…in New Jersey

On By kingsjesterIn Politics5 Comments

chris christieNew Jersey’s larger-than-life Governor has a larger-than-life popularity rating in the Garden State.

It’s the highest job approval Governor Chris Christie has ever had. At 74 percent, it’s the highest of any New Jersey Governor in the 17 years that Quinnipiac has been polling the state, and the highest of any Governor in the seven states that Quinnipiac polls now.

Seventy-one percent say Governor Christie deserves re-election.

“Barbara Buono, the State Senator who is the probable Democratic opponent for him [in the 2014 gubernatorial race] — he beats her 62 percent to 25 percent,” says Maurice Carroll, director of the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute.

Christie also performs strongly among those surveyed in a hypothetical matchup for the White House in 2016.

“If the Democrat was Andrew Cuomo or Hillary Clinton, Clinton beats him 49 percent to 45 percent — within the margin of error — and Cuomo trails him 54 percent to 36 percent in New Jersey,” Carroll explains.

Carroll says Christie’s response to Hurricane Sandy helped to boost his popularity.

Perhaps in “Joisey”, Mr. Carroll, but Governor Zeppelin’s (as New Jersey Conservatives have named him) “bromance” with President Barack Hussein Obama did absolutely nothing to endear himself to Conservatives in the rest of the country.

On November 19, 2012, the New York Times reported on Americans’ Post-Romney-loss reaction to Christie’s “bromance”:

A few days after Hurricane Sandy shattered the shores of New Jersey, Gov. Chris Christie picked up the phone to take on a different kind of recovery work: taming the Republican Party fury over his effusive embrace of President Obama.

On Nov. 3, Mr. Christie called Rupert Murdoch, the influential News Corporation chief and would-be kingmaker, who had warned in a biting post on Twitter that the governor might be responsible for Mr. Obama’s re-election.

Mr. Christie told Mr. Murdoch that amid the devastation, New Jersey needed friends, no matter their political party, according to people briefed on the discussion. But Mr. Murdoch was blunt: Mr. Christie risked looking like a spoiler unless he publicly affirmed his support for Mitt Romney, something the governor did the next day.

Mr. Christie has been explaining himself to Republicans ever since. His lavish praise for Mr. Obama’s response to the storm, delivered in the last days of the presidential race, represented the most dramatic development in the campaign’s final stretch. Right or wrong, conventional wisdom in the party holds that it influenced the outcome.

But behind the scenes, the intensity of the reaction from those in Mr. Christie’s party caught him by surprise, interviews show, requiring a rising Republican star to try to contain a tempest that left him feeling deeply misunderstood and wounded.

The governor, who had spent days delivering bear hugs and words of sympathy to shellshocked residents, resented the pressure to choose between the state he loves with fervent, Springsteen-fueled ferocity and his future as a leader in the Republican Party.

In New Jersey, Mr. Christie’s politics-be-damned approach to the storm seemed to represent a moment of high-minded crisis management for a governor frequently defined by his public diatribes and tantrums. Mr. Christie locked arms with Mr. Obama, flew with him on Marine One, talked with him daily and went out of his way to praise him publicly as “outstanding,” “incredibly supportive” and worthy of “great credit.”

But in the days after the storm, Mr. Christie and his advisers were startled to hear from out-of-state donors to Mr. Romney, who had little interest in the hurricane and viewed him solely as a campaign surrogate, demanding to know why he had stood so close to the president on a tarmac. One of them questioned why he had boarded Mr. Obama’s helicopter, according to people briefed on the conversations.

It did not help that Mr. Romney had not called Mr. Christie during those first few days, people close to the governor say.

The tensions followed Mr. Christie to the annual meeting of the Republican Governors Association in Las Vegas last week. At a gathering where he had expected to be celebrated, Mr. Christie was repeatedly reminded of how deeply he had offended fellow Republicans.

“I will not apologize for doing my job,” he emphatically told one of them in a hotel hallway at the ornate Wynn Resort.

His willingness to work closely with the president has cast a shadow over Mr. Christie’s prospects as a national candidate, prompting a number of Republicans to wonder aloud whether he is a reliable party leader.

“It hurt him a lot,” said Douglas E. Gross, a longtime Republican operative in Iowa who has overseen several presidential campaigns in the state. “The presumption is that Republicans can’t count on him.”

Republican voters in Iowa, the first state to select presidential candidates, “don’t forget things like this,” Mr. Gross said.

With Mr. Romney’s loss still an open sore, Mr. Christie’s conduct remains a topic of widespread discussion in the party.

And, it remains a topic of discussion to this day.

Gov. Zeppelin, in his own way, has become a loathsome symbol of the Vichy Republican Establishment, who have sold all their Conservative Principles and any integrity that they may have once had, in an ill-fated attempt to appeal to the squishy middle of the American voting public, while ignoring the date who brought them to the dance, the Conservative Base.

Unfortunately for the Grand Old Geniuses, their fictional “Moderate Base” exists predominately up in the Northeast.

Average Americans living in the Heartland are still Conservative by nature, with actual morals and ethics, which aren’t situational.

You’ve heard the old saying,

If you don’t stand for something, you’ll fall for anything?

Well, evidently Gov. Christie and the rest of the Republican Moderate Elite never have.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Obama to Propose His Own Illegal Immigration Plan

On By kingsjesterIn Politics3 Comments

obamaillegalimmigrationWhile the First Couple is vacationing on opposite ends of the country, on our dime, news of a proposed plan by the Prevaricator-in Chief, to deal with Illegal Immigration, has been leaked to a Liberal National Newspaper.

A draft of a White House immigration proposal obtained by USA TODAY would allow illegal immigrants to become legal permanent residents within eight years.

The plan also would provide for more security funding and require business owners to check the immigration status of new hires within four years. In addition, the nation’s 11 million illegal immigrants could apply for a newly created “Lawful Prospective Immigrant” visa, under the draft bill being written by the White House.

If approved, they could then apply for the same provisional legal status for their spouse or children living outside the country, according to the draft.

The bill is being developed as members in both chambers of Congress are drafting their own immigration bills.

…The bill mirrors many provisions of the bipartisan 2007 bill that was spearheaded by the late Sen. Ted Kennedy, D-Mass., and Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., and ultimately failed.

In his first term, Obama often deferred to Congress on drafting and advancing major legislation, including the Affordable Care Act. He has openly supported the efforts in Congress to take the lead on immigration legislation, and just this week met with Democratic senators to discuss their proposals.

But two weeks ago in Las Vegas, while outlining his immigration plans, Obama made clear that he would not wait too long for Congress to get moving.

“If Congress is unable to move forward in a timely fashion, I will send up a bill based on my proposal and insist that they vote on it right away,” he said.

According to the White House draft, people would need to pass a criminal background check, submit biometric information and pay fees to qualify for the new visa. If approved, they would be allowed to legally reside in the U.S. for four years, work and leave the country for short periods of time. After the four years, they could then reapply for an extension.

Illegal immigrants would be disqualified from the program if they were convicted of a crime that led to a prison term of at least one year, three or more different crimes that resulted in a total of 90 days in jail, or if they committed any offense abroad that “if committed in the United States would render the alien inadmissible or removable from the United States.”

People currently in federal custody or facing deportation proceedings also could be allowed to apply for the Lawful Prospective Immigrant visa. Application forms and instructions would be provided in “the most common languages spoken by persons in the United States,” but the application and all supporting evidence submitted to the federal government would have to be in English.

They would also be given a new identification card to show as proof of their legal status in the country.

The immigrants could then apply for legal permanent residence, commonly known as a green card, within eight years if they learn English and “the history and government of the United States” and pay back taxes. That would then clear the path for them to apply for U.S. citizenship.

To combat fraud, the draft proposes a new Social Security card be developed that is “fraud-resistant, tamper-resistant and wear-resistant.” The Social Security Administration would be required to issue the new cards within two years.

A major requirement for many Republicans is enhanced border security. The bill calls for an unspecified increase in the Border Patrol, allows the Department of Homeland Security to expand technological improvements along the border and adds 140 new immigration judges to process the heavy flow of people who violate immigration laws.

It also orders U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to study whether a land-border crossing fee should be implemented to help offset border security costs. The draft also proposes raising many inspection fees that border-crossers already pay.

The draft bill proposes a new plan to allow Homeland Security to “accept donations” from citizens, businesses and local and state governments to improve ports of entry and security features along the border. And it would require CBP to begin collecting statistics on deaths along the border and report them quarterly.

The draft also expands the E-Verify program that checks the immigration status of people seeking new jobs. Businesses with more than 1,000 employees must begin using the system within two years, businesses with more than 250 employees within three years and all businesses within four years.

Homeland Security, working with the U.S. departments of Labor and Agriculture, the attorney general and other agencies, would engage in a $40 million-a-year program to educate business owners and workers about the program.

Homeland Security also would be required to submit a report within 18 months showing how the worker verification system is working, and specifically explain how it is affecting the nation’s agriculture industry, which relies heavily on illegal immigrant workers.

The draft obtained by USA TODAY does not include sections that would alter the nation’s legal immigration system to adjust the future flow of legal immigrants, which is expected to be a critical component of any immigration overhaul.

If the president believes that everyone will accept his brilliant (**cough**) plan with open arms, he has another thing coming.

Politico.com reports that

Sen. Marco Rubio said Saturday that President Barack Obama’s immigration plan will be “dead on arrival” on Capitol Hill if it looks like the proposal reported by USA Today.

“If actually proposed, the president’s bill would be dead on arrival in Congress, leaving us with unsecured borders and a broken legal immigration system for years to come,” said Rubio, who’s seen as a key figure in pushing a bipartisan immigration bill through the Senate.

A White House spokesman told POLITICO earlier Saturday that the administration continues to support a bipartisan plan from the Hill and has not produced a final bill to send to Congress.

Rubio’s statement is combative, faulting the administration for releasing a proposal without getting Republican input. “It’s a mistake for the White House to draft immigration legislation without seeking input from Republican members of Congress,” Rubio said. “President Obama’s leaked immigration proposal is disappointing to those of us working on a serious solution.”

“The president’s bill repeats the failures of past legislation,” he continued. “It fails to follow through on previously broken promises to secure our borders, creates a special pathway that puts those who broke our immigration laws at an advantage over those who chose to do things the right way and come here legally and does nothing to address guest workers or future flow, which serious immigration experts agree is critical to preventing future influxes of illegal immigrants.”

“Much like the president’s self-described stopgap deferred action measure last year, this legislation is half-baked and seriously flawed,” Rubio added. “It would actually make our immigration problems worse and would further undermine the American people’s confidence in Washington’s ability to enforce our immigration laws and reform our broken immigration system.

Perhaps, that is exactly what the president has in mind, Senator.

By proposing and passing his plan by Executive Order, if need be, ol’ Baracky Claus is seeking to create a boatload of grateful, new Democratic voters.

Obama: “Secured Borders? We don’t need no stinkin’ secured borders.”

If this plan becomes law,Obama will create a new working class, or, Proletariat, who will look to Uncle Sugar, or the Politboro, for their very existence.

Then, the greatest country on the face of the Earth will become just another Democratic Socialist nation, fulfilling the dreams of The Manchurian President and all of his minions.

Lenin would be sooo proud.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Why I am Still a “Christian American Conservative”

On By kingsjesterIn Christianity, Politics3 Comments

Christian America Fish LogoLately, I’ve had fellow internet posters ask me, why I am so old-fashioned. Why I don’t just “live and let live”. Why I rail against the recently re-elected Administration of Barack Hussein Obama (mm mmm mmmm).

As I write this post there is a former cop, turned psychopath, lying in a drawer in a California morgue, extra crispy, a reflection of his status in the after-life, and yet, during his murder spree, he was worshiped as a cult hero.

The before-mentioned President and First Lady (an exaggeration in terms) are taking separate vacations, on opposite corners of our country on our dime.

We’ve got young people who can’t read, but they’ve got avatars in every violent video game you have ever heard of.

What in the name of all that’s holy, is going on in this country?

We’ve got babies having babies…when they don’t yank them from their wombs and kill them.e’ve got Gays serving openly in our Armed Forces, and appearing in uniform, in order to make a political point in a parade.

We’ve got black-on-black homocide climbing at an alarming rate in Detroit and Memphis, but no one seems to want to talk about it. That would be RAAACIIIST.

We’ve got gangs recruiting in our schools…but, again,  no one seems to want to talk about it. It might upset little Jimmy.

We’ve got a president who says that we don’t have the intestinal fortitude or the intelligence to achieve success on our own.

We’ve got a First Lady who, while watching police and firefighters fold Old Glory at a ceremony honoring and remembering our fallen on the tenth anniversary of 9/11, said, “all this just for a flag”, while her husband nodded in agreement.

Now, more than ever, we need to return to the values that made this country the greatest on the face of the Earth.

I’ve been asked what the phrase “Christian American Conservative” means.  Please allow me to explain.

First word:  Christian – A follower of Jesus Christ.

I was raised as a Christian by my parents and accepted Christ as my personal Savior many years ago.

Here are some interesting things about Christianity to consider, written by Dr. Ray Pritchard and posted on christianity.com:

1) The name “Christian” was not invented by early Christians. It was a name given to them by others.
2) Christians called themselves by different names—disciples, believers, brethren, saints, the elect, etc.
3) The term apparently had a negative meaning in the beginning: “those belonging to the Christ party.”
4) It was a term of contempt or derision.
5) We can get a flavor for it if we take the word “Christ” and keep that pronunciation. You “Christ-ians.”
6) It literally means “Christ-followers.”
7) Over time a derogatory term became a positive designation.
8) Occasionally you will hear someone spit the term out in the same way it was used in the beginning. “You Christians think you’re the only ones going to heaven.”
9) There was a sense of suffering and reproach attached to the word in the New Testament.

In working my way toward an answer to “What is a Christian?” I decided to check out the dictionary. I found these two definitions:

1. One who professes belief in Jesus as Christ or follows the religion based on the life and teachings of Jesus. 2. One who lives according to the teachings of Jesus.”

That’s actually quite helpful because it gives some content to the word. To be a Christian means that you . . .

Believe Something
Follow Something
Live Something
A Fully Devoted Follower To borrow a contemporary phrase, we could simply say that a Christian is a “fully devoted follower of Jesus.” As I think about that, two insights come to mind.

1) It doesn’t happen by accident. You are not “born” a Christian nor are you a Christian because of your family heritage. Being a Christian is not like being Irish. You aren’t a Christian simply because you were born into a Christian family.
2) It requires conversion of the heart. By using the term “conversion,” I simply mean what Jesus meant when he said that to be his disciple meant to deny yourself, take up your cross and follow him (Luke 9:23). The heart itself must be changed so that you become a follower of the Lord.

Second word: American – A citizen of the United States of America.

Stephen M. Warchawsky, wrote the following in an article foramericanthinker.org:

So what, then, does it mean to be an American? I suspect that most of us believe, like Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart in describing pornography, that we “know it when we see it.” For example, John Wayne, Amelia Earhart, and Bill Cosby definitely are Americans. The day laborers standing on the street corner probably are not. But how do we put this inner understanding into words? It’s not easy. Unlike most other nations on Earth, the American nation is not strictly defined in terms of race or ethnicity or ancestry or religion. George Washington may be the Father of Our Country (in my opinion, the greatest American who ever lived), but there have been in the past, and are today, many millions of patriotic, hardworking, upstanding Americans who are not Caucasian, or Christian, or of Western European ancestry. Yet they are undeniably as American as you or I (by the way, I am Jewish of predominantly Eastern European ancestry). Any definition of “American” that excludes such folks — let alone one that excludes me! — cannot be right.

Consequently, it is just not good enough to say, as some immigration restrictionists do, that this is a “white-majority, Western country.” Yes, it is. But so are, for example, Ireland and Sweden and Portugal. Clearly, this level of abstraction does not take us very far towards understanding what it means to be “an American.” Nor is it all that helpful to say that this is an English-speaking, predominately Christian country. While I think these features get us closer to the answer, there are millions of English-speaking (and non-English-speaking) Christians in the world who are not Americans, and millions of non-Christians who are. Certainly, these fundamental historical characteristics are important elements in determining who we are as a nation. Like other restrictionists, I am opposed to public policies that seek, by design or by default, to significantly alter the nation’s “demographic profile.” Still, it must be recognized that demography alone does not, and cannot, explain what it means to be an American.

So where does that leave us? I think the answer to our question, ultimately, must be found in the realms of ideology and culture. What distinguishes the United States from other nations, and what unites the disparate peoples who make up our country, are our unique political, economic, and social values, beliefs, and institutions. Not race, or religion, or ancestry.

Third word: Conservative -A person who holds to traditional values and attitudes.

J. Matt Barber wrote in the Washington Times that

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

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

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

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

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

Even the Brits understand what American Conservatism is.

Per blogs.telegraph.co.uk:

Conservatism is thriving in America today because liberty, freedom and individual responsibility are at the heart of its ideology, one that rejects the foolish notion that government knows best. And its strength owes a great debt to the conviction and ideals of Ronald Reagan, who always believed that America’s best days are ahead of her, and for whom the notion of decline was unacceptable. As the Gipper famously put it, in a speech to the Conservative Political Action Conference in 1988:

Those who underestimate the conservative movement are the same people who always underestimate the American people.

In conclusion, I, a Christian American Conservative, am a follower of Jesus Christ and a citizen of the United States of America (by the Grace of God), who holds to traditional values and attitudes.

I pray that you, the reader, are able to glean that from my blogs.  Because, as Matthew 6:21 tells us:

For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.

My hope is that, during these troubled times, your heart is held by Him.

May God bless you and yours,

KJ

America 2013: How Did We Get Here…and How Do We Get Back?

On By kingsjesterIn Christianity, Politics4 Comments

conservative1In my post on Thursday, I promised to devote some time this week to explore America’s cultural and societal decline.

Well…there’s no time like the present.

As I mentioned in my 1000th Blog a couple of months ago, I have been told that I am out of touch with America’s present societal and cultural norms…that I am an anachronism…a throwback to an earlier era.

That got me to thinking: How did we get to where we are?

I started First Grade in 1963. Also in 1963, a very important case was brought before the Supreme Court by a bitter, old atheist named Madalyn Murray O’Hair:

School prayer was the focus of Madalyn Murray O’Hair, a militant left wing atheist with close ties to the American Communist Party, when she filed a lawsuit against the school board of Baltimore. The local court judge, J. Gilbert Pendergast, dismissed the petition stating, “It is abundantly clear that petitioners’ real objective is to drive every concept of religion out of the public school system.” The case went to the Maryland Court of Appeals, and the court ruled, “Neither the First nor the Fourteenth Amendment was intended to stifle all rapport between religion and government.”

The “School Prayer” case then made its way to the U.S. Supreme Court. Leonard Kerpelman addressed the court saying prayer in the public schools had been tolerated for so long that it had become traditional and that anything that is unconstitutional does not become constitutional through tradition. He went on to say the Constitution had erected a “wall of separation” between church and state, at which point Justice Potter Steward interrupted, asking where this wording appears. Kerpelman was stumped and an embarrassing silence followed. When he regained his composure, he stated that the text was not explicit on the point but that it had been interpreted to mean so.

Remarkably, the National Council of Churches and several Jewish organizations favored Madalyn O’Hair’s case! Not a single Christian organization filed a brief in support of school prayer. The Supreme Court ruled 8 to 1 in favor of abolishing school prayer and Bible reading in the public schools. Justice Tom Clark wrote, “Religious freedom, it has long been recognized that government must be neutral and, while protecting all, must prefer none and disparage none.” The federal government considers atheism to be a religion, and this Supreme Court ruling favored atheism, at the expense of the Christian majority.

Down here in Dixie, we still pray at school functions…and that fact drives that idiotic bunch of atheists up in the Great White North, the Freedom From Religion Foundation, absolutely nuts. So much so, that they have made it their mission in life, to sue every school that dares have any sort of prayer at any event, on campus or off.

The FFRF has achieved a modicum of success in our court system. However, at least in the South, school organizations such as the Fellowship of Christian Students and the Fellowship of Christian Athletes are still flourishing.

On a side note, I am proud to have helped raise a step-son, who was the head of both of these organizations at his high school, and is now in seminary.

I remember back in elementary school, every morning we began school by singing “Oh, What a Beautiful Morning” and then, reciting The Pledge of Allegiance. Even remembering that ritual today, I find comfort in it.

In the South, at least in the Mississippi County in which I live, the school day still begins with the recitation of the Pledge, which is led by a group of students, standing around a microphone in the Principal’s Office.

Unfortunately, that is no longer the case in many schools around our blessed land.

Nowadays, good old-fashioned American Patriotism is not considered Politically Correct.

So, what is the cause of this 180 degree turn from where we were, as a mostly cohesive society, based on love of God and Country, which I remember so fondly from my childhood, to where we are now as a country comprised, to a certain extent,  of individuals, who believe in relative morality, situational ethics, and a malleable Constitution.

Learned individuals have been trying to discern exactly what has caused this Societal and Cultural Decline, and in the process, they have blamed it on everything from poor schools to poverty to malnutrition.

Being a simple man, (Hey, that would make a great title for a rock song. Oh, wait. It was. Never mind.) I believe that because Americans have wanted, for at least 3 generations now, to give their children everything materialistically possible, they have to a great extent, ignored their children’s spirituality.

God’s Word tells us that we, as parents, should

Train up a child in the way he should go; even when he is old he will not depart from it. – Proverbs 22:6 (ESV)

The dissolution of the American family and the pressure on parents to provide for their children, has certainlty contributed to Americans’ priorities getting waaay out-of-whack.

Instead of training our children in the way they should go, we have, as a society, allowed the television, video games, government-run schools, and our children’s peers to be their surrogate parents.

The selfish hedonism we are witnessing in our country is a direct result of parents abandoning their roles, as the spiritual and ethical teachers of morality to their children.

So, now the Obama Administration is stepping in to fulfill the Parental Role.

An action, which will, most certainly, make a bad situation worse.

After all, as President Ronald Reagan used to say,

The scariest nine words in the English Language are, “I’m from the Government and I’m here to help.”

Americans need to rediscover our Christian Heritage of Love of God and Country, before it is too late.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Obama’s Indoctrination…err…Preschool Initiative

On By kingsjesterIn Politics3 Comments

children2Tuesday night, during his fifth annual State of the Union Address, President Barack Hussein Obama (mm mmm mmmm) announced a new Education Initiative.

These initiatives in manufacturing, energy, infrastructure, housing — all these things will help entrepreneurs and small business owners expand and create new jobs. But none of it will matter unless we also equip our citizens with the skills and training to fill those jobs. (Applause.)

And that has to start at the earliest possible age. Study after study shows that the sooner a child begins learning, the better he or she does down the road. But today, fewer than 3 in 10 four year-olds are enrolled in a high-quality preschool program. Most middle-class parents can’t afford a few hundred bucks a week for a private preschool. And for poor kids who need help the most, this lack of access to preschool education can shadow them for the rest of their lives. So tonight, I propose working with states to make high-quality preschool available to every single child in America. (Applause.) That’s something we should be able to do.

Every dollar we invest in high-quality early childhood education can save more than seven dollars later on — by boosting graduation rates, reducing teen pregnancy, even reducing violent crime. In states that make it a priority to educate our youngest children, like Georgia or Oklahoma, studies show students grow up more likely to read and do math at grade level, graduate high school, hold a job, form more stable families of their own. We know this works. So let’s do what works and make sure none of our children start the race of life already behind. Let’s give our kids that chance. (Applause.)

Evidently, Government-ran Preschools are very important to President Obama. So much so, that the perpetual campaigner has hit the campaign trail to push the idea.

Yesterday, the local CBS affiliate in Atlanta filed the following story:

Secret Service agents began doing security sweeps at the Decatur Recreation Center and at the College Heights Early Childhood Learning Center before daybreak.

Decatur City Schools are on winter break this week. However, College Heights remained open because classes for infants to three-year-olds were still in session. A school system spokeswoman said 100 percent of the teachers and 75 percent of the students in the school’s pre-kindergarten program agreed to come to the school during their time off for the president’s visit.

After touring College Heights and interacting with the children, Obama said in his speech at the Decatur Recreation Center that he wants to make preschool available to all 4-year-olds, a vast expansion of existing early childhood education programs.

He said that education has to start at the earliest possible age.

Obama claimed that every dollar spent on early education saves $7 for the government later on.

“This works. We know it works. If you are looking for a good bang for your educational buck, this is it right here,” said Obama.

The College Heights facility is unique because it provides early learning to children from birth to age four. It’s funded through a partnership between City Schools of Decatur, and Partners for Community Action, Inc. (Head Start Program).

Spotted in the crowd were several local state reps and senators, Decatur Mayor Jim Baskett, Atlanta Mayor Kasim Reed, U.S. Rep. Hank Johnson and former U.S. Sen. Max Cleland.

As Obama pitches his plan, at the Capitol in Washington D.C., Education Secretary Arne Duncan is telling senators that one out of every 13 students already in Head Start classrooms could be left out if lawmakers don’t sidestep a March 1 budget meltdown.

The push to increase and preserve options for pre-kindergarten children comes as Obama’s team is warning Congress — and lawmakers’ constituents — what is expected to happen if leaders fail to avert $85 billion in automatic budget cuts that will impact national security and domestic programs alike.

Other countries have tried National Preschool Programs. For instance, the old Soviet Union. FreeDictionary.com describes the system of  Soviet Preschool Institutions, circa 1979, as

…institutions for the social upbringing of infants (from one to three years of age) and children of preschool age (three to seven years of age). In the USSR the system of preschool institutions includes créches, créche-kindergartens, and kindergartens. V. I. Lenin ascribed enormous importance to the development of pre-school institutions, which he called the “shoots of communism.” In the article “A Great Beginning” he wrote: “Public catering establishments, nurseries, kindergartens—here we have examples of these shoots, here we have the simple, everyday means, involving nothing pompous, grandiloquent, or ceremonial, which can really emancipate women, really lessen and abolish their inequality with men as regards their role in social production and public life”(Poln. sobr. soch., 5th ed., vol. 39, p. 24).

In the USSR, social preschool upbringing, an organic part of the public education system, enjoys the attention and concern of the Communist Party and the Soviet government. The upbringing of children in preschool institutions is based on a single scientific program worked out by Soviet preschool pedagogy. As of Jan. 1, 1971, there were 83,000 kindergartens and créche-kindergartens with a combined enrollment of 8.1 million children. There are special preschool institutions under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Public Health of the USSR for children with physical and mental handicaps. Specialists who work in preschool institutions are trained at pedagogical colleges and institutes. The Doshkol’noe vospitanie (Preschool Upbringing) deals with work experiences obtained in preschool institutions and methods and theories of social preschool upbringing.

After personally witnessing what this Administration’s “educational philosophy, already in our public schools, I can predict, without hesitation, that nationally-run Preschools will not only be Centers of Education, they will also be Indoctrination Centers, where, as Obama himself has called them, “the most vulnerable among us”, will be exposed to all of the government-funded social engineering programs that our children and grandchildren, who are presently attending public schools, under the auspices of the Obama Administration’s Department of Education, are being indoctrinated in.

That’s right, little Johnny. The United States of America is just another country. There is no such thing as American Exceptionalism. See how much fun it is when you “share the wealth”?

The scary thing is, preschoolers’ “spirit of discernment”, while present, is not fully formed , yet. At 4 years old, children are very malleable, and easily led by suggestion (like Liberals).

If your goal was to “radically change” the greatest country on the face of God’s green Earth, who would you start with?

Until He Comes,

KJ

America 2013: A Ball of Confusion (With Apologies to the Temptations)

On By kingsjesterIn Politics4 Comments

straightjacketI promise you, gentle readers..I truly believe that I’m losing what little sanity I have left.

Please allow me to try to rationalize some political absurdities….m’kay?

Marco Rubio gets parched while giving the GOP’s State of the Union Rebuttal…and now his chance to be President of the United States is over with?

A cold-blooded murderer, Chris Dorner, takes his own life, is subsequently rendered extra crispy by a fire in the mountain cabin he was hiding out in…after a shoot-out with law enforcement, in which he killed one deputy and wounded another…and idiot, Mom’s basement-dwelling, Liberals are worshiping him as if he will be the subject of the next t-shirt they will be wearing to an ill-fated job interview.

And at the same time, Dorner’s Mama was spotted eating potato chips and drinking wine, while watching her “baby” shooting it out with the San Bernadino Sheriff’s Department.

The Russian Foreign Minister will not return our new Secretary of State John Kerry’s telephone calls…and, I don’t blame him.

The Obama Administration, including the Attorney General, whose former law firm represents Muslim Terrorists, Eric Holder, says that it will be targeting Americans with unmanned drones.

Constitution? We don’t need no stinkin’ Constitution!

This same Manchurian President and his feckless Administration flew American Flags at half-mast in memory of crack addict Whitney Houston, but not American Hero Chris Kyle.

What in the Wide, Wide World of Sports is a’goin’ on here?

We’ll explore America’s cultural/societal decline later this week.

However, chaos, by definition, stems from a lack of leadership.

About our country’s anti-American President and lack of backlash against his disconnect with average Americans, Conservative Talk Show Host Rush Limbaugh said,

t may have been something you put together long ago. I must confess that I only just realized this today. And it’s about trying to understand how could so many people say they disagree with Obama’s policies and yet reelect him. I know that you and I have expressed our puzzlement and our curiosity over the great disconnect there is in this country. The people that vote for Obama don’t like where we’re going, the direction of the country, the policies of Obama, yet he wins elections.

So we’ve all been taking our stabs at trying to explain why. Well, he won reelection because he did such a good job of demonizing Romney that he made everybody afraid to vote for Romney and they settled and just voted for Obama, vote for the guy who’s already there, at least he’s a known quantity. But the New York Times story today finally opens my eyes to what we’re dealing with, at least for me. And, as I say, you may have understood this long ago. “Polls Show Dissatisfaction With Country’s Direction, but Support for Obama’s Agenda.”

Now, you and I, in what I would call the high-information voter sector, understand what a giant disconnect that is. How in the world can people be dissatisfied with the country’s direction while at the same time support the very agenda that’s causing it? This just doesn’t compute to you and me. We recognize that it is Obama’s agenda which is leading to the problems this country has and thus the dissatisfaction that people have regarding the country’s direction. But the majority of people who vote, there is no connection of those two things whatsoever. They support Obama’s agenda, and they are terribly unhappy about the direction of the country, and, therefore, they do not associate Obama’s agenda or his policies with the direction of the country.

They do not associate Obama’s policies with what has happened to the country. They don’t associate all the spending and all the debt with the lack of jobs. They don’t make that connection, they don’t see any connection, they don’t see it at all. Now, to me this is an eye-opener, and it’s going to force me to assess exactly how to go forward here in dealing with these people. The idea is to persuade them. I mean, they are the low-information voters.

Now, if they’re unhappy with the economy, if they’re unhappy with jobs, if they’re unhappy with the debt, if they’re unhappy with the housing market and yet support Obama’s agenda, then they obviously do not connect Obama’s policies as being in any way related to or responsible for the country’s direction that they don’t like, which means a number of things. It means that they see Obama as working really hard to try to fix everything, rather than Obama as the reason for things worsening. They just do not see that. And to you and me it’s a slam dunk. It’s one plus one is two. These are people, outcome-based education, two plus two is five and we’ll give ’em an A for trying. They don’t see it.

So Obama is not at all connected to the tragic destruction of this country. He is seen as somebody who wants to fix it. It’s the same thing as people seeing Colonel Sanders as a guy running a hospital to save chickens. Wouldn’t compute. It wouldn’t make any sense. But that’s how he’s viewed. Now, maybe one reason is that he’s successfully blamed Bush all these years and the exit polling data last November, vast majority of people still do blame Bush for the economy, but it’s more than that. It’s that Obama never, ever, allows himself to be seen as governing. He is constantly campaigning.

Obama is constantly seen as in competition with what’s happening in Washington. It is though there are straw men. There are men behind curtains. There are invisible, evil people doing all this to the country. He’s trying to expose them and he’s working very hard. Romney is one of them. Bush was one of them. There are a bunch of other people, we don’t know who they are. But Obama is trying to find them. He’s trying to expose them and trying to fix all this. Obama is not seen as the guy behind the curtains pulling the levers. Obama is not seen as the guy who does not like the way the country was founded and is trying to take this country in a different direction. He’s not seen at all in the way he really is. It can’t all be because of the media.

…You may have figured this out long ago, but it just hit me — and if you figured it out long ago and you’ve been trying to get through here and tell me, I wish you’d have gotten through. For those of you who figured it out and I didn’t, I’m just now getting to it. I apologize for being a late arrival to the party, but now — now — it all makes sense. For five years Obama has never once allowed himself to be seen as governing.

He is constantly campaigning against mysterious forces who have ill intentions trying to harm you and this great country. There are these figures behind the screen, behind the curtain. Romney was one. Bush was one. There are others. Obama’s trying to expose them. Throughout history dictators, for example, have never really been blamed for the bad things that happened in their countries. Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Castro, none of them were blamed by the rank-and-file citizenry.

They were, instead, the leaders of the revolution!

Until Americans realize who is causing the political problems, foreign and domestic, which we are facing as a country, and, the civic responsibility that is their heritage as citizens of these United States, our problems will continue to mount, and, this “Shining City on a Hill” will continue a purposeful, man-caused de-evolution into a democratic socialist nation.

Average Americans, like you and me, can stop this.

We can do it, America.

We made a difference in 2010. We can do it again.

It is up to us.

Until He Comes,

KJ

State of the Union Address 2013: An Empty Suit Making Empty Promises

On By kingsjesterIn Politics4 Comments

taxesTonight, in front of a standing room only audience on Capitol Hill, President Barack Hussein Obama will deliver his fifth annual State of the Union Address.

This  year, he is supposed to “be more aggressive”.

TRANSLATION:

The Republicans are the ones keeping you down. They will not co-operate with my grand plan for turning the United States of America into just another Democratic Socialist Country. If they would just “shut up and know their roles”, I could finish my Socialist Utopia.

You can bet your bottom dollar that ol’ Scooter will be all over the place tonight, touching on a myriad of subjects, with all the phony sincerity he can muster.

He will probably put another tingle up Chris Matthew’s leg.

So, what happens if the Republicans actually grow a collective spine, and stand up to the Marxist plans of the Manchurian President?

No problem. He’s making a list…and checking it twice.

According to the George Soros-funded Liberal Website, ThinkProgress.org, the Prevaricator-in-Chief is contemplating bypassing our Constitutional System of Checks and Balances, and issuing the following Executive Orders:

1. Cybersecurity: President Obama appears likely to “establish a voluntary program where companies operating critical infrastructure would elect to meet cybersecurity best practices and standards crafted, in part, by the government.” These voluntary minimum security standards are supposed to ward against an escalating pattern of cyber intrusions on “critical infrastructure.” It’s hard to say exactly what the standards in this order would be with any precision.

2. Housing: Housing is perhaps both the most significant and most ignored problem facing the United States today — 11 million Americans currently are “underwater,” meaning they owe more in mortgage than their house is worth. The executive order under consideration would extend super-low refinancing rates to people who have private mortgages, a helpful move that’s nonetheless insufficient without Congressional action.

3. Climate Change: The Post reports that the President is thinking of expanding two first term climate change executive actions; emission standards for power plants imposed under the Clean Air Act and the Better Buildings Initiative. The former standards currently only applies to new power plants; after these are finalized, the President is “considering moving beyond that effort toward regulating carbon emissions from existing power plants.” The latter is an initiative to improve buildings’ energy efficiency. These two moves, however, only scratch the surface of potential executive actions on climate change.

4. Equality for federal LGBT workers: Congress has been recalcitrant about passing the Employee Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA), which extends full non-discrimination protection to all Americans on the ground of sexual orientation and gender identity. Until recently, President Obama had used the legislative effort as a shield against issuing an executive order that would extend said protections to federal contractors. It now seems likely that an order protecting contractors is forthcoming.

5. Fair payment for home care workers: Roughly two million Americans work in the in-home medical care sector but, due to a legal exemption, can be paid under the minimum wage and generally don’t receive standard overtime wages. These workers are almost all women, and large percentages are poor and/or racial minorities. While the White House initially announced plans to end the minimum wage and overtime exemptions in 2011, it has yet to finalize them — but may well soon.

It was announced today that Americans are paying the highest price they ever have, for gas. What is Obama going to do about that? Nothing.

Millions of our countrymen are out of work. Other Americans are underemployed, forced to work 2 and 3 jobs, and still living paycheck-to-paycheck. What is Obama going to do about that? Nothing.

American Children, who cannot read and write, are still being socially promoted, while teachers’ unions have the temerity to go on strike for fatter paychecks. What’s Obama going to do to help America’s children? Nothing

(Although, he and the First Wookie did start an anti-bullying campaign and make their school lunches smaller.) Biiiig help.

America’s Foreign Policy is a massive failure under The Manchurian President. He sent Crazy Uncle Joe to negotiate with the Muslim Barbarians in Iran, and they refused to talk to him. 4 brave Americans, including our Ambassador were slaughtered on the 11 Anniversary of the worst-ever Terrorist Attack on American Soil. What has Obama done to seek justice for these men? Nothing. He went to the United Nations and apologized for a Youtube video, which no one has seen, claiming it as the reason that Muslims rioted in the Middle East on 9/11/12.

Obama fully intends to continue with his quest for National Gun Confiscation. What will taking away law-abiding citzens’ guns do to protect the children in his Hometown of Chicago, from the cowardly thugs who are murdering them? Nothing.

Our Federal Government, under Obama,  has grown to gargantuan proportions. In order to fund Obamacare, which will grow government even more, Obama is going to tax the He@@ out of Americans. What will that accomplish? Nothing.

In summary, tonight’s State of the Union Address  is going to reflect the accomplishments and substance of President Barack Hussein Obama (mm mmm mmmm).

In other words…an empty suit making empty promises…a big bag of nothing.

Until He Comes,

KJ