For The Simple Factual Record, No Homosexual Has EVER Been Deprived Of The Right To Marry.

I’ve heard this argument – a la Hitler’s “big lie” – so many times that if I’d vomited every time I heard it, I would have barfed myself into vapor by now.  That’s why they call it “ad nauseum,” I suppose.

“Everyone has a fundamental right to marry,” we’re told.  And so homosexual marriage is not merely a Constitutional issue, but a human rights issue.

But here’s the damn obvious question: when have homosexuals EVER been denied the right to marry?

A homosexual can marry anybody of the opposite sex of maritable age and status who will have them, the same as everybody else.  Nobody has had their right to marry deprived from them.

I challenge anybody to find me an example of a single case in which a homosexual was denied the right to marry, given what marriage is: the union between one man and one woman.  Just find me one time when a homosexual tried to marry and was denied the right to do so.

Let’s put it this way: if homosexuals are somehow being defined as having been denied the right to marry, you have to employ a definition of “marriage” that no society has ever before embraced.  Which is to say that you literally have to assume what you want to prove and then use what you just assumed as your “proof.”  To wit, “marriage” is the union between a man and a woman under God.  That is what it has ALWAYS been.  Which is why no civilization has ever called for homosexual marriage.  And unless you assume that marriage is somehow something else (which it isn’t and has never been), no homosexual has EVER been denied “the right to marry.”

That’s what we call facts.  That’s what we call logic.  That’s what we call morality.  And that’s what we call history.  Homosexual marriage fails on all counts.  It is an oxymoron.  “Homosexual marriage” is like “liquid solid.”  It is like “adult children.”  You can’t have both.  It is either one or the other.  Unless you want think of “adult children” in the Obamanomics sense in which young people have been ”fundamentally transformed” into permanent “children” because they’ll never be able to get a job in this disastrous economy and will therefore be helpless dependents forever.  In that Orwellian sense in which “freedom is slavery” and “ignorance is strength,” I suppose anything is possible – even “homosexual marriage.”

“Homosexual marriage” is non sequitur unless you begin by perverting the thing in language that you then want to pervert in actuality.  When I hear somebody mouthing this idiocy of homosexuals being denied the right to marry, I know that I am in the presence of a true moral and intellectual idiot.  And I excuse myself in search of somebody who is actually worth having an intellectual conversation with.

If homosexuals don’t want to marry, fine by me.  But don’t whine because you don’t want what decent, healthy people want.

Homosexuals don’t want the right to marry; they want the right to pervert the institution of marriage.  Period.

Suddenly Everybody Who Is Anybody In America Says Gay Marriage Is The Best Thing Since Sliced Bread. That’s Because This Is God Damn America Now.

Hillary Clinton just came out in a slick video stating that homosexuals are “citizens” who therefore have the right to marry.  She of course used to say the exact opposite.

I completely agree with the actual facts in her statement.  As depraved and perverted as homosexuals are, the ones who were born here (remember, Obama is trying to open the immigration floodgates to as many homosexuals from other countries as he can) ARE in fact citizens.  And of COURSE U.S. citizens ought to have the right to marry.

Which is why I believe that a homosexual has the right to marry any legally competent adult of the opposite sex who is stupid enough to have them.

That’s because marriage is the union between one man and one woman – as Obama famously said not only in Rick Warren’s forum, but on the very eve of the 2008 election on November 3rd.  But it’s one thing to have “the right to marry” and quite another thing for homosexuals to have the “right” to pervert and degrade marriage to make what was formerly holy matrimony as depraved as they are.

Of course Obama is now celebrated by the left for baiting and switching, much the same way he’s celebrated for demonizing George Bush as being “unpatriotic” and “un-American” for his $4 trillion in debt over eight years before racking up $6 trillion more in debt in only four years.

Under liberalism, abject moral hypocrisy is a virtue.  That’s just the way these people are.

And that’s the way all RINOs are, too.  They are people who hold up their finger to the political winds and, standing for nothing, shift in whichever direction those winds blow.

Republicans ran a RINO against Barack Obama in 2008.  The RINO lost.  They ran a RINO against Obama in 2012.  And sure as shooting cow pies in place of skeet, the RINO lost.

Rob Portman is clearly hoping to be the RINO who gets to lose in 2016.

I love Portman’s reasoning.  His son is homosexual, so he’s for gay marriage.

I mean, if Portman’s kid was a rapist child molester, would Portman suddenly support rape and child molesting?  The answer, of course, is that he most certainly WOULD support rape and child molesting - if that’s what was popular.

That’s the thing about RINOs.  They are morally weak people who stand for nothing.

I think Americans have proven they will vote for somebody who is authentically evil over somebody who is inauthentically a puff of fart gas in the wind.

I am sick to my guts of RINOs.  I’ll never vote for a damn RINO again.  If Rob Portman is the GOP nominee, I’ll be penciling in Bugs Bunny – who at least always had the virtue of ending up as the winner in all the cartoons.

The gay rights movement used to feature a group called NAMBLA.  That’s the “Man/Boy Love Association.”

Here’s the skinny on that inconvenient truth:

NAMBLA once actually had United Nations status, due to its membership with the “legitimate” International Lesbian and Gay Association.

NAMBLA has been a member of the International Lesbian and Gay Association for 10 years. We’ve been continuously active in ILGA longer than any other US organization. NAMBLA delegates to ILGA helped write ILGA’s constitution, its official positions on the sexual rights of youth, and its stands against sexual coercion and corporal punishment. We are proud of our contributions in making ILGA a stronger voice for the international gay and lesbian movement and for sexual justice.

Today the gay community excludes NAMBLA as a matter of pure political expediency.  Harry Hay, the founder of the first gay organization in America, ultimately condemned the “gay community” and “reviled what he saw as the movement’s propensity for selling out its fringe members for easy, and often illusory, respectability.” The simple fact is that the gay community is just a bunch of narrow-minded, intolerant bigots and naked political opportunists who want to deny others the basic rights they demand for themselves.

And, of course, President Obama appointed a pro-NAMBLA guy to be the “Safe Schools Czar,” so we have a pretty high-level endorsement right there, don’t we?  We’re talking mainstream stuff here, these days.

Given the fact that judges can usurp the clearly expressed will of the people and impose their own “morality” as they choose, it is guaranteed that we will legalize the buggery of young boys down the road.  Secular humanism  simply doesn’t have the moral resources to prevent it.

Who are you not to allow your little boy to get married to some forty-year old “lover,” you intolerant pig?

Sodomizing young children used to be perfectly fine with the homosexual movement, and you can rest damn assured that it will be for it again – much the way Barack Obama was “for” gay marriage before he was “against” it before he was “for” it again.

Democrats would assure you that such a thing will never happened.  Other than the fact that these liberal turds have ALREADY BEEN FOR IT aside, of course.  But what happened with your Barack Obamas and your Bill and Hillary Clintons will happen with child molesters, too.  Just remember a few facts: 1) pedophiles were born that way as much as homosexuals were born queer; and who are we to legislate against “nature”???  2) Times have changed, and what was wrong when it was convenient for it to be wrong is now just as right as it used to be wrong.  3) If we allow young girls the choice to get legal and free abortions when their “old man” knocks them up, why shouldn’t we allow young boys the right to bend over for some older man???  And 4) when liberals do it it’s called “evolving” but when conservatives do it its called ”flip flopping.”

So let me assure you that as part of Barack Obama’s “fundamental transformation of America” we’re soon going to have child molesters, practitioners of bestiality, and group marriages to be legal.  Because, after all, we’re “tolerant,” aren’t we?  And these people should all have the right to follow their hearts and marry whomever they wish.  And of course if a guy wants to marry his canary, or if a woman wants to marry her stallion so she can be mounted the way she’s always dreamed, then who the hell are YOU to judge, you intolerant prick???

Liberalism guarantees all of this wickedness along with crap that my mind isn’t diseased enough to even imagine.  Because that’s the essence of liberalism.

The great American pastor John MacArthur recently said that the Democrat Party’s platform is Romans chapter one.  And of course he’s right.

In Romans chapter one, a society continues to morally deteriorate until it sinks to the absolute lowest rock bottom level of moral sewage that sure enough the Democrat Party has sunk America to.

The United States of America used to call itself “one nation under God.”  We used to say, “In God we trust.”  We put our hands on Bibles when we took sacred oaths, as if we believed that the Book that called homosexuality an “abomination” actually meant something.

God blessed this nation as He has never blessed any other.  And when God takes that blessing away, it will amount to a curse such that this nation will fall like no other nation has EVER fallen before.  America’s fall will be cataclysmic and catastrophic simply by virtue of the dizzying heights from which we will fall.

When we voted for Barack Obama in 2008, we voted to inherit damnation such as no nation in all of human history has ever experienced.  And when we re-elected this wicked man, we confirmed that demand to be “God damn America” as Obama’s reverend and spiritual mentor for over twenty years once screeched from the pulpit of Obama’s church.

This country is going to get the hell it voted for.

The beast is coming.  The United States of America will be cheering when he arrives.  And nobody will be cheering more loudly than Democrats.

I write this to you as one who sits on the gate of America the way Lot sat on the gate of Sodom, waiting for the brimstone and the fire to start falling.

Why The Left Will Never Understand Reality. In One Bible Verse.

My mother loves the Word of God and has always loved the Word of God, which is why she is the greatest hero of my life.  As a result of that love, she has several “verse a day” calendars in her home that she views every day.  And having heard me describe the moral stupidity and blindness of the left, she made sure I knew about the verse for December 28 (the day I wrote this):

This is what the LORD says, he who made the earth, the LORD who formed it and established it–the LORD is his name: ‘Call to me and I will answer you and tell you great and unsearchable things you
do not know.’ — Jeremiah 33:2-3

This ties into something I have said again and again and again:

I believe – along with orthodox Christian theology – that man’s nature has been corrupted and we cannot understand truth or reality on our own.  And that the ONLY way we can so comprehend truth and reality is to see the world as God sees it; which is to say see the world through God’s Word.  But liberals despise the Word of God and have tried to replace it with every theory and ideology under the sun.  And the result is that liberal man is stupid; further, he is stupid by sheer brute force of will – he is determined to be stupid.  And the more intelligent the liberal is, the more stupid he becomes – because he is able to even further commit himself to failed liberal ideologies and theories than less intellectual liberals who must still at least partly base their worldviews on common sense because they can’t fully comprehend Marxism or other failed progressive socialist theories.

And:

I too often use the word “stupid” to describe the left.

When I do so, I am not referring to their IQs, their level of education or anything of the sort.  Rather, I am referring to their worldview and what their worldview has done to their ability to comprehend reality.

Understanding the world as it really is boils down to being able to see – at least in part and to a certain degree given our finiteness – the world as God sees it.  The Bible – the Word of God – is the lens that enables us to be able to do that.

Liberals as a whole reject that Book just as they reject the Judeo-Christian worldview that is based on what that Book teaches.

Instead of perceiving Truth, liberals turn to a world of theories such as Marxism (which is fundamentally hostile to the Christian world view).  And as such, they cannot even possibly see or understand the world as it actually is.

They literally make themselves stupid by sheer brute force of will.  They take the image of God that God bequeathed every human being with (it’s something that babies in the womb have, btw) and they piss it away.

That’s how I see the blinders that you describe.  And they are blinding indeed.

And:

I’ve had a couple of insights on the nature of “intelligence.”

1) is that real “intelligence” is the ability to perceive and understand the nature of the actual world.  Ultimately, that is the world as God sees it.  But liberals do not want to see the world as God sees it; and in fact they hate the world as God sees it.  We can begin to see the world as God sees it by reading His Word and believing it; but liberals refuse to do that.  Rather, they live in a world of theories, such as Marxism, or existentialism.  They cannot see the world as it actually is, and they literally end up willing themselves to be stupid by sheer brute force of will regardless of their intelligence quotient.

2) Evil is the ultimate form of stupidity.  And again, it is irrelevant how “intelligent” one is.  Take Lucifer/Satan: he is a super-intelligent being, but in his evil self-will he is determined to try to supplant God (His creator).  His wisdom is far greater than any human being’s, on the measure of intellect.  But in the end, and in the measure of ultimate reality, he is truly stupid.  His perverted will and desire made him stupid.

That’s why a dumb Forest Gump is a hell of a lot smarter than a brilliant liberal.

Liberals love to sneeringly think of themselves as “smart.”  Atheists started calling themselves “brights” as a means of letting us know how intellectually superior they are to everyone else.

The reality is quite the opposite; simply because liberals have inoculated themselves against ever being able to perceive reality.

And:

This in response to your 2/27 comment.

I have always tried to provide links to what I claim.  And even give at least a good chunk of articles for posterity – given that papers like the New York Times have a strange way of purging stories that lead to conclusions liberals don’t like.

But I don’t write to persuade liberals.  Frankly, I don’t think liberals can be reasoned with; they live in their own little self-constructed realities.

On my view, those who do not truly believe in God cannot even possibly see or understand reality as it is.  Such people fabricate their own theories of the world (such as Marxism), and literally use their intelligence to rationalize away the truth in order to “explain” their distorted view of reality.  Only God understands reality as it really is.  And only those who see the world and understand reality through the prism of God’s Word to us can possibly understand the world both as it is and as it ought to be.

J. Vernon McGee put it thus: “Now, you might have a better plan than God.  But what you DON’T have is your own universe.”  Romans 1 is a great chapter that explains that there is a giant group of people who don’t see the truth because they don’t WANT to see the truth.  And so they exchange the truth for a lie.

G.K. Chesterton said, “When people stop believing in God, they don’t believe in nothing — they believe in anything.”  Once you rule out the truth, you open yourself up to increasingly ridiculous lies.  It’s as simple as that.  Self-deception becomes like a cancer that eats away more and more of what little truth you ever had to begin with.

Liberals become idiots by sheer brute force of will.  They won’t see the world God’s way.  So they construct alternate realities for themselves, and buy each others’ garbage views of the world.

The Bible, as usual, gets it right.  Look up Romans 1:18, 1:22, Psalm 52:3, Proverbs 8:36, Micah 3:2, 2 Corinthians 4:4, 1 Timothy 4:2 and 2 Timothy 4:3-4 to see the self-imposed blindness of these people.

I want to reach those who are capable of being reached – the independents who haven’t committed their minds to oppose God and His ways.  I want to reach those people who CAN be persuaded with facts.  And just as important, I want

And:

Orwell said that some ideas are so foolish that only an “intellectual” could believe them, for no ordinary man could be such a fool.  And the record of history proves him correct.  20th century intellectuals were especially appalling in this regard.  Every mass-murdering psychopathic dictator had widespread support among the “intellectual” class.  Lenin, Stalin, Mao and Hitler all had their admiring sycophants among the Western intelligentsia.

I have often said that some of (most of?) our most educated people are true moral idiots.  They refuse to view the world through the prism of God and His Word, and instead view the world through their perverted theories.  The result is that they cannot even possibly see the world as it really is (i.e., as God sees reality).  And they end up becoming profoundly stupid people through brute force of will.

Nazi Germany was the most advanced nation of the world – and yet it was the most morally stupid culture that ever existed.  This sophisticated, advanced, scientific culture warped and degraded themselves into the most murderous of barbarians never once realizing how profoundly stupid they had become.

Paul put it well: “Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools.”

And:

I don’t believe Obama is capable of “teachable moments” myself.

Obama’s worldview is a bunch of “-isms” such as Marxism and socialism and fascism and racism, etc.

The only way to experience truth is to experience it through Jesus Christ and His Word or to at least have a Judeo-Christian worldview.

Obama most certainly does not.  He has radically rejected Christianity while falsely calling his blasphemy “Christian” as though Jesus would have blessed abortion and literally championed the murder of the Son of God in an unwed teenage mother’s womb.  While he has called for an end to marriage that marks the official end of any scintilla of “Christendom” in Western Civilization.

When you think like Obama, you force yourself to be a moral and ultimately an intellectual fool through sheer brute force of will.  You can not see the truth because you WILL not see the truth.

These are just a few examples pointing out how many times I’ve said that the stupidity of the left isn’t intellectual; it’s moral.  These are truly stupid people because they hate God and hate His ways and WILL NOT seek truth from Him.  And the result is that they are the most demonically stupid leaders of the last generation before the beast comes and big-government-worshiping liberals take his mark and worship him.

Mother Teresa, who understood the full horror of poverty more than all the liberals in the world combined, nevertheless the true enemy of peace:

“But I feel that the greatest destroyer of peace today is abortion, because it is a war against the child – a direct killing of the innocent child – murder by the mother herself. And if we accept that a mother can kill even her own child, how can we tell other people not to kill one another?” — Mother Teresa

Every single Democrat – and that means YOU, Democrat – have directly participated in the holocaust-murder of 55 million innocent human beings.  And even eternity in hell will not last long enough for the left to pay for their moral crimes against humanity.

What does the counsel of God that liberals love to despise say about unborn human beings?

“For You formed my inward parts; You wove me in my mother’s womb.  I will give thanks to You, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made; Wonderful are Your works, And my soul knows it very well.  My frame was not hidden from You, When I was made in secret, And skillfully wrought in the depths of the earth; Your eyes have seen my unformed substance; And in Your book were all written The days that were ordained for me, When as yet there was not one of them.” — Psalm 139:13-16

What was it that God sent an archangel to tell Mary?

But the angel said to her, “Do not be afraid, Mary, you have found favor with God.  You will be with child and give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus.

Liberals have violently and viciously rejected the truest and deepest meaning of Christmas and the Christ who came.  Because what was in Mary’s womb was NOT a nonhuman lump of goop; it was a Child.  And the Child was not a curse to be exterminated, but a blessing to nurture and love.  And liberals have brutally tried to murder that spirit ever since.  And hell will be their reward.

Let me simply come out and state it as a fact: if the Virgin Mary were a young American teenage girl today, the Democrat Party would have encouraged her to have an abortion and thus murder the Savior of the world.

John MacArthur points out the fact that the agenda of the Democrat Party is the agenda of Romans chapter one.  Because the Democrat Party is the party of homosexual perversion and the party of the damnation of God.

Democrats are the most morally stupid people on the face of the entire earth.  Because they grew up in the nation that most allowed and most cherished the Word of God.  And they are the people who have most turned their backs on the truth that God would have given them had they but turned for one moment to Him.

We are surrounded by the colossal stupidity of Democrats at every level today.

We are seeing a categorical rejection of God and His ways as Democrats impose the way of their god, Satan, and seek to ultimately impose their false messiah, the Antichrist, and the curse of his big government upon the world.

Don’t be discouraged.  Don’t become frustrated that they can’t see the blindingly obvious.  How do you expect baby murderers and depraved perverts to possibly understand economic realities???  What can these people understand when they look at a pregnant mother and can’t realize that there’s a baby in her womb?  They can’t even understand the most basic of moral truths; everything else is as rocket science to a cockroach with them.

The Scripture tells us:

“The god of this age has blinded the minds of unbelievers, so that they cannot see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.” — 2 Corinthians 4:4

These are blind people who have blindly imposed the destiny of their god on the world and on America.  And it’s not like the Bible isn’t filled with warnings about the stupidity and evil that will characterize the last days.

And as a result:

“Many will follow their evil teaching and shameful immorality. And because of these teachers, the way of truth will be slandered.  In their greed they will make up clever lies to get hold of your money. But God
condemned them long ago, and their destruction will not be delayed.” – 2 Peter 2:2-3 NLT

I believe that America has crossed the threshold of God’s judgment.  We are going to go down hard and we’re not going to get up.  And I believe that that will happen whether or not we go off the damn fiscal cliff.

I am now carrying a different message: don’t look to Republican victories in 2014 or 2016; it is too late to save America and neither politics nor politicians ever COULD save America.

Don’t look to America; for it will be burned up.  Look instead to the Kingdom of Heaven and store up your treasures in the new heavens and the new earth that God will create for His people.

Democrats are the enemies of Jesus Christ.  But Jesus told us to love His enemies even as He loved His enemies.  Which is only possible to do through true faith in Him.

My anger over the sheer pathetic stupidity as we rush to welcome the beast and worship him and take his mark isn’t gone; but I rejoice to say it is going away.  If I have one new year’s resolution it is to put anger and vengeance aside and realize that God is telling His people that the last days are at hand and that God will allow the beast to come so He can defeat the evil, the devil and His Antichrist once for all.

John MacArthur Says Democrats Adopted The Sins Of Romans 1 As Their Platform. Thank God When Prominent Christian Leaders Speak Out

For the official record, I actually made this same observation and point back on August 6.  I said:

The lowest point a culture can get is not abortion, as hateful and evil as abortion is; it is the moral crime of condoning and in fact honoring and celebrating homosexuality. It is in the Bible in black and white.

I can explain to you why that is.  It is because after God created man in His image He said to humanity:

God blessed them; and God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth, and subdue it; and rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over every living thing that moves on the earth.” — Genesis 1:28

And from the very outset, from the Tower of Babel on, depraved, sinful, wicked man has had an “alternative” to the plan of the God who created one man for one woman.

It is no surprise that the Democrat Party – the party of genuine evil – would slander and pervert God’s will and plan by endorsing global warming and population controls and the most egregious slap in the face to His will of all: open recognition and celebration of homosexuality.

And I am glad to learn that John MacArthur is saying it too.

John MacArthur knows the Bible like only a few other human beings in the world today know it.  That kind of confirmation from a man I have deeply appreciated for years is powerful.

We are facing a tsunami of genuine evil pouring over this nation; and we are just about to find out what happens when a patient God finally gets angry.  And the most degenerate symbol of that is the embrace not just by the Democrats but by the nation they demagogue to of open homosexuality and its replacement of marriage.

It is also the most degenerate symbol of how our political and judicial branches and the decisions they make are rigged.  The people overwhelmingly vote year after year in state after state to either ban gay marriage or to define marriage as the union between one man and one woman.  Over and over again.  And liberal activist judges decide their morality ought to replace God’s.  Over and over again a Democrat-appointed liberal judge ignored the will of the people and decided that men not being allowed to marry other men somehow violates the Constitution.  Listen: any gay man can legally marry any woman eighteen or older who is crazy enough to have him; same as me.  Because that’s what real marriage is: the union of one man with one woman.  Nobody was deprived of their rights; a homosexual man CAN marry but he refuses to exercise his right.  You don’t get to substitute one right you freely chose not to exercise for another right created just for you; or if I forego on my right to eat brocoli tonight, does that mean I have the right to rape somebody?  A gay man chooses not to marry women and now I have to treat what God calls the “abomination” of the union of sodomites with the same dignity that I treat marriage?  And redefine not only marriage, but the family and society in the doing?  I mean, really?  I don’t think so.

But that is where the Democrat Party has pushed America.  And the fiscal cliff is not the only cliff America is falling over.  Or the worst.

Anyway, all that said, here’s what John MacArthur said:

Pastor John MacArthur: Democrats ‘Adopted The Sins of Romans 1 As Their Platform’
By Jon Street
December 10, 2012

(CNSNews.com) – Evangelical pastor and author John MacArthur  said that the Democratic Party has “adopted the sins of Romans 1 as their  platform.”

“And as you know,” MacArthur told his Southern California  congregation on Sept. 30, “I’m not one to talk about politics as such,  but I was essentially amazed that one of the historic parties here in  the United States adopted the sins of Romans 1 as their platform. This  is a new day in our country. Parties which used to differ on economics  now differ dramatically on issues that invade the realm of God’s law and  morality.”

MacArthur is an author, pastor of Grace Community Church  in Sun Valley, Calif., president of The Master’s College and Seminary,  and a teacher at Grace to You media ministry.

“In an ideal situation, their platform would mean that the government  passes out condoms so people can fornicate at will,” said MacArthur.  “For those who happen to get pregnant in the process, the platform  advocates that you kill the baby at the will of the mother, up and including  the ninth month.”

“At the same time,” he said, “it advocates homosexual marriage,  which is an oxymoron, an utter impossibility, and a gross violation of the law  of God. And then, to add to that, the murder of abortion and then the  platform originally leaving God out. All of that is Romans 1.

“Romans 1 says God will judge, God has judged, throughout human history, nations that experience sexual freedom,” he said. “Romans Chapter 1 lays that out clearly. The wrath of God is revealed from Heaven against those who advocate sexual freedoms, sexual conduct outside of marriage. And that’s an indication of a demise of a nation.

“And then Romans 1 also says God will judge those nations that advocate homosexual behavior, men with men, women with women, doing what is unnatural,” said Pastor MacArthur. “They are also haters of God, haters of God.”

The Democratic Party voted to include support for same-sex marriage  in the party’s platform at the 2012 Democratic National Convention in  Charlotte, N.C.  At the convention, the party also affirmed its  endorsement of Obamacare, which includes a regulation requiring virtually all health-care plans to cover, without co-pay, sterilizations, contraceptives, and abortion-inducing  drugs.

Upon approving the platform, the audience initially “booed” a  reference to God, although the mention of God was ultimately kept in the  party’s platform.

But MacArthur is not the first person to not the contrast between the Christian views espoused in St. Paul’s Letter to the Romans and Democratic Party views on such issues as homosexual marriage and abortion is not new one.

As CNSNews.com reported in 2008, then-Senator Barack Obama (D-Ill.) told a crowd at a campaign stop in Nelsonville, Ohio that the Sermon on the Mount is “more central” to his faith “than an obscure passage in Romans.”

“I don’t think it [a same-sex union] should be called marriage,”  Obama said, “But I think that it is a legal right that they should have  that is recognized by the state. If people find that controversial, then  I would just refer them to the Sermon on the Mount, which I think is,  in my mind, for my faith, more central than an obscure passage in  Romans.”

Three days later, Obama told ABC’s Good Morning America co-host Robin Roberts that his views on gay marriage  were “evolving” and that the issue of gay marriage is also an issue of  “how we treat other people.” Citing his Christian faith, Obama added  that the root of his faith is “not only Christ sacrificing himself on  our behalf,” but also the Golden Rule: “Do to others as you would have  them do to you.”

In Romans 1, it states:

26 That is why God abandoned them to degrading passions:

27 why their women have exchanged natural  intercourse for   unnatural practices; and the men, in a similar  fashion, too, giving up normal   relations with women, are consumed with  passion for each other, men doing   shameful things with men and  receiving in themselves due reward for their   perversion.

28 In other words, since they would not consent to   acknowledge God, God abandoned them to their unacceptable thoughts and indecent behaviour.

29 And so now they are steeped in all sorts of  injustice,   rottenness, greed and malice; full of envy, murder,  wrangling, treachery and   spite,

30 libellers, slanderers, enemies of God, rude, arrogant and   boastful, enterprising in evil, rebellious to parents,

31 without brains, honour, love or pity.

32 They are well aware of God’s ordinance: that  those who   behave like this deserve to die — yet they not only do it,  but even applaud   others who do the same.

Here is a link to the King James   version of Romans 1.

There’s about a 2 1/2 minute video of MacAurthur preaching at the title link.

Pretty soon the Antichrist will be here, and people will have to choose whether to take his mark or die of starvation because you won’t be able to either buy or sell without that mark.

You seriously need to think about what you have been voting for and what you will be held responsible by a just and holy God for voting for.  If you are a Democrat, you PERSONALLY are responsible for every single one of the 55 million innocent human beings who have been murdered because of your vote for the Democrat Party.  We could do the math, figuring out how many Democrats have been elected since Roe v. Wade in 197.  It would probably be something like ten thousand babies were murdered for every single Democrat elected to office.  It is evil.  And you will burn in hell a trillion times a trillion years for each and every single nanosecond of the lives that each and every one of those babies should have had but didn’t because you decided it was legal to murder them.

And you will be held to account for the cancer you were to culture and to the world you were supposed to live righteously in but refused.  Because when you voted Democrat you voted for the homosexualization of society.

I want to understand how Democrats who call themselves “Christians” can justify voting for the wickedness of Romans 1 that God says will bring about His wrath on that nation and on the souls who practice such abomination.  I want to know how you plan to explain how you felt no fear of God when you destroyed 55 million of His precious little image bearers.  I want to know what you will say if God tells you that Jesus couldn’t die for your sins because you aborted Him in Mary’s womb.  The ugliness of abortion is greatest when it is applied to the meaning of Christmas.

And I want you to know that the hoofbeats of the four horsemen of the Apocalypse are sounding closer and closer and they’re riding harder and faster because you’ve allowed them to come with what you’ve done.

 

 

Of Jesus, The Woman Caught In Adultery, Public Morality, The Law – And The Consequences Of Ignoring Our Developing Social Crisis

I had an interesting discussion with an intelligent young libertarian that we didn’t have time to finish.  It involved the libertarian (and liberal) notion that morality shouldn’t be legislated.  An interesting fact about that view is that the very view itself amounts to legislating your morality as opposed to the person’s morality that holds that morality SHOULD be legislated.

It is simply a fact that every single law presupposes somebody’s view of morality.  Any law that says “X is wrong and the consequences are therefore Y” or “You must do X and the penalty for not doing X is Y” are invariably based on somebody’s view as to what is right and what is wrong.  You simply cannot avoid “legislating morality”; it is only a question as to whose morality ought to be legislated.

My friend believes that moral issues such as prostitution and narcotics offenses should not be crimes and should not be punished by the legal system.  He specifically said that people shouldn’t be put in federal prison for such non-violent crimes.  Why not?  After all, he says that he himself doesn’t believe in drugs and would never use a prostitute.  His answer: Because he doesn’t believe that it is right for him to hold other people accountable for his moral views.

Well, let me say a few things in addition to the aforementioned fact that EVERY law and for that matter every striking down of every law that has been on the books (e.g., “sodomy laws”) represent somebody’s morality.  The first emerges from Abraham Lincoln – and why he was the first Republican rather than the first libertarian.

In 1858, Democrat candidate for president Stephen Douglas, in arguing that slavery ought to be legal (more specifically, that slavery not be made ILLEGAL) assumed a view that the government could be completely neutral in regards to a moral issue like slavery (or abortion, or homosexuality, etc.) and allow each person the right to own a slave (or abort a baby or marry a same-sex partner) as he or she chose.  I’ve described the exchange Douglas had with Lincoln before:

Douglas said that, although he was “personally against” the institution of slavery, “popular sovereignty” ought to determine whether slavery was legal or not. Does that sound familiar? The state isn’t “for” slavery or “for” abortion or – in the case of prostitution – “for” prostitution; it ought to be completely “neutral” and allow people to decide for themselves. In their Sixth Debate at Quincy on October 13, 1858, Abraham Lincoln’s famous response to Douglas was:

“So I say again, that in regard to the arguments that are made, when Judge Douglas says he “don’t care whether slavery is voted up or voted down,” whether he means that as an individual expression of sentiment, or only as a sort of statement of his views on national policy, it is alike true to say that he can thus argue logically if he don’t see anything wrong in it; but he cannot say so logically if he admits that slavery is wrong. He cannot say that he would as soon see a wrong voted up as voted down. When Judge Douglas says that whoever or whatever community wants slaves, they have a right to have them, he is perfectly logical, if there is nothing wrong in the institution; but if you admit that it is wrong, he cannot logically say that anybody has a right to do wrong.”

The fact of the matter is that if government permitted blacks to be owned as slaves, it was not taking a neutral position. It was implicitly accepting the view that blacks were less than fully human, and therefore could be owned as property if someone chose to do so. And if the presuppositions justifying slavery were wrong, then as Lincoln said, one simply could not have “the right to do wrong” – even by popular vote. In the same way, by permitting unborn babies to be aborted, the government is not taking a neutral position. Rather, it is likewise implicitly accepting the view that the unborn are not fully human, and therefore can be regarded essentially as property rather than as persons (property that may be destroyed at will).

On issues such as abortion, or prostitution, or homosexual marriage, or narcotics crimes, I do not accept the argument that would be legislating my moral view and that doing so is somehow wrong for me to do.  That is because 1) the other side is equally legislating ITS moral view, and if the other side has a right to legislate its morality than I certainly have just as much right to legislate mine. 2) I further submit that in all of these issues, I am not merely legislating “my” morality; rather, I submit that God has made it plain that He is against these things the same way that I am, and I further submit that the entirety of Western civilization is similarly on my side on all of these issues. 3) there is no such thing as “neutrality” on a moral principle or issue.  You simply ultimately must take one position or the other.  When it comes to legalizing abortion, for example, the government cannot claim “neutrality” because they are affirming that ultimately abortion is permissible and it is not wrong for someone to have one.   And it therefore boils down to 4) as Lincoln argued: a person cannot have a right to do something that is wrong.

During our conversation, my friend brought up a fascinating point as supporting his view that we should not be legislating morality: he brought up Jesus and the example of the woman caught in the act of adultery.  Here’s the story (John 8:3-11 from the NIV):

The teachers of the law and the Pharisees brought in a woman caught in adultery. They made her stand before the group and said to Jesus, “Teacher, this woman was caught in the act of adultery.  In the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women. Now what do you say?”  They were using this question as a trap, in order to have a basis for accusing him. But Jesus bent down and started to write on the ground with his finger.  When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, “If any one of you is without sin, let him be the first to throw a stone at her.”  Again he stooped down and wrote on the ground.  At this, those who heard began to go away one at a time, the older ones first, until only Jesus was left, with the woman still standing there.  Jesus straightened up and asked her, “Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?”  “No one, sir,” she said. “Then neither do I condemn you,” Jesus declared. “Go now and leave your life of sin.”

I should point out that this story – as famous as it is – is NOT in the earliest manuscripts of the Book of John and was quite possibly not in John’s Gospel as he wrote it.  It is also not found in any of the other Gospels.  I could therefore simply dismiss this account as a later addition to the Gospel and at the very least argue that one shouldn’t make sweeping conclusions on the basis of a story that may not even have been part of Jesus’ teaching.  I’m not going to take that path in the rest of my interpretation of this passage and in fact believe the passage is an authentic event in the life of Jesus, but you should realize that option is available.

My friend cited this story in John’s Gospel to support his view that Jesus was essentially a libertarian here and abrogated the notion of the law punishing someone for moral issues like adultery.  And the implicit assumption is that what applies to adultery would likewise therefore apply to prostitution, homosexual marriage and narcotics crimes (i.e., to all the so-called “victimless crimes”).  Is he right?

Take a moment before reading on to think about how you would respond to this and upon what grounds you would so respond before reading on.

Let me point out a few things that need to be understood.

1) Jesus is not abrogating the Law of Moses here.  In a passage that was unquestionably the words of Jesus, we have this: “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them” (Matthew 5:17).

Interestingly, on John’s (Johannine) theology, it was the pre-incarnate Christ who gave Moses the Ten Commandments to begin with.  John 1:1-3 famously teaches that Jesus as the Word was God the Creator.  It teaches that “All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being.”  It was Christ who created the universe and created man in His image so that He could one day assume the image of man in the Incarnation.  And it was the pre-incarnate Christ who appeared to Moses in the burning bush.

It’s not like Christ as God, the Second Person of the Trinity, the Creator, Yahweh the I Am, gave Moses the law and then later came to earth and decided that the stuff about punishing adultery was wrong.  There is a great deal more going on in this account of what Jesus did and why He did it.  And particularly, given that Jesus specifically taught that He had not come to abolish the law, but to fulfill it, one simply does not have warrant to assume that contrary to what Jesus said He actually DID come to abolish the law.

2) Part of that “great deal more” that is going on is overtly stated in the account itself:

 ”Teacher, this woman was caught in the act of adultery. In the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women. Now what do you say?” They were using this question as a trap, in order to have a basis for accusing him.

This was hardly a mere matter of asking Jesus whether the Laws of Moses were valid or whether the specific Law of Moses pertaining to punishment of adultery was valid.  The pharisees dragged this woman before Jesus to trap him.  The woman was merely a pawn in their game.  Basically, they were seeking to put Jesus in an impossible dilemma: if Jesus said that the woman should be stoned, then Jesus would be guilty of demanding the death penalty which was reserved for Rome and therefore Jesus would be guilty of insurrection against Rome.  And don’t think the Pharisees would not have immediately raced to Pontius Pilate and made sure that Pilate was aware that a dangerous insurrectionist was walking around inciting Jews to commit violence.  And if Jesus said the woman should not be stoned, then Jesus would be guilty of abolishing the Word of God and the Law and teachings of Moses and therefore a blasphemer and a heretic.  Jesus had to answer the Pharisees in a manner which did not invite either of these two above interpretations.  If the woman actually had been stoned to death, she would have died not as a result of her adultery but for being a political tool in the effort to entrap Jesus.  That must be seen as the proper background for Jesus’ answer.

3) There is also something very wrong with this picture:

The teachers of the law and the Pharisees brought in a woman caught in adultery.

How many does it take to tango?  Doesn’t it take TWO people to commit adultery?  Where’s the man?  Why isn’t he there?  Just how was it that ”this woman was caught in the act of adultery” but they didn’t catch her partner?

Let’s say, just for the sake of argument, that I to this very day believe that people caught in the act of adultery should be stoned to death.  Does that therefore mean that I would or should agree that only the women should be stoned and the men should get off scott free?  Must I hold that stoning the women is better than not stoning anybody?  Because that’s the specific circumstance that Jesus was confronted with.

By this point in time, the Pharisees had actually long-since ceased following the “laws of Moses” and were instead following “a hedge around the law” of Moses in its place.  They had developed all sorts of laws in sources such as the Talmuds, the Mishnah and the Midrashim and had added levels upon levels and layers upon layers of laws to surround the law of Moses ostensibly to keep a person from breaking the law of Moses by making it such that he or she would have to first break a whole series of laws just to GET to the Law of Moses.

Jesus described these additional laws in Matthew 23:1-4 (NLT):

Then Jesus said to the crowds and to his disciples, “The teachers of religious law and the Pharisees are the official interpreters of the law of Moses.  So practice and obey whatever they tell you, but don’t follow their example. For they don’t practice what they teach.  They crush people with unbearable religious demands and never lift a finger to ease the burden.

Unfortunately, they had an uncanny way of providing loopholes for themselves.  The woman could and should be stoned to death for her crime of adultery, but the man who committed adultery with her and presumably informed the Pharisees of her crime was let off the hook.

And in condemning the woman to death, Jesus would have been providing His assent to this entire unjust system that had arisen around the Law of Moses in addition to being labeled as an  insurrectionist against Rome.

How was Jesus to render His judgment about a system which stoned a woman to death as an adulteress while the man who had committed the same act of adultery with her walked away whistling and able to do it again?

In answering the way that He did, Jesus on the one hand could not be called an insurrectionist against Rome; those who were about to stone the woman put their stones down because of his words.  On the other hand, He likewise could not be said to have abrogated the Law of Moses.  Because He didn’t tell them NOT to stone her; He merely called attention to the fact that those who were about to be executioners because this woman was a sinner were themselves sinners.  It was the perfect answer for the trap the Pharisees had set for Jesus; in fact it was the ONLY answer for the trap.

4) Jesus’ mission and ministry itself was also involved.

I’ve heard death penalty opponents ask the question, “Would Jesus sentence somebody to death?”  And of course, you’re supposed to read John 8:3-11 and conclude “Oh my gosh!  No, He wouldn’t have!  The death penalty is wrong!”  But let’s ask another question on the same view: “Would Jesus sentence somebody to life imprisonment?”  And of course, on the same view that you use above, the answer is, “No.  Jesus wouldn’t have done that, either.  He would have forgiven the criminal.”  On the view that is being taken of Jesus and the woman caught in adultery, Jesus would have forgiven the criminal for his crime – regardless of what it was – and told him, “Go now and leave your life of sin.”

You end up with a category fallacy, as I shall explain. 

We run into two problems in understanding the John 8 passage as Jesus teaching that adultery – and all the other aforementioned moral issues and “victimless crimes” – should no longer be punished.  One is everything I’ve said above, and the other was speaking in John 8 as One who did not come in the Incarnation to judge and condemn people for their sins, but rather to deliver and save people from their sins.  That’s the category fallacy I was talking about.  It doesn’t mean that Jesus was saying that all laws be set aside.  He wasn’t teaching that we can or should do away with the Law of Moses, or that public moral crimes such as adultery and homosexuality and prostitution, etc. etc. be allowed to flourish without any punishments.  Rather, he was saying to those who were merely trying to set a trap for Him by dragging a woman before Him in order to get Him to commit insurrection against Rome that if her accusers were going to demand she be punished for her sins, then her accusers should be punished for theirs, as well.

One day, for the record, Jesus will return as King of kings and as Lord of lords.  And He will very MUCH come to judge and render judgment.  And yes, people WILL be held accountable to the moral law and they will be punished for their crimes against men and against God.

There’s an increasingly popular view that liberals and libertarians share: public moral issues such as homosexual marriage and prostitution and the narcotics industry don’t hurt them as individuals and therefore we should simply step aside and allow those who want to “fundamentally transform” America to have at it.  My response is twofold: number one, if your argument is “It’s not hurting me” and that’s all you care about, you’re not a patriot because you only care about yourself.  Your marriage won’t implode so you don’t care if homosexual marriage and prostitution and widespread narcotics use become the law of the land to go along with adultery and abortion.

Well, that was the exact same attitude that the Germans had as they watched the Nazis take the Jews away.  They weren’t Jews so it didn’t affect them and they didn’t care.  Martin Niemöller summed up the reality that “It doesn’t affect me” is a rather morally idiotic way to live.  This idea that “it doesn’t affect me so I don’t care” is the essence of “All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.”

The second thing is that these issues DO affect you.  Because they affect all of society all around you. 

George Washington said the following in his farewell address.  In his very last words to the nation, the father of our country issued us this warning:

“Of all the habits and dispositions which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism who should labor to subvert these great pillars.”

Fellow founding father John Adams expressed a very similar warning this way:

“Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”

We reject our religious tradition and degrade public morality at our peril.  I write about the constant liberal attempt to rip up the 2nd Amendment of our Constitution and take away our right to keep and bear arms and protect our homes and our properties from both private individual criminals and public sector bureaucrat tyrants alike.  They decry the violence they see around them, but will never realize that it was their “fundamental transformation of America” which they have pursued for the last sixty years that broke down our society and turned it into a violent place to begin with.  I write:

Liberals have worked hard for the last fifty years to take away our morality and our religion. In so doing, they have given us the very violence that is now spiralling out of control. Liberals are the kind of people who have taken away prayer. Liberals are the kind of people who have refused to allow the posting of the Ten Commandments because “If the posted copies of the Ten Commandments are to have any effect at all, it will be to induce the schoolchildren to read, meditate upon, perhaps to venerate and obey, the Commandments,” and God-as-Government forbid that children be allowed to do something like that. Liberals are the kind of people who have imposed godless abortion upon society to the tune of 54 MILLION innocent human beings butchered since 1973. Liberals are the kind of people who have destroyed fatherhood, because according to liberals fathers did not father children, but strictly non-human lumps of biological goop such that they should not be allowed to have any influence whatsoever as to whether their own babies be allowed to even live. Liberals are the kind of people who have imposed pornography on us because liberal justices are moral idiots who are morally incapable of differentiating between art and XXX-rated sex movies. Liberals are the kind of people who imposed no-fault divorce without limit or condition upon us because breaking up families is more important than asking couples who took a vow to one another under God to work to resolve their differences. Liberals are the kind of people who turned marriage itself into a perverted mockery by saying that the institution of marriage as the union of one man and one woman be adulterated to include whatever the hell politically correct understanding depraves the minds of the left next.

These are the people that George Washington said, “These people are NOT patriots.” These are the people that the founding fathers said we needed to be armed to protect ourselves against as they take away the God-given rights of “the people” to protect ourselves against the very tyranny they continually seek to impose upon us.

Abortion has been the death of fatherhood.  When a man and a woman have sexual relations, does a man father a child?  No!  Not on the liberal abortion view!  No child was born; only a lifeless inanimate lump of goo arose.  That man is NOT a father and should have NONE of the rights of a father.  And therefore if he wants his child, he is compelled to stand aside and do nothing while his child is murdered at the “choice” of his child’s mother with absolutely ZERO say in the subject.

In the black community you’ve got two out of every three babies conceived being murdered in their mothers’ wombs.  What ought to be the safest place in the world for a baby is the most dangerous place.  And you wonder why 71% of all black children are raised without fathers?  Those ”non-father fathers” are merely living according to the Democrat/liberal reality that fathers do not matter and that they should have no choice and no rights as fathers.  They didn’t “father” anything and they have no rights and no “choice” even if they think they DID “father” something; so they should therefore have no responsibility and there’s the door right over there.

You say, “It doesn’t affect me so I don’t care.”  But your poor kid or grand kid has to go to school and then walk home from school surrounded by increasingly psychotic little thugs who never had fathers to teach them right from wrong and discipline them when they chose the latter over the former.  More and more boys are growing up having no idea what it means to be a “man” apart from what their mothers who have become embittered against men tell them.  With the clear result being that boys are growing up to be far worse than the “non-father fathers” who abandoned them.  Morally intelligent people are watching their society become more toxic by the day all around them.  And they damn well know that this decay is hurting them.

Meanwhile the number of workers who support each retiree continues to plummet every single year. Seventeen workers contributed to every retiree’s benefits when the Social Security program began. Now it’s down to 2.3. By 2035 it will be down to 2-1. Meanwhile we have murdered more than 54.5 million future workers since 1973. Any fool ought to know that the trend isn’t good. And yet we keep piling on more and more and more idiocy because “it doesn’t affect me so I don’t care.” One day we’re going to wake up to find ourselves in a collapsing banana republic and then we’ll wish we’d cared.

Don’t tell me it doesn’t affect you.  Because I’ll know from that moment that I’m talking to a moral idiot.

The same applies to prostitution.  Do you really think that’s a ‘victimless crime’?  You don’t think the wives and the fiances and the girlfriends of men who use prostitutes aren’t hurt by this public moral depravity?  You don’t think the children of these men aren’t hurt by it?  You don’t think that the women who prostitute themselves aren’t victimized by an action in which they literally sell their bodies to be used like sex dolls?  You don’t think that life hurts their children and hurts their family members?  You don’t think that when women prostitute themselves it in fact hurts ALL women as men develop an increasingly widespread attitude that women are merely objects to be used and discarded when you’re finished using them?  You don’t think that ANY location where prostitutes gather to further poison society doesn’t become a toxic cesspool that won’t lose its value, thus directly hurting that community?  Yes, prostitution hurts society.  Prostitution hurts society at every single level.

Let me cite an article that was in the Los Angeles Times on a different subject that creates the same sort of problems for a community: the different subject was panhandling.  Liberal cities like Arcata – known as “the Berkley of the North” – has tried to ban the panhandlers they once encouraged to flood into their city.  In addition to the trash, the drug needles, the human feces all over, these “tolerant” liberals discovered that they were killing their city’s businesses as shoppers increasingly avoided areas where they would get repeatedly and aggressively hit up for money.  You don’t think prostitution doesn’t create an even BIGGER drag on businesses?  You don’t think that prostitution – which brings in gangs and pimps and turf wars along with many other things that make decent people avoid those areas like it had the plague – doesn’t do the same things to the unfortunate businesses that find themselves next to a hell hole?  You don’t think that as businesses fail, jobs leave the area, tax dollars leave the area, the area itself suffers decline and blight, and people aren’t HURT?

You cannot have a right to do wrong, Lincoln said.  What kind of person would actually say, “There’s nothing wrong with prostitution, and I hope my little girl sells herself for hundreds of anonymous men to sexually use her?”  What kind of people would encourage their wives or their mothers to become prostitutes?  If you think that prostitution is a good thing that will help civilization flourish, if you truly believe that women are the sort of dumb farm animals who won’t mind if their men use women for money that rightfully belongs to their households and to their children, then you are a particular kind of sick idiot.  But please have the basic decency NOT to say that while you personally believe it’s wrong and you would never do it yourself that people ought to have the “right” to do this obviously very wrong thing.  The wisdom of Lincoln refutes you right along with the results of the fruits of your attitude on society.

Marriage is under direct attack from so many different liberal policies it is beyond unreal.  Defining marriage as a mere societal convention that has no divine value or transcendent significance, such that it can be redefined according to whatever is the politically correct attitude that happens to be in vogue, is hardly the way to support the institution of marriage.  If marriage means everything, than marriage means absolutely nothing.  It is either a union of one man and one woman under the sight of God or it isn’t.  People are increasingly asking, “Why should we bother to get married?”  Because marriage means less and less, and there is less and less stigma for those who simply don’t bother to marry because there is no longer any value in marriage.  And therefore there is less and less permanence and stability and more and more fracturing of more and more families.

Liberals want to say race is the leading indicator as to poverty.  They are WRONG.  The leading indicator of poverty is single parent households.  There is absolutely no question that regardless of your race or any other factor, that marriage is the place where children thrive and abandoning marriage results in abandoning children to impoverished lives. 

Let us return again to adultery.  What should we do?  Re-legislate the Law of Moses and stone them?  That would be something, wouldn’t it?  Imagine how many despicable people wouldn’t be around to plague society any longer?  That being said, obviously we’re not going to stone adulterers any time soon whether it’s a good thing to do or not.

Tragically, it is very difficult to put the immoral cat back in the bag and embrace public morality once that love of and pursuit of national public morality has been lost.  Once a nation begins to decline, it is very difficult to turn the ship around.  Degenerating from bad to worse to collapse is the pattern that we have observed over and over and over again.

The first thing that we can do as we realize the enormous hole we have dug ourselves in is for the love of God to STOP DIGGING.  Quit attacking marriage, the family, religion, religious values and morality while assuring the people that doing so will do no harm.  Quit saying “it doesn’t affect me so I don’t care.”

The second thing to do is to try to undergird marriage and fight as a society to keep families together.  No-fault divorce and easy convenient divorce have got to go.  And of course, there is no point fighting to preserve marriages and keep couples together unless “marriage” means something that is truly worth fighting for to begin with.

The third thing to do is to find a way to punish public immorality and make acts of public immorality shameful the way it used to be.  We don’t have to resort in jails or even in a return to the stocks.  There are more ways than ever today to publicly shame those who engage in shameful behaviors to go with community service and fines.  But of course, here’s the conundrum: no perpetrator of a shameful act will never truly feel shame if the people that become aware of his or her shameful act are not offended and outraged by the behavior.  The more immorality there is that comes to characterize society at large, the more apathy there will be, and vice versa.  The more tolerant we are as a society toward adultery and divorce, the less stigma there is to commit adultery and to have divorces, the more adultery and divorce you’re going to see.

There was a time when a person possessing common sense could consider the consequences of having an adulterous affair and conclude that the consequences were simply not worth the “rewards” of the act.  As there are fewer and fewer consequences, we have inevitably seen an increase in the number of Americans who have said, “the hell with it.”

And that’s precisely why we’re going to hell.

No one is more victimized by these things than children.  Children of these tragedies perform more poorly academically, have less social competence, have worse health, and have far more behavioral problems than children of mothers and fathers (note: NOT homosexual couples!).  And of course these dysfunctional, scarred children grow up, and the vicious cycle spirals more and more out of control.

Is there a way out?  There is, but America won’t take it.

Which is why the beast is coming.  We’re living in the last days and the devil is panting with eagerness to introduce his Antichrist to the world that will be looking for a messiah of its own choosing after our depraved world collapses under the weight of its wickedness.

Why Don’t Democrats Who Demonize Chick-Fil-A Over Gay Marriage Not Demonize Black People? Look Right Here, It’s EASY!

Chick-Fil-A has received more hatred this past week than most businesses get in a lifetime.  Why?  Because its CEO expressed his constitutionally-protected opinion and because he took the same position that Liar-in-Chief Obama cynically and deceitfully took for most of his first term before betraying the American people who believed him when Obama said:

“I believe that marriage is the union between a man and a woman. Now, for me as a Christian — for me — for me as a Christian, it is also a sacred union. God’s in the mix.”

It is very difficult to believe now that Rahm Emanuel became this incredibly hateful man’s chief of staff given that Obama “tastes like hate.”

It was only three months ago that Barack Obama tasted like hate.

Why don’t Democrats demonize anyone who ISN’T Christian for believing that marriage is the union between one man and one woman and that homosexuality is a sin?

Why won’t they demonize black people when black people more than ANY other race agree with Chick-Fil-A CEO Dan Cathy’s viewpoint?

Homophobia, to be sure, is a sadly universal phenomenon. But it is one with especially deep roots among blacks. Polling numbers bear this out. In a recent Pew poll, 65 percent of American blacks reported thinking of homosexuality as wrong, while only 48 percent of whites did; in other words, most blacks harbored this prejudice, while fewer than half of whites did. Also, black voters played a disproportionate role in getting the anti-gay-marriage Proposition 8 passed in California in 2008.

Why did Rahm Emanuel demonize Chick-Fil-A and then welcome the Nation of Islam and Loius Farrakhan with open arms when the latter is more intolerant of homosexuality than Chick-Fil-A EVER was?

Why don’t Democrats demonize “homophobic” Islamic mosques and point out that those people who largely have different skin color than white people are all evil intolerant haters?

What about Boston Mayor Menino who supported with municipal licenses and even with the gift of $1.8 million in land a mosque whose founders said that gay people should be burned or thrown off a cliff? 

If memory serves, the people in thirty-five states out of thirty-five states have voted.  And in every single case the people have supported Dan Cathy and Chick-Fil-A’s view of marriage.  Shouldn’t the Democrat Party’s official platform position be that the American people are clearly evil?

Look, Democrats: it’s EASY to demonize a black man.  Watch here to see how your ilk does it:

Boy, are those liberals “brave” for surrounding an old black man and dumping their hate on him.  But at least these white liberals are being slightly consistent unlike the real “99 percent” of their party who would never DREAM of being consistent and viciously attacking black people for their views about a subject they just LOVE to demonize old white men for.

Aside from the fact that to be a Democrat is to be a gutless hypocrite who “stands for everything” and therefore stands for NOTHING, I can tell you the real reason why Democrats have somehow only ever shown the moral “courage” to demonize Christians.  It’s in the Bible.  Jesus Himself taught it:

“If the world hates you, keep in mind that it hated me first.  If you belonged to the world, it would love you as its own. As it is, you do not belong to the world, but I have chosen you out of the world. That is why the world hates you.  Remember the words I spoke to you: ‘No servant is greater than his master.’ If they persecuted me, they will persecute you also. If they obeyed my teaching, they will obey yours also.  They will treat you this way because of my name, for they do not know the One who sent me.”  John 15-18-21

That’s why.

That’s why Democrats hate on Christians and are so “tolerant” to everyone else even when everyone else agrees with the Christian and even when those who agree with the Christian have a long-documented tradition of hatred and bigotry like Louis Farrakhan.

Democrats don’t hate Obama. Even though for three years he “tasted like hate.” Democrats don’t hate black people even though on their own view black people are far and away the most intolerant and evil people in America. Democrats don’t hate Muslims even though they want to see gay people burned alive or thrown off cliffs. Democrats don’t hate Louis Farrakhan or his Nation of Islam in spite of their numerous hateful and racist and bigoted views that of course include homosexuality. Nope.

Democrats hate Christians.

And Jesus told us exactly why Democrats would hate Christians.

Ultimately, to be a Democrat is to be a hater of Jesus Christ.  They hated Him first.  And they hate us because they hate Him.

You go ahead, Democrat.  You hate me as much as you want.  I know why and I’ve chosen my side just like you’ve chosen yours.

See also here for why God ordained marrige the way He did and why the Democrat Party in officially making homosexuality part of their party platform have finally reached rock bottom.

Marriage Defined As The Union Between One Man And One Woman Doesn’t Take ANYBODY’S ‘Rights’ Away – (Except Maybe God’s)

That’s what we’re told every day.  If I believe “marriage” is the union between one man and one woman, I’m some kind of fascist who is out to take people’s rights away.

The problem is, that’s a whole lotta bullcrap.

For one thing, marriage has been defined EXACTLY as I define it by pretty much every single civilization that has ever existed.  There is NO civilization that has EVER allowed homosexual marriage for its people in HISTORY.  So why am I a fascist for holding to a tradition that has accompanied the human race for its entire history rather than the people who are trying to impose a “fundamental transformation” on the entirety of human history up to this point being the fascists?

The entire history of the United States of America from the days when it was a colony to this day records that my views represent America and the views of homosexuals do not represent America.  Why is it that those who are trying to force a new definition that is entirely antithetical to the history of this nation not qualify as fascists?

That’s the overarching argument, of course.

It applies right down to the individual.  By defining marriage as the union between one man and one woman I am not taking anyone’s “rights” away.  Because every single adult American can marry any adult American of the opposite sex who will have him or her.  Nobody’s rights have been deprived.  We all have the SAME rights as everybody else.  And if homosexuals have morally disqualified themselves from wanting to exercise that right is hardly my fault.

If I have the right to marry anybody I choose, then why can’t I marry Aishwarya Rai?  Why can’t I can’t marry the woman of my choice?!?!  And I’m holding out for her.  I’m saving myself for you, Aishwarya!  I’ll never marry anyone else if I can’t have YOU until society gives me my rights!!!

Ah, the gay marriage proponent says, but she doesn’t choose you!  Well, that sucks.  I’ve still been deprived of my right to marry the partner of my choice whether she agrees with that choice or not, the way the left frequently presents their argument, but let’s say that that is the criterion.  So what happens if I want to marry two women?  What happens if I want to marry a ten year-old boy?  And in both cases these marriage partners agree that they would like to marry me too?  In the latter case there is at least a tradition called “pederasty” that has FAR more historical support than gay marriage ever has.  How are you going to rule gay marriage in and rule pederasty out?   There is no question that we are radically redefining society by imposing gay marriage; at least you could point to SOMETHING that once existed with pederasty; it’s been a common if disgusting practice, as opposed to homosexual marriage which is ONLY a disgusting practice.  If  ten year-olds can choose to have an abortion, as the left insists they should be allowed to do, surely they should be able to choose other sexual behaviors such as marriage.  Who are YOU to impose your “outdated morality” and “intolerance” on that ten year-old boy?  And those two women – or for that matter those 22 women – are willing adults.  If you’re going to accuse me of being “arbitrary” for defining marriage as every civilization has basically defined it and very definitely as Western Civilization and the Bible which undermines that Western Civilization has clearly defined it, how is it not “arbitrary” to categorically state that marriage can only be between two people???

If a woman wants to walk out of her home leading her husband – that is literally a well-hung young STALLION – who the hell are YOU to say that’s wrong?  Why do you think you should have the right to impose your narrow-minded intolerant bigotry on that poor woman who only wants to be left alone and live her life with her husband the horse? 

The problem is that marriage is either a particular thing, an ordinance under God that every society has recognized, or it is basically whatever the hell you want it to be at any point in the increasing depravitization of our culture until it becomes too toxic to continue to exist and dies out.

There is something that Francis A. Schaeffer described that he labelled “moral velocitization.”  It referred to something we are seeing coming at us faster and faster and faster with every passing year. 

There was a time not very long ago when NO American president would have celebrated homosexual marriage.  If FDR had campaigned on the platform, “I’m going to give you a country in which one man may openly sodomize another man and anybody who doesn’t like it gets denounced!” he would have had his ass thrown out of office.  And if you go from George Washington to Bill Clinton, you find that Bill Clinton signed into law something called “the Defense of Marriage Act” (DOMA) that defined marriage PRECISELY the way I define it. 

It’s not until you get to the forty-forth president, with the previous forty-three all unanimously disagreeing with him, that you get to an endorsement of homosexual marriage.  And even THAT president lied and decieved his way into office by categorically stating that:

“I believe that marriage is the union between a man and a woman.”

If the forty-forth president had said anything different, his skinny little fascist ass would never have sat in the Oval Office.

THAT’S moral velocitization.  We go from a moral view that nobody in their right mind believed could have characterized this nation to one that is held by the most dishonest president in our nation’s history – and which by “virtue” of a bait-and-switch has gradually acclimated America to a toxic view that our founders would have decried as genuinely evil.

Let me talk about abortion for a moment; I’ll be back to homosexual marriage.

Since 1973, the Democrat Party and every single person who has voted Democrat have murdered 54,559,615 MILLION innocent human beings and counting since Roe v. Wade (that as of January 23, 2012).  We’re talking about a level of homicide that is NINE TIMES WORSE than Adolf Hitler’s Holocaust.

I’ve told more than a few Democrats who call themselves “Christian” that no, you aint: because the Virgin Mary came to you and said, “I’m only thirteen and I’m pregnant.  I have no husband and I don’t know what to do.”  And you fed her the Democrat Party line and she had an abortion.  And so your baby Jesus is dead and He didn’t die for your sins because you killed Him before He had the chance.

You see, the Incarnation and the Baby Jesus is the quintessential proof that life begins at conception and that the Democrat Party is the Party of Demons.  That’s why “Democrat” means “Demonic Bureaucrat.”  And one day Democrats as individual people will try to use the Nazi Nuremburg Defense and say they weren’t responsible for the consequences of their votes.  But God – with the fire of His increasing wrath billowing out from His chariot throne (Daniel 7:9-10) - will point out that with every single vote they as individuals chose more politicians who would appoint more judges who would in turn murder more babies.  And this was hardly done without their knowledge and consent.

Now, I bring that up because as godawful and as depraved as abortion is, God says that that isn’t the lowest depths that the Democrats can attain to.

As recorded in Romans 1:18-28:

God’s Wrath Against Mankind

18 The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, 19 since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them.20 For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities–his eternal power and divine nature–have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.21 For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened.22 Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles. 24 Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another.25 They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator–who is forever praised. Amen.26 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones.27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.28 Furthermore, since they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, he gave them over to a depraved mind, to do what ought not to be done.

The lowest point a culture can get is not abortion, as hateful and evil as abortion is; it is the moral crime of condoning and in fact honoring and celebrating homosexuality. It is in the Bible in black and white.

I can explain to you why that is.  It is because after God created man in His image He said to humanity:

God blessed them; and God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth, and subdue it; and rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over every living thing that moves on the earth.” — Genesis 1:28

And from the very outset, from the Tower of Babel on, depraved, sinful, wicked man has had an “alternative” to the plan of the God who created one man for one woman.

It is no surprise that the Democrat Party – the party of genuine evil – would slander and pervert God’s will and plan by endorsing global warming and population controls and the most egregious slap in the face to His will of all: open recognition and celebration of homosexuality.

As declared in the New York Times on July 30, 2012 under the title “Democrats Draft Gay Marriage Platform“:

Democrats appear ready to embrace same-sex marriage as part of their party platform, a policy shift that reflects an expanded acceptance of gay rights in mainstream politics.

The move would place the party in line with the beliefs of President Obama, who in May became the first sitting president to declare that gay men and lesbians should be able to marry.

Democratic Party officials had squabbled over the issue in the past. But at a platform-drafting meeting over the weekend in Minneapolis, they approved the first step to amend their platform, placing the amendment on track for adoption. In two weeks, the entire platform committee will vote at a meeting scheduled in Detroit. Then, if approved as expected, it would go before convention delegates in Charlotte, N.C., for final passage in early September.

According to Democrats who were briefed on the vote in Minneapolis, there was no objection when the issue came up. Though the language that was voted on could still be revised, party officials do not anticipate any major obstacles going forward.

To put it in Chick-Fil-A terms, God’s reality is as simple as this:

That’s what the Bible says.  What reality says is that homosexuality is horrible for both society and the homosexuals who are trapped in that vile lifestyle.  What reality says is that homosexuality is terrible for the children who are abandoned by the left because of equally vile political correctness. What we find about the “children” of gay parents is that:

Even after including controls for age, race, gender, and things like being bullied as a youth, or the gay-friendliness of the state in which they live, such respondents were more apt to report being unemployed, less healthy, more depressed, more likely to have cheated on a spouse or partner, smoke more pot, had trouble with the law, report more male and female sex partners, more sexual victimization, and were more likely to reflect negatively on their childhood family life, among other things.

Why on earth would anybody want that for children?

Democrats have finally reached rock freaking bottom.  They have completed the Book of Romans circle describing a nation that is ready to be judged by God.

Jesus said:

“FOR THIS REASON A MAN SHALL LEAVE HIS FATHER AND MOTHER, AND THE TWO SHALL BECOME ONE FLESH; so they are no longer two, but one flesh. — Mark 10:7-8

And that’s why Democrats murdered Him in their moral abortion mill as a Baby while He was still in the womb.  Jesus said, “Don’t do it, Democrats!”  And Democrats said, “You just go to hell, Jesus.”

And let there be no mistake: if you vote Democrat, that is PRECISELY what you are voting for.  Because without your continued support of the Democrat Party, this platform would lead to the ruin of the Democrat Party.  But the same godless Democrats who have murdered more than 54 million human beings with your vote are going to take this final step into godless oblivion.

God created man in His image.  He holds us morally accountable to the image of Himself in us.  You can try to usurp His divine right as Creator, but what you cannot do is avoid ultimate judgment by Him.  Which is why the day  is coming when every Democrat will stand before God and be held accountable.

Left Continues To Document That It Is FASCIST. Look At What Is Going On JUST THIS WEEK!

So far, there have been 7,380 arrests of the fascist OWS (Occupy) Movement.  Versus ZERO for the Tea Party that the mainline propaganda media slandered in their “coverage.”  These arrests included acts of terrorism – such as the recent terrorist attempt to bomb a bridge in Ohio (see more here) along with numerous other terrorist attempts such as this one in Chicago.  It is now a repeatedly documented FACT that the fascist left is more than willing to use bombs to advance their fascist cause.

The liberal Occupy Movement is a bowel movement of criminals and rapists and murderers and terrorists.  It has never been anything but that.  These are the people that the left attracts because the left is morally depraved at every level.

WalMart – long a target of the organized left and in fact a target of the fascist OWS Movement - has been victimized by over a dozen bomb threats in its stores across the Midwest:

Secaucus Walmart reopens after evacuation over bomb threat
Thursday, August 2, 2012    Last updated: Thursday August 2, 2012, 8:54 PM
BY  MARLENE NAANES AND JUSTO BAUTISTA
STAFF WRITERS
The Record

SECAUCUS — For the second time this week, the Walmart at Harmon Meadow plaza was evacuated Thursday afternoon after a bomb threat was called in to the store, police said.

TARIQ ZEHAWI / STAFF PHOTOGRAPHER

Walmart shoppers and employees outside of the store after a bomb threat Thursday afternoon.

A caller phoned in the threat at 1:41 p.m., said Detective Sgt. Dominick DeGennaro of the Secaucus police. Store employees called police, and officers and firefighters searched the store without finding anything, DeGennaro said. The store was allowed to reopen after about an hour, he said.

A nearly identical scenario played out at the same Walmart store on Monday. About 700 people, including customers and employees, were evacuated after a threat was called in to the store at 1:45 p.m., police said.

In Secaucus on Monday, K-9 units from the Hudson County Sheriff’s Office and the NJ Transit and Jersey City police searched the store for more than two hours before determining there was no bomb, authorities said. The store was allowed to reopen at 4:15 p.m., he said.

Authorities also searched for a link to at least a dozen similar threats that were called in to Walmart stores in Missouri, Kansas and Oklahoma over the weekend.

Who do ya think is behind these???  This is your cue to look in a mirror, point a finger at it, and say, “YOU are, you fascist scumbag!” at yourself, liberal.

It’s a cheap, cowardly way to “punish your enemies.”  And if your enemies bring a knife, you bring a gun.  If those enemies bring a gun, you call in a bunch of damn bomb threats.

Fascists Democrats are uniting behind their Fascist-in-Chief messiah.  And they will either burn this country to the ground or we will take it away from them come November.

Democrats are people who demand a circular firing squad to kill any businesses that don’t tow their liberal line.  They constantly seek to drive WalMarts out in spite of the tax base and jobs those stores create just as they sought to drive out Chick-Fil-A and literally state “We don’t need their tax dollars” in spite of the fact that each of those restaurants create nearly a hundred long-term jobs along with paying taxes to those cities.  You’d think this was suicidal behavior, but it really isn’t for those who lead “the cause.”  People like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton show up and rouse the rabble with their demagoguery, prevent a business from opening, get shake-down/extortion concessions for themselves in the form of “donations” to their causes in exchange for finally leaving, and then walk away from the communities that will now get NO jobs because of their “leadership.”  In the case of Occupy, there is giant Soros money funding the cause.  George Soros is a Nazi and an enemy of the United States and has always BEEN a Nazi and an enemy to the United States, but that doesn’t matter to these people.  The organizers of those OWS protests get their Judas wages for sabotaging businesses and thereby sabotaging the communities that needed those businesses.

I mentioned Chick-Fil-A.  Yes, the Democrat Party viciously attacked Chick-Fil-A in the form of three fascist Democrat Mayors who threatened that business with government power over daring to hold their own views whether those views are protected by the First Amendment or not.  Yes, in response Chick-Fil-A benefited from the largest sales in their entire history as hundreds of thousands of people stood in line for as long as three hours to buy their products in response to that fascism.  Yes, the left held their own day – a homosexual “kiss-in- that got virtually NOBODY to show up.  But they did manage to pull off still another example of fascist liberal intolerance:

From the LA Times:

On a day that some gay-rights activists are planning a “National Same-Sex Kiss Day,” a Chick-fil-A in Torrance was vandalized overnight with hateful graffiti.

Chick-fil-A employees were greeted Fridays morning with the words “Tastes like hate” scrawled in large black lettering mimicking the chain’s advertising across the back wall of the restaurant at 182nd Street and Hawthorne Boulevard in Torrance.

With media helicopters hovering overhead and police officers on the scene, one employee said, “I’m just trying to sort everything out.”

PHOTOS: CHICK-fil-A at center of controversy

Chick-fil-A has been at the center of media scrutiny and public debate ever since the company’s president publicly expressed his opposition to same-sex marriage.

On Friday, some gay-rights activists are encouraging same-sex couples to go one of the chicken restaurant’s locations and take a photo or video of themselves kissing.

It remains unclear whether this protest will generate the huge crowds that turned out Wednesday for “Chick-fil-A Appreciation Day,” when tens of thousands waited through long lines in a show of support for the executive.

RELATED: Chick-fil-A supporters flood restaurants to support stand on gay marriage

The privately held company declined to give specific sales figures but released a statement to the Los Angeles Times confirming that frenzied sales of chicken sandwiches and cross-cut waffle fries had made for a record-setting day.

“We are very grateful and humbled by the incredible turnout of loyal Chick-fil-A customers on August 1 at Chick-fil-A restaurants around the country,” said Steve Robinson, executive vice president of marketing, in the statement. “While we don’t release exact sales numbers, we can confirm reports that it was a record-setting day.”

Who pulled off that victory for liberalism?  It was a fascist Obama-voting demon-possessed cockroach, that’s who it was.

And as much media attention surrounded that “kiss-in,” only about thirty damn liberal homosexuals showed up to disgust people with one man sucking the face of another.  USA Today provides an example of the embarrassed silence surrounding this fizzle:

By Friday afternoon reports from restaurants around the country showed the number of protesters was low compared to the hundreds of people from around the country who turned out Wednesday for a “Chick-fil-A Appreciation Day.”

It was of course hundreds of thousands of people nationwide, and “the number of [kiss-in] protestors was nonexistant in comparison.  Not that the facts should actually matter or anything.  “Facts” and “truth” and “reality” only matter to rightwingers, and if you care about such idiotic concepts you are a racist homophobic bigot.

We’re living in a day when Nazi Democrats like Harry Reid openly deploy Orwellian tactics to demonize their opponents.  It doesn’t matter if Harry Reid refused in a vote to release his OWN damn taxes; it doesn’t matter if just a few weeks ago his president was protected by his party when Obama declared executive privilege and refused to provide ANY records surrounding the FACT that the Obama administration put 2,000 guns into the hands of Mexican drug cartel murderers who used those guns to murder at least one US Border Patrol Agent and which likely murdered an American ICE agent as well.  How is it that Democrats can surround an act of clear presidential obstruction of justice on the one hand and then turn around and demand records right after refusing to allow any records to be turned over?  And do so with such appalling pseudo-self righteousness?

Here are Harry Reid’s tactics:

“I don’t think the burden should be on me,” Reid said. “The burden should be on him. He’s the one I’ve alleged has not paid any taxes. Why didn’t he release his tax returns?”

Reid said, “the word’s out that he [Romney] hasn’t paid any taxes for 10 years.”  The “word is out” because and ONLY because Harry Reid PUT the word out by making two false and recklessly unsubstantiated statements on the Senate floor while making numerous statements to the press.

This is the new system that Democrats are demanding: they get to make assertions with zero evidence documented by nothing.  And the burden of proof is on whomever they accuse.  That is pure Nazi bullshit and the Democrat Party is the Nazi Party unless and until they drive Harry Reid into retirement for crap like that.  Every Democrat is a fascist for allowing a fascist like Harry Reid to remain in office.

It wasn’t a week ago now that the same Democrat president who was for gay marriage before he was against gay marriage before he was suddenly for gay marriage again pulled that same fascist hat-trick with guns.  He joined the crowd of Democrat fascists in trying to take away our constitutionally guaranteed right to keep and bear arms.  There is absolutely zero question that our founding fathers are firmly on one side and Democrats like Obama are on the other.  And to whatever extent America is going-out-of-control with violence it is ONLY because Democrats have “fundamentally transformed” America into a moral cesspool with their evil fascist policies that revel in evil and oppose what is good.

But Obama wasn’t finished with fascism; he is NEVER finished with fascism.  So the man who likes to call himself “the commander-in-chief” literally sued to keep the troops under him from being allowed to have a chance to vote his skinny fascist weasel ass out of office.  You want to talk about “equal protection under the law?”  I’M a victim of unequal protections; I have an ID legally issued to me by the government; the people that Obama and Holder demand be able to vote DON’T have such ID.  I’m a US citizen; there’s no reason to believe that the people Obama and Holder demand be able to vote share that distinction.  Barack Obama is a cynical fascist weasel who is trying to unconstitutionally stack the deck in his favor by rewarding illegal immigrants who vote overwhelmingly for him and punishing American soldiers who vote overwhelmingly AGAINST him.

Obama is the fascist who said to the racist Hispanic group that literally translates to “The Race”: “The idea of doing things on my own is very tempting. I promise you, not just on immigration reform. But that’s not how our system works. That’s not how our democracy functions. That’s not how our Constitution is written.”  And then Obama did the very thing that he himself had legitimately declared to be Un-American, un-democratic and unconstitutional.  And as a result of his fascism, it was just a WEEK AGO that Obama dictated to the Border Patrol and to ICE that they are no longer to have any ability to detain any illegal immigrant who essentially says, “I can come in because Obama says so.”

All of that pure fascism happened in the Democrat Party between 7/27 and 8/3/2012.  It is truly amazing how wicked this party has become.

Still another thing that has happened during that period has been the Democrat Party’s decision to make homosexuality part of their official party platform.  Read Romans chapter 1 and tell me that the Democrat Party hasn’t just reached the very bottom of the moral sewer.

America is doomed if the Nazi Party of 54 million innocent babies murdered – fully NINE TIMES the death toll of Hitler’s Holocaust – be allowed to continue to bring down the wrath of God on this nation that was once “One Nation Under God.”  Not that liberals haven’t been vocal in demanding that even that shred of God-fearing decency be removed, too.

Half the corn yield in America is poor to very poor in this God damn America under Obama.  We are being judged as God has judged declining nations that had once claimed Him before (Amos 4:7-8; Zech 14:17-18; Revelation 11:6) God is giving America the worst drought in fifty years to wake us up so we will return to Him and abandon big government messiah Obama.  And it will get worse and worse until Obama is gone or until America is gone.

Chick-Fil-A Appreciation Day Draws HUGE Crowds Coming To Support The Right To Eat In America Without Liberal Fascists Dictating To You

You go, Dan Cathy.  A lot more people are behind you than the perennially smug and snide propagandist media will ever acknowledge:

Keep in mind this ”appreciation day” was just something that Mike Hukabee announced would be a nice idea to have on his TV show.

Gay marriage issue sends crowds flocking to Chick-fil-A
Staff and wire reports
Posted Aug 01, 2012 @ 01:05 PM
Last update Aug 01, 2012 @ 01:37 PM

 

JACKSON TWP. — If Chick-fil-A President Dan Cathy wanted to gauge Stark County’s support for backing “the biblical definition of a family,” he would be pleased by the massive turnout Wednesday at the chain’s locations here.

Perspiration dripped down the face of off-duty Jackson Township police officer Craig Hall as he directed a seemingly endless line of vehicles queuing up for lunch at Chick-fil-A’s Dressler Road drive-thru.

Hall, who arrived at 11 a.m., said the line of cars on Dressler waiting to turn in had to be rerouted around neighboring restaurant Ruby Tuesday to avoid a massive traffic jam.

“We haven’t had any problems,” he said. “Just one car stalled in the lane, and people got out and pushed it out of the way.”

Delaney Young of Perry Township waited in the car line with his wife, Mary, and sister-in-law Bobbie Bates of North Canton. He said they are members of Canton Baptist Temple and learned of the support day through their church .

“Chick-fil-A has the right to make these statements,” said Delaney. His family was decked out in white T-shirts with black lettering that said, “God is in control.”

Customers continued to stream in on foot from adjoining parking lots. By 12:30, more than 50 people were waiting in line outside just to get in the doors.

Franchise owner Doug Pugh said the response is overwhelming. “It’s a great day.”

CONTROVERSIAL COMMENTS

Cathy told the Baptist Press last month that the Atlanta-based company was “guilty as charged” for backing “the biblical definition of a family.” That unleashed a torrent of criticism from gay rights groups and others, who have called for boycotts and efforts to block the chain from opening new stores.

Opponents of the company’s stance are planning “Kiss Mor Chiks” for Friday, when they are encouraging people of the same sex to show up at Chick-fil-A restaurants around the country and kiss each other.

In response, Cathy supporters turned out in droves Wednesday to support the restaurant chain. The line was 50 or more at times at the Westfield Belden Village mall store.

WHAT CUSTOMERS SAY

Marilyn Nagle of North Canton carried out a bag of food from the Dressler Road location.

“It’s amazing how many people you meet when you’re standing in line like that. … I heard about this from friends. I wish I had come for breakfast before the crowds gathered.”

If Chick-fil-A President Dan Cathy wanted to gauge Stark County’s support for backing “the biblical definition of a family,” he would be pleased by the massive turnout Wednesday at the chain’s locations here.

Perspiration dripped down the face of off-duty Jackson Township police officer Craig Hall as he directed a seemingly endless line of vehicles queuing up for lunch at Chick-fil-A’s Dressler Road drive-thru.

Hall, who arrived at 11 a.m., said the line of cars on Dressler waiting to turn in had to be rerouted around neighboring restaurant Ruby Tuesday to avoid a massive traffic jam.

“We haven’t had any problems,” he said. “Just one car stalled in the lane, and people got out and pushed it out of the way.”

Delaney Young of Perry Township waited in the car line with his wife, Mary, and sister-in-law Bobbie Bates of North Canton. He said they are members of Canton Baptist Temple and learned of the support day through their church .

“Chick-fil-A has the right to make these statements,” said Delaney. His family was decked out in white T-shirts with black lettering that said, “God is in control.”

Customers continued to stream in on foot from adjoining parking lots. By 12:30, more than 50 people were waiting in line outside just to get in the doors.

Franchise owner Doug Pugh said the response is overwhelming. “It’s a great day.”

CONTROVERSIAL COMMENTS

Cathy told the Baptist Press last month that the Atlanta-based company was “guilty as charged” for backing “the biblical definition of a family.” That unleashed a torrent of criticism from gay rights groups and others, who have called for boycotts and efforts to block the chain from opening new stores.

Opponents of the company’s stance are planning “Kiss Mor Chiks” for Friday, when they are encouraging people of the same sex to show up at Chick-fil-A restaurants around the country and kiss each other.

In response, Cathy supporters turned out in droves Wednesday to support the restaurant chain. The line was 50 or more at times at the Westfield Belden Village mall store.

WHAT CUSTOMERS SAY

Marilyn Nagle of North Canton carried out a bag of food from the Dressler Road location.

“It’s amazing how many people you meet when you’re standing in line like that. … I heard about this from friends. I wish I had come for breakfast before the crowds gathered.”

“I came because I wanted to support (CEO Cathy) who says marriage should be between a man and woman. So if you know a man, I’m a woman.”

Nick Toussant of Hartville said his daughter told him about the event.

“Free speech is not a liberty to take lightly. I’m afraid the almighty dollar speaks loudest.”

Mary Lou Wolfe of Plain Township and her husband went out of their way to visit Chick-fil-A for lunch, a restaurant they don’t normally patronize.

She was impressed by the crowd and the employees who were pleasantly hustling to deal with the crowd crush.

“What I noticed most of all was the customers. Everyone was so happy to see such an outpouring of support. They didn’t mind waiting in line at all,” Wolfe said.

“It was an exhilarating experience.”

Wolfe saw her purchase as supporting free speech, saying the company’s owner has faced unfair criticism.

“Just because a person has a personal belief doesn’t mean his product should be boycotted.”

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

 “I came because I wanted to support (CEO Cathy) who says marriage should be between a man and woman. So if you know a man, I’m a woman.”Nick Toussant of Hartville said his daughter told him about the event.“Free speech is not a liberty to take lightly. I’m afraid the almighty dollar speaks loudest.”Mary Lou Wolfe of Plain Township and her husband went out of their way to visit Chick-fil-A for lunch, a restaurant they don’t normally patronize.She was impressed by the crowd and the employees who were pleasantly hustling to deal with the crowd crush.“What I noticed most of all was the customers. Everyone was so happy to see such an outpouring of support. They didn’t mind waiting in line at all,” Wolfe said.“It was an exhilarating experience.”Wolfe saw her purchase as supporting free speech, saying the company’s owner has faced unfair criticism.“Just because a person has a personal belief doesn’t mean his product should be boycotted.”The Associated Press contributed to this report.

If Chick-fil-A President Dan Cathy wanted to gauge Stark County’s support for backing “the biblical definition of a family,” he would be pleased by the massive turnout Wednesday at the chain’s locations here.

Perspiration dripped down the face of off-duty Jackson Township police officer Craig Hall as he directed a seemingly endless line of vehicles queuing up for lunch at Chick-fil-A’s Dressler Road drive-thru.

Hall, who arrived at 11 a.m., said the line of cars on Dressler waiting to turn in had to be rerouted around neighboring restaurant Ruby Tuesday to avoid a massive traffic jam.

“We haven’t had any problems,” he said. “Just one car stalled in the lane, and people got out and pushed it out of the way.”

Delaney Young of Perry Township waited in the car line with his wife, Mary, and sister-in-law Bobbie Bates of North Canton. He said they are members of Canton Baptist Temple and learned of the support day through their church .

“Chick-fil-A has the right to make these statements,” said Delaney. His family was decked out in white T-shirts with black lettering that said, “God is in control.”

Customers continued to stream in on foot from adjoining parking lots. By 12:30, more than 50 people were waiting in line outside just to get in the doors.

Franchise owner Doug Pugh said the response is overwhelming. “It’s a great day.”

CONTROVERSIAL COMMENTS

Cathy told the Baptist Press last month that the Atlanta-based company was “guilty as charged” for backing “the biblical definition of a family.” That unleashed a torrent of criticism from gay rights groups and others, who have called for boycotts and efforts to block the chain from opening new stores.

Opponents of the company’s stance are planning “Kiss Mor Chiks” for Friday, when they are encouraging people of the same sex to show up at Chick-fil-A restaurants around the country and kiss each other.

In response, Cathy supporters turned out in droves Wednesday to support the restaurant chain. The line was 50 or more at times at the Westfield Belden Village mall store.

WHAT CUSTOMERS SAY

Marilyn Nagle of North Canton carried out a bag of food from the Dressler Road location.

“It’s amazing how many people you meet when you’re standing in line like that. … I heard about this from friends. I wish I had come for breakfast before the crowds gathered.”

“I came because I wanted to support (CEO Cathy) who says marriage should be between a man and woman. So if you know a man, I’m a woman.”

Nick Toussant of Hartville said his daughter told him about the event.

“Free speech is not a liberty to take lightly. I’m afraid the almighty dollar speaks loudest.”

Mary Lou Wolfe of Plain Township and her husband went out of their way to visit Chick-fil-A for lunch, a restaurant they don’t normally patronize.

She was impressed by the crowd and the employees who were pleasantly hustling to deal with the crowd crush.

“What I noticed most of all was the customers. Everyone was so happy to see such an outpouring of support. They didn’t mind waiting in line at all,” Wolfe said.

“It was an exhilarating experience.”

Wolfe saw her purchase as supporting free speech, saying the company’s owner has faced unfair criticism.

“Just because a person has a personal belief doesn’t mean his product should be boycotted.”

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

It’s going on all over the country.  And like everything else, them lines are HUGE in Texas.  In Dallas people are waiting TWO HOURS to order their meal because of the long, looooong lines.  And God bless ‘em for their stand.

Sodom and Gomorrah (Chicago and Boston) weren’t blessed, contrary to the liberal narrative; they were destroyed.

What is most amazing in all of this is that liberal cities are awash in bankruptcy and violence and yet they want to block businesses like Chick-Fil-A from bringing their jobs and their tax dollars in.  Chicago is literally taxing the bejeezus out of people to pay for the deteriorating social services while chasing out businesses that pay taxes and further broaden the tax base by creating jobs.

The success of this “appreciation day” underscores a fact that never ceases to anger me.  The left does boycott after boycott and punishes businesses into cowering to their demands on a regular basis.  Conservatives generally speak of some moral high ground and tell their audiences and constituencies to support “progressive businesses” such as Ben and Jerry’s Ice Cream just to show how “tolerant” we are compared to the left.  And our little moral victory is exactly why the right continues to have less and less influence over culture even though there are easily twice as many conservatives as there are liberals.

I say that’s a truck load of crap.

If mobs of angry conservatives were to start boycotting businesses that don’t represent their values the way the left does we might actually get to a point where both sides agree to lay off each other.  But that’s not the way it works: rather, the side that has half the people generates ten times the impact because they do what we won’t do.

We need to understand what is happening in our culture right now today.  There is something toxic going on that is revealed in polls of Christian teens: In The Jesus Survey Book (2012), Mike Nappa documents that fully one out of three Christian teenagers believes that Jesus, Mohammed, Buddha and other great religious leaders all lead to heaven.  The question is whether morality and religious truth claims are more like math (one right answer) or more like meaninglessness (whatever floats your boat).  If Jesus claimed to be “the Way, and the Truth, and the Life; no one comes to the Father but through Me” as He did in John 14:6, that is either truth like 1 + 1 = 2 or it is like an arbitrary color preference (you like red but I prefer blue).  Jesus very clearly meant for His unique claim to be “the Resurrection and the Life” (John 11:25) to be the former and not the latter.

But our own children are being undermined by a politically correct view of “tolerance” that demands that all views be accorded the same status.  And so morality is just a bunch of arbitary preferences and how dare you hold your arbitrary preference above mine?  Even though I as a liberal very definitely hold MY preference over YOURS.  We are allowing our children to be indoctrinated such that they cannot believe the truth no matter what we teach them because of a more fundamental truth claim that is being pushed into our culture at every level.  Such that even Christian kids are being brainwashed by an idiotic and frankly self-refuting view.  And I say “self-refuting” because the left’s demonizing free speech amounts to a disproof that they actually hold to any true “tolerance” at all.  On the one hand liberals tell our children that there is no one right or wrong way to believe, and on the other hand they are simultanesouly teaching our children that in fact there is only one legitimate way to believe, and that is their way.  That is an obvious fundamental and inherent self-contradiction, but we have degnerated to the point that we simply no longer care any more about such facts.

This is a war that we are losing day by day.  Because we have utterly refused to exercise the power over this culture that our numbers ought to accord us while a much smaller minority increasingly defines this culture with toxic views.  History proves over and over again that if a people or a culture aren’t willing and able to stand up for what they believe, they will find themselves supplanted.  And that is what is going on in our Laodicean Age (Revelation 3:15).

While this is an extremely positive day for conservatives and for supporting conservative values, I would argue that it also shows that we not only need to do a far better job of protecting our businesses, but also of turning liberal tactics against liberals.  Because we are allowing the rug to be pulled right out from under us even as we think we’re standing on it.

Obama’s ‘Major Policy’ Speech Last Thursday Documents He Is A Failure. His Abrogation Of The Rule Of Law On Friday Documents He Is A Fascist.

I thought this blog article which cites USA Today hit part of Obama’s trouble right in the testicles:

“Major economic speech” by Obama planned for Thursday
Posted by: ST on June 13, 2012 at 9:20 am

Via The USA Today:

President Obama will seek to draw economic contrasts with Republican opponent Mitt Romney in what campaign aides are billing as a major speech on Thursday.

In announcing the address at a community college in Cleveland, the Obama campaign said the president will describe his vision as “ensuring that our economy is built to last and restoring economic security for the middle class.”

Obama also plans to condemn Romney’s vision, which the campaign said is “based on the same failed economic policies that brought on the worst crisis since the Great Depression.

“Romney Economics is familiar and troubling,” said the Obama campaign. “More budget-busting tax cuts for the wealthy; fewer rules for Wall Street — the same formula that benefited a few, but that crashed our economy and devastated the middle class.”

Obama is not expected to unveil any new policy proposals of his own; the president is still trying to persuade Congress to adopt elements of a jobs bill he proposed last year.

(Bolded emphasis added by me)

Translation: there’s nothing new here. It’ll just more of the same old song and dance we’ve been hearing for the last three and a half years, jacked up on spinsanity with a generous helping of predictable Democrat class warfare and demagoguery – given in front of (presumably) a captive audience of college students (shocking).

In other news, dog bites man.

BTW, here’s Obama’s fundraising schedule for this week, in the event you actually thought his “presidential responsibilities” excuse for not campaigning for Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett in the Wisconsin recall election was legitimate. Just sayin’ …

Obama’s major speech is a giant bag of wind from the most prolific windbag who ever lived.  Check.

Obama is completely out of ideas.  Check check.

Ninety percent of Obama’s speech was just a slightly different way for Obama to demonize Mitt Romney.  And in what had been built up as a major policy speech at that.  Only ten percent of this speech Obama gave in Ohio on Thursday, April 14 AT BEST discussed what Obama would do if re-elected – which frankly amounted to a steadfast refusal to own up to ANY kind of responsibility for his last four years and a doubling down on what has already been demonstrated to have failed.  The bottom line is that we are currently cursed with a president who doesn’t want to talk about the past but doesn’t have any ideas about the future.

It’s not just me claiming Obama’s “major speech” was a major failure.

Consider leftist Jonathon Alter from MSNBC who said it was “one of the worst speeches I’ve ever heard Barack Obama make.”  And that was actually KIND, given the fact that “Before the speech was over, MSNBC’s Mike O’Brien begged the president to stop.”  While conservatives, of course, are saying, “Don’t you let them interrupt you, Barry Hussein.  By all means, please continue.  You were saying the private sector’s doing fine, right?”

That’s from MSNBC, which without any question is THE most überbiased überObama propaganda out there (see here and here for a couple quick examples).

The reliably leftist Washington Post’s leftist writer Dana Milbank – and this woman is a raving leftie – said that “instead of going to Ohio on Thursday with a compelling plan. for the future, the president gave Americans a falsehood wrapped in a fallacy.”  This in an article titled, “Skip the falsehoods, Mr. President, and give us a plan.”

I mean, thanks for confirming what I’ve been saying all along that Obama is a complete liar without a clue or a plan, but I can’t help but admit my surprise, Dana.  I mean, coming from a woman who once argued that if Obama comes across as stupid, it’s only because he’s just so incredibly brilliant that we frankly don’t deserve his greatness.  Which of course followed the liberal script.

It’s not adequate to say that Barack Obama is a failure; because Barack Obama is an epic failure.

Essentially, Obama’s campaign is about trying to recreate his now thoroughly disillusioned 2008 base.  And the only way that he can do that – because he is a completely failed leader who cannot legislate or compromise – is to issue a “jump the shark” series of executive orders that frankly abrogate the Constitution and the rule of law in America and set a terrifying precedent.  So he demonized his rhetoric of a bogus ”war on women” (see here and here and here and here for how that’s working out for him) and then jumped that shark to “come out” in favor of gay marriage in blatant contradiction of his previous posture (see here and here for how that’s working out for him) – and then he just jumped that shark on Friday to abrogate the Constitution in order to recklessly pander to Hispanics.

And what Obama did on Friday was directly related to the colossal turd he laid on Thursday.  Obama HAS to keep jumping the shark because this complete failure SOMEHOW has to keep the support of a base that would otherwise abandon him like a liberal mommy having her baby aborted.

Consider what Obama himself said in the exact context of what he proceeded to do on Friday:

“The idea of doing things on my own is very tempting. I promise you, not just on immigration reform. But that’s not how our system works. That’s not how our democracy functions. That’s not how our Constitution is written.”

And:

“I swore an oath to uphold the laws on the books. That doesn’t mean I don’t know very well the real pain and heartbreak that deportations cause. I share your concerns and I understand them,” he said Monday. “We work every day to make sure we are enforcing flawed laws in the most humane possible way.”

And:

“America is a nation of laws, which means I, as the president, am obligated to enforce the law. I don’t have a choice about that. That’s part of my job,” Obama said in March 2011 at a town hall event hosted by the Spanish-language television network Univision. [...]

“Congress passes the law. The executive branch’s job is to enforce and implement those laws. And then the judiciary has to interpret the laws,” he said. [...]

“There are enough laws on the books by Congress that are very clear in terms of how we have to enforce our immigration system that for me to simply through executive order ignore those congressional mandates would not conform with my appropriate role as president.”

Apparently, Obama has limited powers unless he a) gives a crappy speech and b) is losing an election.  Then there is no law, no Constitution, and no democracy.

Which all goes to say that what Obama did was a) un-American (“not the way our system works“); b) anti-democratic (“That’s not the way our democracy functions“); and c) unconstitutional (“That’s not how our Constitution is written“).

When I say Obama is a fascist – and I’ve said it before at length – I mean it as a highly accurate descriptive term rather than merely as a rhetorical ad hominem.  And Barack Obama is a fascist BY OBAMA’S OWN PREVIOUS ADMISSIONS ABOUT WHAT HIS ACT ON FRIDAY CONSTITUTED when he set aside the separation of powers and imposed by “Führer-fiat” what the Congress had explicitly refused.

Liberal progressive legal expert Jonathan Turley (along with a number of other constitutional experts) had this to say about Obama’s action in setting aside the rule of law for his political expedience:

“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.”

Obama’s strategy is to set aside and flatly ignore the law for his own political benefit.  Every American who is not deeply troubled by that – troubled enough to not vote for this fascist - is UN-American.

What Obama has done is provide an example of out-and-out lawlessness on the part of the president of the United States.  And when we get a hard-core right wing president the way Obama has been a hard-core left wing president, Obama and the Democrat Party and all of those who voted for Obama and the Democrat Party will be entirely to blame for that president and his extremist actions.  You mark my words.  Because what goes around comes around, and if a Democrat can set aside the law the way Obama has now repeatedly done, well, guess who’s going to be stomping on your necks under your own president’s prior justification???  Conservatives are rising up in a spirit of righteous outrage.  You have repeatedly slapped us in the face through your messiah Obama, and the time is coming when we’re going to punch you hard in the nose and then keep on punching.  And when that day comes, liberals, look to yourselves for blame.

We are watching the unravelling of America as Obama that if his presidency doesn’t succeed, America won’t succeed.

America is losing steam on all economic fronts as we speak.  Europe is falling apart at the seams.  The Middle East is going to hell.  Scandal after scandal is erupting that directly involved the White House.  And Barack Obama is doing more fundraisers than the last five presidents COMBINED.

America doesn’t matter to this Turd-in-Chief.  He’s willing to sell out American foreign policy to the Russians as long as they’ll help him win in November.  And given that we already can see right in front of our faces that Obama is a fascist dictator in his first term, there’s no telling what will happen if he gets a second term and is answerable to nobody and to nothing.

There is absolutely no question that the constant stream of top secret leaks are coming directly out of the White House and that vital secrets are being revealed as a means to create propaganda depicting Obama as a “tough” leader.  General Jack Keane said that the only times that America had ever suffered this much damage to its security was when traitors were selling secrets to our adversaries.  We are literally talking about treason.  

It is VERY possible and even probable that Obama as president declassified vital secrets such as the existence of SEAL Team 6, such as the details of the bin Laden raid and precisely what America found in the compound, such as the top secret operation known as Olympic Games and the computer virus known as Stuxnet, such as the drone missions, such as his use of a “kill list.”  Why would he do something that depraved?  Why, in order to sell long-term American security in exchange for short-term votes, that’s why.  Even Diane Feinstein has publicly stated that no nation will trust America for years to come as a result of these leaks, and it is a fact that intelligence operatives who have cooperated with America have been captured and killed or imprisoned, with far more of that to come.  If Obama declassified these and other secrets that have been leaked in an avalanche unlike anything the American intelligence community has ever seen, Obama will have legalized treason.  As commander-in-chief, a president has the right to declassify secrets.  But no president in American history until Obama will have so despised America that he would see this nation burn if he doesn’t win his election.

Even the very left-leaning Daily Beast is outraged at our Traitor-in-Chief:

Last week, the Times ran two sensational front-page articles, one detailing the president’s personally administered list of terror suspects targeted for assassination—the so-called “kill list,”—the other a book excerpt about the origins of the cyberwarfare program, codenamed Olympic Games, out of which came the Stuxnet virus. Both pieces were widely seen as boosting the president’s credibility on national security just as the 2012 presidential race kicked into high gear. Both pieces cite anonymous current and former high-level officials in the administration. The White House has denied that the leaks were authorized, calling the suggestion “grossly irresponsible.” [...]

This is the nugget of the problem. If information is too dangerous to be public, it’s supposed to be classified. If it isn’t, then it isn’t—full stop. Information isn’t classified—at least it isn’t supposed to be—for political gain or to cover up wrongdoing, or so high-level government officials can unilaterally dole out secrets to their favorite reporters at elite media organizations, or so well-connected politicians can manage the news cycle, undermine enemies, or win allies.

Officially, there is no middle ground. Sadly, leaks out of the Obama administration are beginning to look like official policy. Days before the Stuxnet and kill-list stories in the Times, columnist Glen Greenwald highlighted administration leaks to Hollywood filmmakers for an upcoming production about the raid that killed Osama bin Laden. This, amid the harshest crackdown on unauthorized leaks by any president ever—the Obama administration’s docket of six leak prosecutions under the Espionage Act dwarfs any previous administration’s persecution of loose-lipped officials.

One thing is obvious: Obama only goes after leakers who don’t politically benefit him.

Obama has a long history of personally demonizing people while doing the exact same thing that he demonized them for.  Think of Gitmo, when Obama demonized George Bush – only to keep Gitmo open himself in direct repudiation of his entire presidency by his very own rhetoric.  The same goes for the Patriot Act, for rendition, for military commissions, for domestic eavesdropping and for a long list of other issues.  The liberal New York Times literally accused Bush of “shredding the Constitution.”  Who is shredding it now by the very rhetoric of the left???  In the same way, it is none other than Barack Obama who has violated civil liberties in a manner that goes so far beyond anything that Bush ever did it is almost funny.  The very few liberals who are not abject moral hypocrites (eg., here and here) have pointed this fact out, but the vast majority of liberals who rabidly demonized Bush with froth drooling out of their mouths are nowhere to be seen now that the fascist in the Oval Office is the man they put in there.

Think of Obama’s demonization of Republicans being in the pockets of lobbyists and his lying promises that he would put an end to it.  In fact it’s worse under Obama than it has EVER been, and that according to the liberal Washington Post.  Obama demonized George Bush over the national debt and lied to the American people that he would cut the deficit in half by the end of his first term.  Instead the disgrace has given us more debt than all the previous presidents in history COMBINED.  Obama demonized Bush as irresponsible and even unpatriotic for his debt; now Obama’s debt dwarfs Bush’s.  Obama demonized George Bush as a failed leader for needing to raise the debt ceiling and voting against that debt ceiling himself; now Obama has THREE TIMES raised the debt ceiling to levels never seen in the history of the human race and demonizing Republicans who didn’t want to vote for it.

All again pointing out the fact that Obama leaking secrets that politically benefit him while at the same time attacking anybody who leaks secrets that doesn’t politically benefit him is par for the course.  Which reminds me of the fact that this man who is supposed to be working so hard to get America back on track recently completely his 100th round of golf – equivalent to taking four months off his job.

Barack Obama is a cynical liar and hypocrite without shame, without honor and without decency.  And that is simply a fact of history.  And so are his followers who will vote for him no matter what he does no matter how offended they were when the other side did a small fraction of what Obama has done.

That’s actually a big part of the reason Obama is pushing all of these leaks as a means of ”boosting the president’s credibility on national security.”  He KNOWS that liberals are abject moral hypocrites who will vote for him even if he is murdering American citizens without any kind of trial with predator drones and even if he is personally selecting which terrorists live and which ones die with his political adviser David Axelrod sitting with him.  Obama knows that the left will vote for him no matter what he does because he knows that they are as much fascist hypocrites as he is.  It’s the independents he wants – and these people WANT the president to be like Bush and be tough on terrorist murderers.

And if Obama has to betray America to sell himself to these independents, what is that to him???  Obama is a man who never saw himself as an American to begin with.

Barack Obama is THE most evil man who has ever contaminated the White House.  I saw that in what might even be called a vision the moment I first saw those Jeremiah Wright tapes and realized that Obama had sat for twenty-plus years under the “spiritual leader” and “mentor” Jeremiah Wright and remained for sermon after sermon of this anti-American and racist Marxist.  In my very first political article ever, I betrayed both my naivety and understanding all at once.  I predicted that Democrats would rightly reject Barack Obama in favor of Hillary Clinton due to the Jeremiah Wright revelations; I was wrong because I simply failed to understand how truly depraved Democrats and the Democrat Party had become.  But I also rightly perceived the evil of Obama.  My last words in that very first article of mine were:

If Senator Barack Obama’s presidential aspirations aren’t done for now, they should be. If he wins the nomination, I have every confidence that he will be destroyed in the general election when the Wright issue comes back with a vengeance. Until this week, I believed Senator Hillary Clinton was a far more beatable candidate than Senator Barack Obama. I was wrong.

Barack Obama is far more wrong for sitting under the teaching of such a hateful man for so many years. In doing so, the most liberal Senator in the nation underscores just how extreme his views actually are, and just how dangerous a Barack Obama presidency would be for this country.

Republicans would have had to nominate David Duke for president to even BEGIN to come close to what Democrats did in nominating Barack Obama.  And this nation was asking for it and has dearly paid for it ever since that evil day on June 3, 2008 when he received enough delegates to win the Democrat nomination prior to the economic crash. 

This is God damned America until Obama is thrown out of office.  Now that we’ve seen this failure in action for four years, America has no excuse.  The soul of this nation is at stake in November, and America needs God far, far more than God needs America.