Dems BOO God and Jerusalem – this is who they are! #DNC #tcot #God #Jerusalem


Up until today, the Democratic platform for 2012 excluded any reference to God and did not state that Jerusalem is the capital of Israel.

OK – so we all know that today’s Democrats want God out of all of our lives and we know that the Obama administration doesn’t believe Jerusalem is the capital of Israel or, at best, believes it is not yet decided!

So excluding God and Jerusalem from the DNC platform seems true to Democrat values.

Stop the tapes…..TODAY at the DNC, a vote was taken to restore God and Jerusalem to the platform.

From Yahoo.news:

Democratic big-wigs faced an embarrassing revolt Wednesday as they put references to God and Jerusalem’s status back in the November election platform despite strong opposition from members.

Amid boos at the DNC (booing God and Israel, by the way), opposition to the change seemed to be stronger than those for it, but the bumbling  Los Angeles mayor Antonio Villaraigosa adopted it anyway.

So why the change of heart by Dem leadership?  Because they don’t want God in our country and they don’t support Jerusalem as the capital of Israel….but they can’t “preach” it.  Once the GOP pounced on their platform omissisions, these core beliefs were out there for the “undecideds” and “moderates” to see!
Politics is what motivates them, folks….not values, not the people, not their own delegates…..but VOTES.

But thanks in large part to the influence of Jewish voters in key battleground states like Florida, relations with Israel are a hot button issue in US elections.

and

The revisions came as Obama struggles to win support from white working-class voters, many of whom have strong religious beliefs, and as Republicans try to woo Jewish voters and contributors away from the Democratic Party. Republicans claimed the platform omissions suggested Obama was weak in his defense of Israel and out of touch with mainstream Americans.

Of course, true to their values about God and Israel, Republicans included God and Jerusalem in their platform last week.  And Romney had something to say about the political switcheroo at the DNC today:

GOP officials argued that not taking a position on Jerusalem’s status in the party platform raised questions about Obama’s support for the Mideast ally. Romney said omitting God “suggests a party that is increasingly out of touch with the mainstream of the American people.”

“I think this party is veering further and further away into an extreme wing that American’s don’t recognize,” Romney said.

That last quote is an understatement….The DNC is so far left it’s going to meet up with the Republicans on the other side if their not careful. 🙂

And Romney’s spokeswoman rightfully calls Obama out on his flip-flop anti-Israel stance:

“Mitt Romney has consistently stated his belief that Jerusalem is the capital of Israel,” said Andrea Saul, Romney’s spokeswoman. “President Obama has repeatedly refused to say the same himself. Now is the time for President Obama to state in unequivocal terms whether or not he believes Jerusalem is Israel’s capital.”

Ace of Spades summed up the Democrat platform and convention nicely:

Democrats 2012: Yay abortion! Boo God!

Advertisements

Did Hollywood “genius” Morgan Freeman see the Florida straw poll?


GOP presidential candidate Herman Cain, right, disputed actor Morgan Freeman's, left, claim on Friday that the Tea Party is 'a racist thing.'(pics: Jason Kempin/Getty; Joe Burbank/Pool)

Just wondering…did Morgan Freeman, the Hollywood Whiz Kid*, happen to take a look at the Florida Straw Poll on Saturday?

Herman Cain, a black man, won that straw poll largely from the support of the Tea Party.

Morgan Freeman said on CNN last week that members of the Tea Party are racists willing to do  whatever they can to “get this black man” (Obama) out of the White House.

The only racist I see is Morgan Freeman…..

Herman Cain responds:

“Most of the people that are criticizing the Tea Partiers about having a racist  element, they have never been to a Tea Party………Name calling is something that is going to continue in this because they don’t  know how to stop this movement and this movement is making a big difference in  politics.”

Amen!  Freeman is right about one thing….the Tea Party wants the President out of the White House.

Not because of his race, but rather based on:

So, Mr. Freeman, race is not the issue as proven in Florida….but for some reason it is an issue with you and many like you.

Why don’t you attend a Tea Party (as Herman Cain suggests) before spreading your nastiness?…and then….well….

Get. Over. It.

*sarcasm

“You Picked a Fine Time to Lead Us, Barack”


With nuclear arms in the hands of rogue nations and Obama’s disarming of America….the healthcare takeover, the slush fund bailouts, bashing of our allies, and on and on…..Well, all I can say is, “You Picked a Fine Time to Lead Us, Barack”  🙂

So true, so true!

‘They Need to Be Liberated From Their God’


The Wall Street Journal has an interesting article about Mosab Hassan Yousef, a spy for Israel and the son of the founder of Hamas, who converted to Christianity from Islam and now resides in low profile in Southern California.

He is seeking asylum in the US and tells the story of a good father and childhood. But after seeing the brutality of many Muslims in Hamas and other places, he decided to accept an offer from Israel to become a spy.  He spied for Israel for several years until he decided he was tired of spying in 2006.  By that time, he had converted to Christianity and has moved to the US.  His family has disowned him.

Here are some of his words in the article….but the whole read is very interesting from a Christian perspective but also because through Yousef we see can through one set of eyes from a non-violent Muslim and his conversion to Christianity.  

About his turn from Islam to Christianity:

‘I absolutely know that in anybody’s eyes I was a traitor,” says Mosab Hassan Yousef. “To my family, to my nation, to my God. I crossed all the red lines in my society. I didn’t leave one that I didn’t cross.”

About Christianity’s lessons on love and caring:

“I converted to Christianity because I was convinced by Jesus Christ as a character, as a personality. I loved him, his wisdom, his love, his unconditional love. I didn’t leave [the Islamic] religion to put myself in another box of religion. At the same time it’s a beautiful thing to see my God exist in my life and see the change in my life. I see that when he does exist in other Middle Easterners there will be a change.

With that statement, my own thoughts turn to our founders and the fact that they established our country based on the moral values espoused in the Bible.   Our country has been well-served with those principles and has been a clear “change” from almost all other civilizations in history.  (Which is why we must continue fighting Obama’s anti-freedom agenda with all we have…but that is a post for another day)

 With that foundation, and through the resolve of President George W Bush, we’ve eliminated an evil regime and established a fledgling democracy in Iraq based on a moral law of individual freedom and government of the people.  Perhaps the very extension of our Judeo-Christian-based system into the Middle East and the recent successful elections in Iraq are proof that Yousef’s statement on God’s love and wisdom and accompanying change is accurate.

More on Yousef’s view of Christianity:

“I’m not trying to convert the entire nation of Israel and the entire nation of Palestine to Christianity. But at least if you can educate them about the ideology of love, the ideology of forgiveness, the ideology of grace. Those principles are great regardless, but we can’t deny they came from Christianity as well.”

On Islam’s violent “god” and the ideological war we are fighting:

As the son of a Muslim cleric, he says he had reached the conclusion that terrorism can’t be defeated without a new understanding of Islam. …… 

…….Do you consider your father a fanatic? “He’s not a fanatic,” says Mr. Yousef. “He’s a very moderate, logical person. What matters is not whether my father is a fanatic or not, he’s doing the will of a fanatic God. It doesn’t matter if he’s a terrorist or a traditional Muslim. At the end of the day a traditional Muslim is doing the will of a fanatic, fundamentalist, terrorist God. I know this is harsh to say. Most governments avoid this subject. They don’t want to admit this is an ideological war.

and the lies of Islam:

“The problem is not in Muslims,” he continues. “The problem is with their God. They need to be liberated from their God. He is their biggest enemy. It has been 1,400 years they have been lied to.”

And the very fact that Yousef lives under the veil of continued threat against his life clearly exhibits the difference between what he describes as the lying God of Islam and the loving God of Christianity.  For simply speaking out against his former religion, the followers of Islam, including his family, are taught to hate him, if not eliminate him.

Jon Voight: Let’s help bring an end to (the power of) this false prophet, Obama


At the NRSC-NRCC fund raiser last night, Jon Voight spoke truth in 10 minutes about Israel, Obama and his partners in crime tearing America down, the Left’s lies about Bush, and more.

Priceless to see one from Hollywood who understands Obama’s power grabs, his history, his associations and then have to the guts to speak truth to it.  Thanks for Jon Voight!

(H/T: Michelle Malkin; Video: Earth2Obama.org)

Senator Inhofe says what many are thinking: “I just don’t know whose side he’s on…”


In response to Obama’s Muslim-coddling and apologies for America during his speech at Cairo, Eqypt last week, Senator Jim Inhofe (R-OK) makes a statement that most of us are thinking:

“I just don’t know whose side he’s on…”

Now, of course, several of the group-thinking leftists in the blogosphereare simply appalled. Most are spewing hateful insults to Inhofe without really debating the facts about Obama’s policies and what Inhofe actually said.  That is largely because much of the time blinded Obama supporters and Leftists (not necessarily mutually exclusive) can’t argue based on the facts. 

Here is what Infofe said:

Sen. Jim Inhofe said today that President Barack Obama’s speech in Cairo was “un-American” because he referred to the war in Iraq as “a war of choice” and didn’t criticize Iran for developing a nuclear program. Inhofe, R-Tulsa, also criticized the president for suggesting that torture was conducted at the military prison in Guantanamo, saying, “There has never been a documented case of torture at Guantanamo.” …. “I just don’t know whose side he’s on,” Inhofe said of the president.

Frankly, many of us, including those in government roles, have had similar thoughts.  While we, nor Inhofe, at this point, could prove or even outright state that Obama is squarely on the side of our enemies, it is a rational thought to wonder which side he is on. 

There are several ways to look at it – is he on the side of freedom or oppression? for or against the rights of Muslim women?  supportive of his country’s history and Constitution or ashamed of it in such a way that our country must be radically “changed”?

Here’s a few more thoughts in that direction in analyzing just whose side Obama sounds like he is on:

Why does Obama, for all the world to see, choose to validate “the Muslim world”, but says his own country is not a Christian nation or even acknowledge its Judeo-Christian roots?

The Asia Times had a response to Obama’s Cairo speech that hits the nail on the head regarding Obama’s validation of the “Muslim World”:

The Asia Timessaid Obama made a mistake by speaking in Cairo. “Why should the president of the United States address the ‘Muslim world?,” it asked. “What would happen if the leader of a big country addressed the ‘Christian world’? Half the world would giggle and the other half would sulk.”

 “To speak to the ‘Muslim world’ is to speak not to a fact, but rather to an aspiration,” the paper stated, “and that is the aspiration that Islam shall be a global state religion as its founders intended. To address this aspiration is to breathe life into it. For an American president to validate such an aspiration is madness.”

Does Obama love his country or does he hold such disdain for the greatest country on earth that he can’t help but apologize and put us on equal footing with “The Muslim World” – particularly the part of that “world” that uses violence to spread its nasty tentacles throughout the Middle East, Europe and around the world?

Mark Steyn says it best about Obama addressing the “Muslim World”, as if the “Muslim World” is somehow on par with a sovereign and free nation, the United States.

Overseas, the coolest president in history was giving a speech. Or, as the official press release headlined it on the State Department Web site, “President Obama Speaks To The Muslim World From Cairo.”

Let’s pause right there: It’s interesting how easily the words “the Muslim world” roll off the tongues of liberal secular progressives who’d choke on any equivalent reference to “the Christian world.” When such hyperalert policemen of the perimeter between church and state endorse the former but not the latter, they’re implicitly acknowledging that Islam is not merely a faith but a political project, too. There is an “Organization of the Islamic Conference,” which is already the largest single voting bloc at the United Nations and is still adding new members. Imagine if someone proposed an “Organization of the Christian Conference” that would hold summits attended by prime ministers and Presidents, and vote as a bloc in transnational bodies. But, of course, there is no “Christian world”: Europe is largely post-Christian and, as President Barack Obama bizarrely asserted to a European interviewer last week, America is “one of the largest Muslim countries in the world.” Perhaps we’re eligible for membership in the OIC.

Mark Steyn also hits on Obama’s continued apologies for his own country:

Once Obama moved on from the more generalized Islamoschmoozing to the details, the subtext – the absence of American will – became explicit. He used the cover of multilateralism and moral equivalence to communicate, consistently, American weakness: “No single nation should pick and choose which nations hold nuclear weapons.” Perhaps by “no single nation” he means the “global community” should pick and choose, which means the U.N. Security Council, which means the Big Five, which means that Russia and China will pursue their own murky interests and that, in the absence of American leadership, Britain and France will reach their accommodations with a nuclear Iran, a nuclear North Korea and any other psychostate minded to join them.

Is Obama clearly ignorant of Islam in our early history or he is being disingenous, at best, with the facts of our history?  He portrayed Islam as something embraced by our forefathers, when, in reality, they were studious of Islam in an effort to understand their enemy even then.  Obama had this to say in his speech in Cairo:

Islam has always been a part of America’s story. The first nation to recognize my country was Morocco. In signing the Treaty of Tripoli in 1796, our second President John Adams wrote, “The United States has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion or tranquility of Muslims.” … And when the first Muslim-American was recently elected to Congress, he took the oath to defend our Constitution using the same Holy Koran that one of our Founding Fathers – Thomas Jefferson – kept in his personal library.

From   Andy McCarthy at National Review, the history of Jefferson’s Koran is centered around Jefferson’s need to understand his enemy, not because he embraced the words of the Koran.  Obama’s reference to Keith Ellison’s use of Jefferson’s Koran is wholly disengenuous and his history is revisionist, just as it was when Ellison touted the fact at his inauguratoin.

[I]n 1786, the new United States found that it was having to deal very directly with the tenets of the Muslim religion. The Barbary states of North Africa (or, if you prefer, the North African provinces of the Ottoman Empire, plus Morocco) were using the ports of today’s Algeria, Libya, and Tunisia to wage a war of piracy and enslavement against all shipping that passed through the Strait of Gibraltar. Thousands of vessels were taken, and more than a million Europeans and Americans sold into slavery. The fledgling United States of America was in an especially difficult position, having forfeited the protection of the British Royal Navy. Under this pressure, Congress gave assent to the Treaty of Tripoli, ….

The conclusion on why Thomas Jefferson owned a Koran is best summed up by David Barton in “An Historical Perspective on a Muslim Being Sworn into Congress on the Koran

Recall that Jefferson had been personally exposed to Islamic beliefs when attempting to secure peace between America and Muslim terrorists. Having been told by the Muslim Ambassador that the Koran promised Paradise as a reward for enslaving, killing, and war, Jefferson inquired into the irrational beliefs that motivated the Muslim groups and individuals warring against America.

 Is Obama for or against freedom?  Is it freedom in the Muslim world for women to wear the hajib?  Or, more correctly, is it freedom for women to have the choice to wear the hajib or not?  Most Muslim cultures and states dictate (through violence, death and other means) what the women wear, who they may converse with, who they may marry, and almost every aspect of their lives…..but Obama says that the US will fight for the woman’s right to where the hajib?!?!

Caroline Glick makes this point:

He spoke of the need to grant equality to women without making mention of common Islamic practices like so-called honor killings, and female genital mutilation. He ignored the fact that throughout the lands of Islam women are denied basic legal and human rights. And then he qualified his statement by mendaciously claiming that women in the US similarly suffer from an equality deficit. In so discussing this issue, Obama sent the message that he couldn’t care less about the plight of women in the Islamic world.

Is he for or against the rights of Israel, our allies, to maintain its land and its growth in the settlements?  Obama wants a two-state solution where Israel gives up its land to those who have already stated that Israel has no right to exist.

 Mark Steyn shreds the notion that we must stop the growth of Israel into the settlements:

On the other hand, a “single nation” certainly has the right to tell another nation anything it wants if that nation happens to be the Zionist Entity: As Hillary Clinton just instructed Israel regarding its West Bank communities, there has to be “a stop to settlements – not some settlements, not outposts, not natural-growth exceptions.” No “natural growth”? You mean, if you and the missus have a kid, you’ve got to talk gran’ma into moving out? To Tel Aviv, or Brooklyn or wherever? At a stroke, the administration has endorsed “the Muslim world’s” view of those non-Muslims who happen to find themselves within what it regards as lands belonging to Islam: the Jewish and Christian communities are free to stand still or shrink, but not to grow.Would Obama be comfortable mandating “no natural growth” to Israel’s million-and-a-half Muslims? No. But the administration has embraced “the Muslim world’s” commitment to one-way multiculturalism, whereby Islam expands in the West but Christianity and Judaism shrivel remorselessly in the Middle East.

It is disheartening to endure the apologies for this country made by our President.  This country, almost from its inception, has been the beacon of good in the world.  Domestically, in a few short months of this administration’s policies, we are already weary of unconstitutional takeover of private companies, union political paybacks, and “change” to a bankrupt, Socialist nation….all being implemented at lightning speed….

And we’ve yet to even endure Obama’s healthcare takeover with accompanying rationing and taxes, energy tax, and the repercussions of his “sudden” Muslim roots and awakening — and now the coddling of “the Muslim World” and their anti-freedom mindset –people who will no more respect this country than Obama seems to respect our Judeo-Christian history, traditions, and US Constitution.

In reference to immigration, Teddy Roosevelt had this to say about allegiance and loyalty to one’s country back in 1919:

“…..this is predicated upon the person’s becoming in every facet an American and nothing but an American….There can be no divided allegiance here.  We have room for but one flag (in this country)….We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language, for we intend to see that the crucible turns our people out as Americans, of American nationality, and not as dwellers in a polyglot boarding-house; and we have room for but one soul loyalty, and that is loyalty to the American people.”

In a different twist on Inhofe’s statement, my question is:  Where does Obama’s one soul loyalty lie?

Obama’s Values, not American Values, must be forced onto others


In his interview with the BBC, Obama had this to say in another of his apologies for America:

The danger, I think, is when the United States, or any country, thinks that we can simply impose these values on another country with a different history and a different culture,” he said.

But isn’t it interesting how almost every move made by the Obama administration has been to FORCE his ideological values down the throats of Americans, Israel, and many of our other allies?

Obama on Israel:
Israel apparently must keep to its agreements made my predecessors, but Obama intends to ditch any agreements made by the Bush Administration.

According to a report in the New York Times, the Obama administration is considering taking measures against Israel should Netanyahu not comply with the U.S. administration’s demands to halt settlements. The actions would be a sharp departure from the Bush administration…..
……While Obama reportedly is looking to get out of a deal agreed to by his predecessor, the U.S. president seems to expect Netanyahu to stand by extreme concessions to the Palestinians under his predecessor, Ehud Olmert. ….
……”We have seen progress stalled on this front, and I suggested to the prime minister that he has a historic opportunity to get a serious movement on this issue during his tenure,” Obama said.
“That means that all the parties involved have to take seriously obligations that they have previously agreed to,” he said.

Obama On Iran’s Nuclear Power:

Nuclear power for Iran because we can…you know….trust them to do the right thing….but NO nuclear power for the US…because..you know…we are evil.

Outrageously the “president of the world” is willing to agree with Iran, one of our biggest international enemies, a nation that has sent its soldiers and trainers into combat against our own troops, a nation that exports acts of terror across the globe, a nation that claims it needs nuclear power for domestic energy… and Barack Obama is on their side.

In Prague last month, Obama said that he saw no reason why his administration wouldn’t “support Iran’s right to peaceful nuclear energy with rigorous inspections.”And today in London, Obama reiterated that support by agreeing that Iran’s announced intentions for nuclear power were “legitimate aspirations.”

Not only that, but just last month Obama approved a nuclear power deal with the United Arab Emirates, as well. So, it’s nuclear power for everyone but the U.S.

So what about nuclear power for the US? Here we are dependent upon foreign oil on one hand, or still using what Obama claims is “dirty” coal power on the other, yet Obama still refuses to allow his own countrymen build new nuclear power plants.

Obama on healthcare:
Obama intends to implement a government takeover of healthcare ( I use the word “care” loosely) regardless of the facts….he is doing it because of his worldview and the power grab it affords him.  Again, who is pushing whose values onto whom?

Obama’s plan will eliminate the private insurance industry, “its premised on doing so.” He intends to create a socialist, government controlled health care system regardless.

Obama wants a single payer healthcare system. His deception offers a “choice” that is intended to disappear shortly whether people want their private insurance or not.

 I could go on and on about the Chicago thug tactics being used on TARP recipients, Obama’s abuse of power in firing a sitting GM and partnering with the UAW in taking over a US corporation, or about Obama’s socialist policies being shoved upon the American people….It’s been only a few months and Obama’s brazen moves are numerous and hypocritical.

Obama can’t relate to American values because his values are more closely aligned with our enemies and with ideologies that are enemies of freedom and capitalism. 

Isn’t is amazing how the greatest country on earth has existed for well over 200 years and now….we have an anti-American president who is ashamed of his country and apologizes for the values that made us strong?

And it is the absolute height of hypocrisy to preach to our enemies and allies alike that American “should not impose” its values on the world….all the while Obama is imposing his values upon us all.

Since when are these values not worthy of proselytizing —-  freedom, life, liberty, pursuit of happiness, fiscal responsibility, denouncing terror and murder, & defending Israel and our allies, to name a few?

It sickens me to the point of physical exhaustion sometimes.    And it saddens me to know the world my daughters are inheriting from the madman-in-chief (and his Congressional cohorts) will be one with increasing terror and war, nuclear proliferation like the world has never seen, increasing racial division, and a country that is fully bankrupt morally and financially….