Know who your friends, enemies are

One of the campaign issues Trump sounded a bullhorn on, at least to evangelicals, pastors and churches, was getting rid of the Johnson Amendment.

That is the one burdening pastors and pulpits under political restrictions to the first amendment, by using 501 status as a lever against them. Holding them hostage you might say. Also placing restrictions on churches. Well, seemed popular didn’t it?

But over the years, so many have become programmed and indoctrinated to this policy. Like a lot of liberal theology, it becomes normalized. No excuses, plenty of complacency.

That’s where it is comes time to know who are your friends and who are your enemies, And so often the latter are closer than you think.

Hundreds of religious groups call on Congress to keep Johnson Amendment

Harry Farley Journalist 05 April 2017 | Christian Today

Nearly 100 religious groups are urging Congress to keep the ‘Johnson Amendment’ which limits churches’ political activities.

President Donald Trump has vowed to repeal the law which blocks ministers from endorsing political candidates from the pulpit or religious organizations from donating to either party. Many Republicans back him and argue the amendment infringes on religious groups’ free speech.

But 99 different groups have written to oppose the move.

‘The charitable sector, particularly houses of worship, should not become another cog in a political machine or another loophole in campaign finance laws,’ they write.

The strongly worded backlash comes from across the religious spectrum from The Episcopal Church and Baptist groups to Catholic, Jewish, Islamic and Hindu movements.

‘Current law serves as a valuable safeguard for the integrity of our charitable sector and campaign finance system,’ [they] say in a letter to top members of Congress.

……./

Continue reading at Christian Today

Here they come, in the name of ‘protection.’

Or basically all your liberalized arms of churches. We know how to interpret that. Many are the proud who call for boycott, divest, and gov’t sanction actions toward Israel.

Funny, they never seem restrained at all in pushing the progressive political line in churches. That, of course, was never really restricted. We see no applied restrictions on black or leftist churches. They don’t have to worry.

Though even speaking about abortion, and protecting life, has been deemed political and too taboo for prime-time pulpits. Except if you want to protect baby killing, that’s okay.

So now they reveal who they are. Take note. They will stand and defy the action we want. Just as the sanctuary cities stand in defiance to the law and will of the people. Or should I say much like the activist, Sanctuary Churches? Get the idea? Or let them preach Climatology from pulpits. No, that is celebrated. Does that not illustrate the blatant hypocrisy of what they are lecturing us about?

Proverbs 27:6
“Faithful are the wounds of a friend; but the kisses of an enemy are deceitful.”

RightRing | Bullright

Obama made good on his anti-Israel threats

Back in March this year, escaping much attention in the heat of the election, Dennis McDonough described the White House’s change in policy toward Israel. That was also after the Dems boycotted Netanyahu’s joint session address to Congress. So the radical Left is finishing off the year the way they started it, opposing Israel.

Today they followed through on their threats by refusing to veto the UN resolution on Israeli settlements.

Approved by 14-0, with US abstaining, text seeks action ‘to reverse the negative trends on the ground that are imperiling the two-state solution’

In March McDonough spoke to the Left-leaning J-Street lobby:(I wrote about it)

Huffington Post — 3/24

“We cannot simply pretend that those comments were never made, or that they don’t raise questions about the prime minister’s commitment to achieving peace through direct negotiations,” McDonough added, saying that the Obama administration plans to reevaluate its policy toward Israel and the Palestinian territories.

Though McDonough did not elaborate on what a revamped policy would look like, the White House has suggested that its opposition to Palestinian attempts to secure statehood at the United Nations may soften. On Thursday, White House spokesman Josh Earnest told reporters, “Steps that the United States has taken at the United Nations have been predicated on this idea that the two-state solution is the best outcome. Now our ally in these talks has said that they are no longer committed to that solution. That means that we need to reevaluate our position in this matter, and that is what we will do moving forward,” referring to past down-votes by the U.S. on Palestinian statehood initiatives. ( more)

So he waited till December just before leaving office to stick it to Israel. Well, it cannot hurt Hillary. They did what they wanted to do — make good on their threat.

But this was clear in Israel’s last election. Obama operatives ran a campaign to interfere and oppose Netanyahu. Then they were ticked off at his reelection. Now it is payback, revenge time. Of course this goes over well with their anti-Israel base. It’s a political win. They can grandstand on opposing Israel and Netanyahu.

It is not about settlements either, it is about ’67 borders that are indefensible. Now the Obama administration is going out on their high note: opposing Israel. Then they can try to blame Israel for their actions. Mission accomplished before Obummer leaves office.
(if they only had more time)

Muslims’ Moral Equivalency Problem

How dark are the channels Islamists have constructed of moral equivalence with the Jews to oppressed Muslims? (or anyone else with racial or historical grievances) Muslims are the world-wide object of hatred and bigotry if you follow their apologists’ narrative. Just listen to them. It’s a natural exercise in revision and propaganda.

Once in a while it does pay to venture out and see what their unleashed Islam-peacism movement says, unabashedly. Of course, it is very easy to see through their rhetoric, even easier to poke plenty of holes where it conflicts with reality. But their writing is a sophistry without comparison, unless you go back to Hitler’s rise. Yes, the very thing they hail as the example of their own fascist oppression used a similar approach in its propaganda. They are determined to apply the Nazi example with the Jews to their current situation. A search for Muslims are the new Jews will set one on the path. They make a moral equivalence of Muslims with Jews’ Holocaust and Nazi persecution.

Though there is a moral equivalence of the Obama administration to the Islamists — be it with ISIS terrorists or the wider radical Islamist faction. Sure we are lectured almost daily about blaming all Muslims for what Islamists do. The anti-semetic, Jewish parallel is a canard for all practical purposes. Victimization? You don’t see it. This is a hollow, desperate comparison in search of victims. Rather, a percentage of Muslims victimize the world on behalf of Islam. Does it really matter that there is a percentage that are not complicit in their barbarianism?

I mentioned the reluctance and refusal of the rest of the Muslims to combat or contain the radicals before. It is left to the world to sort out, and the expense of dealing with it is very real. It sucks the urgency out of governments worldwide. That offends me and it should offend any other red-blooded, freedom-loving American. So Islam rightly offends me. I make no apologies. It doesn’t matter that I am a Christian, or weather one happens to be any other faith. Jews were legitimate victims not terrorists.

I am reluctant to make comparisons to the Holocaust. Many pro-lifers for years have drawn abortion parallels to the Holocaust. They may have good reasons, however, I consider the Nazi/Jew case sort of sacred . Not saying I don’t use Hitler or the Third Reich analogies with current examples. I frown on using “Holocaust” (terminology) much except on WWII. Overuse could desensitize the term. I say that to say it is offensive to me seeing and hearing Islamist bandy this terminology around applied to their current struggles.(whatever the hell they, or their apologists, think those are right now) On two grounds it is offensive. The portrayal of Muslims as victims worldwide and the Hitler, fascism comparison.

Now then, these apologists frame it as an oppressed Islam that is only reactionary to what the US (or the West) are doing. Though I’d like to know how we are the inspiration for the Caliphate?(scratch that thought, I’ve heard their rationale and it didn’t sell me but it does sell to Muslims.) This mantra gets it backwards: we are forced to react to what a strain of Islam has done (perfected) for decades. It is just as clever in semantics as it is in their parallel to the Jewish antisemitism and the Holocaust. It singles out Western governments as being complicit in the very terrorism they are fighting for life from. And yes, they blame us for it while calling (us) the real terrorists. We are the terrorists, not Muslims. It has a circular logic flavor to it. It’s an attempt to use a faulty perception to construct a faulty reality. They add as their buttress argument, as Obama does, that Christians had persecutions. Christians also had a reformation which they completely dismiss. Islam is having no reformation unless to turn humanity back to the eighth century.

They compare it to civil rights and racism. According to this rhetoric, we are “prejudice apologizers” for pointing out that being Muslim is not a race? Nor is being Christian a race. It is only a descriptor. See when we try to force fit these labels and canards, we screw up the logic of the underlining point.

But since they make the Nazi parallel, how much help were they fighting the Jewish Holocaust in WWII? Notice how they distance Muslims and Islam from ISIS or the Caliphate while their arguments, and blame, add fuel to the fire ISIS runs on. So their apologetic is not far from being sympatheticy for ISIS, or supporting its agenda. Yet their answer to everything we “bigots” suggest is that you are playing right into the hands of ISIS. Everything becomes “a recruiting tool” for ISIS. Gitmo, Gitmo detainees, war on terror, on and on. Our opposition to it is a recruitment tool.

Here is the ultimate problem with all this. What is actually on the menu of Islamists is to bring the same culture to our shores that is playing out in the Middle East. And to make it mainstream, politically, which is not all that far from the Left’s M/O. In essence, it seeks to turn our country into a battlefield – a war zone. But there is a common misunderstanding about that agenda. Many will point out that it needs some power or the force of government to be effective. No, it only needs immunity from governmental force to be very effective. And that is exactly what many are hell bent on giving them. Whether in ignorance or knowingly, it doesn’t really matter.

So as they tell us we are giving the terrorists recruitment tools, it is ridiculous. But they are giving Islamists exactly what they want and need, practically an invitation. ISIS and Islamists recruit no matter what and will use our weaknesses against as their chief tool.

I get so sick of all this rhetoric that we are somehow aiding ISIS by taking a tough stand. Indeed, the only thing that will be effective and that they understand is force. But we have to be willing to stand behind it, unlike our weak-kneed apologist-in-chief who sympathizes with Islam every chance he gets. Can you say “recruitment tool?” He sympathizes with ISIS whether he knows it or not — some think he knows exactly what he is doing.

If Muslims or their sympathetic political allies are worried about bias against Muslims, then they have to look also at the context of violence in beheadings and hatred by the Islamic radical communities, both here and abroad. Then tell us there is no justification for our suspicions and concerns. But as to religious hate crimes, it is more prevalent toward Jews than Muslims. Then look at Christian cleansings carried out throughout the Middle East and in Africa. No one seems concerned at a national level by those alarming atrocities, yet we are to worry about head scarfs, hijabs, and prayer considerations for Muslims. When an event like an Oklahoma beheading is carried out in the workplace by a radical Muslim, it is labeled a workplace violence incident, giving a false victim status aura to the perpetrator. Is that rational? Is that a hate crime committed by a radical Muslim? But we are to worry about Muslims’ sensitivities. Who else can carry out an attack like that without some backlash?

Of course the problem is that Islamic radicals have declared and waged war on us. Does the fact that they are a religion really make that much difference? Why should they be treated differently because it happens to be a religious sect that is waging the war via terrorism? But they are asking us to treat them differently because they are religiously motivated.

How then do they contort that into religious persecution on a parallel with Jews? How do they perceive Muslims and Islam as victims that need the world’s help to prevent their extermination? And of all places, to make that charge about the US just because we call for scrutiny and screening the very people who declared war on us, already attacked us multiple times, and want to destroy us. That is the outrageous case they are making. If Muslims have such great sensitivities about all this, then where is their outrage, concern and criticism for what radical Muslims are doing? Oh, right, they are afraid to speak out for fear of being targeted. Right. Christians around the world are suffering persecution and we are supposed to be preoccupied with Muslim sensitivities and non-persecution of Muslims right here in the USA.

A related article: http://www.tabletmag.com/jewish-news-and-politics/182608/islamophobia-anti-semitism

RightRing | Bullright

A message for Muslims: beware

So let me offend Muslims a little bit and say we should use a little psyops on them. (apply a little reverse psychology) It may sound provocative to some people.

We can start with one of the oldest books in the Old Testament. Joel has something to say about just such a situation as we are going through. People of Judah were down and things were bad. Joel felt judgement had come upon them.

Joel 1:2-4

2 Hear this, you elders;
listen, all who live in the land.
Has anything like this ever happened in your days
or in the days of your forefathers?
3 Tell it to your children,
and let your children tell it to their children,
and their children to the next generation.
4 What the locust swarm has left
the great locusts have eaten;
what the great locusts have left
the young locusts have eaten;
what the young locusts have left
other locusts have eaten.

Joel 2:6-7

6 At the sight of them, nations are in anguish;
every face turns pale.
7 They charge like warriors;
they scale walls like soldiers.

They were depressed at the prospects all around them. They were no doubt wondering if God was with them? The answer came in the second half of chapter two.

Joel 2:25’I will repay you for the years the locusts have eaten — the great locust and the young locust, the other locusts and the locust swarm— my great army that I sent among you. (26) “You will have plenty to eat, until you are full, and you will praise the name of the LORD your God, who has worked wonders for you; never again will my people be shamed. (27) Then you will know that I am in Israel, that I am the LORD your God, and that there is no other; never again will my people be shamed.

(28)’And afterward, I will pour out my Spirit on all people. Your sons and daughters will prophesy, your old men will dream dreams, your young men will see visions.”

The point is we often debate the cause of bad things, but there is also judgment. Yet God is capable of restoring us to greater blessings for going through them. When we call on Him and pray, He hears. He can turn to good that which is done to us.

We tend to personalize it seeing circumstances as punishment feeling judgment has come, that God has removed his protection. But He will restore even bless us.

2 Chronicles 7:13″If I shut up the heavens so that there is no rain, or if I command the locust to devour the land, or if I send pestilence among My people, 14and My people who are called by My name humble themselves and pray and seek My face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, will forgive their sin and will heal their land.”

So I have to wonder about the terrorism, as bad and evil as it all is? I’m thinking how God can restore us and greatly bless us for going through it. Then I wonder how great those blessings might be for what we are going through now?

Do hihadis and Islamists realize, with what they are doing, that God can and will bless us in the end? God will restore His people, and take them to greater heights. We can have faith in that. That’s the message I hear.

That should give Muslims, Islamists, and terrorists pause to know(or think) we will be restored. We will be blessed in spite of all they do. Now maybe that is the best message that could be sent to them. Just proclaim what is going to happen. That might be the best campaign we could have. It will also build a confidence among God’s people in anticipation of what is to come. Plus, it would be better than any propaganda we could employ. God repaid to his people what the locusts had eaten. God has a salvation plan, Christ.

RightRing | Bullright

Israel’s cultural stigmatism

Every once in a while — all right more frequent than that — it is time to get out and see what some of the biggest mouthpieces are saying about key events going on outside the beltway-fed silos or mainstream American news cycles.

Whoops, did I just say mainstream America? That should be a typo since what the left’s acolytes increasingly lump into “mainstream” are the radical assertions trickled down from ivory towers on high, cultivated then fertilized further by hotbeds of hatred activists for anyone with opposing views to their uber-centric, neo-Marxist ideology.

Gaza’s kids affected psychologically, physically by lifetime of violence

Al Jazeera asks medical experts about the psychological, physical and generational effects of war on Gaza’s youth
July 31, 2014 | Al Jazeera

Beyond the immediate loss in Gaza — destruction of property, infrastructure, and the deaths of more than 1,600 people, mostly civilians — Israel’s onslaught will have long-term mental and physical effects on the Palestinian children who survived weeks of airstrikes and naval and tank shelling.

Many of them watched as family members were killed and homes, schools and mosques bombarded. Others suffered life-altering injuries. Israel’s military campaign may also affect the unborn, as mothers and fathers struggle with traumatic stress, health experts warn. [more]

I challenge you after reading these clips, to take a look at the link from Al Jazeera to see the academic level of their Leftist diagnosis of the Israel-Palestinian situation, which is the thought they are trying to mainstream. They’ve been somewhat successful at it.

Dr. Jesse Ghannam, clinical professor of psychiatry and global health sciences at the University of California at San Francisco School of Medicine:

Psychological impact

Even before the current military offensive, young Gazans bore the mental scars of years under siege and previous episodes of bombardment. After the 2012 war, the rate of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) among children in Gaza doubled, according to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency, which provides assistance for Palestinian refugees. Mental health experts fear that the latest bombardment may create detrimental repercussions too difficult for children to overcome.

Palestinian children in Gaza are exposed to more violence in their lifetime than any other people, any other children, anywhere in the world. If you look at children right now who are 10 years old, they’ve been through Cast Lead in 2008 and 2009, the invasion in 2012 and now the invasion and destruction in 2014, in addition to the siege. If you look at the statistics, for example, even before Cast Lead, 80 percent of Palestinian children in Gaza have witnessed some sort of violence against them, a friend or a family member. And now you’re getting to the point where probably close to 99 percent of children in Gaza are being exposed to a level of violence where they have seen family members be killed, murdered, burned alive. There’s nothing like the levels of traumatic exposure that any child in the world has ever been exposed to on a chronic and daily basis. – more Al Jazeera

Here is a llnk from the Salon magazine arguing against the coverage in the NYT of the Israel-Palestine conflict. They blame the Times for getting it wrong by leading people to think it is a matter of various factors and social media that lead Palestinian youth to the violence like the recent attacks on Israelis. They take big issue that this be blamed on anything but Israel. Imagine that, even the Times doesn’t satisfy their anti-Israel appetite.

It may be hard for us to consider that the Times falls short in carrying the Leftists’ water, but this illustrates that dynamic I’m talking about where even the Leftists are not far enough Left to satisfy them. Thus, the whole push to mainstream, further, the narrative of the new Leftist thought. And they will have their way, as they usually do, even if incrementally, driving the Times and other Leftist mouthpieces into their narrative. After all, when they get academia and virtually all their other liberal institutions to drive a point it usually has results.

So just for a flavor of that high-brow prodding toward their “mainstream” view, here is a small sampling:

If not placing the blame on social media and Palestinian youth, defenders of Israel’s policies argue that the cause of the violence goes far back in history, to an inbred, and therefore a historical hatred toward Jews. Such an argument also says therefore that the Occupation is not to blame. Maybe not, but how then to ignore the fact that the very worst of the violence we have seen through the years has been in the West Bank and Gaza, and that it is occurring now? – Salon

 

Then you have from a blogger on the topic, what passes now more for liberal mainstream, an overview of the mainstreaming activism of pro-Palestinian thought.

Mondoweiss

The leftwing movement of criticism of Israel is getting more and more mainstream by the second. Everyone is walking the path; they’re just getting there a little later. The Washington Post, a hotbed of neoconservative ideas for the last 15 years, has another article harshly critical of Israel today, written by an Israeli. And guess what: that article along with yesterday’s article by the two prestige Jewish academics calling for boycott of Israel are the two “most-read” articles on the Post list this morning! –

    See more at: http://mondoweiss.net/2015/10/washington-unrepairable-society#sthash.zqkR5pXe.dpuf

This feeds into the next topic, the BDS activist movement. As it says, this is increasingly becoming mainstream opinion/thought, at least from leftists. They get louder to drive the narrative and seem to think the more they promote it as such, the more it becomes a self-fulfilled prophecy. Seeing is believing.

Obama’s fruits in the Mid-East

The Obama Intifada

Column: How coddling Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas led to terrorism in Israel

BY: Matthew Continetti
October 16, 2015  Free Beacon

More than 30 dead in Israel as Palestinians armed with knives attack innocents. What’s responsible? A campaign of incitement, which slanderously accuses Jews of intruding on the Al-Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem and murdering Arab children in cold blood.

And who is legitimizing this campaign? None other than Mahmoud Abbas, president of the Palestinian Authority, whom President Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry have long held up as a peacemaker. “I think nobody would dispute that whatever disagreements you may have with him, he has proven himself to be somebody who has committed to nonviolence and diplomatic efforts to resolve this issue,” Obama told writer Jeffrey Goldberg in 2014.

That’s a strange view of commitment. This is the same Abbas, remember, who rejected then-Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert’s absurdly generous 2008 peace offer. The same Abbas who resisted negotiations with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu during the 10-month settlement freeze in 2010, which Obama demanded explicitly on the grounds that it would give Abbas the cover he needed to begin talks.

More http://freebeacon.com/columns/the-obama-intifada/

Well, Obama can’t exactly blame it on Boosh. Promoting Abbas as a peacemaker, what nonsense. Only in Obama’s dreamworld is there a willing partner named Palestine to make a deal with. It’s already known Obama wants to apply the same Iran formula to Korea. That doesn’t look likely. He’s desperate to apply his talents somewhere, division is his specialty.

Then Obama and his henchmen blame Israel for excessive force and say they are engaged in terrorism. Funny, terrorists don’t mind being called terrorists. Sometimes it might be a compliment. But Obama goes with saddling the label on Israel, and cries “excessive force” when there is actually an organized effort from Abbas. It’s being called another intifada. If anyone else, he would call it hate crimes.

Terrorists post videos teaching Palestinians “How to Stab a Jew”

NY Post

Terrorists have posted videos and manuals on social media to teach Palestinian supporters — even children — “how to stab a Jew.”

Israel’s UN ambassador, Danny Danon, displayed a how-to manual before a meeting of the UN Security Council on Friday.

“You can see with this picture what incitement looks like,” he said while showing a page.

http://nypost.com/2015/10/17/terrorists-post-videos-teaching-palestinians-how-to-stab-a-jew/

And Obama’s people are concerned about Israel’s use of force, in self defense?

State of the State

I am mentioning some random observations, not that they are connected with one another.

Here we are on the verge of Hillary possibly getting into the White House, with Bubba Clinton. People are projecting her into popular office. No choice but Hillary. “Hard Choices”.

Russia revised its constitution in a way for Putin to get back into office. He’s more popular than ever in the country. They seem to love the guy.

Elists are unpopular in government or elsewhere. The American people are fed up with elitists rule in government and Washington in particular. The disgruntled seem to be across the political spectrum. Trump exposes behind the scenes media manipulation regarding the debates. Who knew? People are turned off by the bias of media in general. Media doubles down on bias.

The world is on fire with radicalism and Obama takes a sigh approach. Obama administration accuses Israel of using excessive force. State Department says that Palestine and Israel are committing terrorism.

David Cameron comes out to make speeches pointing directly to Islamic terrorism. Obama can’t be forced to use the words and says ISIS is not Islamic. Obama calls Islam a religion of peace. Obama wants to put more Muslims in space and other places. But Obama tells us the Crusades are an issue.

Jerusalem is under attack and knife wielding terrorists are spreading throughout Israael. When Israel takes defensive actions it is roundly condemned or criticized. Media cannot be any more biased against Israel.

Sure its a proxy war in Syria, but the media is finally admitting it? Old news, no? Russia has gone through its proper government channels to approve its actions. Obama is flying by the seat of his pants, much the way he did things in Libya. (that worked out well) Obama claims Russia, Putin are operating out of weakness. Hmmm.

Obama says global warming is the greatest security threat. Pay no mind to all other impostors. State of the State — maddening; requires willing suspension of disbelief.

Obama’s anti-Bibi tactics

More disgusting and obvious antics from Obama. What else? What we’ve come to expect.

REVEALED: The Sickening Move Obama Made to SABOTAGE Netanyahu’s Incredible Speech to the U.N.

Conservative Tribune

Just before Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu began speaking in front of the United Nations General Assembly in New York on Thursday, President Barack Obama pulled U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry and U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Samantha Power aside for some sort of meeting.

“Ambassador Power and Secretary Kerry were unable to attend Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu’s speech before the General Assembly because they were called into a meeting with President Obama, which they participated in via video teleconference,” a State Department spokesperson told Breitbart.

Read more: http://conservativetribune.com/sickening-move-obama-made/

So the transparently bigoted Obama cast his(our) vote against Bibi. He treats Putin better than Netanyahu. Then he complains that people call him anti-Israel.

He entertained the Pope and listened to every word he said, but he has no time for Bibi at all. He has to make sure he dissed him as much as he can. He threw a fit over his joint session speech. Now he boycotts the UN speech. Friends like Obaama, who needs enemies?

Iran deal causing fractures

So at the summer DNC meeting it was noted Obama could not even shore up support for his Iran deal. So what was in it for Obama?

CNN reports

The Democratic National Committee’s summer meeting is over, and there is something you won’t find in the official minutes: a resolution supporting President Obama’s Iran nuclear agreement.

The deal has divided the [Democrat] party, to the point where the chairwoman, Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz of Florida, has not made her position clear as yet. As the President heads into a veto battle with Congress on the issue, he needs every Democratic vote he can muster. But Jonathan Martin of The New York Times noted he couldn’t get help from the party he leads.

“The Obama-controlled DNC could not pass a resolution this weekend expressing support for President Obama’s Iran deal,” said Martin. “It’s a bit of an embarrassment for the administration, seeing as how it’s his party. He appointed Debbie Wasserman Schultz.”

More at http://www.cnn.com/2015/08/30/politics/ip-obama-trump-jeb–romney/index.html

So Debbie is playing her cards close to her hairspray, eh? Wow that little deal is causing lots of headaches even at the DNC anti-Israel Party.I wonder if she is suffering from a case of crazyitis too? Or she could be one of those Iranian hardliner allies we hear about?

Why hasn’t she jumped to the head of the line and proudly endorsed Obama’s nuclear deal for Iran? Probably ol’ Debbie does not want to make her endorsement, of Obama’s deal, public as she’d have to explain it. She doesn’t do well on explaining things, or answering questions.

Am I to interpret that family feuds are now fashionable in the DNC?

Obama: family feud over Iran deal

Just like a family gathering or reunion with a little tiff, a little nuclear tiff.

Obama: US-Israel Family Feud Will Abate When Iran Deal in Place

Saturday, 29 Aug 2015 | Newsmax

President Barack Obama is comparing tensions between the U.S. and Israel over the Iranian nuclear deal to a family feud and says he expects quick improvements in ties between the longtime allies once the accord is implemented.

“Like all families, sometimes there are going to be disagreements,” Obama said Friday in a webcast with Jewish Americans. “And sometimes people get angrier about disagreements in families than with folks that aren’t family.”

The president’s comments came as momentum for the nuclear accord grew on Capitol Hill, where lawmakers will vote next month on a resolution to disapprove of the deal. Sen. Tom Carper, D-Del., became the 30th senator to publicly back the agreement, saying Friday that it was a good deal for America and for allies like Israel.

The looming congressional confrontation has sparked a summer of intense debate between supporters and opponents of the nuclear accord. The deliberations have also divided Jewish Americans, with leaders of many organizations expressing concern about long-term damage to the community.

Read more http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/US-Obama-Iran-Nuclear/2015/08/29/id/672541/

Oh, because we are good family members is why they are opposed to his deal? Yes, if we weren’t so close, Israel wouldn’t be so upset. Then why were Arabs/Saudis so against it?

With just 34 votes, Democrats could block the bill to prevent the Iran Deal. Obama compares it to a family feud. He’s so confident Israel will be right back on board once the deal is lodged into place. What an arrogant soul he is, if he has one. How is it, too, that he can speak for another sovereign country? Yet he used none of that prophetic vision in negotiating the deal. Why, it was to get a deal at any cost. Any deal that is.

But this is his M/O after all: scorched easrth politics at any cost, then assume the opponent will just live with it after he gets his way. The means to that end is lying, early and often.

After lighting the Mid East ablaze, Obama reaches for the marshmallows and says relax, enjoy the show and don’t worry about the effects, it’ll all be good. You’ll get used to it.

Iran, say it isn’t so

So many truths lurk in the background of all Obama’s lies. It’s amazing how he is trying to spin this Iran deal around.

Memo to Obama: It’s Not Iran Deal Critics Who Are the ‘Crazy’ Ones

Nile Gardiner / August 25, 2015

Just back from his annual summer vacation at Martha’s Vineyard, President Barack Obama has returned to disparaging his political adversaries and anyone who happens to disagree with him on policy.

According to a report in Politico, the president has taken to describing opponents of the hugely controversial Iran deal as “crazies.” The so-called “crazies” now include a majority of members of the House and Senate, a large chunk of the American electorate according to opinion polls, and the government of Israel, led by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

More at http://dailysignal.com/2015/08/25/memo-to-obama-its-not-iran-deal-critics-who-are-the-crazy-ones/

Now we’re the crazies when the crazy administration just made about the worst deal possible with Iran. He accused us of actually siding with the hard-liners in Iran when that is who he and Kerry made the deal with. And they are quite happy with it. Doesn’t that tell us anything? But it gets worse, the closer you look.

He made a deal that just doesn’t allow the terrorism to continue but makes us partners in promoting their terrorism around the globe. We are actually subsidizing and funding their activity. But then blame us because he cannot ram it through. The name-calling comes out. What a ruthless bastid Obama is. No one can even reason with him while he attacks and calls everyone names who disagrees with him. (probably his intent)

Start with a big lie though, just to make it fly easier. Call it something other than a treaty. Then Kerry issues the lame excuse that we can’t pass treaties anymore. So they had to lie to us. Notice a pattern here? Lie first, then say it’s our fault they had to lie to us. It’s probably true Obama is trying to drive people crazy with his schemes and blame machine, to silence the opposition. It hasn’t worked. So they just have to lie harder.

It’s about that time with Obama on Iran deal

What time is it? It must be Obama slime time. Time to get the slime machine in mach speed, like the centrifuges in Iran.

He’s using every nasty slur and label he can to attack anyone, including Jews, who don’t support his Iran “peace in our time” nuclear deal. What’s behind door number one, nuclear bomb. What’s behind door number two, the Ayatolah and a nuclear bomb. Never mind what’s behind the third because you’ll never get passed the first two.

Jewish Magazine Accuses White House of Using ‘Jew-Baiting’ and ‘Bigotry’ to Smear Iran Deal Critics

Aug. 9, 2015 10:08am Sharona Schwartz | The Blaze

The Jewish online magazine Tablet has accused the White House of engaging in “Jew-baiting” and “racial and ethnic prejudice” to slander critics of the Iran deal, including New York Sen. Chuck Schumer.

The magazine’s editors compared the behavior of the White House to “the kind of dark, nasty stuff we might expect to hear at a white power rally.”

Schumer, a Jewish Democrat, announced on Thursday that he was breaking with President Barack Obama and would vote to oppose the Iran nuclear agreement.

In the editorial, titled “Crossing a Line to Sell a Deal,” the editors of Tablet on Friday asserted that the “White House and its allies shouldn’t need to smear American Jews — and a sitting senator — as dual loyalists to make their case.”

While the editors noted that they “support the president” and “sympathize” with his efforts to combat Iran’s nuclear weapons pursuit, they wrote, “What we increasingly can’t stomach — and feel obliged to speak out about right now — is the use of Jew-baiting and other blatant and retrograde forms of racial and ethnic prejudice as tools to sell a political deal, or to smear those who oppose it.”

“Accusing Senator Schumer of loyalty to a foreign government is bigotry, pure and simple. Accusing Senators and Congressmen whose misgivings about the Iran deal are shared by a majority of the U.S. electorate of being agents of a foreign power, or of selling their votes to shadowy lobbyists, or of acting contrary to the best interests of the United States, is the kind of naked appeal to bigotry and prejudice that would be familiar in the politics of the pre-Civil Rights Era South,” the editors wrote.

“This use of anti-Jewish incitement as a political tool is a sickening new development in American political discourse, and we have heard too much of it lately — some coming, ominously, from our own White House and its representatives,” Tablet wrote. “Let’s not mince words: Murmuring about ‘money’ and ‘lobbying’ and ‘foreign interests’ who seek to drag America into war is a direct attempt to play the dual-loyalty card.”

“It’s the kind of dark, nasty stuff we might expect to hear at a white power rally, not from the President of the United States — and it’s gotten so blatant that even many of us who are generally sympathetic to the administration, and even this deal, have been shaken by it,” the editors wrote.

“Whatever one feels about the merits of the Iran deal, sales techniques that call into question the patriotism of American Jews are examples of bigotry — no matter who does it,” the editors added.

Read more The Blaze

Time for Obama to unleash another divisive attack campaign on his opponents — even if they be Democrats.  The White House has threatened that anyone vying for leadership would be held to account for past positions. Dems have already announced they will oppose Schumer for leader based on this position. Of Course if Schumer was not such a racist, bigot, backed by Jew billionaire lobby, anti-peace extremist, dual loyalist, war monger, and ally to the radicalized “death to America” Islamists in Iran. Any questions?

How the truth became politically incorrect to Obama

The story here is not only that truth became politically incorrect to Obama but also, more importantly, that anyone endorsing or trafficking in truth became the opposition to Obama. Imagine that, just by aligning oneself with the truth turns one into an enemy of Obama. And by extension, considering his position, it thereby turns one into an enemy of the state. We see how all this works. In effect, truth has become Obama’s chief enemy, and thereby an enemy of the state.

Of course it would be a difficult thing for media to accept. Fortunately, they don’t have to worry about such a thing. That would admit being played or hoodwinked by Obama.

The Iran deal reveals a chunk of this truism about Bary Soetoro. Go back to his campaign days where, asked about Iran, he always favored talking to Iran. His supporters loved it. Conservatives took issue with that for exactly the reasons we witnessed, of “negotiation” with the talks. Of course we were told we were wrong that talks do not equal negotiating. But they do and did. Now we also see how that negotiation turned out .

So they made it so complex, attaching side deals, which no one will see between Iran and IAEA, that it would be purposefully hard to understand. Trust us, they said, it is a good deal. (a good deal of BS) See it would require trust. However, trust does not make it a good deal. But “trust” is the fallacy that Obama has peddled all along, since his early days as Senator, to his first campaign to today. We are always to just trust him, with little or no basis for it, and then we get screwed in the end. Trust though is a central ingredient in his modus operandi and agenda. It’s the top necessary ingredient with Obama. Which is why I called his a faith-based campaign: “Hope and change” and “change you can believe in.”

The side deals, as they are referred to, are unknown to Kerry and even Obama. By law, all materials of the deal must be given to Congress. So how can they sign off on something they don’t know the details of, and cannot see? But that is what Obama is asking of Congress. It’s a good deal, trust us, “peace in our time.” Trust is the operative word.

Remember Reagan’s maxim of trust and verify?

We always verify after the fact that he lied to us. But it always shows in the end our trust was without merit. We always get a raw deal or royally screwed. He is not happy enough to screw us in the present, he wants to stick to future generations too. There are normally multiple layers of screwage. He also sets it up where future negotiations with Iran will be necessary. Then the future administration(s) will have to deal with Tehran. We really made Iran some kind of a partner.

Every step along the way on issues Obama abused our trust and destroyed the grounds for it. I can’t say he actually destroyed our trust because people cannot accept that their trust was shot through, because that would be admitting they were taken, lied to, or hoodwinked. Who wants to admit being a mark? But they continue to trust him.

It is a serial abuse relationship Obama has with even many of his voters and base. (they aren’t all communists though they endorse Marxist people, which is another subject) To admit it is more than they can take. Each step Obama requires people to just trust him.

Seeing is believing, or not.

We know it is not the transparency he promised, another lie. So behind their backs he is abusing their trust in him. A few, and I don’t know how many, are probably privy to this whole charade Obama plays but who also believe in the destination anyway, so it is acceptable. Remember the professor of Obamcare, Jonathan Gruber, and his repeated statements that they had to lie to us. Which is more profound, that they believed they had to lie to us or that lying is such a necessary tactic in their agenda?

Well, it was the same premise in the Iran deal, they had to lie to the American people. From the beginning they said we would have anytime anywhere access and that would be in any agreement. Now we see we don’t have anywhere anytime access. Then Kerry said that anywhere anytime was not promised, or part of the plan. He denied that there were any side deals and, low and behold, there are side deals. They denied that sanctions were working though they claim that sanctions, in fact — ones congress not Obama imposed — were the pressure that brought them to the negotiation table. Then they condemned any talk of new sanctions or reinstatement of the previous ones, which Obama lifted. They claimed eliminating the prospect of a nuclear Iran was the objective, while they in effect enshrined their nuclear ability. They also denied that containment was their strategy, but voila theirs is a strategy of containment.

Furthermore, let’s back up again to the campaign trail. Obama claimed his mission was to stop proliferation. In fact he wants to eliminate all nuclear weapons. We now see he has proliferated them starting a nuclear arms race in the Middle East. He said he would do these things with, he assured us, the purest of motives. Now we look at what really motivated him.

The political strategy, lie a lot — early and often.

Probably the biggest parallel theme to things though is the lies. Its a tactic and an overall strategy of his. Tell us anything in order to get his way, pass legislation, accomplish his mission or goal — preferably the opposite of what he is doing. Obamacare was built on lies and illusion. He sold the initial idea that it would only affect those who didn’t have insurance or medical coverage. Hello, it affected everyone. He said if you liked your plan you could keep your plan. Wrong, you couldn’t. He said if you liked your doctor, you could keep your doctor. Wrong. He said it would lower the cost of your insurance, saving average family 2500 per/yr. In fact, it increased the cost and for some families by 2500 a year. He said it would lower our debt while it added to it.

But probably the central, critical lie he used from the onset was that, since there was a majority of people already covered, it would not affect them. That made it very palatable. It basically was only going to help those who had no coverage. So people went along because they believed it would not affect them personally, least not negatively. And many of those are the very ones it affects the most, and in the worst way. Now they have soaring premiums and deductibles. It was a pack of lies, actually built on a foundation of lies. Sound familiar? Then came Professor Gruber who said just that. Well, then it was the lie that he was nothing and not connected with drafting the law. Actually he was an architect of the law. See?

So now we have an Iran deal following the same formula. Tell the people anything at the beginning, lie and promise them anything. Whatever means to the ends. Then deny what you said and did. But then Gruber’s admission was even worse than admitting they lied. It was, yes we lied to the stupid American people. But it even went a step deeper than that.

Daily Caller

Obamacare architect Jonathan Gruber said that lack of transparency was a major part of getting Obamacare passed because “the stupidity of the American voter” would have killed the law if more people knew what was in it.

Catch that? First he told us they had to lie to the stupid people. Then he suggested they had to lie to us because we are stupid. In effect, we are the cause for their lying. It’s our fault they lied.(that’s something like the ultimate lie) Like: I’ll admit I lied but the reason was because you made it so necessary. It’s all our fault and we’re stupid, so we probably can’t even understand that. Geesh. Maybe one day we’ll come up to their level and be able to understand — surely it won’t be soon. By then they will be even smarter. It’s not even that government knows best, it is that the progressives know better than all.

Then there was Senator Hillary CLinton’s statement to General Petraeus that his report “requires the willing suspension of disbelief.” Take that from the Liars Club. Ironically, that is exactly what Obama and his administration, including Hillary, requires from us — “suspension of disbelief.” We know he’s lying to us, but let’s not pay much attention to that detail. Instead, let’s accept what he says as the truth. Most places would call deceit on that level fraud. Just like the kind that ushered Obama into office. But in his campaign, at the time, he was busy pointing out Hillary’s lies. Round and round it goes, where it stops only Obama knows. But it never will stop because he cannot allow the lies to end.

RightRing | Bullright

Pope validates Palestinian State

NY Times | May 13,2015

JERUSALEM — The Vatican announced Wednesday that it would soon sign a treaty that includes recognition of the “state of Palestine,” lending significant symbolic weight to an intensifying Palestinian push for international support for sovereignty that bypasses the paralyzed negotiations with Israel.

Non-Muslim prayer on Temple Mount

Jerusalem court upholds Jewish prayer on Temple Mount

Security services prohibit non-Muslims from praying or engaging in other forms of worship on the site, claiming such activity triggers Palestinian violence.

Activists hailed what they labeled as an historic victory on Monday, after the Jerusalem Magistrate’s Court issued a ruling ostensibly backing claims that Jews be allowed to pray on the Temple Mount.

Activist Yehudah Glick had brought a law suit against the Israel Police for banning him for two years from visiting the site because of video evidence of him praying there.

Glick, who was seriously wounded in an assassination attempt last year by a Palestinian extremist, was banned from the Temple Mount between 2011 and 2013 after he was seen uttering a Jewish prayer at the site in a Channel 10 broadcast.

The security services prohibit non-Muslims from praying or engaging in other forms of worship on the Temple Mount, claiming that such activity inevitably triggers Palestinian violence.

The Supreme Court has previously upheld the theoretical right for Jews to pray at the site, although it has stated that the security services are permitted to take security considerations into account when deciding whether to allow non-Muslim prayer there.

More: http://www.jpost.com/Israel-News/Jerusalem-court-upholds-Jewish-prayer-on-Temple-Mount-392744

We’ll see what happens. Muslims paid no attention to that before, will they now?

Funny how any non-Muslim prayer agitates and offends Muslims. So your freedom of religion triggers their Muslim violence. But we have “phobias”?

Pope Francis recently visited the Temple Mount. I hope he did not engage in any triggering prayer while there. (he probably knew better)

Well, let’s not trigger those sensitive Muslims.

The Left having their way

I didn’t want to start a long rant over the sentiments in that last article about Israel. I almost did but then what’s the use? It is nothing new under the sun.

But if I would have, I almost said something like I hope by next year you find something positive to be cheerful about to appreciate Israel’s Independence Day. Almost. But if you consider what would make some on the Left happy and encouraged by Israel, that was probably not a good idea.

In other words, had Netanyahu lost then probably a lot of that negativity would have been washed away. If his opponents and Obama-bots had their way, it would be another story. They would be dancing in the streets Sort of like here when Obama won. They would be shouting victory, maybe naively. Anyway it provided a good comparison and reminder to the state of America as well as the state of Israel — and current world conditions.

I find it amusing sometimes how the leftist mind works or doesn’t. The old saying about be careful what you wish for rings true. The same applies to the progressive Left here. They don’t read the word caution on a sign, they react by going full speed ahead.

Anyway, not to rant here, but when I consider what the Leftists want it makes me realize why we cannot appease them. It is not a pretty world when the progressives get exactly what they want. That does not stop their overreaching either. It could be a horrible thing to think about the Left getting its way entirely. You can say “but they are,” though they haven’t got to their utopia yet. That’s the difference. There is a whole lot they still want. And besides, I don’t think there is a finality to their utopian model, it keeps on going. So if they were all happy campers, then I think we’d be in even worse shape – imagine.

I heard someone ask a minister about all the places he had spoke asking, ‘if you were invited to speak at a Hillary Clinton rally, would you?’ But I think I know that answer, the person said. The minister explained, I can speak most anywhere except where I have to water down or change my message. So the point was if they gave him unconstrained ability to say what he would, then he could do it. But that is not the Left of today.That is not going to happen because it would not be in the Left’s interests. Hillary or the Left will have certified fellow-travelers speak because they can control the message. And truth is really not on topic. There are a few parallels to both of these.

Actually if it was up to the Left, they would run Elizabeth Warren if she could win hands down. But even Warren is not left enough for them. (I’m not sure socialist Bernie Sanders is either) You can probably find the same thing in Israel’s Left.

It is sort of like wondering what it would have taken to make Ted Kennedy happy? We saw how far he was willing to go to get what he wanted, volunteering our media to Soviets. Kennedy would supply them press access to speak directly to the  American people, with the objective of defeating Reagan — but he offered access. So you see there are no lines or limits with the Left. Just like with Clintons, whatever their objectives are; or like Obama’s “ends justifies the means” philosophy. It’s something akin to wishing the Islamic State happiness, while knowing what makes them happy.

PS: I forgot the obvious, who puts political agenda above their national holiday?

No cause for Israel celebration

With a little sadness, but knowing and seeing how the left thinks, I ask any pro-Israel people to take a look at this article and read it. Well, the anti-Israel haters can read it too, though their sentiments are close to what’s reflected in it.

Why I won’t be celebrating Israel’s independence this year” | Haaretz news

Doesn’t it sound eerily familiar, like some of our liberals here? Talk about a pessimistic view. All about politics and negativity because Netanyahu won et al. Note the channeled voice of speaking for masses and the dripping intellectual elitist views. Well, it probably went over real well in some circles.(if that was the plan) Sad it comes to this.

Obama tells shrink his personal feelings

Not exactly, but it was along those lines that he laid out his concerns and problems.

Obama claims he is hurt by these comments that his administration is anti-Israel. Oh, our negative talk about Obama and his policies is the problem. His feelings are hurt.

We already know that “death to America” and “death to Israel” chants don’t bother him. But we the people talking about his anti-Israel policy hurts him. Wow, so the truth actually does hurt? (obviously not enough)

But then he was also hurt…no pissed off when Bibi came here to make a speech at Congress. The petulant manchild has some awfully strange phobias as it turn out.

I guess he skipped the whole Biblical principle that those who bless Israel will be blessed and those who curse it will be cursed. Maybe if he began to break out with boils and lesions, he would start to get the message. Then again…

Israelis may be “hurt” by his administration calling Netanyahu chicken-__. Nah.

    “It has been personally difficult for me to hear, sort of expressions that somehow we don’t have…that this administration has not done everything it could…uh, to look out for Israel’s interests.” Obama told the New York Times in an interview, with a grinnish smirk on his face.

His personal difficulties are now, on record, embedded in the political narrative as being a victim of comments that he is anti-Israel. Whoa to those personal difficulties.

Yet he goes to another Easter prayer breakfast to complain once again about Christians. Just after an earth-shattering agreement with the theocratic “death to America” Iran, he lectures us on Christianity. Another prayer breakfast, another attack.

Obama: I’m Concerned by ‘Less Than Loving’ Comments From Christians

Fred Lucas — | The Blaze

President Barack Obama on Tuesday used the White House Easter prayer breakfast to accuse some Christians of lacking love, then said he was “pulling back” from saying any more.

“On Easter, I do reflect that as a Christian, I am supposed to love,” Obama said. “I have to say that sometimes, when I listen to less than loving expressions by Christians, I get concerned. But that’s a topic for another day.”

Some in the audience applauded, and laughed.

More: http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/04/07/obama-im-concerned-by-less-than-loving-comments-from-christians/

No doubt about that, it will be a “topic” on another day, too, at opportune times.

We never hear any of his sharp critiques aimed at Muslims and Islam, or in his festivities in Ramadan etc. No, he goes out of his way to shed the best possible light on Islam and fellow Muslims, living out their faith.

Obama’s Christian-bashing is akin to Pontius Pilate lecturing the disciples on the finer points of their Christian faith. So, if the Christians he is referring to would only be more agreeable to him(and his thinking), there would be no problem. Obama was not practicing his divisive organizing talent on Iran. Instead, he goes back to using Christians and Christianity for a whipping post.

All this Christian persecution everywhere but he’s hurt by our “anti-Israel” comments, of the “less than loving” Christians?

The economic activism of the Left

Two aspects of liberal activism share a common theme.

The Left and the gay movement boycott your business if they don’t like your views or ideas. Or they want to force you to do business, while giving you the business.

Here we have progressives, Liberals, Democrats or what ever you want to call them, with their favorite method of economic activism. Striking at the heart of businesses has long been a target of opportunity for the Left.

Boycotting places like Chick-fil-A was their standard m/o when a company or owner did something, or had a social position, they did not like. Yes, it turned into a boon when people countered by taking business to them in droves. It was a reverse activism the Left despised. So they painted anyone who patronized the business into bigots.

Remember how they boycotted Dr Laura and her sponsors? Eventually she gave up. Notice all the times they targeted businesses and sponsors of shows like Dr Laura’s they didn’t like. The Left loves a good boycott to get their collective juices going. They don’t have to know all the details. But of course they don’t stop with boycotts, they actively protest or march against the establishments. The goal is to hurt or destroy it.

Then there was Occupy Wall Street cranking their strategy up a few notches — as only the left can. That just showed how they can roll all their ugly activism into one and still have pols and government pandering to their agenda — whatever that was, and it’s a moving goalpost.(capitalism, big banks, big business, big-government, wages or whatever)

Then there is their beloved crown jewel, the BDS movement (haters inc.), against Israel. Anyone who does business or buys and sells with Israel deserves to be on the list. Anything tied to Israel in some way gets on that enemy list. That is on top of their ordinary protests against Israel. Fuel it with plenty of anti-Semitism. Israel is grounds for protest; or divestment of anything related to Israel. They call on governments and campuses to take up that banner. They call on countries and the UN to slap sanctions on Israel. The reason becomes secondary to the actual movement, it doesn’t really matter. In effect, they want a world united against Israel. No, it doesn’t matter who is a party to the movement or what they’ve done. Anyone can and should join, according to the organizers.

The BDS movement offers a glimpse into the scope of their activism. Anything goes: board a ship or break the law, it doesn’t matter. All that matters is hatred of Israel. It brings on board some of the worst of the worst offenders in human rights. It unites them all — the Left, Muslim Brotherhood, dictators,terrorists, academia, unions — under the same banner on a platform of hatred. Rally the troops. The same formula on a smaller scale plays out on all sorts of the Left’s favorite social issues. Again, the political movement matters even more than the justification or rationale. Politics rules.

The civil rights activists operate in the same way, from Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson to Hollywood celebs engaging in the same politics. Blacklisting people, no problem. Boycotting or running them out of business. Shaking down corporations for money or cronyism. Now the gay agenda, a limb of the Left, engaging their sexual agenda.’ Don’t like a policy or something of a business? This is the means to whatever ends you desire.

Now up pops another tactic: force businesses or people to do business in ways they don’t want. The polar opposite of boycotts. Force businesses into agreements or relationships because activists can. Then use the Left’s staple of government force, against their will, as the enforcer. They always love to have government coercion working on their behalf. The ultimate goal of the Left is having government enforcement. Think of it as the 60s radicals now having government serve their interests.

Use it under the banner of: environmentalism, the green agenda, illegal immigration, social justice, gun control, spending programs, energy, oil and resources development, same sex marriage and gay agenda, abortion, crime and justice, class warfare, wages, union activism, or anti-Christian agenda.

So they pick out those they choose to offend into submission under government’s hand. Morals and principles are replaced by political agenda. Politics trumps all. Now when Harry Reid tells a big lie from the floor of the Senate, it is justified if his enemy loses. People refer to this as “the ends justify the means” but it is worse than that. It is a politics at any cost ideology.(the very definition of an ideologue)

This is their economic terrorism model. Just that it strives to have government run interference for their political agenda. Any wonder we see a politicized bureaucracy and hyper-partisanship? That is by design, after all, and exactly what they want. They don’t want a neutral or Apolitical government, they want it radicalized just like under Obama. It could be the closest thing yet to a utopian model.

You already knew that but it doesn’t hurt to keep pointing it out. They want government to be their big brother, the thug, the enforcer… the Cosa Nostra. They don’t want officials to take an oath, they want them to vow to government’s omerta and punish whistleblowers. (break their kneecaps) It all means whatever their political agenda is at the time. And keep those government wheels well-greased with plenty of lobbying and activism — Organize for Activism and Move On dot ug. Petitions and perpetual grievance keep it running smoothly. (smooth in radical terms)

So activists want to force a business they don’t like to do business against its will, or activists will boycott and ruin the business. Make sense? Hey.hey, ho, ho…

RightRing | Bullright