The New Bolsheviks: College Protests Continue, Expanding Across America. Who is Behind It?

th (49)The year is 1903, The Russian Social Democratic Party is meeting in London. All the intellectuals in their party have been arguing since the end of the 1800′s as to the direction the party should take. One year earlier, in 1902, a man named Lenin, living in exile, wrote a paper entitled, “What Is To Be Done”.

The work was smuggled into Russia and spelled out his views regarding what the Social Democrats should be doing as a party. Lenin attacked party members who “were content to wait while history took its predetermined course.” Rather than wait, Lenin wanted to kick-start the issue he believed in to get things done rather than wait on intellectuals sitting around refuting each other’s ideas. The meeting resulted in a Party split creating the Mentsheviks and the Bolsheviks. The two factions reunited under Lenin in April 1905. Lenin went on to organize the November 1917 Russian Revolution on the Promise of “peace. bread, and land”.

On the night of Nov. 6 (Oct. 24, O.S.), the Bolsheviks staged a coup, engineered by Trotsky; aided by the workers’ Red Guard and the sailors of Kronstadt, they captured the government buildings and the Winter Palace in Petrograd. A second all-Russian congress of soviets met and approved the coup after the Mensheviks and Socialist Revolutionaries walked out of the meeting. A cabinet, known as the Council of People’s Commissars, was set up with Lenin as chairman, Trotsky as foreign commissar, Rykov as interior commissar, and Stalin as commissar of nationalities. The second congress immediately called for cessation of hostilities, gave private and church lands to village soviets, and abolished private property.

By now, you’re saying, “So?  What does Lenin’s push to power and the subsequent Russian Revolution have to do with what is going on in America right now…our horrible economy, our still-massive unemployment, the illegal alien invasion, and now, these protests on College Campuses across the  nation?”

Keep reading. I’ll explain.

The New York Times reports that

The passion that ousted the heads of the University of Missouri after protests over racial discrimination on campus is spreading to other colleges across the country, turning traditional fall semesters into a period of intense focus on racial misunderstanding and whether activism stifles free speech.

Hundreds of students demonstrated at Ithaca College in upstate New York on Wednesday, demanding the resignation of the college president, Tom Rochon, for what they said was his lackluster response to complaints of racial insensitivity on campus, including an episode in which two white male alumni on a panel called a black alumna a “savage,” after she said she had a “savage hunger” to succeed.

At Smith College, in Northampton, Mass., about 100 students demonstrated in solidarity with their counterparts in Ithaca and Missouri, while at the University of Kansas, the administration called a town hall meeting to give students and faculty a chance “to be heard” before any concerns about race on campus could grow.

At Claremont McKenna College in California, the junior class president resigned Tuesday after a furor over a Facebook photograph that showed her posing with two women who were wearing sombreros, ponchos and mustaches for Halloween. A campus demonstration followed on Wednesday.

And at Yale, the campus is still in turmoil about an overheard “white girls only” remark at an off-campus fraternity party, and debating over whether students had a right to wear transgressive Halloween costumes.

In interviews, students say they have been inspired by the Black Lives Matter movement that grew out of the fatal shooting of Michael Brown by the police in Ferguson, Mo. They say the victory of protesting students and football players at the University of Missouri has spurred them to demand that their universities provide a safe space for students of color.

In New Haven, Aaron Z. Lewis, a 21-year-old senior at Yale, used to spend his days studying cognitive science and thinking about what he will do after graduation. Now he is devoting his time to protesting and writing about racial injustice, particularly for black women, on campus and elsewhere.

Mr. Lewis and other students said the racism they had experienced or observed was often subtle rather than blatant, but no less disturbing and no less deserving of attention.

“I don’t think it matters what my own personal experiences are with this,” Mr. Lewis said. “What matters is that we all need to have empathy for the experiences that people of color have even if we don’t have those experiences for ourselves.”

He added, “It really is hard to believe because we want to believe that we’re a postracial society, but it’s just not true.”

At Smith, the protesting students gathered at noon in a tight circle, with umbrellas and parkas to shield them from the afternoon’s spitting rain. Some had left classes 10 or 15 minutes early.

“Systematic oppression affects us all,” said Tyahra Angus, a senior, speaking through a megaphone to the group, a mix of minority and white students.

The environs were a far cry from the University of Missouri. Smith’s undergraduate student body is all women and the institution itself is situated in a progressive college town. It is not in the midst of major upheaval.

But the students who gathered on Wednesday spoke of “microaggressions” — tone-deaf slights directed toward minority students — and continuing difficulties of being a student of color on a contemporary college campus, and encouraged their peers to raise awareness of them.

“It’s the microaggressions in classrooms,” Raven Fowlkes-Witten, a junior who organized Wednesday’s demonstration, said in an interview. “It’s students not feeling represented. It’s few faculty members of color,”

As Ms. Fowlkes-Witten addressed the group, she stood under an umbrella held by Donna Lisker, the dean of the college.

“I don’t think I ever want to fall into a false sense of security that things can’t happen here,” Ms. Lisker said in an interview after the demonstration, adding, “Being continually reflective about what you’re doing, and listening — that’s why I went today.”

At Ithaca, one of the issues is the on-campus panel on Oct. 8, in which Tatiana Sy, a 2009 graduate, said she had a “savage hunger” to do everything in college. Another panelist, J. Christopher Burch, the chief executive of Burch Creative Capital who is also an alumnus, responded, “I love what the savage here said,” according toYouTube clips of the event. The moderator, Bob Kur, a former NBC News correspondent, joined in, pointing to Mr. Burch, saying, “You are driven,” and pointing to Ms. Sy and saying, “You’re the savage.” The men are both white, and Ms. Sy describes herself as Afro-Cuban.

When Ms. Sy objected, Mr. Burch said, “It’s a compliment.” Mr. Burch later apologized.

Ms. Sy, the special events director for the Downtown Ithaca Alliance, said in an interview on Wednesday that she had been uncomfortable because Mr. Burch had continued to refer to her as “the savage” even after she reminded him what her name was. “You could sense that there was an energy in the room that everyone was uncomfortable with,” she said.

Nalani Haueter, 19, a sophomore and sociology major at Ithaca from San Luis Obispo, Calif., said Wednesday that she has been shocked by the numbers of people participating in protests and meetings. “Throughout the last couple of months,” she said, “it’s grown into a large percentage of this campus being active and paying attention.”

In a statement Wednesday, Tom Grape, the chairman of the Ithaca College board, said the trustees took the issues seriously and would work with Mr. Rochon to address them. Mr. Rochon, who attended Wednesday’s protests, has promised changes, including the hiring of a diversity officer and the creation of a review board for complaints about the campus police.

In a campus email, the president of Claremont McKenna College, Hiram E. Chodosh, said, “I stand by our students,” and announced steps including a new leadership position on diversity and help for new students, especially first-generation college students, in adjusting to campus life. Mr. Chodosh said in an interview that one role of higher education was “to provide a very special home for our students as a bridge from their families to the truly adult and independent world.”

Roger Lopez, 19, a sophomore studying political science at Yale who grew up in New York City, said some students had been so upset and consumed by recent events that they had asked for extensions on major papers or exams.

Students had even started questioning whether it was appropriate to call the leaders of the university’s residential colleges “masters,” because they thought the term had connotations of slavery.

Rush Limbaugh made the following remark on his radio program, yesterday:

Okay.  Do you notice any commonality here?  One of the major complaints at Mizzou: “Students don’t feel safe!”  Citizens of Baltimore don’t feel safe.  In Ferguson, Missouri, they don’t feel safe.  But predominantly the University of Missouri Columbia, they don’t feel safe. They feel very scared.  It’s really traumatic, you know?  And at Ithaca? Oh, it’s so scary, Carol. Students feel unsafe, and you can understand it! I mean, we didn’t get our diversity officer when they promised one. So there’s nobody, nobody to enforce fairness and equality. So, yeah, we feel really unsafe.  Notice the commonality? “Unsafe.” That tells me the whole thing is coming from a manual.  There’s an instruction manual here, blueprints or what have you. 

It isn’t spontaneous by any stretch of the imagination.

Exactly, El Rushbo.

Breitbart.com asks and answers the following question…

Are the same radicals who influenced the burning down of parts of St. Louis at all influencing or even present at the University of Missouri?

A Breitbart News examination of Twitter accounts shows the presence in Columbia of two individuals from Black Lives Matter who fanned the flames in Ferguson, Baltimore, and Charleston, South Carolina. DeRay McKesson and Johnetta Elzie have tweeted their presence in Columbia and published photos of them meeting with Student Body President Payton Head.

McKesson calls himself “an American civil rights activist.” He’s founder of something called We the Protesters that, according to its website, is dedicated to “radical liberation” focusing exclusively on “black lives.” McKesson is a 2007 graduate of Bowdoin College and has worked as “Senior Director of Human Capital at the Minneapolis Public Schools. McKesson has been active at protests in Ferguson, Baltimore, and Charleston, South Carolina after the shootings there.

McKesson’s frequent partner is Johnetta Elzie who is also present in Columbia. She, too, is identified as an “American civil rights activist.” She seems to have gotten her start at the Ferguson riots where she edited the Ferguson protest newsletter but she has also been present at the Baltimore troubles. She co-founded We the Protestors with McKesson.

Elzie founded the website “Mapping Police Violence” and The Atlantic Monthly identified her as one of the leaders of the Black Lives Matter.

The Huffington Post published an “Open Letter from Ferguson Protesters and Allies” written by McKesson and Elzie where they said, “We are not concerned if this inconveniences you. We are not concerned if this disturbs your comfort. We are not concerned if this upsets your order. We are not concerned if this upsets your order. This is an American Horror Story.” The letter concluded, “Your calm is built on our terror. We will disrupt your life until we can live.”

McKesson, identified as part of Black Lives Matter, lectured at the Yale Divinity School. In May, the New York Times identified Elzie and McKesson as the founders of the national “first 21st century civil rights movement.”

McKesson and Elzie were given the Howard Zinn Freedom to Write Award from the New England Branch of PEN and were named on Fortune Magazine’s list of The World’s 50 Greatest Leaders. They were listed at #11 behind Taylor Swift but ahead of Bill Gates.

DeRay Tweet with Elzie and Mizzou hunger striker Jonathan Butler.

As I reported, earlier this week, The Open Society Institute, financed by Billionaire Puppetmaster and Nazi Collaborator, George Soros, is providing the funds for Black Lives Matter to travel to hot spots around the country.

Which leads us back to the earlier history lesson on the Russian Revolution…

Lenin rose to power during a time of economic plight in Russia, which was perceived as being the result of a greedy upper class. In order to depose the Czar and his government, Lenin had to solidify the “have-nots”, the Mentsheviks and the Bolsheviks, into his own private army, designed to usher in his “Glorious Revolution”.

He got them on his side by promising them a better, more prosperous life, in which the benevolent “Nanny-State” Government, would supply all of their needs.

By ginning up the dependent base already here…and growing…due to the influx of illegals…Black Lives Matter, acting with the passive (at least, publicly) support of the White House and the Democratic Party and all of their Liberal Minions are infiltrating America’s College Campuses, promising “Free Tuition”, “Empowering Students”,  “Power to the People” and all that jazz, creating their own “Revolutionary Army”, attempting to fulfill Barack Hussein Obama’s promise of “rapidly changing” America as we know it.

Far fetched? Perhaps.

However, Norman Mattoon Thomas (1884-1968) six-time U.S. Presidential candidate for the Socialist Party of America, infamously said,

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

How do we stop this?

The greatest President in my lifetime, Ronald Wilson Reagan, once 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. 

It’s time to stand up to the Bullies.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

Pope Visits White Obama. White House Compares Obama to Pope. “Social Justice” Abounds.

th (28)Today’s top news story reminds me of a joke…

These two socialists walk into the White House…

Just kidding….or, am I?

The Washington Examiner reports that

Pope Francis and President Obama have both dedicated their lives to helping the less fortunate, and that commonality will be central to their meeting Wednesday during the pope’s first visit to the United States, a White House spokesman said hours before Obama left to greet the pontiff as he landed at Andrews Air Force Base Tuesday afternoon.

“[B]oth men have talked, quite publicly, about their commitment to social justice,” White House spokesman Josh Earnest said in previewing their Oval Office meeting scheduled for Wednesday morning. “And both men have dedicated their, not just their careers, but their lives, to that effort.”

“Certainly the kind of commitment that we’ve seen from Pope Francis is unique and singular,” Earnest allowed “but I think the values that both men live out have some common ground.”

Earnest talked about how Obama turned down high-paying jobs upon graduating law school to instead work in Chicago’s poor South Side, and how Francis is known for advocating on behalf of impoverished communities in his home country of Argentina before ascending through the Roman Catholic Church’s ranks.

When it comes to internet history, Faulkner said it best: ‘The past isn’t over. It isn’t even past.’

“And you know, the president actually worked quite closely with other Catholics in that community, and the president has talked about that quite a bit … this has been a value that has animated the president’s career choices since he was a young man.”

Earnest said Francis’s story is similar.

“[P]rior to rising through the leadership ranks of the Catholic Church … Pope Francis earned a reputation in Latin America [as being someone] willing to roll up his sleeves” to help the less fortunate, “particularly those who were economically destitute,” Earnest said.

Earnest said many in the administration are looking forward to greeting Francis because they feel they are working toward the same goals.

They’re “animated by the same kinds of values that animate the pope,” Earnest said about White House staffers. “And I think that’s why the opportunity to have Pope Francis, somebody who shares those values, here in this building tomorrow, makes for a really special day.”

A crowd of 15,000 is expected to welcome Francis at a ceremony on the White House lawn Wednesday morning.

According to press reports, several hundred people were on hand at Maryland’s Andrews Air Force Base to watch “Shepherd One” land and cheer the pope as he deplaned.

“We love Francis, yes we do,” people reportedly chanted. “We love Francis, how about you?”

In addition to Obama, First Lady Michelle, Vice President Joe Biden his wife Jill, and their extended families, nearly 20 other dignitaries were on hand at Andrews, including all of the Washington and Baltimore areas’ Catholic bishops.

“Ho, ho, hey, hey, welcome to the USA,” the larger crowd chanted, welcoming Francis on his first trip ever to the United States.

Interesting. Why are Obama and his Liberal Minions embracing “Il Papa”, when they have done everything in their power to minimalize the role of our Christian Faith in the day-to-day lives of Americans?

Rush Limbaugh explained why, on his radio program yesterday…

It’s a political thing.  It’s rooted in political power. It’s rooted in money.  They have this utter contempt, the American left.  What do you think the reasons they object to Southern culture really is about?  It’s those pro-lifers and gun nuts and those Bible thumpers, people that drive old pickups.  They get to the church parking lot Saturday night to get a good spot for the sermon the next day.  They speak with utter contempt of all this.  And who are they embracing? 

So why are they embracing a man more powerful than they are who stands for everything they supposedly oppose.  They must think something is different about this guy.  We’ve already read that Obama plans to hide the advancement of his agenda behind the pope.  We know that’s gonna happen.  That’s why what Josh Earnest just said insults my intelligence. 

You know, I don’t have any patience for that.  Just lie to me, just tell me, look at my face and tell me you’re gonna lie to me instead of trying to get me to believe your lie, because it just insults my intelligence. (imitating Earnest) “Oh, no, these are not two political figures meeting.  No, no, no.  These are two men who hold similar views about life and are simply meeting to try to find common ground.”  Right.  That’s why Obama is making sure that we’ve got a nun that’s pro-abortion, that we’ve got lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgendered Catholics showing up. 

By the way, apparently the Vatican let it be known that they were not happy with this guest lest.  I don’t know what’s become of it.  My guess is Obama doesn’t give a rear end what the Vatican thinks.  You talk about hypocrites or irony.  But what it shows is they’ll sidle up to anybody if it’ll help ’em disguise their agenda in order to advance it. I mean, what could be better for them?  Here you have these anti-religion zealots known as your modern-day Democrats, and here comes Pope Francis, first ever trip to America, and because he has said a couple of things that arouses them — and make no mistake, when the pope starts talking about anti-capitalism, they get all hot and bothered, excited. 

So they’ll sacrifice what they really believe, these phony baloney, plastic banana, good-time rock ‘n’ rollers to hide behind this guy and make it look like his agenda is theirs.  And in the process, if anything, make it look like this pope is abandoning his own church in favor of the liberal church.  If not abandoning, then what would be the word?  Drastically restructuring his own organization to fit with theirs.  That’s a definite narrative that they’re going to try to promulgate out there. 

But I just think it’s phony as it can be.  I mean, this is a party that raises money and gets elected on their outright utter contempt for religious people, now welcoming the man who represents an organization they despise and are trying to undermine.  And make no mistake, any time you hear some Democrat or member of the media or some liberal activist just anywhere demand that the church moderate its tone or demand that the church modernize and realize that women today have many more needs than the church is meeting.  Women today want abortions, and they want to be able to have access to church sponsored and paid-for contraception, and it’s up to the church to moderate and modernize and modify its beliefs in order to be more in touch and have more in common with average, normal people.

If they think a religious leader is doing that, then of course they will embrace.  They’ll embrace anybody they think is willfully, willingly doing damage to an organization they despise.  I’m not exaggerating this.  They hold the Catholic Church in contempt.  Why do you think Catholic charities and so forth are spelled out in Obamacare? The Democrat Party and Obama would love to nullify the Catholic Church and its opposition to things that are doctrinal.  Oh, man, if they can get the church to change its doctrine, oh, man, if they could pull that off, that’d be even better to ’em than subverting the Constitution.  That would be a bigger success story to them than subverting the Constitution. 

Per usual, the Godfather of Political Talk Radio is spot on.

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.

Pope Francis is the first Pope who represents the Far Left Political Viewpoint.

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

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

These three stood for everything that was good about freedom.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Pope John Paul II also said…

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

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.

Dr. Albert Mohler, President of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, once said:

Regrettably, there is no shortage of preachers who have traded the Gospel for a platform of political and economic change, most often packaged as a call for social justice…

The church is not to adopt a social reform platform as its message, but the faithful church, wherever it is found, is itself a social reform movement precisely because it is populated by redeemed sinners who are called to faithfulness in following Christ. The Gospel is not a message of social (collective) salvation, but it does have social implications.

Pope Francis is presently doing the World’s Catholics a great disservice.

The current Pope’s embracing of certain aspects of Socialism, “Climate Change”, and the other erroneous, secular philosophies of the Far Left, dilutes his effectiveness as an Emmissary of God and the Head of the Catholic Church.

The world hungers for the Word of God.

Mankind needs to hear of God’s Love for them as individuals, not the machinations and limitations of man, as detailed in Marxist Theory.

 Until He Comes,

KJ

 

Obama Wants to Forcibly “Desegregate” Wealthy Neighborhoods Through Socialism…AKA…”Government Grants”.

littlepinkhousesFrom the get-go, President Barack Hussein Obama’s motto has been “Share the Wealth”. Not his, of course, but, ours.

This “Quest for Equality”, i.e., lack of individualism, i.e., forming a collective society, if you will, springs from his love for the teachings of Karl Marx and Saul Alinsky, and his upbringing within an American Communist Family, which led to his association with people who wanted, with all their hearts to “radically change” America…by any means necessary.

Obama wants to limit our freedom…by making our choices for us.

And, by taking away individual achievement.

For example…

Thehill.com reports that

The Obama administration is moving forward with regulations designed to help diversify America’s wealthier neighborhoods, drawing fire from critics who decry the proposal as executive overreach in search of an “unrealistic utopia.”

A final Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) rule due out this month is aimed at ending decades of deep-rooted segregation around the country.

The regulations would use grant money as an incentive for communities to build affordable housing in more affluent areas while also taking steps to upgrade poorer areas with better schools, parks, libraries, grocery stores and transportation routes as part of a gentrification of those communities.

“HUD is working with communities across the country to fulfill the promise of equal opportunity for all,” a HUD spokeswoman said. “The proposed policy seeks to break down barriers to access to opportunity in communities supported by HUD funds.”

It’s a tough sell for some conservatives. Among them is Rep. Paul Gosar (R-Ariz.), who argued that the administration “shouldn’t be holding hostage grant monies aimed at community improvement based on its unrealistic utopian ideas of what every community should resemble.”

“American citizens and communities should be free to choose where they would like to live and not be subject to federal neighborhood engineering at the behest of an overreaching federal government,” said Gosar, who is leading an effort in the House to block the regulations.

Civil rights advocates, meanwhile, are praising the plan, arguing that it is needed to break through decades-old barriers that keep poor and minority families trapped in hardscrabble neighborhoods.

“We have a history of putting affordable housing in poor communities,” said Debby Goldberg, vice president at the National Fair Housing Alliance.

HUD says it is obligated to take the action under the Fair Housing Act of 1968, which prohibited direct and intentional housing discrimination, such as a real estate agent not showing a home in a wealthy neighborhood to a black family or a bank not providing a loan based on someone’s race.

The agency is also looking to root out more subtle forms of discrimination that take shape in local government policies that unintentionally harm minority communities, known as “disparate impact.” 

“This rule is not about forcing anyone to live anywhere they don’t want to,” said Margery Turner, senior vice president at the left-leaning Urban Institute. “It’s really about addressing long-standing practices that prevent people from living where they want to.”

“In our country, decades of public policies and institutional practices have built deeply segregated and unequal neighborhoods,” Turner said.

Children growing up in poor communities have less of a chance of succeeding in life, because they face greater exposure to violence and crime, and less access to quality education and health facilities, Turner suggested.

“Segregation is clearly a problem that is blocking upward mobility for children growing up today,” she said.

To qualify for certain funds under the regulations, cities would be required to examine patterns of segregation in neighborhoods and develop plans to address it. Those that don’t could see the funds they use to improve blighted neighborhoods disappear, critics of the rule say.

The regulations would apply to roughly 1,250 local governments.

Hans von Spakovsky, a fellow at the conservative Heritage Foundation, called the Obama administration “too race conscious.”

“It’s a sign that this administration seems to take race into account on everything,” Spakovsky said.

Republicans are trying to block the Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing rule. Before passing HUD’s funding bill this week, the GOP-led House approved Gosar’s amendment prohibiting the agency from following through with the rule.

Though segregationist policies were outlawed long ago, civil rights advocates say housing discrimination persists.

HUD is looking to break down many barriers, but Gosar suggested the regulation would have negative repercussions.

“Instead of living with neighbors you like and choose, this breaks up the core fabric of how we start to look at communities,” Gosar said. “That just brings unease to everyone in that area.”

“People have to feel comfortable where they live,” he added. “If I don’t feel comfortable in my own backyard, where do I feel comfortable?”

Critics of the rule say it would allow HUD to assert authority over local zoning laws. The agency could dictate what types of homes are built where and who can live in those homes, said Gosar, who believes local communities should make those decisions for themselves rather than relying on the federal government.

If enacted, the rule could depress property values as cheaper homes crop up in wealthy neighborhoods and raise taxes, Gosar warned.

It could also tilt the balance of political power as more minorities are funneled into Republican-leaning neighborhoods, he suggested.

The Supreme Court is expected to weigh in on housing discrimination in a related case in the coming weeks. At issue is whether government policies that unintentionally create a disparate impact for minority communities violate federal laws against segregation.

The Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs is facing accusations that it makes low-income housing funds more readily available in minority neighborhoods than in white neighborhoods. This promotes segregation, critics argue, by encouraging minorities to continue living in poor communities where government assistance is available.

Court observers say the case could have a profound impact on HUD’s rule.

“Government-Funded Upward Mobility”?

Are we still in America?

How does that work in cities that are already 90 % minority population, like Detroit or Memphis?

As Charles Barkley pointed out a while back, Racism is not just a one-way street. How do you think that these cities go this way? Not all of their White citizens moved out because they wanted to.

But, I digress.

On a Sunday, in October of 2008, outside of Toledo, Ohio, Democratic Presidential Nominee Obama met a plumber named Joe Wurzelbacher. Joe, who owned his own plumbing company, dared to ask Obama about his proposed tax hikes. In fact, he told Obama that he did not want to pay higher taxes, he was already paying enough. Obama told him,

Now, I respect the disagreement. I just want you to be clear – it’s not that I want to punish your success – I just want to make sure that everybody who is behind you – that they’ve got a chance at success too.”

…I think when you spread the wealth around, it’s good for everybody.

Evidently, the “fairness” Obama seeks, includes making everyone’s housing “fair”, too.

No individuality allowed in the Proletariat.

Welcome to the USSA, “komrades!”

Until He Comes,

KJ

Pope Francis: The Pope of the Far Left

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

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

Yahoo News Canada reports that

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

DIPLOMATIC RISKS

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

These three stood for everything that was good about freedom.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Pope John Paul II also said…

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

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

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

 Until He Comes,

KJ

If I Were a Socialist U.S. President [May 2015 Edition]

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

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

If I were a Socialist U.S. President…

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Reverting back to the one job in my life that I was good at, that of being a “Community Organizer”, I would encourage an “Us Vs. Them” Racial Division in America, supporting out-of-control rioters over those who protect the Citizens of the United States, the Thin Blue Line, America’s Police Departments, because then, I could use the situation to create my own National Police Force.

I would alienate Conservative Christians living in America’s Heartland by vilifying them as “Bitter Clingers”, marginalizing them throughout my presidency, even to the point of lecturing them in my Easter Address, telling them to get off their “high horse”, basicially saying that the followers of Jeus Christ, the Son of God, are no better than the murderous followers of Mohammed, whose Ideological Brethren continue to murder Christians in the Middle East.

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

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

I would push for “gay marriage” and the legalization of marijuana.

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

By legalizing marijuana, I will succeed in dumbing down the population and eliminating their desire to succeed as individuals, making them even more subservient and reliant on the Almighty State for their very existence, thus creating a new “Proletariat”.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Because, after all, as Vladimir Lenin said,

One man with a gun can control 100 without one. 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Until He Comes,

KJ

Garland, Texas Jihadists Connected to ISIS. Are They At Our Border?

muslimsignBy now, you have probably heard about “the incident”(as my Local Newscast described it), at a “Draw Mohammed” Contest featuring Pamela Geller, Sunday night in Garland, Texas.

The London Daily Mail reports that

A former terror suspect has been named as one of the gunmen shot dead by police after the two attackers blasted an unarmed security guard in the ankle during an anti-Islam art contest in Texas on Sunday night.

Elton Simpson, 30, who was previously the subject of a terror investigation, and his roommate Nadir Soofi, 34, were armed with assault rifles when they were killed by a quick-thinking traffic officer after opening fire outside the Curtis Culwell Center in Garland, Dallas, at around 7pm.

The shooting unfolded as the American Freedom Defense Initiative held an event inside the building where caricatures of the Prophet Muhammad were being displayed. Followers of Islam deem that any physical depiction of the prophet – even a positive one – is blasphemous. 

Simpson, identified in court papers as an American Muslim, had been convicted of lying to federal agents about his plans to travel to Somalia five years ago, but a judge ultimately ruled it could not be proved that he was heading there to join a terror group. He was placed on probation.

Soofi, named as the second gunman by the Washington Post, shared an apartment with Simpson at the Autumn Ridge complex in Phoenix.

On Monday morning, FBI agents and investigators could be seen cordoning off and searching the apartment, as well as a white van believed to belong to Simpson. Investigators are also reviewing computer records from materials found at the home. 

Investigators also searched the car that the two gunmen drove to the scene and found luggage and further ammunition inside. Some of the belongings were destroyed as a precaution but no explosives were found inside the vehicle, Garland Police Officer Joe Harn said on Monday.

On Monday, Simpson’s father said that he believes his son, who had worked in a dentist’s office, ‘made a bad choice’.

‘We are Americans and we believe in America,’ Dunston Simpson told ABC News. ‘What my son did reflects very badly on my family.’ 

Ahead of the attack on Sunday evening, several Twitter messages were sent out, and authorities believe Simpson was behind them. The last one was shared just half an hour before the shooting.

Followers of ISIS had been calling for an attack online for more than a week after learning that the competition in Garland would feature a ‘draw Muhammad’ art contest, with a prize of $10,000 for the best caricature.

After the attack, the SITE Intelligence Group reported that an Islamic State fighter claimed on Twitter that the shooting was carried out by two pro-Isis individuals. 

In a series of tweets and links, a jihadist named as Abu Hussain AlBritani, which SITE said was British IS fighter Junaid Hussain, claimed that ‘2 of our brothers just opened fire’ at the Prophet Muhammad exhibition in Texas.  

‘They Thought They Was Safe In Texas From The Soldiers of The Islamic State,’ added the tweet.  

Other ISIS supporters claimed on Twitter that one of the gunmen was a man calling himself Shariah Is Light on the social media site, using the now-suspended account name @atawaakul, according to New York Times reporter Rukmini Callimachi.

He had posted a message earlier that said ‘the bro with me and myself have given bay’ah [oath] to Amirul Mu’mineen [ISIS leader Al Baghdadi]. May Allah accept us as mujahideen #texasattack’. 

The contest was just minutes from finishing when multiple gunshots were heard.

The two suspects had pulled up in a vehicle before getting out and firing at a security officer, 57-year-old Bruce Joiner, who was employed by the independent school district. He was later taken to hospital in a stable condition and was released on Sunday evening. 

Less than a month ago, on April 14th, I asked and answered the following question:

Could it be possible that a Radical Islamic Organization, which has promised to plant its flag on top of the White House, is presently camped along our Southern Border?

You betchum, Red Ryder.

Judicial Watch has posted the following troubling  report…

ISIS is operating a camp just a few miles from El Paso, Texas, according to Judicial Watch sources that include a Mexican Army field grade officer and a Mexican Federal Police Inspector.

The exact location where the terrorist group has established its base is around eight miles from the U.S. border in an area known as “Anapra” situated just west of Ciudad Juárez in the Mexican state of Chihuahua. Another ISIS cell to the west of Ciudad Juárez, in Puerto Palomas, targets the New Mexico towns of Columbus and Deming for easy access to the United States, the same knowledgeable sources confirm.

During the course of a joint operation last week, Mexican Army and federal law enforcement officials discovered documents in Arabic and Urdu, as well as “plans” of Fort Bliss – the sprawling military installation that houses the US Army’s 1st Armored Division. Muslim prayer rugs were recovered with the documents during the operation.

Law enforcement and intelligence sources report the area around Anapra is dominated by the Vicente Carrillo Fuentes Cartel (“Juárez Cartel”), La Línea (the enforcement arm of the cartel) and the Barrio Azteca (a gang originally formed in the jails of El Paso). Cartel control of the Anapra area make it an extremely dangerous and hostile operating environment for Mexican Army and Federal Police operations.

According to these same sources, “coyotes” engaged in human smuggling – and working for Juárez Cartel – help move ISIS terrorists through the desert and across the border between Santa Teresa and Sunland Park, New Mexico. To the east of El Paso and Ciudad Juárez, cartel-backed “coyotes” are also smuggling ISIS terrorists through the porous border between Acala and Fort Hancock, Texas. These specific areas were targeted for exploitation by ISIS because of their understaffed municipal and county police forces, and the relative safe-havens the areas provide for the unchecked large-scale drug smuggling that was already ongoing.

Mexican intelligence sources report that ISIS intends to exploit the railways and airport facilities in the vicinity of Santa Teresa, NM (a US port-of-entry). The sources also say that ISIS has “spotters” located in the East Potrillo Mountains of New Mexico (largely managed by the Bureau of Land Management) to assist with terrorist border crossing operations. ISIS is conducting reconnaissance of regional universities; the White Sands Missile Range; government facilities in Alamogordo, NM; Ft. Bliss; and the electrical power facilities near Anapra and Chaparral, NM.

Is President Barack Hussein Obama blissfully unaware of this contingency?

Probably not.

Perhaps ol’ Scooter needs it spelled out for him.

I have updated some information I first shared back on September 14, 2014.

Sign, sign, everywhere a sign…

According to Breitbart.com,

On September 11, 2014, individuals or a group in Mexico hung a message to America over the U.S.-Mexico border wall condemning American support for Israel and declaring support for Palestine. U.S. federal agents discovered the banner draped over the primary border fence in Arizona’s Yuma Sector in a restricted area that could only have been reached from Mexico. The message also contained an image described by authorities as an anarchist symbol. The incident was kept secret from the American public by federal authorities. Breitbart Texas exclusively obtained the leaked incident report from federal agents on the condition their identities remain private.

The leaked incident report reveals that U.S. Border Patrol agents discovered the banner in the early hours of September 12, 2014, indicating that the banner had been draped over the border wall late in the night on September 11th. 

Obama and the rest of “the Smartest People in the Room” have never taken into consideration that Muslim Terrorists could be among the Illegal Aliens whom his quest for Blanket Amnesty will cover.

Their ignorance and naivete, born out of their zeal for political expediency, could be the instruments of our nation’s demise.

The addition of Home-grown Muslim Terrorists with connections to ISIS, who themselves may be coming across our wide-open Southern Border, is a doubly-dangerous situation, which has happened because of President Barack Hussein Obama’s arrogance and ineptitude, which has led to failed Foreign and Domestic Policies.

A wide-open Southern Border is as big a threat to the sovereignty of the United States as anything that our enemies can throw at us right now.  Mr. President, quit playing political games.  The safety of America is at stake .  SECURE THE BORDER NOW.

Thank the Good Lord that Americans are Still Individualists and not the Socialist Collective that Obama and his Progressive Minions want us to be.

Thanks to one well-trained Garland, Texas Traffic Cop, two Wannabe Jihadists are now in the company of their 72 virgins…who all look like Rosie O’Donnell.

I hope ISIS is paying attention.

We’re not just another country, boys.

WE’RE AMERICA.

WE FIGHT BACK.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Bernie Sanders: A Political Career Built on “Running Out of Other People’s Money”

 

 

thROUC0M5DBernie Sanders  is a self-identified socialist, who served in the House of Representatives from 1991 to 2007, founded the Congressional Progressive Caucus, and has served in the U.S. Senate since 2007.

He has announced that he will compete against Hillary Rodham Clinton for the Democratic Nomination for their Presidential Candidate.

ABC.go.com reports that

Newly declared presidential candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders said today he hopes to lead a “political revolution” for working families and against money in politics in his bid for the White House.”I think I’m the only candidate who’s prepared to take on the billionaire class,” Sanders, I-Vt., told ABC’s George Stephanopoulos on “This Week.” “We need a political revolution in this country involving millions of people who are prepared to stand up and say, enough is enough, and I want to help lead that effort.”

Sanders, who will run in the Democratic primary against Hillary Clinton, told ABC’s Jonathan Karl earlier this week the millions of dollars flowing into the Clinton Foundation poses a “very serious problem.”

 “It’s not just Hillary. It’s the Koch Brothers. It is Sheldon Adelson,” he said, referring to billionaire backers of conservative causes and candidates. “Can somebody who is not a billionaire who stands for working families actually win an election?”

Sanders could challenge Clinton from her left. He opposed the Iraq War, which Clinton supported in the Senate, and is against Trans-Pacific Partnership trade agreement, which the Obama administration is trying to get through Congress.

Clinton fully supported TPP as secretary of state but has raised reservations about it since announcing her presidential bid.

“Hillary Clinton has been part of the political class for many, many years,” Sanders said. “I respect her and I like her, but I think what the American people are saying, George, is … maybe it’s time for a real political shakeup in this country.”

He has raised more than $1.5 million since announcing his campaign on Thursday, but has pledged not to have a Super PAC that could accept unlimited contributions.

A self-described socialist who won his first election to become mayor of Burlington, Vermont, by just 10 votes, Sanders has a message for his doubters.

“Very few people thought that I would beat an incumbent Republican to become United States congressman from Vermont by 16 points,” Sanders said. “And people weren’t so sure I could beat the richest person in Vermont to become a United States senator.

“Don’t underestimate me,” he added.

I don’t intend to, Bernie.

There’s too much information available on just how dangerous a person you are.

Per discoverthenetworks.org,

Bernard “Bernie” Sanders was born in Brooklyn, New York on September 8, 1941, to Polish immigrants of Jewish descent. After attending Brooklyn College for one year, he transferred to the University of Chicago (UC) and earned a bachelor’s degree in political science in 1964. At UC, Sanders joined the Young Peoples Socialist League (youth wing of the Socialist Party USA) as well as the Congress of Racial Equality and the Student Peace Union.

After college, Sanders lived briefly on an Israeli kibbutz, then moved to Vermont where he worked variously as a carpenter, filmmaker, writer, and researcher. In 1971 he joined the anti-war Liberty Union Party (LUP), on whose ticket he made unsuccessful runs for the U.S. Senate in 1972 and 1974, and for Governor of Vermont in 1976. Sanders’s LUP platform called for the nationalization of all U.S. banks, public ownership of all utiliies, and the establishment of a worker-controlled federal government.

Sanders resigned from LUP in 1979 and became a political Independent. Two years later he was elected mayor of Burlington, Vermont, a post he held until 1989. Sanders created some controversy when he hung a Soviet flag in his mayoral office, in honor of Burlington’s Soviet sister city Yaroslav.

According to an Accuracy In Media report, Sanders during the 1980s “collaborated with Soviet and East German ‘peace committees'” whose aim was “to stop President Reagan’s deployment of nuclear missiles in Europe.” Indeed, he “openly joined the Soviets’ ‘nuclear freeze’ campaign to undercut Reagan’s military build-up.”

In 1985 Sanders traveled to Managua, Nicaragua to celebrate the sixth anniversary of the rise to power of Daniel Ortega and his Marxist-Leninist Sandinista government.

In 1986 Sanders ran unsuccessfully for Governor of Vermont, and two years later he made a failed bid for a seat in the U.S. House of Representatives.

In November 1989 Sanders addressed the national conference of the U.S. Peace Council, a Communist Party USA front. The event focused on how to “end the Cold War” and “fund human needs.” Fellow speakers included such notables as Leslie Cagan, John Conyers, and Manning Marable.

Choosing not to seek re-election to a fifth term as mayor, Sanders spent 1989-90 working as a lecturer at Hamilton College in upstate New York and the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University.

By 1990 Sanders was a leading member of Jesse Jackson’s National Rainbow Coalition, and he ran successfully for Congress as a socialist, representing Vermont’s single at-large congressional district. The following year, Sanders founded the Congressional Progressive Caucus along with fellow House members Tom Andrews, Peter DeFazio, Ron Dellums, Lane Evans, and Maxine Waters.

During the 1990s, Sanders participated multiple times in the Socialist Scholars Conferences that were held annually in New York City.

…Sanders has long maintained that “global warming/climate change” not only threatens “the fate of the entire planet,” but is caused chiefly by human industrial activity and must be curbed by means of legislation strictly limiting carbon emissions. In 2007 Sanders and Senator Barbara Boxer proposed the Global Warming Pollution Reduction Act, which, according to an MIT study, would have imposed on U.S. taxpayers a yearly financial burden of more than $4,500 per family, purportedly to check climate change. In February 2010 Sanders likened climate-change skeptics to people who had disregarded the Nazi threat prior to WWII: “During that period of Nazism and fascism’s growth … there were people in this country and in the British parliament who said, ‘Don’t worry! Hitler’s not real! It’ll disappear!’” Accusing “big business” of being “willing to destroy the planet for short-term profits,” Sanders in 2013 said that “global warming is a far more serious problem than al Qaeda.” Stating unequivocally that “the scientific community is unanimous” in its belief that “the planet is warming up,” Sanders the following year declared that the “debate is over” and emphasized the importance of “transform[ing] our energy systems away from fossil fuels.”

In September 2011, Sanders was the first U.S. Senator to support the anti-capitalist Occupy Wall Street movement, lauding its activists for focusing a “spotlight” on the need for “real Wall Street reform.”

In March 2013, Sanders and fellow Senator Tom Harkin together introduced a bill to tax Wall Street speculators. “Both the economic crisis and the deficit crisis are a direct result of the greed, recklessness, and illegal behavior on Wall Street,” said Sanders.

Over the years, Sanders’s political campaigns have received strong support from such organizations as the AFL-CIO, the American Association for Justice, the Backbone Campaign, the Council for a Livable World, the Democratic Socialists of America, and Peace Action.

In other words, he’s a Far Left, Socialist Whackjob.

We are already suffering under one Far Left Socialist Whackjob, we sure as heck don’t need to follow up this present Presidential Nightmare with another.

French sociologist and political theorist Alexis de Tocqueville (1805-1859) traveled to the America in 1831 to study our prisons and returned to France with a wealth of broader observations that he compiled together in “Democracy in America” (1835), one of the most influential books of the 19th century. With its spot-on observations on equality and individualism, Tocqueville’s work remains a valuable explanation of America to Europeans and of Americans to ourselves.

He once observed that

Democracy and socialism have nothing in common but one word, equality. But notice the difference: while democracy seeks equality in liberty, socialism seeks equality in restraint and servitude.

In other words, the failed political ideology of socialism takes away the exhilaration and fulfillment of individual achievement and replaces it with self-sacrifice in servitude to the State, for the good of the Central  Nanny-State Government, which, in turn, promises to “share the wealth”, but, as was the case in the old Soviet Union, and more recently, Venezuela, never does.

The great Sir Winston Churchill once said that

The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries.

I would rather be blessed than miserable.

How about you?

Until He Comes,

KJ

Obama’s New Bolsheviks: His Vanguard of “Radical Change” (A KJ Op Ed)

AFBrancoConsequences111714Back in the 1990s, I worked in the Education/Media Services Department, of one of the largest hospitals in America. The department was overseen by an older lady, who had an educational doctorate. This lady was full of energy, was very sweet, and very smart. However, she became notorious for what my manager labeled “crisis management”. Meaning, that when the president of the hospital wanted her to undertake a major project and wanted a report of her plans before she began, she would wait until the last cotton picking minute to get her act together and her report as well, sending the whole department into a frenzy which was reminiscent of the chase scene at the end of The Benny Hill Show.

I remembered that story, as I was trying to get a handle on United States President Barack Hussein Obama’s management style. Obama, as we all know, has a management style that is reactive, instead of being proactive. His management of our nation’s resources leaves a lot to be desired. And, I am being very kind when I say that.

Perhaps there is a purpose in Obama’s slapdash method of handling his job duties.

We have all come to recognize that Obama does not handle criticism of his job performance very well. Let’s face it, Obama’s ego is as big as the great outdoors. And, of course, when you are a super genius such as Barack Hussein Obama, you don’t have to listen to peons like you and me, anyway.

The thread that ties together the story which I began today’s blog with and Barack Hussein Obama’s management style, is the fact that when you practice crisis management, more times than not, you do it in the fervent hope that by doing such, no one can question your management style until everything is said and done. In other words, until it is too late to do anything about it.

Obama, while practicing this management style, hopes to circumvent the Constitution of the United States, by portraying the “plight” of people who have trespassed into our country as an “emergency humanitarian situation”. If news had not leaked out last week that Obama was going to grant Amnesty by Executive Order, he probably would have just come on television this Friday and explained his whole brilliant plan to all of us. And, by the time we finished watching his pronouncement slack-jawed, in his mind anyway, it would have been too late for us to do anything about it.

When you have a crisis manager such as Obama, it is a very natural reaction for them not to take criticism well, and for them to be surprised when somebody bucks them on what they believe is a brilliant idea and a brilliant game plan.

Hence, the Presidential Temper Tantrums that Scooter throws every time somebody tells him “NO”.

However, in our present situation in America, I believe that this may be more than the simple case of a crisis manager’s plans being thwarted.

When you have an orderly structure already in place, such as our System of Checks and Balances, which was set up to provide a mechanism which protects our sovereign nation from usurpation of our Constitution, and provided for us in the founding of this country by our forefathers, it is not easily circumvented.

It hit me yesterday, after I wrote a blog about Obama’ s meeting with the protest leaders who are presently chomping at the bit to write it in Ferguson Missouri over the shooting of the young thug, Michael Brown.

What Obama was running for president, he promised to “radically change” the Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave into a vision which he had for America. I believe that not only this upcoming amnesty on Friday, but the racial upheaval in Ferguson and across the country, which Obama’s irresponsible use of the rhetoric of race and class warfare has directly caused, as well, are both political tools, which he wishes to use as a Vanguard for his own revolution, whose sole purpose is to usher in the “radical change” which he spoke of all those years ago.

Just as was the case in the Russian Revolution, any “Democratic Socialist” nation we see around our Modern World, went through a course-altering revolution, whether through a violent overthrow of the Government or through a “radical change” in the political ideology of their nation and the way that their populace voted in the subsequent election.

I firmly believe that the mission of Barack Hussein Obama, from the moment he became President of United States to this very day, has been exactly what he said it was during his first presidential campaign: to “radically change” our nation into something that every patriotic American will no longer recognize.

With citizenship and voting rights granted to illegal aliens and with Obama’s covert and overt support of these perpetually-grieved protesters, fueled by racial animus, Obama has created his own version of Lenin’s Bolsheviks.

That is why the election earlier this month was so very important. No matter what the puppets of the Obama Administration, the Main Street Media proclaims,  the reason that Americans elected Republicans to both Houses of Congress was not to work with Barack Hussein Obama, but to oppose him at every turn.

America’s survival as a free nation depends on it.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Why Should Illegals Get Free Healthcare For Breaking Into Our Country? (A KJ Op Ed)

AFBrancoVoting Results111514We should insist that if the immigrant who comes here does in good faith become an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed or birth-place or origin.

But this is predicated upon the man’s becoming in very fact an American and nothing but an American. If he tries to keep segregated with men of his own origin and separated from the rest of America, then he isn’t doing his part as an American. There can be no divided allegiance here. . . We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language, for we intend to see that the crucible turns our people out as Americans, of American nationality, and not as dwellers in a polyglot boarding-house; and we have room for but one soul loyalty, and that is loyalty to the American people. – President Teddy Roosevelt

I remember it as if it was yesterday. It was a Sunday morning, around this time of year. I was 11 years old and I was sick as a dog from bronchitis.

My devoted Daddy was driving me to the doctor’s office. One of the three doctors, who literally raised me  as an asthmatic child, would open up the office for a couple of hours on Sunday morning, for folks who were seriously ill.

Since all three of them felt like they were my surrogate fathers, when we got to the office, the doctor immediately set me down and started to care for me.

Both my mother and father worked for Sears for 20 years. This being the 1960’s, there were no hoops to jump through, just insurance to be filed later by the doctor’s office.

Now, all these years later, I am still asthmatic, however, my condition is controlled by medication prescribed to me by physicians who worked in the finest healthcare system in the world.

As an adult, in the past, even during periods of unemployment, I was always able to receive treatment, from doctors who would work with me.

Having recently gone through a period of unemployment, I found, with the advent of Obamacare, that if you did not have insurance, doctors were more reluctant to work with you in regards to payment of their services. In fact, my physician requested payment of $250 on the spot for treating me for another case of bronchitis. Luckily, I had it, or else I would have been out of luck.

Now, it’s not like I did not try to get Obamacare while I was out of work. However, my wife has insurance through her job, and, according to the Obamacare website, I was not eligible, even though the cost of adding me to my wife’s insurance was beyond our means to pay.

Through the providence of Gods, now I have a great job, and will be eligible in January for my company’s insurance plan.

All that being said, were you aware that the secretary of Human Services has suggested giving all of these five million illegal aliens whom Obama is fixing to grant amnesty to, FREE OBAMACARE?

I’m not kidding.

That’s correct. The Prevaricator-in-Chief, Barack Hussein Obama, wants to give away free healthcare to people who have never sworn allegiance to our country.

Let that soak in for a moment, boys and girls.

These criminals, who have broken into our country, violated our laws, and already are on EBT cards and are receiving driver’s licenses, will now receive their healthcare absolutely free.

Do you think that if we broke in to Mexico that we would get all this stuff for free?

There’s less chance of that happening, than Davy Crockett and those boys had in surviving the Alamo.

However, you have to admit, that it is a heck of a way to both create and buy off new voters.

And, that is what this is all about. Barack Hussein Obama is not being benevolent. He is as self-centered and Machiavellian as they come.

The fact is, the Democratic Party cannot stand on their own ideals. They just got their hindquarters handed to them in the midterm elections.

Anybody with any common sense whatsoever, knows that socialism has failed everywhere it has been tried. These self-proclaimed geniuses are no smarter than any other want-to-be socialists, who have tried to implement “sharing the wealth” in the past. They just have a more effective propaganda machine.

What we saw on Tuesday the 4th, was what happens when the promise of a Marxist ideology, turns out to be the reality of a failed presidency.

And, just like Lenin used the Bolsheviks to overthrow the Czar in the Russian Revolution, so are Obama and the Democrats using the illegal aliens to ensure that they will be elected to office for decades to come.

This next week will show us exactly what we bought with our votes on November the 4th.

It is up to Mitch McConnell, John Boehner, and the rest of the Republicans in Congress, to stand tough against this usurpation of the Constitution.

Contrary to what the mainstream media and the rest of the Democrats have been saying since the election, Americans did not collect all these Republicans to work with the Democrats, we elected them to stop them.

This week is their chance to prove that we made the right decision.

Their bosses, We the People, are watching.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Hillary Proclaims That “Businesses Do Not Create Jobs”

Hillary Ramirez CartoonThe question remains on the lips of the Democratic faithful,

Who are we going to get to run for President in 2016? We have to make Americans forget about the miserable failure of a president we have in there now!

The hopeful eyes of these sniveling snobs have been turned in the direction of Hillary Rodham Clinton, former poster girl for feminism and aggrieved Liberal wives everywhere.

Right now, Bubba’s old lady is out on the campaign trail stumping for Democrats, in the last two weeks before the Political Tsunami that will be the 2014 Mid-Term Elections.

Brietbart.com reports that

Appearing at a Boston rally for Democrat gubernatorial candidate Martha Coakley on Friday, Hillary Clinton told the crowd gathered at the Park Plaza Hotel not to listen to anybody who says that “businesses create jobs.”

“Don’t let anybody tell you it’s corporations and businesses create jobs,” Clinton said.

“You know that old theory, ‘trickle-down economics,’” she continued. “That has been tried, that has failed. It has failed rather spectacularly.”

“You know, one of the things my husband says when people say ‘Well, what did you bring to Washington,’ he said, ‘Well, I brought arithmetic,’” Clinton said, which elicited loud laughs from the crowd.

So, Hillary admits that she, if elected would be another Socialist President, like the current Marxist/Alinsky-ite , living in OUR House  at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue in Washington, DC.

It was Barack Hussein Obama who said,

We can’t have special interests sitting shotgun. We gotta have middle class families up in front. We don’t mind the Republicans joining us. They can come for the ride, but they gotta sit in back.- Barack Hussein Obama

When Barack Hussein Obama first ran for the Presidency of the United States in 2008, he claimed that his economic policies would “foster economic growth from the bottom up and not just from the top down.” Obama promised to put in place “an immediate rescue plan for the middle class” and would end the “tired, worn-out, trickle-down ideologies we’ve been seeing for so many years.”

Obama got everything that he wanted in his first two years in the White House, when Democrats had solid control of Congress — a massive stimulus, auto industry bailouts, temporary middle class tax cuts, vast new regulations on businesses and ObamaCare.

But,  all of his brilliant Socialist Economic  Policies produced the exact opposite of what he’d promised.

So, he pounded his them of “Class Warfare” even harder.

So much so that, during his Re-election Campaign in 2012, President Barack Hussein Obama said,

This country doesn’t just succeed when just a few are doing well at the top. It succeeds when the middle class gets bigger. Our economy doesn’t grow from the top down — it grows from the middle out. We don’t believe that anybody is entitled to success in this country,” said Obama. “But we do believe in opportunity. We believe in a country where hard work pays off and responsibility is rewarded, and everybody is getting a fair shot and everybody is doing their fair share and everybody is playing by the same rules.

On July 24, 2013, Newly-Re-elected President Obama began a series of Stump Speeches titled, “Growing the Economy From the Middle Class Out”.  Here’s an excerpt of the first speech:

…With an endless parade of distractions, political posturing and phony scandals, Washington has taken its eye off the ball. And I am here to say this needs to stop. Short-term thinking and stale debates are not what this moment requires. Our focus must be on the basic economic issues that the matter most to you – the people we represent. And as Washington prepares to enter another budget debate, the stakes for our middle class could not be higher. The countries that are passive in the face of a global economy will lose the competition for good jobs and high living standards. That’s why America has to make the investments necessary to promote long-term growth and shared prosperity. Rebuilding our manufacturing base. Educating our workforce. Upgrading our transportation and information networks. That’s what we need to be talking about. That’s what Washington needs to be focused on.

And that’s why, over the next several weeks, in towns across this country, I will engage the American people in this debate. I will lay out my ideas for how we build on the cornerstones of what it means to be middle class in America, and what it takes to work your way into the middle class in America. Job security, with good wages and durable industries. A good education. A home to call your own. Affordable health care when you get sick. A secure retirement even if you’re not rich. Reducing poverty and inequality. Growing prosperity and opportunity.

So, who is it that is keeping America’s Middle Class from prospering?

I’ll give you a clue: His initials are B.H.O.

The Washington Times reports that

Under President Obama, the richest 10 percent were the only income group of Americans to see their median incomes rise, according to a survey released this week by the Federal Reserve.

The Fed data covered the years 2010-2013, during which period Mr. Obama constantly campaigned against income inequality and won re-election by painting his Republican rival as a tool of Wall Street plutocrats.

“Data from the 2013 [Survey of Consumer Finances] confirm that the shares of income and wealth held by affluent families are at modern historically high levels,” the report said in noting that the median income fell for every 10-percent grouping except the most affluent 10 percent. 

“The 2013 SCF reveals substantial disparities in the evolution of income and net worth since the previous time the survey was conducted, in 2010,” the report stated. The SCF is conducted by the Federal reserve triennially and compiles information about family incomes, credit use, net worth and finances.

The 2010-2013 SCF found that even though real gross domestic product grew by 2.1 percent and civilian unemployment fell from 9.9 percent to 7.5 percent, only families at “the very top of the income distribution saw widespread income gains,” though mean median income levels still lagged behind 2007 numbers.

The report comes just a week after AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka said the union group would not endorse any more Democrats that are following President Obama’s economic policy.

“We will call in and question all of the candidates,” he said. “One of our biggest concerns is who is the candidate’s economic team, because if the present economic team doesn’t change, you are going get the same results.”

The survey also found that family in the middle income bracket (40th to 90th percentiles) saw “very little” change in average real incomes and still have not recovered losses from 2010 and 2007. Families at the bottom of the income distribution continued to see “substantial declines” in average real incomes, a continuing trend from the previous two surveys.

The top percentile of Americans also increased their wealth share since 2010, corresponding to a loss in wealth for the bottom 90 percent of Americans, according to the Fed data.

“The wealth share of the top 3 percent climbed from 44.8 percent in 1989 to 51.8 percent in 2007 and 54.4 percent in 2013. … The share of wealth held by the bottom 90 percent fell from 33.2 percent in 1989 to24.7 percent in 2013,” the report stated.

The prosperous years during the Reagan Presidency marked a period of economic progress for Middle Class Americans. Middle Class Income increased 11 percent after adjustment for inflation, while nearly 20 million new jobs were created.

Those Liberal critics of the 1980s, who argue that the Middle Class shrank in number during those years, are half -right for the wrong reasons. The proportion of Middle Class Americans did indeed decline, but this reflected an upward movement of households into the high income category. Meanwhile, the proportion of Low Income Households declined, as more became middle class. The income growth during the Reagan Presidency increased the size of the pocketbooks of Americans at all income levels.

During Obama’s time in office, America’s major corporations have been hit with punitive measures, including high corporate tax rates and Obamacare, which has caused them to “down-size” their employee rolls and to relocate their call centers to companies like India, which has effected the rest of our economy.

Trickle-Down Economics was simply common sense. Capitalism is the engine that drives America’s economy.

When those who actually hire Americans are attacked by an Administration, naturally, those consequences are felt by those in lower economic strati (that’s you and me, boys and girls).

Obama’s “Trickle-Up” Economic Policy has been a miserable failure.

And, God help us, if the “Queen of Mean” runs for President and gets elected, because it would be more of the same.

(…Of course, government jobs would be available for willing interns, if you know what I mean.)

Because, as Lady Margaret Thatcher once said,

The problem with Socialism is that eventually you run out of other people’s money.

Until He comes,

KJ