Archive for the ‘morality’ Category

Liberals ‘Religion’ Is The ‘Religion’ Of Abject Hypocrisy, Cynicism And Fascism

July 30, 2014

It’s a funny thing, liberals and Jesus.

On the one hand, they loudly and shrilly denounce conservatives from talking about religion and most certainly for actually trying to make their religion part of public policy in any way, shape or form.

“How DARE you?!?!” they declare with über self-righteous indignation and moral outrage.  “The separation of church and state is the foundation of our democracy!!!”

Only that’s an outright lie, or course, as is easily proven by reading the words of our founding fathers – including our very greatest founding father who was the father of our country:

What are the foundations of America? After 45 years of public service, George Washington, our greatest patriot and the father of our country, gives his farewell address. He says, ‘We need to remember what brought us here. We need to remember what made us different from all the other nations across Europe and the rest of the world. We have to remember what our foundations are.’ It was the road map, showing us how we’d become what we were, and how to preserve it. It has long been considered the most important address ever given by any US president. President Lincoln set aside an entire day for the entire Union Army and had them read and understand it. Woodrow Wilson did the same during WWI. But we haven’t studied it in schools for over 45 years, so your lack of understanding is understandable. Washington said:

“Of all the habits and dispositions which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports.” — George Washington, Farewell Address

If you want your politics to prosper, the two things you will not separate will be religion and morality. If you want your government to work well, if you want American exceptionalism, if you want the government to do right, if you want all this, then you won’t separate religion and morality from political life. And America’s greatest patriot gave a litmus test for patriotism. He says in the very next sentence (immediately continuing from the quote above):

“In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism who should labor to subvert these great pillars.” — George Washington

Washington says, Anyone who would try to remove religion and morality from public life, I won’t allow them to call themselves a patriot. Because they are trying to destroy the country.

I have a lengthy volume of quotes in the article I link to above proving that “separation of church and state” was not a value our founding fathers cherished.  What modern progressive liberals wanted is most clearly seen in the near-contemporaneous events of a very different worldview that emerged in the French Revolution and ended in “the Reign of Terror” as a truly ugly and tragic spirit of atheism became a toxic, murderous cancer across France.

But what is most interesting about liberals isn’t merely their hatred of the morality of religion and their determination to suppress and exterminate religion by essentially banning it from government and from culture.

It is the amazing hypocrisy that they immediately show when they believe they can twist, pervert, distort religion to their side.

As an example, let’s consider what liberals – and I mean the liberals who are most toxic in their rants against the “Christian right” – are doing to subvert Jesus into their political ideology.

I came across on the editorial page of the überleftist Los Angeles Times a cartoon by the liberal cartoonist Jimmy Margurilis one such example:

Who Would Jesus Deport

Well, I suppose I’d like to ask Jimmy Margulies – since the opinion of Jesus is clearly so important to him – who Jesus would TAX?  Who would Jesus regulate?  Who would Jesus oppress with government bureaucracy?  Who would Jesus, for that matter, sentence to prison on Margulies’ deeply flawed understanding?  If Jesus wouldn’t deport anyone, He wouldn’t imprison anyone either, would He?  He’d just forgive them and let them go scott free to torture and rape and murder and oppress the rest of us.   That’s the Jesus the left loves: the benign Jesus who morally stood for NOTHING but “tolerance.”

Here’s another liberal telling us we should be a theocracy:

“Revised Tea Party Gospel: ‘Suffer the little children come unto me. Unless they’re undocumented kids from Central America,'” tweeted King Tuesday before adding: “Much easier to be a Christian when the little children aren’t in your back yard, isn’t it?” — Stephen King

It turns out that Christian groups – the very people Stephen King is most demonizing – are doing by far and away the MOST work to help these people who are flooding across the border.  And they rightly asked the secular humanist progressive liberal turd, “What are YOU doing to help these people???”

But here Stephen King is quoting the Bible for us, quoting the Jesus who said, “I am the Way, the Truth and the Life.  NO MAN comes to the Father except through ME.”  The same Jesus also said, “I did not come to abolish the Law, but to fulfill it.”  In fact, Jesus said, “not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.”  And oops, Stephen, that includes the parts about homosexuality being an abomination and a detestable act and the like.  And oops, that includes abortion and the systematic murder of more babies than the total number of dead – civilian and military alike on both sides alike – of the bloodiest and most murderous war in the history of the human race.

Liberals believe in the separation of church and state.  Oh, until it suits their purpose NOT to believe in the separation of church and state.  To put it more accurately, liberals believe in the separation of church and state for Republicans and conservatives.

Which is why it is always amazing to hear a liberal try to tell you that we should open our arms, surrender our borders, and allow every single “refugee” to come flooding into our country because it’s in the Bible.  Where, number one, it is NOT in the Bible, and number two, even if it WERE, it would fundamentally and profoundly contradict your precious “separation of church and state” to do it anyway.

If Stephen King and Jimmy Margulies and Barack Obama and Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid want a Judeo-Christian theocracy, fine.  Let them say so.  Let them stand for the stoning of homosexuals and adulterers and forced worship of Christ.  But that’s not what they want, is it?  No.  They want a liberal progressive, secular humanist salad bar where THEY and ONLY THEY get to cherry pick the highly selective parts of the Bible they want to follow after splitting those parts out of their context and warping them.

See, I could actually LIVE in a world where Jesus was taken seriously and obeyed.  It’s LIBERALS who would be violently revolting.  Because liberals are people who are so toxic to Jesus that they literally put Him in a jar of urine and funded it as “art.”

I ask you, liberal, to produce for me ONE Bible verse that says it is secular government – and not the church’s and not God’s people’s – role to provide welfare.  I’m just going to state it categorically until you do, that your worldview is found NOWHERE in the Bible.

When the disciples came to Jesus because there was a crowd of 5,000 men (probably a good 15,000 people) who had nothing to eat, do you know what Jesus did NOT tell them to do?  He didn’t tell them to go to King Herod or to Governor Pilate for a government welfare program to feed the poor.  He said YOU feed them.  And after a little humming and hawing the disciples finally did the right thing: they did their best to put some food together and came to Jesus and asked HIM to bless it.

In 1 Samuel chapter 8, we find that the people, in wanting to be like all the other nations with a human king and a human big government, were rejecting GOD.  If you don’t believe me, why don’t you read 1 Samuel 8:7 for yourself?  And God warns the people, saying over and over again, when you have your big government king, HE WILL TAKE… HE WILL APPOINT FOR HIMSELF… HE WILL TAKE… HE WILL TAKE… (and redistribute them to his cronies according to 1 Samuel 8:14).   HE WILL TAKE (and redistribute them to his cronies according to 1 Samuel 8:15).  HE WILL TAKE (and exploit what he takes for his political and ideological projects according to 1 Samuel 8:16).  HE WILL TAKE … and you will become HIS servants.

And God will not answer you because you made GOVERNMENT your God and your master.

And that is exactly what liberals have done and exactly what liberals want.

Unless, that is, in their twisted and perverted way, they think they can twist and pervert Jesus into their socialist elf.

It’s actually true that the Bible tells us not to harm the sojourner in your land.

But let’s see if that’s an all-encompassing and all-inclusive edict that should apply to illegal immigrants who break our laws to enter our country and consume our resources like locusts when they arrive.  Let’s see what God had to say to Israel about how to treat the Jebusite, the Hittite, the Canaanite, the Philistine, etc:

“Only in the cities of these peoples that the LORD your God is giving you as an inheritance, you shall not leave alive anything that breathes.  But you shall utterly destroy them, the Hittite and the Amorite, the Canaanite and the Perizzite, the Hivite and the Jebusite, as the LORD your God has commanded you, so that they may not teach you to do according to all their detestable things which they have done for their gods, so that you would sin against the LORD your God. — Deuteronomy 20:16-18

I wonder if liberals are going to quote that passage to me when it comes with how to deal with illegal immigrants???

Oh, wait, I DON’T wonder.  Because liberals are the worst kind of self-serving, dishonest HYPOCRITES who despise the Bible in any kind of actual, legitimate CONTEXT.

God commanded Israel to drive out or destroy these peoples because they were absolutely wicked and depraved.  God knew they would corrupt His people with their vile ways.  A little leaven leavens the whole loaf.  And history proves that Israel collapsed spiritually and morally before they collapsed politically because they failed to carry out God’s command.

God was incredibly patient with these people in their wickedness.  In Genesis 15:6, God gave Abraham the land these wicked peoples inhabited.  But first Israel would remain in Egypt for four hundred years.  Why?  God explained, ” In the fourth generation your descendants will come back here, for the sin of the Amorites has not yet reached its full measure.”  When these peoples reached their “full measure” of wickedness, it was time for Israel to come in and take what God had given them.

And America is in a very similar situation as millions of illegal immigrants pour in who do NOT love America, who do NOT want to assimilate, who have NO love for our Constitution, our founding fathers or our ways.  And they are subverting everything this nation used to stand for just as the above “immigrants” subverted everything that God intended for Old Testament Israel to stand for.

I state for the factual record that there are a lot more verses like that one regarding “immigrants” in the Bible than there are the kind the liberals cite as categorical commands to allow illegal immigrants to come in and take over our country as Democrats exploit them to “fundamentally transform” America.

And how did Obama instruct the people the liberals demand we let in?

“If Latinos sit out the election instead of saying, ‘We’re gonna punish our enemies and we’re gonna reward our friends who stand with us on issues that are important to us,’ if they don’t see that kind of upsurge in voting in this election, then I think it’s gonna be harder and that’s why I think it’s so important that people focus on voting on November 2.”

But I’m sure that leftist propagandist Jimmy Margulies would fully agree that Jesus would instruct His followers to “punish your enemies.”  And of course Jesus would use the IRS as a political weapon to harass, intimidate, dismantle and persecute – and yes, “punish” – His political opponents, wouldn’t He???

Let me assure you of something: if Hispanic illegal immigrants voted Republican, you would see the rabid, poison-dripping FANGS of Democrats come out in a spirit of rage and hate unlike nothing you’ve ever seen on the faces of Republicans as they went completely poop-flinging nuts over the invasion of our border.

I attend a church that has an English and Hispanic congregation.  And I regularly take part in ministry to Hispanics, quite a few of which are here illegally.  As a true Christian, I DON’T hate illegal immigrants.  I realize as a moral human being that if I were a poor Mexican or Central American living in a completely failed state the way these people are, I would come to America too – either legally or illegally.  I recognize that for many illegal immigrants, work is a good thing that they are grateful for.  And that they send a lot of the money they earn home to their families.  These are virtuous things.  What I rabidly despise is a cynical and dishonest liberal ideology that wants to politically benefit from these poor people’s misery and ignorance.  I blame the left for its hostility to America as they seek to cynically grab further political advantages by exploiting these people.  Liberals are like drunken braggarts in a bar, buying drinks for everyone in order to be popular and then refusing to pay the tab when the bill comes.  America cannot afford to continue living so wildly and wickedly beyond our means.  We are going to completely economically and socially collapse because of the vile wickedness of Democrats.  And then you will see suffering as you have never seen before – suffering that Democrats forced upon the America that they destroyed.

I believe, therefore, that we ought to treat the illegal immigrants who are coming here as human beings.  And that we should protect our nation, protect our borders, protect our culture, protect our way of life by controlling our borders and enforcing our laws.

And, like the Christians that Stephen King demonizes, I’ve actually put both my time and my money where my mouth is.

Liberals don’t want to follow God or His ways.  They HATE and DESPISE God and His ways.  Instead, they want to REPLACE God with their human government and they want to replace God’s ways with the ways of “political correctness” that they can shape and distort and control by first banning God from our discourse and then replacing God’s ways with their ways in the vacuum that they created with their “separation of church and state.”

If you actually follow Jesus and His Word and regard both as your moral authority, fine, you go ahead and quote Jesus and quote the Bible.  But when I know and YOU know that you really despise both Jesus and the Word of God, THEN DON’T YOU DARE DISHONOR CHRIST BY SUBVERTING HIS TEACHING WITH YOUR WICKED IDEOLOGY THAT IN EVERY WAY, SHAPE AND FORM ABANDONS HIM.

I tell you what, liberal.  Since what you really want is more big government, instead of quoting the Jesus whom you clearly don’t follow, why don’t you quote the sources that actually represent your real belief system?  Quote me fellow adherents and proponents of your monster-sized (and frankly monstrous) government system.  Quote me Chairman Mao, quote me Joseph Stalin, quote me Adolf Hitler, quote me Kim Jong-Il on illegal immigration.  But, oh, that’s right: these people EXTERMINATED immigrants they didn’t like.  You’d be completely and utterly long, but at least you’d have the virtue of integrity.

But instead what you do is falsely masquerade behind an artificial Jesus when we both damn well know you don’t follow Jesus and never will.  There’d be nearly 57 million more babies born to grow up and come to the feet of Jesus if you believed Him, just for starters.

What liberals really want isn’t Christ, but the Antichrist.  They want the ultimate big government tyrant who will viciously persecute the people of God and impose the complete socialist takeover of the world in the economic system known as the “mark of the beast” such that no one can buy or sell ANYTHING without government approval.  THAT’S the “Christ” liberals want.

Jesus told us in the last days prior to “the Democrat Jesus” – the Antichrist – coming, people would come in His name claiming to represent Him.

And in the warped, dishonest left, that’s what we’re seeing.

Which is how we can know the beast is coming.

 

 

How To Be God’s Gift To Women: A Christian Guide

July 28, 2014

I’ve heard the phrase “God’s gift to women” used quite a few times in my life.  In all the times I’ve ever heard a woman use that phrase, I don’t think I’ve ever once heard it used in a positive way.

Who are women talking about when they describe a man as “God’s gift to women?”  He’s a vain, arrogant, self-absorbed narcissistic man who believes that his appearance, and/or his wealth, and/or his success, and/or his fame, and/or his physique, and/or the size of his “equipment” – and heaven help you if you meet a man who checks off all of the above as applying to himself – make him irresistible to women.  And, of course, once he’s gotten what he’s wanted from one woman, he’s off to be “God’s gift” to the next one.  He might literally be narcissistic enough to reason that he’d be selfish to remain with one woman when there are so many others desperate for “the gift” that he believes he is.

That’s a shame and a tragedy, because the fact of the matter is that God truly intended men to actually BE God’s gift to women.

The purpose of the rest of what you read is to describe and explain HOW a man truly CAN be “God’s gift” to a woman.

I need to specify something in advance: what I will be talking about is how to be “God’s gift” to a GODLY woman.  While one could reasonable argue that God created women to respond a certain way to the right kind of love and support, I believe that the Fall of Adam and Eve messed up both man and woman alike.  And just as Lucifer rebelled even against God’s perfect love, I believe that an ungodly, unrighteous woman will rebel against even the most perfect man’s love.

If you’re a liberal, progressive, secular humanist feminist woman, I don’t have a doubt in my mind that you’ll reject the kind of man I’m going to describe who would be “God’s gift.”  You reject God HIMSELF; of COURSE you will reject God’s gifts and any man who professes to believe in either of them – if not all men in general.

The kind of woman who will rejoice to find the kind of man I’m describing is the kind of woman who has placed her trust in Jesus Christ, been saved by Him, been filled with the Holy Spirit and made it the purpose of the remainder of her life to follow Jesus as His disciple and live according to His teaching in His Word, the Bible.

At some point, therefore, I need to talk about a woman’s proper response to the man who strives to be “God’s gift” to her according to God’s Word.  But let me begin with the responsibility of a man to his wife.

The key verse is found in Ephesians 5:25, which says:

 “Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself up for her”

What does it mean to love your wife just as Christ loved the church?

To begin with, it means literally being willing to DIE for her.  A husband’s duty is to literally lay down his life for his wife, if that’s what it takes to keep her safe.

Given the fact that a husband’s role model should be Christ, and that husband’s should love their wives the way Christ loved the church, another passage illustrates this concept as well as an even more radical one for a husband:

“For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life a ransom for many.” — Mark 10:45

The notion that a woman exists to serve and service a man is simply flat-out WRONG.

A godly husband SERVES his wife.  A godly husband SACRIFICES for his wife.  A godly husband lays down his life for his wife.

Let me now introduce a wife’s proper response to this kind of love and explain why it is the right response.

We actually have it told to us several times:

Wives, be subject to your husbands, as is fitting in the Lord — Colossians 3:18

Wives, be subject to your own husbands, as to the Lord.  For the husband is the head of the wife, as Christ also is the head of the church, He Himself being the Savior of the body.  But as the church is subject to Christ, so also the wives ought to be to their husbands in everything. — Ephesians 5:22-24

In the same way, you wives, be submissive to your own husbands so that even if any of them are disobedient to the word, they may be won without a word by the behavior of their wives, as they observe your chaste and respectful behavior.  — 1 Peter 3:1-2

We are ALL – men and women alike – to submit to Jesus Christ.  But the Word of God instructs godly women to be willing to submit to their husbands.

We don’t know precisely why that is.  In the aftermath of the Fall, God cursed every participant (even including the earth that bore the two trees!).  See Genesis 3:14-18.  Particularly relevant to our discussion, God cursed the woman, saying:

“To the woman He said, “I will greatly multiply Your pain in childbirth, In pain you will bring forth children; Yet your desire will be for your husband, And he will rule over you.” — Genesis 3:16

One might argue that “men rule over women” as part of God’s judgment/curse for Eve’s part in the rebellion against Him.  But I do NOT believe that is what is being played out in a Christian marriage.  Rather, I believe that Eve usurped her rightful role and God pronounced a curse – you could call it a factually correct prediction – on her sinful role in a sinful world system.

But women were ALWAYS intended by God to be helpers rather than the leaders of their men.  God created the man first, and then He created woman as “a suitable helper” (Genesis 2:18).

Paul commented on this in another passage that liberal progressive secular humanist feminists find frankly evil:

But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet.  For it was Adam who was first created, and then Eve.  And it was not Adam who was deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression.  — 1 Timothy 2:12-14

Let me begin with the fact that St. Paul is NOT talking about a woman as a business leader or even as a political leader; he is speaking spiritually in a spiritual context.

What St. Paul is pointing out is that man WAS created first and intended by God to BE first and to LEAD.  He created woman as a suitable helper, not as a usurper who would take man’s legitimate role away from him and unrighteously supplant him.  And he further points out that there is something about man’s makeup and woman’s makeup that equips them to perform their God-given roles but that which KEEPS women from performing the roles that God intended men to have.  There are many attributes about women that made them wonderful for the roles that God intends for them to have: they tend to be more compassionate than men, for instance, more gentle, less harsh.  And these things and many other things that make women different from men are all good in themselves, and help balance men out in a godly relationship with women.  But when women usurp men’s roles and rule over men, then these very good things become bad things: because all of these differences between men and women result in the fact that women are more easily deceived by Satan masquerading as a good, caring, sensitive, compassionate, sophisticated angel of light.  The very same emotional and psychological differences that make women more caring also make them more likely to be spiritually deceived.  Where men – who are more equipped and more empowered to stand up and FIGHT – see the true nature of evil more clearly.

Adam KNEW what he was doing was wrong.  In his case his wife had already committed the deed and he frankly chose Eve over God.  But Eve had been deceived to believe what she was doing was actually good.

I’d put it in its simplest form thus: the same sensitive nature of women that make them more sensitive to other points of view make them more open to deception from the wicked point of view that they are by their nature also more sensitive to.

We’re seeing that a great deal today.  And the polls clearly demonstrate that women are on the wrong side of most of the most serious cultural departures from God, whether it be abortion or homosexuality or socialism where the State replaces God.

As a caveat, I submit that women can and should be pastors, but not senior pastors, according to the clear teaching of St. Paul.  A woman pastor should be under the overall authority of a senior male pastor.  That would satisfy the requirement of 1 Timothy 2.

That was a necessary digression to try to provide some grounds for explaining why God has ordained a system in which husbands do more leading and wives do more following.  And I don’t state that because I’m a man and I get to rule over women; I say it because the Word of God says it.  And since liberal progressive secular humanist feminists defiantly won’t place themselves under the Word of God, it is no wonder they will refuse to place themselves under any man, either.

That’s one nasty pill for any liberal progressive secular humanist feminist woman to swallow, I have no doubt whatsoever.  It is clearly not even a very easy thing for a godly, Christ led woman to willingly choose: a submitted life.

But here’s how it should work in a biblical marriage:

A wife submits to her husband.  Wherever there is more than one mind/soul, there needs to be a leader.  If we always take a vote and we each get to do what we want, I’ll just skip to the end of the story and tell you what happens: divorce, where both “partners” choose to go their separate ways.  It literally cannot end much any other way if taken to its conclusion, can it?  Which is why our divorce rate is so sky-high in this “emancipated” age of ours.

So the biblical wife makes the choice to humble herself and submit to her husband.

And what should the biblical husband do?  Should he rule over her, dominate her, make her his servant if not his slave?

Only if that’s how Jesus related to us, it is.

But that’s NOT how Jesus related to us.

The godly husband, recognizing that his wife made the sacrificial decision to submit to her husband and follow him, ought to LAY DOWN HIS LIFE FOR HIS WIFE.  Every day and in every way.

She’s trusting him, trusting his leadership, trusting that he will take care of her, and will love her, and will protect her and lead in such a way that blesses her and seeks her highest good and well-being.

The godly man’s duty is to respond with “servant leadership.” 

“The servant-leader is servant first… It begins with the natural feeling that one wants to serve, to serve first. Then conscious choice brings one to aspire to lead. That person is sharply different from one who is leader first, perhaps because of the need to assuage an unusual power drive or to acquire material possessions…The leader-first and the servant-first are two extreme types. Between them there are shadings and blends that are part of the infinite variety of human nature.

“The difference manifests itself in the care taken by the servant-first to make sure that other people’s highest priority needs are being served. The best test, and difficult to administer, is: Do those served grow as persons? Do they, while being served, become healthier, wiser, freer, more autonomous, more likely themselves to become servants? And, what is the effect on the least privileged in society? Will they benefit or at least not be further deprived?“

A servant-leader focuses primarily on the growth and well-being of people and the communities to which they belong. While traditional leadership generally involves the accumulation and exercise of power by one at the “top of the pyramid,” servant leadership is different. The servant-leader shares power, puts the needs of others first and helps people develop and perform as highly as possible.

As a servant leader of his wife, as a husband who is willing to lay down his life for his wife, a godly husband makes every meaningful decision of his life with the blessing and happiness and joy of his wife and his family. He’s not seeking his good; he’s seeking HER good and the good of his FAMILY first.  His needs come second to theirs.

A godly wife doesn’t tell her husband how to serve her.  She doesn’t tell him how she needs to be blessed.  She trusts him and she waits to see how he will bless her, what direction that blessing will take, how he will lead her to a better life and a deeper relationship with him and with their Lord.

And a godly wife will blossom and bloom and thrive with that kind of a husband.  He will be God’s gift to her and she will thank God for him every day of her life.

What follows may not be a perfect analogy, but I had an opportunity to live this out for a young woman I know.  Please understand, I am not trying to claim that every woman would be like the one I am describing below in the same situation.

She learned that I love to take frequent long hikes – and I’m talking ten miles – in the desert and she wanted to go with me on one of my hikes.  She said that she had wanted to go hiking out in the desert for quite a while, but was afraid to go alone or even with another woman.

She knew I’d been a paratrooper – and presumably knew what I was doing – and that I am a Christian and she could trust me.

Anyway, due to the 110 degree heat of the Coachella Valley that’s routine in the summers, I usually leave around six o’clock p.m.  I take my dog with me, and when you do all your sweating out of your tongue, you just can’t release enough body heat in the heat of the day.  She needs late afternoon shade to get out of the direct sun and she just needs it a little bit cooler.  If I leave early in the morning on one of these long hikes, I’ve got the same problem backwards: it’s pitch black when I would have to leave at 4 AM.  Because by 8 AM it’s already baking and too hot for the dog.  It’s easier to go in the early evening than an hour plus before the crack of dawn.

So we’re hiking along up the last of one of the few blind canyons I take – where you just keep going up and up and up but not so steeply that it’s overly hard to come back down – and it is getting DARK.  It had just so happened that our first hike together occurred on an overcast evening right near a new moon.  And the steep, high walls of the blind canyon just took what little light there was away.  You could see the white sand beneath your feet, but the rest of the landscape was just pitch black.

And she began to become frightened.

During the daylight, she’d been peppering me with questions about coyotes and rattlesnakes – and I had told her how a couple of weeks before I had encountered two rattlesnakes on the same hike – along with a number of other questions such as how often I ran into scary men out here.  I’d told her that a lot of guys shot guns in the area, and I think she had the idea of hillbillies in pickup trucks and then the people who came to shoot were of course driving pickup trucks.  And when the darkness came it simply began to overwhelm her overstimulated imagination.

I stopped walking and asked her, “If I were to suddenly leave you right now – just walked away in the dark and left you on your own – would you be scared?”

And she said, “I’m scared RIGHT NOW.  If you left, I’d be absolutely terrified.”

She also said, “Please don’t play any games with me.”  And I could tell she was extremely frightened by her voice.

I assured her right away that I wasn’t playing any games – that only a true fool would play a vile game like that – and that I wasn’t going to leave her out of my sight until she was safe.

It was a good thing that she told me she would have been scared if I’d left her, because that helped make my following point a lot more impactful.

I made her a solemn promise: that as long as she was with me out there, I would protect her, I would take care of her, I would if necessary lay down my life to ensure her safety.  I promised her that it would literally be over my dead body that anything would harm her.

And so I led the way home and she walked behind me, most of the time either holding my hand or my shirt.  I know that she could see me in the dark, but I think she wanted some kind of physical connection as a form of reassurance.  She was – appropriately I might add – most afraid of running into a rattlesnake.  Unfortunately, they’re out the most during the same times that we tend to be out the most: in the evenings, nighttime and in the early mornings when it’s cooler.  I’ve encountered dozens and dozens of rattlesnakes in the desert.  You either deal with them or you stay home and hide.  I told her to follow me, to walk behind me and follow my steps, so that I would be the one to deal with whatever was in our path.  If there was a rattlesnake in the darkness, I would be the one to come upon it and deal with it.  That was MY job.  It was MY job to keep her safe and to put myself between her and anything that could harm her.

And that was where I gave her the example of a husband and a wife, and a husband leading while his wife trusted him to lead her.  And I asked her to trust me.  I was literally asking her to let me be what God wants me to be as a man.

We made it home, safe and sound.  And she’s actually been on several of my long hikes since.  She goes a little bit nuts with her flashlight – if there’s so much as one bush in the desert she doesn’t shine her beam at I would be shocked – but it’s truly nice to have her company.  We’re not romantically involved, but it is still a considerably more pleasant walk than it is to be alone or to be with a male friend.  It’s nice to be a man alone, it’s even nicer to be a man among other men; but there’s just something special about being a man with a woman who appreciates it when that man acts like a man.

Obviously, not every situation where a man and a woman are involved is like that.  But it certainly provides a visceral illustration of how God wants a man to act.  It’s not about the glory of leading; it’s about the duty to provide a place of safety and security.  But as every gallant little boy who ever killed a spider for a girl knows, it feels good to be the noble knight in shining armor riding to the rescue of his damsel in distress.

The more fundamental question is how that knight acts when there’s no longer a spider to kill.  Does he think he’s entitled to slavish devotion and gratitude for his wonderfulness?  Because that is the worst possible attitude to have as a man.  And of course women who encounter it very rightly resent it.

I digress at this point to mention that I actually prefer to follow the path of my dog – who has something like 100,000 times better sense of smell than I have to go along with her dramatically superior night vision and hearing – as opposed to overly relying on my flashlight.  If there’s a rattlesnake, she’ll tip me off.  I use my flashlight for brief spot checks to look for coyotes (their eyes glow green in the beam of the light) – who will try to lure her away from my ability to protect her.  And when I see a coyote in the area I’ll put her on the leash rather than risk her racing off to possibly get ambushed by a group of killers.

It’s an interesting experience to be completely out on your own in the desert.  For one thing it’s incredibly romantic, with the pitch black silhouette of the hills beneath a sky filled with stars unless a giant moon is crowding out their light.  Sometimes its really spooky, with the wind making it seem like something is moving around in every one of the thousand shrub bushes all around you.  I do my praying on these walks.  I do my meditating.  I do my reflecting.  It’s just you and God.

I’ll also say this: in my youth, I went through my own “God’s gift to women” phase.  I wasn’t interested in marriage because there were SO many women out there and I didn’t seem to have an awful lot of problems finding a new one.  I took a lot of women for granted in those days.

But experience is a marvellous teacher.  On the one hand, good decisions are invariably the result of experience; but on the other hand, experience very often unfortunately comes from making bad decisions.  As you get older, you finally begin to appreciate things that you just weren’t capable of appreciating when you were younger and racking up all that “experience” from making all those bad decisions.

Now I know that a good woman is worth more than her weight in gold, that when you find the right woman, and the right woman finds you, you are a truly fortunate man.  And if you treat such a woman as anything less than a queen, you are a fool.

Those final words don’t come right out of the Bible – although there are Proverbs such as found in chapter 18 and 31 that come real close – but they are very much in harmony with it: “A good woman is hard to find, and worth far more than diamonds,” Proverbs 31:10 begins.  And damn right she is.

I end this by pointing out a fact: that my mother is my life hero.  I’m a mamma’s boy through and through.  My mother was for all of my life and remains to this day a foundation of love, of integrity, of virtue that I have depended upon in times good and times bad.  If it weren’t for my mother, if it wasn’t for her teaching when I was a child, for her prayers as I became older, I wouldn’t be saved.

Anyone who wants to demonize me as having some harsh, hateful attitude against women is simply profoundly wrong.  I’ve got the Bible and I’ve got the noblest and godliest woman I’ve ever known on my side to tell me that.

 

Who Is Jesus … REALLY?

July 21, 2014

I grew up going to church.  I’m talking about from my earliest childhood: from the nursery right into Sunday School.

And yet I didn’t actually become a Christian until I was fifteen years old.

I can easily explain why: I had never, until that fifteenth year, truly been introduced to a Jesus I was willing to truly follow.

Oh, the Jesus the kindly Sunday School teachers described was nice enough.  The pictures they had of Him on the walls of the Sunday School room were illustrative: a nice, rather wimpy-looking man surrounded by a bunch of children.  Oh, and He always seemed to be carrying a lamb around His shoulders.

It wasn’t that I “rejected” that Jesus; it was rather more of, “That’s nice,” and I continued on going about my life.

I was, I suppose, too young to ask the questions that I existentially needed the answers to.  Or at least, I was too lazy to ask them, anyway.

Well, between my fifteenth and sixteenth year on this earth I went to a Christian camp called “Forest Home” in California.  And it was there that I first really understood who Jesus was and saw in Him someone for whom I would lay down everything and follow.

The Jesus I welcomed as my Savior and as my Lord was a Man, a tough Man, a bold Man, a Man who stood up for God and refused to back down even when hell itself got in His face.  He stood up to everyone and to everything that was wrong about the world He confronted, from the culture to the government to even His own followers.  This Jesus was the ultimate Hero, who came to save helpless people who otherwise would have perished.

Who is our Jesus, who is our Christ?

According to Colossians, He is the image of the invisible God, which means that Jesus is literally the answer to the question, “What is God like?”  The Gospel of John in the eighteenth verse of chapter one says, “No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him.”  And that verb “explained” is the word from which we get “exegesis.”  It means, “to show the way, to explain.”  That’s what Jesus did: He explained and literally showed us God.  That’s why when Philip said,”Lord, show us the Father, and it is enough for us,” Jesus responded, “Have I been so long with you, and yet you have not come to know Me, Philip? He who has seen Me has seen the Father.”

St. John explained the relationship between God the Father and God the Son in his introduction:

“In the beginning was the Word (Christ), and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.  He was in the beginning with God.  All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being.  In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men.”

Mormons and Jehovah’s Witnesses tragically distort the true nature of Christ and in so doing preach “another Jesus” from the Jesus God’s Word presents.  They insert the article “a” to teach that the Word was merely “a god” rather than God.  They artificially manufacture a rule that literally excludes them from ever receiving a higher degree in biblical language.  And they further show their hypocrisy by applying their “rule” only when Jesus’ deity is ascribed.  For instance, by the same “rule,” their translation would say, “In a beginning” rather than “In the beginning.”  Which just gets downright weird, doesn’t it?

What St. John did in Greek was to perfectly differentiate between the Father and the Son.  There was a heresy called Modalism that taught that the Father WAS the Son, like the same actor who put on different hats to play different roles during a play.  Mormons and Jehovah’s Witnesses demand an article – a “the” – in the Greek for the translation to be “… and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.”  But if that article were present, the translation would declare Modalism, that “the Word was God” in exclusion to the Father also being God.  Instead, what St. John is teaching is that Christ, the Word, the Son is God, was WITH the Father from the very beginning, but is not numerically identical with God the Father.  John 1:1 is actually a masterful construction that precisely differentiates the true Jesus between two heresies – the heresy of Modalism that presents God as an actor wearing three hats and the heresy of Arianism that teaches Jesus as a lesser being who was merely a creation rather than truly being God.

The Word of God teaches that it was Christ who created the world: “All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being.”  And therefore, logically, it is IMPOSSIBLE for Christ to have Himself been a created being.  How could Christ create “all things” and have “all things come into being by Him” and He Himself be created???  It’s logically absurd.  And so Mormons and Jehovah’s Witnesses manufacture a word that is NOT present in the Bible and assert, “all other things came into being by him.”

There’s a short, simple, powerful rhyme that explains it well: “He came to die on a cross of wood, yet made the hill on which it stood.”

Our Christ is the preeminent One over Creation.  Mormons and Jehovah’s Witnesses falsely seize upon the description of Christ as “the firstborn over all creation” and assert that it means He was “born” in the sense of having been “created.”  That isn’t true: “firstborn” is a title of preeminence, a statement that Jesus – as the Creator as the following verses prove – has a preeminent position over all of creation.  Think of Abraham’s firstborn: who was it?  Isaac or Ishmael?  Think of Isaac’s sons, Jacob and Esau: who was the “firstborn”?  And no matter how you answer I can say, “Wrong!”  Because the “firstborn” son in birth order was NOT the firstborn son who inherited the birthright.  In both of these crucial cases, the “firstborn” turned out NOT to be the “firstborn.”  Isaac was given the inheritance of “firstborn” even though he was NOT born first.  And so was Jacob over Esau, with Esau literally cavalierly selling his birthright for a bowl of stew when he was hungry.  And the point being that “birth” has nothing to do with being “firstborn.”  It is a TITLE in its most important sense that Paul uses in Colossians 1:15.

And so the passage in its context reads:

He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation. For by Him all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities– all things have been created through Him and for Him.  He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together.

By WHOM were “all things created”?  By the One who is called “the firstborn over all creation,” by the One who is “the image of the invisible God.”  And note again He created ALL things, NOT “all other things.”  And not only were all things created THROUGH Him, but FOR Him.  We’re taught in Ephesians chapter one that the Father had a plan to glorify His Son, to literally create a world just so He could point to His Son and say, “Look at My Son!  Isn’t He WONDERFUL!?!?”

Who is our Jesus, who is our Christ?  The entire universe was created through Christ and for Christ.  Our Christ is before ALL things “and in Him all things hold together.”

Jesus Christ is literally the mysterious force that prevents every atom from literally flying apart.  If THAT isn’t absolute power over the universe, what is?

Quite a far cry from the meek little wimp who hangs out with children with a lamb around his neck, you know?

THAT is who our Jesus is.

It was this Christ, who we now know is the Creator who made ALL THINGS according to His Father’s plan to glorify Him, who created Adam and Eve in Genesis 1:27:

God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.

You should now understand: in creating human beings, Christ created us in HIS image such that one day He could assume OUR image.

And in the Virgin Birth, prophesied hundreds of years beforehand in Isaiah 7:14, “Therefore the Lord Himself will give you a sign: Behold, a virgin will be with child and bear a son, and she will call His name Immanuel.”   St. Matthew completes the picture in chapter one and verse 23 of his gospel:  “BEHOLD, THE VIRGIN SHALL BE WITH CHILD AND SHALL BEAR A SON, AND THEY SHALL CALL HIS NAME IMMANUEL,” which translated means, “GOD WITH US.”

Isaiah 9:6 tells us more about this miracle Baby:

For a child will be born to us, a son will be given to us; And the government will rest on His shoulders; And His name will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Eternal Father, Prince of Peace.  There will be no end to the increase of His government or of peace, On the throne of David and over his kingdom, To establish it and to uphold it with justice and righteousness From then on and forevermore. The zeal of the LORD of hosts will accomplish this.

Does that sound like an ordinary human to you?  Does that sound like the work of anything less than God?

The angel who appeared to Joseph, the soon-to-be husband of Mary, didn’t believe so:

But when he had considered this, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream, saying, “Joseph, son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary as your wife; for the Child who has been conceived in her is of the Holy Spirit.  She will bear a Son; and you shall call His name Jesus, for He will save His people from their sins.” — Matthew 1:20-21

Who does the Bible teach saves people from their sins?  GOD and God ALONE.

The angel who appeared to Mary didn’t believe so:

The angel said to her, “Do not be afraid, Mary; for you have found favor with God.  And behold, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you shall name Him Jesus.  He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High; and the Lord God will give Him the throne of His father David and He will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and His kingdom will have no end.” — Luke 130-:33

In the Incarnation, which resulted in the Virgin Birth of Jesus, Christ – who was God – assumed a human nature, a human nature untainted by the sin of the Fall that corrupted us, so that He could come to live a perfect life in our place that we could not live and then die as our substitute as “the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world.”

Understand the dilemma: on the one hand, mankind had sinned and mankind had to pay the penalty – which is death – for the wages of sin.  On the other hand, only God can truly save us from sin.  No mere man, no mere angel, can take my sins away from me, such that God cannot see them to hold them against me and rightly judge and condemn me for them.

Only God Himself can do that.  That is why God Himself declares:

I, even I, am the LORD, And there is no savior besides Me.”

And again:

Yet I have been the LORD your God Since the land of Egypt; And you were not to know any god except Me, For there is no savior besides Me.”

That ought to tell you what the real story of the very first Christmas, heralded by an angel, truly was:

In the same region there were some shepherds staying out in the fields and keeping watch over their flock by night.  And an angel of the Lord suddenly stood before them, and the glory of the Lord shone around them; and they were terribly frightened.  But the angel said to them, “Do not be afraid; for behold, I bring you good news of great joy which will be for all the people; for today in the city of David there has been born for you a Savior, who is Christ the Lord.” — Luke 2:8-11

My Savior is none other than God Himself; and that’s why I can know that I am going to heaven.  Because only God can do that work in me.  Anyone else who relies on anything else is lost in their sins.  Because no man and no angel has the power to be your true Savior.

Some day I plan to ask the angel who came to those shepherds and said, “Do not be afraid; for behold, I bring you good news of great joy…” to perform a dramatic reenactment of that scene.  Because for all eternity that announcement will send shivers through my spine.

God was born when God the Son assumed a human nature and entered the world through Mary, a descendant of King David, in Bethlehem as God’s Word foretold centuries before:

“But as for you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, Too little to be among the clans of Judah, From you One will go forth for Me to be ruler in Israel. His goings forth are from long ago, From the days of eternity.” — Micah 5:2

He came to die on a cross of wood, yet made the hill on which it stood.

What did our Jesus do?  In one of the most beautiful passages in all Scripture, St. Paul gives us a moral lesson for how we should live our lives based on what Jesus did:

Do nothing from selfishness or empty conceit, but with humility of mind regard one another as more important than yourselves; 4do not merely look out for your own personal interests, but also for the interests of others. 5Have this attitude in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus, 6who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped, 7but emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men. 8Being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross. 9For this reason also, God highly exalted Him, and bestowed on Him the name which is above every name, 10so that at the name of Jesus EVERY KNEE WILL BOW, of those who are in heaven and on earth and under the earth, 11and that every tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. — Philippians 2:3-11

The New Living Translation just flat-out says it in verse 6: “Though he was God, he did not think of equality with God as something to cling to.”

Although Jesus was truly God, God the Son, the Christ, the Word, as God He did not regard His deity something to cling to, something to be exploited for its own advantage.  But instead, in His other-centered love that ONLY God can manifest, He emptied Himself.  He laid aside the exercise of His deity so that He could become an ordinary man and live among us and fulfill the salvation plan of His Father that Ephesians 1 teaches His Father had established from eternity.

And so Christ came into the world, not to be served, but to serve, and to give His life a ransom for many.  That’s not my notion, but Jesus’ Himself:

“For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life a ransom for many.” — Mark 10:45

What did our Jesus do?  He lived a perfect life in my place when I couldn’t.  And then He died the death in my place that I should have died for my sins.  The One who created the entire universe, who created me, took the blame for my sins upon HIMSELF.  On the cross, Jesus literally took the blame of the sin of the whole world upon Himself so that we could be free of the power and death of sin.  And by faith we die with Him – as depicted by going under the water in baptism – and by faith we are raised with newness of life with Christ.  Jesus died because He assumed a human nature.  BUT GOD CAN’T STAY DEAD.  And so He rose bodily from the dead in Resurrection Power.

I love the words of Colossians 3:3-4

For you have died and your life is hidden with Christ in God.  When Christ, who is our life, is revealed, then you also will be revealed with Him in glory.

What is God like?  He’s just like Jesus.  And in what way does Jesus show us what God is ultimately like?  In His incarnation.  What did He show us about the nature of God?  Love so astonishing that it is hard to believe.

Jesus showed us what God is truly like.  And what a beautiful God He truly is.

Because no one else would have come to me the way Jesus came for me.

I’ve always believed in God.  The Bible declares it is only the worst kind of fool who does not believe in God.  The Bible declares that the existence of God is self-evident in Creation.   The Bible points out that even the demons believe in God.  What is miraculous beyond belief isn’t that God IS, but that God is so good and so loving and so gracious and so … wonderful that He would come to me even at my very worst and most loathsome point and love me enough to save me when all I deserve is hell.

That’s what my Jesus did.  My Creator saved me from myself and from my sin, which many times seems like an even greater and even more profound miracle than the Creation of the whole universe.  Because it’s one thing to create something from nothing; quite another to fix something that was so hopelessly broken and ruined that for anyone short of God it needs to be destroyed because it is simply too impossible to fix.

Jesus is my hero because I was lost.  I was even worse than lost, I was DEAD.  And Jesus saved me:

 1And you were dead in your trespasses and sins, 2in which you formerly walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, of the spirit that is now working in the sons of disobedience. 3Among them we too all formerly lived in the lusts of our flesh, indulging the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, even as the rest. 4But God, being rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us, 5even when we were dead in our transgressions, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved), 6and raised us up with Him, and seated us with Him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, 7so that in the ages to come He might show the surpassing riches of His grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus. 8For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; 9not as a result of works, so that no one may boast. 10For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand so that we would walk in them.  — Ephesians 2:1-10

Every time a new believer enters the Kingdom of Heaven because of the finished work of Jesus on the cross, there is a staggering miracle of Creation: what was dead is made alive.  What was broken beyond human or angelic repair is made whole.  A destroyed, ruined, broken life becomes transformed in new life.

That transformation is at work in my own life.  It will not be complete in this world, but at the moment of the Rapture I know that no matter what happens in this world I will be the ME that God always intended me to be.  And I will have joy as I share all eternity with my Creator and my Savior and my Lord Jesus.  St. Paul described this moment in 1 Corinthians 15:51-58:

51Behold, I tell you a mystery; we will not all sleep, but we will all be changed, 52in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet; for the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised imperishable, and we will be changed. 53For this perishable must put on the imperishable, and this mortal must put on immortality. 54But when this perishable will have put on the imperishable, and this mortal will have put on immortality, then will come about the saying that is written, “DEATH IS SWALLOWED UP in victory. 55“O DEATH, WHERE IS YOUR VICTORY? O DEATH, WHERE IS YOUR STING?” 56The sting of death is sin, and the power of sin is the law; 57but thanks be to God, who gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ.

58Therefore, my beloved brethren, be steadfast, immovable, always abounding in the work of the Lord, knowing that your toil is not in vain in the Lord.

It’s like that hymn, “Because He Lives“:

Because He lives, I can face tomorrow.
Because He lives, All fear is gone.
Because I know He holds the future,
And life is worth the living just because He lives.

Jesus is my hero because where I had no hope, I now have hope that will literally carry me through this world and into and through the world to come.

I don’t know what anyone else has; I just no it very certainly isn’t better than what I have in my Jesus.

Jesus is my hero, because in a world filled with lies He came to testify to the TRUTH:

Therefore Pilate said to Him, “So You are a king?” Jesus answered, “You say correctly that I am a king. For this I have been born, and for this I have come into the world, to testify to the truth. Everyone who is of the truth hears My voice.” — John 18:37

I heard you, King Jesus.  Thank God Almighty, I heard you.

I hope you can hear Jesus too.

 

 

Obama’s Border Crisis Makes Bush’s Hurricane Katrina Actually Look Like A Heckuva Job, Brownie, Indeed. And It Makes Democrats Look Positively EVIL.

July 11, 2014

Do you remember that line from George Bush: “Brownie, you’re doing a heckuva job”???  Thanks to the mainstream media machine, that quote became immortalized as an out of touch president who looked out of an airplane to see the world from far below.

Too bad that media died and they decided to utterly abandon all journalistic principles to worship their messiah instead of reporting the damn news.

Otherwise they would see a president who can’t even be bothered to fly over the damn disaster zone that is our border with Mexico as tens of thousands and growing into hundreds of thousands of children come pouring across the border driven by the FACT that Barack Obama has abrogated all border enforcement and basically won’t deport ANYBODY.

I tell you the truth: one day, soon, at the very rock bottom of hell will be the reporters who abandoned their constitutional responsibility and instead published their ideology rather than the truth.  And standing on their shoulders will be the liberal progressive Democrats who stood on the shoulders of these dishonest propagandist shills throughout their political careers.

WHERE is the media publishing the damn photo of Obama looking out of his plane while on his way to a damn FUNDRAISER when at least Bush had the courtesy to fly over the disaster zone???

And of course they’re nowhere, just as the president who voted “present” more times than all the presidents in the entire history of our republic COMBINED ever voted “present” is nowhere to be found, that’s where.

Barack Obama is a truly evil man, a profoundly wicked man, a political ideologue, BY HIS OWN DEMONIC AND DEMAGOGIC STANDARD.

Listen to Barack Obama demonize George Bush for his “Katrina flyover”:

OBAMA:  “When the people of New Orleans and the Gulf Coast extended their hand for help, help was not there.  When people looked up from the rooftops, for too long they saw an empty sky.  When the winds blew and the floodwaters came, we learned that for all of our wealth and our power, something wasn’t right with America.  We can talk about what happened for a few days in 2005, and we should.  We can talk about levees that couldn’t hold, about a FEMA that’s seen as not just incompetent but paralyzed and powerless, about a president who only saw the people from the window of an airplane.”

Now it is official: George W. Bush – even at his very worst moment – was still about a trillion times more of a freaking man than Barack Obama ever has been or ever WILL be.  Because, to put it in Obama’s own slander, Obama is such a pathologically worthless sack of stink that he won’t even bother to “see the people from the window of an airplane.”

What a loathsome, uncaring, cynical, depraved piece of work our Coyote-in-Chief is to dare to say that about Bush and then not even be able to come CLOSE to manning up himself to GO TO THE DAMN BORDER AND PERSONALLY SEE THE DISASTER HE CAUSED.

What is Obama saying now?  This:

OBAMA:  “There’s nothing that has taken place down there that I am not intimately aware of and briefed on.  This isn’t theater.  This is a problem.  I’m not interested in photo-ops.  I’m interested in solving a problem.  And those who say I should visit the border, when you ask ‘em what should we be doing, they’re giving us suggestions that are embodied in legislation that I’ve already sent to Congress.”

Let me ask you a question, liberal hypocrite: what if George Bush had pointed out that maybe he wasn’t all that interested in photo-ops, either.  For the record, he would be a few trillion times more honest than Obama – the first “selfie president” – is about not loving “photo-ops” whenever they suit his demonic agenda.

What would you craven, demon-worshiping hypocrites have said if George W. Bush had arrogantly said, “There’s nothing that has taken place down there [in that hurricane disaster zone] that I am not intimately aware of and briefed on”????  Tell me that you wouldn’t have held a national – hell, GLOBAL freak-out that would have lasted the rest of your worthless lives.

Obama now says, “This isn’t theater.  This is a problem.”

Very well, you future residents of hell, tell me NOW that Hurricane Katrina – unlike the Obama border fiasco – was just “theater” to you.  Tell me it actually WASN’T a “problem” such that the George W. Bush whom Barack Obama demonized should have and could have just done one fundraiser after another instead.

And tell me how it would have played with you vermin liberals had George Bush said, “This isn’t a theater.  This is a problem.  I’m not interested in photo-ops.  I’m interested in solving a problem.  So instead of going to the hurricane disaster zone like an actual LEADER, I’m instead going to demonize my political opponents and do NOTHING… well, except a damn freaking buttload of FUNDRAISERS”????

Do you Democrats have any concept whatsoever how EVIL you are???  And I don’t mean by MY standards; I mean by YOUR OWN as expressed by your pharaoh god-king, Emperor Obama???

Liberals make me want to puke until there’s nothing left and I dematerialize with their endless abject HYPOCRISY.

If you want to blame Bush as a failed president, fine.  But if you can’t recognize how failed Obama is BY THE VERY SAME STANDARDS YOU CONDEMNED BUSH, there is something so broken and so twisted and so vile it is simply beyond unreal.

To be a Democrat today is to be a hypocrite slime who says Bush is to blame for 9/11.  It doesn’t matter that ALL the damn terrorists entered the United States and largely completed their training while Bill Clinton was in office AFTER YEARS OF WEAK INACTION, just as it doesn’t matter to them that Bill Clinton had gutted both our intelligence and our military such that we were both weak and blind or that it was because of Bill Clinton’s pathetic weakness that an emboldened terrorist named Osama bin Laden started calling Americans “paper tigers.”

To be a Democrat today is to be a hypocrite without any virtue or honor who says Bush is to blame for the 2008 economic crash.  It doesn’t matter at ALL to you that Bill Clinton was JUST as to blame for the Dotcom Bubble collapse that led to a giant recession that was very close to being every bit as bad as what happened in 2008.  As George W. Bush assumed office, the nation was officially in RECESSION.

I know you don’t believe me, liberal.  After all, Clinton paved the streets with gold in your mythologies.  But Bloomberg reported this:

Jan. 22 (Bloomberg) — The U.S. economy slipped into recession during Democrat Bill Clinton’s presidency rather than under President George W. Bush, the group that officially sets the timing of the country’s business cycles may decide.

The seven-member Business Cycle Dating Committee of the Cambridge, Massachusetts-based National Bureau of Economic Research may change its determination that the recession started in March 2001 to reflect recent revisions to government growth statistics, committee members, including Victor Zarnowitz, said.

“We are discussing it now, and in my opinion it should be changed,” Zarnowitz, a senior fellow at the Conference Board in New York, said in an interview. “In my opinion, the recession started in December 2000.”

Such a change might help Republicans deflect a principal criticism of Democrats seeking to unseat Bush in this year’s presidential election. Bush took office in January 2001.

And CNN reported the FACTS albeit sadly AFTER the fact when the facts would have actually made more of a difference:

John Kerry declared, “[George Bush] inherited the strongest economy in the world – and brought it to its knees.” There is no evidence to support this claim. In fact, the evidence now suggests that President Bush inherited a recession. Did the recession begin in the last quarter of 2000 or during the first months of the Bush presidency. Granted, even if the truth is that the recession began in the days after George W. Bush’s inauguration, most reasonable people would conclude that a president cannot on a dime turn a $10 trillion economy one way or the other. However, data and supporting analyses from economists indicate that the recession began well before Bush took office, making political criticism of the president on the jobs issue even more inappropriate. According the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER), the unofficial arbiter of business cycles, the recession began in March 2001 and ended in November 2001. NBER analyzes four data series from the U.S. Department of Commerce, the Federal Reserve Board, and other government sources. While previously NBER indicated the recession started in March 2001 (it has not formally revised that date), official revisions of the data indicate that the recession started earlier than that. For example, under revised calculations, real disposable income peaked in October 2000, rather than steadily rising in 2000 and early 2001 as indicated in the original data. Industrial production/manufacturing and trade sales both peaked in June of 2000, instead of September and August, respectively. Non-farm payroll employment peaked in February 2001, not March 2001. And monthly gross domestic product, which the NBER recently announced will be included in dating recessions, also peaked in 2000. According to the Council of Economic Advisers, the median date of these five data series is October 2000 – at least three months before George W. Bush took office. We also know that the stock market started to decline in March of 2000, business investment began to fall in the third quarter of 2000, and initial jobless claims began to rise at the end of 2000 – more evidence that the U.S. economy in late 2000 was in fact “on the front end of a recession,” as Vice President-elect Dick Cheney observed on Meet the Press on December 3, 2000. Senator John Kerry and other Democratic party leaders ignore or gloss over these facts. However, even professor Joseph Stiglitz, the chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers under President Clinton, admits that “the economy was slipping into recession even before Bush took office, and the corporate scandals that are rocking America began much earlier.”

So given the FACT that Bush and Clinton basically ended up with the same economic performance – with both presidents averaging 5.2% unemployment during their presidencies – the ONLY difference between Bush and Clinton was that Clinton’s recession blew up in Bush’s face as Clinton left office and Bush’s recession also blew up in Bush’s face before Bush left office.

The DotCom bubble burst was a HUGE recession, comparable to our so-called “Great Recession.”  It vaporized 78% of the Nasdaq portfolio, which is the measure of tech stocks.  And it caused a massive $7.1 TRILLION loss for the U.S. economy.  And frankly the ONLY reason more people don’t remember that massive economic hit was because Bill Clinton let those pesky terrorists come into America to attack us.

The amazing thing is that had Clinton not left us vulnerable to the 9/11 attack, he would have received more of the blame due to him over the massive recession that began under his watch.  Instead, given the dishonesty and hypocrisy of the openly-liberal mainstream media, he was largely let off the hook for BOTH disasters.

But, yeah, to be a Democrat is to be the kind of personally dishonest hypocrite who blames Bush for Clinton’s economy, then blames Bush for Bush’s economy and then blames Bush for Obama’s economy EVEN SIX YEARS AFTER OBAMA TOOK DAMN OFFICE.

Getting back to this border meltdown, we’ve got to acknowledge something called a FACT: for all of Bush’s mishandling of Hurricane Katrina, George W. Bush did not cause the giant waves to wash over Louisiana.  You know, unlike Barack Obama, who sure as poop stinks DID cause the flood of immigrant children to wash over America.

Do you remember Lucifer Obama and his lieutenant Beelzebub Holder SUING Jan Brewer and declaring that ONLY the federal government had any right to enforce our border???  Do you remember how they falsely declared how secure the border was???

Do you remember Obama just flat-out demonically lying when he claimed over and over and over again that he was doing more deporting than any president when in FACT he was doing the LEAST???

In a stunning admission before a House Committee panel on Tuesday, DHS Secretary Jeh Johnson admitted that the Obama Administration has been artificially inflating deportation numbers. While the administration has claimed a “record number” of deportations, earning Pres. Obama the nickname “Deporter in Chief”, Johnson admitted that they have been counting border apprehensions that are turned over to Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers as deportations. [...]

Jessica Vaughan, the Director of Policy Studies at the Center for Immigration Studies, has been arguing that actual deportations have declined under Pres. Obama. In her research, she says that if you count all removals, including those done by ICE and Border Patrol, then the Obama administration averages 800,000 removals per year. In comparison, George W. Bush would have removed more than 1.3 million illegal aliens per year, and Bill Clinton would have removed more than 1.5 million per year.

Vaughan also found that if you examine deportations from enforcement efforts by ICE, the number declined by 19 percent between 2011 and 2012 and was on track to decline another 22 percent in 2013. Further, the total number of deportations in 2011 was the lowest level since 1973.

Do you remember this story:

DHS document: 68,000 illegal immigrants with criminal convictions released in 2013
By Alexander Bolton – 03/31/14 05:45 AM EDT

Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials last year released 68,000 illegal immigrants with criminal convictions, undercutting Democratic claims that President Obama has strictly enforced immigration laws.

An internal Department of Homeland Security document compiling statistics on arrests and deportations in 2013 showed that ICE agents encountered 193,357 illegal immigrants with criminal convictions but issued charging documents for only 125,478. More than 67,800 were released.

The data came from an end-of-year “Weekly Departures and Detention Report.”

The Center for Immigration Studies, a research group that favors stricter enforcement of immigration laws, estimates ICE agents released more than a third of illegal immigrants with criminal records they detained.

“ICE released 68,000 criminal aliens in 2013, or 35 percent of the criminal aliens encountered by officers. The vast majority of these releases occurred because of the Obama administration’s prosecutorial discretion policies,” Jessica Vaughn, director of policy studies at the Center for Immigration Studies, wrote in a memo summarizing the DHS document.

ICE classifies illegal immigrants as criminal if they have been convicted of a crime, not including traffic offense, Vaughn noted.

Sen. Jeff Sessions (Ala.), the ranking Republican on the Budget Committee, blasted the administration’s record.

“The preponderance of the evidence demonstrates that immigration enforcement in America has collapsed. Even those with criminal convictions are being released. DHS is a department in crisis,” he said in a statement Sunday.

“Secretary Johnson must reject the president’s demands to weaken enforcement further and tell him that his duty, and his officers’ duty, is to enforce the law — not break it,” he added in reference to Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson.

A spokeswoman for ICE did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Advocacy groups on both sides of the immigration debate have fired salvos back and forth over Obama’s track record enforcing the law.

Republicans say they cannot trust Obama to enforce the law, and Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) cited that as an obstacle to passing immigration reform through the House.

Pro-immigrant groups argue Obama has enforced the law too zealously.

Janet Murguía, the president of the National Council of La Raza, called Obama the “deporter in chief” earlier this month.

Senate Democrats like Sen. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) have called on Obama to halt the deportations of illegal immigrants who are immediate family members of U.S. citizens.

The Center for Immigration Studies reports that ICE officials moved to deport 28 percent fewer illegal immigrants from the interior of the country in 2013 than in 2012.

The group obtained the law enforcement records through a lawsuit.

They obtained the records through a lawsuit because Obama’s is the LEAST most transparent and the MOST dishonest administration in the entire history of the republic.  Because these shenanigans keep going on over and over and over again, whether it’s the fiasco of Benghazi and Obama’s lies and cover ups or the fiasco at the IRS and Obama’s lies and cover ups or the fiasco at the VA and Obama’s lies and cover ups.

Do you remember this story from well over a YEAR ago?

President Barack Obama and his administration appear to care about satisfying “special interest groups” within the Democratic base more than protecting the lives of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers, the ICE union boss told lawmakers Tuesday.

“Internally, the agency, in my opinion is falling apart. Morale is at an all-time low, according to recent federal surveys. The agency refuses to train our officers on these new policies, resulting in mass confusion and frustration… nobody really knows what’s going on,” Chris Crane, president the National Immigration and Customs Enforcement Council, told the House Judiciary Committee.

He went on: “As our officers are investigated by ICE for enforcing U.S. immigration law as they see other officers threatened with suspensions for lawful arrests, increasingly officers feel they have become the enemy of this administration.”

Watch a portion of Crane’s testimony below:

Crane said ICE agents have been “essentially prohibited” from enforcing U.S. immigration law. He said agents are unable to arrest illegal aliens who are in the country illegally or immigrants who have overstayed their visas. “It’s basically not illegal anymore, generally speaking, not unless the alien has been convicted of a criminal offense.”

He said ICE agents are being forced to accept any illegal alien’s claim as to whether he or she graduated or is attending high school or college, thus qualifying them for Obama’s “deferred action for childhood arrivals” (DACA) privileges. Agents are “powerless” in requiring illegal aliens to prove they actually qualify.

“Death or serious injury to ICE officers and agents appears more acceptable to ICE, DHS, and Administration leadership, than the public complaints that would be lodged by special interest groups representing illegal aliens,” Crane said, according to a report by the Washington Examiner.

Several ICE agents have filed a lawsuit against the Obama administration over policies that prevent immigration officials from enforcing federal immigration law.

Let’s go over the ICE union head’s testimony again:

“Internally, the agency, in my opinion is falling apart. Morale is at an all-time low, according to recent federal surveys. The agency refuses to train our officers on these new policies, resulting in mass confusion and frustration… nobody really knows what’s going on.” …    “As our officers are investigated by ICE for enforcing U.S. immigration law as they see other officers threatened with suspensions for lawful arrests, increasingly officers feel they have become the enemy of this administration.”

That was in February of 2013, nearly a year and a damn half ago.

Democrat, if you want to claim that Obama isn’t one-trillion percent responsible for this total anarchy and collapse on our border, you have that right as a future eternal resident of the fire of hell.  But I’m going to point out the fact that you are psychologically sick and you are morally evil.

Democrats are telling us that the border meltdown is the result of a 2008 law.  Fine.  And I’ll believe it when I see that there were hundreds of thousands of children streaming across our border beginning in 2008.  Only that isn’t TRUE.  It didn’t begin until Obama declared a de facto AMNESTY and basically assured his liberal voting bloc of Hispanics that he would never bother to enforce the law beyond his bogus dishonest application of pseudo statistics.

Even NOW Democrats are continuing to prove that they are so radically disassociated with reality that they belong in rubber rooms.  Because they’re saying that the reports that the Central American families are hearing – that if their children come to the US they will be able to stay here – aren’t true.  But they ARE true.  As Obama is proving by serving as their Coyote-in-Chief as he buses and flies these children all over America.  And then tells them to report to an INS facility when it is simply a FACT that 90% of them will NEVER report.

I now state it as a documented FACT that Brownie DID do a heck of a job during Hurricane Katrina.  Because we now see what a truly CRAPPY job really looks like.

 

 

 

 

Frothing Liberals AGAIN Document They Are FASCISTS With Their Rabid Response To The Hobby Lobby Case

July 1, 2014

It’s always an amazing thing to watch liberals being hypocrites.  Liberalism is ABJECT personal moral hypocrisy; liberals are people who say what is always fascist for thee to do is never fascist for me to do.

Under the warped doctrine of “separation of church and state,” liberals have attacked and successfully purged most vestiges of God and Judeo-Christianity from society.  No Judeo-Christian practice or doctrine or belief can have anything whatsoever to do with culture.  But then you take liberal’s Church of the Ungodly Nazi Bureaucrat, and suddenly on their view the church IS the state and the state IS the church.  So you can’t have a cross representing veterans who gave their lives on public land, but you can sure force the owners of businesses to violate their most deeply held moral beliefs by exploiting the raw, naked force of government.

Liberals are either pathologically stupid people or pathologically evil people – or both, as I believe.  You can surely see this again in the shrill, unhinged rhetoric flying around from the left in the aftermath of the Supreme Court’s Hobby Lobby decision.

If I had a nickel for every liberal who came out and claimed that somehow the Supreme Court just took away birth control from women, I would be a very rich man.  When the truth of the matter is that birth control is as available today as it was before yesterday.  The only thing that has been taken away is the “right” of liberals to impose THEIR religious beliefs onto the owners of businesses who have different religious beliefs when it comes to abortion.

To wit, Hobby Lobby – long before this court decision – had been providing SIXTEEN different forms of birth control to female employees as part of their generous health care coverage.  The only forms of “birth control” they didn’t want to pay for were abortifacients which do NOT prevent a conception but kill a baby.  And the members of the Church of the Ungodly Nazi Bureaucrat screamed, “Nein!  Nein! Nein!  You WILL cover our religious right to murder babies!!!  Our god (human government) has the divine power to FORCE you to kill babies for us!!!”

You need to understand why liberals get into such an unhinged frenzy.  For them, human government is God and God is human government.  They have no other gods before human government.  And so when they are confronted with a ruling like this one, well, their god let them down and abandoned them.  And they therefore simply have to race around cursing like rabid vermin.

There are so many ways that liberals are abject hypocrites jus on this case that it is beyond unreal.  Let’s look at a few:

First, there’s the fact that to be a liberal is to be not only a fascist but a Nazi.  Take a look at the vicious threats against Hobby Lobby from the left.  I apologize for the language in advance, but you have to consider the unhinged, rabid, VIOLENT, viscious, rabid hate that characterizes liberalism when one of the things that these fascists try to impose on everybody else gets taken away from them:

‘Fu*k you:’ Left-wingers want to ‘burn down’ Hobby Lobby after SCOTUS win
Posted at 10:42 am on June 30, 2014 by Twitchy Staff | View Comments

Let it all out. Exhale.

Stay classy. And peaceful:

For the record, my copy and paste didn’t grab all of the hate.  But you ought to get the idea.

The first one above gives you the noxious, rotten flavor that is liberalism: “F- you, you narrow-minded, anti-women pieces of feces!!!!!!”  Because this person is CLEARLY “tolerant” and open to disagreeing points of view, isn’t she?  And as for the “anti-women” thing, I looked at the images of the gathering outside the Supreme Court taken by the reliably leftist Los Angeles Times and there were far more women cheering the decision than men.  And so what Sandra McMahan is really saying is that “feminists” are so rabid and so toxic that they – like Hitler – are willing to STRIP AWAY the femaleness of pro-life women the way that the Führer rhetorically stripped away the humanity of Jews.  You simply have to think exactly like these people.  Period.

Liberals have pissed away the image of God in what used to be their “human natures.”  They fully qualify for the words of Proverbs 12:1

Whoso loveth instruction loveth knowledge: but he that hateth reproof is brutish.

The word “brutish” – most often translated as “stupid” – refers to stupid, brutish animals who lack the capacity that humans have for moral reasoning and receiving wisdom.  It’s what Romans chapter one teaches, “God gave them over” to their stupid, brutish natures.

That is why liberals are so often so pathologically stupid and dishonest, such as the liberals exemplify when they claim that “Scalia law is like shariah law.”  These people are literally that stupid and that evil, that there is no difference to them between asking a woman to pay for her own abortion-inducing drugs and stoning a woman to death.  They are stupid, brutish animals who can’t distinguish the difference.

So, yeah, to be a liberal is to be a violent, vicious, fascist thug.  When John Roberts basically betrayed conservatives and re-wrote the damn ObamaCare law to make what was explicitly ILLEGAL and UNCONSTITUTIONAL fly, did conservatives threaten to burn down the world?  Nope.  When the Supreme Court voted for the wrath of God as per Romans chapter one and ruled to abandon DOMA, did conservatives threaten to burn down gay bars?  Nope.  Because we’re not fascists like liberals are.

Here’s another example of pure, unadulterated hypocrisy.  Meet Harry Reid, hypocrite:

“It’s time that five men on the Supreme Court stop deciding what happens to women.”

I mean, Harry Reid is FINE with five men deciding what happens to women.  As long as the five men think exactly like HE does.

EVERY SINGLE ONE of Harry Reid’s top staffers are MEN.  Which is a characteristic ENDEMIC to the left.  But what can I say?  When you’re a Nazi, you demand that Jews be treated one way and that you as a Nazi be treated a different way.  So the same rules you want to apply to “the other” should NEVER apply to you.

Liberals hate truth.  Jesus said, “Everyone who is on the side of truth listens to Me.”  And they held their ears and began screaming f-words and shouting to burn Jesus down, to crucify Him.  Jesus told us that liberals would hate us and He pointed out, “They hated Me first.”  And that’s why they hate Jesus for describing marriage as the union between one man and one woman.  It’s why they despise the Word of God when it teaches that God forms the unborn child in the womb.  When the Virgin Mary was pregnant with the baby Jesus, they howl in rage that she didn’t abort Him and murder Him in the womb.  And when the unborn John the Baptist kicked in the womb when he neared the unborn Jesus in Mary’s womb, they wish that instead of the unborn John kicking in excitement both woman had instead headed to the nearest “clinic” to get rid of the parasites invading their bodies.

Liberals HATE the truth with a passion.  The “truth” is a rhetorical game for them to exploit with propaganda, the way they have exploited their bogus “war on women.”

 

 

Not With A Bang But A Whimper: LA Times Admits That Obama’s (And Hillary Clinton’s) Intervention In Libya Was A MAJOR Disaster

June 27, 2014

We hear all the time from liberals that George W. Bush broke the law when he attacked Iraq and that Bush turned Iraq into a hellhole with his warmongering.

It’s time to point out a few things.

Number one, no, Bush DIDN’T break the law when he attacked Iraq; he actually passed “the Iraq War Resolution” that Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, Harry Reid, John Kerry, etc. voted for.  And when George Bush attacked Iraq, he did what nearly sixty percent of the Democrats in the US Senate authorized him to do.  And number two, when George Bush LEFT Iraq, he left a safe, stable region that prompted Joe Biden to say:

“I am very optimistic about — about Iraq. I mean, this could be one of the great achievements of this administration. You’re going to see 90,000 American troops come marching home by the end of the summer. You’re going to see a stable government in Iraq that is actually moving toward a representative government.”

… and for Barack Obama to boast in 2011:

“This strategy is grounded in a clear and achievable goal shared by the Iraqi people and the American people: an Iraq that is sovereign, stable, and self-reliant.”

and:

“[W]e will work to promote an Iraqi government that is just, representative, and accountable, and that provides neither support nor safe haven to terrorists.”

Bush left behind a safe, stable Iraq.  And all Barack Obama had to do was keep a small US force there to keep safe and stable what we had fought to make safe and stable.  Obama failed as only the worst kind of FOOL can fail by ignoring his top general’s urgent warnings and pleas to keep a force in Iraq:

WASHINGTON, Feb 2 2009 (IPS) – CENTCOM commander Gen. David Petraeus, supported by Defence Secretary Robert Gates, tried to convince President Barack Obama that he had to back down from his campaign pledge to withdraw all U.S. combat troops from Iraq within 16 months at an Oval Office meeting Jan. 21.

But Obama informed Gates, Petraeus and Joint Chiefs Chairman Adm. Mike Mullen that he wasn’t convinced and that he wanted Gates and the military leaders to come back quickly with a detailed 16-month plan, according to two sources who have talked with participants in the meeting.

Obama’s decision to override Petraeus’s recommendation has not ended the conflict between the president and senior military officers over troop withdrawal, however. There are indications that Petraeus and his allies in the military and the Pentagon, including Gen. Ray Odierno, now the top commander in Iraq, have already begun to try to pressure Obama to change his withdrawal policy.

A network of senior military officers is also reported to be preparing to support Petraeus and Odierno by mobilising public opinion against Obama’s decision.

Petraeus was visibly unhappy when he left the Oval Office, according to one of the sources. A White House staffer present at the meeting was quoted by the source as saying, “Petraeus made the mistake of thinking he was still dealing with George Bush instead of with Barack Obama.”

Petraeus, Gates and Odierno had hoped to sell Obama on a plan that they formulated in the final months of the Bush administration that aimed at getting around a key provision of the U.S.-Iraqi withdrawal agreement signed envisioned re-categorising large numbers of combat troops as support troops. That subterfuge was by the United States last November while ostensibly allowing Obama to deliver on his campaign promise.

Do you want to know who broke the law and then left a ruined country that is completely going to pot now?

Barry Hussein Obama, that’s who.  Even the fool’s own damn LAWYERS told him that what he was doing was illegal and criminal.  But the thug in chief was above the law.

Obama’s reckless action in Libya prompted even a DEMOCRAT to say this about false messiah Obama:

Representative Lynn Woolsey charged the President of showing “contempt” for the Constitution, and insulting the intelligence of the American people.  Woolsey made the following statement: “The Obama Administration’s argument is one that shows contempt for the Constitution and for the executive’s co-equal branch of government, the United States Congress.  To say that our aggressive bombing of Libya does not rise to the level of ‘hostilities’ flies in the face of common sense and is an insult to the intelligence of the American people.  This act must not stand, because we can’t afford another full-blown war—the ones we’re already fighting are bankrupting us morally and fiscally.  Let those who support the military campaign against Libya make their case, in an open debate culminating with a vote in the U.S. Congress.  The American people deserve nothing less.”

And yes, the criminal fascist thug Obama DID what he ACCUSED George Bush of doing when he attacked Libya without bothering to get ANY Congressional approval:

Senator Obama, taking a cheap shot at then-President Bush:

Barack Obama: “The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation,” Obama responded.

“As Commander-in-Chief, the President does have a duty to protect and defend the United States,” Obama continued. “In instances of self-defense, the President would be within his constitutional authority to act before advising Congress or seeking its consent. History has shown us time and again, however, that military action is most successful when it is authorized and supported by the Legislative branch.”

Do you remember being attacked by Libya?  Did the Libyans invade us?  I mean, maybe I was just asleep when it happened or something.  Otherwise, Barack Obama ought to be impeached, and the single witness against him should be … Barack Obama.  Barack Obama trampled all over the Constitution according to none other than … that’s right, Barack Obama.

George Bush got Congress’ approval before BOTH of his attacks on Afghanistan and Iraq.

And not only did Obama’s adventure in Libya NOT have the approval of Congress, but it also has less approval than ANY US military action in the last four decades going back to Vietnam.

And just what in the hell made our Idiot-in-Chief decide to be the first president in the sorry history of Gaddafi’s forty-plus years of abusing his own people to shake hands with the monster?

Do you see what a meandering idiot this guy is?

So having just taken that trip down memory lane, let’s see what the uberliberal leftist snot rag the Los Angeles Times has to say about the hellhole that Libya has become under Obama’s hypocritical and incompetent watch:

U.S. intervention in Libya now seen as cautionary tale
By Paul Richter,  Christi Parsons
June 27, 2014, 4:00 AM|Reporting from Washington

  • SHARELINES
    3 years after U.S. military intervention, Libya has become what U.S. officials dread most
    As the U.S. considers a limited intervention in Iraq, the experience in Libya is seen as a cautionary tale
    More than 50,000 people, including refugee and migrants, have flooded to Europe through Libya’s porous borders

A group of U.S. diplomats arrived in Libya three years ago to a memorable reception: a throng of cheering men and women who pressed in on the startled group “just to touch us and thank us,” recalled Susan Rice, President Obama’s national security advisor.

The Libyans were emotional because the U.S. and its allies had toppled leader Moammar Kadafi in a military campaign that averted a feared slaughter of Kadafi’s foes. Obama administration officials called the international effort, accomplished with no Western casualties, a “model intervention.”

But in three years Libya has turned into the kind of place U.S. officials most fear: a lawless land that attracts terrorists, pumps out illegal arms and drugs and destabilizes its neighbors.

Now, as Obama considers a limited military intervention in Iraq, the Libya experience is seen by many as a cautionary tale of the unintended damage big powers can inflict when they aim for a limited involvement in an unpredictable conflict.

“If Iraq and Afghanistan are examples of overkill and overreach, Libya is the reverse case, where you do too little and get an unacceptable result,” said Brian Katulis, a Middle East specialist at the Center for American Progress, a think tank. “The lesson is that a low tolerance of risk can have its costs.”

Though they succeeded in their military effort, the United States and its North Atlantic Treaty Organization allies fell short in the broader goal of putting Libya on a path toward democracy and stability. Exhausted after a decade of war and mindful of the failures in Iraq, U.S. officials didn’t want to embark on another nation-building effort in an oil-rich country that seemed to pose no threat to Western security.

But by limiting efforts to help the new Libyan government gain control over the country, critics say, the U.S. and its allies have inadvertently helped turn Libya into a higher security threat than it was before the military intervention.

Libya has become North Africa’s most active militant sanctuary, at the center of the resurgent threat that Obama warned about in a May address at West Point. A 2012 terrorist attack against the U.S. diplomatic compound in Benghazi killed four Americans, including Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens.

Arms trafficking from Libya “is fueling conflict and insecurity — including terrorism — on several continents,” an expert panel reported to the United Nations Security Council in February. Weapons smuggled out of Libya have been used by insurgents in Mali, by Boko Haram terrorists in Nigeria and by Palestinian militants in the Gaza Strip.

More than 50,000 people, including refugees from Syria and migrants from North Africa, have flooded into Europe through Libya’s porous borders, sharpening the continent’s immigration crisis.

The latest U.S. State Department travel warning portrays Libya as a society in near-collapse, beset by crime, terrorism, factional fighting, government failure and the wide availability of portable antiaircraft weapons that can shoot down commercial airplanes.

U.S. officials, now scrambling to reverse Libya’s downward spiral, say blame rests with the Libyans who took control of a country that has proved more dysfunctional than expected.

[...]

Some observers are warning that the administration eventually may be forced to do more. A Rand Corp. report this spring predicted that if Libya’s problems continue to worsen, another NATO intervention might be required.

“Libya is a lesson about the risks,” said Robert Danin, a longtime U.S. diplomat in the Middle East who warned about the risks of ensuing chaos. “With nation-building in disrepute, there’s a tendency now to want to declare victory and move on. But interventions can’t be done neatly.”

Here’s the money quote:

“If Iraq and Afghanistan are examples of overkill and overreach, Libya is the reverse case, where you do too little and get an unacceptable result,” said Brian Katulis, a Middle East specialist at the Center for American Progress, a think tank. “The lesson is that a low tolerance of risk can have its costs.”

That’s precisely what Obama did across the Middle East: he declared victory and moved on.  It’s what he did in Iraq in spite of the fact that he refused to deploy ANY security force whatsoever; it’s what he did in Libya after he bombed the country into rioting and terrorism that led to the Benghazi debacle and Obama’s cover-up of that debacle; it’s what he did in Syria after his weakness-personified “red line” and his deal with Putin that secured Assad’s power-grip and ultimately led to the rise of ISIS that is owning Obama right now.  Again and again, Obama declared victory and moved on, having done little or nothing.  He assured us that al Qaeda – which is now larger, more powerful, wealthier and controls more territory than EVER in it’s history – was “decimated” and “on the run.”  But they WEREN’T running; they were running their FLAG up over OUR embassies!!!  And Obama declared that ISIS was “JV” and that just because they dressed up in Laker’s uniforms didn’t make them Kobe Bryant.  When we can now see that it’s OBAMA who is “JV” and ISIS is looking like Kobe Bryant at the very top of his game in comparison to anything our weak president is doing.

Obama lied to you, America: you can’t eat your cake and have it, too.  We either fight to win or we lose and ultimately we die.  Those are out choices.

Whether in Iraq, or Libya, or anywhere ELSE you want to name, “worst-case scenario” is now becoming the normal state of affairs under this spectacularly failed presidency.

The point is this: Bush went on the offensive and there are those who argue that he failed.  Mind you, Bush left office with a JUST A SMALL FRACTION OF THE FORCE that Obama escalated Afghanistan into and was responsible for about a fifth of the casualties suffered in Afghanistan and HE WON IN IRAQ UNTIL OBAMA PISSED VICTORY AWAY (see also here and here).  And here for what I predicted back in 2011.

Obama’s “red line” fiasco turned into a bloodbath in Syria.  Obama’s complete withdrawal from and abandonment of Iraq turned into the largest terrorist caliphate the world has ever seen.  And it will be coming at us soon because they’ve SAID it would be coming:

[The United States] intercepted a letter written from Al-Zawahiri to the leader of Al Qaeda in Iraq. The letter described four stages that they would engage in: drive the Americans out, establish a caliphate in Bahgdad, use that base to attack other countries, attack Israel.

And as Obama has – as a result of his “policy” – utterly abandoned the Middle East to chaos and terrorism and murder – it is now obvious that Obama has failed FAR WORSE than Bush or any other president who ever lived.

Did you notice that Susan Rice was there again, she who is Obama’s top liar of choice first in Benghazi and more recently in the Bowe Bergdahl trade-your-soul and your five captured terrorist generals for a worthless turd deal???

I also can’t help but laugh that the same damn fool president who caused such a humanitarian crisis in Libya has also caused a similar one on our very own border with his ridiculously failed morally idiotic policies.

Somehow I remember the mainstream media propaganda that is our “journalism” today going ape poop over the Bush administration prediction that “we’ll be greeted as liberators” line.  But where have they been in the three years since Obama’s reckless, criminal and incompetent action in Libya broke down all civilized structures in Libya?  NOWHERE.  Because if you’re a reporter today, you view yourself as serving your messiah Obama and the Ultimate Cause of liberalism and secular humanism.  And you are willing to lie for your god and for your cause because you believe the ends justify the means.

George Bush essentially won the Iraq War in 21 days.  That’s how long it took for the air power to cripple Iraq’s ability to wage war and for US troops to largely secure the most vital parts of the country.  The rest of it was the attempt to “build and hold.”  Obama didn’t bother with that in Libya.  Hell, he didn’t even bother with it in Iraq.  As Jonah Goldberg pointed out:

Hillary Clinton has defined leadership in a democracy as a relay race: “You run the best race you can run; you hand off the baton.” Obama was handed a baton he didn’t want, so he dropped it.

Which is to say that even by Hillary Clinton’s standard, Barack Obama was a complete, unmitigated FAILURE who screwed America horribly in Iraq.  Obama lost what had been won at great cost because he didn’t like the baton he was held and threw it away like it was a piece of trash even as he claimed credit for the victory that he was about to piss away with his abject fool stupidity.

When you secure something, you stay there to make sure it STAYS secured.  That’s one of the great lessons that we learned in Vietnam.  We would take a hill at bloody cost, like “Hamburger Hill, and then withdraw a day after we took it to allow the communists to occupy it all over again.  We learned not to do that by paying a terrible price for our stupidity.  Only to have Barack Obama UN-learn it for us so we get Vietnam all over again.

At this point I submit that there is only one thing left to try regarding the Middle East: the World War II strategy.

In World War II we did not concern ourselves with “collateral damage.”  If you were a civilian and you were sitting on a Nazi tank, too damn bad for you.

We FIREBOMBED Dresden.  We killed something like 135,000 people.

We FIREBOMBED Tokyo.  We killed about 100,000 people – nearly as many as both the two atomic bombs combined did.

We were able to do that because we were a people who had something to live for, something to fight for, and therefore something to kill our enemies for.

We HAVE to respond to terrorist attacks.  And frankly at the same time, we’re simply not prepared any more – for various reasons including sheer exhaustion – to conquer, hold and rebuild.

All that is left is to bomb the populations that allow terrorism to fester into the stone age.  And if they start to get nasty again, bomb the rubble into smaller particles of rubble.  And DON’T GO IN.  LEAVE THEM to the consequences of their evil ideology.

Turn Afghanistan into “Lake Afghanistan” if that is what it takes to end the scourge of Islamic violence.  Because at this point, if these people are going to act like cockroaches, they need to be STOMPED like cockroaches.  And we don’t need to send in troops as long as we’ve got a big enough fly swatter from the air and our naval platforms out at sea.

I truly believe that if the message – the clear, consistent message regardless of president or party – was, “If you threaten us or our interests, we will bring the fire of hell to you, to your women and to your children,” terrorism would become a lot less popular.  All these Muslims would have to see is that yes, we DO mean business and we mean it in a very painful way.  But as it is now, there is no down-side to fostering terrorism whatsoever.  We do these precise, surgical strikes to avoid actually hurting anybody.  And all our enemies have to do is put a hand-lettered sign that reads “Baby milk factory” and our destruction of a weapons-of-mass-destruction facility becomes a war crime:

One of [CNN reporter Peter] Arnett’s most controversial reports during the Gulf War was a report on how the coalition had bombed a baby milk factory. Shortly after the report, an Air Force spokesman stated “Numerous sources have indicated that [the factory] is associated with biological warfare production”. Later the same day, Colin Powell stated “It was a biological weapons facility, of that we are sure”. White House spokesman Marlin Fitzwater stated “That factory is, in fact, a production facility for biological weapons” and “The Iraqis have hidden this facility behind a façade of baby-milk production as a form of disinformation.”

The image of a crudely made hand-painted sign reading “Baby Milk” in English and Arabic in front of the factory, and a lab coat dressed in a suit containing stitched lettering reading “BABY MILK PLANT IRAQ” only served to further the perception that purportedly civilian targets were simply being made to look like that by Saddam Hussein, and that Arnett was duped by the Iraqi government. The sign appeared to have been added by the Iraqis before the camera crews arrived as a cheap publicity ploy. Newsweek called the incident a “ham-handed attempt to depict a bombed-out biological-weapons plant near Baghdad as a baby-formula factory.”

Arnett remained firm. He had toured the plant in the previous August, and was insistent that “Whatever else it did, it did produce infant formula”. Described as being a veritable fortress by the Pentagon[citation needed], the plant, Arnett reported, had only one guard at the gate and a lot of powdered baby milk. “That’s as much as I could tell you about it … [I]t looked innocent enough from what we could see.” A CNN camera crew had been invited to tour this plant in August 1990. They videotaped workers wearing new uniforms with lettering in English reading, “Iraq Baby Milk Plant”.

If we’re not going to fight back – and fight back like we really mean it – we truly deserve to die.

I mean, my God, you pathetic, apathetic coward herd animals, just bleat until you die like the sheep you are.

Here’s another thing: the terrorists ARE fighting for a cause that they believe is very much worth dying for.  Versus us: what the hell are WE fighting for?  Are we fighting for Obama?  Are we fighting for political correctness?  Are we fighting for the determination to not allow God or any transcendent cause whatsoever to interfere with our abortion and our homosexual sodomy???

If I had a son, I would urge him with all the passion I had not to waste his life for this country at this point.  I served, as did my father, my father, my grandfather and my grandfather’s father before me.  But we served a very different nation which did not piss in the Eye of God.

We are losing the war on terror because secular humanist liberals like Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton have eradicated ANY reason whatsoever to actually fight for our own worthless lives – and if you believe in abortion your life is worthless by definition because you acknowledge that you began as the kind of thing that could have and even SHOULD HAVE been killed as a parasite or a disease – and our own worthless values.

We need to either figure out what it is that is worth fighting for in our age of secular humanism or we need to go out “not with a bang but a whimper” as the T.S. Elliot poem predicted we would.

Because in the age of Obama, a whimper is about all we’ve got.

Obama’s policy of inaction, of too-little-action-way-too-late, of bogus “red lines,” of retreat, of withdrawal, of apologizing, of weakening America and broadcasting the message of weakness to the world, has resulted in the world erupting into a firestorm that we now cannot put out with our meaningless and frankly depraved values.

Our own pathetic secular humanist values have been used against us and turned into a weapon of our own mass destruction.  We COULD fight, but as morally insane secular humanists we put on a strait jacket – and now we’re helpless while our rabid enemies are coming at us with the passion that comes from having a powerful cause that we long-since abandoned as a post-Christian culture.

And that’s why Armageddon is coming.

 

Barack Hussein Obama, Our Class 4 Felon-In-Chief (Outrage On The Border With THOUSANDS Of Children Being Dumped On Street By Feds)

June 11, 2014

I have pointed this out many times: Barack Obama is a fire hose of pure demonic evil.  There is literally NO WAY to keep up with all the sheer outrages to reason, to justice, to morality as this demon-possessed president pours evil out of his White House like a giant tsunami that washes over what has now become “God damn America.”

Consider that as I write this, the VA scandal consumes more and more Veterans facilities like a raging fire, proving that socialized medicine is inherently inferior to privatized health care and that Obama and the Democrat Party were genuinely evil to impose an even more socialist system onto our health grid than we already unfortunately had.  As I write this, the second largest city in Iraq (Mosul) just fell to the Taliban.  The black flag of al Qaeda now flies over Iraq - exactly as conservatives declared would happen as a result of our fool-in-chief cutting and running from a nation AFTER the war was won without bothering to keep troops there to maintain what 4,500 soldiers died to secure.  As the left-leaning Daily Beast points out:

Friday’s anniversary of Saddam Hussein’s arrest sees the country struggling with a resurgent al Qaeda and a death rate double that of a decade ago.
Ten years after the capture of Saddam Hussein, Iraq is at risk of becoming a failed state again as al-Qaeda reclaims vast swathes of the country. [...]

Al Qaeda now controls more territory and more people than they EVER have in their history as a testament to the complete failure and disgrace of the Obama administration’s foreign policy.

Well, things have changed.

In what can be described a truly ironic event and a major failure for America’s stated mission (because one can’t help but wonder at all the support various Al Qaeda cells have received from the US and/or CIA) of eradicating the Al Qaeda scourge from the face of the earth, we learn today that al Qaeda appears to control more territory in the Arab world than it has done at any time in its history. According to a CNN report “from around Aleppo in western Syria to small areas of Falluja in central Iraq, al Qaeda now controls territory that stretches more than 400 miles across the heart of the Middle East, according to English and Arab language news accounts as well as accounts on jihadist websites.”

This splinter group from al Qaeda – ISIS – which by all accounts is even MORE deadly and radical than their “daddy” has seized THREE MAJOR CITIES.  They have done what al Qaeda only dreamed of: create a caliphate out of which to launch global jihad.  What has happened in Iraq – which conservatives repeatedly PREDICTED WOULD HAPPEN if Obama did what he did by withdrawing – is not only the nightmare scenario, but is actually even WORSE than anyone predicted.  It is STUNNING how quickly Obama failed America and failed the free world in Iraq.

Back in 2008, McCain warned that Obama was a politician who would “legislate failure” in Iraq.  He declared, “Both candidates in this election pledge to end this war and bring our troops home. The great difference — the great difference — is that I intend to win it first.”  Now we are beginning to experience what will happen with Obama’s approach.  Barack Obama made a decision to pull back and withdraw from the Middle East and claim victory as he did so.  He created a massive vacuum.  That vacuum has now been filled by the terrorist ideology that anyone with common sense knew would fill it.

Of course, the article I link to above discusses Obama’s pathetic weakness to Putin’s Georgia invasion.  And we know that Sarah Palin predicted that Putin would go after Ukraine next as a result.  Which of course he did the moment after the Olympic games held in Russia ended when he realized what a weak, cowardly, craven, incompetent, political, cynical, gutless weasel Obama is.

Many of the terrorists streaming into Iraq came from Syria.  Obama’s failure there – and his weakness and refusal to do ANYTHING while civilians have been slaughtered by the hundreds of thousands after Obama’s “red line warning” fiasco – is manifest.  Again, conservatives BEGGED Obama to aid the pro-democracy rebels when he had a chance to do so.  He refused, and in doing so he FAILED.  Without the support they needed, the terrorists wings that DID get support quickly overran the pro-democracy forces.  And now we’ve got a metastasizing cancer of gargantuan proportions.

As a result of Obama’s radicaly failed policies, terrorism has increased – and get this – NINEFOLD according to a major study by the Rand Corp. basically under Obama’s watch.

This is what happens when you boast of “ending wars” rather than winning them.

Consider that the IRS scandal continues to prove that Obama is worse than Nixon (who merely TALKED about using the IRS as a political weapon to punish his enemies): the IRS – that specifically targeted “anti-Obama rhetoric” and harassed and terrorized Americans for trying to exercise their Supreme-Court-verdict rights – criminally sent 1.1 million records to the IRS and tried to bait the FBI into prosecuting as a crime opposing Obama.

We may now know why the FBI had predetermined that there wouldn’t be any charges filed in the IRS scandal. It turns out that the nation’s leading law enforcement agency may have been involved in the targeting of conservative groups.

House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Darrell Issa (R-CA) and Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) have uncovered new information indicating that the IRS sent 21 disks containing some 1.1 million confidential documents of tax-exempt groups to the FBI in October 2010, just weeks before the mid-term election:

Issa, who heads the oversight committee and Jordan, who chairs a subcommittee, said in a statement on Monday they sent a new letter to the IRS, demanding more information about the data sent to the FBI.

“At the very least, this information suggests that the IRS considered the political speech activities of nonprofits to be worthy of investigation by federal law-enforcement officials,” the letter states.

According to Issa and Jordan, the IRS apparently realizes it should not have sent the information to the FBI.

“After the Justice Department turned over the database to the Oversight Committee this month in response to a subpoena, the Justice Department says it was informed by IRS officials that it contains legally protected taxpayer information that should not have ever been sent to the FBI and it now plans to return the full database to the IRS,” a statement from the oversight committee said.

According to material obtained by the committee, the IRS sent the FBI “21 disks constituting a 1.1 million page database of information from 501(c)(4) tax exempt organizations, to the Federal Bureau of Investigation.”

Issa and Jordan’s letter to IRS Commissioner John Koskinen can be read here (PDF). It includes emails between disgraced IRS official Lois Lerner and Richard Pilger, director of the Justice Department’s Election Crimes Division. Pilger’s name came up in the Lerner emails released in April by Judicial Watch.

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) grilled FBI Director James Comey last month over the agency’s foot-dragging on the IRS scandal. The Texas conservative was unable to get answers on the most basic questions, including how many targeted organizations the FBI had interviewed or whether the agency had interviewed any White House employees.

The FBI’s involvement in the scandal further underscores the need for an independent investigation, something that Republicans have wanted since news of the targeting of conservative groups came to light. There’s no other way the IRS, Justice Department, and the FBI are going to get answers for those whom the federal government tried to silence.

We now know that Barack Obama BROKE THE LAW when he refused to notify Congress of the release of what his own military officials claimed were the equivalent of “five four-star generals.”  We know that Obama’s intelligence officials, his Pentagon officials, the intelligence committee members of his very own party, were opposed to this release of five terrorist generals AND INTERNATIONAL WAR CRIMINALS for a documented deserter.

Obama has told what is documented to be one lie after another: first he said that he had to do the trade without notifying Congress because Bergdahl was sick to the point of death – which turned out to be obviously untrue when he showed up physically healthy at the swap site.  Then the claim was that they couldn’t notify Congress out of concern for Diane Feinsten blabbing – but Obama told some ninety members of his own White House and it was this White House rather than Diane Feinstein which had just destroyed the cover of the top CIA man in Afghanistan.  And of course we had the same Susan Rice who had lied so demonically at the outset of the Benghazi fiasco who Obama trotted out to declare that a DESERTER “served with honor and distinction” and was “captured on the battlefield” when in fact he had removed his uniform and sought out the enemy.

All that is going on as we speak, and so many more vile, evil things that I can’t even so much as shake a stick at them.  Barack Obama is and has been a fire hose of satanic evil.

And if those outrages aren’t enough, now we’ve got thousands of illegal immigrant children pouring across the border because they know that if they can get here, Obama will pursue his “catch-and-release” program and they will ultimately become US citizens and get all the welfare, et al of every other lazy degenerate Democrat voter.

What Barack Obama is doing is felony child abuse:

Maricopa county attorney: Feds dumping illegal minors is ‘child abuse’
June 09, 2014 1:56 pm  •  By Howard Fischer Capitol Media Services

PHOENIX — Saying illegal immigrant children being bused to Arizona may be being placed in danger, Maricopa County Attorney Bill Montgomery warned federal officials today they may be violating state child abuse laws.

In a letter to a top immigration official, Montgomery said he fears that unaccompanied minors are being left at bus stations “without food, water or shelter, or means to acquire same.” And he cited an Arizona law which prohibits someone who has care or custody of a child from permitting them to be injured or placed in a dangerous situation.

He said that, given the 100-plus degree temperatures, “any federal official who directly engages in such conduct or who authorizes such conduct may be guilty of a Class 4 felony.” And if that is classified as a dangerous offense, the presumptive prison term is 6 years behind bars.

Montgomery’s complaint comes as top officials in the Obama administration admitted earlier today they’re not meeting a requirement in federal law to process unaccompanied minors within 72 hours and turn them over to federal health officials.

The officials, speaking with reporters on background, said they had prepared for an increase in illegal immigrants from violence-prone Central American countries. But they said the flood of illegal immigrants, mainly coming through the Rio Grande Valley in Texas, was larger than anticipated.

What that means is that children are remaining longer in what essentially is a refurbished warehouse with no indoor plumbing.

One administration official said efforts are underway to provide hot meals and shower facilities, “all kinds of thing to make their life there as comfortable as possible — but with the ultimate goal of trying to move the children as quickly as possible.”

That, however, creates another problem: Administration officials admit that the three facilities being prepared for the children to go at military bases in Texas, California and Oklahoma can house perhaps a maximum of 3,000. But hundreds have been arriving daily at Nogales for processing.

Administration officials said the Department of Health and Human Services, which is accepting legal responsibility for these unaccompanied minors, has access to thousands of other beds at existing facilities. But they said that clearly is not a good long-term answer.

What is, they said, is trying to find adult relatives for these children — even those in this country illegally and awaiting their own deportation proceedings — or at least foster care families.

What Obama did is a growing disaster of epic proportions“Obama’s kids” are sleeping on plastic bags and being denied basic needs like showers.  All because Obama cynically believes that if he can capture the illegal immigrant vote – and don’t you DARE tell me Democrats don’t want these illegal immigrants voting or they wouldn’t be going frothing-at-the-mouth rabid psycho every time somebody suggested reasonable voter IDs – he can steal America from Americans the way Adolf Hitler stole Germany from Germans.  It is fascism, and it is merely a different face of Nazism.

And this is at the very same time the most vicious kind of political payback from the president who said, “punish your enemies and reward your friends”:

Are Illegal Immigrants Being Dumped in Arizona as Payback?
Katie Pavlich | Jun 04, 2014

Payback. That’s the word being used to describe recent busload transfers of illegal immigrants, mostly children, caught in Texas and dumped at bus stops in hot, Arizona cities. In case you missed it last week, here’s a refresher about what’s going on. First, the crisis happening at the Texas border:

Children traveling without their families, including an “overwhelming” number younger than 12, are flooding across the southwestern border in the latest test of the Obama administration’s immigration policy.

Homeland Security Officials predict that 60,000 minors will cross the border this year and that the number will double next year, accounting for an astonishing percentage of people trying to jump the border — braving the tremendous perils of crossing Mexico and trying to evade border authorities, hoping to eventually connect with family in the U.S.

 

Instead of using resources to send the children home, I.C.E. and Border Patrol agents were instructed by officials in Washington to transport illegals from Texas to Arizona. When illegals are dropped off, they are given a court date and ICE simply hopes they show up for the hearing.

Hundreds of undocumented immigrants detained as far away as Texas are being released under supervision in Tucson. But getting to their next destination leaves them on their own.

Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE, has said that it does not want to put children in detention centers and it does not want to split up families. ICE releases those families with the condition that they contact ICE for their next court date once they reach their destination in this country.

Now, the move is being seen as payback for Arizona’s previous attempts to take control of their illegal immigration problem by bucking the feds inaction. Republican Rep. Paul Gosar, who represents Arizona’s 4th district, made an appearance on America’s Newsroom recently to explain.

Bill Hemmer: Why Arizona?

Paul Gosar: Well we are one of the hubs. We’ve been having the argument in regard to upholding the rule of law Bill and this is actually just a way for the administration to poke Arizona in the eye.

Gosar is demanding an investigation from the House Oversight Committee into what he is calling, “illegal alien smuggling by the Obama administration.”

“I support Governor Brewer and Treasurer Ducey’s calls for an investigation by the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee into the actions taken by the Obama Administration in the wake of detained illegal immigrants being shipped to Arizona,” Gosar said in a statement. “As a member of that Committee, I plan on taking a lead role in seeking accountability for those individuals responsible for this violation of the Rule of Law, should the Committee favorably respond to my request.”

Arizona Governor Jan Brewer is questioning the administration’s decision from a humanitarian angle, pointing out that not only do these children not have parents with them, but that they’re being dropped of in 100 degree temperatures.

“I remind you that the daytime temperatures in Arizona during this time of year are regularly more than 100 degrees. Consequently, this federal operation seems to place expediency over basic humanitarian concerns. The federal government should not shirk its lawful responsibility to care for and properly process these individuals,” Brewer wrote in a letter to President Obama earlier this week.

Two weeks ago newly minted Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson (who was put into the position after bundling money for President Obama’s 2012 re-election campaign) testified in front of Congress and was asked about how the administration plans to handle this ongoing crisis. Since then, President Obama has called on FEMA to provide housing for children roaming around the streets without parents.

Barack Obama is the Stalinist psychopath who released 68,000 criminal illegal aliens – and by “criminal” I mean to include THOUSANDS OF RAPISTS and MURDERERS – to prey on innocent and thanks-to-Obama-helpless Americans again.  And probably again after that.

Barack Obama – the same “Liar of the Year” who assured Americans over and over and over again (to the tune of at LEAST 37 times) that you could keep your doctor and you could keep your health plan in his socialist-takeover of health care – has lied without shame in EVERY aspect of his dishonest presidency.  And this is as true for illegal immigration as it is for every other issue under the sun.  Because we now know that Barack Obama boasted that he had deported more illegal immigrants than any previous president to falsely claim he was tough on immigration AFTER DISHONESTLY CHANGING THE STATISTICS THAT EVERY OTHER PREVIOUS PRESIDENT HAD USED.

Barack Obama has deliberately and systematically refused to enforce America’s laws – both on our borders and pretty much everywhere else (as just one example, consider that he has disregarded his own ObamaCare law thirty-eight times).  And this fiasco on our border in the inevitable consequence.  Obama as a fascist always wants a crisis to exploit.  And he crafted himself one here.

This lying disgrace is truly evil.  And everyone who supports him is truly evil.

And this nation is probably done now – bankrupt and imploding on virtually every relevant aspect – because of his wicked presidency and the wickedness of the American people who voted for him twice.

Liberalism = Insanity Alert: California Public Elementary School Forces Girls To Announce To Boys Whether They’ll Go All The Way For Them

June 9, 2014

Just another amazing day in the life of “God damn America”:

Girls To Publicly Declare How Far They Will Go Sexually
The Daily Caller
June 8, 2014 1:20 PM

At least one pair of parents is fuming after their eighth-grade daughter came home from school saying that every student in her class had to indicate – publicly – how far they are prepared to go sexually.

The incident happened this week at Woodland Park Middle School in the San Diego, Calif. suburb of San Marcos, reports local ABC affiliate KGTV.

The parents, who don’t want to be named, say their 14-year-old daughter was embarrassed because the teacher in her family life and health class instructed her and all of her classmates to stand under one of several signs. Each sign was labeled with a different phrase.

Some of the labeled signs were innocuous, according to KGTV. These included “smiled at,” “hugged” and “kissed.”

Other signs, such as “above the waist,” “below the waist” and “all the way,” were to varying degrees considerably less innocuous.

“To put them up in front of their friends to be humiliated or to be asked questions that I believe are personal, it’s really none of the school’s business,” one of the peeved parents told the ABC station.

The parent added that her daughter felt confused and peer-pressured afterward.

Officials at the taxpayer-funded school defended the exercise, calling it a dating lesson.

“The parents sign permission slips for the class and can look at the curriculum prior,” the Woodland Park Middle School told KGTV. “The purpose of the lesson was to open the lines of communication between parents and students about dating expectations.”

It’s not clear how standing under signs labeled “above the waist” or “all the way” while at school would open up lines of communication between eighth graders and their parents.

The principal added that the school found the lesson at a community clinic and has used it for several years now.

According to the middle school’s website, the principal is Brian Randall.

The angry parents suggested that perhaps an anonymous student survey could be less humiliating for students.

Follow Eric on Twitter and on Facebook, and send education-related story tips to erico@dailycaller.com.
Join the conversation on The Daily Caller

The White House has played this game with mainstream media “journalists” and every single one of them proudly stated that they would happily go “all the way” for their messiah Obama and whore their integrity for him by writing lies in place of “news.”

I had to laugh when I saw the very last sentence: “The angry parents suggested that perhaps an anonymous student survey could be less humiliating for students.”  Because first of all, YA THINK?  And second of all, maybe teaching students to read and write and do arithmetic instead ought to be worth a try.  Because these God damned – and I’m using that as a technical term as used by St. Paul in Galatians 1:9 – government schools are indoctrinating our children into the homosexual/abortion/Obama culture rather than teaching them much of anything else.

Let me call this what it is: PEDOPHILIA.

Can you imagine your daughter standing under the “hugging” sign and being mocked as a prude and indoctrinated into the “all the way” club???

And the reason I call pedophilia that is because these CHILDRN are UNDER THE AGE OF LEGAL CONSENT to consent to any sex act.  They CANNOT legally enter into a sexual relationship; it is a CRIME to attempt to induce them to do so.  Which is to say that the police should be ARRESTING and PROSECUTING the principal, all the teachers involved, and every single adult who was present and did not stop it.

If you do not see this as sick, I can safely know that you are truly sick.  And if your argument is that parents ought to hire lawyers to read all the fine print of the permission slips, you are a demon-possessed bureaucrat (i.e., a DEMOCRAT).

If I were a parent in a school that did anything remotely like this, I would yank my kid out so fast I’d look like the Roadrunner in the Wile E. Coyote cartoons.  Either that, or I would show up with a baseball bat and just END the principal and teachers that just used peer pressure to cynically indoctrinate my child into a life of sexual promiscuity.

In God damn America few parents stand up for their children.  Which is why our culture keeps growing sicker and sicker and more and more degraded every hour of every day.

Let me point out a FACT, not an opinion: liberalism is moral insanity which leads to intellectual idiocy.  Take the indoctrination of homosexuality.  Well, don’t these same people teach Darwinian evolution?  And what is homosexuality in Darwinian terms?  A dead end.  The “fittest” are defined as “those who leave behind the most offspring.”  And homosexuals are biologically UNFIT by the tenants of evolution.  And to the extent that evolution ought to have ANY effect on morality – and it SHOULD if it is true just as it should NOT if it is false – homosexuality is about as immoral as you can get in evolutionary terms.  And yet liberals hypocritically and irrationally indoctrinate both at the same time without bothering to point out that the one fundamentally contradicts the other.  Because the last thing you should be encouraging is behavior that your own theological system (and that’s what evolution is) describes as a dead end.

In the same way, you’ve got liberals on the one hand literally caught in the act here indoctrinating children into sexual promiscuity even as the numbers of sex abuse cases SKYROCKET in our society.  And of course they’re doing it at every level of society: politically and judicially as liberals continually drive out morality and replace it with a grotesque mockery of morality, culturally in our movies and television programs (all run by Hollywood liberals), and educationally in our schools where they’re able to indoctrinate our youngest and most vulnerable minds.  Sexual abuse is up FIFTY PERCENT under Obama.  What’s funny is that liberals are now blaming women and arguing they must be lying because otherwise how could the statistics be so horrible?  And I’ll tell you how: there is now NO MORAL FRAMEWORK WHATSOEVER that makes rape wrong apart from the notion that Obama doesn’t like it.  Liberals have ended the world of “God” and “Thou shalt not” and now we’ve got the consequences.  What makes a behavior wrong?  What makes it right?  Liberals saying one thing after having said its opposite?  That’s bullcrap, and the skyrocketing sexuality and sexual assaults among our young people in our uberliberal colleges and universities is proof that young people at some gut level understand that it’s bullcrap.

Again, you’ve got to be EVIL and INSANE to indoctrinate young people into sexual promiscuity – and yet liberals are doing it.  Because these sodomy-worshiping baby killers are the devil’s fools and the devil’s tools.

Liberalism heralds itself as “pro-education.”  Liberals are no more “pro-education” than these the people who have murdered more than 55 million babies are “pro-child” (which they also insanely claim themselves as being).  Consider how vicious liberals are toward homeschooling.  Consider that through homeschooling, one family has put SEVEN children into college – ALL BY AGE 12.  And if you think that your local government school with its “dating game” wickedness is capable of that, I’ve got all kinds of bridges and statutes to sell you, fool.

In the same vein, liberals are on a similar jihad against private schools – and especially Christian private schools.  They have done EVERYTHING and thrown up EVERY OBSTACLE to prevent children from having a real education rather than a government indoctrination.  It doesn’t matter that it is simply a beyond-plain-as-day FACT that Christian schools so massively outperform government schools that it is beyond ridiculous.  But the liberals who go psycho whenever Christian schools are brought up don’t care: all they care about is ideology and the unions who provide the muscle to their fascist ideology.

There is something beyond hypocritical and even beyond irrational on the part of liberalism when they claim to be for the very things they are doing everything they can to either outright destroy or to undermine.

In the same beyond-insane manner, liberals pride themselves on their “tolerance” when in fact they are as rabidly intolerant as the Taliban and as likely to purge and “purify” institutions as Stalin.  This one article about says it all:

College faculties, long assumed to be a liberal bastion, lean further to the left than even the most conspiratorial conservatives might have imagined, a new study says.

By their own description, 72 percent of those teaching at American universities and colleges are liberal and 15 percent are conservative, says the study being published this week. The imbalance is almost as striking in partisan terms, with 50 percent of the faculty members surveyed identifying themselves as Democrats and 11 percent as Republicans.

The disparity is even more pronounced at the most elite schools, where, according to the study, 87 percent of faculty are liberal and 13 percent are conservative.

“What’s most striking is how few conservatives there are in any field,” said Robert Lichter, a professor at George Mason University and a co-author of the study. “There was no field we studied in which there were more conservatives than liberals or more Republicans than Democrats. It’s a very homogenous environment, not just in the places you’d expect to be dominated by liberals.” [...]

Rothman sees the findings as evidence of “possible discrimination” against conservatives in hiring and promotion. Even after factoring in levels of achievement, as measured by published work and organization memberships, “the most likely conclusion” is that “being conservative counts against you,” he said. “It doesn’t surprise me, because I’ve observed it happening.” The study, however, describes this finding as “preliminary.”

If Osama bin Laden is “tolerant,” then you can call the liberals who have purged their way into total power in our education system as “tolerant.”

Liberals have abandoned discussion for fascist intolerance and in so doing have abandoned young people to indoctrination rather than anything approaching “education.”

Liberalism has, furthermore, abandoned young people economically – again by moral insanity that leads to intellectual stupidity.  Jack Kemp put it best in his slogan, “You can’t love jobs and hate job creators.”  But that is precisely what hypocrite and moral-idiot liberals DO: they despise job creation by demonizing job creators as selfish and greedy and imposing stupid and inherently destructive regulations and tax burdens upon them.  And the only Democrat that liberals can point to as an economic success was Bill Clinton – but that was ONLY because Bill Clinton essentially agreed that liberalism was inherently self-defeating when he declared, “The era of big government is over.”  Because when liberalism and the big government that liberals impose is allowed to kick down the door of the economy with its jackbooted feet, jobs go bye-bye.

And so, thanks to Obama, thanks to Harry Reid, thanks to Nancy Pelosi, all the young people even HAVE now is sexual promiscuity and the sexual assaults that go hand-in-hand with such rabid sexuality.

 

Remembering Tiananmen Square

June 4, 2014

For me, Tiananmen Square comes down to this moment that I still vividly remember:

I watch that man stand in front of a sixty ton tank and what I see is raw courage and the true beauty of the human spirit.

Imagine doing that.  A column of massive tanks is heading down a street to impose dictatorship and something in you snaps and you determine that you will stop it with the only thing you’ve got: your body.  Hundreds of tons of metal in those tanks are coming at you, and you STAND.

There are at least four tanks, one right behind the other (and probably several more behind those): one man, one incredibly brave human being, stopped them all with his act of defiance against brutal dictatorship.

We don’t even know who the man was.  He was probably intercepted and hauled away by secret police as he returned to the crowd and executed by the brutal regime.  His act, seen by millions and maybe billions of human beings, is anonymous.  And in a way that is fitting, because he represents ALL of us who defy totalitarian authority.

We think about the Tiananmen Square Massacre.  How many died in the crackdown?  An Orwellian State has made sure that no one will ever know.  The death toll is probably in the thousands, but the scene was scrubbed by government worshipers and the same government worshipers have banned any discussion of the event to this very day.

Because you don’t have freedom in such a government colossus.  THAT’S why the man stood in front of the tanks: because it was the only freedom he had left under this totalitarian State.

I have thought about that unknown “tank man” who stopped a column of tanks armed with nothing except raw courage and the sheer will to resist a power-mad government many times.  It sends shivers through my spine every time I watch it.

But I have also thought of the driver of that tank.  Not much talk or thought has been about him.

This tank driver was driving his tank for the brutal regime.  And obviously, the same brutal regime that brutally cracked down on thousands of people who were trying to stand up for human freedom and human dignity wanted that tank driver to crush that hero who placed his body in front of that tank.  I imagine the tank commander was screaming, “What are you doing stopping?  What are you doing turning?  Drive OVER him!  Run Him down!”

But that tank driver refused.  He would not run his tank over that noble human being.

I imagine he was never seen again, either.

Ultimately, that’s the only time such a heroic resistance can get off the ground: when the foot soldiers of evil look around and realize that what they are doing IS evil and stop.  And refuse to obey their wicked orders.

Today, on this 25th anniversary of the Tiananmen Square Massacre, I salute both of these unknown heroes.  I salute the Chinese people for producing such men who would so love the human spirit that they would courageously die for that love.  I resolve to be like these men against whatever “tanks” of State oppression I am facing.  And I call upon others to resolve to be like them.

Update: I found this picture.

Look at all the tanks lined up as “tank man” makes his stand!  I count at least twenty – and again, there are probably more behind those.

The next time you helplessly ask, “What can I do?  I’m just one person!”  Think of the one person who stopped God-only-knows how many tanks in their tracks!!!

Freedom is not unique to Americans; it is – or ought to be – the natural state of all human beings.  Elite American warriors yearn to find the kind of love for freedom that we see here; and our SEALs and our Delta Force operators and our Special Forces bond incredibly closely with hearts of men all over the world whose hearts resound with the same beat of freedom that theirs does.  The tragedy is that there are few such men today and there are more men than ever who want to take the ever-diminishing freedoms we have away from us.

The SOG who fought and died in Vietnam had a motto: “For those who fought for it, freedom has a flavor that the protected will never know.”

Do you want to really know what freedom tastes like?  The please STAND UP and FIGHT for it.

Moral Outrage About Liberalism’s Vile ‘Moral Outrage’

May 28, 2014

I came across an all-too typical liberal op-ed from a Harvard professor from the Kentucky School of Government named Moshik Temkin.

The subject in this case was the death penalty.  Basically, Professor Temkin says that Obama ought to once again ignore the constitutional limits on his power and declare as our Führer that the death penalty is immoral and he will not stand for it.  He ends his screed saying:

What abolitionists need to do is call for change to emanate from the very top. The president (whether the current one or a future one) will need to express a principled opposition to the death penalty in terms of the sanctity of human life and dignity.

Here I see some room for guarded optimism. Obama does not need to worry about his political future. This could be the moment for him to take a stand against capital punishment, the way he did on gay marriage. But he will probably not do this on his own; public pressure is the key.

Those of us horrified by the death penalty should not look to the courts or the states. We must look toward our national leaders and demand that they do what is right.

In the print version, the giant bold type face screamed, “Outrage over botched executions isn’t enough.  It’s about a moral stand.”

It’s an interesting thing to consider what the left would do if a right-wing president used the tyrannous dictatorial power the way Obama has to merely impose his law in place of the rule of law.  Basically, liberals are people who shout, “It’s never fascist when WE do it; it’s ALWAYS fascist when you do what wasn’t fascist for us to do!”

And they are morally idiotic enough to actually believe it, which is the truly astounding thing.

I leave my case to a LIBERAL legal scholar who has had more than enough of Obama’s fascism.  What is Jonathon Turley saying about Obama?

I have great trepidation of where we are headed, because we are creating a new system here – something that is not what was designed. We have a rising fourth branch in a system that was tripartite. The center of gravity is shifting and that makes it unstable. And ithin that system, you have the rise of an Uber-Presidency. There could be no greater danger for individual liberty. I really think that the Framers would be horrified by that shift, because everything they dedicated themselves to was creating political balance – and we’ve lost it.”

And:

“…the President is outside the line… we have the most serious Constitutional crisis I view, in my lifetime… this body (Congress) is becoming less and less relevant.”

And:

“The president is using executive power to do things Congress has refused to do, and that does fit a disturbing pattern of expansion of executive power under President Obama. In many ways, President Obama has fulfilled the dream of an imperial presidency that Richard Nixon strived for. On everything from (the Defense of Marriage Act) to the gaming laws, this is a president who is now functioning as a super legislator. He is effectively negating parts of the criminal code because he disagrees with them. That does go beyond the pale.”

Our system of government is intentionally tripartite, with each branch holding certain defined functions delegated to them by the Constitution. The President is charged with executing the laws; the Congress is charged with writing the laws; and the Judiciary is charged with interpreting them.

The Obama Administration, however, has blatantly, repeatedly and defiantly ignored the Constitution’s carefully balanced separation of powers and unilaterally granted itself the extra-constitutional authority to amend the laws and to waive or suspend their enforcement at his dictate.

In place of the checks and balances established by the Constitution, President Obama has proclaimed that “I refuse to take ‘no’ for an answer” and that “where [Congress] won’t act, I will.” Throughout the Obama presidency we have seen the same pattern repeated over and over again: President Obama circumvents Congress when he doesn’t get his way.

And fascists like Temkin – a vile hypocrite in that he would be SCREAMING FROTHINGH RABIDITY if a right wing president declared anywhere NEAR similar power for himself – is encouraging him to go farther.

And I am outraged that a documented FASCIST like Moshik Temkin is allowed to hold a position whereby he can pollute the minds of young people with ideas that history has declared to be truly evil.  Fascism is ugly.  It is immoral.  We fought a World War to stop it.  We shouldn’t be forced to have to fight the same war over again.  But fascist progressive liberal secular humanist atheists appear to be ensuring that we will have to.

People like Moshik Temkin yearn for a dictatorship, so long as the dictator is a liberal progressive secular humanist atheist like themselves.  These roaches WELCOME Big Brother as long as they get to choose their Stalinist totalitarian dictator.

I frankly laugh in disgust and contempt at anyone who wants to impose “morality” on a people not through the legislative process, but through the unconstitutional dictate of a tyrant.

On that “secular humanist atheist,” aspect, I quote Temkin as declaring that the death penalty is immoral in terms of “the sanctity of human life and dignity.”

As I read that line, I thought about Isaiah 5:20:

Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil; Who substitute darkness for light and light for darkness; Who substitute bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!

I want you to stop and think about what Temkin is asserting: the people who have now murdered well over 55 million innocent human babies in their abortion mills are now asserting that “the sanctity of human life” that they have viciously refused to apply to the most helpless and the most innocent among us – and if you didn’t have your start in your mother’s womb, this doesn’t apply to you – ought to apply to the most depraved torture-rapist-murderers among us.

Let us see what the Bible says about children in the womb, with this being but one example:

For You created my inmost being; You knit me together in my mother’s womb. I praise You because I am fearfully and wonderfully made; Your works are wonderful, I know that full well. My frame was not hidden from You when I was made in the secret place. When I was woven together in the depths of the earth, Your eyes saw my unformed body. All the days ordained for me were written in Your book before one of them came to be (Psalm 139:13-16).

In 1999, Clayton Lockett – the heroic martyr of liberalism – kidnapped, beat, and shot nineteen-year-old Stephanie Neiman and ordered an accomplice to bury her while she was still breathing. She slowly died after having been buried alive from two wounds from a shotgun fired by Lockett. In 2000, Lockett was convicted of murder, rape, forcible sodomy, kidnapping, assault and battery and sentenced to death.

According to progressive liberal secular humanist atheist, this monster deserves to be honored with the recognition of the “sanctity of his life” and his “dignity.”  But you can and should go on exterminating human beings in the womb in a vicious manner that these selfsame self-righteous liberals would be weeping over if we did the same thing to rats.

“A rat is a pig is a dog is a boy,” declares these truly morally stupid and morally evil people.  That is the soul-diseased left talking.

God declared capital punishment in very simple terms:

“Whoever sheds human blood, by humans shall their blood be shed; for in the image of God has God made mankind. — Genesis 9:6

I want you to notice here that God explains that it is precisely BECAUSE of “the dignity of human life” – that results from being made in the image of God and from NOTHING less and nothing ELSE – as the reason why there should be a death penalty.  It comes down to this: when one human being literally takes the power of GOD into his or her own hands to destroy the image of God in another human being, that murderer needs to die in order for the dignity of human life to be honored.  To allow such a murderer to live after that murderer took another human life is to DISHONOR and DISGRACE the image of God and to spit on the memory of the victim(s) of such a monster.

To argue that murderers ought to be spared but helpless innocent babies ought to die horrifying deaths as they are literally torn to pieces while they try to avoid the medical implements that are killing them, burned alive by acid, and ripped apart by suction (see also here), is evil.  And to repeat that evil more than fifty-five million times makes the Nazis look positively humane.

But the thing is that that means absolutely NOTHING to a genuine moral idiot like Moshik Temkin.

No, liberal secular humanists stand in JUDGMENT of God and they have declared Him evil and His ways wicked.  They have placed themselves above God and condemned Him.  And that is why they hate Christians and conservatives who try to live according to the morality God provided in His Word.

Jesus taught in John 15:18-22 (NLT):

“If the world hates you, remember that it hated Me first.  The world would love you as one of its own if you belonged to it, but you are no longer part of the world. I chose you to come out of the world, so it hates you.  Do you remember what I told you? ‘A slave is not greater than the master.’ Since they persecuted Me, naturally they will persecute you. And if they had listened to Me, they would listen to you.  They will do all this to you because of Me, for they have rejected the one who sent Me.  They would not be guilty if I had not come and spoken to them. But now they have no excuse for their sin.”

Progressive liberal secular humanists hate me and hate my ways because they love evil and because they hated Jesus first.

That is why they have become the official party of the wrath of God according to the divine condemnation of Romans chapter one (see here and here).

Liberalism is a rejection and a replacement of all ten of the Ten Commandments.

Liberalism is the defiant contempt of God and God’s ways and God’s people, nothing more and nothing less.  Liberals are people who kicked God out of America with their contrived “separation of church and state” myth that is NOT found in our Constitution but IS found in the Constitution of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.  And having exorcised God much the way Jesus exorcised demons and banished God in the name of “secularism,” they rapidly moved in to replace God with their totalitarian State that abrogated all of the divine prerogatives of God unto themselves.

Communism is State atheism.  And it is therefore no surprise that progressive liberal secular humanists would embrace the essence of Communist theory: The dictatorship by the proletariat embodied in their leader will bring about a Utopia.  And I still hear the Satan that is Obama shouting, “We are the ones we’ve been waiting for. We are the change that we seek” while his followers worshiped him like a god.  I still think of Obama actually saying that as a result of his presidency, “this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal; this was the moment when we ended a war and secured our nation and restored our image as the last, best hope on Earth.”  I still remember liberals literally teaching their own children – along with as many OTHER people’s children as they could – to worship Obama in songs to their deity.  I wanted to puke.  But liberals are a stupid enough, depraved enough, leader-worshiping enough bunch of moral idiots to fall on their knees before this pseudo-messiah.

You show me doing any of that crap with Bush.  By a wide margin over the 2nd place Abraham Lincoln, Americans say that Ronald Reagan was our greatest president.  But even with Reagan, conservatives never worshiped the man the way liberals have worshiped Obama even as Reagan led America upward versus Obama who has led this nation downward and further downward.  Liberals are quintessentially FASCIST; they YEARN for a Führer.  They’ve basically found one in Obama – and they want him to keep moving his Führership forward to the next level and then the next one after that.

It is and always has been the LEFT that 1) purges God from society and 2) establishes a cult of personality for its leaders.  Something must fill the vacuum when God is removed.  And leftists fill that vacuum with the State as epitomized in their current Stalin, their Obama.

In progressive liberal secular humanism, just as in Stalinsim, we have an ideology that suggests society would be better if it could be purified.  Stalin purged “kulaks” by the millions.  HE alone got to define what or who a “kulak” was.  Just being so labeled pretty much meant you were finished.  And now we’re seeing JUST ALL OVER THE LEFT that the same fascist murderous heart that beat in Hitler and in Stalin beats in the liberal progressive as well.  A modern “kulak” today in America is pretty much anybody that says or does anything progressive liberal secular humanists don’t like.  And they will come after their “kulaks” with a rabid hate that is astounding because the very same people endlessly talk about how “tolerant” they are at the same time they’re dumping hate on you for disagreeing with them:

Howard Dean, who is still alive, told attendees at a fundraiser for a Democratic congressional hopeful that Republicans “are not American” and would “be more comfortable in the Ukraine or Russia.” He also screamed that GOP supporters should “stay away from our country.”

Dean, a former Vermont governor, a former Democratic National Committee chairman and a 2004 presidential candidate, made the statements last week in a fit of zeal as he was speaking in support of Colorado 6th Congressional District candidate Andrew Romanoff.

“This is a Republican party that has decided they like power so much that they think it’s okay to win by taking away the right to vote,” Dean told the gathered assembly of 750 people at Dora’s Mexican Restaurant in Aurora, Colo.

“They are not American,” he bellowed. “They could be more comfortable in the Ukraine or Russia but stay away from our country. This is based on the right to vote.”

Amusingly, Dean then lectured Republicans on tolerance and love:

“We have had enough of the extreme right wing,” Dean continued. “We have had enough of the politics of anger, we have had enough of the politics of hate, we have had enough of the politics of division,” Dean told the estimated 750 in attendance at Dora’s Mexican Restaurant.

You’d think their skulls would explode trying to contain all the massive contradictions, but not progressive liberals; their very ideology is pathological hypocrisy.  And so what they say versus what they do and how they demonize others for doing a fraction of the evils they do is an intrinsic part of liberalism.  Such that if you removed the hypocrisy from a liberal he or she would utterly dematerialize never to be seen again.

Progressive liberals say they’re like Jesus because they want socialism to care for the poor.  No.  You’re NOT like Jesus because Jesus never taught socialism: when the disciples came to Jesus and told Him that there were 5,000 men (probably on the order of 15,000 people altogether), Jesus did NOT say to call Herod or Pilate and urge them to begin a government welfare program; He said “YOU feed them.”  The ONLY places that talk about big government in the Bible, such as 1 Samuel chapter 8, CONDEMN IT.  No, you’re not like Jesus for wanting socialism, liberal; you’re like Hitler and Stalin.  You’re like Hamas and Hezbollah and other terrorist groups with supposed programs to care for the poor.  And oh, yes, you really are like them.

Jesus very definitely found nothing of Himself in a liberal system by which one group forcibly seizes the wealth of another group and then gives that money not to the poor but to a totalitarian State that endlessly promises to help the poor but which year after year and decade after decade pisses away more than a half a billion dollars every single day.

If you think that Jesus believed in homosexual marriage, you’re beyond morally idiotic and you’re just plain evil.  Jesus taught that He had come to fulfill ever single jot and tittle of the lawwhich very definitely called homosexuality an “abomination” and “a detestable act.”  And Jesus commissioned the New Testament, which very clearly condemns homosexuality every bit as forcefully as does the Old Testament that Jesus lived and breathed.

For the record, one of the things Jesus lived and breathed and said He came not to abolish but to fulfill was the commandment concerning the death penalty for murderers.  That’s there, too, you know.

I read through articles in which people actually try to argue that the Bible doesn’t condemn homosexuality and simply marvel at the determination to self-deceive and to deceive as many others as possible.  Paul spoke of these minds that “profess themselves to be wise, but become fools” (Romans 1:22) as “always learning, but never coming to a knowledge of the truth” (2 Timothy 3:7).

You’re definitely not like Jesus when it comes to children; Jesus said, “Let the little children come unto Me.”  In the entirety of the Bible and the biblical worldview, children were (and are) a sign of blessing from God.  But YOU say, “we define fifty-five million dead children as ‘a good start.'”

I recently wrote an article titled, Evolution Vs. The 10 Commandments: And The Winner Is…?.”   Secular humanists routinely and constantly mock and slander “Christian morality,” but I’ll take that over “Darwinian morality” every day of the year given the catastrophic consequences of embracing the “morality” of the left.  One moral system is timeless and based on God; the other continually evolves at the whim of a group of people who crave for themselves the place of God.

If there is no God, there IS no “morality.” We should act like the beasts we are. But what these people are truly looking for is to stand in the place of God over the human race (which they are strangely part of even as they view themselves as inherently superior over it) and impose THEIR vision, THEIR stamp, on the human race. We shouldn’t do what GOD says, we should do what Barack Obama says.

Such a person’s “moral outrage” is itself morally outrageous.

 

 

 


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 513 other followers