Tag: political ideology

Pope Francis: The Pope of the Far Left

On By kingsjesterIn Christianity, PoliticsLeave a comment

th (7)The current Leader of the Catholic Church, Pope Francis, has chosen a very different path than any of his predecessors.

And, from this Christian American’s Viewpoint, that is not necessarily a good thing.

Yahoo News Canada reports that

Pope Francis’ hard-hitting criticisms of globalization and inequality long ago set him out as a leader unafraid of mixing theology and politics. He is now flexing the Vatican’s diplomatic muscles as well.

Last year, he helped to broker an historic accord between Cuba and the United States after half a century of hostility.

This past week, his office announced the first formal accord between the Vatican and the State of Palestine — a treaty that gives legal weight to the Holy See’s longstanding recognition of de-facto Palestinian statehood despite clear Israeli annoyance.

The pope ruffled even more feathers in Turkey last month by referring to the massacre of up to 1.5 million Armenians in the early 20th century as a “genocide”, something Ankara denies.

After the inward-looking pontificate of his scholarly predecessor, Pope Benedict, Francis has in some ways returned to the active Vatican diplomacy practiced by the globetrotting Pope John Paul II, widely credited for helping to end the Cold War.

Much of his effort has concentrated on improving relations between different faiths and protecting the embattled Middle East Christians, a clear priority for the Catholic Church.

However in an increasingly fractured geopolitical world, his diplomacy is less obviously aligned to one side in a global standoff between competing blocs than that of John Paul’s 27-year-long papacy.

This is reinforced by his status as the world’s first pope from Latin America, a region whose turbulent history, widespread poverty and love-hate relationship with the United States has given him an entirely different political grounding from any of his European predecessors.

“Under this pope, the Vatican’s foreign policy looks South,” said Massimo Franco, a prominent Italian political commentator and author of several books on the Vatican.

He said the pope has been careful to avoid taking sides on issues like Ukraine, where he has never defined Russia as an aggressor, but has always referred to the conflict between the government and Moscow-backed rebels as a civil war.

That approach is intended to ensure he remains more credible with countries like Syria, Russia or Cuba, all nations where Francis feels he can help local Christians best by steering an independent course.

DIPLOMATIC RISKS

Francis already has his hands full overhauling the Vatican’s complex internal bureaucracy after a series of financial and sexual scandals involving abuse of children by priests which date back decades.

But clearly deeply interested in how the world outside the walls of the Vatican works, he appears determined to use his position and the huge global audience he commands to challenge entrenched diplomatic positions as well.

The former secretary of state, Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, a veteran insider whose office formerly controlled both relations with foreign powers and many internal Vatican affairs, has been replaced. His office has been downgraded to resemble a more classical diplomatic service while Francis has set a bolder, more personal stamp on Vatican foreign policy.

“He’s someone who’s capable of praying in the Blue Mosque in Istanbul and then talking about the Armenian genocide. He’s not someone who’s bound by political correctness,” said former Italian Foreign Minister Franco Frattini.

“It’s the diplomacy of a real leader.”

Whether it is to the taste of all the world’s 1.2 billion Catholics, world politicians with priorities of their own or even the many layers of the Church’s own administration is another matter.

With many conservative Catholics unhappy about the pope’s focus on issues like economic injustice and his relatively tolerant tone on sensitive social topics like homosexuality and the status of divorced people, pronounced views on delicate diplomatic issues could cause further division in the Church.

It is a point where he will be particularly tested in September on his upcoming visit to the United States, where some conservative U.S. Catholics are openly hostile.

After helping to foster last year’s agreement reviving diplomatic relations between Havana and Washington, Francis reaped criticism from many U.S. conservatives, including Marco Rubio, a candidate for the Republican nomination for president.

Rubio, the son of Cuban immigrants and a practicing Catholic, avoided directly admonishing the pope, but said he should “take up the cause of freedom and democracy” in Cuba.

That kind of veiled criticism from a politician who would normally be considered a staunch Church ally reflects the wider unease some Catholics feel at the change Francis has ushered in at one of the world’s most conservative institutions.

“Bishops complain that he becomes popular by attacking the Church,” said Franco.

“He speaks directly to the people and doesn’t respect the usual command structures. He decides on his own or with people who are not those who previously had a central role.”

In other words, he is the first pope who seemingly represents the Far Left Political Viewpoint.

Pope Francis seems more comfortable reaching out to Communist and Socialist countries, then he does to the Vatican’s Traditional allies, those countries who enjoy strong economies, built upon freedom and a competitive marketplace.

I know that I may sound like an old cracker, but my generation was blessed with three very remarkable leaders: United States President Ronald Reagan, British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, and Pope John Paul II.

These three stood for everything that was good about freedom.

All three knew the dangers and corruption of the implementation of Marxist Theory through the governments of man.

Here is what the wonderful and gracious Pope John Paul II said about an out-of-control Nanny-State (Socialist) Government:

By intervening directly and depriving society of its responsibility, the Social Assistance State leads to a loss of human energies and an inordinate increase of public agencies, which are dominated more by bureaucratic thinking than by concern for serving their clients, and which are accompanied by an enormous increase in spending, In fact, it would appear that needs are best understood and satisfied by people who are closest to them who act as neighbors to those in need. It should be added that certain kinds of demands often call for a response which is not simply material but which is capable of perceiving the deeper human need.

And, while this present Pontiff is romancing the Palestinians, Pope John Paul II reached out to God’s Chosen People.

In 1994, John Paul II established full diplomatic ties between the Vatican and Israel. He said,

For the Jewish people who live in the State of Israel and who preserve in that land such precious testimonies to their history and their faith, we must ask for the desired security and the due tranquillity that are the prerogative of every nation . . .

Pope John Paul II also said…

The historical experience of socialist countries has sadly demonstrated that collectivism does not do away with alienation but rather increases it, adding to it a lack of basic necessities and economic inefficiency.

Why is this present Pope supporting the enemies of Freedom…and of God’s Chosen People?

Being a peacemaker is one thing. Being an enabler of the Enemies of Freedom is quite another.

 Until He Comes,

KJ

Rolling Stone Lied About UV “Rape” Story

On By kingsjesterIn PoliticsLeave a comment

 

 

Media Bias MeterHonesty…is such a lonely word. – Billy Joel

The New York Times reports that

Rolling Stone magazine retracted its article about a brutal gang rape at a University of Virginia fraternity after the release of a report on Sunday that concluded the widely discredited piece was the result of failures at every stage of the process.

The report, published by the Columbia Graduate School of Journalism and commissioned by Rolling Stone, said the magazine failed to engage in “basic, even routine journalistic practice” to verify details of the ordeal that the magazine’s source, identified only as Jackie, described to the article’s author, Sabrina Rubin Erdely.

On Sunday, Ms. Erdely, in her first extensive comments since the article was cast into doubt, apologized to Rolling Stone’s readers, her colleagues and “any victims of sexual assault who may feel fearful as a result of my article.”

In an interview discussing Columbia’s findings, Jann S. Wenner, the publisher of Rolling Stone, acknowledged the piece’s flaws but said that it represented an isolated and unusual episode and that Ms. Erdely would continue to write for the magazine. The problems with the article started with its source, Mr. Wenner said. He described her as “a really expert fabulist storyteller” who managed to manipulate the magazine’s journalism process. When asked to clarify, he said that he was not trying to blame Jackie, “but obviously there is something here that is untruthful, and something sits at her doorstep.”

The Columbia report cataloged a series of errors at Rolling Stone, finding that the magazine could have avoided trouble with the article if certain basic “reporting pathways” had been followed. Written by Steve Coll, the Columbia journalism school’s dean; Sheila Coronel, the dean of academic affairs; and Derek Kravitz, a postgraduate research scholar at the university, the report, at nearly 13,000 words, is longer than the 9,000-word article, “A Rape on Campus.”

After its publication last November, the article stoked a national conversation about sexual assault on college campuses and roiled the university.

The police in Charlottesville, Va., said last month they had “exhausted all investigative leads” and found “no substantive basis” to support the article’s depiction of the assault. Jackie did not cooperate with the police and declined to be interviewed for the Columbia report. She also declined, through her lawyer, to be interviewed for this article. She is no longer in touch with some of the advocates who first brought her to the attention of Rolling Stone, said Emily Renda, a rape survivor working on sexual assault issues at the University of Virginia.

Mr. Wenner said Will Dana, the magazine’s managing editor, and the editor of the article, Sean Woods, would keep their jobs.

Since the 1960s, America’s newsrooms have been overwhelmingly staffed by Liberals.

However, nowadays, a Conservative watchdog organization keeps an intense watch on the antics of the Main Stream Media:

The Media Research Center, headquartered in Alexandria, VA, began modestly with a handful of employees, a black and white TV, and a rented computer. The first order of business was to organize a research operation second to none. For years, conservatives could only present the anecdotal evidence of liberal journalists’ bias — a question in this interview, a statement in that report. However, anecdotal examples of bias do not prove a liberal agenda. Only through thorough, comprehensive, and ongoing analysis based on quantitative and qualitative research can one document liberal bias in the media.

From a $339,000 initial annual budget, the MRC has grown to be the nation’s largest and most sophisticated television and monitoring operation, now employing 60 professional staff with a $10 million annual budget.

The result of the MRC’s work is a mountain of evidence to use in combating the undeniable bias. The key to the MRC’s effectiveness is the ability to prove bias by using scientific studies and word-for-word quotes from the media.

For example, the MRC reports that:

In May 2004, the Pew Research Center for The People and The Press (in association with the Project for Excellence in Journalism and the Committee of Concerned Journalists) surveyed 547 journalists and media executives, including 247 at national-level media outlets. The poll was similar to ones conducted by the same group (previously known as the Times Mirror Center for the People and the Press) in 1995 and 1999. The actual polling was done by the Princeton Survey Research Associates.

KEY FINDINGS:

Five times more national journalists identify themselves as “liberal” (34 percent) than “conservative” (just 7 percent). In contrast, a survey of the public taken in May 2004 found 20 percent saying they were liberal, and 33 percent saying they were conservative.

The percentage of national reporters saying they are liberal has increased, from 22 percent in 1995 to 34 percent in 2004. The percentage of self-identified conservatives remains low, rising from a meager 4 percent in 1995 to a still-paltry 7 percent in 2004.

Liberals also outnumber conservatives in local newsrooms. Pew found that 23 percent of the local journalists they questioned say they are liberals, while about half as many (12 percent) call themselves conservative.

Most national journalists (55 percent) say the media are “not critical enough” of President Bush, compared with only eight percent who believe the press has been “too critical.” In 1995, the poll found just two percent thought journalists had given “too much” coverage to then-President Clinton’s accomplishments, compared to 48 percent who complained of “too little” coverage of Clinton’s achievements.

Reporters struggled to name a liberal news organization. According to Pew, “The New York Times was most often mentioned as the national daily news organization that takes a decidedly liberal point of view, but only by 20% of the national sample.” Only two percent of reporters suggested CNN, ABC, CBS, or NPR were liberal; just one percent named NBC.

Journalists did see ideology at one outlet: “The single news outlet that strikes most journalists as taking a particular ideological stance — either liberal or conservative — is Fox News Channel,” Pew reported. More than two-thirds of national journalists (69 percent) tagged FNC as a conservative news organization, followed by The Washington Times (9 percent) and The Wall Street Journal (8 percent).

The way the Main Stream Media views themselves is quite different from the way Americans view them.

On July 25th of 2011, thehill.com published a poll focusing on voters’ perceptions of Media Bias:

A full 68 percent of voters consider the news media biased, the poll found. Most, 46 percent, believe the media generally favor Democrats, while 22 percent said they believe Republicans are favored, with 28 percent saying the media is reasonably balanced.

The share of voters who believe the media are too friendly with politicians is almost twice as large as those who find their coverage of politicians appropriate. Forty-four percent of voters assert the former; only 24 percent believe the latter.

The picture is not much brighter on the general question of ethics. Fifty-seven percent of voters think of the news media as either somewhat or very unethical, while only 39 percent see them as somewhat or very ethical.

With more and more news stories, such as this one, turning out to be outright lies, it has become very apparent that, the Main Stream Media’s “broadcast journalists” don’t feel that they have to feign objectivity anymore.

The majority of the “News Operations” in our country long ago sold out to the Democrat Party and their own Liberal Ideology. Sensationalism, propaganda, and toeing the Party Line, have replaced Journalistic Ethics and objectivity.

And, all too often, as in the case of the Duke Lacrosse Players and, almost, these young me from the University of Virginia, the Main Stream Media can irreparably damage people’s lives.

…And, shape the destiny of a country through lies, innuendo, and cover-up.

“And, that’s the way it is, April 6th, 2015.”

Until He Comes,

KJ

Saving America From Oblivion (A KJ Op Ed)

On By kingsjesterIn Politics1 Comment

Obama-Shrinks-2Conservatives continued to outnumber moderates and liberals in the U.S. population in 2014, as they have since 2009. However, their 14-percentage-point edge over liberals last year, 38% vs. 24%, is the smallest in Gallup’s trends since 1992. The percentage of U.S. adults identifying themselves as politically conservative in 2014 was unchanged from 2013, as was the percentage of moderates, at 34%, while the percentage considering themselves liberal rose a percentage point for the third straight year. – Gallup.com

As I am wont to do, from time to time, this Saturday morning’s post is going to be an Opinion editorial, or an Op Ed.

When did America stop being the Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave…and start being the Land of the Restricted and the Home of the Apologetic?

Regardless of what your first thought probably is, this phenomenon did not originate with Barack Hussein Obama, it just intensified with him.

In American Politics, as far as anybody can remember, that is still alive and kicking, you have had those of a political ideology who were Pro-American and Gung Ho about all the things that this country stands for. And, on the other side, you had those of a political ideology who criticized everything that America stood for, and still stands, for to this day.

From those who believed that Communism would be great for America back in the 1950s, to those in the 1960’s, who wanted to “tune in, turn on, and drop out”, and spit on our returning Servicemen, to those of the 1970s who were naive pacifists like their President, Jimmy Carter, to those in the 1980s, who were part of the “Me Generation”, to those whom we call “Progressives” (a misnomer) or “Modern Liberals” in our present generation, there has always been a minority segment of American Society, who despise everything that this land, which was given us by the Almighty and was fought for and died for by those before us, stands for, while they reap all the benefits of America the Beautiful.

Hypocritical, No?

Back in simpler times, a lot of Americans had a bumper sticker that read

America… Love it or Leave it.

I’d love to have a bumper sticker that said,

America… Stand for her or shut up.

I guess that the reason that I’m speaking of this on this crisp March morning before Palm Sunday, is that I am fed up with our first anti-American President and all his sycophantic, unwitting minions, who cannot understand the peril that we are facing. It’s one thing to go around like an ostrich with your head in the sand, but it sure does limit your view of what is happening around you, while showing off your hindquarters to the rest of the world.

Unfortunately, that is exactly what is happening to our nation today.

The trouble with our Liberal friends is not that they’re ignorant; it’s just that they know so much that isn’t so. – Ronald Reagan

Modern American Liberals, from President Barack Hussein Obama on down the line,  believe intrinsically that they are the smartest people in any room that they walk into, an arrogance which blinds them to reality 99.9% of the time.

…foreign policy is the area where I am probably most confident that I know more and understand the world better than Sen. Clinton or Sen. McCain.”- Barack Hussein Obama, April 2008

Uh huh.

Lost in the fog of his own hubris, Obama, in his zeal to form what he believes to be a lasting agreement with the Rogue Barbaric Islamic State of Iran, which includes trusting them implicitly not to use the nuclear bomb, to blow us off the face of the earth, which he is going to allow them to have,  seriously believes that the Iranians will be faithful to this farce of an agreement. His own mistaken faith in his own “superior intellect” will not allow him to believe otherwise. In his quest to leave a legacy, other than the destruction of our country, as we know it,

President Obama’s foreign policy is one of saying, first of all, America’s just another nation with a flag. – Mitt Romney, 11/22/2011

Unfortunately, his domestic policy is no better than his foreign policy, which leaves the overwhelming majority of Americans with no sense of security in Obama’s ability to lead, whatsoever.

78% of Americans are worried about the direction of the nation’s economy in the next year – Fox News 2014 Midterm Elections Exit Poll

That is, those of us who do not have our heads placed firmly in the sand and our hindquarters sticking defiantly up in the air.

Fortunately, the number of Americans we’re walking around without blinders on, with a panoramic world view, and with their hindquarters exactly where they are supposed to be, is growing in number, as proven by the midterm elections of 2014.

Do not allow the members of a minority political ideology, which only comprises 24% of America’s population, convince you that everyone feels about America the way they do.

Liberals truly believe and shriek at the top of their lungs that calling out Obama on his ineptness and incompetency means that you are “against America”.

That is not the case.

Ask “Bubba”:

Obama, Bill Clinton said, “doesn’t know how to be president” and is “incompetent.”- “The Amateur”, Edward Klein, May, 2012

As certain as I am about the love of my 7-year old grandson, I possess that same certainty that the overwhelming majority of Americans are becoming very aware of the perilous situation, which this administration has placed us in.

This awareness will manifest itself in the upcoming months as we near the 2016 presidential election.

Whoever winds up as the Republican Presidential Candidate, must not only also possess that awareness, but must possess the oral skills to communicate that awareness and also, a passion to protect and serve the United States of America, a nation which he must love with all his heart.

That is what it will take to stop this “Shining City Upon a Hill”, from becoming a third-world barrio…and to continue our existence as a nation.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Little White Liars, Bald-Faced Liars, and Brian Williams

On By kingsjesterIn Politics1 Comment

Brian Williams 1Lies, lies
I can’t believe
A word you say
Lies, lies
Are gonna make
You sad someday – The Knickerbockers, 1966

The New Orleans Advocate reports that

NBC News anchor Brian Williams, who apologized on the air Wednesday night for lying about an experience covering the Iraq War, is now facing scrutiny over his gripping accounts of Hurricane Katrina, the disaster that burnished his nightly news bona fides almost a decade ago.

Williams’ account of seeing a body float by in the French Quarter — which remained largely dry — and even a claim of catching dysentery from drinking Katrina floodwaters have raised eyebrows among bloggers and elsewhere since he took it on the chin this week over a claim that he rode in a helicopter that was downed by a rocket-propelled grenade in Iraq.

“I was instead in a following aircraft. We all landed after the ground fire incident and spent two harrowing nights in a sandstorm in the Iraq desert,” Williams said Wednesday. He painted his earlier description as a “bungled attempt” to thank an Iraq War veteran.

The online feeding frenzy quickly turned to the 55-year-old anchor’s signature assignment: covering Katrina from before it made landfall, when he spent the night of the storm with refuge-seekers in the Superdome and then reported on the harrowing days that followed.

“When you look out of your hotel window in the French Quarter and watch a man float by face down, when you see bodies that you last saw in Banda Aceh, Indonesia, and swore to yourself that you would never see in your country,” Williams said in a 2006 interview.

And last year, in an interview with Tom Brokaw, the man he replaced in the anchor chair at NBC, Williams said:

“My week, two weeks there was not helped by the fact that I accidentally ingested some of the floodwater. I became very sick with dysentery, our hotel was overrun with gangs, I was rescued in the stairwell of a five-star hotel in New Orleans by a young police officer. We are friends to this day. And uh, it just was uh, I look back at total agony.”

But the French Quarter, the original high ground of New Orleans, was not impacted by the floodwaters that overwhelmed the vast majority of the city.

A spokesman for NBC did not immediately respond Thursday to questions about those comments, the hotel to which Williams referred, whether Williams stands by the claims or whether the network is reviewing them.

Williams has described his experiences during Katrina as personally transformative, and he has returned to the city and the topic numerous times since.

“I saw fear, I saw death, I saw depravity, I saw firearms being brandished, I saw looting,” he told the Los Angeles Times a year after Katrina made landfall.

He also recalled the danger of the moment in a 2007 interview on C-SPAN.

“We had to have men with guns behind me one night because I was the only source of light downtown, was the lights that were illuminating the broadcast,” Williams said. “We were told not to drink our bottled water in front of people because we could get killed for it.”

Other accounts have Williams curled up in the fetal position between his on-air reports from a bad bout with dysentery.

A spokeswoman from the Louisiana Department of Health and Hospitals said dysentery is not one of the reportable diseases the agency tracks but that contaminated water sources are possible “transmission points” for dysentery.

Dr. Brobson Lutz, a former city health director who manned an EMS trailer that was set up in the 900 block of Dumaine Street, a block from his house in the French Quarter, said he was a fan of Williams but dubious of his claims.

“We were never wet. It was never wet,” he remarked of the conditions in the city’s most historic neighborhood.

As for dysentery, “I saw a lot of people with cuts and bruises and such, but I don’t recall a single, solitary case of gastroenteritis during Katrina or in the whole month afterward,” Lutz said.

As for Williams saying he accidentally drank floodwaters, Lutz added, “I don’t know anybody that’s tried that to see, but my dogs drank it, and they didn’t have any problems.”

In his interview last year, Brokaw praised Williams, saying that with his reporting during Katrina, Williams “took ownership, if you will, of the anchor chair” following a longtime stint as Brokaw’s understudy.

Since then, Williams has become well known for his sharp-witted comic turns on the late-night talk show circuit. And he has continued to check in on a city that he has said “is always going to be a part of me.”

Questions about Williams’ recollections of his experience during Katrina weave into a larger tapestry of erratic, and sometimes downright erroneous, journalism that emerged from the chaos of the storm and its aftermath.

Why do members of the Main Stream Media, like Brian Williams,  feel so compelled to lie about their experiences, “embellishing their resumes”, and acting like a poor man’s Geraldo Rivera?

First, Let’s look at the make-up of our nation, in terms of political ideology.

Per gallup.com…

38% of Americans are Conservative.
34% of Americans are Moderate.
23% is Americans are Liberals.

These numbers prove that Conservatism remains the strongest political ideology in America, followed closely by Americans who consider themselves to be “Moderate”.

Liberalism remains the smallest (albeit most vocal) political ideology in America, still mired in the low 20s, in terms of that ideology’s percentage of our population.

The disconnect between CNN and MSNBC and the American Viewing Public occurs because the political ideology of the Main Stream Media is overwhelmingly Liberal.

A while back, the Media Research Center reported that:

In May 2004, the Pew Research Center for The People and The Press (in association with the Project for Excellence in Journalism and the Committee of Concerned Journalists) surveyed 547 journalists and media executives, including 247 at national-level media outlets. The poll was similar to ones conducted by the same group (previously known as the Times Mirror Center for the People and the Press) in 1995 and 1999. The actual polling was done by the Princeton Survey Research Associates.

KEY FINDINGS:

Five times more national journalists identify themselves as “liberal” (34 percent) than “conservative” (just 7 percent). In contrast, a survey of the public taken in May 2004 found 20 percent saying they were liberal, and 33 percent saying they were conservative.

The percentage of national reporters saying they are liberal has increased, from 22 percent in 1995 to 34 percent in 2004. The percentage of self-identified conservatives remains low, rising from a meager 4 percent in 1995 to a still-paltry 7 percent in 2004.

Liberals also outnumber conservatives in local newsrooms. Pew found that 23 percent of the local journalists they questioned say they are liberals, while about half as many (12 percent) call themselves conservative.

Most national journalists (55 percent) say the media are “not critical enough” of President Bush, compared with only eight percent who believe the press has been “too critical.” In 1995, the poll found just two percent thought journalists had given “too much” coverage to then-President Clinton’s accomplishments, compared to 48 percent who complained of “too little” coverage of Clinton’s achievements.

Reporters struggled to name a liberal news organization. According to Pew, “The New York Times was most often mentioned as the national daily news organization that takes a decidedly liberal point of view, but only by 20% of the national sample.” Only two percent of reporters suggested CNN, ABC, CBS, or NPR were liberal; just one percent named NBC.

Journalists did see ideology at one outlet: “The single news outlet that strikes most journalists as taking a particular ideological stance — either liberal or conservative — is Fox News Channel,” Pew reported. More than two-thirds of national journalists (69 percent) tagged FNC as a conservative news organization, followed by The Washington Times (9 percent) and The Wall Street Journal (8 percent).

Since Pew conducted their research, 10 years ago in 2004, the Liberal Political Bias, present in America’s Newsrooms, has steadily become worse, to the point of being unwatchable, due to their slavish devotion to the “First Post-Racial President”and their decidedly Liberal slant to every single news story, including the shootings of Strong Arm Robbery Suspect Michael Brown, Earl Gardner in New York City, and all of the politically-funded “protests”.

The brilliant Conservative Economist, Dr. Thomas Sowell wrote,

…Perhaps the most remarkable feature of the world envisioned by today’s liberals is that it is a world where other people just passively accept whatever “change” liberals impose. In the world of Liberal Land, you can just take for granted all the benefits of the existing society, and then simply tack on your new, wonderful ideas that will make things better.

Liberal Ideas always cost taxpayer money…and they never make things better for the average American.

The Main Stream Media firmly believes that it is their job to serve as a Propaganda Arm for both the Democrats in Congress and President Barack Hussein Obama and his Administration, no matter how costly their programs might be to the American People.

President Ronald Reagan once famously said, 

It isn’t so much that liberals are ignorant. It’s just that they know so many things that aren’t so.

Which explains the gross overestimation by “Broadcast Journalists”, such as Brian Williams, of their own intelligence and potential popularity through their subjective coverage, aimed at a Liberal audience.

In clear and concise terms (in deference to any Liberals who may be reading this), the reason that Fox News kicks CNN’s and MSNBC’s hindquarters week after week, and is actually more respected than the Broadcast News Operations, is because their programming and news-reporting philosophy more accurately reflects the political ideology of the average American.

When I was a Collegiate Radio News Director from 1978-1980, I made sure that all 21 students on my on-air staff, including myself, maintained our objectivity in our reporting.

In Main Stream Media Newsrooms now, 35 years later,  ideology has replaced objectivity.

And, that is why they fail.

…And, why Brian Williams felt compelled to lie…and lie….

Until He Comes,

KJ

Fox News Continues to Dominate CNN and MSNBC. Liberals Can’t Figure Out Why.

On By kingsjesterIn PoliticsLeave a comment

cablenewslogos8252014As I peruse Political Websites and Facebook Pages, I have noticed that Liberal Posters really have a problem with Fox News. They cannot, for the life of them, figure out why CNN and MSNBC keep getting trounced in the Rating Wars by “Faux News”, as they feebly refer to the Cable News Leader.

Variety.com reports that

A busy week in news was a good one for Fox News Channel, which logged its second highest-rated frame of the year, but a weak one for MSNBC, which found itself deep in third place.

FNC, with several shows hitting 2014 highs, won in adults 25-54 and total viewers on both a primetime and total-day basis for Monday through Friday of last week. Tune-in was above average across the news board due to coverage of the protests in Ferguson and the murder of James Foley.

Looking at the Nielsen numbers, Fox News averaged 443,000 adults 25-54 in primetime to finish ahead of CNN(361,000) in the key news demo, with both networks more than doubling the tally of MSNBC (179,000). CNN had narrowly won in the demo on Monday and Tuesday, before Fox News asserted itself Wednesday through Friday.

In total-day numbers, FNC averaged 272,000, to 241,000 for CNN and just 106,000 for MSNBC.

The only week to rate higher for Fox News this year was the State of the Union frame in January.

As usual, it was no contest in total viewers, with Fox News (2.25 million in primetime, 1.26 million total-day) beating the combined tune-in of CNN (901,000 in primetime, 690,000 in total-day) and MSNBC (737,000 in primetime, 402,000 in total-day).

Among the highlights for Fox News was “The Kelly File” drawing its largest weekly demo audience of the calendar year (455,000), while “Hannity” had its most-watched week of the year (1.84 million) and its highest-rated demo performance to date in the 10 o’clock hour (421,000).  Daytime shows “Outnumbered” and “Happening Now” also hit some 2014 highs.

Why does Fox News keep kicking CNN’s and MSNBC’s hindquarters in the Ratings Wars?

It’s all boils down to a FAILURE TO COMMUNICATE, brought about by disparate political ideologies.

First, Let’s look at the make-up of our nation, in terms of political ideology.

Per gallup.com…

38% of Americans are Conservative.
34% of Americans are Moderate.
23% is Americans are Liberals.

These numbers prove that Conservatism remains the strongest political ideology in America, followed closely by Americans who consider themselves to be “Moderate”.

Liberalism remains the smallest (albeit most vocal) political ideology in America, still mired in the low 20s, in terms of that ideology’s percentage of our population.

The disconnect between CNN and MSNBC and the American Viewing Public occurs because the political ideology of the Main Stream Media is overwhelmingly Liberal.

A while back, the Media Research Center reported that:

In May 2004, the Pew Research Center for The People and The Press (in association with the Project for Excellence in Journalism and the Committee of Concerned Journalists) surveyed 547 journalists and media executives, including 247 at national-level media outlets. The poll was similar to ones conducted by the same group (previously known as the Times Mirror Center for the People and the Press) in 1995 and 1999. The actual polling was done by the Princeton Survey Research Associates.

KEY FINDINGS:

Five times more national journalists identify themselves as “liberal” (34 percent) than “conservative” (just 7 percent). In contrast, a survey of the public taken in May 2004 found 20 percent saying they were liberal, and 33 percent saying they were conservative.

The percentage of national reporters saying they are liberal has increased, from 22 percent in 1995 to 34 percent in 2004. The percentage of self-identified conservatives remains low, rising from a meager 4 percent in 1995 to a still-paltry 7 percent in 2004.

Liberals also outnumber conservatives in local newsrooms. Pew found that 23 percent of the local journalists they questioned say they are liberals, while about half as many (12 percent) call themselves conservative.

Most national journalists (55 percent) say the media are “not critical enough” of President Bush, compared with only eight percent who believe the press has been “too critical.” In 1995, the poll found just two percent thought journalists had given “too much” coverage to then-President Clinton’s accomplishments, compared to 48 percent who complained of “too little” coverage of Clinton’s achievements.

Reporters struggled to name a liberal news organization. According to Pew, “The New York Times was most often mentioned as the national daily news organization that takes a decidedly liberal point of view, but only by 20% of the national sample.” Only two percent of reporters suggested CNN, ABC, CBS, or NPR were liberal; just one percent named NBC.

Journalists did see ideology at one outlet: “The single news outlet that strikes most journalists as taking a particular ideological stance — either liberal or conservative — is Fox News Channel,” Pew reported. More than two-thirds of national journalists (69 percent) tagged FNC as a conservative news organization, followed by The Washington Times (9 percent) and The Wall Street Journal (8 percent).

Since Pew conducted their research, 10 years ago in 2004, the Liberal Political Bias, present in America’s Newsrooms, has steadily become worse, to the point of being unwatchable, due to their slavish devotion to the “First Post-Racial President”and their decidedly Liberal slant to every single news story, including the recent shooting of Strong Arm Robbery Suspect Michael Brown, and his Media Circus Funeral, yesterday.

The brilliant Conservative Economist, Dr. Thomas Sowell wrote,

…Perhaps the most remarkable feature of the world envisioned by today’s liberals is that it is a world where other people just passively accept whatever “change” liberals impose. In the world of Liberal Land, you can just take for granted all the benefits of the existing society, and then simply tack on your new, wonderful ideas that will make things better.

Liberal Ideas always cost taxpayer money…and they never make things better for the average American.

The Main Stream Media firmly believes that it is their job to serve as a Propaganda Arm for both the Democrats in Congress and President Barack Hussein Obama and his Administration, no matter how costly their programs might be to the American People.

President Ronald Reagan once famously said, 

It isn’t so much that liberals are ignorant. It’s just that they know so many things that aren’t so.

Which explains the gross overestimation by Liberal Cable News Channels of their own intelligence and potential popularity through their subjective coverage, aimed at a Liberal audience.

In clear and concise terms (in deference to any Liberals who may be reading this), the reason that Fox News kicks CNN’s and MSNBC’s hindquarters week after week, is because their programming and news-reporting philosophy more accurately reflects the political ideology of the average American.

When I was a Collegiate Radio News Director from 1978-1980, I made sure that the on-air staff, including myself, maintained our objectivity in our reporting.

In Main Stream Media Newsrooms now, 35 years later,  ideology has replaced objectivity.

And, that is why they fail.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

Thoughts For a Sunday Morning: Why Liberals Who Compare American Christianity To Radical Islam Fail…Miserably

On By kingsjesterIn Christianity, Politics7 Comments

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

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

This is the direct opposite of Christianity.

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

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

Obama,having attended school at an Indonesian Madrassa as a child, has been supportive of Muslims in America since his Presidency began.  In a speech he delivered to the Muslim world on June 4, 2009 at Cairo University, Obama said:

I know, too, that Islam has always been a part of America’s story. The first nation to recognize my country was Morocco. In signing the Treaty of Tripoli in 1796, our second President John Adams wrote, “The United States has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion or tranquility of Muslims.”

Time out, Scooter.  US President John Adams  also said:

The general principles on which the fathers achieved independence were the general principles of Christianity. I will avow that I then believed, and now believe, that those general principles of Christianity are as eternal and immutable as the existence and attributes of God.

Now, back to the Cairo Speech.

And since our founding, American Muslims have enriched the United States. They have fought in our wars, served in government, stood for civil rights, started businesses, taught at our Universities, excelled in our sports arenas, won Nobel Prizes, built our tallest building, and lit the Olympic Torch. And when the first Muslim-American was recently elected to Congress, he took the oath to defend our Constitution using the same Holy Koran that one of our Founding Fathers – Thomas Jefferson – kept in his personal library.

However, what the Liberal Main Stream Media never reported, and Obama chose to ignore, was the fact that Thomas Jefferson kept a Koran in his library in order to gain a better insight into the way Muslims think, because of the War with the Barbary Pirates.

Obama and his minions are trying desperately to rewrite history , by trying to somehow subliminally imply that Muslims go all the way back in our nation to the Founding Fathers.  That is not the case.

From adherents.com:

There were 95 Senators and Representatives in the First Federal Congress. If one combines the total number of signatures on the Declaration, the Articles of Confederation and the Constitution with the non-signing Constitutional Convention delegates, and then adds to that sum the number of congressmen in the First Federal Congress, one obtains a total of 238 “slots” or “positions” in these groups which one can classify as “Founding Fathers” of the United States. Because 40 individuals had multiple roles (they signed multiple documents and/or also served in the First Federal Congress), there are 204 unique individuals in this group of “Founding Fathers.” These are the people who did one or more of the following:

– signed the Declaration of Independence
– signed the Articles of Confederation
– attended the Constitutional Convention of 1787
– signed the Constitution of the United States of America
– served as Senators in the First Federal Congress (1789-1791)
– served as U.S. Representatives in the First Federal Congress

The religious affiliations of these individuals are summarized below. Obviously this is a very restrictive set of names, and does not include everyone who could be considered an “American Founding Father.” But most of the major figures that people generally think of in this context are included using these criteria, including George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Samuel Adams, Benjamin Franklin, John Adams, John Hancock, James Madison, Alexander Hamilton and more. 

<!–

–>

Religious Affiliation
of U.S. Founding Fathers		 # of
Founding
Fathers		 % of
Founding
Fathers
Episcopalian/Anglican 88 54.7%
Presbyterian 30 18.6%
Congregationalist 27 16.8%
Quaker 7 4.3%
Dutch Reformed/German Reformed 6 3.7%
Lutheran 5 3.1%
Catholic 3 1.9%
Huguenot 3 1.9%
Unitarian 3 1.9%
Methodist 2 1.2%
Calvinist 1 0.6%
unknown 43  %
TOTAL 204

Here are some quotes about God and Christianity from 3 Presidents of the United States, whom you might recognize:

John Quincy Adams

My hopes of a future life are all founded upon the Gospel of Christ and I cannot cavil or quibble away [evade or object to]. . . . the whole tenor of His conduct by which He sometimes positively asserted and at others countenances [permits] His disciples in asserting that He was God.

The hope of a Christian is inseparable from his faith. Whoever believes in the Divine inspiration of the Holy Scriptures must hope that the religion of Jesus shall prevail throughout the earth. Never since the foundation of the world have the prospects of mankind been more encouraging to that hope than they appear to be at the present time. And may the associated distribution of the Bible proceed and prosper till the Lord shall have made “bare His holy arm in the eyes of all the nations, and all the ends of the earth shall see the salvation of our God” [Isaiah 52:10].

In the chain of human events, the birthday of the nation is indissolubly linked with the birthday of the Savior. The Declaration of Independence laid the cornerstone of human government upon the first precepts of Christianity.

Thomas Jefferson

The doctrines of Jesus are simple, and tend all to the happiness of man.

The practice of morality being necessary for the well being of society, He [God] has taken care to impress its precepts so indelibly on our hearts that they shall not be effaced by the subtleties of our brain. We all agree in the obligation of the moral principles of Jesus and nowhere will they be found delivered in greater purity than in His discourses.

I am a Christian in the only sense in which He wished anyone to be: sincerely attached to His doctrines in preference to all others.

I am a real Christian – that is to say, a disciple of the doctrines of Jesus Christ.

George Washington

You do well to wish to learn our arts and ways of life, and above all, the religion of Jesus Christ. These will make you a greater and happier people than you are.

While we are zealously performing the duties of good citizens and soldiers, we certainly ought not to be inattentive to the higher duties of religion. To the distinguished character of Patriot, it should be our highest glory to add the more distinguished character of Christian.

The blessing and protection of Heaven are at all times necessary but especially so in times of public distress and danger. The General hopes and trusts that every officer and man will endeavor to live and act as becomes a Christian soldier, defending the dearest rights and liberties of his country.

I now make it my earnest prayer that God would… most graciously be pleased to dispose us all to do justice, to love mercy, and to demean ourselves with that charity, humility, and pacific temper of the mind which were the characteristics of the Divine Author of our blessed religion.

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

Now, I am not saying that every Muslim is on a jihad against “the infidels”.

However…

When Christians become “radicalized”, we want to share the testimony of what God has done for us through His love, with everyone we meet. We get involved in our local church and we become better fathers, mothers, sisters, brothers, and American Citizens.

When Muslims become “radicalized”, they want to “kill the Infidels” in the name of “Allah the Merciful”.

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

In the case of the barbarians of ISIS, it has turned them into doppelgangers of the Nazi Butchers of Dachau.

For Liberals to deny that, is disingenuous at best, and just plain out-and-out lying at worst.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

Israel Defends Itself Against Hamas. American Liberals Whine. European Muslims Riot.

On By kingsjesterIn Christianity, PoliticsLeave a comment

IsraelHamas1Now the Lord said to Abram, “Go from your country] and your kindred and your father’s house to the land that I will show you. 2 And I will make of you a great nation, and I will bless you and make your name great, so that you will be a blessing. 3 I will bless those who bless you, and him who dishonors you I will curse, and in you all the families of the earth shall be blessed.” – Genesis 12: 1-3

As America faces the current Illegal Alien Invasion, the United Kingdom and the rest of Europe is dealing with one of their own, as Middle Eastern Muslims are immigrating to European Nations, bringing Sharia Law and their Political Ideology, masquerading as a religion, with them.

The truth of my preceding statement was made quite evident, as Muslim-sponsored protests broke out across Europe, yesterday.

The website, timesofisrael.com reports that

Tens of thousands protested in London Saturday afternoon against Israel’s military operations in Gaza, denouncing Israel as a terrorist state and castigating British Prime Minister David Cameron for backing Israel’s right to self-defense against Hamas rocket fire.

Led by speakers on a podium, protesters holding placards and banners chanted pro-Palestinian and anti-Israel slogans.

At one point, a woman on the podium shouted “from the river to the sea” — a call for the elimination of Israel — and protesters responded by yelling “Palestine will be free.”

The crowd also directed shouts of “Shame on you” at Cameron, who publicly backed Israel’s right to defend itself against Hamas rocket fire aimed at the Israeli civilian population.

The Palestine Solidarity Campaign, which organized the demonstration, said that since the protest began at 12 p.m. (GMT), tens of thousands of people had gathered, more than the 20,000 anticipated. The demonstration began outside Downing Street and was to march to the Israeli embassy.

“London has already shown its outrage at Israel’s attacks on the mostly refugee population of Gaza, with people turning out in their thousands last week,” PSC Director Sarah Colborne said in a press release on the organization’s website. “Today’s national demonstration will give people from across the country the chance to say enough is enough, Israel’s siege of Gaza and its occupation of Palestinian land has to end now.”

Since Israel began Operation Protective Edge 12 days ago, 337 people have died in Gaza. Hamas has fired around 1,400 rockets into Israeli territory, aimed mostly at southern cities, but also frequently reaching the population centers of the Tel Aviv metropolitan area and Jerusalem. Several Hamas rockets have also struck almost as far north as Haifa. Two Israeli civilians have died in rocket attacks, including a Bedouin man near Dimona Saturday.

Saturday’s demonstration in London came on the heels of numerous protests Thursday and Friday worldwide, including Cairo, Istanbul, Cape Town, Berlin, New York and Washington. Many of the protests have turned violent.

In Istanbul, police warded off hundreds of rioters who attempted on Thursday to storm the Israeli embassy building. Demonstrators in Ankara and Istanbul also hurled stones at several compounds where Israeli officials reside. Calls for the destruction of the Jewish state were heard in both Turkish cities. Police responded by firing tear gas canisters and water cannons at the crowds. Israel decided Friday to pull some of its diplomatic staff out of Turkey in the wake of the protests.

These protests were on behalf of the “Palestinian People”. An area known as Palestine is referenced in the BIble…

Yea, and what have ye to do with me, O Tyre, and Zidon, and all the coasts of Palestine? will ye render me a recompence? and if ye recompense me, swiftly and speedily will I return your recompence upon your own head. – Joel 3:4

Palestine was a conventional name, among others, used between 450BC and 1948AD to describe a geographic region between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River, and various adjoining lands.

However, was there ever really such a “race” as the “The Palestinian People”?

According to disoverthenetworks.org,

Since the Six Day War of 1967, the Arab world’s most powerful leaders — in Egypt, Libya, Arabia, Syria, and Iraq prior to Saddam Hussein’s demise — have waged a war of words against Israel. Having failed to defeat Israel by means of naked military aggression, these leaders and their advisors decided, sometime between the end of the war and the Khartoum Conference of August-September 1967, to bring about the destruction of Israel by means of a relentless terror war.

To justify to the world their ruthless murder of Israeli civilians and their undying hatred of the West, these leaders needed to invent a narrative depicting Israel as a racist, war-mongering, oppressive, apartheid state that was illegally occupying Arab land and carrying out the genocide of an indigenous people that had a stronger claim to the land of Israel than did Israel itself.

Thus the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), under the tutelage of the Soviet KGB, invented “The Palestinian People” who allegedly had been forced to wage a war of national liberation against imperialism.

To justify this notion, Yasser Arafat, shortly after taking over as leader of the PLO, sent his adjutant, Abu Jihad (later the leader of the PLO’s military operations), to North Vietnam to study the strategy and tactics of guerrilla warfare in the hopes that the PLO could emulate Ho Chi Minh’s success with left-wing sympathizers in the United States and Europe. Ho’s chief strategist, General Giap, offered advice that changed the PLO’s identity and future:

“Stop talking about annihilating Israel and instead turn your terror war into a struggle for human rights. Then you will have the American people eating out of your hand.”

Giap’s counsel was simple but profound: the PLO needed to work in a way that concealed its real goals, permitted strategic deception, and gave the appearance of moderation. And the key to all this was creating an image that would help Arafat manipulate the American and Western news media.

Arafat developed the images of the “illegal occupation” and “Palestinian national self-determination,” both of which lent his terrorism the mantle of a legitimate peoples’ resistance. After the Six Day War, Muhammad Yazid, who had been minister of information in two Algerian wartime governments (1958-1962), imparted to Arafat some wisdom that echoed the lessons he had learned in North Vietnam:

“Wipe out the argument that Israel is a small state whose existence is threatened by the Arab states, or the reduction of the Palestinian problem to a question of refugees; instead, present the Palestinian struggle as a struggle for liberation like the others. Wipe out the impression . . . that in the struggle between the Palestinians and the Zionists, the Zionist is the underdog. Now it is the Arab who is oppressed and victimized in his existence because he is not only facing the Zionists but also world imperialism.”

This past week, in my discussions on political websites, I have found that Liberals and those who claim to be “l”ibertarians are siding with these “Palestinians”, following the example of their “fallen messiah” and his administration, who want God’s Chosen People to give half of their country to the people who want to kill them.

So, why would an American Administration and their fellow Liberals, including American Jews,  join with our nation’s sworn enemies in their Jihad against our staunchest ally, Israel?

For example, last week,

A CNN reporter, speaking live from Israel and overlooking the Gaza border, called Israelis ‘Scum’ for cheering IDF strikes against Hamas terrorists in the Gaza Strip.

During her live report, the reporter, CNN’s Diana Magnay, said, “I think you can probably see there are lots of Israelis gathered around who are cheering when they see these kinds of Israeli strikes.”

A few minutes later, she tweeted: “Israelis on hill above Sderot cheer as bombs land on #gaza; threaten to ‘destroy our car if I say a word wrong.’ Scum.”

In an  article, which posted June 2, 2011, on americanthinker.com, “Why Does the Left Hate Israel?”,  Richard Baehr attempts to answer that very question…

…I have been to several of the left wing Israel hate fests. They are scary. There is real passion in the air. There is something about Israel that gets the juices going. Anti—Semitism is a part of it. There are a lot of people who are envious of Jews, on the left as well as the right. Patrick Buchanan thinks Jews have hijacked the conservative movement. But on the left, particularly in the academy, and in journalism, I am certain there is professional envy of the many Jewish faces and what better way to get even, and get back for sometimes losing the competitive battle, than by picking on the Jewish state as a surrogate. Leftist Jews sometimes lead the assault against Israel in these venues, thereby giving the attacks, whatever their reason, greater moral authority. Few Jews will stand up for Israel in these environments, because of the great pressure on the left to conform to the group think in the institutions they control.

…The evidence I believe is clear today that Israel faces far greater threats from the left than the right. The left is reflexively anti—Israel and has established important beachheads in significant American institutions— academia, the media, and the old line Protestant ‘high’ churches, as well as in the very seats of government power in many Western European countries, and their intelligentsia. It is not surprising that Israel seems unable to get a fair shake from college professors, the BBC, Reuters, NPR, or liberal churches. Being anti—Israel has become part of their religion.

As a Christian American Conservative, I know whom I support:  Israel, home to God’s Chosen People.

You see, I’ve read The Book all the way through, several times.  I know how all of this ends.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Liberals Pushing “Moral Equivalency” Between American Christianity and Radical Islam

On By kingsjesterIn Christianity, Politics2 Comments

Islam cartoonRecently, I have heard and read from some of this “Me, First Generation” that there is not any difference between American Christianity and Radical Islam. Quite frankly, that’s like saying that there’s no difference between an in-ground swimming pool and a garden hose.

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

This is the direct opposite of Christianity.

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

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

Obama,having attended school at an Indonesian Madrassa as a child, has been supportive of Muslims in America since his Presidency began.  In a speech he delivered to the Muslim world on June 4, 2009 at Cairo University, Obama said:

I know, too, that Islam has always been a part of America’s story. The first nation to recognize my country was Morocco. In signing the Treaty of Tripoli in 1796, our second President John Adams wrote, “The United States has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion or tranquility of Muslims.”

Time out, Scooter.  US President John Adams  also said:

The general principles on which the fathers achieved independence were the general principles of Christianity. I will avow that I then believed, and now believe, that those general principles of Christianity are as eternal and immutable as the existence and attributes of God.

Now, back to the Cairo Speech.

And since our founding, American Muslims have enriched the United States. They have fought in our wars, served in government, stood for civil rights, started businesses, taught at our Universities, excelled in our sports arenas, won Nobel Prizes, built our tallest building, and lit the Olympic Torch. And when the first Muslim-American was recently elected to Congress, he took the oath to defend our Constitution using the same Holy Koran that one of our Founding Fathers – Thomas Jefferson – kept in his personal library.

However, what the Liberal Main Stream Media never reported, and Obama chose to ignore, was the fact that Thomas Jefferson kept a Koran in his library in order to gain a better insight into the way Muslims think, because of the War with the Barbary Pirates.

Obama and his minions are trying desperately to rewrite history , by trying to somehow subliminally imply that Muslims go all the way back in our nation to the Founding Fathers.  That is not the case.

From adherents.com:

There were 95 Senators and Representatives in the First Federal Congress. If one combines the total number of signatures on the Declaration, the Articles of Confederation and the Constitution with the non-signing Constitutional Convention delegates, and then adds to that sum the number of congressmen in the First Federal Congress, one obtains a total of 238 “slots” or “positions” in these groups which one can classify as “Founding Fathers” of the United States. Because 40 individuals had multiple roles (they signed multiple documents and/or also served in the First Federal Congress), there are 204 unique individuals in this group of “Founding Fathers.” These are the people who did one or more of the following:

– signed the Declaration of Independence
– signed the Articles of Confederation
– attended the Constitutional Convention of 1787
– signed the Constitution of the United States of America
– served as Senators in the First Federal Congress (1789-1791)
– served as U.S. Representatives in the First Federal Congress

The religious affiliations of these individuals are summarized below. Obviously this is a very restrictive set of names, and does not include everyone who could be considered an “American Founding Father.” But most of the major figures that people generally think of in this context are included using these criteria, including George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Samuel Adams, Benjamin Franklin, John Adams, John Hancock, James Madison, Alexander Hamilton and more. 

<!–

–>

Religious Affiliation
of U.S. Founding Fathers		 # of
Founding
Fathers		 % of
Founding
Fathers
Episcopalian/Anglican 88 54.7%
Presbyterian 30 18.6%
Congregationalist 27 16.8%
Quaker 7 4.3%
Dutch Reformed/German Reformed 6 3.7%
Lutheran 5 3.1%
Catholic 3 1.9%
Huguenot 3 1.9%
Unitarian 3 1.9%
Methodist 2 1.2%
Calvinist 1 0.6%
unknown 43  %
TOTAL 204

Here are some quotes about God and Christianity from 3 Presidents of the United States whom you might recognize:

John Quincy Adams

My hopes of a future life are all founded upon the Gospel of Christ and I cannot cavil or quibble away [evade or object to]. . . . the whole tenor of His conduct by which He sometimes positively asserted and at others countenances [permits] His disciples in asserting that He was God.

The hope of a Christian is inseparable from his faith. Whoever believes in the Divine inspiration of the Holy Scriptures must hope that the religion of Jesus shall prevail throughout the earth. Never since the foundation of the world have the prospects of mankind been more encouraging to that hope than they appear to be at the present time. And may the associated distribution of the Bible proceed and prosper till the Lord shall have made “bare His holy arm in the eyes of all the nations, and all the ends of the earth shall see the salvation of our God” [Isaiah 52:10].

In the chain of human events, the birthday of the nation is indissolubly linked with the birthday of the Savior. The Declaration of Independence laid the cornerstone of human government upon the first precepts of Christianity.

Thomas Jefferson

The doctrines of Jesus are simple, and tend all to the happiness of man.

The practice of morality being necessary for the well being of society, He [God] has taken care to impress its precepts so indelibly on our hearts that they shall not be effaced by the subtleties of our brain. We all agree in the obligation of the moral principles of Jesus and nowhere will they be found delivered in greater purity than in His discourses.

I am a Christian in the only sense in which He wished anyone to be: sincerely attached to His doctrines in preference to all others.

I am a real Christian – that is to say, a disciple of the doctrines of Jesus Christ.

George Washington

You do well to wish to learn our arts and ways of life, and above all, the religion of Jesus Christ. These will make you a greater and happier people than you are.

While we are zealously performing the duties of good citizens and soldiers, we certainly ought not to be inattentive to the higher duties of religion. To the distinguished character of Patriot, it should be our highest glory to add the more distinguished character of Christian.

The blessing and protection of Heaven are at all times necessary but especially so in times of public distress and danger. The General hopes and trusts that every officer and man will endeavor to live and act as becomes a Christian soldier, defending the dearest rights and liberties of his country.

I now make it my earnest prayer that God would… most graciously be pleased to dispose us all to do justice, to love mercy, and to demean ourselves with that charity, humility, and pacific temper of the mind which were the characteristics of the Divine Author of our blessed religion.

Islam and Christianity present two very different Deities, who may share some similarities, but who have different identities and ultimately different standards. To pretend they are the same is not only to be clueless of the faith of 78% of the citizens of this nation, but, to be ignorant of an integral part of our American Heritage, the legacy of Christian Faith, which our Founding Fathers bequeathed us.

Now, I am not saying that every Muslim is on a jihad against “the infidels”.

However…

When Christians become “radicalized”, we want to share the testimony of what God has done for us through His love, with everyone we meet. We get involved in our local church and we become better fathers, mothers, sisters, brothers, and American citizens.

When Muslims become “radicalized”, they want to “kill the Infidels” in the name of “Allah the Merciful”.

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

For Liberals to deny that, is disingenuous at best, and just plain out-and-out lying at worst.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

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

On By kingsjesterIn Christianity, Politics6 Comments

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