Perspectives; Thoughts; Comments; Opinions; Discussions

Archive for July, 2015

Dems come to defense of Planned Parenthood

By Sarah Ferris – 07/15/15

URL of the original posting site: http://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/248137-dems-come-to-defense-of-planned-

Congressional Democrats are coming to the defense of Planned Parenthood as Republicans launch investigations into the group’s use of fetal tissue from abortions. Multiple Democratic lawmakers on Wednesday dismissed a secretly recorded viral video that shows a Planned Parenthood executive detailing how the livers, lungs and hearts of fetuses are preserved during abortions for medical research. “It’s got a Benghazi feel to it, for me,” centrist Rep. Scott Peters (D-Calif.) said. “They’ve been attacking Planned Parenthood for years,” said Rep. Barbara Lee (D-Calif.), another prominent abortion rights supporter. “They’ve been calling for investigations for years.”

Still, the footage, which was recorded by anti-abortion advocates posing as fetal tissue buyers from a research company, is putting Democrats in an uncomfortable spot. While Democrats have for years defended Planned Parenthood against GOP attacks, the graphic discussion about “fetal parts” in the video has energized conservative groups that say the reality of abortion is deliberately obscured by the media.

The remarks from Planned Parenthood’s chief medical director surfaced Tuesday in a nearly nine-minute video that was created by a new group, the Center for Medical Progress. Planned Parenthood, which receives federal funding that cannot be used for abortions, has acknowledged that the video does feature its top medical officer but says the footage is heavily edited and “grossly mischaracterizes” the organization’s practice of donating fetal tissue to research.

At least one anti-abortion Democrat, Rep. Dan Lipinski (Ill.), said he supports the GOP for its planned investigations. Lipinski denounced the video in a press conference with several House Republicans on Wednesday and said he believes more of his colleagues in the Congressional Pro-Life Caucus will follow. “I’m hopeful that some of the pro-choice Democrats also come out in support of the investigation to find out what’s going on at these clinics,” he told The Hill. “I think everyone should be concerned about it, no matter what your position is on abortion.”

Some Democrats, like Rep. Diana DeGette (Colo.), the co-chairwoman of the House Pro-Choice Caucus, have been cautious in their response to the video. In a statement to The Hill, she expressed support for Planned Parenthood, though it fell far short of a sweeping defense. “Planned Parenthood has spoken clearly on the specific circumstances surrounding this video, and I will let their experts explain for themselves. Circumstances of this video aside, people need to understand the important research that specific tissue types contribute to,” she wrote in a statement.

The video, which is nearing 1.5 million views online, reverberated across Capitol Hill and the campaign trail on Wednesday. Less than 24 hours after it surfaced, lawmakers in the House had opened a pair of congressional investigations. Dozens of Republicans, including Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio), have condemned the claims in the video as “inhumane” and “grotesque.”

GOP presidential hopefuls, including Sens. Ted Cruz (Texas) and Rand Paul (Ky.), are also raising the issue’s national profile. The remarks by Planned Parenthood’s medical director in the video are shockingly candid.

While sipping wine in a Los Angeles restaurant, she describes “crushing” the fetus in a way that preserves its organs for researchers. She also describes the growing demand for liver, lungs and “intact” hearts.

Democrats have said there’s no evidence that the group is violating federal laws from her remarks, though none of them told The Hill they had seen the video. “Planned Parenthood is actually allowed, is my understanding, for scientific research, to use fetal tissue, and that is not illegal,” said Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.), a member of the Congressional Pro-Choice Caucus who said she had spoken to Planned Parenthood leadership. When asked about Republicans’ planned investigations into Planned Parenthood, Schakowsky said she wanted an investigation into the Center for Medical Progress, which she called “a phony company.”

The issue of abortion has already caused trouble for members of Congress in both parties this year, from a bipartisan Senate bill to fight human trafficking to a House bill banning late-term abortions that drew objections over its language on rape.

Earlier this week, House leaders pulled a bipartisan bill from Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-N.Y.) that would have created a commemorative coin to help raise money for breast cancer research because some of that funding would have gone to Planned Parenthood. The bill was ultimately passed Wednesday with broad support from both parties. But Maloney hinted that the delay was, in part, because of the Planned Parenthood video. Asked if she thought the outrage over the video fueled sudden opposition to her bill, Maloney responded, “Yes. It is an unusual coincidence, shall we say.”

Cristina Marcos contributed.

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

President 2016: Clinton’s big CNN interview

by David Freddoso – Jul 12, 2015

URL of the original posting site: http://conservativeintel.com/2015/07/12/the-briefing-vol-iii-issue-21

Hillary Clinton: Clinton’s big CNN interview — her first as a candidate — demonstrates why her campaign has gone to such great lengths to keep her away from interviewers. A defensive Clinton blamed Republicans for most of the problems she created for herself.

She made many untrue statements in the process — for example, that she was not required to turn over her work emails, that there were no rules or regulations against her keeping them private and withholding them for so long, and (although one might quibble that it’s a question of opinion) that voters trust her.

This isn’t the place to dissect these, or her claim that she was not under subpoena (it depends on what the definition of “was” is), but it’s important to note the continuity of Clinton style. The maze of Clinton investigations and allegations became so complex in the late 1990s that it became all too easy for Team Clinton to muddy the waters with factually false statements.

In a similar way, Hillary and her team seem to think that all she has to do under media pressure is state that everything she did to separate her work product from as secretary of State was both legal and ethical (even if it wasn’t), and keep stating it. One potential problem with this is that the Clintons do not control the White House anymore and lack the institutional levers that contributed so much to Bill Clinton’s popularity. After all, he was president and Republicans were trying to remove him from the office. This time, in contrast, Hillary is a private citizen with a large bank account from monetizing government service. Voters (as the polls suggest) already smell a rat, and it’s still only July 2015.

It is unclear whether Clinton’s scandals as known to date can truly sink her in a general election. A lot will depend on the quality of the Republican nominee and whether the mainstream media is willing to continue pursuing these issues in depth as the campaign progresses.

But every time you see or hear about a huge Bernie Sanders event, bear in mind that fear of the potential for Clinton implosion is motivating some of his support. Among those who do not believe Clinton is an honest person, a small but significant share are liberals who will vote for her in November 2016 no matter what. It is not a hopeful sign, but it might not be fatal either.

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

Dem: Rejecting Iran deal would be ‘absolute blow’ to presidential legitimacy

By Ben Kamisar – 07/16/15

“This is an exceptional moment where you have the United States, our European partners, Russia and China all agreeing on a path forward, and if the United States Congress was to override that, I don’t know how any president in the future can ever sit across our allies and adversaries and negotiate a deal.”

Murphy chided Republicans for a “casualness of opposition” given the consequences, and questioned whether the party believes in diplomacy. “Republicans in Congress just simply don’t believe in the legitimacy of diplomacy as a tool in the toolkit of the American president,” he said. “They do zero oversight on our war we are fighting right now against ISIS, military engagement in the Middle East, but they do oodles of oversight on a diplomatic agreement with Iran.”

Lawmakers are just beginning what’s likely to be a polarized debate over the controversial nuclear deal. Congress has the power to reject the deal, but that would have to overcome a presidential veto, meaning two-thirds of Congress would have to band together against it.

Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) on the same show pushed back against the idea that Republicans don’t support diplomacy, arguing that the terms simply amounted to a bad deal. He noted that the deal allows for a delay before monitors are able to access potentially secret nuclear sites, and expressed concerns about agreeing to lift arms and ballistic missile embargoes down the road if Iran follows the agreement. “This is a country that terrorizes the region already and we are going to make it easier for them to do that by lifting the sanctions and giving them tens of billions of dollars, in addition to now having access to the arms that would enable them to do that,” he said. Thune added that he’s approaching the deal with a “high level of skepticism” and said that his party isn’t against diplomacy, only weak diplomacy. “It’s got to be strong diplomacy and strong leadership. But that opportunity may have been lost, that window might have closed,” he said. “The next president is going to have to manage nuclear proliferation in the Middle East, and that’s essentially going to be the legacy of what this deal is.”

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

Today’s Politically INCORRECT Cartoon

A Pitiful Deal

July 16, 2015

URL of the original posting site: http://conservativebyte.com/2015/07/a-pitiful-deal

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

‘Terrible’ Iran Deal Makes Israeli Strike Inevitable

by Joel B. Pollak14 Jul 2015

URL of the original posting site: http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/07/14/terrible-iran-deal-makes-israeli-strike-inevitable

Tension Remain High At Israeli Gaza Border

The nuclear deal reached with Iran on Tuesday is clouded by uncertainty about whether the Iranian regime will live up to its relatively weak commitments. One outcome is almost certain, however: Israel will launch a pre-emptive strike against Iran, hoping to weaken the regime and stop, or slow, its nuclear program.

Israel will attack–possibly by year’s end–because there is no other way to disrupt Iran’s advance to regional hegemony, which will become unstoppable once the deal’s provisions–especially the non-nuclear provisions–begin to take effect. Despite what the Obama administration and its media supporters are saying, there is almost no doubt that the Iran deal, should it survive Congress, will enable Iran to become a nuclear power.

President Barack Obama himself admitted as much in April, when he defended the provisional deal signed in Lausanne by admitting it allowed Iran to reach “breakout” shortly after the ten-year (now eight-year) expiration date. The only question is whether Iran will move that date forward and risk the meager diplomatic consequences of breaking the deal.

There are Israeli analysts–a minority–who believe that Israel can live in the shadow of a nuclear-armed Iran, at least for a while. After all, Israel has developed a lethal “second-strike” capacity, in the form of nuclear missiles aboard Dolphin-class submarines programmed to target Iran. That leaves the Iranian regime to weigh the odds of surviving an Israeli counterattack versus the chances of causing the end of the world as they know it. From a fanatical religious perspective, it is a win-win scenario–but cooler, or less pious, heads may prevail.

The problem is that the Iran deal goes so much further than the nuclear issue alone. The Iranians shrewdly bargained for a host of late concessions: an end to the international arms embargo, the lifting of a ban on ballistic missile technology, and an accelerated schedule of sanctions relief that will pour over $100 billion into depleted Iranian coffers. The regime knew that Obama would not walk away–that he had committed his political career to a deal, and he was already dismissing all other alternatives, severely undermining his own leverage.

Israel just might find a way to live with a nuclear Iran, but it cannot live with a nuclear Iran and an array of turbo-charged Iranian proxies on its borders.

Iran has already renewed its support for Palestinian terror groups in Gaza, and the U.S. has quietly allowed Iranian-backed Hezbollah to regroup in Lebanon, even as it has been weakened by losses in the Syrian civil war. Flush with cash, armed with advanced new weapons, and perhaps equipped with nuclear contaminants, these groups will pose an ever-greater threat to Israel’s security–and soon.

That is why the alternative that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu presented to Congress–and he did present an alternative to the present deal, though Obama pretended not to notice–included three provisions:

“first, stop its aggression against its neighbors in the Middle East;
second, stop supporting terrorism around the world;
and third, stop threatening to annihilate my country, Israel–the one and only Jewish state.”

None of those referred directly to the Iranian nuclear program. Obama ignored Netanyahu’s suggestions and forged ahead.

An Israeli strike might not stop the Iranian nuclear program. But it could stall that program, and create a renewed sense of vulnerability around the regime, which was near collapse as recently as 2009. Israel could also make Iran pay a direct cost for arming Hezbollah, Hamas, and other terror groups–a cost historically borne by the civilians of southern Lebanon or Gaza. It could project a conventional deterrent that would affect Iran here and now, as opposed to a nuclear deterrent whose effect might only be felt after an atomic exchange (i.e. not at all).

For Israel, the costs of such an attack on Iran–even a successful one–could be severe. It would be condemned and isolated internationally. It might suffer thousands of rocket attacks from Lebanon and Gaza. It may lose thousands of soldiers and civilians in a ground war. Obviously the consequences will be less damaging–or more bearable–if the pre-emptive strike is successful. The reason Israelis are willing to take the risk at all is twofold. First, they have done it before (Iraq 1981; Syria 2007). Second, the alternative–thanks to the Iran deal–looks far worse.

The Obama administration has done all it can to prevent an Israeli pre-emptive strike, from leaking Israeli attack scenarios to denying Israel air space over Iraq. As a result, the only realistic bombing plans–whether Israel targets Iran’s nuclear and political installations directly, or detonates an electromagnetic pulse (EMP) over the country–involve a Doolittle Raid-style attack from which Israel’s pilots will not expect to return, or a landing in Saudi Arabia. The latter was once a non-starter, but–ironically–Obama’s overtures to Iran have made it possible.

The Saudis are expected to respond to the Iran deal by seeking nuclear weapons of their own. But the monarchy could also strike an alliance with Israel–perhaps even a grand bargain. The Saudis could give Israel landing rights, logistical support, and intelligence. In return, Israel could accept Saudi Arabia’s proposal for a Palestinian state roughly along the “1967 lines”–plus Saudi control of Jerusalem’s Muslim holy sites, which would cement the royal family’s legitimacy. (Ironically, Obama, by provoking war, would enable Arab-Israeli peace.)

The clock is ticking, however. Before the Iran deal, it was thought that Israel could only carry out a pre-emptive strike in the time period before Iran actually became a nuclear power. Now, the deadlines are even shorter, and more complex. Israel would need to attack before Russian S-300 surface-to-air missiles, already sold to Iran, can be delivered and activated. It would also need to attack while Hezbollah and Hamas are still weak, war-weary and cash-strapped–i.e. before sanctions relief delivers billions to Iran’s regional war and terror efforts.

Israel must also be wary of attacking too soon. It will not attack in the next ten days, for example, because they coincide with a religious period of mourning for historic defeats. It would also make little sense for Israel to attack while Congress is debating the Iran deal.

But Israel will attack before it loses the option. It will do so because the purpose of Israeli statehood is to enable Jews to defend themselves, and not rely on the help or mercy of others.

Obama wants to build a new legacy, but Netanyahu has inherited an old legacy–one he cannot ignore.

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

Texas Clerk Refuses to Issue Same-Sex Marriage Licenses

Authored by BarbWireon 14 July, 2015

URL of the original posting site: http://barbwire.com/2015/07/14/0700-texas-clerk-refuses-to-issue-same-sex-marriage-licenses

A Texas clerk refused to issue licenses for same-sex “marriage,” and Liberty Counsel has come to the defense of this clerk.

Mat Staver: Matt, this is in Texas, it’s Irion County, and that particular location is the place for a clerk, by the name of Molly Criner, who has issued a statement regarding marriage and the fact that she says she will uphold the Constitution, and therefore must reject the ruling that is lawless.

This is what her statement says in part, “To keep my oath to protect the Constitution I must reject this ruling that I believe is lawless. I have to stand for the Constitution and the rule of law.”

Matt Barber: She is setting an example for millions, frankly, of other American citizens, for clerks, for judges, for attorneys, for teachers…on and on it goes. And what we’re talking about here is the rule of law.

She said, “The justices of the Supreme Court acted outside and against the authority granted to them by the very Constitution that we have sworn to uphold.”

So what she is saying here, Molly Criner, she’s saying I’m going to obey the Constitution and uphold my duty, sworn duty to the Constitution, and I am going to ignore this unconstitutional, lawless decision by these five unelected, unaccountable, justices of the U.S. Supreme Court.

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

The world of post-SCOTUS gay marriage and church insurance

Posted by Kemberlee Kaye Tuesday, July 14, 2015

URL of the original posting site: http://legalinsurrection.com/2015/07/the-world-of-post-scotus-gay-marriage-and-church-insurance/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+LegalInsurrection+%28Le%C2%B7gal+In%C2%B7sur%C2%B7rec%C2%B7tion%29

As told by one of our readers

Supreme Court Gay Marriage Oral Argument Fox News Tax Exemption Liberty

Last week, we took a look at an insurance notification received by a church in Oregon. National Review’s David French originally reported the story.

Those fearful Obergefell v. Hodges could spell trouble for religious liberty were validated much sooner than anticipated. Less than 48 hours after the decision was handed down, New York Times columnist Mark Oppenheimer called for the end of tax exemptions for religious institutions. And the piecemeal dismemberment on religious liberties continues.

Now infamous for their intolerance of Christianity, Oregon continues to be ground zero for the Biblical Principles vs. Ideological Fascism showdown.

National Review’s David French explains an emerging problem for Oregonian pastors seeking liability insurance.

Churches, like virtually every functioning corporation, protect against liability risks and the potentially ruinous costs of litigation through liability insurance. With same-sex marriage now recognized as a constitutional right — and with news of Oregon’s Bureau of Labor and Industries awarding a lesbian couple $135,000 in damages for “emotional, mental and physical suffering” after a Christian bakery refused to bake their wedding cake — pastors are reaching out to insurance companies to make sure they’re covered. And at least one insurer has responded with a preemptory denial: no coverage if a church is sued for refusing to perform a same-sex wedding.

While denying insurance coverage is not itself an encroachment of religious liberty, lack of protection is as much a problem; one that could easily sink any independent church that winds up the defendant of a complaint.

French continues:

On July 1, David Karns, vice president of underwriting at Southern Mutual Church Insurance Company (which “serve[s] more than 8,400 churches”), wrote an “all states” agents’ bulletin addressing same-sex marriage. It begins: “We have received numerous calls and emails regarding the Supreme Court’s ruling on same-sex marriages. The main concern is whether or not liability coverage applies in the event a church gets sued for declining to perform a same-sex marriage.” Karns continues:

The general liability form does not provide any coverage for this type of situation, since there is no bodily injury, property damage, personal injury, or advertising injury. If a church is concerned about the possibility of a suit, we do offer Miscellaneous Legal Defense Coverage. This is not liability coverage, but rather expense reimbursement for defense costs. There is no coverage for any judgments against an insured.

In other words: Churches, you’re on your own. (National Review has tried to reach Mr. Karns and Southern Mutual’s corporate office, and they have not yet returned our calls.)

Monday one of our astute readers and blogger at Insureblog (a blog that covers all things insurance), provided a much appreciated technical view of the church insurance/religious liberty discussion.

Henry Stern writes:

SSM & Church Insurance

The other day, we looked at how health insurance (particularly group plans) will be impacted by the recent SCOTUS ruling on Same Sex Marriage (SSM). Now, the legal beagles over at Legal Insurrection have a very interesting post about the future of liability insurance in this new, enlightened age, and it’s not pretty:

“On July 1, David Karns, vice president of underwriting at Southern Mutual Church Insurance Company (which “serve[s] more than 8,400 churches”), wrote … The main concern is whether or not liability coverage applies in the event a church gets sued for declining to perform a same-sex marriage”

The short answer: No.

As usual when it comes to issues involving Property and Casualty (P&C), I turned to good friend and guru Bill M for his insights:

The reason that coverage in such circumstances would (likely) be declined is that it was an intentional act of violating the law. So if (when?) a church (or synagogue, or mosque) is sued for refusing to perform a SSM, the resulting lawsuit would not be covered. That also means the carrier has no “duty to defend” (basically: provide legal counsel).

Of course, any fines imposed by the state would also be excluded.

This is not quite the same as the linked post’s headline:

“Churches refusing to perform same sex marriages may be denied liability insurance”

At this point, no carrier is refusing to actually underwrite and issue a policy to non-complying churches for the simple reason that it’s not currently a part of the underwriting process. That is, there’s no question on the app that reads “Do you refuse to perform gay weddings?” If and/or when a claim arises because of such refusal, the carrier would simply deny coverage.

Now, actually denying to write a policy in the first place is currently pretty speculative. But as Bill pointed out to me, such a scenario is not necessarily farfetched:

Imagine Acme Church Insurance Company with 50,000 policyholders, 10,000 of which get sued for refusing SSM, and all 10,000 of these claims are denied. That’s a lot of ticked off customers, no? So what’s the likelihood that the next application version’s going to include a question about SSM, and if the answer’s not “sure, all the time,” then no soup policy for you.

Is that likely to happen in the next year or two? Probably not, but don’t be surprised when it does happen a few years down the road.

Bill also brought up another very disturbing thought: many (most?) churches have Boards of Directors (or Elders, or Deacons, etc), and thus likely have D&O (Directors and Officers) coverage:

“Errors and omissions coverage for an organization, its leaders, and governing bodies while acting within the scope of their duties.”

The reason for this coverage is that board members could be sued individually, putting their personal assets at risk for something their church or its leaders may have done (or not done).

Bill mused about whether such policies might also decline coverage for SSM-related claims. Talk about a chilling effect on lay folks volunteering for leadership positions in their congregations.

Brave new world, indeed.

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

Today’s Politically INCORRECT Cartoon

Erasing History

July 15, 2015

URL of the original posting site: http://conservativebyte.com/2015/07/erasing-history

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

Revealed: 276 ‘sanctuary cities’ let 8,145 illegal offenders free in just 8 months, 17,000 total

By Paul Bedard • 7/13/15

URL of the original posting site: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/276-sanctuary-cities-let-8145-illegal-offenders-free-in-just-8-months/article/2568121

: Illegal immigrant Francisco Sanchez is charged with murdering Kate Steinle in San Francisco. AP Photos

Some 276 “sanctuary cities,” nearly 50 percent more than previously revealed, released over 8,000 illegal immigrants with criminal records or facing charges free despite federal requests that they be turned over to Immigration and Customs Enforcement for deportation, according to an explosive new report. The Center for Immigration Studies, revealing new numbers it received under the Freedom of Information Act, said that those releases from cities that ignored federal demands came over just eight months and are just part of an even larger release of 17,000 illegals with criminal records.

RELATED: Map — Over 200 ‘sanctuary cities’ in 32 states and D.C.

Author Jessica M. Vaughan, director of policy Studies for the center, also reported that many of those illegals have been rearrested after their release and charged with nearly 7,500 new charges, including child sex abuse.

: Francisco Sanchez, right, is lead into the courtroom for his arraignment in the shooting death of 32-year-old Kathryn Steinle. (Michael Macor/San Francisco Chronicle via AP, Pool)

The report, titled “Ignoring Detainers, Endangering Communities State/local agencies release criminals rather than obey law,” provided to Secrets, is expected to fuel U.S. anger over sanctuary cities and the murder by one freed illegal of a San Francisco woman earlier this month.

“The Obama administration has given sanctuaries free rein to ignore detainers by ending the successful Secure Communities program and replacing it with the Priority Enforcement Program. This new program explicitly allows local agencies to disregard ICE notifications of deportable aliens in their custody by replacing detainers with ‘requests for notification,'” wrote Vaughan. “The only truly effective and lasting solution is for Congress to spell out in federal law that local law enforcement agencies must cooperate with ICE by complying with all detainers or face sanctions in the form of disqualification from certain kinds of federal funding,” she added.

The new federal documents show that there are at least 276 sanctuary cities, more than the 200 previously believed, and are in 43 states, also more than previously revealed. Instead of turning illegal immigrants facing criminal charges over to ICE under its “detainer” rule, the sanctuaries simply ignore the request in many cases let the illegals go. Many of those released had more than one ICE “detainer” request.

The majority, 5,132, had past criminal records, like Juan Francisco Lopez-Sanchez, the illegal previously deported five times and now charged with murdering 32-year-old Kate Steinle. Of those, 2,984 had a prior felony conviction or charge. And, 1,867 offenders who were released were re-arrested, accumulating 7,491 new charges, including child sex abuse. Vaughan’s report found that 10 percent of the new charges involved dangerous drugs and seven percent were for driving under the influence of alcohol.

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

‘Sheer insanity’: Iran-deal critics go nuclear on Obama

Posted By Garth Kant On 07/13/2015

Article reblogged from WND: http://www.wnd.com

URL to article: http://www.wnd.com/2015/07/source-iran-deal-appears-imminent

: U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry (far right) negotiates with Iranians

WASHINGTON – Criticism of President Obama’s nuclear agreement with Iran has been fast and furious. “I don’t trust Obama on this anymore than I trusted him on ‘if you like your plan, you can keep your plan,’” talk-show host Laura Ingraham told WND. She added, “Elections have consequences—from our health-care system, to the definition of ‘marriage,’ to our military strength, to now our national security, Barack Obama has, indeed, ‘fundamentally transformed’ America.”

Sheer insanity

“This is sheer insanity,” Iran expert Clare Lopez told WND. “This agreement legitimizes Iran’s overt nuclear weapons program and provides both cover and funding for its clandestine nuclear weapons program, with extra financial bonuses for its global terrorist network,” said the vice president for research and analysis at the Center for Security Policy.

In a dawn speech from the White House on Tuesday, Obama proclaimed, “[W]e have stopped the spread of nuclear weapons in this region,” but a parade of ferocious critics claimed just the opposite.

Iranian jackpot

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu feared the worst, saying, “From the initial reports we can already conclude that this agreement is an historic mistake for the world.” He predicted, “Iran is going to receive a sure path to nuclear weapons.” “Iran will get a jackpot, a cash bonanza of hundreds of billions of dollars, which will enable it to continue to pursue its aggression and terror in the region and in the world,” said the prime minister. “One cannot prevent an agreement when the negotiators are willing to make more and more concessions to those who, even during the talks, keep chanting: ‘Death to America,’” Netanyahu concluded.

License to kill

By contrast, Obama said he hoped the deal would cause Iran to choose a “different path, one of tolerance, of peaceful resolution to conflict.” He also predicted a greater chance of war in the Mideast if Congress rejects the deal.

Former Israeli military spokeswoman Miri Regev said, instead, it gave Iran a “license to kill.”

Israeli Deputy Foreign Minister Tzipi Hotovely called it “a historic surrender by the West to the axis of evil headed by Iran.”

Hillary blames Bush

Hillary Clinton didn’t fully endorse the deal in public, but she reportedly did in private, during a meeting with congressional Democrats. During a brief press conference on Capitol Hill, the presidential candidate and former secretary of state merely called the deal “an important step,” one that “puts a lid on Iran’s nuclear programs.” But, behind closed doors, Clinton gave the deal a “full-throated” endorsement, according to Rep. Gerry Connolly, D-Va.. Rep. Steve Israel, D- N.Y., said Clinton even blamed President George W. Bush for Iran’s nuclear proliferation.

According to the congressman, Clinton said it would hypocritical for Republicans to criticize Obama’s deal because, “[F]or eight years under George Bush, the Iranians built two nuclear facilities and they mastered the nuclear fuel cycle and enhanced the number of centrifuges spinning.”

Red lines become green lights

However, Democratic Sen. Bob Menendez of New Jersey, a senior member of the Foreign Relations Committee, said, “The bottom line is: The deal doesn’t end Iran’s nuclear program — it preserves it.” “I’m concerned the redlines we drew have turned into green-lights; that Iran will be required only to limit rather than eliminate its nuclear program, while the international community will be required to lift the sanctions, and that it doesn’t provide for anytime-any-place inspections of suspected sites,” he said in a statement.

Catastrophic

Leading GOP presidential candidate Donald Trump summed up the deal as, “Iran gets everything and loses nothing.” He predicted, “The inspections will not be followed, and Iran will no longer have any sanctions.” Trump called the agreement very dangerous and ” a horrible and perhaps catastrophic event for Israel.”

The busniessman analyzed the deal harshly, stating, “[W]e should have kept the billions of dollars we have agreed to pay them. Any great dealmaker would know this is a perfect example of ‘tapping along’ and because they have been unchecked for so long throughout this extremely lengthy process, I guarantee they are much closer to producing a nuclear weapon than they were at the start of negotiations.”

Trump sized up the Obama administration as “incompetent leaders and even more incompetent negotiators.”

Death sentence for Israel

“A possible death sentence for the nation of Israel” that will “make everything worse” is how Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., described the deal on MSNBC. ‘This is most dangerous, irresponsible step I’ve ever seen in the history of watching the Mideast,’ said the presidential candidate. “With this deal, you’ve ensured that the Arabs will go nuclear. You have put Israel in the worst possible box. This will be a death sentence over time for Israel if they don’t push back. You put our nation at risk….Barack Obama and John Kerry have been dangerously naive about the Mideast in general. They’ve taken it to a new level and any senator who votes for this is voting for a nuclear arms race in the Mideast,” he said in reference to the Corker bill, which requires a vote by two-thirds of Congress to reject the deal. Congress now has 60 days to review the deal and to try to stop it with legislation.

However, Obama, promised to veto any attempt by Congress to stop the deal, saying, “I am confident that this deal will meet the national security interests of the United States and our allies.”

Betrayal

Another presidential candidate, Gov. Scott Walker, R-Wisc., bluntly declared, “President Obama’s nuclear agreement with Iran will be remembered as one of America’s worst diplomatic failures.” Announcing his candidacy on Monday, Walker promised to “terminate” the deal on his first day in office.

Presidential candidate Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, called it a ” staggeringly bad deal” and a “mistake of historic proportion. It is a fundamental betrayal of the security of the United States and of our closest allies, first and foremost Israel.” Cruz added that it seemed “President Obama would concede almost anything to get any deal – even a terrible deal.”

GOP presidential candidate Carly Fiorina disputed Obama’s claim the deal will stop a Mideast nuclear arms race, noting, “Our Arab allies have said just the opposite, so has Israel, so there is reason for suspicion here that’s not partisan. Saudi Arabia and Israel, as we know, don’t agree on very much, but they do agree that this is a bad deal,” she said on CBS.

Shame on Obama

Republican presidential hopeful and former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee said, “Shame on the Obama administration for agreeing to a deal that empowers an evil Iranian regime to carry out its threat to ‘wipe Israel off the map’ and bring ‘death to America.’ John Kerry should have long ago gotten up on his crutches, walked out of the sham talks, and went straight to Jerusalem to stand next to Benjamin Netanyahu and declared that America will stand with Israel and the other sane governments of the Middle East instead of with the terrorist government of Iran,” he added.

Another presidential candidate, Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., said Obama gave “concession after concession to a regime that has American blood on its hands, holds Americans hostage, and has consistently violated every agreement it ever signed.”

He predicted Congress will reject the the deal because it “undermines our national security.”

Appeasement, not diplomacy

Another GOP presidential candidate, Jeb Bush, said, “This isn’t diplomacy – it is appeasement.” He labeled the agreement as “dangerous, deeply flawed, and short sighted,” and complained, “A comprehensive agreement should require Iran to verifiably abandon – not simply delay – its pursuit of a nuclear weapons capability.”

Presidential contender Rick Santorum blasted the deal as “a catastrophic capitulation” that give Iran “legitimacy” in the international community.

Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, another presidential candidate, said “While Secretary Clinton has been the architect of President Obama’s foreign policy, she can do the right thing and prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon and oppose this deal.”

Clinton’s rival for the presidential nomination, Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., maintained, “This is a victory for diplomacy over saber-rattling and could keep the United States from being drawn into another never-ending war in the Middle East.”

Dangerous game

GOP presidential hopeful, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie said Obama was “playing a dangerous game with our national security. The deal threatens Israel, it threatens the United States, and it turns 70 years of nuclear policy on its head,” Christie said. “I urge Republicans and Democrats in Congress to put aside politics and act in the national interest. Vote to disapprove this deal in numbers that will override the President’s threatened veto.”

Obama claimed, “This deal is not built on trust” because “it is built on verification,” but a chorus of critics strongly disputed that.

Worse deal than imagined possible

“It’s a deal worse than even we imagined possible,” said Weekly Standard editor William Kristol. “It’s a deal that gives the Iranian regime $140 billion in return for … effectively nothing: no dismantlement of Iran’s nuclear program, no anytime/anywhere inspections, no curbs on Iran’s ballistic missile program, no maintenance of the arms embargo, no halt to Iran’s sponsorship of terror.”

The chairman of the House Intelligence Committee said the deal will secure Iran’s pathway to a bomb, and that, “This deal will guarantee Iran the capability to carry out its clear intent.”

Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Calif., added, “I don’t know what information the Obama administration possesses that indicates this deal will actually prevent Iran from getting a nuclear weapon or will cause the mullahs to reduce their support for worldwide terrorism, but it sure isn’t the same intelligence we’re seeing in the Intelligence Committee.”

Threat to civilization

Rep. Louie Gohmert, R-Texas warned the deal was “disastrous for the future of the United States,” an “ultimate betrayal of Israel, Egypt and moderate Muslim nations,” and, “a devastating threat to civilization which must not be ratified” by Congress. The congressman observed the agreements reported provisions include “the lifting of the embargo on arms being sold to Iran; Iran will be allowed to keep its military sites off-limits ‘for a time;’ Iran can veto any nuclear inspections that were supposed to be allowed ‘anytime, anywhere;’ no nuclear facilities will actually be dismantled; and Iran will be ever closer to making good on its promise to try to wipe Israel off the map.” Gohmert concluded, “The Obama-Kerry deal agrees to the release of tens of billions of dollars to Iran that unquestionably will include money used to terrorize and kill Americans, Christians, Jews and moderate Muslims the world over.”

Paves path to Iranian nuke

Rep. Ron DeSantis, R-Fla., chairman of the Subcommittee on National Security and a member of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, said, “This Iran deal gives (Iranian Supreme Leader) Ayatollah Khamenei exactly what he wants: billions of dollars in sanctions relief, validation of the Iranian nuclear program, and the ability to stymie inspections. It even lifts sanctions against Quds Force Commander Qasem Soleimani, who is responsible for the deaths of hundreds of American soldiers during the campaign in Iraq,” he added. “The deal will further destabilize the Middle East, allow Iran to foment more terrorism, and aid Iran’s rise as the dominant power in the region. By paving Iran’s path to a nuclear weapon, the deal harms American national security and effectively stabs our close ally Israel, which Iran has threatened to wipe off the map, in the back. Congress needs to move swiftly to block this dangerous deal.”

“This act of appeasement by the Obama Administration now legitimizes both Iran’s path to nuclear weapons and the terrorist regime itself. It endangers the national security interests of the U.S., Israel, and allies across the word,” said former U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. John Bolton. “Not only can Iran continue to pursue its 30-plus year objective of pursuing deliverable nuclear weapons, but the regime, the leading state sponsor of terror for over 35 years, is also free of global financial sanctions. Ultimately, we will see that Obama has capitulated to Iran’s demands, and this agreement is simply a pit stop between one set of negotiations and the other,” he added.

Historic victory for Iran

Rep. Mark Meadows, R-N.C. said, “The nuclear agreement is a historic victory — for Iran. For the last 18 months the Obama Administration made concession after concession to the rogue regime in Tehran, while taking the most basic demands off the table to try to secure a deal. I warned when the framework agreement was released that it relied on blind faith in a notoriously dishonest regime.”

He added, “The fact that the President came out today and threatened to veto any legislation that could potentially block the deal’s implementation is particularly concerning. If the deal is in fact strong, why is the President worried that Congress may reject it? Could it be the same reason why the Iranian regime is celebrating their victory? This historic deal requires strict scrutiny by Congress and I will not support any deal that puts the safety and security of the American people at risk.”

Sen. Orrin G. Hatch, R-Utah, called it “worse than no deal at all” because it “removes sanctions without robust means of ensuring the regime’s disarmament and compliance with its international obligations.”

“Sadly, the Administration just lit the fuse for a nuclear arms race in the Middle East,” said Sen. Ben Sasse, R-Neb. “We all know Iran’s neighbors will not sit idly as the world’s largest state-sponsor of terror becomes a nuclear-threshold state.”

Strengthens Iran’s ‘constructive’ role

Ordinary Iranians celebrated the deal in the streets and on twitter. Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif called it a “win-win solution” that builds a “new chapter of hope.” In a nationwide televised address Tuesday, Iranian President Hassan Rouhani claimed, “Iran has never sought to manufacture a nuclear weapon and will never seek to manufacture a nuclear weapon.”

Secretary of State John Kerry called it “the good deal that we sought.”

European Union foreign policy chief Federica Mogherini said the deal was “a sign of hope for the entire world.”

British Prime Minister, David Cameron, said the agreement “secures our fundamental aim — to keep Iran from developing a nuclear weapon — and that will help to make our world a safer place.”

“We are certain that the world heaved a sigh of relief today,” said Russian President Vladimir Putin. “Russia will do its utmost to make sure that the Vienna agreement is fully implemented, thus contributing to the international and regional security.”

A Vatican spokesman said the agreement “is viewed in a positive light” by Pope Francis.

A spokesman for Iraqi Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi said the deal would be “a catalyst for regional stability.”

Syria’s President Bashar Assad called it “a historic turning point” which will lead to “strengthening of the constructive role played by Iran in supporting the rights of nations.”

Iran took yes for an answer

The deal is supposed to delay the amount of time required for Iran to assemble a nuclear weapon from a few months to a year, which Western leaders hope would give them enough time to stop Iran from using such a device. But many fear the agreement will just give Iran the cover it needs to complete its work in secrecy, and that the U.S. conceded far too much to the Islamic Republic.

The problem for the Obama administration had been, “Iran won’t take ‘yes’ for an answer,” a Capitol Hill source told WND on Monday. Critics say the reason Iran had refused to take yes for an answer was that the Obama administration had conceded on virtually every key demand, so the Iranians just kept demanding more.

Follow Garth Kant@DCgarth

Category:

International Politics

Tagged with:

Posted on July 13, 2015

URL of the original posting site: http://clashdaily.com/2015/07/share-this-heres-the-dirty-details-of-the-democrats-horribly-racist-legacy

Here are the facts about the history of racism and the Democrat party that you won’t hear from the mainstream media.

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

Shock Video Catches Planned Parenthood’s Top Doctor Selling Body Parts of Aborted Babies

Reported by Steven Ertelt July 14, 2015 | Washington, DC

URL of the original posting site: http://www.lifenews.com/2015/07/14/shock-video-catches-planned-parenthoods-top-doctor-selling-body-parts-of-aborted-babies

A shocking new expose’ video has caught Planned Parenthood’s top doctor describing how the abortion business sells the body parts of aborted babies. New undercover footage shows Planned Parenthood Federation of America’s Senior Director of Medical Services, Dr. Deborah Nucatola, describing how Planned Parenthood sells the body parts of aborted unborn children and admitting she uses partial-birth abortions to supply intact body parts.

In the video, Nucatola is at a business lunch with actors posing as buyers from a human biologics company. As head of PPFA’s Medical Services department, Nucatola has overseen medical practice at all Planned Parenthood locations since 2009. She also trains new Planned Parenthood abortion doctors and performs abortions herself at Planned Parenthood Los Angeles up to 24 weeks.

(Watch the FULL two-hour video at the end of this article).

Nucatola admits that Planned Parenthood charges per-specimen for baby body parts, uses illegal partial-birth abortion procedures in order to get salable parts, and is aware of their own liability for doing so and takes steps to cover it up.

The footage shockingly depicts the top medical official at the Planned Parenthood corporation munching on her salad while she discusses the sale of body parts of unborn children victimized by abortions. She brazenly describes how the heads of unborn babies killed in abortions command top dollar.

SIGN THE PETITION! Congress Must Investigate Planned Parenthood for Selling Aborted Baby Parts

The buyers ask Nucatola, “How much of a difference can that actually make, if you know kind of what’s expected, or what we need?” “It makes a huge difference,” Nucatola replies. “I’d say a lot of people want liver. And for that reason, most providers will do this case under ultrasound guidance, so they’ll know where they’re putting their forceps. The kind of rate-limiting step of the procedure is calvarium. Calvarium—the head—is basically the biggest part.”

Nucatola explains, “We’ve been very good at getting heart, lung, liver, because we know that, so I’m not gonna crush that part, I’m gonna basically crush below, I’m gonna crush above, and I’m gonna see if I can get it all intact.” “And with the calvarium, in general, some people will actually try to change the presentation so that it’s not vertex,” she continues. “So if you do it starting from the breech presentation, there’s dilation that happens as the case goes on, and often, the last step, you can evacuate an intact calvarium at the end.”

Federal law prohibits the sale of body parts of aborted babies. In fact, the sale or purchase of human fetal tissue a federal felony punishable by up to 10 years in prison and a fine of up to $500,000 (42 U.S.C. 289g-2).

Nucatola also reveals that Planned Parenthood’s national office is concerned about their liability for the sale of fetal parts. “At the national office, we have a Litigation and Law Department which just really doesn’t want us to be the middle people for this issue right now,” she says. “But I will tell you that behind closed doors these conversations are happening with the affiliates.”

A separate clip shows Planned Parenthood President and CEO Cecile Richards praising Nucatola’s work to facilitate connections for fetal tissue collection. “Oh good,” Richards says when told about Nucatola’s support for fetal tissue collection at Planned Parenthood, “Great. She’s amazing.”

The video is the first by The Center for Medical Progress in its “Human Capital” series, a nearly 3-year-long investigative journalism study of Planned Parenthood’s illegal trafficking of aborted fetal parts. The head of the project, David Daleiden, reacted to the shocking footage his team captured: “Planned Parenthood’s criminal conspiracy to make money off of aborted baby parts reaches to the very highest levels of their organization. Elected officials must listen to the public outcry for Planned Parenthood to be held accountable to the law and for our tax dollars to stop underwriting this barbaric abortion business.”

Operation Rescue President Troy Newman serves on the Board of Daleiden’s Center for Medical Progress. During this investigation, Newman advised Daleiden, providing consultation services and material support. “Abortionists use ultrasound like a butcher uses scales to sell meat by the pound for profit,” said Newman in an email to LifeNews. “Evidence further shows that Planned Parenthood has gone to great lengths to keep the public from ever knowing about their illicit human body-parts trade, understanding that if news were to leak, it could spell doom for the abortion giant.”

The FULL two-hour video footage follows:

PLEASE CLICK ON THE LINK BELOW ANDSIGN THE PETITION.

Congress Must Investigate Planned Parenthood for Selling Aborted Baby Parts Petition | GoPetition

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

Today’s Politically INCORRECT Cartoon

Sizing Up The Deal

July 14, 2015

URL of the original posting site: http://conservativebyte.com/2015/07/sizing-up-the-deal

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

Pope Francis Leads the Apostasy – Says the Bible and the Koran are the Same?

Authored by Michael Bresciani on 12 July, 2015

URL of the original posting site: http://barbwire.com/2015/07/12/pope-francis-leads-apostasy-says-bible-Koran

The one world religion nonsense of the liberals across the globe just got a boost from Pope Francis. At the same time the truth and the plenary verbal inspiration of the scriptures has taken a serious hit, at least among the 1.2 billion Roman Catholics of the world. Most of mainstream biblically based Christianity is still reeling from the Pope’s recent entrance into the uber-green panicky nonsense about global warming posing a threat to the very future existence of the human race.

The Olive Branch Report featured the commentary of Marianne Bernard in an article entitled “Pope Francis To Followers: “Koran And Holy Bible Are The Same.” Bernard posed the question, “And the heresy continues. This was an article from earlier this year, but it clearly shows the false teaching that is now coming from the Vatican regarding Islam and Christianity. Can this be the start of the one-world religion?” The earlier article Ms. Bernard is referring to appeared in the National Report and has garnered almost a hundred replies most which question the Pope’s wisdom.

Scriptures say basic message of the Koran is false and is an “other gospel”

We have a Pope who seems totally ignorant of the one quarter of the bible that lays out the future of man in clear and precise prophecies which are pre-written history, not suspect science, speculation or religious tripe.

A lot of time is spent on labeling non-Catholics as independents, but it takes little wisdom to recognize the semantic twisting of such an effort. It would be both accurate and far more honest to say that both Catholics and bible believing Christians are completely – ‘dependent.’ Catholics depend of the Pope for authority and biblically based Christians depend on the scriptures alone.

This simple truth is the reason why we cannot follow the Pope down the apostasy trail to the kind of error that will cost the lives of many people when the axe of the world’s last dictator (antichrist) begins to fall. Here are some of the scriptures that we depend on rather than the Pope’s encyclicals or Pontifical statements. These passages are strict warnings against the attempt to lump together the writings of ancient or modern pagan and idolatrous religions of the world – much more, they are a strict warning not to follow the falsehoods the Pope is putting forth.

“Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.” Jn 14: 6

“But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.” Ga 1: 8

“Be it known unto you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom ye crucified, whom God raised from the dead, even by him doth this man stand here before you whole. This is the stone which was set at nought of you builders, which is become the head of the corner. Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.” Ac 4: 10-12

“He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.” Jn 3: 36

Does the Pope serve a schizophrenic God?

Islam and Christianity are so completely incompatible that the only way the Pope could get any traction on his new assertions is to have God pronounced as a feather brained, double minded delusionary, suffering from dementia praecox.

When a Christian shares the gospel message with an unbeliever they are invited to come to repentance of sin and new life, but they are never forced or coerced against their will. They alone must open the door. To wit:

“Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me.” Rev 3: 20

When Muslims share, they are given leave to kill those who will not accept or believe in their religion. To wit:

“Fight and kill the disbelievers wherever you find them, take them captive, harass them, lie in wait and ambush them using every stratagem of war.” Qur’an 9: 5

A comparison of these two verses alone leave us in amazement and raise yet another question – has the Pope ever read the Scriptures or the Koran – at all?

God’s house is not divided – so exactly who has dementia praecox?

If, as the Pope says, Allah and Christ are the same entity, then why did Jesus say – “Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and a house divided against a house falleth?” Lk 11: 17

Let’s review.

The Pope’s “same entity” is calling for the death of unbelievers in one part of the world, which as we see from day to day, includes Christians, but across the pond he is calling for loving our enemies and showing them kindness and forgiveness.

The best wisdom of God and man arrives at the same place, either God is schizophrenic or the Pope has gone astray. This answers, yet once again, the question of why bible believing Christians will only adhere to the words of scriptures. We do not hate or disdain the Pope, but in the end, it will not be his words that will scrutinize our lives. To wit:

“I am come a light into the world, that whosoever believeth on me should not abide in darkness. And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world. He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day.” Jn 12: 46-48

Our God is not flighty, and never opposes himself.

As for the Pope, it can be seen that this is not the case. Advising his 1.2 billion followers to put the Koran on the same level as the Bible may be the most incongruous and completely ridiculous thing any Pope has said in all of history. Christians and unbelievers alike should be warned that this contradiction must never be taken seriously.

“…what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness? And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel? And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.” 2 Cor 6: 14-16

Author Michael Bresciani

Michael Bresciani is the publisher of AmericanProphet.org since 2005. The website features the articles and reports of Rev Bresciani along with some of America’s best writers and journalists, news and reviews that have earned the site the title of – The Website for Insight. Millions have read his timely reports and articles in online journals and print publications across the nation and the globe.

Category:

Religion

Tagged with:

‘ISIS Blows Up Baby in Training Class Demo’

Mon, July 13, 2015

URL of the original posting site: http://www.clarionproject.org/news/isis-blows-baby-training-class-demo

: Illustrative. (Photo © flickr / Johanne and Carole Brunet)

In one of its cruelest acts to date, Islamic State reportedly blew up a baby to show members how to handle explosives. The incredible incident took place in Diyala Province on July 10, according to provincial Security Committee Chairman Sadiq el-Husseini. He detailed the event to the local Arabic-language A-Sumeriah News.

The baby’s father was apparently executed just weeks ago, after he allegedly took part in the killing of an Islamic State member.

Sadiq el-Husseini “The organization booby trapped the baby in front of dozens of armed ISIS men and then detonated it from afar,” Sadiq el-Husseini said. The rigging of the baby and its detonation was a training exercise of ISIS to teach its people booby-trapping techniques.

“The organization doesn’t care about the most basic human values. Their crimes are incalculable and the blowing up of the baby is the best proof to the threat of ISIS’ ideology to the state.”

Category:

Islamic News

Tagged with:

Woman allegedly attacked by group near U of C campus with kids in car

By Eric Horng, Friday, July 10, 2015

URL of the original posting site: http://abc7chicago.com/news/abc7-exclusive-woman-allegedly-attacked-by-group-near-uofc-campus/841913

: The victim of an alleged group attack near the University of Chicago campus with her children in the back seat of her car talked exclusively with ABC7 Eyewitness News

CHICAGO (WLS) —

Her car damaged, her nerves shaken, the victim of an alleged group attack near the University of Chicago campus spoke exclusively with ABC7 Eyewitness News. Police say two people were arrested and charged, but Susan Pedersen says several dozen people were involved in the attack that left her two children covered in broken glass. They were in the back seat of the vehicle, which was left dented with the rear glass shattered. “I’m very scared, very anxious, nervous. Just fearful,” she said.

Broken glass littered the pavement at 60th and King Drive across from Washington Park, where the attack took place around 9 p.m. Thursday night. Pedersen says she had just dropped off a friend at the University of Chicago when she stopped at a red light and found her car surrounded by several dozen young people. “They were walking around both sides of the vehicle – in the front, in the back – and as they were walking across, they were hitting my car, using racial slurs and telling me that I didn’t belong in their neighborhood because I was white,” Pedersen said. The group, all African-American, she says, kicked the vehicle and shook it violently. Her children were screaming from the back of the vehicle. Pedersen said one person was on a bicycle, which the group used it as a battering ram to shatter the back window. The broken glass left cuts on her 3-year-old son, Benjamin. Pedersen said a police car, which happened to be nearby, arrived and the group scattered.

Two juveniles were arrested, police said. They were charged with misdemeanor criminal damage to property.

Pedersen says the crime damaged more than her property. She would like more serious charges filed. “This is something that’s going to stay with me for the rest of my life,” she said.

Category:

Society

Tagged with:

Bill of Rights’ Most Important Liberty: Religion

Written by Bethany Blankley

URL of the original posting site: http://constitution.com/bill-of-rights-most-important-liberty-religion

The Bill of Rights, the first ten amendments to the Constitution, listed non-negotiable constitutionally guaranteed freedoms in specific order, unchanged since 1791. James Madison, its chief architect, listed freedom of religion first; then speech, press, assembly, petition, right to keep and bear arms, and freedom from forced quartering of military members in one’s home.

Freedom from civil government overreach and interference was essential to establishing sustainable civil order and a just rule of law; the first ten amendments — only 468 words — were added to protect what the founders considered “preexisting rights” from federal government “encroachment.”

Freedom of religion was un-mistakenly listed as the first freedom of the Bill of Rights. And the term “religion” was well understood from its original context derived from the State of Virginia’s Bill of Rights. In Article 1, Section 16, Virginia’s Bill of Rights defines “religion” as “the duty which we owe to our Creator… the manner of discharging… [of which] can be directed only by reason and conviction, not by force or violence.”

(Many significant words and phrases used to write the Bill of Rights to the U.S. Constitution were selected from preexisting documents and individual state constitutions’ declaration of rights, which provided more detailed definitions.)

Virginia’s Bill of Rights legally defined “religion” as a means to secure freedom from government coercion, which enabled a foundational protection for other freedoms. The Bill of Rights, by defining religion, allows people to believe and act by “reason or conviction” without fear of being coerced to violate their “dictates of conscience.” In this way, religion is jurisdictional– the Bill of Rights ensures that the government cannot force a citizen to violate his/her conscience.

James Madison articulated in Memorial and Remonstrance:

“The Religion … of every man must be left to the conviction and conscience of every man; and it is the right of every man to exercise it as they may indicate. This right in its nature is an unalienable right. It is unalienable; because the opinions of men … cannot follow the dictates of other men: It is unalienable also; because what is here a right towards men, is a duty towards the Creator. … This duty is precedent both in order of time and degree of obligation, to the claims of Civil Society.”

Madison believed that citizens were first “subject[s] of the Great Governor of the Universe,” who must first make his/her “allegiance to the Universal Sovereign” before they could consider being a “member of Civil Society.”

He considered religion first and foremost “immune” from any and all civil authorities. The wording used for the First Amendment’s two religion clauses were specifically straightforward: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof …” All matters of religion were exempted from civil authority.

Madison asserted:

“In matters of Religion, no man’s right is abridged by the institution of Civil Society, and that Religion is wholly exempt from its cognizance.”

As a legal and jurisdictional matter, Madison asserted that all men are first subject to God as an immutable fact based on the Christian worldview (Mark 12:17, Psalm 24:1). It was imperative to specify that no government could ever have authority over one’s relationship with God. Understanding that even governmental authority itself originates from God (Romans 13:1) — moral standards could not be mutually exclusive from rule of law.

Furthermore, freedom of conscience, under the jurisdiction of freedom of religion, established the next four freedoms guaranteed by the First Amendment. They include freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom to peacefully assemble, and freedom to petition the government for a redress of grievances. These four freedoms granted constitutional security for “residual sovereignty” of the people, not the government. The Bill of Rights ensured freedom of religion as the foundation for all other liberties. No other amendments were possible if freedom of religion had not first been guaranteed as an unalienable right.

Bethany Blankley; http://BethanyBlankley.com

Bethany Blankley is a political analyst for Fox News Radio and has appeared on television and radio programs nationwide. She writes about political, cultural, and religious issues in America. She worked on Capitol Hill for four U.S. Senators and one U.S. Congressman, for a former New York governor, and for several non-profits. She earned her masters degree in theology from The University of Edinburgh, Scotland and her bachelors degree in politics from the University of Maryland. Follow her @bethanyblankley & BethanyBlankley.com.

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

Lots of Democrats Want Socialism; Malarkey over the ‘wealth gap’

Authored by John Stossel | July 8, 2015

URL of the original posting site: http://reason.com/archives/2015/07/08/lots-of-democrats-want-socialism#.pkwhgg:sdBY

Nearly 10,000 people turned out to hear Bernie Sanders in Wisconsin. Why? Apparently, many Democrats want socialism. Sanders is the Vermont senator who is running for the Democratic Party’s presidential nomination. Sanders calls himself a “democratic socialist,” not to be confused with New York City mayor Bill de Blasio’s preferred label, “social democrat,” but both believe that more power and wealth in the hands of government (and less in the hands of free people and the free market) is a good thing. They just don’t want you to think they’re dictators like Stalin. They may institute terrible economic policies, but they’ll have the backing of voters.

More Democrats say they plan to vote for Hillary Clinton, but she’s already sounding more socialist to ward off the Sanders challenge, slamming “corporations making record profits.”

In crucial early-voting state New Hampshire, next door to Sanders’ home state, Sanders polls at 35 percent to Clinton’s 43.

A big reason for Sanders’ appeal is his relentless criticism of America’s wealth gap. His “solutions” include;

raising the federal minimum wage to $15,
completing the government takeover of healthcare,
mandating paid maternity leave,
punishing bankers,
expanding Social Security
and spending more on job training.

We must do these things, he says, because “wealth is centered in the hands of a very few.” He accuses Republicans of preferring it that way. That’s a common refrain on the left, and it appeals to many voters. Some poor people think they’ll be helped by “redistribution,” and rich people who don’t understand the process that made them rich want more rules to “level the playing field.”

I wish someone would educate them and ask Clinton, “What’s wrong with ‘record profits’? What do you think happens to that money? Greedy executives just sit on it? No! Profit is reinvested in ways that make all of us better off!” Libertarians and real free-marketers agree that too few people are rich but understand that today it’s largely because of government. The minimum wage laws that Sanders likes decrease the odds that people on the bottom rung will get hired and learn the basics of being a good employee. Other laws make it harder for them to move up.

Today’s thicket of regulations means entrepreneurs must hire lawyers and “fixers” to get anything done, and those middlemen cost money. Not a big problem if you’re already rich, but a big obstacle if you’re just starting out, or trying to expand a small business. Requiring paid maternity leave makes companies even more wary of hiring young women. The law forbids such discrimination, of course, but bosses just give some other reason for not choosing female applicants.

That same unintended consequence happened with the Americans with Disabilities Act, the well-intended law supported by Democrats and Republicans meant to help more disabled people enter the workforce. But fewer disabled people work now that the law is in effect. Fifty-one percent held jobs when the law passed; now only 32 percent do.

Greece “protects” workers by banning part-time work and banning working more than five days a week. You’d think American socialists would learn something watching Greece fail. But, no, they never learn.

Government interventions in health care—such as Obamacare—haven’t made health care cheaper, but they sure helped rich insurance companies. By writing the companies’ roles directly into the law, Obamacare makes it harder for others, such as the new fee-for-service health stores, to compete.

Complex financial regulations mean that rich investors who are already cozy with big law firms, big banks and the Fed are better at understanding and manipulating the rules than a small “angel investor” who wants to back a new invention or interesting start-up.

For 200 years, poor Americans pulled themselves out of poverty by finding new and better ways to do things, or just by working hard. Today, fewer lift themselves up. One big reason is that rules meant to help poor people end up favoring the well-connected rich while keeping poor people dependent.

Sen. Sanders and his fellow socialists should stop callously ignoring how government makes life harder for poor people.

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

New Bible Translation “Queen James Bible” Eliminates “Homosexuality As Sin” Because It Insults Gays

By AM

URL of the original posting site: http://conservativepost.com/new-bible-translation-queen-james-bible-eliminates-homosexuality-as-sin-because-it-insults-gays

<!–

July 10, 2015

–>

The website promoting the book says, “The Queen James Bible resolves any homophobic interpretations of the Bible…We wanted to make a book filled with the word of God that nobody could use to incorrectly condemn God’s LGBT children, and we succeeded.”

What they have succeeded in doing is misrepresenting the word of God.

Here’s some examples of what they terribly did:

1. Leviticus 18:22

KJV: Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is an abomination.

QJV: Thou shalt not lie with mankind as with womankind in the temple of Molech: it is an abomination. (Page 75)

2. Leviticus 20:13

KJV: If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.

QJV: If a man also lie with mankind in the temple of Molech, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them. (Page 76)

3. Romans 1:26

KJV: For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against their nature.

QJV: Their women did change their natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, left of the natural use of the woman, burned in ritual lust, one toward another. (Page 545)

4. Romans 1:27

KJV: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.

QJV: Men with men working that which is pagan and unseemly. For this cause God gave the idolators up unto vile affections, receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet. (Page 545)

THIS IS AN ABOMINATION!

Let’s them hear this warning from the HOLY SCRIPTURE:

Revelation 22:18-19

I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book, and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book.

Please SHARE!!

Category:

Society

Tagged with:

Today’s Politically Incorrect Cartoon

Bomb Parts

July 13, 2015

URL of the original posting site: http://conservativebyte.com/2015/07/bomb-parts

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

Kansas Governor Brownback Issues Order Protecting Beliefs of Clergy About Same-Sex “Marriage”

Written by Warren Mass, Friday, 10 July 2015

URL of the original posting site: http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/constitution/item/21236-kansas-gov-brownback-issues-order-protecting-beliefs-of-clergy-about-same-sex-marriage

Kansas Governor Sam Brownback issued an executive order on July 7 that prohibits the state government from taking any action against any individual clergy, religious leader, or religious organization that “acts in accordance with a religious belief or moral conviction that marriage is or should be recognized as the union of one man and one woman.” The governor said his order protects “Kansas clergy and religious organizations from being forced to participate in activities that violate their sincerely and deeply held beliefs.”

Brownback issued the executive order, entitled “Preservation and Protection of Religious Freedom,” in response to last month’s U.S. Supreme Court ruling in the case of Obergefell v. Hodges, mandating recognition of same-sex “marriage” in all 50 states. In the order, he cited the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, Section Seven of the Bill of Rights of the Kansas Constitution, and the Kansas Preservation of Religious Freedom Act (which he signed in 2013), all of which protect the religious liberty of Kansans. He quoted from the latter, which provides that state government shall not “substantially burden a person’s civil right to exercise of religion.”

&amp;lt;a href=’http://67.227.136.223/~adserve/www/delivery/ck.php?n=a9664042&amp;amp;amp;cb=INSERT_RANDOM_NUMBER_HERE’ target=’_blank’&amp;gt;&amp;lt;img src=’http://67.227.136.223/~adserve/www/delivery/avw.php?zoneid=334&amp;amp;cb=INSERT_RANDOM_NUMBER_HERE&amp;amp;n=a9664042′ border=’0′ alt=” /&gt;&lt; /a&gt;

Building on that legal foundation, Brown noted that “the recent imposition of same sex marriage by the United States Supreme Court poses potential infringements on the civil right of religious liberty” and that “government actions and laws that protect the free exercise of religious beliefs about marriage will encourage private citizens and institutions to demonstrate tolerance for those beliefs and convictions and therefore contribute to a more respectful, diverse, and peaceful society.”

Getting down to specifics, Brownback ordered:

The State Government shall not take any discriminatory action against any individual clergy or religious leader on the basis that such individual declines or will decline to perform, solemnize, or facilitate any marriage, based upon or consistent with the individual’s sincerely held religious belief or moral conviction

The four Catholic bishops in Kansas issued a joint statement urging state officials to make the enactment of new legal protections for those who are opposed in conscience to same-sex marriage a top priority in coming months. The bishops praised Brownback’s order and said in a statement: “Generations of Americans have taken freedom of conscience for granted. We, sadly, do not have that luxury anymore.”

Texas Governor Greg Abbott recently issued a similar memo to all agency heads in his state, granting state employees who object on moral grounds to same-sex marriage some protection against the ruling. Abbott’s memo stated: “All state agency heads should ensure that no one acting on behalf of their agency takes any adverse action against any person, as defined in Chapter 311 of the Texas Government Code, on account of the person’s act or refusal to act that is substantially motivated by sincere religious belief.”

While orders such as Brownback’s and Abbott’s mitigate some of the most harmful effects of the Supreme Court’s overreaching decision on same-sex “marriage” — about which Justice Samuel Alito said in his dissent, “The Constitution leaves that question to be decided by the people of each State” — they fall far short of other remedies available to the states. One such remedy is nullification, a little-used technique in recent history, but a viable one nevertheless. As Joe Wolverton noted in a recent article for The New American on the prospect of states using nullification to resist the application of Obergefell v. Hodges within their borders:

Nullification, whether through active acts passed by the legislatures or the simple refusal to obey unconstitutional directives, is the “rightful remedy” for the ill of federal usurpation of authority. Americans committed to the Constitution must walk the fences separating the federal and state governments and they must keep the former from crossing into the territory of the latter.

Wolverton cited no less an authority on the Constitution than Thomas Jefferson to support the legitimacy of nullification, quoting from the Founding Father’s statement in the Kentucky Resolutions:

That the several states who formed that instrument [the Constitution], being sovereign and independent, have the unquestionable right to judge of its infraction; and that a nullification, by those sovereignties, of all unauthorized acts done under colour [sic] of that instrument, is the rightful remedy.

Though nullification is a valid, constitutional option, no state has thus far made an attempt to apply the principal to Obergefell v. Hodges. Granted, it has been only a few weeks since the decision was made, and such matters take time. However, that is all the more reason why serious discussions to consider that possibility should now be taking place.

One of the strongest statements suggesting nullification came from former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Texas), who said on Newsmax TV’s The Steve Malzberg Show shortly before the High Court handed down its decision that the states should ignore any Supreme Court ruling in favor of same-sex marriage. “A ruling by the Supreme Court is nothing but an opinion if the legislative branch and the executive branch do not enforce it,” said DeLay. “Not only that, if the states would just invoke the 10th Amendment and assert their sovereignty, they can defy a ruling by the Supreme Court. It’s in the Constitution. We can tell the court what cases they can hear.”

What DeLay described regarding telling the federal courts which cases they can hear is governed not by the 10th Amendment, which protects the sovereignty of the states, but by Article III, Section 2 of the Constitution, which gives Congress the power to make exceptions to and regulate the jurisdiction of the federal courts. Former Representative Ron Paul (R-Texas) attempted to utilize this power when he introduced his We the People Act in 2004 and 2009. The bill, if it had passed, would have removed jurisdiction of federal courts from cases involving the establishment of religion, sexual orientation, abortion, and marriage.

Invoking such power made more practical sense when DeLay mentioned it prior to Obergefell v. Hodges being decided. Since the court has now ruled, it would be difficult to rescind its jurisdiction to decide on marriage cases retroactively. However it is not too late to use the other tool that DeLay recommended, the 10th Amendment, to which Justice Alito alluded when he said, “The Constitution leaves that question to be decided by the people of each State.”

If the decision should be decided by the states, then the states must declare that the power usurped by the Supreme Court in rendering that decision is null.

Related articles:

Political Leaders Voice Discontent With Supreme Court Marriage Ruling

Catholic Leaders Vow to Stand Against Contraception Mandate, Same-sex Marriage

Texas AG: “Reach of Court’s Opinion Stops at the Door of the First Amendment”

Supreme Court Rubber Stamps Same-sex “Marriage” — Time for Nullification

Rome: Hundreds of Thousands Protest Against Same-sex Unions

Marriage Can’t Be Redefined

Sen. Lee and Rep. Labrador Propose Protection for Religious Liberty

Southern Baptist Leader: Prepare for Civil Disobedience Over Gay Marriage Ruling

As Gov. of Texas, Would Abbott Continue to Stand for States’ Rights?

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

Ohio Judge Declines — Citing ‘Christian Beliefs’ — to Marry Same-Sex Couple

URL of the original posting site: http://cnsnews.com/blog/melanie-hunter/ohio-judge-declines-citing-christian-beliefs-marry-same-sex-couple

: Kimmy Denny and her partner, Barb Lawrence of Palm Harbor, Fla., wait outside a court hearing on gay marriage in Miami in July. (AP Photo)

: Judge C. Allen McConnell

A Toledo Municipal Court judge who refused to marry a same-sex couple because of his religious beliefs said Wednesday that he will seek an advisory opinion from the Ohio Supreme Court on whether he can “opt out of the rotation” for performing marriages.

“On Monday, July 6, I declined to marry a non-traditional couple during my duties assignment. The declination was based upon my personal and Christian beliefs established over many years. I apologize to the couple for the delay they experienced and wish them the best,” Judge C. Allen McConnell, a Democrat, said in a statement, according to Toledo News Now.

“The court has implemented a process whereby same-sex marriages will be accommodated. I will continue to perform traditional marriages during my duties assignment. I am also seeking advisory opinion from the Supreme Court of Ohio at this time as to whether or not I can opt out of the rotation. Upon receipt of the advisory opinion from Supreme Court, I will abide by its decision,” McConnell added.

Carolyn Wilson said on Monday a bailiff called her and her partner into the hall and told them that McConnell did not perform “these types of marriages,” and although she did not speak to the judge himself, she assumed McConnell meant same-sex marriages, The Blade reported. After returning to the clerk’s office with the sheriff’s deputy who works in the court, Wilson and her partner were told they could try to find another judge or get a refund. After McConnell chose not to marry Wilson and her partner, Judge William M. Connelly, Jr., a Republican, eventually married the couple instead.

Connelly said he did so because of the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling that legalized gay marriage. “My reading of it says we are to perform same-sex marriages,” Connelly said.

Nick Komives, executive director for Equality Toledo, said the couple “didn’t deserve to be humiliated” or “inconvenienced.”
“That’s just wrong, and we won’t tolerate it. It is his duty to perform this ceremony, and if he’s not willing to perform his duties, he needs to step down,” The Blade quoted Komives as saying. “I don’t think this is a very complicated issue. This court, the Toledo Municipal Court, requires the Judge on duty to perform marriages,” Equality Toledo Board member and attorney Rob Salem said in a statement. “Judge McConnell took an oath of office when he became judge to uphold the laws of this land. He vowed also to apply those laws as equally and fairly without any regard to his own personal biases and prejudices,” he said. According to Salem, because McConnell is a public official, he doesn’t have the same discretion that religious clergy do. McConnell’s job is “to serve all people, not just the people that he likes,” Salem said.

McConnell’s decision “calls into question whether or not he’s going to treat LGBT litigants in his courtroom fairly going forward. That’s a really an important issue for me; I think that has to be resolved as well. In the meantime, I hope he changes his mind and does the right thing,” Salem added.

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

Give Trump the Medal of Freedom

Posted By Ted Nugent On 07/08/2015

Article reblogged from WND: http://www.wnd.com

URL to article: http://www.wnd.com/2015/07/give-trump-the-medal-of-freedom

The problem with guys like Ari Fleischer, the former press secretary of George W. Bush, is that he’s drunk the inside-the-beltway political Kookaid for so long that he actually believes his own spin. Poor guy went down for the third time in the denial goo long ago. Donald Trump’s biggest critics all believe that the engine of all things good and serious emanates from the professional Fedzillacrats who apparently enjoy wallowing in the said goo of Washington, D.C.

In a recent Politico article, Fleischer is quoted as saying, in part, that “Donald Trump is like watching a roadside accident. Everybody pulls over to see the mess.”

Donald Trump is a mess? Maybe Mr. Fleischer should open up the political garbage can he and the majority of Fedzillacrats live in and take a look at the real, certifiable, rotting, stinking mess that has been caused by the professional scammers of both political stripes for the past 50 years.

What do YOU think? Love him or hate him, what’s your take on Donald Trump? Sound off in the WND Poll

Mr. Fleischer and other critics of Mr. Trump aren’t listening to the blaring trumpets of dissatisfaction that are blown by millions of Americans who realize that it’s the professional political punks in D.C. who have engineered the economic train wreck that is strangling the economy, shrinking the middle class and creating even further embarrassing, America-destroying dependence on Fedzilla by tens and tens of millions of Americans. Mr. Trump didn’t create this economic swan dive to the street. Our politicians did, the very guys Mr. Fleischer apparently believes are the solution to the problem. If he actually believes this jabberwocky, Fleischer should seek political mental health disability.

Donald Trump is running strong in the early polls because Americans are fed up with the political status quo, especially from left-leaning GOP Fedzillacrats who want to feed us cow dung while telling us it’s a cheeseburger.

Our forefathers wouldn’t recognize the political labyrinth our professional politicians have created. The very things our forefathers warned us not to do as it pertains to embracing a centralized, powerful federal government is the very cliff our professional politicians have steered the Goodship America straight off of.

And Donald Trump is a mess?

American doesn’t need any more professional political punks in D.C., unless you believe sticking a red hot crowbar in your eye is an excellent treatment for cataracts. It’s professional political punks who have created the puss-filled infected wound of fundamental transformation, not Donald Trump.

They are the ones calling for a bigger bureaucratic shovel for the hole they have already dug, not Donald Trump. They are the ones who have lied to Americans or intentionally hidden the truth from us, not Donald Trump. It’s professional politicians who are the enemy of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, not Donald Trump.

Donald Trump’s message sings to Americans because he doesn’t play politically correct brain-dead games. He calls them like he sees them. That’s refreshing to millions of Americans who believe political correctness is a public cancer that has eroded free speech and everything else good about America.

Those who condemn Donald Trump for refusing to use cowardly, politically correct words would be wise to remember the words of Harry Truman who said, “Once a government is committed to the principle of silencing the voice of opposition, it has only one way to go, and that is down the path of increasingly repressive measures, until it becomes a source of terror to all its citizens and creates a country where everyone lives in fear.”

Instead of being condemned and lampooned by the likes of Ari Fleischer and his ilk, Donald Trump should be given the Medal of Freedom for speaking his mind in such a bold, honest and straight-forward manner.

If you want to watch a real political train wreck, witness a real mess in progress, you need look no further than the professional politicians who have borrowed and spent this country into oblivion. Trump that if you dare.

Carry on, Mr. Trump. Unless you are taking flak, you’re not over the target.

And for the record, I dare anybody to show me one word from Trump that isn’t accurate. What sort of denial gagged liar denies that our country is being invaded by drugrunners, murderers and rapists? What sort of denial gagged liar could possibly believe Trump meant legal immigrants?

GOP, your very existence is on the line here. Show some honesty or you’re done.

Media wishing to interview Ted Nugent, please contact media@wnd.com.

Category:

Opinion

Tagged with:

Woman shot, killed in Hollywood with no apparent motive; search underway for gunman

By Marc Cota-Robles andCarlos Granda; Monday, July 06, 2015

URL of the original posting site: http://abc7.com/news/woman-shot-killed-in-hollywood-with-no-apparent-motive/831009

: A 30-year-old woman walking with her boyfriend in Hollywood was shot and killed, and police are looking for the gunman.

HOLLYWOOD, LOS ANGELES (KABC) –A woman walking with her boyfriend in Hollywood was shot and killed, and police are looking for the gunman. The shooting was reported shortly after 10 p.m. Sunday. Police said the victim, identified as Carrie Jean Melvin, 30, of Hollywood was found on Sunset Boulevard and McCadden Place near Hollywood High School.

According to investigators, the suspect approached the woman from behind and shot her. The woman’s boyfriend, who was with her at the time, was not shot. Police said Melvin lived nearby and the two were walking to get something to eat. Melvin was pronounced dead at the scene. Her boyfriend was not injured. His identity has not been released.

Authorities said there is no known motive at this time. “We’ve interviewed the boyfriend, there’s no indication that they had any idea there were enemies, that she would be targeted, so at this point we just don’t know,” said Detective John Skaggs.

Witnesses said the suspect ran to a car, described as a black four-door vehicle, and drove off.

Police described the suspect as a black male wearing dark clothing and a hoodie. Authorities said they are planning on looking at surveillance footage from nearby businesses to assist in their investigation.

Skaggs had a message for the suspect. “We are going to pursue you. We’re going to investigate this case with everything that we have,” Skaggs said.

Area resident Nikkolene Callis said she heard what sounded like a shotgun blast, and it was so loud that car alarms were set off. “And then, looked out and saw all the police cars coming and a body laying on the ground which was clearly the victim,” Callis said.

If you have any information about this crime, you’re urged to contact homicide detectives at (213) 382-9470 or (877) LAPD-247.

Category:

Society

Tagged with:

Ben Carson: Government Doesn’t Get to Decide if We are a Pro-Life Nation, We Do

Sarah Zagorski Jul 10, 2015 | Washington, DC

URL of the original posting site: http://www.lifenews.com/2015/07/10/ben-carson-government-doesnt-get-to-decide-if-we-are-a-pro-life-nation-we-do

Dr. Ben Carson is a brain surgeon who has written eight books including a few New York Times best sellers about his work in medicine. He also happens to be running for president and is adamantly pro-life. Today at the National Right to Life (NRLC) Convention he shared about his work and how it’s affected his pro-life beliefs.

He said, “There are few things I like to talk about more than life. My whole career has been about that. There is nothing that you have that is more valuable than your life.”

He explained that this is exactly why he’s against Obamacare because it gives bureaucrats the power to do they want with health care.

Dr. Carson said, “America was designed around the people, with the government to facilitate life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. With the Affordable Care Act, the government comes along and says ‘We don’t care what you the people think.’ It turns the whole concept of America on it’s head and if we continue to accept it, where else will it go? It’s up to us the people to stand up for what we believe in.”

Additionally, Dr. Carson explained that he performed the first ever successful intrauterine surgery on a unborn baby who had Hydrocephalus, which causes a baby to accumulate fluid around the brain. He was amazed when he inserted a shunt and saw the baby’s head shrink on the ultrasound. Remarkably, the baby survived and later he mentioned that many pro-abortion physicians would have advised the mother to abort that child rather than save its life through surgery.

Dr. Carson stressed that technology and education can change the face of the pro-life movement. He said, “It’s hard to keep people in the dark with the technology that exists today and we have to continue to make that available to everybody because it’s education that’s going to save us. Our founders said that our society and liberties are based on well informed and an educated populous. Why? Because they realized that people who are uneducated are easy to manipulate.”

Dr. Carson is correct; medical technology is one of the reasons the pro-life movement is thriving today. For example, countless babies are saved every year thanks to ultrasounds, which can show the baby in utero in incredible detail. In fact, statistics show that 78% of pregnant women who see an ultrasound of their baby reject abortion.

At the NRLC convention, Dr. Carson concluded by saying that millions of Christians didn’t vote in the last election and it’s critically important that those people go to the polls in 2016 and vote pro-life. He said, “We have a government that believes we aren’t a Judeo-Christian nation. But they don’t get to decide that, we get to decide that.”

: This is a photo of a dad with his hands in a heart shape holding his 3 week old infants feet.

As LifeNews previously reported, in 2013, Dr. Carson shared what he believes about the supposed “war on women” at the Voters Value Summit. He said, “You know, there are those of us in this society who have told women that there’s a war on them because that cute little baby inside of them, they may want to get rid of it and there are people that are keeping you from doing that,”

Carson continued. “And women say, ‘No, no, they’re not doing that to me! No!’ And they get all riled up.” He continued, “There is no war on them, the war is on their babies, Babies that cannot defend themselves. Over the past few decades, we have destroyed 55 million of them. And we have the nerve to call other societies of the past heathen. What we need to do is re-educate the women to understand that they are the defenders of these babies.”

Category:

Opinion

Tagged with:

Lib Rag Salon Calls For Law To Make Flying The Confederate Flag A “Hate Crime”…

The shark has been jumped.

URL of the original posting site: http://www.weaselzippers.us/228796-lib-rag-salon-calls-for-law-to-make-flying-the-confederate-flag-a-hate-crime

Via Salon:

It is a fine thing that the Confederate flag will no longer fly above the South Carolina state capitol. But displaying the Confederate flag anywhere is, at bottom, an act of hate. It should be recognized as such, and punished as a hate crime.

Below is an image I came across. It’s author is noted. It’s point is the sadist of commentaries on our Godless, sin-sick society, the results of the Leftist deliberate engineering to take this country 100% Marxist/Socialist.

Jerry Broussard of WhatDidYouSay.org

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

Rainbow-flag Christians quizzed by pastor

Posted By -NO AUTHOR- On 07/10/2015

Article reblogged from WND: http://www.wnd.com

URL to article: http://www.wnd.com/2015/07/rainbow-flag-christians-quizzed-by-pastor

In the aftermath of the U.S. Supreme Court’s creation of “same-sex marriage,” a pastor’s list of questions for Christians who support the decision is going viral. It’s been shared on Facebook nearly 400,000 times and tweeted more than 3,000. Pastor Kevin DeYoung’s list of questions for rainbow flag-waving Christians includes: “As you think about the long history of the church and the near universal disapproval of same-sex sexual activity, what do you think you understand about the Bible that Augustine, Aquinas, Calvin and Luther failed to grasp?”

DeYoung’s questions have been posted on the website for The Gospel Coalition, which describes itself as a “broadly Reformed network of churches.” It “encourages and educates” current and next-generation Christian leaders by “advocating gospel centered principles and practices that glorify the Savior and do good to those for whom he shed his life’s blood.”

DeYoung is senior pastor of University Reformed Church in East Lansing, Michigan.

He says the court’s ruling “hurts.”

Christian apologist Josh McDowell’s “Evidence for Christianity” addresses the need in society today for a solid body of persuasive evidence about Christianity. It answers the hard-to-answer questions.

“Making legal and theological decisions based on what makes people feel better is part of what got us into this mess in the first place,” he wrote. “There are many reasons for our lamentation, from fear that religious liberties will be taken away to worries about social ostracism and cultural marginalization.”

But he said the biggest hurt comes from Christians who give “their hearty ‘Amen’ to a practice we still think is a sin and a decision we think is bad for our country.”

Among the questions he asks: “How long have you believed that gay marriage is something to be celebrated?” and “What Bible verses led you to change your mind?”

He also wants to know how a positive case can be made from Scripture “that sexual activity between two persons of the same sex is a blessing.”

“What verses would you use to show that a marriage between two persons of the same sex can adequately depict Christ and the church?”

Why, he asks, did Jesus “reassert the Genesis definition of marriage as being one man and one woman?”

“Do you believe that passages like 1 Corinthians 6:9 and Revelation 21:8 teach that sexual immorality can keep you out of heaven?”

“What arguments would you use to explain to Christians in Africa, Asia and South America that their understanding of homosexuality is biblically incorrect and your new understanding of homosexuality is not culturally conditioned?”

Specific to the United States, he asks, “Do you think Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama were motivated by personal animus and bigotry when they, for almost all of their lives, defined marriage as a covenant relationship between one man and one woman?”

Once the biblical standard is abandoned, he asks, “Should marriage be limited to only two people?” and “On what basis, if any, would you prevent consenting adults of any relation and of any number from getting married?”

And addressing the responsibility of churches, he asks, “What open and affirming churches would you point to where people are being converted to orthodox Christianity, sinners are being warned of judgment and called to repentance and missionaries are being sent out to plant churches among unreached peoples?”

DeYoung said the questions “aren’t meant to be snarky or merely rhetorical.”

“They are sincere, if pointed, questions that I hope will cause my brothers and sisters with the new rainbow-themed avatars to slow down and think about the flag you’re flying.”

For evangelicals who lament last Friday’s Supreme Court decision, it’s been a hard few days. We aren’t asking for emotional pity, nor do I suspect many people are eager to give us any. Our pain is not sacred. Making legal and theological decisions based on what makes people feel better is part of what got us into this mess in the first place. Nevertheless, it still hurts.

There are many reasons for our lamentation, from fear that religious liberties will be taken away to worries about social ostracism and cultural marginalization. But of all the things that grieve us, perhaps what’s been most difficult is seeing some of our friends, some of our family members, and some of the folks we’ve sat next to in church giving their hearty “Amen” to a practice we still think is a sin and a decision we think is bad for our country. It’s one thing for the whole nation to throw a party we can’t in good conscience attend. It’s quite another to look around for friendly faces to remind us we’re not alone and then find that they are out there jamming on the dance floor. We thought the rainbow was God’s sign (Gen. 9:8-17).

If you consider yourself a Bible-believing Christian, a follower of Jesus whose chief aim is to glorify God and enjoy him forever, there are important questions I hope you will consider before picking up your flag and cheering on the sexual revolution. These questions aren’t meant to be snarky or merely rhetorical. They are sincere, if pointed, questions that I hope will cause my brothers and sisters with the new rainbow themed avatars to slow down and think about the flag you’re flying.

1. How long have you believed that gay marriage is something to be celebrated?

2. What Bible verses led you to change your mind?

3. How would you make a positive case from Scripture that sexual activity between two persons of the same sex is a blessing to be celebrated?

4. What verses would you use to show that a marriage between two persons of the same sex can adequately depict Christ and the church?

5. Do you think Jesus would have been okay with homosexual behavior between consenting adults in a committed relationship?

6. If so, why did he reassert the Genesis definition of marriage as being one man and one woman?

7. When Jesus spoke against porneia what sins do you think he was forbidding?

8. If some homosexual behavior is acceptable, how do you understand the sinful “exchange” Paul highlights in Romans 1?

9. Do you believe that passages like 1 Corinthians 6:9 and Revelation 21:8 teach that sexual immorality can keep you out of heaven?

10. What sexual sins do you think they were referring to?

11. As you think about the long history of the church and the near universal disapproval of same-sex sexual activity, what do you think you understand about the Bible that Augustine, Aquinas, Calvin, and Luther failed to grasp?

12. What arguments would you use to explain to Christians in Africa, Asia, and South America that their understanding of homosexuality is biblically incorrect and your new understanding of homosexuality is not culturally conditioned?

13. Do you think Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama were motivated by personal animus and bigotry when they, for almost all of their lives, defined marriage as a covenant relationship between one man and one woman?

14. Do you think children do best with a mother and a father?

15. If not, what research would you point to in support of that conclusion?

16. If yes, does the church or the state have any role to play in promoting or privileging the arrangement that puts children with a mom and a dad?

17. Does the end and purpose of marriage point to something more than an adult’s emotional and sexual fulfillment?

18. How would you define marriage?

19. Do you think close family members should be allowed to get married?

20. Should marriage be limited to only two people?

21. On what basis, if any, would you prevent consenting adults of any relation and of any number from getting married?

22. Should there be an age requirement in this country for obtaining a marriage license?

23. Does equality entail that anyone wanting to be married should be able to have any meaningful relationship defined as marriage?

24. If not, why not?

25. Should your brothers and sisters in Christ who disagree with homosexual practice be allowed to exercise their religious beliefs without fear of punishment, retribution, or coercion?

26. Will you speak up for your fellow Christians when their jobs, their accreditation, their reputation, and their freedoms are threatened because of this issue?

27. Will you speak out against shaming and bullying of all kinds, whether against gays and lesbians or against Evangelicals and Catholics?

28. Since the evangelical church has often failed to take unbiblical divorces and other sexual sins seriously, what steps will you take to ensure that gay marriages are healthy and accord with Scriptural principles?

29. Should gay couples in open relationships be subject to church discipline?

30. Is it a sin for LGBT persons to engage in sexual activity outside of marriage?

31. What will open and affirming churches do to speak prophetically against divorce, fornication, pornography, and adultery wherever they are found?

32. If “love wins,” how would you define love?

33. What verses would you use to establish that definition?

34. How should obedience to God’s commands shape our understanding of love?

35. Do you believe it is possible to love someone and disagree with important decisions they make?

36. If supporting gay marriage is a change for you, has anything else changed in your understanding of faith?

37. As an evangelical, how has your support for gay marriage helped you become more passionate about traditional evangelical distinctives like a focus on being born again, the substitutionary sacrifice of Christ on the cross, the total trustworthiness of the Bible, and the urgent need to evangelize the lost?

38. What open and affirming churches would you point to where people are being converted to orthodox Christianity, sinners are being warned of judgment and called to repentance, and missionaries are being sent out to plant churches among unreached peoples?

39. Do you hope to be more committed to the church, more committed to Christ, and more committed to the Scriptures in the years ahead?

40. When Paul at the end of Romans 1 rebukes “those who practice such things” and those who “give approval to those who practice them,” what sins do you think he has in mind?

Food for thought, I hope. At the very least, something to chew on before swallowing everything the world and Facebook put on our plate.

Note: An earlier version of this post had the questions in paragraph format rather than enumerated. The content is still the same. Readers interested in studying what the Bible teaches about homosexuality may be interested in checking out my new book on that theme.

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

Today’s Politically INCORRECT Cartoon

Sanctuary Poster Boy

July 10, 2015

URL of the original posting site: http://conservativebyte.com/2015/07/sanctuary-poster-boy

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

NAACP President Arrested for Selling Cocaine

Authored by Tim Brown 4 hours ago

In a story that went virtually unreported in the mainstream media (try barely reported via a Google search), NAACP President Timothy Wade Miles was charged with selling cocaine to a confidential informant. The Star Press reported:

The president of the local chapter of the NAACP was arrested Wednesday, accused of selling cocaine for a third time to an informant for the Delaware County Sheriff’s Drug Unit.

Timothy Wade Miles, 49, is also assistant director of transportation for MITS [Muncie Indiana Transit Systems], and police reports indicate he was in a vehicle owned by the local bus service when he sold the cocaine. One of the transactions occurred in Westside Park as children played nearby, authorities said.

The third alleged cocaine deal this month between Miles and the informant took place early Wednesday evening in downtown Muncie.

According to the report, Miles asked to be unhandcuffed so that bus employees wouldn’t think he was being arrested. “My career and life is over,” pled Miles to a deputy, who said that Miles did not want to be arrested. I supposed he should have thought about that before selling cocaine.

According to the Delaware County Sheriff’s Office, this is the third time that Miles had sold cocaine in buys that were monitored.

In fact, in one previous encounter, Miles told the informant, “I’m the president of that [Muncie NAACP]. It’s crazy.”

Miles also told investigators that he “just threw his (23-year) career at MITS away.”

The Indy Star reported, “Miles later allegedly acknowledged he had gone into cocaine trafficking to raise funds to pay court-ordered child support. He told authorities he routinely bought the drug for $1,250 an ounce and sold it for twice that.”

Miles also has children, which the mayor said he felt especially bad for. “Drugs strike and destroy the core of families,” he said.

Indeed, they do.

“We aren’t going to give him prejudice because of his title or his status in the community. We are going to treat him just like we would treat anyone else,” said Cpl. Jeff Stanley, Delaware County Sheriffs Drug Unit.

Miles did not have a prior criminal record. He was released on a $15,000 bond.

Apparently in the land of Indiana, the sheriff’s department and court system only function from 8-4, so no one was able to respond and indicate who actually paid the bail for Mr. Miles.

It is sad that Mr. Miles had put himself and his family through this ordeal, but what is even sadder is that the NAACP has not been taken to task over some of its present issues and employees as has been given to the confederate flag issue, which is over 170 years old!

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

In Oregon, 15-year-olds can get state-subsidized sex change surgery without parental consent

By Howard Portnoy on July 10, 2015

transition between man woman transgender

Never mind death panels under Obamacare. Instead try to wrap your mind around a different panel of experts, this one with the authority to grant your 15-year-old’s request to undergo sex reassignment surgery — and without your knowledge, much less your consent.

As unfathomable as it sounds, such a panel exists in the state of Oregon and has the Orwellian-sounding name Health Evidence Review Commission (HERC). This 13-member panel is hand-selected by the governor and confirmed by the Senate.

Fox News reports that HERC recently changed its policy to include cross-sex hormone therapy, puberty-suppressing drugs, and gender-reassignment surgery for people with gender dysphoria. Since the age of medical consent in Oregon is 15, your 15-year-old can decide on his own to become a her. To add insult to horrific injury, covered medical procedures are paid for through the Oregon Health Plan, the state’s Medicaid program. This means that although parents don’t get to participate in their child’s decision to undergo life-altering medical treatment, they do ultimately get stuck with the bill.

Paul McHugh, of the Johns Hopkins Psychiatry Department and himself a pioneer in gender reassignment surgery, says Oregon’s policy amounts to child abuse. He is quoted as saying:

We have a very radical and even mutilating treatment being offered to children without any evidence that the long-term outcome of this would be good.

A 2008 study published in the Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry further calls into question the wisdom of this procedure, noting as it does that “most children with gender dysphoria will not remain gender dysphoric after puberty.”

Jenn Burleton, who herself underwent sex-reassignment surgery and founded the Portland non-profit group TransActive, argues that the policy has the potential to save young lives:

Parents may not be supportive. They may not be in an environment where they feel the parent will affirm their identity, this may have been going on for years.

But a study conducted by Britain’s National Health Service found that the percentage of those who commit suicide after being denied the surgery is nearly identical to the percentage of people who kill themselves after receiving the surgery.

It is clear that more research is needed on this topic. In the meantime, one would be hard-pressed to justify letting any child make the decision unilaterally to undergo any surgery.

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

Memphis city council votes to dig up remains of Confederate Civil War general, wife

By Howard Portnoy on July 9, 2015

Statue, shmatue. The latest effort to expunge the odious memory of a man who fought for the Confederacy during the Civil War doesn’t just end with his sculpted likeness. The city of Memphis wants the earthly remains of General Nathan Bedford Forrest exhumed and moved out of Dodge. His wife’s, too.

CBS affiliate WREG reports:

On Tuesday evening the Memphis City Council unanimously passed a resolution to remove … Forrest’s remains from under his statue in the Health Sciences Park on Union Avenue….

“It is no longer politically correct to glorify someone who was a slave trader, someone who was a racist on public property,” said City Council member Myron Lowery.

The removal of the general’s statue is its own ball of wax. An ordinance proposing that the offensive likeness be removed will have to be read before the council three times before approval can be granted. From there the Tennessee Historic Commission will have to render a decision on the disposition of the monument, though there is no timeline for when such a decision will be made. The next time the commission is scheduled to meet is in October.

Lowery freely concedes that the urgency to get rid of the statue was spurred on by the recent shooting deaths of nine churchgoers in South Carolina by a white supremacist.

Not everyone in Memphis is on board with moving the statue or Forrest’s remains. Lee Millar, a spokesman for the group Sons of the Confederate Veterans, told reporters:

I think it’s disgusting that people use the shooting in Charleston and use those victims to forward their own agenda and join this anti Confederate hysteria that’s going on.

To attack something like that now I feel is just really misguided.

Katherine Blalock, whose great grandfather served under Forrest, concurred: “We need to have a coming together of people, not a divide and conquer,” she explained.

Regardless of what decision is made, City Councilman Edmund Ford, Jr. said there is a more crucial issue that must be resolved. He asked:

Even when all the flags have been taken down and when all the artifacts have been moved, what do we do next as a people?

Good question.

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

Today’s Politically INCORRECT Cartoon

**At His Feet And On *His*** Hands

July 10, 2015

URL of the original posting site: http://conservativebyte.com/2015/07/at-his-feet-and-on-his-hands

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

Trump Overtakes Bush As #1 in Polls, Causing Republican Rhinos to Panic

Authored by Theodore Shoebat

URL of the original posting site: http://freedomoutpost.com/2015/07/trump-overtakes-bush-as-1-in-polls-causing-republican-rhinos-to-panic/#o6XA1UHr4lO95LMM.

The GOP’s smear campaign, working overtime to mock and discredit Donald Trump, has backfired so badly that Trump is now #1. Americans are actually beginning to see that Trump will fight for the American people.

The Telegraph had this to sayregarding Trump and some of the GOP’s fear and smear:

For Donald Trump the entrepreneur, it was a damaging week. Two major television networks severed ties, Macy’s dropped his clothing line, and Carlos Slim, the even richer Mexican tycoon, ended a joint venture with him.

But for Donald Trump, the inveterate showman and Republican challenger for president, the week was a triumph, as he climbed in the opinion polls and dominated media coverage, despite the backlash against his decision to condemn Mexican immigrants as rapists and drug traffickers.

“Wow, Huffington Post just stated that I am number one in the polls of Republican candidates,” the brash billionaire bragged as the week closed, citing the liberal media outlet that has been a platform for many of the strongest attacks on him. “Thank you, but the work has just begun!”

Mr. Trump was touting his first place in an average of 105 polls. Of the 14 candidates who have declared, Trump topped the field with 13.6 per cent support to 13.3 per cent for Jeb Bush, the former Florida governor and son and brother of two past president, respectively.

The Republican hierarchy is not laughing as he rides an anti-establishment populist tide, shooting from the hip with his overheated rhetoric. They are concerned, not because they think he has a chance of securing the nomination, but because they fear he could influence the election by scarring the party’s reputation.

“Donald Trump is like watching a roadside accident,” Ari Fleischer, a former spokesman for George W Bush, told Politico. “Everybody pulls over to see the mess. And Trump thinks that’s entertainment. But running for president is serious. And the risk for the party is that he tarnishes everybody.”

Mr. Trump’s rivals in the race were, at first, unsure how to respond. Marco Rubio, the Florida senator and son of Cuban immigrants, finally, on Thursday, called the comments “not just offensive and inaccurate, but also divisive.”

Jeb Bush, whose wife is Mexican and who delivered his declaration speech in English and Spanish and supports creating a path for legalizing the status of undocumented immigrants, said: “His remarks do not represent the values of the Republican party and they do not represent my values.”

But he defended his stance and said he had become a “whipping post” for speaking up on immigration and crime. The lone fellow candidate to speak up for Mr. Trump was Ted Cruz, the Texas senator whose father is Cuban, saying he “speaks the truth.”

This is what attracts grassroots supporters such as Ken Crow, a leader of the Tea Party in the first-voting caucus of Iowa. He reeled off a list of reasons why he was backing Mr. Trump. “Americans are sick and tired of corrupt government and career politicians,” he said. “He will straighten out the economy and defend our borders. Americans want a John Wayne right now, someone who’ll be a champion of our country.”

The Trump candidacy is playing up strains between Tea Party activists and senior party figures, with Mr. Fleischer adding that his comments were irresponsible and “hurtful.”

And John Weaver, an adviser on John McCain’s 2008 presidential campaign, noted: “I remember growing up in Kermit [Texas], every time the carnival came to town it drew a big crowd. But nobody wanted the carnival barker to be mayor.” (Read the full story at The Telegraph)

Now, Trump leads in North Carolina and is beating Bush, according to Newsmax, the Washington Examiner, and the Charlotte Observer:

Trump’s momentum “just keeps on building,” according to the PPP website, though the poll found Trump drags the bottom of the GOP field among those who could likely beat Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton.

Still, Trump leads the GOP field in North Carolina with 16 percent, followed by Jeb Bush and Scott Walker at 12 percent each; Mike Huckabee at 11 percent; Ben Carson and Marco Rubio at 9 percent; Rand Paul at 7 percent; Ted Cruz at 6 percent; Chris Christie at 5 percent; Carly Fiorina at 4 percent; Rick Perry at 2 percent; Lindsey Graham, Bobby Jindal, and Rick Santorum at 1 percent each; and John Kasich and George Pataki at less than 1 percent each.

Trump has a way of expressing American anger at the liberal mental disorder. All one has to do is watch how Trump just owned MSNBC (click [here] or [here]) to see why the man is surging in the polls.

On April 14th, before Trump even announced and while everyone was so skeptic he would run or even when most doubted he would even make it, we stated:

“I suspect Trump will run, win, and rid us from one wicked wretch: Hillary Clinton.”

I never doubted that Trump will make it.

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

CANDACE CAMERON: Just Handed The Hagfish On The View Their Backside On Gay Marriage

Posted on July 8, 2015

The only voice of common sense and reason on The View, Candace Cameron, handed their butts to them during the discussion on forcing Christian bakers to bake a gay wedding cake.

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

The View

347,000 + CONVICTED CRIMINAL IMMIGRANTS AT LARGE IN U.S.

Authored by Katie McGuire — July 8, 2015

URL of the original posting site: http://joeforamerica.com/2015/07/347000-convicted-criminal-immigrants-large-u-s

Hundreds of thousands of convicted criminal immigrants remain at large in the U.S. and a number have gone on to commit additional crimes. As if anyone should act shocked, or surprised here, when anyone with a grain of sense in their noggin as said that this would happen MULTIPLE times, and Donald Trump is being crucified for saying so. Just tomfoolery if you ask me:

According to a March 2, 2015 “ICE Weekly Departures and Detention Report” obtained by Center for Immigration Studies expert Jessica Vaughan and shared with Breitbart News, there were 168,680 convicted criminal immigrants who had final orders of removal but who remained at large in the U.S.

Another 179,018 convicted criminal immigrants with deportation cases pending also remained at large.

While the vast majority were not in custody some were detained — namely 6,220 criminal immigrants facing final deportation orders and another 7,680 convicted criminal immigrants with immigration cases pending.

In recent years there has been a focus on the number of annual criminal immigrant releases.

In 2013 the Obama administration released 36,007 criminal immigrants who had nearly 88,000 convictions. Those convictions included 193 homicide convictions, 426 sexual assault convictions, 303 kidnapping convictions, and 1,075 aggravated assault convictions.

In January, the Department of Homeland Security revealed in a 38-page document to Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-IA) showing that of those criminals released in 2013, 1,000 had gone on to commit additional crimes including, terroristic threats, lewd acts with a minor, various types of assault, DUI, robbery, hit-and-run, gang activity, rape, and child cruelty.

“The Obama Administration claims that it is using ‘prosecutorial discretion’ to prioritize the removal of criminal aliens from this country. But this report shows the disturbing truth: 1,000 undocumented aliens previously convicted of crimes who the Administration released in 2013 have gone on to commit further crimes in our communities,” Grassley said in January.

In 2014 the administration released another 30,558 criminal immigrants, who had a total of 79,059 convictions.

The convictions included in the 2014 releases included: 86 homicide convictions, 186 kidnapping convictions, 373 sexual assault convictions, 449 commercialized sexual offenses, 1,194 battery convictions, 1,346 domestic violence convictions, and 13,636 DUIs.

“When aliens released onto the streets go on to commit additional crimes yet could have been placed in ICE custody, this Administration is responsible. From January 1, 2014 to September 30, 2014, over 10,000 detainers were not honored,” House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-VA) said in April. “The recidivism rate for these aliens was 29 percent. Innocent citizens and law enforcement officers could be injured, maimed, or murdered due to a detainer not being issued or honored because of this Administration’s policies.”

“The Administration is responsible and will be held accountable,” he added.

Often the administration has pointed to the Supreme Court decision in Zadvydas v. Davis — preventing indefinite detention of immigrants facing deportation, most often when the immigrant’s home country will not take them back. However in recent months lawmakers have chipped away at that response.

In April the House Judiciary Committee revealed that of the 30,558 released criminal immigrants in 2014 just 2,457 were released due to Zadvydas or about eight percent.

In May the Obama administration revealed to the Senate Judiciary Committee that between 2010 and 2014, 121 convicted criminal immigrants with final orders of deportation were never removed and now face murder charges.

Hmm. Maybe Donald Trump IS right. I highly doubt many are agreeing with Jebby Boy after reading some of these stats. We need to have an administration that will not allow us to become a country of murderous leeches on society. Come on, America. We deserve better than that, don’t we?

H/T: Breitbart

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

The Most Idiotic Comment in Presidential History

Authored by Ben Shapiro | Jul 08, 2015

URL of the original posting site: http://townhall.com/columnists/benshapiro/2015/07/08/the-most-idiotic-comment-in-presidential-history-n2022373/page/

On Monday, President Obama spoke about his new strategy to take on the terrorist entity Islamic State in Iraq and Syria. In doing so, he explained that the battle against that terrorist group — a group he had once termed “JV” — would amount to a “generational struggle.” Why would defeating a ragtag army of primitives take generations? Because, Obama explained, “This is not simply a military effort. Ideologies are not defeated by guns. They’re defeated with better ideas.” To cap off this airsickness bag of gobbledygook, Obama then concluded, “We will never be at war with Islam.”

So let’s get this straight. A group Obama said he would degrade and destroy can only be degraded and destroyed with ideas. Its own ideologies — its animating force, according to Obama — have nothing to do with Islam. The cretinism here resembles a perfect Jenga tower of fatuity: Remove one phrase, and the whole structure tumbles

Americans should gawk at the sheer wonder of Obama’s applesauce here. Obama’s bad acid trip bumper sticker foreign policy — “Better Ideas Beat Bad Ideologies” over a Grateful Dead peace symbol — reeks of third grade oral presentations. It takes more than great ideas to beat ideologies — it takes heavy weaponry. The victims of the Holocaust didn’t sit around thinking to themselves, “Golly, if only we’d been able to come up with a better idea than Nazism, that Hitler sure would have stopped all this nonsense.” America didn’t end World War II by dropping informational leaflets. We dropped warning leaflets, then bombs. Large ones. Atomic ones. No armed ideologues in history have been defeated solely by better ideas — at least not before decades of murder, repression and evil.

So what did Obama actually mean? It simply lacks credibility to read the president’s comments at face value: No sentient human being could be this dull. He meant that ideologies aren’t defeated by American guns, because American guns are backed by American ideas. And American ideas are by nature bad, evil, racist, xenophobic, homophobic, centophobic, and, presumably, arachnophobic. Sure, American ideas backed with guns won World War II — but hey, pretty much any ideas backed with guns would have defeated Nazism, amirite? (Well, except for the ideas of the British, the French, the Czechs, the Polish…)

When it comes to fighting the ideology of ISIS, however, Obama finds Americanism insufficient, since Americanism creates ISIS ideology through Islamophobia. That’s why Americans with guns can’t defeat ISIS, says Obama: Americans with guns create ISIS. Only internationalism can win the day!

So far, that internationalism has been a massive failure. Of course, internationalism is always a massive failure, because it isn’t an idea, any more than “diplomacy” is an idea. Both are tools, to be used by those who actually have something to say, something to fight for. But President Obama despises traditional Americans who have something to say or fight for. They are the problem. He is the cure. And he would rather disarm those Americans and their rotten ideas than let them loose with guns against those who slaughter babies.

None of this should be surprising from President Obama. He’s been clear about his anti-Americanism since “Dreams From My Father”; in that masterwork of falsely nuanced detritus, Obama lambasted the “powerful” for their “dull complacency and … steady, unthinking application of force, of … more sophisticated military hardware.”

Give Obama this: He didn’t lie to us. 66 million Americans blinded themselves to his ideology, proving conclusively that bad ideologies are not always defeated by better ideas. Sadly, Obama’s own rotten-to-the-core ideology continues to win victories, and the world continues to lose because of it.

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

Ann Coulter Letter: “ISIS: 0; Ted Kennedy: Too Many To Count”

Commentary by Ann Coulter | Wednesday Jul 8, 2015

URL of the Original Posting Site: http://humanevents.com/2015/07/08/isis-0-ted-kennedy-too-many-to-count/?utm_source=coulterdaily&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl

ISIS: 0; Ted Kennedy: Too Many To Count

In the days leading up to July Fourth weekend, Americans were hysterically warned about an ISIS attack in the United States. Congressman Peter King, for example, somberly advised Fox News viewers that “this is the most concerned I’ve seen the FBI and Homeland Security” since 9/11.

And, once again, the weekend came and went without anyone in America being killed by ISIS, but a lot of people being killed by immigrants — legal, illegal, second generation and anchor babies. There’s no way to know exactly how many Americans were killed July Fourth weekend as a result of the country’s immigration policies, because the media don’t trust us with the truth.

But the holiday weekend kicked off with the news that an illegal alien from Mexico, Francisco Sanchez, had shot and killed 32-year-old Kathryn Steinle on Wednesday on a San Francisco pier. The most surprising aspect of the crime was that we were told right away that Steinle’s suspected killer was an illegal alien. Usually, we only find out that the perp was an immigrant years later when the Spanish translators show up in court.

The day after Steinle was shot to death, the Associated Press reported that members of the Mexican mafia and their associates — Loribeth Martinez, John Mendoza Jr., Kristopher Sanchez and Veronica Sanchez — had been arrested for the murder of two people, Traci Lynn Lemley and Jeremy Carrico, in San Antonio, Texas.

Also on Thursday:

– A fifth suspect in a shooting in Las Vegas, Benjamin Hernandez, was arrested. He joined Yors “Cuete” Garcia-Mier, Nicholas Pedro “Silent” Cortes, Miguel “Trips” Salazar and Jeiszon Valles in jail for the killing.

– In New Jersey, an illegal alien from Ecuador was indicted for attempting to murder his ex-wife by stabbing her with a steak knife in front of one of their children. (Gosh — I hope all those kids were born here, so the media can start referring to them as “American citizens” right away.)

– The bodies of two Americans, Michael Careccia and his wife, Tina, were dug out of the Arizona desert, and Jose Valenzuela, was arrested for their murder.

– An illegal immigrant from Mexico, Juan Francisco de Luna Vasquez, murdered his wife with a hammer in Laredo, Texas. Vasquez had previously been charged with assault, making terroristic threats, DWI and evading arrest. It just sounds awful to be living in the shadows like that!

That was Thursday. And I didn’t even include drunk driving fatalities, a specialty of our Latin American immigrants. (It may not be a good idea to pluck people from the Mayan jungle and put them directly on American roads and highways.)

On Friday, as Americans worried about the imminent ISIS attack:

– Prudencio Juan Fragos-Ramirez, an illegal alien in Washington state, was accused of murdering an 18-year-old and her toddler son, then setting the pair on fire.

– Irina Kolenkina, a Russian immigrant who does not speak English, was ordered to stand trial for the murder of her husband in Vienna, Wisconsin. Kolenkina had to be put into restraints because she became so combative upon her arrest.

– Illegal immigrant Sinar Roblero Escalante found out he would get off scot-free for killing a 24-year-old man in East Naples, Florida, 10 years ago in a car accident. After the crash, Escalante had fled the scene on foot. He went on the lam and is believed to have hid out in Mexico for at least part of that time — thus, outlasting the statute of limitations. Escalante was recently re-arrested after being caught in his car with a baggie of cocaine on his lap.

– In another immigration success story, Andrew Romero assaulted a prison guard in New Mexico last week. Romero is awaiting trial on charges that he murdered Rio Rancho Police officer Gregg Benner.

– On our nation’s birthday, it was reported that Brogenet Cinor, a Haitian voodoo priest, was arrested for child rape in Florida.

– On Monday, an illegal alien from Mexico engaged in a fatal hit-and-run accident in Bellingham, Washington, then fled the scene of the accident. Witnesses described a “short Hispanic man” running from the car, which was littered with empty beer bottles and a case of Modelo Especial. The illegal farm worker doesn’t speak English, but he was able to ask for an attorney in Spanish.

In related news, a non-elderly woman in Washington state became the first person to die of measles in the U.S. since 2003.

On the bright side, heading into the July 4 weekend, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) announced that it is reconsidering its policy of releasing convicted criminal illegal aliens into the public without warning. This was the agency’s lightning-fast response to the murder of 21-year-old Grant Ronnebeck by a Mexican illegal alien in Arizona last January.

Apolinar Altamirano had been released by ICE because the charge on his conviction sheet was “burglary,” which our public servants deemed a “nonviolent” offense. But burglary was merely the charge Altamirano had agreed to in a plea bargain. His actual crime, according to the victim, was to break into her home with two accomplices, steal all her belongings, kidnap and rape her.

Mexico really is sending us its best people!

Some of these crimes were committed by legal residents — even “citizens.” But without Teddy Kennedy’s 1965 immigration act, combined with Justice William Brennan’s 1982 anchor baby invention, the “Mexican mafia” would not be living in America, much less be “citizens.”

Just as America’s immigration policies began favoring people from cultures as different from ours as possible, we also began providing government assistance to any loser immigrants and refusing to deport the criminals.

There’s no question but that the only reason any of this week’s criminal immigrants are in America at all is because of Ted Kennedy’s 1965 immigration act.

Now go back to worrying about ISIS.

Category:

Opinion

Tagged with:

Today’s Politically INCORRECT Cartoon

Fighting Back

July 8, 2015

URL of the original posting site: http://conservativebyte.com/2015/07/fighting-back

Mitt Romney is a Rhino Disguised as an Elephant: 100% Conservative.

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

Here is an EXCELLENT Comment I received Yesterday.

david andre davison said:

Regarding Academic: Constitution Is ‘Confederate Symbol,’ Censor It

July 8, 2015 at 7:53 pm

As a student of History, I get enjoyment out of modern society trying to rewrite the past to suit their views. History is what really happened, not a revision that suits our present philosophy.

George Washington and Thomas Jefferson were slave owners. Abraham Lincoln wanted to send slaves back to Africa. Many southerners didn’t even own slaves. The Civil War was fought over tariffs and states rights, not only slavery…

What does the future hold for History? Will we re-write Pearl Harbor as not to offend our Japanese friends and population? Will we erase all evidence of the unfair encroachment of Native American villages and lands, along with broken peace treaties? What about the way we “Stole” Florida from Spain and the Seminoles, or the southwest from Mexico?

Re-writing history and removing monuments and symbols only destines us to repeat our mistakes through ignorance.

Just my two-cents!

I would like to hear from more of you. This was an excellent comment, based on obvious study of history.

Thank You Again, david andre davison

Jerry Broussard of WhatDidYouSay.org

Category:

Opinion

Tagged with:

Academic: Constitution Is ‘Confederate Symbol,’ Censor It

Authored by Blake Neff, Reporter, 07/07/2015

URL of the original posting site: http://dailycaller.com/2015/07/07/academic-constitution-is-confederate-symbol-censor-it/#ixzz3fLGNRhGb

: burning Constitution YouTube screenshot/FX Riot

A political scientist and former professor has penned an article calling for the U.S. Constitution to be censored in order to conceal older parts that are offensive. “South Carolina’s battle flag may soon come down from the capitol flagpole, but other symbols of the Confederacy’s ideology remain in place,” writes political scientist and former University of Maryland professor Henry Bain in an editorial that has appeared in several newspapers around the country. “For example, consider the U. S. Constitution.”

Bain isn’t calling for the creation of a new Constitution, but rather says the current one should simply be edited to remove parts he considers immoral and outdated. “All copies of the Constitution promulgate detailed instructions for the recapture of slaves who have run away from their owners,” he says. “They also specify that slaves are to be counted as three-fifths of a person in the Census, giving a boost to the slave-owning states in the House of Representatives and the Electoral College.” Bain is referring, of course, to the parts of the Constitution which reflect the fact slavery was legal until after the Civil War, when the Thirteenth, Fourteenth, and Fifteenth Amendments were ratified. Slavery isn’t his only problem, as he believes in removing any other text that references “embarrassing” parts of American history, like Prohibition.

Modern copies of the Constitution (such as that at Archive.gov) typically show the text as it originally was, while also including a note that such clauses have been superseded by later amendments. That may seem reasonable, but Bain says that kind of approach is the reason nine people found themselves brutally gunned down in Charleston. “One might justify this presentation of our national charter by saying that it commemorates an earlier time or instructs students on the nation’s political history,” says Bain. “That kind of thinking has prevailed for a long time in Charleston, only recently yielding in the face of an atrocity.”

And so, Bain says, the Constitution needs to be “reorganiz[ed]” to suit the modern era, with offensive text excised and moved to a separate back section, “where it belongs.” Such a move would create “a Constitution that deserves to be read aloud each year when the House of Representatives begins its session,” unlike the undeserving current one, which Republicans have read aloud at the opening of Congress for the last three congresses.

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

The Slumbering Giant Is Finally Awakening

By: Ray Rooney, Jr.; Posted: Wednesday, July 8, 2015

“Now that the sleeping giant is awakening…what will it say? “

– Ray Rooney, Jr.

Finally, the eyes of the slumbering giant in America are beginning to flicker open. The American church has been in a deep sleep for decades; possibly even as long as a century. Evolution, pluralism, progressivism, abortion, and pornography have all come and established themselves in the culture with barely a collective stir from the people of God.

Education, open-mindedness, tolerance, love, and acceptance have long been used as excuses by Christians to keep their eyes closed and their mouths shut to the infusion and acceptance of sin in the culture;

“Maybe God used evolution as His mechanism of Creation,”
“maybe it’s a little much to say that Jesus is the only way of salvation,”
“maybe the Church should show it’s openness to changing cultural mores as a means of reaching people,”
and “maybe God has grown up and changed His views on sexual practice”

are just a few of the ways Christians have for decades justified their ongoing slumber.

After all, we’ve had more important matters to attend to than gearing up for some silly culture war. Parking lots needed paving, carpet needed updating, relocations, grounds crews, staff salaries, and audio/video equipment had to be installed. The American church had too much going on to take notice that the Founders’ faith was being surreptitiously eradicated from American history. It was too zoned in to taking the gospel halfway around the world than seeing the need for it in our own backyard. Slowly but surely we allowed the gospel message to be whittled down to “God’s will is for everyone to be meek and accepting.” That was easy to oblige.

But this homosexual marriage thing…may have finally jarred a fair percentage of us awake. The Kleins in Oregon who politely declined to participate in a homosexual marriage by baking a cake and have been fined $135,000 and placed under a gag order is taking the blinders off some in church. The recent Supreme Court decision finding a fundamental and constitutional right for homosexual marriage is so blatantly ridiculous that finally some of our Christian kindred are wiping away the sleep from their eyes asking “What’s happened?” The gloves are coming off in the public sphere as writers like Sally Kohn, writing for The Daily Beast have come out and said for all to read “Will anti-gay Christians be politically and socially ostracized? I sure hope so.”

Despite the fact large numbers in the Christian Church in America seem blissfully excited about our culture’s descent into the abyss of immorality, I believe an equally large number of those who go to church are finally waking up to where all this is going. Both testaments are absolutely clear and unequivocal in their rejection of homosexuality as anything but an affront to the holiness of God. No amount of Scripture twisting, theological rationalization, or abuse of the word “love” is successfully legitimizing this sin in many of the faithful’s hearts or eyes. And the SCOTUS decision shows just how far up the ladder political correctness has ascended. Unfortunately, (or maybe fortunately) shoving this blatant sexual sin down the throats of the sleeping giant has been too much.

Consequently, the question of the hour from those who are just now waking up to the culture war is “what can we do?”

Many of the long term faithful culture warriors are answering that question with great relief (that church people are finally asking the question) and specificity. But I believe many of them are overlooking something that, while obvious to them, is not so evident to those just waking from the slumber of apathy.

The first and best thing to do for those who are finally asking how to engage the enemy in the culture war is to practice…talking openly about it. That may not seem like much but I can assure you that it is. If you have been told year after year that politics and church don’t mix, or that speaking openly in church about sex is wrong, or that the Constitution expressly forbids any kind of interaction between church and state, or simply that salvation is the only issue that the church should even attempt to bring to the public sphere…then before you grab the shield of faith and the sword of the Spirit on your way to the battle you might want to just practice talking openly about the nature of sin in general and the sinfulness of homosexuality in particular.

Psalm 107:2 says, “Let the redeemed of the Lord say so, whom he has redeemed from trouble…” That’s not just an opaque platitude from someone writing a song. Consider the following:

On your walls, O Jerusalem, I have set watchmen; all the day and all the night they shall never be silent. (Isaiah 62:6)
If I say, “I will not mention him, or speak any more in his name,” there is in my heart as it were a burning fire shut up in my bones, and I am weary with holding it in, and I cannot. (Jeremiah 20:9)
Then those who feared the Lord spoke with one another. The Lord paid attention and heard them…(Malachi 3:16)
Go home to your friends and tell them how much the Lord has done for you, and how he has had mercy on you. (Mark 5:19)
Since we have the same spirit of faith according to what has been written, “I believed, and so I spoke,” we also believe, and so we also speak.” (2 Corinthians 4:13)
Do not be ashamed of the testimony about our Lord…(2 Timothy 1:8)

We’ve got to start talking about the issues in our churches! Regularly and openly. And because our kids are tuned in to social media and things like homosexual marriage are all over that we simply must have Sunday School teachers and curriculum that address this and other issues from a biblical perspective. Because we have failed to so for so long we now have grown adults in church who have bought hook, line, and sinker into the argument that God made people homosexual.

For goodness sake, has there not been anyone teaching Genesis 3? “Did God actually say…?” said the serpent to Eve. People have grown up in the American Church and have no idea that that ploy is still being used against them by the same slick shyster.

The preachers have got to lead in this. How about a sermon on John 3:16 that says something to the effect of “God so loved the world that He sent His onlybegotten Son to die on a Cross for your sin(s). Love cannot therefore mean that God is accepting of anything and everyone because if God accepted everyone as they are then sending Christ to the Cross was unnecessary!”

It’s time to start talking about politics in church. It’s time to start talking about sex in church. It’s time to start talking about biblical marriage in church. Once we get in the habit of speaking freely about issues on Sundays we will be much more ready and effective to begin taking the actions that our generation’s culture warriors are giving us.

Cultural acceptance and governmental endorsement of homosexual marriage may just have done what none of the other “progressive” issues has been able to do: awaken the giant. Now that the sleeping giant is awakening…what will it say?

Category:

Opinion

Tagged with:

Obama scheme gives Democrats ‘power for all time’

Posted By Greg Corombos On 07/07/2015

Article printed from WND: http://www.wnd.com

URL to original article: http://www.wnd.com/2015/07/obama-scheme-gives-democrats-power-for-all-time

A conservative congressman says the murder of a San Francisco woman by an illegal immigrant deported five times is a microcosm of the border security dereliction of the Obama administration and liberal city leaders choosing to reward criminal behavior. Rep. Louie Gohmert, R-Texas, also addressed the fierce debate within the Republican presidential field, taking care to avoid characterizing any candidate but leaving no doubt what he thinks the GOP’s policy position ought to be. The immigration debate took on a more personal dimension over Independence Day weekend, as 32-year-old Kate Steinle was randomly murdered by 45-year-old Juan Francisco Lopez-Sanchez. The killer, who has since confessed, has been convicted of seven felonies and deported five separate times. Gohmert said similar stories have played out far too often as the Obama administration effectively waves illegals across the border.

“It’s very easy to explain when you have a president who does not believe in the rule of law, who has pandered to people who are illegally in the country,” Gohmert said in an interview with WND and Radio America. “All we can figure is, he thinks that if they can just get people who are illegally the right to vote before they understand the responsibilities of trying to keep a democratic republic, then it will give the Democrats all power for all time.”

According to Gohmert, the Steinle murder is hardly an isolated incident. He said the House Judiciary Committee, of which he is a member, received very disturbing numbers from Immigration and Customs Enforcement on the extent of violent crimes committed by illegal immigrants in Fiscal Year 2014 alone. “These individuals have been convicted of 79,059 crimes, including 175 homicides, 373 sexual assaults, 186 kidnappings (and) 14,014 impaired driving offenses. It just goes on and on. This is making America less safe,” he said, noting both the federal government and city governments must stop rewarding criminals.

Listen to the WND/Radio America interview with Rep. Louie Gohmert, R-Texas:

“If the president’s going to protect America, if our city leaders are going to protect America, the cities can’t be this haven for people who broke the law and would kill a beautiful young lady like we had in San Francisco,” Gohmert said. “And the federal government has got to stop encouraging illegal immigration.”

The congressman said the Steinle murder struck close to home for him, and he said the policy of San Francisco and other “sanctuary cities” needs to be revisited right away. “Having three daughters, I’m particularly sensitive to these things. But to have her shot so senselessly, randomly, right there in front of her parents, would never have happened if San Francisco were not a city that just welcomed people who violated our immigration laws. It is a sanctuary city,” said Gohmert, meaning San Francisco and other cities have laws refusing to hold people whose only known offense is coming to the U.S. illegally.

Lopez-Sanchez has seven felonies on his record. San Francisco and the federal government are now engaged in a blame game over which is responsible for the killer being loose in the first place. The federal government asserts Lopez-Sanchez was in custody and about to be deported for a sixth time when he was handed over to the city to face a drug charge and should never have been released when those charges were dropped. San Francisco officials say it was the federal government’s job to have a warrant ready to go when the drug case concluded.

Shocker: See how the left plans to win in 2016! Strategy could bring Democrats to power – but also bring down the country

Gohmert said illegal aliens create trouble for law-abiding citizens, even when there is no violent crime involved. He contends a recent account from a teenage constituent is a perfect example. “She and her single mom were trying to make ends meet. An illegal alien hit her car,” he said. “He had no driver’s license, no insurance. He was allowed to drive off in his car. Hers was totaled. It just made things crazy for these poor girls. It’s just outrageous that this president would not be more sympathetic to the plight of Americans dealing with crime in America.”

Just as maddening to Gohmert as what he sees as the Obama administration refusing to enforce immigration law is the president’s insistence that border security is operating at record efficiency. “It may just be because our president doesn’t know enough about our history,” he said. “I’m sure they didn’t teach it in Indonesia, but the fact is, when he says nobody has done more to secure the border than I have, or words to that effect, it’s simply not true.”

The congressman said the border was far more secure after President Woodrow Wilson (not a favorite of Gohmert’s) effectively sealed the border after Mexican revolutionary Pancho Villa conducted numerous murderous raids into the United States. On Wilson’s orders, thousands of forces clamped down on the southern border. “The border was secure,” Gohmert said. “Nobody came in unless we wanted them to.

“This president could do more. Of course, you remember (former Homeland Security Secretary) Janet Napolitano just announced one day, ‘Hey, the four billion dollars or so that was appropriated by Congress for virtual fence? I’m not going to do that. I’m going to spend the money elsewhere.’ This administration not only encourages people to violate our immigration law but it violates the laws regularly themselves.”

The killing of Kate Steinle poured rhetorical gasoline onto an already combustible debate within the 2016 Republican presidential field over the issue of illegal immigration.

Billionaire real-estate developer Donald Trump immediate stirred the pot in announcing his White House bid. “[Mexico is] sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists, and some I assume are good people,” said Trump on June 16.

Several other GOP hopefuls have denounced Trump both for his language and for his alleged inaccuracy. “He’s doing this to inflame and to incite and to draw attention, which seems to be his organizing principle of his campaign,” said former Gov. Jeb Bush, R-Fla. “He doesn’t represent the Republican Party or its values.”

Gohmert is not wading into the back-and-forth between candidates, but he said he trusts the assessment of the U.S. Border Patrol, and its assessment is sobering. “Many of them have told me there is not a single mile of the U.S.-Mexico border that is not under the auspices of some drug lord. And you don’t cross that border into the United States without permission from that drug lord. If you do, they’ll find you in the United States and kill you,” said Gohmert, who added that many illegals come across and claim they are refugees from deadly gang violence in their home countries.

After a brief interrogation, it is usually discovered that gangs are not the reason for their illegal migration but the means for shuttling them across the border.

The congressman said the proper approach for Republicans should be obvious. First, he said there should be nothing but admiration for Hispanic families who come here legally, since they value the intact family as high as this country did in the past. “It’s a generalization, but it’s a pretty good generalization that Hispanics love God, are devoted to God, love family, are devoted to family and they have a hard work ethic,” Gohmert said. “Those are the kind of things that made America great. We need more of that. We need more of what the Hispanic can bring before we co-opt it and teach them other ways.” However, he said, that admiration has to be tempered by a strict adherence to the law. “They have to come in legally,” he said. “To just disregard the rule of the law makes us like the countries in central America or Mexico that they’re fleeing.”

Opposition to legal status or even a pathway to citizenship for those illegally in the U.S. has long been described as unrealistic, and now Republicans and Democrats accuse people who hold that position of being hateful or even racist. Gohmert flatly rejects the label. “It’s ridiculous to say it’s racist if you want people who commit crimes to be punished for those crimes,” he said. “Having been a former felony judge, many times people accused me of being mean, but I followed the law. I was fair across the board, and that’s what we have to do. It’s part of the price of maintaining this democratic republic, as (Benjamin) Franklin said, if we want to keep it.”

What do YOU think? Is the U.S. becoming inhospitable for Americans? Sound off in today’s WND poll

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

Gun allegedly used by San Francisco shooting suspect belonged to federal agent, source says

Published July 08, 2015; FoxNews.com

: July 7, 2015: Francisco Sanchez, right, is lead into the courtroom by San Francisco Public Defender Jeff Adachi, left, and Assistant District Attorney Diana Garciaor, center, for his arraignment at the Hall of Justice in San Francisco. (AP)

The gun used by a Mexican illegal immigrant when he allegedly shot and killed a 32-year-old woman at a San Francisco pier belonged to a federal agent, a source confirmed to Fox News Tuesday. It was not immediately clear how Francisco Sanchez, 45, would have obtained the weapon. However, the San Francisco Chronicle reported sources told the paper the gun had been stolen during a car burglary in June.

Earlier Tuesday, Sanchez pleaded not guilty to first-degree murder in last week’s shooting of Kathryn Steinle, 32, while she was walking with her father and a family friend at Pier 14. Police said witnesses heard no argument or dispute before the shooting, suggesting it was a random attack.

Sanchez had previously told KGO-TV Sunday in a mix of Spanish and English that he found a gun wrapped inside a shirt while he was sitting on a bench at the pier and smoking a cigarette. “So I picked it up and … it started to fire on its own,” Sanchez said, adding that he heard three shots go off. A source familiar with the investigation told the San Francisco Chronicle that Sanchez said he was at the popular pier to shoot at sea lions, and discarded the firearm after realizing he had shot Steinle.

The shooting has drawn national attention and criticism of the city’s sanctuary ordinance after federal officials revealed that Sanchez has seven felony convictions and was deported five times to his native Mexico. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement had turned Sanchez over to authorities in San Francisco on March 26 on an outstanding drug warrant. The Sheriff’s Department released Sanchez on April 15 after the San Francisco district attorney’s office declined to prosecute him for what authorities said was a decade-old marijuana possession case.

ICE spokeswoman Virginia Kice said the agency had issued a detainer for Sanchez, requesting notification of his release and asking that he remain in custody until immigration authorities could pick him up. The detainer was not honored, she said.

Freya Horne, counsel for the San Francisco Sheriff’s Department, said Friday that federal detention requests are not sufficient to hold someone. Under the city’s sanctuary ordinance, people in the country illegally aren’t handed over to immigration officials unless there’s a warrant for their arrest.

Fox News’ Jessica Miller and The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

Today’s Politically INCORRECT Cartoon

Article One

July 7, 2015

URL of the original posting site: http://conservativebyte.com/2015/07/article-one

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

Kenyan Politician: If Obama Brings ‘Gay Agenda, We Will Tell Him to Shut Up and Go Home’

URL of the original posting site: http://cnsnews.com/news/article/patrick-goodenough/kenyan-politicians-obama-ahead-visit-dont-talk-about-homosexuality

Obama’s trip to Kenya, his first as president, is scheduled to take place four weeks after the White House was bathed in rainbow colors to mark the U.S. Supreme Court ruling declaring that same-sex marriage is a right.

At a small pro-family demonstration at the parliament in Nairobi Monday, organized by the Evangelical Alliance of Kenya, participants called on the American president not to raise the subject during his visit.

“It is important for us as Kenyans to know that the U.S. is not God,” local media quoted evangelical Bishop Mark Kariuki as saying, adding that Obama should not use the visit to “talk about the gay issue.”

Irungu Kangata, a lawmaker in President Uhuru Kenyatta’s The National Alliance (TNA) party, was blunter: “We are telling Mr. Obama when he comes to Kenya this month and he tries to bring the abortion agenda, the gay agenda, we shall tell him to shut up and go home.”

According to The Standard of Nairobi, Kangata said Kenyans would demonstrate against Obama over the issue during his visit. Kenya’s The Daily Nation quoted several other lawmakers’ views on the matter. “Anybody who tries to come and preach to this country that they should allow homosexuality, I think he’s totally lost,” said TNA lawmaker Jamleck Kamau. “And I would also like to add, our son from the U.S., Barack Obama, when he comes here, to simply avoid that topic completely,” added Kamau, “because Kenyans will not be happy with him if he comes to bring the issue of homosexuality in this country.”

“Liberal thoughts are being entertained in some countries under the guise of human rights,” the speaker of the National Assembly, Justin Muturi, told an Anglican Church congregation. “We must be vigilant and guard against it. We must lead an upright society and not allow obnoxious behavior as we have a responsibility to protect our children.”

Rose Mitaru, one of 47 female lawmakers representing counties across the country, said that allowing same-sex marriage in Kenya would open “floodgates of evil synonymous with the biblical Sodom and Gomorrah.”

TNA lawmaker Cecily Mbarire urged the government to reject any foreign aid tied to efforts to legalize same-sex marriage.

On Sunday, Deputy President William Ruto delivered a church sermon in Nairobi in which he said homosexuality was “against the plan of God.” “God did not create man and woman so that men would marry men and women marry women,” The Daily Nation quoted him as saying. “Those who want to engage in those businesses, they can do it in their countries, and they can do it wherever it is they want. In Kenya, we will stand firm.”

White House press secretary Josh Earnest indicated Monday that Obama would not avoid the topic during his visit. “We have been clear that when the president travels around the world, he does not hesitate to raise concerns about human rights,” he told a press briefing, in response to a question on the Kenyan criticism.

“I’m confident the president will not hesitate to make clear that the protection of basic universal human rights in Kenya is also a priority and consistent with the values that we hold dear here in the United States of America,” Earnest said.

‘Everybody has to be treated equally’

Obama is scheduled to visit Kenya later this month to open the sixth Global Entrepreneurship Summit, an Obama initiative aimed at promoting entrepreneurship, particularly in Muslim societies. He will then visit Ethiopia for bilateral and African Union meetings. It will be his fourth trip to sub-Saharan Africa during his presidency.

Homosexuality is frowned on in many African countries, both Christian and Muslim. The Obama administration’s State Department has made promotion of LGBT issues a foreign policy priority.

Obama’s last visit to the continent coincided with the June 2013 U.S. Supreme Court ruling on the Defense of Marriage Act, and the LGBT question came up during a joint press appearance with Senegalese President Macky Sall. Asked about the issue of homosexuality in Africa, Obama said he believed that “every country, every group of people, every religion have different customs, different traditions.” “But when it comes to how the state treats people, how the law treats people, I believe that everybody has to be treated equally,” he said. “I don’t believe in discrimination of any sort. That’s my personal view.”

In his response, Sall said Senegal was not ready to change to decriminalize homosexuality, and that countries should respect each other’s choices. He also said Senegal “does not discriminate in terms of inalienable rights of the human being.”

According to data compiled by the International Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans and Intersex Association (ILGA), same-sex sexual acts are illegal in 76 countries around the world, 36 of them in Africa.

In May 2014, the African Commission on Human and People’s Rights, which reports to the African Union, passed a resolution calling on African countries to “end all acts of violence and abuse … including those targeting persons on the basis of their imputed or real sexual orientation or gender identities, ensuring proper investigation and diligent prosecution of perpetrators, and establishing judicial procedures responsive to the needs of victims.”

Category:

International Politics

Tagged with:

U.S. Constitution Acknowledges Jesus, is Unquestionably Uniquely Christian

Written by Bethany Blankley

URL of the original posting site: http://constitution.com/u-s-constitution-acknowledges-jesus-is-unquestionably-uniquely-christian

decl-loc This year marked the 239th anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence. Not insignificantly, Barack Obama intentionally ignored God in his July 4^th “video tribute to America.”However, the signers of the Declaration of Independence—and the majority of America’s 200 Founders—were quite clear: they believed in the God of the Bible. They consistently and publicly acknowledged and thanked God; their speeches, statements, and letters total many tens of thousands of volumes of books.

imgres

George Mason, one founder known as the “Father of the Bill of Rights,” affirmed: “My soul I resign into the hands of my Almighty Creator, Whose tender mercies are all over His works… humbly hoping from His unbounded mercy and benevolence, through the merits of my blessed Savior, a remission of my sins.”Founder James Madison wrote, “I have sometimes thought there could not be a stronger testimony than for men who occupy the most honorable and gainful departments and are rising in reputation and wealth publicly to declare their unsatisfactoriness by becoming fervent advocates in the cause of Christ.”

Unlike the U.S. Supreme Court of the last century, the Constitution communicates the Founder’s intentions by acknowledging both Christianity and Jesus Christ.

When the delegates deliberated over each word when writing the First Amendment, they did so within a specific religious and historical context— influenced by Christianity. In fact, George Mason proposed that the First Amendment include the following terminology:

“[A]ll men have an equal, natural and unalienable right to the free exercise of religion, according to the dictates of conscience; and that no particular sect or society of Christians ought to be favored or established by law in preference to others.” (Rowland, 1892, 1:244).

The Annals of Congress, records of their deliberations, evidence the Framers’ discussions about “religion” pertained to Christianity—not Islam, not Hinduism, not Buddhism, and not Judaism (Annals of Congress, 1789, pp. 440ff; Story, 1833, 3.1873:730-731).

Furthermore, Section 7 of Article I, refers to Christianity, not any other religion: “If any Bill shall not be returned by the President within ten Days (Sundays excepted) after it shall have been presented to him, the Same shall be a Law, in like Manner as if he had signed it….”

If this exception were made for Jews, Congress would have stated, “Saturdays excepted;” if for Muslims, “Fridays excepted.” If for people practicing no faith, delegates would have specified that the government be closed on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, or Thursday. Yet the Founders specified: “Sundays excepted,” recognized the importance of the Christian faith to America’s founding.

Their Christian worldview primarily explains the Founders’ reasoning to intentionally insert two Religion Clauses to prohibit federal government interference.

This was well understood by John Jay, the original Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court. He testified: “Unto Him Who is the author and giver of all good, I render sincere and humble thanks for His manifold and unmerited blessings, and especially for our redemption and salvation by His beloved Son… Blessed be His holy name.”

Significantly, the U.S. Constitution closes with the following words after Article VII: “Done in Convention by the Unanimous Consent of the States present the Seventeenth Day of September in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven and of the Independence of the United States of America the Twelfth …”

The Framers intentionally used the “Year of our Lord” (English for the Latin “Anno Domini,”A.D.). Granted, all western Christiansocio-political cultures have recorded time—dates and calendars of events—based on the person of Jesus Christ. Datesprior to Christwere recorded as B.C. (“Before Christ”).The Framers could have used a nominal pluralistic, multi-cultural, or politically correct designation like C.E. (“Common Era”) and B.C.E. (“Before the Common Era”). If they wanted to historically date the Constitution according to the Islamic calendar they would have used “A.H.” (“Anno Hegirae,” “in the Year of the Hijrah”), referring to Muhammad’s escape from Mecca in A.D. 622, officially marking Islam’s beginning.

Jesus is Lord The adjective, “Our Lord,” didn’t refer to a generic deity or to God as father or creator. It explicitly referred to Jesus Christ, who Christians (not anyone else) worship as the Son of God.

To be clear: the Constitution of the United States explicitly refers to Jesus Christ—not Allah, Buddha, Muhammad, or any Hindu or Native American god known to the Founders, to validate its historical date and importance.

The Founder’s commitment to the Bible is noteworthy. Prior to the Revolutionary War, King George prohibited American colonists from printing the Bible in English. However this changed after the Battle of Yorktown when colonists first became free of British policies. In 1782 Congress, in its entirety, approved printing the Bible in English. On the first page of each newly printed Bible read: “Resolved, that the United States in Congress assembled … recommend this edition of the Bible to the inhabitants of the United States.”

John Adams, one of the most influential Founders, wrote in his diary and to his beloved friend Thomas Jefferson,

“Suppose a nation in some distant region should take the Bible for their only law book and every member should regulate his conduct by the precepts that there exhibited… What a Utopia—what a Paradise would this region be! The Bible is the best book in the world.”

It was no accident that “In God We Trust” and “Annuit Coeptis” (Latin, “God has favored our undertaking”) were first printed on American currency—to be used as the basis for all financial transactions.

Indeed, Alexander Hamilton, the founder of America’s financial system and first Secretary of the Treasury said, “I have a tender reliance on the mercy of the Almighty, through the merits of the Lord Jesus Christ.”

The Declaration of Independence un-mistakenly alludes four times to the God of the Bible. The U.S. Constitution ensures that Christians must be able to practice their faith freely, unimpeded by the government, that the day of Sunday is to be respected and that Jesus Christ is significant to history, time, date, and law. Without question the U.S. Constitution remarkably acknowledges uniquely Christian concepts and was framed by men who openly valued the God of the Bible.

Category:

Patriotic

Tagged with:

Christian churches urged to fly U.S. flag below another

Posted By Bob Unruh On 07/06/2015

Article reblogged from WND: http://www.wnd.com

URL of the original posting site: http://www.wnd.com/2015/07/church-flies-christian-flag-over-american-flag

First it was one church. Then a second joined. Now there’s an online presence and a campaign for people of faith across the nation to recognize that God comes first, ahead of nation, and that means the Stars and Stripes will be accorded second place, behind the Christian flag. According to a report from WBTV in Charlotte, North Carolina, pastor Rit Varriale is placing the Christian flag at the top, with the American flag below it, on the flagpole at Elizabeth Baptist Church in the town of Shelby. “Our typical flag etiquette is to have the American flag above the Christian flag. But when you stop and think about it, it should be our commitment to God first, then our commitment to country,” he told WBTV.

See video coverage of the story:

He admits he got the idea from pastor Walter Wilson, down to road, at Focus Missionary Baptist Church. And Wilson said the idea just came to him. “As I was changing the rope one day, the Lord just laid on me that He is first and when He told me that, I switched the flags around.”

Now Varriale has launched the God Before Government website, through which other pastors are encouraged to join the movement. There, he writes, “If there was ever a time when people need to stand up for traditional values and beliefs, it is now. On Sunday July 5th, Elizabeth Baptist Church in Shelby, North Carolina, took its stand with a flag raising ceremony that displayed the Christian flag over the American flag. This new approach to flag etiquette symbolizes that our service and commitment to God is greater than our service and commitment to government – especially a government that coerces us to violate our commitments to God.”

He said churches need to “start flying the flags in such a manner that it is clear we will serve God before government. If your church is willing to join ours, please take a picture of the flag pole at your church, post it on Instagram, Facebook, or Twitter using the hashtag #GodBeforeGovernment, and join the conversation about religious freedom and the role of government in modern society.”

On the site, he advises readers that silence is “no longer an option.”

He recalled a prayer offered to the North Carolina General Assembly, in which he said, “The sad truth about the church is that it often takes the path of ease, when instead it should take the path of resistance, responsibility and reform. … The American church, like the German church of the 1930s and 1940s, is free of persecution because it has done little that is worthy of persecution.”

From the Gadsden to the Union Civil War, from the C.S.A. Jack Battle to the Bennington, from the Culpeper to the Betsy Ross, see the huge selection of flags in the WND Superstore.

Both pastors told WBTV they hope to spark a movement across the land – especially in light of the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent ruling that created same-sex “marriage” in all 50 states. Varriale acknowledges that some claim the move is disrespectful. And unpatriotic.

But the former Army Ranger brushes it off. “I really don’t need a lecture on patriotism. I’m willing to give my life for my country. When you think of military mottoes, for example, God and country, God first and then country,” he told WBTV.

Varriale he said the position of the flag is a symbol that congregations will serve God first.

One online commenter, Dave Higginson said, it’s a wake-up call for Americans “that God blessed us with our country and [Christians] should not, nor ever will, play ‘second fiddle.”

Ballot initiative defines ‘gay marriage’ as civil union

U.S. Russian cleric: Marriage ruling an ‘earthquake’

Franklin Graham decries Christian bakers’ beat-down

Related columns:

How marriage defenders lost their case, Part 1 by Fr. Marcel Guarnizo

The outrageous dissolution of marriage by Joseph Farah

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

Christian Students FORCED To Pray To Allah! Coming To a School Near You

Commentary By Adina Kutnicki — July 6, 2015

URL of the original posting site: http://joeforamerica.com/2015/07/christian-western-students-forced-pray-allah-coming-u-s-school-near

Have your kids begun being introduced to praying to Allah? PATRIOTS, hang onto your last meal, you may just feel the need to vomit after you read the following contents.

THIS is precisely what I have been warning about at various venues, including at Joe For America. HOLD on tight…and even tighter to your kiddies!

LIKE night follows day, how many times, how many ways, has this site warned about the creeping encroachment of Islam via Shariah Law’s mandates within America, as well as the west in toto? Enumerable. But before we get to the complete encirclement of the kiddies, certain rehashes are necessary. Building blocks.

NOW, it is not as if “The Plan” is news to dedicated readers, however, countless are in the dark about its existence. Its basis. It is this document which spells out how Americans have become increasingly de-sensitized to Islamic indoctrination, and the stealth methods used to effectuate its underpinnings.

Adina Kutnicki: Indeed, let’s, as a first stop, hop aboard our Inquisitor journey with “The Plan”. At its core, “The Plan” is a detailed blueprint, one which the leadership of the Muslim Brotherhood adheres to – and augments as necessary – to infiltrate and penetrate the west, but most intrinsically they are targeting America, the “Great Satan”. It is the main linchpin to the west’s fall. “The Plan’s” basic goals are described thusly:

Phase 1: Establishment of an elite Muslim leadership, while raising taqwa, or Islamic consciousness, in the Muslim community.

Phase 2: Creation of Islamic institutions the leadership can control, along with the formation of autonomous Muslim enclaves.

Phase 3: Infiltration and Islamization of America’s political, social, economic and educational systems, forming a shadow state within the state. Escalation of religious conversions to Islam.

Editor’s Note: One of the hot spots of conversion to Islam is America’s extensive system of prisons.

Phase 4: Openly hostile public confrontation over US policies, including rioting, and militant demands for special rights and accommodations for Muslims.

Phase 5: Final conflict and overthrow (jihad).

While each phase has many subsections and takes years to implement, the fact of the matter is that their goals have been ongoing for decades. They are rapidly, stealth-fully bearing fruit.

Editors note: The following statement revealing the Muslim Brotherhood’s plan for America was found in an internal Brotherhood document and presented into evidence during the Holy Land Foundation terror financing trials in 2007 and 2008.

“The Ikhwan [Muslim Brotherhood] must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and “sabotaging” its miserable house by their hands and by the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God’s religion is made victorious over all other religions.”

INDEED, additional stops on your journey can be found here….and some are housed inside the video. Highly recommended viewing.

YES, the above Obama-vomit is part and parcel of the Brotherhood Mafia’s plan, and it cements (some of) the pieces together – Islam’s forward march! STEP by step along this nauseous path – sorry for that – the lessons learned at these pages are ongoing and wholly supportable via a highly developed knowledge base, in tandem with access to a network of “experts among experts.” Remember that.

IN this regard, once again, heed the following warning: America’s kiddies are in grave danger! As repeatedly assessed:

SEVERAL warnings were blared but the following sets the stage: Obama Inc. funnels taxpayer revenues to Islamize kiddies. This is transpiring inside America and beyond its borders!

INDEED, housed under the guise of Common Core are lesson plans which ‘innocuously’ slide in the ‘exemplary’ and “benign” aspects of Islam. These plans are usually found within the social studies and English curriculum’s, but not exclusively so. One example (out of countless) is more than instructive, relative to the underlying goal of indoctrination.

Parents in Farmville, North Carolina want to know why their children were given a Common Core vocabulary assignment in an English class that promoted the Prophet Muhammad and the Islamic faith …continue reading here…

AS predicted – and in the same manner in which Europe is always the forerunner to western civilization’s (incremental) demise – Eurabia’s leaders are whole hog into Islam as the continent’s de facto religion, despite any jibber jabber to the contrary. Consequentially, its Christian public school children are being FORCED to submit to (pagan) Allah! Cause and effect.

SCOTLAND: Glasgow public (state) school forces Christian students to recite Islamic prayers and perform Wudu (ritual washing) at a mosque

Why is there no follow-up about parental outrage and threats of legal action against the school that arranged this? Muslim students are NEVER forced to go on similar field trips to churches or synagogues.

HEAD spinning. Heart stopping. Western civilization’s death throes!

EVEN so, we are not done yet. As always, Shariah Law’s encroachment (whatever the western locale) is both subtle – stealth jihad-like – and unrelenting. Hence, “accommodations” to “refugees” is the next step/stop, but no one should be foolish enough to believe that it wasn’t planned in advance. Again, coming to a U.S. school near you. Count on it.

A school in Bavaria has sent a letter home to parents warning them not to let their daughters wear revealing blouses or short skirts, because emergency accommodation for refugees has been set up next to the gym.

A week ago emergency accommodation for 200 Syrian refugees was erected right next to the gym of Wilhelm-Diess-Gymnasium in Pocking, Bavaria, Die Welt reports. The gym has been closed as a result, and PE lessons have been relocated to a nearby primary school, but the school is still worried about the refugees interacting with students.

So worried in fact that the headteacher recently sent out a letter to parents to give reassurance about extra security measures. “For the refugees, access to the school gardens and buildings is strictly forbidden. The same goes for the school grounds during the day. The number of teachers on duty during breaks has been increased,” read the letter from head teacher Martin Thalhammer. The letter goes on to give students instructions on how to deal with the situation:

“The Syrian citizens are mainly Muslims and speak Arabic. The refugees are marked by their own culture. Because our school is directly next to where they are staying, modest clothing should be adhered to, in order to avoid discrepancies. Revealing tops or blouses, short shorts or miniskirts could lead to misunderstandings.”

The letter has not been met favourably by some parents, but a local politician, who did not want to be named, told Die Welt the move was “absolutely necessary”. “When Muslim teenage boys go to open air swimming pools, they are overwhelmed when they see girls in bikinis,” he said. “These boys, who come from a culture where for women it is frowned upon to show naked skin, follow girls and bother them without realizing. Obviously this is concerning for us,” he continued.

The move by the school has caused a lot of discussion, and Thalhammer has received queries from all over the media, reports the Passauer Neue Presse. “There have never been uniform rules at this school and there never will be.” He said. “It is my duty to look after the children. Therefore I wanted to inform everyone about what is going on at school and what the gym is being used for.” “It was my responsibility to remind everyone that two cultures are coming together here,” he continued.

UNDERSTOOD? And despite the headmaster’s nonsensical rhetoric, “there have never been uniform rules at this school and there never will be”, the fact remains that he did order the female students to dress modestly, so that Syrian Muslim male “refugees” wouldn’t get all riled up: “revealing tops or blouses, short shorts or miniskirts could lead to misunderstandings.”

MOST significantly, instead of the so-called “refugees” being forced to integrate into their host country, the converse is true. Yes, the native population MUST now accommodate them! Is this rational within any non-submitted society? Of course not.

IF all of the above appears too fantastical, alas, preferring to believe that FORCING Islamic prayer upon America’s kiddies could never happen – despite many proofs housed in this site – so be it. But you would do well to take off your (mental) blinders before it is too late. Post haste. Forthwith. Forewarned.

IN this regard, just revert back to pre HUSSEIN Obama’s coronation, and search your heart of hearts for what you never thought could happen within the heretofore land of the free, the home of the brave. Resultant, did you ever conceive that gay “marriage” would become the law of the land, in a country built upon Christian and Jewish foundations? Did you believe that citizens would essentially be FORCED to buy any product, let alone health insurance via Obamacare…aka Hitlercare? Did you ever have a nightmare that a global trade agreement – one which DE FACTO gives up America’s sovereignty to foreign (corp) players – would become America’s reality ala the EU? Believe it!

BOTTOM LINE: are you still a disbeliever? On the other hand, have you woken up from dreamland and properly assessed America’s nightmare? Either way, U.S. kiddies are primed to bow to Allah, and this site has already proven it “six ways to Sunday”….er, should it now be known as “six ways to Friday” in “deference” to Islam?

WESTERN lights (almost) out!

Category:

Islamic News

Tagged with:

Greece: Perfect Example of the Failure of Socialism

Posted by Michael Becker — July 6, 2015

URL of the original posting site: http://joeforamerica.com/2015/07/greece-perfect-example-of-the-failure-of-socialism

The Greeks voted a resounding NO to more austerity measure yesterday in return for more money from the EuroZone and the IMF. Things are not going to go well for the Greece. And they’re just a snapshot of what’s coming. Greece is the poster child for socialism. You can retire at full pension in your 50s, like a firefighter or cop in many cities in the US. They have an extensive social service network to take care of their people, think “safety net.”

The problem, as an author discovered when he moved to Greece to find out what the country was like, is that people will do what you pay them for.

It was the rumours of an ‘island of the blind’ which first bought Angelos, a journalist, to Greece in 2011. He had heard that on Zakynthos, something like two per cent of the population were registered blind. All was not quite how it seemed, however, and it transpired that 61 of the 680 ‘blind’ residents were quite happily driving around the island. In fact, an astonishing 498 of those 680 were not blind at all – or even partially sighted.

You may be scratching your head, but remember the “safety net.” But being ‘blind’ had its advantages – in particular, the €724 paid in benefits once every two months, and a reduction in utility bills. It was a scam which could be traced back to one ophthalmologist and one official, which was estimated to have cost the country €9 million.

That wasn’t even the tip of the iceberg. The whole story is worth reading, but here’s another sample.

When the government chose to take a closer look at who they were paying pensions to, they found a slightly suspicious 8,500 pensioners had surpassed the milestone age of 100. An even closer look revealed, 40,000 pension claims were fraudulent. It seems people were forgetting to register their loved ones’ deaths.

Virtually everything in Greece that will get someone a nickle from the government is drenched in fraud. (And for an example here, Google “Medicare fraud.”)

That noise heard by the Greeks this morning was a rooster crowing. As Margaret Thatcher noted about socialism, pretty soon you run out of other peoples’ money and the Greeks ran out yesterday. Unfortunately, they won’t be able to eat the chickens coming home to roost, those chickens may be eating them.

Banks have been closed for a week and they’ll likely be closed all this week at a minimum. Forget withdrawing your deposits. No wire transfers. Here’s what a Greek bank looks like today. We expect to see the government laying claim to all bank deposits by the end of the month.

Greece will likely leave the EuroZone and start printing Drachmas. They should start with one-billion Drachma notes and peg those to the Peso. There is a very high price to pay for running out of other peoples’ money, and the Greeks are about to demonstrate the price.

A bigger problem for the EuroZone is that if Greece walks away from their debts and pulls out of the Euro, the only question is, “who’s next?” Italy, Portugal, and Spain all have teetering socialist economies and France isn’t far behind.