The San Bernadino Massacre, Sharia Law, and the U.S. Constitution (A KJ Sunday Morning Op Ed)

American Christianity 2

Tonight, the President of the United States of America, Barack Hussein Obama, is going to deliver a speech from the Oval office, to address this past week’s massacre of innocent Americans in San Bernadino, California, as the result of a merciless attack by Radical Islamists.

As has been his pattern, I look for Obama to 1. Deny that Radical Islam is actually a part of Islam and 2. Draw a false equivalency between the Christians who founded our Sovereign Nation and the Syrian Muslim “Refugees”, whom he is forcing our states to take in.

This past year, Pope Francis paid a visit to the United States of America.

During his visit, while addressing the Congress of the United States of America, he basically said that we have an “obligation” to take in the Syrian Refugees, among them Radical Muslims, who are presently rioting in Europe.

Pope Francis, like President Obama and other Liberals, has been pushing a false equivalency, in equating Islam to Christianity, for a while now.

Back in June, The Washington Times reported that

On Monday, the Bishop Of Rome addressed Catholic followers regarding the dire importance of exhibiting religious tolerance. During his hour-long speech, a smiling Pope Francis was quoted telling the Vatican’s guests that the Koran, and the spiritual teachings contained therein, are just as valid as the Holy Bible.

“Jesus Christ, Mohammed, Jehovah, Allah. These are all names employed to describe an entity that is distinctly the same across the world. For centuries, blood has been needlessly shed because of the desire to segregate our faiths. This, however, should be the very concept which unites us as people, as nations, and as a world bound by faith. Together, we can bring about an unprecedented age of peace, all we need to achieve such a state is respect each others beliefs, for we are all children of God regardless of the name we choose to address him by. We can accomplish miraculous things in the world by merging our faiths, and the time for such a movement is now. No longer shall we slaughter our neighbors over differences in reference to their God.”

The pontiff drew harsh criticisms in December (2014) after photos of the 78-year-old Catholic leader was released depicting Pope Francis kissing a Koran. The Muslim Holy Book was given to Francis during a meeting with Muslim leaders after a lengthy Muslim prayer held at the Vatican.

Last February 5th, after President Barack Hussein Obama’s incendiary and decidedly anti-Christian remarks at the National Prayer Breakfast, Reverend Franklin Graham spoke truth to power:

Today at the National Prayer Breakfast, the President implied that what ISIS is doing is equivalent to what happened over 1000 years ago during the Crusades and the Inquisition. Mr. President–Many people in history have used the name of Jesus Christ to accomplish evil things for their own desires. But Jesus taught peace, love and forgiveness. He came to give His life for the sins of mankind, not to take life. Mohammad on the contrary was a warrior and killed many innocent people. True followers of Christ emulate Christ—true followers of Mohammed emulate Mohammed.

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

Not too long ago, Republican Presidential Candidate Hopeful, Dr. Ben Carson, got a lot of attention from hang-wringing Liberals in the Main Stream Media, the Democratic Party and among the Vichy Republicans, also, when he said that a Muslim should never be President of the United States of America., because Sharia Law in incompatible with The United States Constitution.

He was absolutely right.

The Center For Security Policy issued the following PDF, ” “Sharia Law Vs. The Constitution”,

Article VI: The Constitution is the supreme law of the land

  • Constitution: Article VI: “This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby”
  • Shariah: “The source of legal rulings for all acts of those who are morally responsible is Allah.” (a1.1, Umdat al-salik or The Reliance of the Traveller, commonly accepted work of Shariah jurisprudence); “There is only one law which ought to be followed, and that is the Sharia.” (Seyed Qutb); “Islam wishes to destroy all states and governments anywhere on the face of the earth which are opposed to the ideology and program of Islam regardless of the country or the nation which rules it. The purpose of Islam is to set up a State on the basis of its own ideology and program.” (Seyed Abul A’ala Maududi)

First Amendment: Freedom of religion

  • Constitution: First Amendment: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof ”
  • Shariah: “Those who reject Islam must be killed. If they turn back (from Islam), take hold of them and kill them wherever you find them.” Quran 4:89 ; “Whoever changed his [Islamic] religion, then kill him” Sahih al-Bukhari, 9:84:57.  In historic and modern Shariah states, Shariah law enforces dhimmi status (second-class citizen, apartheid-type laws) on nonMuslims, prohibiting them from observing their religious practices publicly, building or repairing churches, raising their voices during prayer or ringing church bells; if dhimmi laws are violated in the Shariah State, penalties are those used for prisoners of war: death, slavery, release or ransom.(o9.14, o11.0-o11.11, Umdat al-salik).

First Amendment: Freedom of speech   

  • Constitution: First Amendment: Congress shall not abridge “the freedom of speech.”  
  • Shariah: Speech defaming Islam or Muhammad is considered “blasphemy” and is punishable by death or imprisonment.

First Amendment: Freedom to dissent

  • Constitution: First Amendment: “Congress cannot take away the right of the people “to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” 
  •  Shariah: Non-Muslims are not to harbor any hostility toward the Islamic state or give comfort to those who disagree with Islamic government.

Second Amendment: Right to self-defense

  • Constitution: Second Amendment: “The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” 
  • Shariah: Under historic and modern dhimmi laws, non-Muslims cannot possess swords, firearms or weapons of any kind.

Fifth, Sixth and Seventh Amendments: Right to due process and fair trial

  • Constitution: Fifth Amendment: “no person shall be held to answer for a capital or otherwise infamous crime… without due process of law.”  Sixth Amendment: guarantees a “public trial by an impartial jury.”  Seventh Amendment: “the right of trial by jury shall be preserved.”
  • Shariah: Hadith Sahih al-Bukhari: Muhammad said, “No Muslim should be killed for killing a Kafir (infidel).”  Non-Muslims are prohibited from testifying against Muslims.  A woman’s testimony is equal to half of a man’s.

Eighth Amendment: No cruel and unusual punishment 

  • Constitution: Eighth Amendment: “nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.”
  • Shariah: Under Shariah punishments are barbaric: “Cut off the hands of thieves, whether they are male or female, as punishment for what they have done – a deterrent from Allah.” Quran 5:38; A raped woman is punished:”The woman and the man guilty of adultery or fornication – flog each of them with a hundred stripes” (Sura 24:2).

Fourteenth Amendment: Right to equal protection and due process 

  • Constitution:  Fourteenth Amendment: “No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. “
  • Shariah: Under dhimmi laws enforced in modern Shariah states, Jews, Christians and other non-Muslims are not equal to Muslims before the law.  Under Shariah law, women, girls, apostates, homosexuals and “blasphemers” are all denied equality under the law. 

Given this incompatibility between Sharia Law and the Constitution of the United States of America, which our Freedom and our System of Laws are based upon, if given the choice, which would Muslims currently living in the Land of the Free and the home of the Brave choose to be faithful to?

Back on June 23, 2015, the Center for Security Policy released the following findings for a poll they took of 600 Muslims, who current live in America.

The numbers of potential jihadists among the majority of Muslims who appear not to be sympathetic to such notions raise a number of public policy choices that warrant careful consideration and urgent debate, including: the necessity for enhanced surveillance of Muslim communities; refugee resettlement, asylum and other immigration programs that are swelling their numbers and density; and the viability of so-called “countering violent extremism” initiatives that are supposed to stymie radicalization within those communities.

Overall, the survey, which was conducted by The Polling Company for the Center for Security Policy (CSP), suggests that a substantial number of Muslims living in the United States see the country very differently than does the population overall.  The sentiments of the latter were sampled in late May in another CSP-commissioned Polling Company nationwide survey.

According to the just-released survey of Muslims, a majority (51%) agreed that “Muslims in America should have the choice of being governed according to shariah.”  When that question was put to the broader U.S. population, the overwhelming majority held that shariah should not displace the U.S. Constitution (86% to 2%).

More than half (51%) of U.S. Muslims polled also believe either that they should have the choice of American or shariah courts, or that they should have their own tribunals to apply shariah. Only 39% of those polled said that Muslims in the U.S. should be subject to American courts.

These notions were powerfully rejected by the broader population according to the Center’s earlier national survey.  It found by a margin of 92%-2% that Muslims should be subject to the same courts as other citizens, rather than have their own courts and tribunals here in the U.S.

Even more troubling, is the fact that nearly a quarter of the Muslims polled believed that, “It is legitimate to use violence to punish those who give offense to Islam by, for example, portraying the prophet Mohammed.”

By contrast, the broader survey found that a 63% majority of those sampled said that “the freedom to engage in expression that offends Muslims or anybody else is guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution and cannot be restricted.”

Nearly one-fifth of Muslim respondents said that the use of violence in the United States is justified in order to make shariah the law of the land in this country.

In conclusion, I am not saying that every Muslim is on a jihad against “the infidels”, and, wish to invade our Sovereign Nation and over-throw our Government.

However, there is a difference between being an average Christian American and a Muslim, living in America.

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

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

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

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

For Liberals, including Pope Francis, to deny that, is disingenuous at best, and just plain dangerous at worst.

It becomes even more dangerous when that Liberal is the President of the United States of America.

Until He Comes,

KJ

America on the Brink: When We Need “Ronnie Raygun”, We’ve Got Steve Urkel.

untitled (4)Once again, this has been a pivotal week in the life of our country.

Thanks to the woefully and purposefully inadequate leadership of the 44th President of the United States of America, Barack Hussein Obama, “The Shining City Upon a Hill” has become greatly tarnished, in not only the view of its citizens, but, also, in the view of the whole Free World.

At the same time, our enemies, the Enemies of Freedom, are diggin’ it….because America has gone from having a man like Ronald Reagan occupy the Oval Office to a clueless, prevaricating wuss, in the form of Barack Hussein Obama.

To prove my point, I am going to list five examples of the Greatest Accomplishments of  Ronald Wilson Reagan, courtesy of humanevents.com, and answer each one of them, with a failure of Barack Hussein Obama, in that very same area.

The kicker is, all of the failures that I will cite, have occurred THIS PAST WEEK.

1. Peace through Strength:  The military was diminished during the Carter years, but Reagan reversed that by rebuilding the armed forces.  His Peace Through Strength philosophy was manifested by his reviving the B-1 bomber that Carter canceled, starting production of the MX missile, and pushing NATO to deploy Pershing missiles in West Germany.  He increased defense spending by more than 40%, increased troop levels, and even got much-needed space parts into the pipeline.  Those efforts ensured that America remained a military superpower.

Last Monday, President Barack Hussein Obama appeared, once again, before the General Assembly of the United Nations. Among the topics he pontificated upon on, was his Foreign Policy Goals for the next year.

While ol’ Scooter was reporting in to his Masters at the UN, msn.com reported that

The Iraqi military announced Sunday that it had agreed to share intelligence about the Islamic State with Russia, the Syrian government and Iran, an agreement that caught the Obama administration off guard. The Iraqi military said in a statement that the new agreement was necessary because thousands of volunteers who have joined the Islamic State have come from Russia. Asked if he welcomed the accord, Secretary of State John Kerry said it was important that the United States and Russia coordinate.

“I think the critical thing is that all of the efforts need to be coordinated,” Mr. Kerry said at the start of a meeting in New York with Sergey V. Lavrov, the Russian foreign minister. “This is not yet coordinated. I think we have concerns about how we’re going to go forward, but that’s precisely what we’re meeting on to talk about now.”

Which leads us to Reagan’s next accomplishment…

2.  Ending the Cold War:  The Cold War had raged since World War II and  communism’s quest for world domination remained an existential threat to the United States when President Reagan took office.  Reagan reversed the policy of detente and stood firm against the Soviet Union, calling it the Evil Empire and telling Mikhail Gorbachev to “tear down this wall” in Berlin.  He was relentless in pushing his Strategic Defense Initiative and gave aid to rebels battling Soviet-backed Marxists from Nicaragua to Angola. Those efforts were critical in the ultimate collapse of the Soviet empire and essentially ended the Cold War.

This past week, Obama’s failed Foreign Policy, erroneously named “Smart Power!”, has resulted in Obama being told to “‘step aside”, getting sand kicked into his face, like the 98-lb. weakling in those old Charles Atlas Ads, which used to be on the back of comic books, back in the day, during a time when our enemies knew better than to mess with us.

Yahoo News reported that

Russia’s dramatic entry Wednesday into the Syrian war put the United States on the back foot once again and left Washington struggling to regain the military and diplomatic initiative.

As US Secretary of State John Kerry was in New York trying to coordinate with his Kremlin opposite number Sergei Lavrov, a Russian officer contacted the US embassy in Baghdad.

His message was simple: Russian jets are about to launch air strikes in Syria, please stay out of their way.

Kerry quickly protested to Lavrov that this was not in the spirit of Moscow’s promise to agree a “de-confliction” mechanism to ensure Russian flights do not interfere with US-led operations.

But the strikes were already underway, potentially altering the balance of power in Syria back in favor of Bashar al-Assad’s regime, and Washington was looking at a fait accompli.

Enough about Foreign Policy, let’s take a look at Domestic Policy…

3. Reaganomics: Reagan’s mix of across-the-board tax cuts, deregulation, and domestic spending restraint helped fuel an economic boom that lasted two decades.  Reagan inherited a misery index (the sum of the inflation and unemployment rates) of 19.99%, and when he left office it had dropped to 9.72%. President Obama take note:  Under Reaganomics, 16 million new jobs were created.

According to the Monthly Jobs Report, released by the Bureau of Labor Statistics on Friday Morning. the number of Americans not in the labor force exceeded 94 million for the second time in a row last month hitting a new record high.

The BLS reports that 94,610,000 people (ages 16 and over) were not in the America’s Workforce in September. This means that they were neither employed nor had made specific efforts to find work in the prior four weeks.

The number of individuals out of the work force last month — due to just flat giving up, retirement or other reasons, represented a huge 579,000 person increase over the most recent record, hit in August, of 94,031,000 people out of the workforce.

The story of this report lies not just in the shear, maddening numbers, but in the spiritual, psychological, and economical toll, grinding those families stuck in Obama’s Failed Economy, face down in a morass of overdue bills, failed marriages, and bankruptcy.

4. Morning in America:  It was basically a slogan for Reagan’s 1984 reelection bid, but Morning in America symbolized a new beginning for the country.  Reagan’s jaunty optimism and an economic boom was a much-needed tonic for a country that had experienced the malaise of the Carter years and the traumas of Watergate and Vietnam.

From the beginning of his tenure as President of the United States, Barack Hussein Obama has been a “Nattering Nabob of Negativity”, to quote the late Vice-President Spiro Agnew. From his Speech at the University of Cairo to the Muslim World, to his World Apology Tour, where he apologizes for “how mean” the USA had been to “everybody”, to his continuous blaming of America’s Municipal Police Forces for the violent result of HIS Rhetoric of Racial Animus and Class Warfare, to his championing of “Abortion Rights”, to his belief that all of those out here in America’s Heartland are “bitterly clinging” to our Bibles and our guns, Obama’s demonstrated belief that America and Americans are NOT exceptional, have lead to a seven year “malaise” that makes the Carter Years seem positively jubilant.

5. Voiced values: Reagan gave voice to the values that had served America well –   thrift, patriotism, and hard work –  and often recounted the wisdom of the Founding Fathers.  He also championed the causes of the pro-life and family-values movements that sought to counter the societal upheavals of the 1960s and 1970s.

Obama’s First Presidential Campaign was based on his call for “Radical Change” in America. Now, 7 years later, we know what he meant.

The past two afternoons, Obama has gotten his mug in from of the television cameras, addressing the nation, using the actions of a crazed shooter at a community college in Oregon, to call for his favorite cause (besides the advancement of Islam) Gun Control. Never mind the fact that Black-on-Black Homicides are out-of-control in America, with Chicago experiencing 50 violent deaths last weekend, and Detroit and my hometown of Memphis, both overwhelmingly-majority black, being listed by the FBI as the two Most Violent Cities in America.

As we all know, even Obama, thugs are called “outlaws’ for a reason. New gun laws will not stop the killings. A good American man or woman with a gun can, though.

So, why is Obama so fervent in his quest to get America’s guns?

As Vladimir Lenis said,

One man with a gun can control 100 without one.

And, by the way, don’t you dare call it fascism. Remember, it’s not fascism, when Modern American Liberals propose it.

Barack Hussein Obama’s disdain for all of the core values of our country, such as American Exceptionalism, American Rugged Individualism, American Achievement, the American Family Unit, and the Faith of Our Fathers, has been shown through his words and actions, over and over again, through this long National Nightmare, through which we have been suffering, hoping fervently that the light at the end of the tunnel, is not an oncoming train…or a Nuclear Explosion.

The Good News is…

As a Constitutional Republic, those of us, the overwhelming majority of Americans who still believe in the concept of right and wrong, maintain the Rights which our Founding Fathers bestowed upon us, to speak our mind…regardless of what the current Presidential Administration, the Main Stream Media, and the rest of the mindless sycophants, who worship at the dual altars of popular culture and political correctness, want us to do.

We shall not be assimilated into the Hive-Mind.

That still, small voice which resides within each one of us, has led Americans to do great things, in service to their country and the concept of American Freedom, as personified by Lady Liberty, standing so majestically in New York Harbor.

God gave us this nation, ensconced in the concept of “Liberty and Justice for all”.

By His Grace, we will keep it.

As President Ronald Wilson Reagan, himself, said,

Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn’t pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Pope Francis, Sharia Law, and the U.S. Constitution: Comparing Plowshares to Scimitars [A KJ Sunday Morning Op Ed]

American Christianity 2The past week, Pope Francis paid a visit to the United States of America.

During his visit, while addressing the Congress of the United States of America, he basically said that we have an “obligation” to take in the Syrian Refugees, among them Radical Muslims, who are presently rioting in Europe.

Pope Francis, like other Liberals, has been pushing a false equivalency, in equating Islam to Christianity, for a while now.

Back in June, The Washington Times reported that

On Monday, the Bishop Of Rome addressed Catholic followers regarding the dire importance of exhibiting religious tolerance. During his hour-long speech, a smiling Pope Francis was quoted telling the Vatican’s guests that the Koran, and the spiritual teachings contained therein, are just as valid as the Holy Bible.

“Jesus Christ, Mohammed, Jehovah, Allah. These are all names employed to describe an entity that is distinctly the same across the world. For centuries, blood has been needlessly shed because of the desire to segregate our faiths. This, however, should be the very concept which unites us as people, as nations, and as a world bound by faith. Together, we can bring about an unprecedented age of peace, all we need to achieve such a state is respect each others beliefs, for we are all children of God regardless of the name we choose to address him by. We can accomplish miraculous things in the world by merging our faiths, and the time for such a movement is now. No longer shall we slaughter our neighbors over differences in reference to their God.”

The pontiff drew harsh criticisms in December (2014) after photos of the 78-year-old Catholic leader was released depicting Pope Francis kissing a Koran. The Muslim Holy Book was given to Francis during a meeting with Muslim leaders after a lengthy Muslim prayer held at the Vatican.

Last February 5th, after President Barack Hussein Obama’s incendiary and decidedly anti-Christian remarks at the National Prayer Breakfast, Reverend Franklin Graham spoke truth to power:

Today at the National Prayer Breakfast, the President implied that what ISIS is doing is equivalent to what happened over 1000 years ago during the Crusades and the Inquisition. Mr. President–Many people in history have used the name of Jesus Christ to accomplish evil things for their own desires. But Jesus taught peace, love and forgiveness. He came to give His life for the sins of mankind, not to take life. Mohammad on the contrary was a warrior and killed many innocent people. True followers of Christ emulate Christ—true followers of Mohammed emulate Mohammed.

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

Recently, Republican Presidential Candidate Hopeful, Dr. Ben Carson, got a lot of attention from hang-wringing Liberals in the Main Stream Media, the Democratic Party and among the Vichy Republicans, also, when he said that a Muslim should never be President of the United States of America., because Sharia Law in incompatible with The United States Constitution.

He was absolutely right.

The Center For Security Policy issued the following PDF, ” “Sharia Law Vs. The Constitution”,

Article VI: The Constitution is the supreme law of the land

  • Constitution: Article VI: “This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby”
  • Shariah: “The source of legal rulings for all acts of those who are morally responsible is Allah.” (a1.1, Umdat al-salik or The Reliance of the Traveller, commonly accepted work of Shariah jurisprudence); “There is only one law which ought to be followed, and that is the Sharia.” (Seyed Qutb); “Islam wishes to destroy all states and governments anywhere on the face of the earth which are opposed to the ideology and program of Islam regardless of the country or the nation which rules it. The purpose of Islam is to set up a State on the basis of its own ideology and program.” (Seyed Abul A’ala Maududi)

First Amendment: Freedom of religion

  • Constitution: First Amendment: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof ”
  • Shariah: “Those who reject Islam must be killed. If they turn back (from Islam), take hold of them and kill them wherever you find them.” Quran 4:89 ; “Whoever changed his [Islamic] religion, then kill him” Sahih al-Bukhari, 9:84:57.  In historic and modern Shariah states, Shariah law enforces dhimmi status (second-class citizen, apartheid-type laws) on nonMuslims, prohibiting them from observing their religious practices publicly, building or repairing churches, raising their voices during prayer or ringing church bells; if dhimmi laws are violated in the Shariah State, penalties are those used for prisoners of war: death, slavery, release or ransom.(o9.14, o11.0-o11.11, Umdat al-salik).

First Amendment: Freedom of speech   

  • Constitution: First Amendment: Congress shall not abridge “the freedom of speech.”  
  • Shariah: Speech defaming Islam or Muhammad is considered “blasphemy” and is punishable by death or imprisonment.

First Amendment: Freedom to dissent

  • Constitution: First Amendment: “Congress cannot take away the right of the people “to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” 
  •  Shariah: Non-Muslims are not to harbor any hostility toward the Islamic state or give comfort to those who disagree with Islamic government.

Second Amendment: Right to self-defense

  • Constitution: Second Amendment: “The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” 
  • Shariah: Under historic and modern dhimmi laws, non-Muslims cannot possess swords, firearms or weapons of any kind.

Fifth, Sixth and Seventh Amendments: Right to due process and fair trial

  • Constitution: Fifth Amendment: “no person shall be held to answer for a capital or otherwise infamous crime… without due process of law.”  Sixth Amendment: guarantees a “public trial by an impartial jury.”  Seventh Amendment: “the right of trial by jury shall be preserved.”
  • Shariah: Hadith Sahih al-Bukhari: Muhammad said, “No Muslim should be killed for killing a Kafir (infidel).”  Non-Muslims are prohibited from testifying against Muslims.  A woman’s testimony is equal to half of a man’s.

Eighth Amendment: No cruel and unusual punishment 

  • Constitution: Eighth Amendment: “nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.”
  • Shariah: Under Shariah punishments are barbaric: “Cut off the hands of thieves, whether they are male or female, as punishment for what they have done – a deterrent from Allah.” Quran 5:38; A raped woman is punished:”The woman and the man guilty of adultery or fornication – flog each of them with a hundred stripes” (Sura 24:2).

Fourteenth Amendment: Right to equal protection and due process 

  • Constitution:  Fourteenth Amendment: “No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. “
  • Shariah: Under dhimmi laws enforced in modern Shariah states, Jews, Christians and other non-Muslims are not equal to Muslims before the law.  Under Shariah law, women, girls, apostates, homosexuals and “blasphemers” are all denied equality under the law. 

Given this incompatibility between Sharia Law and the Constitution of the United States of America, which our Freedom and our System of Laws are based upon, if given the choice, which would Muslims currently living in the Land of the Free and the home of the Brave choose to be faithful to?

Back on June 23, 2015, the Center for Security Policy released the following findings for a poll they took of 600 Muslims, who current live in America.

The numbers of potential jihadists among the majority of Muslims who appear not to be sympathetic to such notions raise a number of public policy choices that warrant careful consideration and urgent debate, including: the necessity for enhanced surveillance of Muslim communities; refugee resettlement, asylum and other immigration programs that are swelling their numbers and density; and the viability of so-called “countering violent extremism” initiatives that are supposed to stymie radicalization within those communities.

Overall, the survey, which was conducted by The Polling Company for the Center for Security Policy (CSP), suggests that a substantial number of Muslims living in the United States see the country very differently than does the population overall.  The sentiments of the latter were sampled in late May in another CSP-commissioned Polling Company nationwide survey.

According to the just-released survey of Muslims, a majority (51%) agreed that “Muslims in America should have the choice of being governed according to shariah.”  When that question was put to the broader U.S. population, the overwhelming majority held that shariah should not displace the U.S. Constitution (86% to 2%).

More than half (51%) of U.S. Muslims polled also believe either that they should have the choice of American or shariah courts, or that they should have their own tribunals to apply shariah. Only 39% of those polled said that Muslims in the U.S. should be subject to American courts.

These notions were powerfully rejected by the broader population according to the Center’s earlier national survey.  It found by a margin of 92%-2% that Muslims should be subject to the same courts as other citizens, rather than have their own courts and tribunals here in the U.S.

Even more troubling, is the fact that nearly a quarter of the Muslims polled believed that, “It is legitimate to use violence to punish those who give offense to Islam by, for example, portraying the prophet Mohammed.”

By contrast, the broader survey found that a 63% majority of those sampled said that “the freedom to engage in expression that offends Muslims or anybody else is guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution and cannot be restricted.”

Nearly one-fifth of Muslim respondents said that the use of violence in the United States is justified in order to make shariah the law of the land in this country.

In conclusion, I am not saying that every Muslim is on a jihad against “the infidels”, and, wish to invade our Sovereign Nation and over-throw our Government.

However, there is a difference between being an average Christian American and a Muslim, living in America.

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

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

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

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

For Liberals, including Pope Francis, to deny that, is disingenuous at best, and just plain dangerous at worst.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Trump Preaches to the Populace in Dallas. Professional Politicians and Pundits Perplexed.

Trump-Punch-600-LAAmerica’s so-called “Political Experts” are beside themselves this morning.

The Political Interloper, whom they predicted would fade fast in the Republican Presidential Primary Race, is still packin’ them in.

The Washington Post reported last night, that

Donald Trump, the front-runner in the Republican presidential sweepstakes, received a standing ovation Monday evening during a campaign rally before thousands in an arena here when he hit on his signature issue: curbing illegal immigration.

“We are a dumping ground for the rest of the world,” said Trump, who emphasized his commitment to deporting all undocumented immigrants and building a wall on the southern border of the United States.

We don’t want them either!” yelled a woman as he spoke.

The subject of illegal immigration, which has made Trump a sharply polarizing figure in the 2016 White House race, brought the Republican his most enthusiastic cheers of the evening.

His remarks were meandering. He criticized Republican and Democratic detractors, promised strong leadership and boasted of how well his campaign has performed so far. As usual, he was short on policy specifics.

The event served as one of Trump’s final warm-ups for the second Republican debate Wednesday night. Trump will be positioned at center stage once again, a reflection of polls that show him holding a clear lead over the rest of the field.

“I hear they are all going after me,” Trump said of his competitors. “Whatever.”

The rally, which was held at the American Airlines Center, where professional basketball and hockey teams play, attracted a large and energized crowd. But many of the upper-level seats were empty, raising questions about exactly how many ticketholders showed up. All of the roughly 20,000 tickets organizers distributed for free were scooped up by the end of last week. Some who landed tickets sought to sell them online for hundreds of dollars.

“Can you people see me up there?” Trump said, highlighting the size of both the crowd and the venue. He appeared to try to explain the empty seats with a joke: “I said to them, don’t fill up the upper rings. It’s not fair.”

Trump, whose immigration plans have drawn intense criticism from Democrats and some Republicans, also attracted protesters who marched toward the arena carrying anti-Trump signs.

“What do we want? Dump Trump!” they chanted.

Trump enthusiasts started lining up at noon outside the arena, some driving considerable distances. Some said they were not at all sure they would vote for him but sure didn’t want to miss a chance to see him in person. 

“He’s entertaining!” said Paul­ine Pitman, 73, a retired county government employee, “I like his business sense.” But she said she would need more convincing to vote him president.

Some Trump supporters decided to make a buck — and thought Trump would approve of it.

Selling “Make American Great Again” hats, visors, T-shirts and buttons, small-time entrepreneurs decided to cash in on the enthusiasm for the unconventional candidate.

“I am sure I will sell out!” said Janet Newlong, 67, an office manager for a Chattanooga HVAC company who drove 11 hours to see Trump. And while there, she had a few dozen $21 Trump hats, and they were going fast.

Trump singled out a long list of foes in his remarks, including Republican strategist Karl Rove, Washington Post columnist George Will, the media in general, former Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney, former Florida governor Jeb Bush and former secretary of state Hillary Rodham Clinton.

He said that his surprisingly strong showing in the polls will mean nothing if he does not prevail when voters cast their ballots.

“Unless I win, it’s a been a waste of time for me,” he said.

On Tuesday, Trump plans to be in Los Angeles, where he will host a national security event aboard the USS Iowa battleship.

He said he liked many of his Republican opponents including Ted Cruz, whom he called “a good guy.” But he warned against aggressively criticizing him.

“If he comes out and attacks me on Wednesday night, I will take it back immediately,” said Trump.

Why is Donald Trump still the frontrunner among all the Republican Presidential Candidates?

Because he is not a professional Politician, that’s why!

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 is doing 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.

On March 1, 1975, the Great Communicator and Future President of the United States, Ronald Wilson Reagan, spoke the following words at the 2nd Annual CPAC Convention. He may as well have been speaking yesterday.

I don ‘t know about you, but I am impatient with those Republicans who after the last election rushed into print saying, “We must broaden the base of our party” — when what they meant was to fuzz up and blur even more the differences between ourselves and our opponents.

It was a feeling that there was not a sufficient difference now between the parties that kept a majority of the voters away from the polls. When have we ever advocated a closed-door policy? Who has ever been barred from participating?

Our people look for a cause to believe in. Is it a third party we need, or is it a new and revitalized second party, raising a banner of no pale pastels, but bold colors which make it unmistakably clear where we stand on all of the issues troubling the people?

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.

Back in the day, that political strategy propelled Ronald Reagan to the Presidency of the United States.

Per learnourhistory.com:

Through the 1970s, the United States struggled through a terrible recession and government became much more involved in Americans’ lives. Additionally, America showed significant weakness globally, as the Soviet Union flexed its muscles and smaller nations began to lose both fear and respect for the United States. It was clear the country needed a change.

Ronald Reagan was the right man for the job and was elected in a landslide. He swiftly changed the course of the nation, lowering taxes and reducing regulations to stimulate the economy and standing up for America’s principles and beliefs around the world. In addition to his changes to foreign and domestic policy, Reagan was an “American Exceptionalist”, meaning that he understood that there was something special and different about America that set it apart from all other nations. During his time in office, Reagan reduced the intrusive role of the government and helped the nation re-discover its greatness, power and economic growth.

The Political Strategy of “Bold Colors” is the reason that Trump is still leading all of the Professional Politicians, who are currently seeking the Nomination for the Republican Presidential Candidacy.

The Republican Establishment continues to show 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.

It’s a whole different country out here.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Hillary Announces Candidacy: “At This Point, What Difference Does It Make?”

 

Hillary Ramirez CartoonThe inevitable happened yesterday, as Former First Lady, New York Senator, and Secretary of State, Hillary Rodham Clinton announced her intention to seek the Democratic Party’s Presidential Candidate Nomination.

I hurled.

But, I digress…

The Daily Mail reports that

Hillary Rodham Clinton is running for president, leaning on a message of middle-class rescue and claims that America’s economy is ‘still stacked in favor of those at the top,’ according to a campaign video that went online Sunday afternoon.

‘I’m getting ready to do something,’ Clinton says in the brief ad, following a series of clips of ordinary-looking Americans describing what they’re ‘getting ready’ for.

‘I’m running for president,’ she says. 

‘Everyday Americans need a champion, and I want to be that champion.’  

That message is a daring one, given Clinton’s wealth. When she left the U.S. State Department in 2013, her financial disclosure report showed that her combined net worth with her husband was between $5.2 and $25.5 million. Millions more rolled in when she published her memoirs.

She famously claimed last year that she and former president Bill Clinton were ‘dead broke’ whenthey left the White House in 2001 – when they moved into a palatial home in a tree-lined New York City suburb.  

Clinton’s chief of staff John Podesta pushed a similar ‘middle-class’ message, but stepped on her announcement with his own email to a group of donors. 

Some mixed reactions to Hillary Clinton’s 2016 bid

‘I wanted to make sure you heard it first from me — it’s official: Hillary’s running for president,’ Podesta wrote. 

He said the former secretary of state ‘is hitting the road to Iowa to start talking directly with voters. There will be a formal kickoff event next month.’

‘We need to make the middle class mean something again,’ Podesta’s email closed. ‘We can do this.’

From her mother’s own childhood – in which she was abandoned by her parents – to her work going door-to-door for the Children’s Defense Fund to her battling to create the Children’s Health Insurance Program, she’s fought children and families all her career. Clinton’s press office left an embarrassing typo in its press announcement, saying that she had ‘fought children and families all her career’

Podesta leads the Podesta Group, one of Washington’s most powerful lobbying firms. He was a senior adviser to President Barack Obama until February. 

Clinton, too, is part of the upper-crust of America’s wealth pool, earning millions since she left public office. 

The campaign’s internal schedule had called for a 12:00 p.m. tweet linked to a video, revealing the worst-kept secret in America to more than 3 million online followers. In reality, the big reveal was nearly two and a half hours late.

Clinton is entering the 2016 race without a splashy announcement of the kind that Republicans are staging for cheering throngs this month. 

That strategy will help her skirt the kind of uncomfortable media questions that tend to dog anyone named Clinton.

There will be no press conferences, no grand speeches until at least early May, and few interviews. 

Also missing: Her campaign website includes a lengthy biography but no discussion of issues, no policy platforms and no staked-out ideological territory.

Hillary for America, the official campaign organization, said in a statement that Clinton is ‘committed to spending the next 6 to 8 weeks in a “ramp up” period where her team will start to build a nation-wide grassroots organization, and she will spend her time engaging directly with voters.’ 

In May, once her supporters in all 50 states are organized for house parties or to watch over live-streams,’ the statement said, ‘Hillary will hold her first rally and deliver the speech to kick off her campaign.

As a candidate, Mrs. Clinton carries more baggage than American Airlines.

For example…

Within a blog titled “Hillary Clinton Lied About Benghazi…and Her Health. (I’m Shocked. Shocked…I Tell You.)”, which I posted on June 23, 2014, I reported the following information…

Per the New York Post

In his new book, “Blood Feud,” Edward Klein explores the contentious, jealous relationship between Bill and Hillary Clinton and Barack and Michelle Obama. In this excerpt, he explains what happened the night of the Benghazi attack.

By 10 p.m. on Sept. 11, 2012, when Hillary Clinton received a call from President Obama, she was one of the most thoroughly briefed officials in Washington on the unfolding disaster in Benghazi, Libya.

She knew that Ambassador Christopher Stevens and a communications operator were dead, and that the attackers had launched a well-coordinated mortar assault on the CIA annex, which would cost the lives of two more Americans.

She had no doubt that a terrorist attack had been launched against America on the anniversary of 9/11. However, when Hillary picked up the phone and heard Obama’s voice, she learned the president had other ideas in mind. With less than two months before Election Day, he was still boasting that he had al Qaeda on the run.

If the truth about Benghazi became known, it would blow that argument out of the water.

“Hillary was stunned when she heard the president talk about the Benghazi attack,” one of her top legal advisers said in an interview. “Obama wanted her to say that the attack had been a spontaneous demonstration triggered by an obscure video on the Internet that demeaned the Prophet Mohammed.”

A protester reacts as the US Consulate in Benghazi is seen in flames during a protest by an armed group in September 2012 that killed US ambassador to Libya, Chris Stevens and three others.Photo: Reuters

This adviser continued: “Hillary told Obama, ‘Mr. President, that story isn’t credible. Among other things, it ignores the fact that the attack occurred on 9/11.’ But the president was adamant. He said, ‘Hillary, I need you to put out a State Department release as soon as possible.’”

After her conversation with the president, Hillary called Bill Clinton, who was at his penthouse apartment in the William J. Clinton Presidential Library in Little Rock, and told him what Obama wanted her to do.

“I’m sick about it,” she said, according to the legal adviser, who was filled in on the conversation.

“That story won’t hold up,” Bill said. “I know,” Hillary said. “I told the president that.” “It’s an impossible story,” Bill said. “I can’t believe the president is claiming it wasn’t terrorism. Then again, maybe I can. It looks like Obama isn’t going to allow anyone to say that terrorism has occurred on his watch.”

Hillary’s legal adviser provided further detail: “During their phone call, Bill started playing with various doomsday scenarios, up to and including the idea that Hillary consider resigning as secretary of state over the issue. But both he and Hillary quickly agreed that resigning wasn’t a realistic option.

If her resignation hurt Obama’s chances of winning re-election, her fellow Democrats would never forgive her. Hillary was already thinking of running for president in 2016, and her political future, as well as Obama’s, hung in the balance.”

Obama had put Hillary in a corner, and she and Bill didn’t see a way out. And so, shortly after 10 o’clock on the night of September 11, she released an official statement that blamed the Benghazi attack on an “inflammatory (video) posted on the Internet.”

The Benghazi Deception was in full swing.

And, it never stopped swinging (or, spinning).

Remember when Hillary fainted before she was supposed to appear before the House Committee investigating that horrible night in Benghazi? According to Klein,

To begin with, Hillary fainted while she was working in her seventh-floor office at the State Department, not at home, as Reines told the media. She was treated at the State Department’s infirmary and then, at her own insistence, taken to Whitehaven to recover. However, as soon as Bill appeared on the scene and was able to assess Hillary’s condition for himself, he ordered that she be immediately flown to New York–Presbyterian Hospital in the Fort Washington section of Manhattan. When Reines subsequently released a statement confirming that Hillary was being treated at the hospital over the New Year’s holiday, it naturally intensified speculation about the seriousness of her medical condition.

While she was at the hospital, doctors diagnosed Hillary with several problems.

She had a right transverse venous thrombosis, or a blood clot between her brain and skull. She had developed the clot in one of the veins that drains blood from the brain to the heart. The doctors explained that blood stagnates when you spend a lot of time on airplanes, and Hillary had clocked countless hours flying around the world.

To make matters worse, it turned out that Hillary had an intrinsic tendency to form clots and faint. In addition to the fainting spell she suffered in Buffalo a few years before, she had fainted boarding her plane in Yemen, fallen and fractured her elbow in 2009, and suffered other unspecified fainting episodes. Several years earlier, she had developed a clot in her leg and was put on anticoagulant therapy by her doctor. However, she had foolishly stopped taking her anticoagulant medicine, which might have explained the most recent thrombotic event.

“The unique thing about clotting in the brain is that it could have transformed into a stroke,” said a cardiac specialist with knowledge of Hillary’s condition.

…According to a source close to Hillary, a thorough medical examination revealed that Hillary’s tendency to form clots was the least of her problems. She also suffered from a thyroid condition, which was common among women of her age, and her fainting spells indicated there was an underlying heart problem as well. A cardiac stress test indicated that her heart rhythm and heart valves were not normal. Put into layman’s language, her heart valves were not pumping in a steady way.

When the author attempted to contact the Clintons’ cardiologist, Dr. Allan Schwartz, he refused to comment, which made it impossible to determine the exact nature of Hillary’s medical status or its long-term significance. However, sources who dis- cussed Hillary’s medical condition with her were told that Hillary’s doctors considered performing valve-replacement surgery. They ultimately decided against it. Still, before they released Hillary from the hospital, they warned Bill Clinton: “She has to be carefully monitored for the rest of her life.” 

So, why hasn’t all of this come to light before now? The reason is simple, per Klein,

She had managed to keep her medical history secret out of fear that, should it become public, it would disqualify her from becoming president

Well….after her new Book. “Hard Choices”, tanked so spectacularly this past week, she may not have to worry about that. Per The Weekly Standard,

…a veteran publishing source calls the latest Hillary Clinton book, Hard Choices, a memoir of her State Department years, a “bomb.” The source is referring to the early but underwhelming sales figures.

“Between us, they are nervous at S&S [Simon & Schuster],” says the source, who gave permission for his email to be published. “Sales were well below expectations and the media was a disaster.”

According to this source, a Simon & Schuster insider, “They sold 60,000 hard covers first week and 24,000 ebooks.” The publishing house was “hoping and praying for 150,000 print first week.”

“The 60k represents a less than 10% sell thru based on what they shipped,” says the source.

It’s been reported that one million copies of Clinton’s book were shipped weeks before the June 10 publication date. “They will be lucky to sell 150,000 total lifetime,” the source writes in the email.

Hillary reportedly received a near-$14 million advance, a sum the publishing house will unlikely make back.

“It’s a bomb but it will be interesting to see how they spin it.”

Ruby Cramer of BuzzFeed reported earlier today that Barnes & Noble sold 24,000 of Clinton’s book.

Remember this from January 23, 2013’s Wall Street Journal?

Hillary Clinton is ending her tenure as secretary of state in fiery fashion. “You really get the sense that [Mrs.] Clinton barely managed to restrain herself from dropping an F-bomb there,” remarks New York magazine’s Dan Amira. He refers to an exchange between the secretary and Sen. Ron Johnson of Wisconsin at a Foreign Relations Committee hearing this morning.

Johnson pressed her about the administration’s conflicting explanations for the Sept. 11 attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, which killed the ambassador and three other Americans. “With all due respect, the fact is we had four dead Americans,” said the secretary snappishly to the senator. “Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk one night decided to go kill some Americans? What difference at this point does it make? It is our job to figure out what happened and do everything we can to prevent it from ever happening again, Senator.”

So, what difference does Hillary’s lying about Benghazi and her health make?

Answer: A lot.

As Americans, we have already suffered under a Democratic President with no ethics or moral compass, whatsoever. Why should we subject ourselves to all of that pain and suffering again?

Back in the early 1980s’, HBO taped a couple of live performances of America’s “Clown Prince of Comedy”, Richard “Red” Skelton. Even though the ol’ redhead was 78 years old, he was still as sharp as a tack…and was still an absolute master of comedic timing. At one point,  he was telling the audience how much he loved his wife, when abruptly,he looked from side to side, got a mischievous grin of his legendary face and said,

But, where that woman spits, grass never grows again.

He could have been speaking about Hillary Clinton.

She doesn’t deserve to be a school teacher, much less the President of the United States.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Obama to Surrender US Climate Sovereignty to United Nations

 

obamaburningconstitutionSince He is already in the process of surrendering our safety to Iran, Obama has decided to surrender our sovereignty to the United Nations.

The Washington Post reports that

The White House on Tuesday introduced President Obama’s blueprint for cutting greenhouse gas emissions in the United States by nearly a third over the next decade.

Mr. Obama’s plan, part of a formal written submission to the United Nations ahead of efforts to forge a global climate change accord in Paris in December, detailed the United States’ part of an ambitious jointpledge made by Mr. Obama and President Xi Jinping of China in November.

The United States and China are the world’s two largest greenhouse gas polluters. Mr. Obama said the United States would cut its emissions by 26 to 28 percent by 2025, while Mr. Xi said that China’s emissions would drop after 2030.

Mr. Obama’s new blueprint brings together several domestic initiatives that were already in the works, including freezing construction of new coal-fired power plants, increasing the fuel economy of vehicles and plugging methane leaks from oil and gas production. It is meant to describe how the United States will lead by example and meet its pledge for cutting emissions.

But the plan’s reliance on executive authority is an acknowledgment that any proposal to pass climate change legislation would be blocked by the Republican-controlled Congress.

At the heart of the plan are ambitious but politically contentious Environmental Protection Agency regulations meant to drastically cut planet-warming carbon dioxide emissions from the nation’s cars and coal-fired power plants. The plan also relies on a speedy timetable, which assumes that Mr. Obama’s administration will issue and begin enacting all such regulations before he leaves office.

Let me tell any idiotic individuals who might support this insane plan by Petulant President Pantywaist, the way I feel about “answering” to the United Nations.

The United States of America is a Sovereign Nation, created by the blood, sweat, and tears of men and women, who rise above you in stature, honor, integrity, and courage to the point where you are not even fit enough to tie their boots.

All those things that you got away with in college, including burning our flag, protesting, being ungrateful, obnoxious, and unpatriotic, does not fly with the overwhelming majority of Americans.

What Americans have witnessed during this pitiful excuse for a President’s Administration, have disgusted Patriotic Americans to the point of rage.

On his nationally syndicated radio program, back in January of this year, the Godfather of Conservative Talk Radio, Maha Rushie, himself, spoke about Obama’s “Independence Proclamation” in which he proclaimed that what Congress would not do, he would accomplish by Executive Orders:

Executive orders to make things fair. He can do executive orders and executive actions to get rid of the unfairness. He’s gonna make this lousy country finally fair! … He’s got these Republicans standing in his way. “Okay, I’m gonna just start writing executive orders. “To hell with it! I’m gonna finally make everything fair.” Now, he might have a pen, and he might have a phone, but what he does not have is the constitutional power to run this country like a dictator…

…He’s a constitutional lawyer, and he should know better. But he doesn’t care. He doesn’t care about the Constitution. The Constitution is an impediment to Obama. The Constitution is not something to be respected — and it’s not just Obama, by the way. It’s to the vast majority of the intellectual, leftist elite. They really detest the Constitution, because it thwarts them. Some of you may not know this, but the United States Constitution was written to limit government power.

The US Constitution’s first 10 amendments specifically limit government’s power. Well, that’s not cool if you’re Obama or any of today’s liberal Democrats. That, to you, is shackles. They call that “a charter of negative liberties.” Stop and think of that. A document founded in the belief, the proclamation, the declaration, the primacy of individual liberty and freedom is considered “a charter of negative liberties.”

It’s something that gives the people individual primacy and freedom — and, to the left, that’s negative — and the reason they call it “a charter of negative liberties” is because it limits government. They don’t like that, and that’s what Obama was talking about, “You know, the heck with it!”

…Violating the Constitution — there’s no question about this, folks. It’s just a matter of whether people in power and who have the authority to do so want to stop it. Because if nobody’s gonna stop Obama, he’s gonna be able to keep doing it.

President Obama has been on a mission during his presidency to circumvent the system of checks and balances which Our Founding Fathers have so wisely put in place, in order to prevent exactly what our Imperial President is attempting to do.

Therefore, one can say that the president’s actions, concerning the issuance of “Memoranda”, are no less than tyrannical.

What did our Founding Fathers have to say about Tyranny?

The liberties of our country, the freedoms of our civil Constitution are worth defending at all hazards; it is our duty to defend them against all attacks. We have received them as a fair inheritance from our worthy ancestors. They purchased them for us with toil and danger and expense of treasure and blood. It will bring a mark of everlasting infamy on the present generation – enlightened as it is – if we should suffer them to be wrested from us by violence without a struggle, or to be cheated out of them by the artifices of designing men. -Samuel Adams

Resistance to tyrants is obedience to God.- Thomas Jefferson

And, this final quote, which is amazingly prophetic:

Single acts of tyranny may be ascribed to the accidental opinion of a day; but a series of oppressions, begun at a distinguished period and pursued unalterably through every change of ministers, too plainly prove a deliberate, systematic plan of reducing [a people] to slavery.- Thomas Jefferson

If you haven’t noticed, there has been an explosion of Conservative Bloggers during the Obama Administration. There is a reason for this.

Just as Benjamin Franklin (Poor Richard’s Almanac) and Thomas Paine (Common Sense) used their biting wit, as communicated by the Written Word, to fight tyranny in their time, so are “Citizen Bloggers” using the power of the Written Word once again, this time magnified in scope a thousand-fold by the power of the Internet, to fight an Imperious President.

Because…

All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. – Edmund Burke

Speak your mind. It is your right and legacy as an American Citizen.

Do not allow yourself and the country which has been bequeathed to us by the blood, sweat, and tears of those who have gone before us, to “go gently into that good night”.

Rage, rage against the dying of The Light.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Hillary’s E-mailgate: “Oh, What a Tangled Web We Weave…”

Hillary Ramirez CartoonBack in the early 1980s’, HBO taped a couple of live performances of America’s “Clown Prince of Comedy”, Richard “Red” Skelton. Even though the ol’ redhead was 78 years old, he was still as sharp as a tack…and was still an absolute master of comedic timing. At one point,  he was telling the audience how much he loved his wife, when abruptly, he looked from side to side, got a mischievous grin on his legendary face and said,

But, where that woman spits, grass never grows again.

He could have been speaking about Hillary Clinton.

By now, unless you have been living under a rock, I am sure that you have heard about the latest scandal involving Former First Lady and Former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton.

It appears that Mrs. Clinton used her own personal e-mail account exclusively to conduct “business”, while she was Secretary of State under Barack Hussein Obama, which is not only very clandestine in nature, but, also a breach of Government Protocol and time-honored rules and regulations.

According to The New Republic

The Times doesn’t say why Clinton didn’t turn over all emails. If she and her advisers selectively chose which emails to hand over, we need to at least know the selection process. Otherwise, who knows what she left out?

The Clinton camp adamantly denies that it’s trying to hide anything. “Like Secretaries of State before her, she used her own email account when engaging with any Department officials,” her spokesman, Nick Merrill said. “For government business, she emailed them on their Department accounts, with every expectation they would be retained.” Hillary had every expectation, they say, that all of her communications from her time at the State Department would become public.

Clinton herself isn’t speaking. As a still-unofficial presidential candidate, she doesn’t feel compelled to answer questions about this latest damaging report. But she should—because it’s starting to appear that Clinton is far less prepared for a presidential run than anyone expected.

First, she made multiple gaffes about her own wealth, saying her family was “dead broke” after Bill Clinton left office. At the same time, she has given numerous speeches for hundreds of thousands of dollars. And over the past few weeks, the Wall Street Journal and Washington Post reported in separate investigations that the Clinton Foundation had accepted donations from foreign countries both during and after her time as secretary of state. Many of those countries, like Saudi Arabia, do not have stellar records on human rights.
 
Hillary Clinton’s Worst NightmareFor a would-be presidential candidate with her deep experience in Washington, that’s a lot of unforced errors. The foundation shouldn’t have accepted donations from foreign countries so that no one could ever accuse Clinton of being influenced by that money. She should have stopped giving paid speeches a long time ago. And she should have used a government email address at the State Department. These should all be easy decisions to make, and yet Clinton got them all wrong. (And, in the case of the paid speeches, continues to get wrong.)

This should frighten Democrats. Who knows what other past mistakes might surface, or ones yet to come? It hasn’t taken much digging from journalists to find these stories. Republican opposition researchers are surely going into overdrive now that they smell blood in the water.

The best way for a party to vet a candidate, and get all of the dirt out of the way, is in a primary. But the Democratic Party is not going to have a competitive primary. At best, former Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley and former Senator Jim Webb will be her challengers. That’s not a particularly tough primary.

The wild card is Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren, whom liberals have long wanted to run for president. Warren has basically ruled out a presidential run. She has made no moves to indicate she is considering one. But as she sees Clinton struggle before even hitting the campaign trail, Warren—and other party leaders—has to be thinking about it more every day. She probably wouldn’t win, but it would still make for a far more competitive primary, take some of the heat and press coverage off Hillary, and make her a far more battle-tested candidate for the general election. That’s exactly what the Democratic Party needs.

Additionally, theoretically, any non-RINO Republican Candidate, who is willing to get down in the trenches and slug it out, should have a field day citing Hil’s notorious past along the 2016 Presidential Campaign Trail.

Because, the fact of the matter is, the Hildebeast has traveled a “long and winding road” of prevarication.

For example…

On Jan. 8, 1996, in a commentary titled “Blizzard of Lies,” New York Times columnist William Safire described Hillary Clinton as “a congenital liar.”

Americans of all political persuasions are coming to the sad realization that our First Lady — a woman of undoubted talents who was a role model for many in her generation — is a congenital liar.Drip by drip, like Whitewater torture, the case is being made that she is compelled to mislead, and to ensnare her subordinates and friends in a web of deceit.

1. Remember the story she told about studying The Wall Street Journal to explain her 10,000 percent profit in 1979 commodity trading? We now know that was a lie told to turn aside accusations that as the Governor’s wife she profited corruptly, her account being run by a lawyer for state poultry interests through a disreputable broker.

She lied for good reason: To admit otherwise would be to confess taking, and paying taxes on, what some think amounted to a $100,000 bribe.

2. The abuse of Presidential power known as Travelgate elicited another series of lies. She induced a White House lawyer to assert flatly to investigators that Mrs. Clinton did not order the firing of White House travel aides, who were then harassed by the F.B.I. and Justice Department to justify patronage replacement by Mrs. Clinton’s cronies.

Now we know, from a memo long concealed from investigators, that there would be “hell to pay” if the furious First Lady’s desires were scorned. The career of the lawyer who transmitted Hillary’s lie to authorities is now in jeopardy. Again, she lied with good reason: to avoid being identified as a vindictive political power player who used the F.B.I. to ruin the lives of people standing in the way of juicy patronage.

3. In the aftermath of the apparent suicide of her former partner and closest confidant, White House Deputy Counsel Vincent Foster, she ordered the overturn of an agreement to allow the Justice Department to examine the files in the dead man’s office. Her closest friends and aides, under oath, have been blatantly disremembering this likely obstruction of justice, and may have to pay for supporting Hillary’s lie with jail terms.

Again, the lying was not irrational. Investigators believe that damning records from the Rose Law Firm, wrongfully kept in Vincent Foster’s White House office, were spirited out in the dead of night and hidden from the law for two years — in Hillary’s closet, in Web Hubbell’s basement before his felony conviction, in the President’s secretary’s personal files — before some were forced out last week.

Why the White House concealment? For good reason: The records show Hillary Clinton was lying when she denied actively representing a criminal enterprise known as the Madison S.& L., and indicate she may have conspired with Web Hubbell’s father-in-law to make a sham land deal that cost taxpayers $3 million.

Why the belated release of some of the incriminating evidence? Not because it mysteriously turned up in offices previously searched. Certainly not because Hillary Clinton and her new hang-tough White House counsel want to respond fully to lawful subpoenas.

One reason for the Friday-night dribble of evidence from the White House is the discovery by the F.B.I. of copies of some of those records elsewhere. When Clinton witnesses are asked about specific items in “lost” records — which investigators have — the White House “finds” its copy and releases it. By concealing the Madison billing records two days beyond the statute of limitations, Hillary evaded a civil suit by bamboozled bank regulators.

Another reason for recent revelations is the imminent turning of former aides and partners of Hillary against her; they were willing to cover her lying when it advanced their careers, but are inclined to listen to their own lawyers when faced with perjury indictments.

Therefore, ask not “Why didn’t she just come clean at the beginning?” She had good reasons to lie; she is in the longtime habit of lying; and she has never been called to account for lying herself or in suborning lying in her aides and friends.

No wonder the President is fearful of holding a prime-time press conference. Having been separately deposed by the independent counsel at least twice, the President and First Lady would be well advised to retain separate defense counsel.

Safire was being too kind.

Vince Foster and the Benghazi 4 remain unavailable for comment.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Scott Walker Now Lead Candidate With Conservative Base. Liberals Launch Attack.

Scott WalkerI have been politically depressed for the last couple of weeks.

The reason?

Because, among those already actively seeking the office of the President of the United States of America, there has been no one who represents the Conservative Base.

However, just when I thought that we were going to be stuck with Jeb Bush, a light appeared at the end of the tunnel… and it was not an oncoming train.

It’s Governor Scott Walker of Wisconsin.

Gov. Walker set tongues wagging as a result of his appearance last month in Iowa, as The Washington Examiner reported:

Ditching a suit coat for casual rolled-up sleeves, Walker paced across the stage as he ticked through his accomplishments as the two-term governor of a blue state.

“In Washington, they keep trying to find ways to take more of your money. In Wisconsin, we’re trying to find ways to give more of the money back to the people who earned it,” Walker said, highlighting the tax cuts he brought to his state and suggesting he could do the same for the rest of the country.

“Our property taxes are lower today than they were four years ago,” he said. “How many governors can say that?”

Among the political victories Walker cited was the passage of pro-life state legislation, an issue that likely resonated with the audience of conservative activists given lawmakers’ ultimately unsuccessful attempt to pass a late-term abortion ban in the House this week.

Walker recounted the personal upheaval he experienced when the Occupy Wall Street movement swept through Wisconsin during his first term.

He said Occupy protesters gathered outside his family’s home and threatened his wife and children.

“Someone sent me a threat that said they were going to gut my wife like a deer,” Walker said. “All they did was remind me how important it was to stand up for the people of my state.”

Taking a subtle swipe at the president’s reluctance to engage extremists abroad, Walker pushed for a stronger national position on defense.

“We need leaders who will stand with our allies against radical Islamic terrorists,” he said, drawing one of the loudest waves of applause of the speech.

Why are Conservatives, like myself, in the state of euphoria, over this possible candidate?

Rush Limbaugh nailed it, once again, yesterday.

I’m telling you, this is why Scott Walker is running away with every Republican poll right now.  The consultant class doesn’t get it. The Republican establishment doesn’t understand it. They’re scratching their heads, what’s Walker done?  They do not get it.  They don’t understand.  For two years I have been ballyhooing Scott Walker, not personally, but here’s a guy not only has he drawn the blueprints for beating the left — what are blueprints?  They are designs for building something.  Well, he’s built the house. He wrote the blueprints and he built the building.  He built the machine that defeats the left.  He has shown how to do it, and he did it.  He is a walking gold mine.

Scott Walker has been targeted every bit as much as any other Republican has as a racist, sexist, bigot, homophobe, as a criminal, as a mean-spirited whatever. He had to win three elections in four years.  Think of that.  Think of that.  Three elections in four years.  He had the federal judiciary trying to hamper him and punish him.  He had the entire Democrat Party and its union support base throwing money and thug like tactics against him and his family, and he did not try to appease them once.  He stood up to them in his way.

He won elections, and then afterwards he did not give a speech about how now it’s time to come together for the people of Wisconsin.  Well, he might have said that but he did not mean it’s time to let them now have a role in his government.  His objective was to overcome them.  His objective was to defeat them, in their schools, in their school curriculum, in the way the unions, public and private, were ruining Wisconsin, and he has succeeded.

I would think that everybody at the RNC and the consultant class who wants to win would be taking notes and would be talking to him and his people about how they did it.  Instead, they’re trying to ignore it.  He’s winning every flash poll.  Drudge is doing one, just saw this.  Your vote for Republican presidential candidate.  He’s got Bush, Carson, Christie.  I would lay you 10 to one that whenever Drudge starts publishing results Walker is gonna be well over 50% in this poll.

Now, nothing scientific about it.  This is just an Internet poll.  But the reason why is because, as I said, Scott Walker could be wrong on immigration.  He could be wrong on global warming, to the base.  The base may not like his view on this or that, but they’re gonna support him because he is fighting back.  That’s what has been missing.

Right on, right on.

You know why I believe that Scott Walker might just be the candidate that those of us in the conservative wing of the Republican Party have been waiting on?

Because, on Facebook yesterday, on the political pages, the Liberals started attacking him, like he was Sarah Palin’s kid brother.

Liberals were calling Walker everything but a child of God, in an effort to squash his candidacy, before it even begins.

Because, when a Republican actually starts to fight back, against the Tyranny of the Minority, as I call Liberal Oppression, the minority political ideology  in this nation (Liberalism) stands up and takes notice.

The members of the Hive Mind, that is the Democratic Party, are not used to having to defend themselves against a Republican who will fight back and not compromise his/her ideals or values, as so many up on Capitol Hill have.

I am jazzed up. Things are starting to get interesting.

For this Christian Conservative American Blogger, “business” is about to pick up.

Let the games begin.

Until He Comes,

KJ