What Started as a National Pandemic Becomes a Political War as Americans Fight for the Right to Get Back to Work

8ac3b4c66aa8478d8f3884ffdce7f009-8ac3b4c66aa8478d8f3884f

FoxNews.com reports that

Unrest is growing Friday in the American states that have become the last holdouts in terms of announcing dates when their economies will start reopening during the coronavirus outbreak.

As the virus continues its deadly and unpredictable spread across the U.S., the economic losses are piling up as well, with more than 33 million Americans seeking jobless aid since the closures began.

The overwhelming majority of states have given businesses the green light to start reopening in hopes of containing the damage, with some going as far as allowing retail stores, restaurants and hairdressers to start serving customers again in limited capacities.

But other holdouts such as New York and Washington – despite revealing phased plans to do so – remain for the most part locked down indefinitely.

In Pennsylvania, Gov. Tom Wolf announced Friday that 13 western counties, including the Pittsburgh metropolitan area, would be permitted to gradually reopen next week, joining 24 counties across the northern part of the state. The only western county held back, Beaver County, is home to a severe nursing home outbreak where dozens have died and a congressman is calling for an investigation.

Beaver County officials blasted Wolf’s decision at a news conference Friday, saying the entire county shouldn’t be forced to stay shut down because of the problems at a single facility. The Beaver County district attorney, meanwhile, said he doesn’t want local police enforcing the business shutdown, nor would he prosecute violators.

“Our business owners and residents cannot become prisoners in our own county,” said Daniel Camp III, chairman of the Beaver County Board of Commissioners, calling Wolf’s decision to keep Beaver locked down “unwarranted and irrational.”

Wolf accused Beaver County officials of “jeopardizing lives” and said local officials’ anger at him is misdirected.

“I understand the frustration. But again the frustration has to be directed at the real enemy here. It’s the virus. It’s not the regulation,” he said.

“As we look at what we need to do to responsibly reopen the state, we can’t help but note that yesterday, May 6 — so this is now over two months since our first case — 325 people walked through or were taken through the doors of hospitals,” New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy said Thursday as protesters amassed once again at its statehouse in Trenton, reportedly chanting “open New Jersey now” and “freedom over fear!”

New Jersey – another one of the holdouts – reopened its parks and golf courses last week. Murphy around that time told “Fox & Friends” that the rest of his state’s reopening can begin to be phased in “as soon as we can responsibly get the health challenges under control” — which he thinks could be in a matter of weeks, not months. But as of Friday, that exact date remains unclear.

In Maryland, protests broke out over the weekend with some people calling on Gov. Larry Hogan to lift the state’s stay-at-home order and closures, which as of this Friday remain in effect for many industries and businesses across the state with no clear end date in sight. Hogan told Fox News on Sunday that while he was sympathetic, the number of confirmed cases in Maryland is continuing to rise.

“We’re hoping to get our numbers to plateau so we can get things open as quickly as possible because we have too many people not working and too many businesses that are suffering,” he said.

And in New York — which has suffered the most coronavirus deaths of any state in the nation–Gov. Andrew Cuomo outlined a set of criteria this week that each region must meet before phase one of its opening plan can begin. The soonest any region could start reopening is May 15, as the state’s stay-at home orders expire on that date. Yet some regions are being held up solely because they lack the testing levels Cuomo is seeking, leaving residents guessing how long it will take to meet that threshold.

“I get the emotion — everybody would like to see everything reopen tomorrow. Me, first and foremost. Everyone. On every level – personally, economically,” Cuomo said during his daily press briefing Friday. “But… we are now in control and we have the virus on the run because we have been smart and because we have been disciplined.”

The debate on America reopening its economy hit a flashpoint on April 30, as dozens of protesters — some of whom were carrying rifles – gathered inside Michigan’s Capitol building to voice their opposition to Gov. Gretchen Whitmer’s stay-at-home order.

As of this week, the tensions there remain, as one Michigan state lawmaker was spotted heading into work while being flanked by armed escorts.

…Yet as states begin to pull back the restrictions on their economies, experts like Dr. Anthony Fauci, who is the head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) and a member of the Coronavirus Task Force – are urging them to take caution.

“You can’t just leap over things and get into a situation where you’re really tempting a rebound,” he told NBC’s “Today” show in a recent interview. “That’s the thing I get concerned about. I hope they don’t do that.

“When you pull back, there will be cases,” he added.

What began as a “national pandemic” has become a political war to determine if America remains a Constitutional Republic or if we become a “Democratic Socialist” (i.e., MARXIST) country.

The Democrats have been using fear as a motivation to get usually rational average Americans to remain isolated and unemployed.

Since they do not have the power of the Presidency, the Dems have used their political clout in blue states to attempt to herd Americans into obeying state and municipal elected politicians as if those politicians were shepherds and they were sheep.

As far as I am concerned, there was and is only one Good Shepherd and He wants us all to be free.

Cowering in fear and following like lost sheep are not things that come naturally to Americans.

We are direct descendants of people who braved long voyages to reach an undeveloped land full of unknown dangers.

And, after they got here and started to build a life for themselves, in order to secure their freedom, they, although greatly outnumbered, had to face the largest and most efficient army in the known world, even though they were greatly outmanned and outgunned, in a war to secure freedom for themselves, their children, and their children’ children.

That’s us, y’all.

When our Founders declared their freedom from tyranny, the document they wrote began as follows:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed…The Declaration of Independence, July 4, 1776

The majority of Americans want to get back to work. They want to provide for their families.

They want their individual freedom, their birthright as Americans, back.

Now, those who wish for Americans to continue to live cloistered like a bunch of Monks will claim that they “just want to keep us safe”.

Well, as of yesterday, it has been reported that 66% of those living in New York City who have contracted the Chinese Coronavirus have done it by following the guidelines put in place by the government: living in isolation, social distancing, and washing their hands often.

Americans are becoming restless because it is dawning on them that all of the economic gains which we have made as Americans under President Donald J. Trump over the last three years are being taken away from them in a political power play masked as a national “quarantine”.

I am certainly not saying do not use common sense as the coronavirus fades away.

What I am saying is this:

Americans have had enough of being “quarantined” when they are not even sick.

We, as a Facebook friend of mine keeps reminding me, are doing exactly what China wants us to do.

It is time to put Americans back to work before our country is “radically changed” into something that it was never meant to be.

We can not live in fear.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Christianity, Socialism, and the Future of the USA (A KJ Sunday Morning Reflection)

Washington-Praying

I began writing my daily articles in April of 2010.

Today, almost 10 years later, the struggle to prevent Liberals from rewriting our nation’s history continues.

As does the fight to keep the greed and avarice of those promoting the installment of Marxist Theory in our political, medical, and religious institutions from consuming our nation in a fire of self-destruction, as it has those before us.

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

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

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

JESUS, THE PERFECT MAN

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Jesus spoke the truth, and the truth is eternal.

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

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

WHO, THEN, was Jesus?

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

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

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

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

1. Socialism is Based on a Materialistic Worldview

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

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

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

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

2. Socialism Punishes Virtue

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

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

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

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

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

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

3. Socialism Endorses Stealing

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

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

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

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

4. Socialism Encourages Envy and Class Warfare

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

5. Socialism Seeks to Destroy Marriage & Family

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

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

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

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

America was not founded to be a Socialist Nation.

The following is courtesy of adherents.com:

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

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

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

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

Courtesy adherents.com

Religious Affiliation of U.S. Founding Fathers

# of Founding Fathers/% of Founding Fathers

Episcopalian/Anglican 88 54.7%
Presbyterian 30 18.6%
Congregationalist 27 16.8%
Quaker 7 4.3%
Dutch Reformed/German Reformed 6 3.7%
Lutheran 5 3.1%
Catholic 3 1.9%
Huguenot 3 1.9%
Unitarian 3 1.9%
Methodist 2 1.2%
Calvinist 1 0.6%
TOTAL 204

The Founding Fathers were, I do not doubt, aware of the following passage:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

As President Ronald Reagan said,

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

This November, Americans face a critical choice once again.

Do not be fooled.

Whether it is BIden or Sanders who is the Democratic Presidential Candidate, they are both Socialists.

Joe Biden just hides it better than Bernie Sanders does.

Pay attention to his actions, not his words.

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

Until He Comes,

KJ

Christianity, Socialism, and the Future of the USA (A KJ Sunday Morning Reflection)

Washington-Praying

I began writing my daily articles in April of 2010.

Over seven years later, the struggle to prevent Liberals from rewriting our nation’s history continues.

As does the fight to keep the greed and avarice of those promoting the installment of Marxist Theory in our political, medical, and religious institutions from consuming our nation in a fire of self-destruction, as it has those before us.

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

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

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

JESUS, THE PERFECT MAN

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Jesus spoke the truth, and the truth is eternal.

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

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

WHO, THEN, was Jesus?

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

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

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

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

1. Socialism is Based on a Materialistic Worldview

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

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

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

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

2. Socialism Punishes Virtue

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

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

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

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

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

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

3. Socialism Endorses Stealing

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

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

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

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

4. Socialism Encourages Envy and Class Warfare

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

5. Socialism Seeks to Destroy Marriage & Family

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

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

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

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

America was not founded to be a Socialist Nation.

The following is courtesy of adherents.com:

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

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

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

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

Courtesy adherents.com

Religious Affiliation of U.S. Founding Fathers

# of Founding Fathers/% of Founding Fathers

Episcopalian/Anglican 88 54.7%
Presbyterian 30 18.6%
Congregationalist 27 16.8%
Quaker 7 4.3%
Dutch Reformed/German Reformed 6 3.7%
Lutheran 5 3.1%
Catholic 3 1.9%
Huguenot 3 1.9%
Unitarian 3 1.9%
Methodist 2 1.2%
Calvinist 1 0.6%
TOTAL 204

The Founding Fathers were, I do not doubt, aware of the following passage:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

As President Ronald Reagan said,

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

Isn’t it interesting that those among us who claim to be the most tolerant are actually the least tolerant of all?

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

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

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

Until He Comes,

KJ

A KJ Sunday Morning Reflection: Political Pope Preaches Political Philosophy Instead of Psalms. Source: Secular Socialism.

shutterstock_357934955_edit

2 Now early in the morning He came again into the temple, and all the people came to Him; and He sat down and taught them. 3 Then the scribes and Pharisees brought to Him a woman caught in adultery. And when they had set her in the midst, 4 they said to Him, “Teacher, this woman was caught in adultery, in the very act. 5 Now Moses, in the law, commanded us that such should be stoned. But what do You say? 6 This they said, testing Him, that they might have something of which to accuse Him. But Jesus stooped down and wrote on the ground with His finger, as though He did not hear.

7 So when they continued asking Him, He raised Himself up and said to them, “He who is without sin among you, let him throw a stone at her first.” 8 And again He stooped down and wrote on the ground. 9 Then those who heard it, being convicted by their conscience, went out one by one, beginning with the oldest even to the last. And Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst. 10 When Jesus had raised Himself up and saw no one but the woman, He said to her, “Woman, where are those accusers of yours? Has no one condemned you?”

11 She said, “No one, Lord.”

And Jesus said to her, “Neither do I condemn you; go and sin no more.” – John 8: 2-11

The well-known admonition,

People who live in glass houses should not throw stones.

derives from this scripture.

As a Believer who had read God’s Holy Word from cover-to-cover in the past, 6 years in a row, I can tell you that you get something new out of the Bible every time you read it.

…if you are paying attention and not just reading the words.

CNSNews.com reports that

Pope Francis told the Italian newspaper La Repubblica on Thursday that the United States of America—and Russia, China, North Korea and Bashar al Assad’s Syria—have “a distorted vision of the world”–(“una visione distorta del mondo,” as reportetd in Italian by La Repubblica). 
The pope made the observation in an interview with La Repubblica reporter Eugenio Scalfari.

“Last Thursday, I got a call from Pope Francis,” Scalfari reported. “It was about noon, and I was at the newspaper when my phone rang.”

He said the pope wanted to see him at four that afternoon, according to a Google translation of the Italian report.

“Pope Francis told me to be very concerned about the meeting of the G20,” Scalfari wrote.

“I am afraid there are very dangerous alliances between powers who have a distorted view of the world: America and Russia, China and North Korea, Russia and Assad in the war in Syria,” the pope said.

As printed in Italian in La Repubblica, the pope said: “Temo che ci siano alleanze assai pericolose tra Potenze che hanno una visione distorta del mondo: America e Russia, Cina e Corea del Nord, Russia e Assad nella guerra di Siria.”

As transclated into English by Agence France Presse, which picked up the story, Pope Francis told La Repubblica: “I worry about very dangerous alliances between powers which have a distorted vision of the world: America and Russia, China and North Korea, (Russian President Vladimir) Putin and (Syria’s Bashar al-) Assad over the war in Syria.”

“The danger concerns immigration,” the pope continued to La Repubblica, as translated by AFP. “Our main and unfortunately growing problem in the world today is that of the poor, the weak, the excluded, which includes migrants.”

“This is why the G20 worries me: It mainly hits immigrants,” Pope Francis said, according to AFP.

In the same interview, according to La Repubblica, Pope Francis said that Europe must take on a “federal structure.”

“I also thought many times to this problem and came to the conclusion that, not only but also for this reason, Europe must take as soon as possible a federal structure,” the pope said, according to the Google translation of the La Repubblica article.

Speaking of “distorted visions of the world”…

Nice glass Vatican you live in, your eminence.

Newsmax.com reported recently that

Vatican police raided a gay orgy at the apartment of a Cardinal’s aide and Pope Francis was described by Italian media as “enraged.”

The apartment, where Francesco Cardinal Coccopalmerio’s secretary lives, belongs to the Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith, the arm charged with investigating clerical sex abuse, noted the New York Post, citing the Italian newspaper Il Fatto Quotidiano.

Coccopalmerio is a key aide to Pope Francis.

Police arrested the secretary, who is a priest, after taking him to a clinic for detox from the drugs he ingested, noted the Post.

Il Fatto Quotidiano reported that Pope Francis was “enraged” by the incident and that it happened on property owned by the church.

The newspaper stated that police raided the apartment in late June after receiving complaints from neighbors, said the Post. Authorities found men using drugs and engaging in homosexual activity when they arrived, reported the Italian press.

London’s Daily Mail said Coccopalmerio leads the Pontifical Council for Legislative texts and was said to have once recommended his secretary for a promotion to bishop.

The Daily Mail said the raid was just the latest black eye for the Vatican, which was dealing a two-year investigation that connected its finance chief Cardinal George Pell with historical sexual offenses.

Pell charged that he is not guilty of the charges, which police have yet to reveal publicly. The cardinal said he is looking forward to defending himself after “leaks to the media” about the case and “relentless character assassination,” said the Daily Mail.

This is not the first time that “Il Papa” has made his feelings known about America’s Political System.

According to the website, churchauthority.org, the Pope has three main duties:

He is the Supreme Pastor.

That means that he represents Christ’s love and concern for every single individual. That is why the Pope’s priority lies in getting to know people, understanding how they live, listening to their interests and sharing their sufferings and their joys. On no account should the Pope allow his contact with ordinary people to be obstructed by a multitude of administrative duties.

He is the Unifier of the People of God.

Because of the international character of the Church, this will create many demands. The good of the world-wide Church and the autonomy of local Churches need to be balanced. That is why the Pope should guide and inspire the Central Synod of Bishops so that it can efficiently work out agreements and general Church policies.

He is the Prime Witness to Faith.

This includes both preaching [= announcing the message to non-Christians] and teaching [= explaining an element of Christ’s message in today’s context]. On very rare occasions the Pope is the main exponent of the infallible understanding of faith [=inerrancy] that is carried by the whole people of God. The Pope can only do so after listening to the People of God and discerning the faith they carry in their hearts.

 

In February of 2016, while returning from Mexico, the pope was asked if U.S. Catholics could vote for someone with Trump’s views on immigration, particularly on the candidate’s promise to build a wall at the border with Mexico. He said a person with such views was “not Christian.”

Trump struck back, calling the pope’s comments “disgraceful.”

By now, those of you Liberals who are reading this post are probably participating in a synchronized wave, while chanting “Go, Pope, go!” with a joint in one hand and Mao’s “Little Red Book” in the other while saying to yourselves,

The Pope was right. You’re attempting a false equivalency. Modern America has no “Papal Treasure Vault” to protect.

That’s where you’re wrong, Skippy…and…err…Skippette.

Stop munching your Cheetos sitting there nekkid in a beanbag chair in Mom’s Basement for just a minute and I will tell you why.

Now, about your “Glass House”, Your Eminence, and the traditional Papal Attitude toward “immigrants” and “migrants”…

The wall around Vatican City  was built in 846, after Muslim raiders known as the Saracens looted Old St. Peter’s Basilica and the Papal Basilica of St. Paul outside the walls. The pirates took priceless treasures from the shrines.

In retaliation for the sack of some of the most sacred sites in Christendom, Pope Leo IV created the Leonine Wall, which completely surrounds the Vatican Hill. Additional defenses were added in the 15th and 16th centuries.

So, Liberals and Socialists (but, I repeat myself) ARE hypocrites.

Even if they wear a Papal Robe and Ring.

Now, Snowflakes…listen up.

America’s “Papal Treasure” is our people, especially our young people, who are so often the targets of those who have illegally entered our Sovereign Country through our porous Southern Border.

If Pope Francis has the right to protect his Papal Treasure behind an impenetrable wall, shouldn’t America have the right to do the same?

Nowhere in his Job Description, does it say that the Pontiff gets to interfere in the Political Affairs of any nation, much less, those of the Greatest Country on the Face of the Earth.

Pope Francis is the first Pope who represents the Far Left Political Viewpoint, which encompasses Modern Liberalism and the failed Marxist Political Ideology of Socialism.

He also comes from Latin America. It is not a coincidence that the recent invasion of underage illegal “immigrants” comes from that area, as well.

I had a poster on a Facebook Political Page scold me a while back for pointing out Il Papa’s Political Ideology. I informed them that the Pope, while being “Christ’s Representative” on Earth, is not himself, the Son of God, and, is therefore, an imperfect man, like the rest of us.

I do not believe that Jesus would be a part of the Social Justice Movement, which is so popular among Liberal Churches, today. His was and is a soul-saving movement. One that still brings hundreds of thousand of people to individual salvation on this terrestrial ball every day. A movement that, in fact, was embraced by the founders of this cherished land.

The Pope is the Leader of the Catholic Church.

No disrespect meant, but shouldn’t he be more concerned about winning individual souls for God, than “saving the Collective” and advancing the Political Ideology of Marx?

Until He Comes,

KJ

Christianity, Socialism, “Social Justice”, and the Future of the USA

th0MSCP94RI began writing my daily articles in April of 2010.

Over six years later, the struggle to prevent Liberals from rewriting our nation’s history continues.

As does the fight to keep the greed and avarice of those promoting the installment of Marxist Theory in both our political and religious institutions from consuming our nation in a fire of self-destruction, as it has those before us.

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

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

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

JESUS, THE PERFECT MAN

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Jesus spoke the truth, and the truth is eternal.

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

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

WHO, THEN, was Jesus?

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

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

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

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

1. Socialism is Based on a Materialistic Worldview

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

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

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

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

2. Socialism Punishes Virtue

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

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

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

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

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

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

3. Socialism Endorses Stealing

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

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

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

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

4. Socialism Encourages Envy and Class Warfare

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

5. Socialism Seeks to Destroy Marriage & Family

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

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

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

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

America was not founded to be a Socialist Nation.

The following is courtesy of adherents.com:

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

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

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

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

Courtesy adherents.com

Religious Affiliation of U.S. Founding Fathers

# of Founding Fathers/% of Founding Fathers

Episcopalian/Anglican 88 54.7%
Presbyterian 30 18.6%
Congregationalist 27 16.8%
Quaker 7 4.3%
Dutch Reformed/German Reformed 6 3.7%
Lutheran 5 3.1%
Catholic 3 1.9%
Huguenot 3 1.9%
Unitarian 3 1.9%
Methodist 2 1.2%
Calvinist 1 0.6%
TOTAL 204

The Founding Fathers were, I do not doubt, aware of the following passage:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

I have, however, noticed in the last few years, a propensity among those who have not been raised in a Christian home, to be intolerant toward those who have….staring with the individual who sits at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue in Washington, DC.

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

As President Ronald Reagan said,

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

Isn’t it interesting that those among us who claim to be the most tolerant are actually the least tolerant of all?

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

Watch the upcoming National Political Conventions and see who talks about Freedom and Responsibility and who talks about the right of “citizens”, both legal and illegal, to “free stuff”.

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

Until He Comes,

KJ

#BlueLivesMatter: The Sniper Attack in Dallas and the Consequences of Causing Racial Division for Political Gain

I woke up this morning with the following story on my phone, courtesy of AT&T Live (Yahoo News)…

Dallas suspect exchanges words, shots with police: ‘The end is coming’ Live…

Four officers have been killed and at least seven more injured in a hail of gunfire during a demonstration organized to protest this week’s police-involved shootings in Minnesota and Louisiana, Dallas police confirm.

Police Chief David Brown said at least two snipers ambushed law enforcement from an elevated position, striking 10 officers and a civilian.

SWAT officers continued to exchange gunfire early Friday with a suspect who was holed up in a downtown parking garage. The assailant, the chief said, is being very uncooperative.

“He has told our negotiators that the end is coming and he’s going to hurt and kill more of us — and that there are bombs all over the place in this garage and in downtown,” Brown said.The chief said a woman and two men are in custody and being questioned for their possible involvement in the attack.
“We still don’t have a complete comfort level that we have all the suspects,” Brown said during a 12:30 a.m. news conference.

Earlier in the evening, police published a photo of a gun-toting man on social media. They later said the man had turned himself in, but it remained unclear early Friday if he has any connection to the rampage.

This is one of our suspects. Please help us find him!pic.twitter.com/Na5T8ZxSz6

— Dallas Police Depart (@DallasPD) July 8, 2016
Friends and family told reporters that the man in the photos is Mark Hughes. Despite carrying an assault-style rifle during the march (which is legal in Texas), the man’s relatives were adamant that he was not involved in the shooting.

Bystanders reported hearing dozens of shots fired near City Hall about 9 p.m. local time. The gunfire terrified hundreds of demonstrators, sending them running for cover.

Video from a protestor as the shooting began. Jesus. Disturbing content. #Dallas#DallasPoliceShootingpic.twitter.com/yhPTI9KC2g

— Andy Cole (@AndyCole84)July 8, 2016
Some witnesses said the shooter or shooters ambushed officers from a multi-story parking garage.

“The cops had no idea who was shooting at them,” Jamal Johnson told KTVT-TV in Dallas. “Everyone knew it wasn’t a firework — it was an actual shot.”

The shooting broke out just hours after President Obama — reacting to the shootings deaths of black men in Minnesota and Louisiana this week —posted an emphatic message on Facebookcalling upon all Americans to confront persistent racial disparities between law enforcement and the communities they serve.

“To admit we’ve got a serious problem in no way contradicts our respect and appreciation for the vast majority of police officers who put their lives on the line to protect us every single day,” he wrote. “It is to say that, as a nation, we can and must do better to institute the best practices that reduce the appearance or reality of racial bias in law enforcement.”

Ever since Obama got into office, instead of words of unity and cohesiveness, such as Ronald Reagan spoke as president, all I have heard from him is the Rhetoric of Racial Division and Class Warfare.

It reminded me of all the historical conflicts which I used to read about, during the course in college which I took, titled “The Rhetoric of Social Protest“.

Karl Marx knew long ago that all you needed to do to touch the heart of the common man was to convince him of a shared struggle.

Vladimir Lenin took this a step further, by using the concept of a shared struggle to convince the Bolsheviks to help him overthrow the Czar of Russia and murder him and his family during the Russian Revolution.

Forgive me for stating the obvious, but fiery rhetoric spoken by a national leader and his “New Bolsheviks” have consequences.

President Barack Hussein Obama is as responsible for what happened in Ferguson, New York, Baltimore, and which is now happening, once again, in cities across America,  as any thug wannabe in those cities.

The blood of those 11 officers shot last night, including the five who have passed away, so far, from the bullets of those snipers, is on his hands.

However, he is not alone in his responsibility.

Also responsible are the black political leaders, who make their living and get their 15 minutes of fame by exacerbating racially-divided situations. Their silence speaks volumes.

For example,  the Mayor of Baltimore, who purposely gave carte blanche to the rioters to destroy her city by ordering the police to stand down, she, like the Roman Emperor Nero, lit the match that set her kingdom ablaze.

If Black Lives truly do matter, it is the black community who are going to have to save themselves.

With a nationwide illegitimate birth rate of 74%, black Americans, with help from Uncle Sugar, have succeeded in tearing apart the very thing that kept them safe and strong for decades: the Black Family Unit.

Additionally, the Black-on-Black Homicide Rate is astronomical.

Until that Sacred Foundation, which taught individual responsibility to generations of black Americans, is restored, the violence and disrespect for others will continue.

I remember, as a 9 year old in Memphis, Tennessee, watching my parents’ black and white television as the National Guard was called into action on the night that Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was assassinated.

I remember after that Civil Defense Announcement that President Lyndon Johnson come on national television to make the announcement of Dr. King’s death. I remember a feeling of helplessness and of fear, as a nine-year-old, that I had not felt before.

It wasn’t just the fact that we were living in Midtown Memphis, that made me afraid.

It wasn’t just the fact of the out-of-control violence itself, that caused my consternation.

It was watching my beloved Hometown on the verge of going up in flames.

And now, 48 years later, Memphis is one of the Most Dangerous Cities in America, as ranked by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and has borne witness to a record number of homicides so far the year, the overwhelming majority of which were black Memphians killing one another.

Words can hurt or words can heal.

A President who was supposed to bridge the Racial Divide in this nation…has, instead, widened it.

And, with every divisive word he and the political activists whom he champions speak, the chasm of Racial Divisiveness, which has created a gaping hole in the fabric of American Society, grows wider.

Words mean things.

In this case, it meant that 11 of Dallas’s Finest, were marked for execution by a cowardly bunch of snipers.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Trump Takes South Carolina. Jeb! Quits. Why is Trump Winning? Let Me Tell You Why…

thU1LM6XXMDo you believe in “momentum”?

The Associated Press reports that

SPARTANBURG, S.C. (AP) — Donald Trump tightened his grip on the mantle of Republican presidential front-runner on Saturday as South Carolina voters seething about Washington and career politicians propelled the billionaire businessman to a comfortable primary win.

One of Trump’s favorite targets, former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, finally threw in the towel, suspending his campaign after a dismal finish. “Thank you for the opportunity to run for the greatest office on the face of the earth,” an emotional Bush told his supporters.

Trump looked ahead to Nevada and then the 10 primaries and caucuses on Super Tuesday as he tries to increase his delegate advantage.

In a family-affair victory speech, Trump ticked off his policy promises, vowing to terminate President Barack Obama’s health care law and get Mexico to pay for a wall at the border.

“We’re going to start winning for our country because our country doesn’t win anymore,” said Trump, with his wife, Melania, and daughter Ivanka at his side.

Two freshmen senators — Ted Cruz of Texas and Marco Rubio of Florida — were battling for second place, which would give them bragging rights but might not get them any delegates in the march to the nomination.

Rubio declared, “This has become a three-person race.”

Cruz evoked his win in the leadoff Iowa caucuses as he urged conservatives to rally around his campaign, saying, “We are the only candidate who has beaten and can beat Donald Trump.”

The two-three finish of Cruz and Rubio undercut the value of some coveted South Carolina endorsements. Rubio had the backing of Gov. Nikki Haley, Sen. Tim Scott and Rep. Trey Gowdy; Cruz got the support of former Gov. Mark Sanford, now a House member.

Exit polls showed 4 in 10 voters angry about how Washington is working, and more than half saying they felt betrayed by politicians in the Republican Party.

Trump’s victory capped a week in which he called rivals liars, blamed House Speaker Paul Ryan for the GOP’s loss in the 2012 presidential race, and even tangled with Pope Francis.

He was backed by nearly 4 in 10 of those who are angry at the federal government, and a third of those who feel betrayed. He did best with men, older voters, those without a college degree and veterans.

About three-quarters of Republican primary voters support a temporary ban on Muslims who are not U.S. citizens from entering the United States. Nearly 4 in 10 of those voters backed Trump, while a third who oppose such a ban preferred Rubio.

Trump won a majority of the delegates in the South Carolina primary — at least 38 of the 50 — and has a chance to win them all.

Trump leads the overall race for delegates with 55. Ted Cruz has 11 delegates, Marco Rubio has 10, John Kasich has five, Jeb Bush has 4 and Ben Carson has three.

It takes 1,237 delegates to win the Republican nomination for president.

While the real estate magnate scored a decisive win in New Hampshire, his second-place finish in Iowa to Cruz illustrated gaps in his less-than-robust ground operation, and questions remain about the extent to which he can translate leads in preference polls and large rally crowds into votes.

Trump’s win Saturday could answer some of those questions, adding momentum going into the collection of Southern states that will vote March 1.

The exit polling of voters was conducted for The Associated Press and the television networks by Edison Research.

The final results, courtesy of politico.com, show the following…

Republican – 100% Reporting – Delegates Allocated: 44/50
Winner D. Trump 32.5% 44
M. Rubio 22.5%
T. Cruz 22.3%
J. Bush 7.8%
J. Kasich 7.6%
B. Carson 7.2%

FoxNews.com reported previously, that

Syndicated columnist Charles Krauthammer told viewers Friday on “Special Report with Bret Baier” that Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump will be the victor by a wide margin in Saturday’s South Carolina GOP primary.

“I think the odds are that Trump is going to win, probably big. That’s expected,” Krauthammer said. “[But] I think the real key is going to be what the distance is between the one who comes in third, and the bottom three.”

Those are the results that might help determine the eventual Republican nominee, Krauthammer said.

“In other words, if you get Trump, [Sen. Ted] Cruz, [Sen. Marco] Rubio, in that order, and then the bottom three are in single digits it… would be a seminal event.”

“If the race is a three way race, then it really is a toss-up, who of the top three will get it,” Krauthammer said. “If it remains a six man race [or] a five man race that means that Trump will romp all the way to the nomination, because he will dominate if the so-called establishment vote is split,” he said.

Well, Dr. K, I would say that Trump won by a pretty wide margin, wouldn’t you?

Why do I believe that Donald J. Trump is still the frontrunner among all the Republican Presidential Candidates?

This brash, unabashedly American, business entrepreneur and quintessential showman has dominated the media for the past several years.

The popularity of his reality program on NBC and the catch phrase that came leaping out from it, “You’re fired!”, spread across America like wildfire.

Now, his Presidential Campaign continues to do the same.

It is not just his flamboyance that has caught the eye of Americans.

The fact is, after almost two terms of an Administration taking the great country in the world on a scenic tour of the Highway to Hell, Donald Trump is the only Republican Candidate shouting, “Hit the brakes, you idiots!”

Trump’s straightforwardness has struck a chord in the hearts of average Americans, tired of the wussification of America, being so relentlessly pushed by both modern political parties.

This is what I don’t understand about the Republican Establishment:

They run around telling everybody how Conservative they are, when in reality, they actually hold the same beliefs as Liberal Democrats.

Ronald Reagan gave a famous stump speech about the fact that the Republican Party at one time, needed “bold colors, not pale pastels”.

From what I’m seeing out of a lot of the Republicans right now, they’re not even presenting Americans with pale pastels.

…Except for Donald Trump.

They are showing their color to be Liberal Blue, while they claim to be Conservative Red.

It is almost as if they believe that the Political Tsunami, which resulted in Republicans holding both Houses of Congress, came about because they made themselves look like Democrats.

They need to come down off of Capitol Hill every now and then.

And, visit Realityville.

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

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

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

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

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

You want to talk about anger and frustration?

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

It makes you want to give up…daily.

But, I digress…

Anger has played an important part in the forging of this great country, which will be lucky to survive Obama’s final year in office.

It was anger that formed our country….an anger over being held captive to “Taxation Without Representation”…an anger which, as a prime example of history repeating itself, Americans are experiencing, even as I type this blog.

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

If the Republican establishment does not accept the fact that Americans are angry, they will go down to defeat again in 2016.

They will never achieve victory by trying to push the Jello of “Liberal Moderation” up a hill.

Hence, the failed campaign of Jeb! Bush.

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

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

Now, where did I hear about that sort of thing before?

Oh, yeah.

That’s the way the Founding Fathers envisioned our system of government, led by citizens, who served their term s as public servants…AND THEN WENT HOME.

But, I digress…

You know what intrigues me the most about “The Donald”?

He reminds me of one of my favorite movie characters.

He actually has a backbone.

Just remember what ol’ Jack Burton does when the earth quakes, and the poison arrows fall from the sky, and the pillars of Heaven shake. Yeah, Jack Burton just looks that big ol’ storm right square in the eye and he says, “Give me your best shot, pal. I can take it.” – Jack Burton, Truck Driver (Kurt Russell) “Big Trouble in Little China”

…and that, boys and girls, despite all of Trump’s faults, remains a refreshing change.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

 

Head of ICE: “Rubio Absolutely Knowingly Mislead the American People”

cartoonmarcorubiogangof8Listen, I’m a politician which means I’m a cheat and a liar, and when I’m not kissing babies I’m stealing their lollipops. But it also means I keep my options open. – Jeffrey Pelt, “The Hunt for Red October”

The President of ICE, Christopher Crane, recently gave an Exclusive Interview to Breitbart News

in which he detailed his behind-the-scenes interactions with Florida Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL), as Crane sought to protect the nation’s ICE officers and national security.  Crane was integral to stopping Sen. Rubio’s amnesty plan from passing the House—which, as Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) recently explained, “was a near-run thing.”

…In his responses, Crane addresses an incident—first detailed by Breitbart News— in which Marco Rubio stood idly by as Crane was ejected from a Gang of Eight press conference for trying to ask a question on behalf of law enforcement.

Crane, an active duty ICE officer, has served as an officer for approximately 13 years and has been elected by his peers as the president of their union, as thus their voice on the national stage. Prior to joining ICE, Crane was a United States Marine.

Here is an excerpt from that interview…

BREITBART NEWS: It is well known that the Gang of Eight reached out to big business groups and amnesty groups in the process of writing the bill. When Sen. Rubio started writing his bill, did he reach out to you and other ICE officers for your ideas and input?

CRANE: Sen. Rubio never reached out to us. He surrounded himself with big business and amnesty groups, most of which were more interested in cheap labor and their own political agendas, and had no real concern for the welfare of immigrants, public safety, or the security of our nation. This while he ignored boots on the ground law enforcement officers who work within our broken immigration system every day and know better than any what’s needed to fix it. Common sense dictates that law enforcement be at the table when creating a bill like this. I think Sen. Rubio knew that, but actively chose to exclude us because of his own personal agenda.

BNN: Did Sen. Rubio meet with you voluntarily or did he have to be pressured into doing so at the last minute? Do you remember how you were ultimately able to secure the meeting? Did it take a long time?

CHRIS CRANE: It was definitely last minute as we met in the evening and they introduced the bill a few hours later that same night. It doesn’t get much more last minute than that. Was he pressured? I definitely think so. Not just by the public, but by some in the media as well. I think appearances on the Greta Van Susteren and Gov. Mike Huckabee shows are what tipped the balance and got us in. I think Gov. Huckabee was especially important in making the meeting happen, he was genuinely concerned that law enforcement was being excluded from the process and reached out to Sen. Rubio on our behalf. Many thanks to him for his attempts to help us.

BNN: What happened in the meeting? Did Sen. Rubio make any promises to you? Did he keep them?

CRANE: To start, even though I had requested to bring someone with me, Sen. Rubio denied the request and demanded that I come alone, which I still believe was highly peculiar and inappropriate.

He, of course, had what appeared to be his entire staff in his office with me. Most of his staff stood behind me as there was no place for them to sit. I raised a series of strong concerns with the bill, and as I raised each issue, Sen. Rubio would look to his staff and ask if that was what the bill said. Each time his staff agreed with my interpretation, and Sen. Rubio would shake his head in disbelief and indicate the bill had to be changed.

Sen. Rubio talked very specifically and very directly to me and his staff saying that the changes I suggested had to be made and specifically said that other Gang of Eight members wouldn’t be happy, but “Oh well.” Obviously the changes I suggested were all serious enforcement related issues, such as establishing a biometric entry-exit system, and cracking down on sex offenders, gang members, violent criminals and other criminal aliens.

When I walked out of his office that night I definitely thought the bill would undergo significant changes, but of course absolutely no changes were made.

BNN: Almost immediately after you met with Sen. Rubio, he introduced bill. Did it include any of the changes you asked for?

CRANE: Not one of the changes we suggested was made to the bill before Sen. Rubio introduced it.

All of his strong statements during our meeting about making the changes we suggested were apparently all just a dodge to get rid of me. It quickly became obvious why he didn’t permit me to take anyone with me to the meeting— he didn’t want any witnesses.

BNN: What happened during the press conference when you tried to ask Sen. Rubio and Chuck Schumer to take a question?

CRANE: I was polite, professional and respectful at all times. I didn’t interrupt anyone or cause a scene. The press was there, but Sen. Rubio and the rest of the Gang of Eight had also filled the large room with amnesty supporters and open borders people to cheer and applaud the Gang of Eight every time they said something. It was a real dog and pony show, sort of a circus.

Because it wasn’t your traditional closed press conference, it didn’t seem at all out of place to me, as an American citizen, to politely ask these elected officials a question about the legislation they were there to discuss. After all, I thought that Congress was the People’s House.

When the floor was opened to reporters to ask questions, I too politely raised my hand and asked, “Will you take a question from law enforcement?”

The amnesty folks immediately started making hateful comments like: you’re not welcome here, you need to leave, you have no right to speak here. A commotion took place on the stage with the Gang of Eight Senators. Sen. Rubio did look directly at me, and it appeared that he told Sen. Flake who I was.

Yet, despite having looked directly at me, Sen. Rubio did absolutely nothing to allow me to ask a question on behalf of the nation’s ICE officers, sheriffs and front line law enforcement.

I was able to ask the same question approximately two more times, before a Senate staffer accompanied by Capitol Hill police approached— demanding that they escort me out.

As I was escorted out by police, some within the amnesty groups applauded, laughed at me, and made hateful remarks. Once police escorted me outside of the main room, police informed me that I was not free to go and that I was to be taken somewhere for questioning.

As a law enforcement officer I knew that their actions met the legal standard for an arrest. At that point I demanded to know the charges against me and why I was being arrested. Television cameras, reporters and microphones came swooping in, and as they did the Senate staffer scurried away like a cockroach, leaving the Capitol Hill police on their own. I was allowed to leave the area, but I think it was only because the police were afraid to handcuff me with reporters filming them.

Senator Rubio and the Gang of Eight stood there and watched it all happen. Anyone of them could have jumped to the mic and yelled for the Senate staffer and the police to stop what they were doing to me, but none did. Sen. Rubio just stood their silently and watched it happen. I am told that Sen. Rubio later stated that I should not have been removed, but he never reached out to me to say that or apologize. To my knowledge he and the Gang of Eight never called for an investigation.

If it had been Mark Zuckerberg in the crowd asking questions the Gang of Eight Senators would have been tripping over themselves to kiss his backside, but as a normal citizen without the means to filter money into their campaigns they had me forced out by police

BNN: What did you mean when you said in Congressional testimony: “Never before have I seen such contempt for law enforcement officers as what I’ve seen from the Gang of Eight”? CRANE: As ICE officers, we wrote a letter to Congress expressing strong concerns with the Gang of Eight bill. The letter was endorsed by approximately 150 Sheriffs, to include Sheriff Sam Page of the National Sheriffs Association Border Security and Immigration Committee, as well the National Association of Former Border Patrol Officers and other law enforcement groups. Law enforcement officers were screaming for help from the Gang of Eight to make changes to the bill that would better provide for public safety and national security, but the Gang of Eight ignored all of them. The Gang of Eight not only ignored law enforcement, but actively fought to keep our input out. Only wealthy special interests like the Chamber of Commerce were permitted to be a part of the process. It was dirty D.C. politics at its worst.

BNN: Sen. Rubio touted his bill as “The Toughest Border Security & Enforcement Measures In U.S. History,” do you believe this was an honest representation of the bill?

CRANE: I think that’s absolutely false – there was no real promise or guarantee of stronger border security. The bill actually relinquished Congress’ authority to establish border security measures to the head of DHS. The head of DHS then had something like so six months to unilaterally develop a border security plan after the Gang of Eight bill passed.

So not only was there no real plan, but Sen. Rubio apparently thought that giving a presidentially appointed bureaucrat god-like powers over America’s immigration system was the answer to border security, this as other Republicans are fighting corrupt and incompetent bureaucrats in agencies like the IRS and Secret Service, not to mention the unlawful policies on immigration enforcement enacted by the current President. Rather than being touted as the toughest border security and enforcement plan in history, it could more accurately be touted as the worst.

BNN: Sen. Rubio pledged his bill would provide enforcement first, do you believe this was an honest representation the bill?

CRANE: No, I don’t believe it was an honest representation. Protection from deportation, a type of de facto amnesty, came almost immediately as the first step in a much broader amnesty like process provided in the bill. There was no real promise of border security in the bill, and the bill provided nothing for interior enforcement, but instead made legalization of criminal aliens and gang members a priority. People need to understand that this bill was written by pro-amnesty and open borders groups that have no concern for America’s borders or the safety of its communities. It shouldn’t surprise anyone that the bill was such a lopsided mess.

BNN: Sen. Rubio’s bill legalized sex offenders, drunk drivers, and others with criminal records. From an ICE officer’s perspective, how do you feel about his decision to legalize illegal immigrants with criminal convictions?

CRANE: Under the Obama Administration, ICE released estimates stating that approximately 2 million criminal aliens resided in the U.S. That’s 10 times the size the U.S. Marine Corps, at least when I was in. And I think ICE’s estimates are low.

People need to wake up. We can’t continue to keep taking millions of the world’s criminals without expecting serious repercussions to public safety and expense and burden to our legal system. Local and state jurisdictions are already overwhelmed by the criminal alien problem in our country. To turn this around and get things back under control, the U.S. must take the opposite approach. We must send criminals back to their countries. Especially sex offenders. I can’t understand why any lawmaker or special interest group would support legalizing sex offenders, but it shows how out of control the bill really was.

BNN: In your letter, you specifically protested that the bill would legalize gang members. As an ICE officer, how do you feel that this provision was left in the bill?

CRANE: It disgusts me. Violent street gangs were literally able to lobby Sen. Rubio and the Gang of Eight more effectively than law enforcement, they had more influence on the bill than we did. Gangs were able to get provisions in the law to protect themselves. It’s absolutely insane. What on earth are our lawmakers thinking? I think it’s this type of utterly stupid lawmaking that has caused most Americans to lose faith in Congress.

BNN: Sen. Rubio was on television and radio constantly promoting his bill, which was backed by powerful special interests. What did you learn about Sen. Rubio’s character during that time?

CRANE: In my opinion, Sen. Rubio absolutely knowingly mislead the American people regarding the bill. He was not telling the American public the truth about what that bill contained.

I realize that was a lengthy excerpt. However, I felt that it was important to keep as much of Crane’s remarks intact, as possible.

Marco Rubio , judging by his Campaign Appearances and Stump Speeches, appears to be in the throes of a “mea culpa” as regards his sucking up to the Establishment (Vichy) Republicans…and the Democrats…during his tenure as a card-carrying member of “The Gang of Eight”.

My question to you: DO YOU BELIEVE HIM?

History records that, “The Gang of Eight Bill” came up for a final Senate vote on June 27, 2013. Rubio, as a key author of the legislation, voted for its passage. Cruz voted against it.

Back in January, before the Iowa Caucus, The Washington Examiner filed the following report,

Following his rapid-fire assault on Sen. Ted Cruz’s record during Thursday evening’s debate, Sen. Marco Rubio’s campaign in Iowa kept up his line of attack by calling out Cruz as a follower of the political winds.Rep. Kristi Noem, a South Dakota Republican and Rubio supporter, told reporters after the debate that Cruz is nothing more than a political opportunist who supports “whatever’s popular that day,” continuing Rubio’s line of attack that the Texas senator engages in “political calculation” and not “consistent conservatism.”

“From what I heard come from Donald Trump, from what I’ve seen of actions coming from Ted Cruz, they’re not the right people for the job,” Noem told reporters after a Rubio watch party. “Ted Cruz says whatever’s popular that day. He votes one way, and then a month later will vote another way. He’ll take a position, write an op-ed on something as critical as our economic future and trade with foreign countries, and he’ll change his mind because the political winds are blowing a different direction.”

“I don’t want another president like that. I don’t want a president like the one that we have that knows how to talk, but doesn’t walk the walk,” Noem continued. I want one that will actually follow through on what he says he will do.”

Irony is embarrassed.

There are no angels in the 2016 Presidential Primaries, on either side.

For each and every candidate, including Donald J. Trump, unlike the Syrian Refugees, who Obama is attempting to force on us, there is an abundance of information out there, which shows their past thoughts, words, and deeds (or, lack thereof).

In Rubio’s Case, just as in the case of the current “Political” Pope’s insult of Donald J. Trump, as regards to calling Ted Cruz as “opportunist”, Marcio forgot that

People in Glass Houses should not throw stones.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

 

Hillary, Benghazi, and the Democrat Nomination: Inaction Has Consequences, Too

untitled (18)In the Arena of Presidential Politics, sometimes what is lauded as “inevitable”, “ain’t necessarily so”.

The Washington Post has the story…

Some leading Democrats are increasingly anxious about Hillary Clinton’s prospects for winning the party’s presidential nomination, warning that Sen. Bernie Sanders’s growing strength in early battleground states and strong fundraising point to a campaign that could last well into the spring.

What seemed recently to be a race largely controlled by Clinton has turned into a neck-and-neck contest with voting set to begin in less than three weeks.

On Capitol Hill and in state party headquarters, some Democrats worry that a Sanders nomination could imperil candidates down the ballot in swing districts and states. Others sense deja vu from 2008, when Clinton’s overwhelming edge cratered in the days before the Iowa caucuses.

Just as Barack Obama’s stunning upset there helped assure Democrats in later states that a black man could win votes from whites and propelled him to victory in South Carolina and other places, so, too, could a Sanders victory on Feb. 1 in Iowa and then Feb. 9 in New Hampshire ease doubts about the viability of a self-described “democratic socialist,” some said.

“It’s just like the weak spot for Barack Obama was his skin color, but he got cured of that in Iowa,” said Rep. James E. Clyburn (D-S.C.), the party’s leading African American in Congress.

“If [Sanders] comes out of Iowa and New Hampshire with big victories — if it’s close in both places, that’s one thing — but if he comes out of there with big victories, hey, man, it could very well be a new day,” Clyburn added.

One Clinton ally on Capitol Hill said some in the party are starting to seriously consider what it would mean for Democrats nationally if Sanders were to win.

“There’s definitely an elevated concern expressed in the cloakroom and members-only elevators, and other places, about the impact of a Sanders nomination on congressional candidates,” Rep. Steve Israel (D-N.Y.) said.

Israel, a former chairman of the Democrats’ House campaign committee, said that a Sanders nomination “increases the level of anxiety that many of our candidates have in swing districts, where a Hillary Clinton nomination erases that anxiety.”

Sensing the tightening race, some state party officials have gone out of their way to keep the peace with supporters of Sanders, hoping to tap their energy and keep them activated for the general election campaign.

The reevaluation of the Democratic primaries — which seemed destined for a Clinton coronation after she recovered from a summer slide amid controversy over her use of a private email system while secretary of state — comes as state and national surveys show her sliding fast once again.

A Des Moines Register survey of likely Iowa caucus voters released Thursday showed a statistical dead heat, with Clinton at 42 percent and Sanders at 40. That marks a significant shift from a month ago, when Clinton held a lead of nine percentage points and saw her share of the vote at 48 percent. In New Hampshire, Sanders holds a commanding lead, 53 percent to 39 percent, according to a Monmouth University poll released this week. 

Clinton and Sanders have escalated their attacks on each other, with each claiming to be the strongest general election candidate.

The new dynamic will be on display in South Carolina this weekend, when the Democratic candidates attend a party dinner and then a fish fry hosted by Clyburn ahead of their debate Sunday night. The pre-debate events, expected to draw hundreds of activists, will serve as a chance for Sanders to prove that his campaign has an effective organization beyond the first two states.

“We’re really at the front end of the process for states beyond Iowa and New Hampshire,” said Sanders adviser Tad Devine. “Part of the process is to convince people Bernie is a serious option, and doing well in early states helps.”

Clinton’s allies have said that they have always planned for a difficult primary season and that they expect their well-structured campaign to pay dividends when the race moves on to larger states with more diverse electorates than the two earliest states. They note that a recent trip to Oklahoma, part of the Super Tuesday bloc of 10 states on March 1, demonstrated their campaign’s long view of the race.

“From Day One, we have told everyone who will listen this would be a dogfight,” said Jerry Crawford, a longtime Clinton supporter in Iowa. “Hillary will continue to fight for every vote just as she has done since Day One in Iowa, and I wouldn’t trade places with any other campaign.”

Whether or not he wins, Sanders’s rise has created challenges for party leaders by highlighting policy differences between the Democratic establishment and the party’s support base.

Many Sanders proposals — Medicare for all, free college and breaking up big banks — go beyond congressional Democrats’ agenda but are embraced by an ascendant wing of the party.

Those policy prescriptions win support in primaries, but many Democratic elites fear how they would play in a general election. At the same time, Democratic leaders know they can’t afford to alienate an energized party base.

Some recent surveys suggest that Sanders is drawing support beyond the liberals and young voters who have flocked to his rallies.

A Quinnipiac University poll early this month found Sanders trailing Clinton by an insignificant two percentage points among moderate and conservative Democrats, a sharp shift from Clinton’s 24 percentage-point lead among that group in December.

“Whatever the success that Senator Sanders, that Bernie Sanders, has, I think it’s important to recognize that his supporters are essential to our success in winning the White House,” House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (Calif.) told reporters in the Capitol on Wednesday.

In the Senate, more than two-thirds of the Democratic caucus has endorsed Clinton. For now, the senators will remain calm, even if she loses the first two states, according to a senior consultant working on Senate races.

However, full-fledged panic would set in if Clinton loses the Nevada caucuses, wedged in between New Hampshire and South Carolina, the consultant said.

A Clinton defeat would complicate matters for one of the country’s most vulnerable Democrats, Rep. Cheri Bustos (D-Ill.). Bustos said that much of her campaign strategy is based on energizing female voters with the potential of a female presidential nominee . “There’s a lot of excitement about having a woman at the top of the ticket,” Bustos said, without directly critiquing Sanders.

While the Elite of the Democrats are excited about the prospect of having “The Queen of Mean” as their Presidential Candidate, others are, as the article alluded to, beginning to distance themselves from Hillary and her “baggage”.

Regardless of what she proclaimed in front of a sub-committee, what happened at a remote Embassy Compound in Libya DOES MAKE A DIFFERENCE.

And now, it is on “the Big Screen” for all Americans to see.

The Christian Post reports that

Pat Smith, mother of American 2012 Benghazi terrorist attack victim Sean Smith, called presumptive 2016 Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton “a liar” this week after viewing the Benghazi-themed film “13 Hours: The Secret Soldiers of Benghazi.”

Smith, in an appearance on Fox News with Megyn Kelly this week, said she couldn’t complete watching the film after seeing the portrayal of her deceased son in the movie. 

“Hillary is a liar! I know what she told me,” screamed Smith pointing to the Obama administration blaming a YouTube video for the controversial attack.

Kelly noted that Clinton had denied telling families of the Benghazi victims that the YouTube video was what caused the terrorist attack but Smith replied “bull feathers.”

“Oh, Pat. I know it must be so hard. So many people want to put this behind them and say, Hillary sat there and testified, she testified with her own 13 hours. And they say it’s done. They say there’s no story about Benghazi. And that she did everything she could do to the war and she came right out and said she is not lying. Suggesting you are the one who is lying about what happened [at] that Air Force base,” said Kelly.

“Bull feathers! That is just plain old bull! I know what she said and not only did she say it, but Obama said the same thing to me. And Panetta. And Biden. And Susan Rice. I went up to all of them, begging them to tell me what happened. And they all said, that it was the video. Every one of them,” said Smith. 

“13 Hours: The Secret Soldiers of Benghazi” is an action thriller based on the 2014 non-fiction book written by journalist Mitchell Zuckoff with the Annex Security Team. The film depicts the harrowing true story of the attack on a CIA annex in Benghazi, Libya, on September 11, 2012, which killed four Americans. After the assault begins, a U.S. Special Ops team are sent to the annex to protect those still trapped within the compound. The film is directed by Michael Bay, and stars John Krasinski, James Badge Dale, and Pablo Schreiber.

We have learned a lot of things since the Benghazi Massacre.

On October 27th, 2012, I reported that

Fox News has learned from sources who were on the ground in Benghazi that an urgent request from the CIA annex for military back-up during the attack on the U.S. consulate and subsequent attack several hours later on the annex itself was denied by the CIA chain of command — who also told the CIA operators twice to “stand down” rather than help the ambassador’s team when shots were heard at approximately 9:40 p.m. in Benghazi on Sept. 11.

Former Navy SEAL Tyrone Woods was part of a small team who was at the CIA annex about a mile from the U.S. consulate where Ambassador Chris Stevens and his team came under attack. When he and others heard the shots fired, they informed their higher-ups at the annex to tell them what they were hearing and requested permission to go to the consulate and help out. They were told to “stand down,” according to sources familiar with the exchange. Soon after, they were again told to “stand down.”

Woods and at least two others ignored those orders and made their way to the consulate which at that point was on fire. Shots were exchanged. The rescue team from the CIA annex evacuated those who remained at the consulate and Sean Smith, who had been killed in the initial attack. They could not find the ambassador and returned to the CIA annex at about midnight.

At that point, they called again for military support and help because they were taking fire at the CIA safe house, or annex. The request was denied. There were no communications problems at the annex, according those present at the compound. The team was in constant radio contact with their headquarters. In fact, at least one member of the team was on the roof of the annex manning a heavy machine gun when mortars were fired at the CIA compound. The security officer had a laser on the target that was firing and repeatedly requested back-up support from a Spectre gunship, which is commonly used by U.S. Special Operations forces to provide support to Special Operations teams on the ground involved in intense firefights.

CIA spokeswoman Jennifer Youngblood, [on orders from General Petraeus] though, denied the claims that requests for support were turned down.

“We can say with confidence that the Agency reacted quickly to aid our colleagues during that terrible evening in Benghazi,” she said. “Moreover, no one at any level in the CIA told anybody not to help those in need; claims to the contrary are simply inaccurate. In fact, it is important to remember how many lives were saved by courageous Americans who put their own safety at risk that night-and that some of those selfless Americans gave their lives in the effort to rescue their comrades.”

That means that the order to stand down had to come from Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, and/or President Barack Hussein Obama. [or Valerie Jarrett]

We also learned on October 26, 2012, that there were two drones circling overhead, as four brave Americans were being slaughtered. Obama and his Administration knew exactly what was happening, yet, for the sake of political expediency, chose to do nothing about it.

What Hillary’s  appearance before the Benghazi Hearings showed, was a pathological predilection for dishonesty, insincerity, and inappropriateness, not only on the part of Former Secretary of State, Hillary Rodham Clinton,  but the whole Obama Administration, as well, from the top on down.

They all knew that the cause of the attacks was not some stupid Youtube Video, but a full-blown Muslim Terrorist Attack.

However, for the sake of Political Expediency…and the re-election of President Barack Hussein Obama and the legacy of his rapidly-failing Foreign Policy, known as Smart Power!, they had to quickly come up with an excuse for their liability in the deaths of those four brave Americans.

And now, Hillary Rodham Clinton, with her Oscar-worthy Performance in front of the House Committee, which including circuitous answers to Yes or No Questions and inappropriate smirks, accompanied by cackling laughter, echoes across the years, proving completely true and accurate as to what I and my fellow Conservative Americans have said about her all along:

She is a sociopath, who envisions herself to be smarter than everybody else, above the law, and White House-bound, because, “it’s her turn”.

The new movie about that fateful night of September 11, 2012, hopefully, will be the final nail in her Political Coffin.

The only place that she should be bound, at least in this life, is jail.

Her final destination promises to be a more Southern Locale…and infinitely hotter.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

 

 

 

The Trump Backlash: Huma “The Proud Muslim” and Her “Troubling Familial Affiliations”

Huma-Abedin-and-Hillary-Clinton-620x436Well, for the last few days, the popular thing among “The Smartest People in the Room” has been to stand up to Republican Presidential Hopeful Donald J. Trump’s suggestion to pause all Muslim Immigration into the United States of America, until our government figures out how to ensure that ISIS will not embed themselves among innocent Muslims.

Hillary’s “Right-Hand Woman” and Gal-Pal Huma Abedin (Mrs. Anthony Weiner) recently decided to join the Peanut Gallery, as Fox News Reports…

Huma Abedin, the longtime confidant to Democratic presidential front-runner Hillary Clinton, took aim at Donald Trump’s proposal to ban Muslims from entering the United States in an email with the subject line: “I’m a proud Muslim.”

“Donald Trump is leading in every national poll to be the Republican nominee for president. And earlier today, he released his latest policy proposal: to ban all Muslims from entering our country,” wrote Ms. Abedin, in an email Monday evening to Mrs. Clinton’s supporters. “I’m a proud Muslim — but you don’t have to share my faith to share my disgust.”

Of course, that was a strictly political move.

Breitbart.com reports that

Democratic presidential frontrunner Hillary Clinton is seizing on Donald Trump’s proposal to ban all Muslim entry into the U.S. with a fundraising email featuring long-time aide Huma Abedin, who is Muslim.

The email reads, in part: “I’m a proud Muslim–but you don’t have to share my faith to share my disgust.” The email is noteworthy for two reasons: first, that it acknowledges Abedin’s faith at all; and second, that it features Abedin, who is not only under ethical criticism but also suspected of radical ties.

In 2008, then-Sen. Barack Obama was terrified of having his campaign associated with Islam, lest it trigger what his aides feared might be a Muslim backlash. In June 2008, Ben Smith (then of Politico) reported: “Two Muslim women at Barack Obama’s rally in Detroit on Monday were barred from sitting behind the podium by campaign volunteers seeking to prevent the women’s headscarves from appearing in photographs or on television with the candidate.” (The campaign later apologized to them.)

The Clinton campaign, in fact, even sought to capitalize on anti-Muslim sentiment by circulating a photograph of Obama wearing a headscarf on a visit to Kenya. (The candidate herself claimed not to “know anything about it.”)

Democrats have come a long way, from trying to appease anti-Muslim sentiment in their own party to using Muslims to fundraise from their supporters.

However, Huma Abedin is an odd choice. A “proud Muslim” would not marry a Jew–much less scandal-plagued former Rep. Anthony Weiner–given that Islamic law prevents women from marrying non-Muslims. Stranger still, Huma Abedin’s mother Saleha is reported to be part of the Muslim Brotherhood, which is not only “proud” but radical, and violent.

In addition, Huma Abedin was recently investigated for embezzlement, and has been accused of failing to provide complete financial disclosure to the State Department, as well as working for a private contractor on the side.

Not exactly a proud record–except in Clintonland.

Let’s look a little closer at Ms. Abedin’s background, and her “troubling Familial Affiliations”, shall we?

According to discoverthenetworks.org,

Huma Abedin was born in 1976 in Kalamazoo, Michigan. Her father, Syed Abedin (1928-1993), was an Indian-born scholar who had worked as a visiting professor at Saudi Arabia’s King Abdulaziz University in the early Seventies. 

[She is]

  • Daughter of Saleha Mahmood Abedin, a pro-Sharia sociologist with ties to numerous Islamist organizations including the Muslim Brotherhood
  • Longtime assistant to Hillary Clinton
    Wife of former congressman Anthony Weiner
  • Longtime former employee of the Institute of Muslim Minority Affairs, which shares the Muslim Brotherhood’s goal of establishing Islamic supremacy and Sharia Law worldwide.

…From 1997 until sometime before early 1999, Abedin, while still interning at the White House, was an executive board member of George Washington University’s (GWU) Muslim Students Association (MSA), heading the organization’s “Social Committee.”

It is noteworthy that in 2001-02, soon after Abedin left that executive board, the chaplain and “spritual guide” of GWU’s MSA was Anwar al-Awlaki, the al Qaeda operative who ministered to some of the men who were among the 9/11 hijackers. Another chaplain at GWU’s MSA (from at least October 1999 through April 2002) was Mohamed Omeish, who headed the International Islamic Relief Organization, which has been tied to the funding of al Qaeda. Omeish’s brother, Esam, headed the Muslim American Society, the Muslim Brotherhood’s quasi-official branch in the United States. Both Omeish brothers were closely associated with Abdurahman Alamoudi, who would later be convicted and incarcerated on terrorism charges.

From 1996-2008, Abedin was employed by the Institute of Muslim Minority Affairs (IMMA) as the assistant editor of its in-house publication, the Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs (JMMA). At least the first seven of those years overlapped with the al Qaeda-affiliated Abdullah Omar Naseef’s active presence at IMMA. Abedin’s last six years at the Institute (2002-2008) were spent as a JMMA editorial board member; for one of those years, 2003, Naseef and Abedin served together on that board.

Abedin went on maternity leave after giving birth to a baby boy in early December 2011. When she returned to work in June 2012, the State Department granted her an arrangement that allowed her to do outside consulting work as a “special government employee,” even as she remained a top advisor in the Department. Abedin did not disclose on her financial report either the arrangement or the$135,000 she earned from it, in violation of a law mandating that public officials disclose significant sources of income. Abedin’s outside clients included the U.S. State Department, Hillary Clinton, the William Jefferson Clinton Foundation, and Teneo (a firm co-founded by Doug Band, a former counselor for Bill Clinton). Good-government groups warned of the potential conflict-of-interest inherent in an arangement where a government employee maintains private clients.

In June 2012, five Republican lawmakers (most prominently, Michele Bachmann) sent letters to the inspectors general at the Departments of Homeland Security, Justice, and State, asking that they investigate whether the Muslim Brotherhood was gaining undue influence over U.S. government officials. One letter, noting that Huma Abedin’s position with Hillary Clinton “affords her routine access to the secretary [of state] and to policymaking,” expressed concern over the fact that Abedin “has three family members—her late father, mother and her brother—connected to Muslim Brotherhood operatives and/or organizations.” Some other prominent Republicans such as John McCain and John Boehner disavowed the concerns articulated in the letters.

On February 1, 2013—Hillary Clinton’s final day as Secretary of State—Abedinresigned her post as Mrs. Clinton’s deputy chief of staff. Yet she would continue to serve as a close aide to Clinton. 

On March 1, 2013, Abedin was tapped to run Clinton’s post-State Department transition team, comprised of a six-person “transition office” located in Washington.

Huma Abedin’s brother, Hassan Abedin, has ties to the Muslim Brotherhood and is currently an associate editor with the JMMA. Hassan was once a fellow at the Oxford Center for Islamic Studies, at a time when the Center’s board included such Brotherhood-affiliated figures as Yusuf al-Qaradawi and Abdullah Omar Naseef.

Huma’s sister, Heba Abedin (formerly known as “Heba A. Khaled”), is an assistant editor with JMMA, where she served alongside Huma prior to the latter’s departure.

Speaking straight from the heart, as an American citizen, I remain offended, that during the time of Hillary Clinton’s tenure as Secretary of State, that someone with direct ties to our sworn enemies, the Muslim Brotherhood, had access to the highest level of Top Secret Information contained in our State Department.

And, the thing is, she not only had access through her job as Assistant to Secretary of State Clinton, she also had access to government information through pillow talk with her husband, then-Congressman and “Professional Sexter” Anthony Weiner.

And, being the “proud Muslim” that she has proclaimed herself to be, it is a certainty that this information found its way to those “troubling Familial Affiliations”.

Which brings up a troubling question:

What if the Obama Administration and their minions are shouting down Donald J., Trump, because they knew “what was going on” all along

…and simply did not care?

Until He Comes,

KJ