Obama administration denying reality

President Obama has gone to great lengths to eliminate the reality of Radical Islam and Islamic terrorism. This is nothing new. That which is new is the President has begun manipulating reference to domestic Islamic terrorism by directing the FBI to terminate the use of the terminology on a local level. This occurrence has happened in the face of domestic Islamic terrorism most notably but not limited to the Ft Hood Massacre perpetrated by Muslim military psychiatrist Major Nidal Hasan.

Here is the ACT for America email exposing BHO hypocrisy and enabling to sign a petition that allows the President know that Americans desire that soldiers wounded or killed on America soil by Islamic terrorists deserve the Purple Heart.

JRH 2/27/12

*******************************

Obama administration denying reality

The Obama administration’s denial of reality— and why Rep. Allen West’s Purple Heart legislation is so important

Please add your name today!

Sent by ACT for America

Sent: 2/27/2012 9:23 AM

Last week we emailed you about our open letter to the chairmen of both the U.S. House and Senate Armed Services Committees. The letter calls on the committees to take up and pass H.R. 1142, sponsored by Rep. Allen West, which would confer the Purple Heart upon victims of jihadist attacks (Ft. Hood, the Little Rock Recruitment Center, etc.).

Doing so would correct a grave injustice. It would also shine a light on a reality the Obama administration is desperately trying to deny:

·         that there is a jihadist ideology;

·         that the primary meaning of the doctrine of jihad has always been warfare against non-Muslims;

·         that the perpetrators of jihadist violence are not mere “criminals”—they are enemy combatants who deserve to be treated as enemy combatants;

·         and that their victims, such as at Ft. Hood and the Little Rock Recruitment Center, are not victims of “crime” or “workplace violence,” but are victims of an act of war—jihad.

The Obama administration has gone so far in acting on this denial that, at the insistence of radical Muslim organizations, it is expunging any references to “jihad” or “radical Islam” from FBI terrorism training manuals.

This pattern of denial by the Obama administration can be seen in other areas. Recently, Gen. Martin Dempsey, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, made the incredulous statement that Iran is a “rational actor” and is not trying to develop nuclear weapons.

This illustrates a triumph of wishful thinking, or perhaps wishful parsing of intelligence data, over an understanding of religious doctrinal beliefs that are at least in part driving Iran’s leaders on its path toward nuclear weaponry. When Ahmadinejad, Khameini, or any other Iranian leader, express their belief in the return of the 12th imam, and how a worldwide apocalypse must occur before this happens, we should take them at their word. What better way to instigate a worldwide apocalypse than to launch nuclear weapons?

But instead of taking this seriously, it seems that this administration dismisses such notions as crazy ramblings, because, after all, no one in our leadership would ever believe such a thing.

The Obama administration has also been exhibiting a denial of reality in the way it is responding to the accidental burning of some Qur’ans in Afghanistan. It has trotted out one apology after another, from different leaders in the administration, even going so far as to promise that those who burned the Qur’ans will be held accountable.

(Interestingly, some modern and ancient Islamic authorities specifically sanction the burning of Qur’ans as a proper means of disposal. To find out more see this enlightening article by our friend and colleague Andrew Bostom.)

The Obama administration actions have been undertaken in the hope that this would somehow assuage the wrath of the Afghan rioters, when in fact it denies the reality that such repeated pleas for forgiveness are doing the exact opposite, like throwing gasoline on a fire. The Obama administration’s actions are emboldening the rioters and have failed to achieve their purported goal.

Every person who signs the Purple Heart letter is not only calling on Congress to correct a grave injustice, he or she is sending a message that we have lost patience with the denial of the reality that jihad is what is motivating Islamic terrorists and that jihad is an act of war.

So if you haven’t yet signed the Purple Heart letter, for the sake of the victims at Ft. Hood and Little Rock, please add your name today.
______________________________

ACT for America is an issues advocacy organization dedicated to effectively organizing and mobilizing the most powerful grassroots citizen action network in America, a grassroots network committed to informed and coordinated civic action that will lead to public policies that promote America’s national security and the defense of American democratic values against the assault of radical Islam. We are only as strong as our supporters, and your volunteer and financial support is essential to our success. Thank you for helping us make America safer and more secure.

Wake Up, America, Wake Up!

Justin O. Smith writes in a harsh manner sure to aggravate Muslims that have been brainwashed to believe that Islamic holy writings promote peace when in actuality those books have a dark side. That dark side requires violence and/or even death for insults to Islam. Therein I am guessing, is the reason for Smith’s harshness.

JRH 2/25/12

*****************************

Wake Up, America, Wake Up!

By Justin O. Smith

Sent: 2/25/2012 2:31 PM

Islam has never undergone a reformation in the manner of all other religions. Islam today is just the same as it was in the 7th century. In this sense, some Muslims may attempt to set aside the cruel and harsh tenets of the Sunnah and they may try to worship peacefully through only the Abrahamic passages of the Koran (borrowed from Judaism), but Islam on the whole cannot and never does allow any such deviation from the teachings of their false prophet Mohammed. "Moderate" Muslims, "radical" Muslims, "moderate" Islam and "radical" Islam are simply background noise and a confusion. There exists only Islam and Muslims in their tightly narrated dance of enslavement and death!

"The mosques are our barracks, the domes our helmets, the minarets our bayonets and the faithful our soldiers." -Turkey's Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan.

FBI files and recent independent investigations fully support the truth and accuracy of John Guandolo's assertions that: 1) mosques are front organizations for the Muslim Brotherhood with no right to exist, and 2) they (Muslims) do not have a First Amendment right to do anything. With twelve years of experience in the FBI investigating numerous Muslim terror cells and plots and many more with the Strategic Engagement Group, one should give Mr. Guandolo's analysis considerably more weight over the objections of questionable critics, such as Jim Cavanuagh, former ATF agent, who is no authority on Islam as evidenced by his blog at the leftist Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC).

Certainly no one, except Muslims, can actually suggest that a religion can operate within the realm of First Amendment rights and still call for the enslavement, "dhimmitude" or conversion of someone upon pain of death and honor killings of women and the execution of homosexuals. And yet, modern day Islam still espouses these exact policies, and if a Muslim is not in complete agreement with these views, he is often regarded as "not Muslim enough" and subjected to extreme abuse or even death at the hands of other Muslims. Nearly every practice, premise and concept within Islam is unconstitutional and violates the rights of every U.S. citizen, Muslim and infidel alike!

Clergymen, such as Pastor J. David Miller, would be of better service if they viewed Islam as it really exists, rather than as they wish it to be. In an abundantly ignorant statement, Pastor Miller compared Sheriff Arnold's collaborative efforts with John Guandolo to Nazi guards training Rutherford Co. deputies about Jews; Miller obviously does not know that 22,000 Bosnian Muslims fought alongside Hitler's SS troops specifically in order to kill Jews. He chastises Rev. Allan Jackson, of the World Outreach Church (Murfreesboro, TN), with the terms "intolerance" and "racism", while he calls imam Mohammed Ahmed, of the Nashville Islamic Center, "friend" and "a passionate communicator", even though 80% of the U.S. mosques are now operated by extremists and Saudi Arabian imams, just like Ahmed, whose anti-American activities are still funded by Saudi Arabia; Youssef al-Qaradawi, who called the Holocaust "Divine punishment" for the Jews, was once affiliated with Ahmed's mosque.

Perhaps the leftists of the SPLC and the journalism hacks from 'The Tennessean', such as Bob Smietana, will accept the results from years of research concerning U.S. mosques by nationally renowned security analyst Dave Gaubatz. Gaubatz's investigators discovered a direct link between the Halaco Bookstore and the Dar al-Hijrah mosque in Falls Church, Va. Halaco distributes Sharia law and violent jihad materials to Islamic schools across America that tell young Muslim children the U.S. government is evil, do not follow U.S. law and America's leaders will all go to hell; these materials also call on them to kill anyone who oppresses Islam, and they teach them how to obtain weapons, even weapons of mass destruction.

Two weeks at the Al Farooq mosque in Nashville, TN. uncovered violent books and videos explaining the necessity of overthrowing any government that oppresses Islam. Gaubatz's investigators also found teachings from U.S. Islamic leaders that included propaganda designed to make their followers hate America. They also found credible evidence of forced child marriages within this mosque, but Nashville Metro Police Dept and, of course, the Islamic organizations were reluctant to act from a fear of CAIR initiated lawsuits.

In a 1990s memorandum, the Muslim Brotherhood stated that they were intent on "destroying the Western civilization from within and sabotaging its miserable house by...the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated" and Islam "is made victorious over all other religions." This certainly does give John Guandolo's assertion an exponentially greater amount of credibility, or is overthrowing the U.S. government by a foreign cultural and ideologically driven movement now acceptable under our First Amendment?

Speaking frankly, little 98 year old widow-women across America are not plotting and committing terrorist acts in our nation, but Muslim males between 18 and 36 are. On Feb. 17, shortly after this controversy arose over Guandolo's assistance to Sheriff Arnold, 29 year old Amine el-Khalifi, a Morocco national, was arrested as he attempted to detonate a bomb two blocks from the U.S. Capitol Building. Khalifi had overstayed his visa by several years. One must wonder, "which mosque did Khalifi attend?" ...Adams Center? ... Perhaps Dar al-Hijrah? So, while not all Muslims are terrorists, nearly all terrorists are Muslim, and they will not be found at the World Outreach Church, unless they are there to kill our friends, families and fellow Americans!

Is it enough not to handle explosives, not to decapitate people or to chatter about peace and mercy to be considered a moderate Muslim? And is it a moderate Muslim who beats his wife or wives or kills his daughter if she falls in love with a Christian? Moderate Islam is another invention of ours.

So-called "moderate" Muslims denounce violence in the name of Islam, but insist that Islam had nothing to do with it; reformists, by contrast, not only deplore Islamist violence, but they admit that Islam has incited violence. When it is moderates, not extremists, who treat other Muslims like traitors for advocating liberal democratic values, something has corrupted the moderates themselves. Moderate Muslims are so consumed with Western transgressions that they have distracted themselves from dealing with the Islamist/Islamofascists inside Islam... Muslims who dominate, censor and murder fellow Muslims. Today, Islam needs more self-conscious reformists who will engage the debate, dissent and reinterpretation that have carried Judaism and Christianity into the modern world.

In Islam's current state, coexistence with Islam is a fantasy. Compromising with Islam before it experiences a real and verifiable reformation would be similar to a society having an epiphany and an ensuing Renaissance and then deciding to return to the Dark Ages. Islam views its subjects through a collective statist/ theocratic prism, and it is repressive towards individual freedom, by the very nature of its doctrines as it demands submission. It is the ideology and principles forged by Western civilization that made choice, free-will and democratic constitutional republics more than just an inkling of an idea in the back of some serf's mind. As long as advocates of Islam and Sharia law continue to subvert the U.S. Constitution and work to destroy Our Beloved America, they are negating their own First Amendment rights themselves, as criminals and traitors to America!

There is Islam and that is all. And Islam is the Koran and Mohammed's last words... and nothing but these works. And the Koran is the 'Mein Kampf' of a religion which has always aimed to eliminate the others... a religion which identifies itself with politics and with governance...which does not concede one innocent hair to free thought, to free choice... which seeks to substitute democracy with the mother of all totalitarianisms: theocracy. Ah! Read it over that 'Mein Kampf' the Muslims call the Koran. Whatever the version, one finds that all the evil which these Sons of Mohammed commit against us and themselves comes from that book; it is written in that book. And if speaking the truth means I have committed some crime, as suggested by Hillary Clinton and the UN's Resolution 16/18, by criticizing or vilifying Islam, then sentence me to all the years of prison you want; in prison I will continue to repeat what I say now. I shall continue to shout: "Wake up, America, wake up!" They have declared war on us; we are at war. And in war, we must fight.

On Nov. 11, 2011, John Guandolo stated,  "We have an insurgency long underway in this nation. We are going to win or lose this war depending on what each of you do...you are the soldiers in this war."

By Justin O. Smith

___________________________

Editor: Spell Check editing was performed on the original document.

The Deterioration of Family Values

YJ Draiman has been running a campaign to be elected Mayor in Los Angeles. His website is campaign site. I have no idea what “R6” represents; however that was how it is entitled.

JRH 2/25/12

***********************

The Deterioration of Family Values R6

By YJ Draiman

Website: http://www.yjdraiman.org/

From: NCCR Comment

2/5/2012 2:54 PM

Comment to: Pro-Homosexual Advocate Destroys Traditional Marriage Banner

Since World War 2 when women were encouraged to join the work force en mass, to replace the men who went to war and keep the economy and the war effort going.

 

There has been a deterioration of family values and a breakdown of the family unit, a trend where a mother was not at home to take care of her children, monitor their behavior, help with the homework and discipline when and where necessary.

 

The advancement in technology has harmed family values. The Media and Television has totally destroyed any comprehension of values in our society. We have become a materialistic society – No holds barred. 

 

The lack of discipline and total disregard for authority and respect is clear to anyone who has watched the past 50 years and seen our society’s values deteriorate.

 

One example alone is that 50 years ago a teacher was happy to go to school to teach, a teacher was respected and looked up-to, a teacher could discipline.  Today teachers fear for their lives they are petrified by their students, discipline is restricted both to teachers and parents alike.

 

This scenario caries on to other social interactions of society today, and the situation is getting worse and worse every year.

 

You will notice that many families who come from other countries have a very strong family values, tradition, good education, respect and the children excel in their studies. That is because they have not had the chance to be influenced by our overly liberal society.

 

The education of our children begins at home and continues in school – the parents and the school must take a proactive approach to teach our children values and respect.

 

In today’s society a teacher is not permitted to discipline a student, the teachers will be sued, not to mention that teachers fears for their safety.

 

Parents in today’s society are also restricted as to how to discipline their children; in many cases parents are getting sued. In many cases children would never dream of treating their parents with such disrespect 50 years ago. Today some parents are afraid of their own children.

 

Abuse has been and will be with society to eternity that does not give society the right to prohibit discipline; a few acts of abuse should not cause society to prohibit proper discipline.

 

When an individual or individuals utilize a vehicle to commit a crime cause the death of others, does society prohibit vehicles altogether, no, a vehicle is very important for our everyday life.

 

Well, the discipline of our children by parents and teachers is extremely important for our society and the preservation of humanity.

It seems that our society is so busy chasing the dollar, fame and glory, that anything goes all values goes out the window. We should be an example of honesty, integrity and respect to our children.

Are Americans patriotic and proud enough to defend, protect and bring family values back to America? Is America ready to fight for honesty integrity and justice in our society, eliminate corruption and fraud, waste and self serving programs?

Re-invigorate our economy, rebuild our industrial base and decrease our dependence on foreign economies and resources.

 

YJ Draiman, Northridge, CA.

 

PS

 

Tell me and I will forget

Show me and I may remember

Involve me and I will understand.

– Chinese Proverb.

We all want health, happiness, prosperity and life PS We, the people, are losing our values. Drunk with decades of material indulgence unbalanced by authentic spiritual endeavor, we’re fast becoming corrupt. We look to objects for happiness and fulfillment. We go shopping when we feel empty and depressed. We elevate billionaires and Hollywood entertainers to positions of public acclaim they have not earned.

AMERICA IS not experiencing a crisis of leadership so much as a crisis of values. Politicians cannot provide them; they are mere caretakers of public business, and are as much in need of values guidance as the rest of us.

Romney will be seated as the head of the International Plutocracy

Tony Newbill’s title wants your eye on Mitt Romney; however the post is more about Leftist business elites and the depopulation agenda to progress the world to a sustainable Leftist utopia. The Romney connection via association is his connection to John Holdren and Holdren is connected to the Leftist elites and the depopulation agenda. So when Romney says he is a Conservative, it would be a statement not supported by his past work that he boasts so much about as a business expert.

JRH 2/25/12

**************************

Romney will be seated as the head of the International Plutocracy

By Tony Newbill

Sent: 2/17/2012 11:34 AM

Romney will be seated as the head of the International Plutocracy that’s trying to be formed with today's Global market crisis.

Soros Big-Business Accountability Project Funded By Big-Business

http://beforeitsnews.com/story/1772/230/NL/

Called "Revenue Watch," it claims to be "a non-profit policy institute and grant-making organization that promotes the effective, transparent and accountable management of oil, gas and mineral resources for the public good. Through capacity building, technical assistance, research and advocacy, we help countries realize the development benefits of their natural resource wealth."

In reality, it is a Wall Street-London centric front of monolithic proportions that ensures foreign competitors, including nationalized companies, are prevented from exploiting in many cases their own national resources, so that they may be reserved instead for the West's corporate giants to plunder them. In many cases, this includes funding and organizing opposition groups to take to the streets and physically stop ongoing projects under humanitarian and environmental pretenses.

A look at Revenue Watch's "partners" page reveals what at only a superficial glance appears to be well-intentioned, noble civil endeavors. However, upon closer examination, a different story is told.
Who's Partnered With Soros' Revenue Watch?

What the "partners" page represents is an interconnected, incestuous network leading each time back to George Soros' Open Society Network, the OCED, USAID, British DIFD, Australia Aid, and the UN Development Program, all of which are directly partnered with the largest banking, big oil, defense contractors, and consumer multinationals on earth. (Read The Rest)

Drones Enter Corporate Media Airspace, this will become a Global activity, and in some instances is already being done.

http://beforeitsnews.com/story/1779/558/NL/Drones_Enter_Corporate_Media_Airspace.html 

… Now, with the passage of the NDAA, we have been treated to the new U.S. battlefield and the need for all of the weapons of war to descend upon American soil, and hover in American skies. (Excerpt from above link)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WGf2EFpF0bk

By simulating the past economic perils of Humanity like when Rome fell, as this story reads, Why The U.S. Economy Parallels Ancient Rome:

 http://beforeitsnews.com/story/1779/758/NL/Why_The_U.S._Economy_Parallels_Ancient_Rome.html

An inefficient, weak tax system. A bloated military budget. Multiple wars being waged simultaneously.

You can be excused for thinking the preceding sentence is about the United States, but in fact, it describes the Roman Empire two millennium ago as it began its long, hundred-year decline. Jeff Gundlach, CEO with DoubleLine Capital LP in Los Angeles, used the parallels between Ancient Rome and the U.S. to frame his latest webcast this week.

In the webcast, Mr. Gundlach goes on to point out that, like the Roman Empire of yesteryear, the U.S. today maintains a massive debt load and by far the world’s largest military budget. And like Rome, where a destitute underclass was granted little social mobility, a similar “underclass” is emerging in the U.S. as the country is dogged by a sluggish jobs recovery and high unemployment.

But of course, given the two-thousand year gap between these two societies, making comparisons works on a broader scale and not so well when taking a more nuanced view. Mr. Gundlach’s webcast is accompanied by a 70-slide presentation that highlights the many unique problems facing the U.S. today. … (Read the entire post at link above) 

Replicating that time event as well as others while society today has been dumbed down is what we see going on and why the elite are getting away with the Financial cabal they are installing slowly. Think about it - has the Ruling Class ever lost their controlling positions over the Global Economic structure??? These technocrats has a Past of Economic History they can use to bring about societal collapse repeating history to suit their desires. It’s all about their Willingness to either extend prosperity or retract prosperity because ever since 1913 they have been in control of Our Monetary Origination of finding resources to promote the economic vitality of Humanity, they perfect a position that enables those who control everything and everyone to continue to do so!!!!!

It’s all because of the Ruling Classes Opinion of Worldwide Overpopulation, is it not???

Romney Voted for Population-Control ~ The Fanatic Presidential Candidate

http://politicalvelcraft.org/2012/01/10/fanatic-presidential-candidate-romney-voted-for-population-control/

Romney Voted for Population-Control ~ The Fanatic Presidential Candidate

So we’ve learned over the past few days that a trio of Mitt Romney’s chosen advisers helped the Obama administration craft ObamaCare. And on top of that, that Gov. Romney sought the advice of Malthusian green activist John Holdren, when Romney was considering a cap and trade regime for Massachusetts.

Holdren’s views humanity as a plague on the planet and the Industrial Revolution as a tragic mistake. The fewer people, he believes, the better, and he’s not shy about the ways he would use to reduce their number.

Why Gov. Romney, a reasonable person, would pick such a man to advise him on anything is beyond us.

On Jan. 1, 2006, Massachusetts became the first state to regulate CO2 emissions from power plants, something the Obama administration is trying to do to all states through the Environmental Protection Agency’s draconian job-killing regulations and mandates.

A Dec. 7, 2005 memo from the governor’s office announcing the new policy listed among the “environmental and policy experts” providing input to the policy one “John Holdren, professor of environmental policy at Harvard University.”

This is the same person who wrote that a “massive campaign must be launched to restore a high-quality environment in North America and to de-develop the United States.”

Holdren wrote that along with Paul and Anne H. Ehrlich in the “recommendations” section of their 1973 book, “Human Ecology: Problems and Solutions.”

Paul Ehrlich is also the author of the 1968 book, “The Population Bomb,” which warned of imminent mass starvation from overpopulation unless excess humanity is dispensed with. (Read the entire article at link above)

 

Op-Ed: Bill Gates Favors The Death Panel and Vaccines To Decrease The World’s Population

http://www.ukprogressive.co.uk/op-ed-bill-gates-favors-the-death-panel-and-vaccines-to-decrease-the-worlds-population/article17430.html

When Bill Gates, founder of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, which provides vaccines to third world countries, promoted decreasing the population of the world and favoring the ‘death panel’, it shocked many people. Bill Gates believes that “instead of spending millions of dollars on old people who just have months to live, the money should be spent elsewhere, where it can actually benefit people”.

Two years ago, the Microsoft billionaire, unveiled his mission to reduce the world’s population through vaccines during a TEDx presentation. As Gates rambles on about CO2 emissions, and its effects on climate change, he injects without pause, that in order to get CO2 to zero, “probably one of these numbers is going to have to get pretty close to zero.” He then goes on to describe how the first number, P (for People) might be reduced.

“The world today has 6.8 billion people”, said Gates, “that’s headed up to about 9 billion. Now if we do a really great job on new vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we could lower that by perhaps 10 or 15 percent.” (Read the entire at link above)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JaF-fq2Zn7I

More Wilheru: Focusing on Founding Fathers and the Constitution

John R. Houk

© February 25, 2012

Wilheru comments on my comment which is as follows:

Implication is the Leftist/Atheist reasoning to abandon Original Intent in favor of the Living Constitution fallacy that Left Wing activist judges have employed since the middle 20th century.

THOSE QUOTES ARE NOT FAKE! To say they are fake is like a person from Chicago talking about a river in Egypt – Da Nile. [Editor: this is edited slightly from the original comment]

The line of comments comes from a post entitled: “Wilheru Criticizes Standing Up to Militant Atheists”. You can read the context of our comments by reading the post (which has been cross posted on several of my blogs) and the comments following.

***************************

Posted: February 2, 2012 at 11:26 AM

Wilheru says:

What is the NeoCon (assuming) biblical literalist reasoning to abandon almost all laws from Leviticus?

John says:

Hmm … I thought I had already covered my stand about the Law of the Old Testament vis-a-vie the New Testament. It could have been someone else though. Here it goes.

Christ is the fulfillment of the Law which does not end the Law; however Christ’s Atonement expiates the penalty (aka curse) of the Law. Thus the Law of Moses is part of the Judeo-Christian foundation influencing the Founding Fathers and the Great Commission of Christ to share the Good News of Redemption has enabled the West (not just America) to move out of medieval punishments that are now considered ridiculous.

Wilheru says:

Besides, nowhere in the Constitution or its amendments is there any mention that churches should be subsidized by the Government, but there is a clear implication that they should not be subsidized because that would be a step in the direction of a state church.

John says:

Actually the Constitution says nothing about “Churches” and uses the term “religion”. From the writings of the most ardent of Deists as well as Christian Founding Fathers, it is evident that “religion” referred to Christianity.

The First Amendment specifically says:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion,

So let’s see. The Legislative Branch (i.e. Congress) shall make NO Law Establishing a State religion; which is to say in context of the Founding Fathers, Congress shall make no Christian Denomination the State religion of the USA.

There is NO place here that forbids Christianity from being an influence or having a political voice in the U.S. Government (i.e. Executive Branch, Legislative Branch AND Judicial Branch). It is simple; Congress cannot establish a State Church. Since there is no mention of Christianity being forbidden from interacting with the government, any interpretation that presumes Christianity must stay off of taxpayer owned public property is a false assumption.

AND to nail my point the First Amendment continues:

… or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Congress cannot legislate the free exercise of religion which would include in government. Congress cannot legislate the abridgement of Free Speech which is inclusive of religion in government. Congress cannot legislate the abridgement of a Free Press which would include religion writing about government. Congress cannot abridge the right of people to assemble peaceably which would include a religious service on taxpayer-public property. Congress cannot abridge the right of people to petition THE GOVERNMENT for redress of grievances which would include the various Christian Denominations that may have a private or public grievance.

There has been a lot of clarity there until the Judicial Branch began muddying that clarity by legislating from the Bench rather than interpreting the Original Intent of the U.S. Constitution. The Judicial Branch has become nearly despotic in its authority in the last 60 to 70 years. The Judicial Branch needs reformed to restrict its duty to interpretation rather than legislating.

Wilheru says:

You’re right about the first quote thing, sorry. It isn’t fake, however it isn’t authored by Washington, so it’s hard to tell if he really believed that. Some quotes by Jefferson, on the other hand, are clearly quote mined. Reading the text in full contradicts the conclusions one might draw from reading just the quote.

John says:

As to quoting Jefferson, I don’t think there is as much quote mining as there is political spectrum mining. A Secularist (in the sense of Separation of Church and State Christians or other religions), Secular Humanist, and/or atheists can easily interpret Jefferson quotes as keeping Christianity out of the government as in the political process. Jefferson was clearly more Deist in the humanist sense than many other Founding Fathers; however some of the scholarship and writings of Jefferson also clearly shows he was not anti-Christian as the European Deists (as espoused by the French Revolution). Jefferson did write a Bible that included Christian Morality and Principles but abandoned the Christian Miraculous. I believe quotes of Jefferson read in the perspective of his own Bible demonstrates his thoughts that Christianity as an influence is something government should not restrict but rather to embrace as a way to keep society devolving into the dark side of majority rule democracy with the corruption of cultural values. In thus way the Right Side of the political spectrum can still claim Jefferson regarded the influence of Christianity as part of the Foundation (but CERTAINLY not the only influence) of the America Republic.

Wilheru says:

At some point I just gave up tracking down all quotes and am no longer interested. I have more important things to do than to argue with someone over the Internet who doesn’t accept reason (otherwise that one wouldn’t need to quote mine people) over what people who died more than three centuries ago felt. Goodbye and enjoy!

John says:

Actually Wilheru I believe I used a great deal of reason to demonstrate the Founding Fathers believed Christianity was a part of the foundation for America. I have to say also part of that foundation included the classics of Greco-Roman philosophy. However some of the greatest influence was from John Locke of which large portions of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution can be seen sometimes verbatim. Read John Locke’s Second Treatise on Government, also titled A Essay Concerning the true original, extent, and end of Civil Government, Book Two. John Locke is steeped in the Christian faith as an influence on secular government. Locke was not too popular with the British Monarchy.

Wilheru when you write in disdain of people who died more than three centuries ago you beckon to my point of Original Intent over the relatively modern political thought that the U.S. Constitution is a Living Constitution that can be molded to any interpretation a political ideology demands (typically judicial fiat) rather than the Constitutional process of Amendments.

If this is the last we are to comment to each other I bid you farewell or as the Founding Fathers' would have said, I bid you Godspeed.

JRH 2/25/12

Could the GOP Have a Brokered Convention?

Karl Rove explains the differences between a Brokered Convention and a Contested Convention. You may not agree with how these situations will or will not occur; however the explanations bring clarity to the media hype relating that the Republicans may arrive at their Florida Convention without a clear winner for the GOP nomination.

JRH 2/24/12

********************************

Could the GOP Have a Brokered Convention?

All the feverish talk ignores the delegate math and the election calendar.

By Karl Rove

February 23, 2012

Originally: Wall Street Journal

Rove.com

The volatile Republican presidential contest has provoked feverish talk in the media and the blogosphere about a brokered or contested convention in late August, when 2,286 Republican delegates gather in Tampa, Fla. Here's how those scenarios would unfold.

A brokered convention would see a new candidate—someone other than Newt Gingrich, Ron Paul, Mitt Romney or Rick Santorum—enter the remaining primaries or parachute in during the convention (if no existing candidate has secured a majority of delegates). In backroom deals, either based partly on the strength of his late primary performances or only on the discretion of party leaders, he would become the nominee.

A contested convention, on the other hand, would see no dark horse enter but none of the existing candidates arrive in Tampa with a 1,144 majority of delegates. Lots of wheeling and dealing would ensue, and after several ballots a nominee would emerge from the four current candidates.

Is either scenario likely? Let's put it this way: The odds are greater that there's life on Pluto than that the GOP has a brokered convention. And while there's a better chance of a contested convention, it's still highly unlikely.

Consider the calendar and the math. After Super Tuesday on March 6, a new candidate could still file for the Nebraska beauty contest, the Minnesota caucuses, and the primaries in New Mexico, California, Utah, South Dakota, New Jersey and Texas. Those eight contests have 519 delegates at stake: 238 awarded winner-takes-all, 241 split proportionally and 40 unpledged.

If a new candidate gets all the winner-takes-all delegates (unlikely since 222 in California and New Jersey are awarded by congressional district, not statewide), plus half those awarded proportionally, he still would have just 378 delegates of the 1,144 needed for nomination. At least two current candidates are likely to have far more. Why would they step aside for a newcomer?

Meanwhile, a brokered convention needs party bosses, and today there aren't any. In the old days, party chiefs often led delegations of regulars who took orders and depended on patronage. No longer. In some states, winning candidates don't even pick their delegates—party conventions do. This means that while the delegation is committed to support a candidate for a certain number of ballots, many individual delegates remain loyal to other candidates. That makes it more difficult for anyone in a smoke-filled bargaining session to deliver a large number of delegates.

Besides, who is available for the role of savior? All of last year's heartthrobs—including Mitch Daniels, Jeb Bush, Paul Ryan and Chris Christie—have again disavowed any interest in running. Why enter the race at the end, facing long odds, rather than at the beginning, with much better ones?

Sarah Palin has said she "would do whatever I could to help" in a brokered convention. But is it realistic to think that millions of Republicans who voted in primaries and caucuses would be happy to have a standard-bearer who had skipped most or all of the primary contests? A brokered convention would split the party and send it into the general election angry and divided. It would be a recipe for disaster.

As for a contested convention: This last happened for the GOP in 1976. Neither President Gerald Ford nor Ronald Reagan had a majority when delegates arrived in Kansas City. The nomination was decided by the unpledged Mississippi delegation swinging in behind Ford. But there are far fewer delegations in 2012 that will arrive in Tampa unpledged.

It's also important to remember that, according to the Republican National Committee, delegates have been officially awarded in just four contests. Missouri's primary was just a beauty contest, and the caucus states have county, congressional-district and state conventions to go through later this spring before their delegations are set, all of which will be affected by what happens in the race between now and then.

There are 48 still to go (including D.C., American Samoa, the Northern Mariana Islands, the Virgin Islands and Guam). And once a candidate starts winning, they tend to keep winning, especially beginning in April when more states award delegates on a winner-take-all basis.

In a smart analysis, Davidson College Prof. Josh Putnam predicts that it could take until late May for anyone to get a majority, assuming the leading candidate receives only 49% in any contest. But after Super Tuesday, the race is likely to narrow to just two significant candidates, and one of them will probably get more than 50% in most of the remaining contests.

The Republican nominee will almost certainly come from the existing field. Though media questions and debates have dinged them all up, whoever emerges is likely to be stronger for having gone through this grueling process. And deserving of respect for having thrown his hat in the ring when others didn't.

_______________________________

This article originally appeared on WSJ.com on Wednesday, February 22, 2012.

Copyright © 2012 Karl Rove & Co