Friday, March 20, 2015

ATTENTION, REPUBLICANS: How to Lose a Presidential Election Before You Pick Your Candidate

2016 could be a good year for the Republican party. Look at what the Democrats have done. The economy stinks. The Democrats have been caught in a series of lies and scandals…like cutting political deals in exchange for campaign donations. The Dems are desperate. They hope to import 15 million illegal immigrants so they can win the next election through voter fraud. This doesn’t look good for them…or does it?
Don’t overestimate the ability of the stupid republican party. Here is what the conservative voter thinks of Republicans.
– Republicans claim they want smaller government…but Republicans vote for larger budgets every time.
– Republicans claim they want smaller government…but Republicans continue to fund the EPA and Department of Education.
– Republicans claim they want more freedom…but Republicans fund Obamacare.
– Republicans claim they respect individual rights…but Republicans support Democrat nominees like Loretta Lynch who will take away our civil rights.
– Republicans claim they want more personal liberty…like getting the government out of marriage…so Republicans force sexual preference into my businesses, my schools and my churches.
– Republicans claim they will secure our borders…but they never vote to do so.
– Do I need to add the Republican record on school choice and abortion? I can…and it isn’t good.
Now…go ahead. Tell me about your Republican candidate for president.
“Umm…Ahh…Our candidate is “less Democrat” than Hillary Clinton or Elisabeth Warren?”
Now that isn’t saying much, is it. You see, the problem is this. It doesn’t matter what Republican politicians say once we’ve seen what Republican politicians do. They don’t have much time to fix it before the voter’s make up their mind.
Image: http://missa-6thamerican.wikispaces.com/1930s?responseToken=5f3fbc220dbdd45ee89 bd1e429fa4fde

Friday, March 13, 2015

From Breitbart.com

REPORT: FEDS ARREST 14 DACA TEMPORARY AMNESTY RECIPIENTS WITH PRIOR CRIMINAL CONVICTIONS 

Federal agents have arrested fourteen DREAMers who received temporary amnesty under President Barack Obama’s 2012 Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) who had previously been convicted of crimes.
According to an Associated Press report, “federal agents in a sweep targeting the most dangerous criminal immigrants arrested 15 people” who had received temporary amnesty.
A U.S. official who was briefed on the arrests told the Associated Press that 14 “of the 15 had been convicted of a crime.” And “in at least one case, the Obama administration renewed the protective status for a young immigrant after that person’s conviction in a drug case,” according to the AP source. The fifteenth DREAMer “hadn’t been convicted of a crime, but was arrested after being found armed with a gun.” The sweep reportedly “also captured five immigrants with protective applications pending and 19 others who had already been denied protection from deportation under the program.”
The Associated Press noted that “it was not immediately clear” when the DREAMers “were convicted or what their crimes were” and “answers to those questions could undermine the integrity of the government’s program, since eligibility is reserved for ambitious, young immigrants enrolled in school or who graduated and who would benefit American society.”
Nearly 700,000 illegal immigrant DREAMers have been granted temporary amnesty and work permits since the program went into effect in August 2012.
According to the federal government, DREAMers can qualify for DACA only if they “have not been convicted of a felony, significant misdemeanor,or three or more other misdemeanors, and do not otherwise pose a threat to national security or public safety.”
When announcing his new executive amnesty for the illegal immigrant parents of U.S. citizens last year and expansion of the DACA program that lifted the upper age limit, Obama emphasized that temporary amnesty recipients must pass criminal background checks.
“So we’re going to offer the following deal: If you’ve been in America for more than five years; if you have children who are American citizens or legal residents; if you register, pass a criminal background check, and you’re willing to pay your fair share of taxes — you’ll be able to apply to stay in this country temporarily without fear of deportation,” he said. “You can come out of the shadows and get right with the law. That’s what this deal is.”
At a recent Senate Judiciary Immigration and the National Interest Subcommittee hearing, Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) pointed out that it would be nearly impossible to vet executive amnesty applicants for past criminal activities or ties to gangs. He added that federal officials do not even have the resources or standard operating procedures to verify the identities of applicants who, for instance, do not have a middle initial on their application but submit suspicious documents with a middle initial
As Breitbart News reported, Sessions told top United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) officials that they have been “asked to do more than is physically possible” and Obama should have never asked them to vet executive amnesty applicants for criminal activity when they do not have the resources to do so.
“You just don’t have the ability to do this,” Sessions said, noting that legal immigrants are put through more rigorous backgrounds check than illegal immigrants applying for temporary amnesty.
When officials testified that USCIS has a “layered” process where applications are read by different people and amnesty applicants would not be given in-person interviews, Sessions called it a “dangerous” process for an agency that has already been accused of “rubber-stamping” applications.
“You don’t have any staff to do those interviews,” he said. “This is not going to work. You know it and I know it.”
After federal judge Andrew Hanen issued a temporary injunction against Obama’s executive amnesty, the administration halted the program until the case is resolved. The Obama administration on Thursday asked the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals to block Hanen’s injunction in an emergency filing.

Tuesday, March 10, 2015

    image: http://mobile.wnd.com/files/2013/09/boehner-gavel.jpg
    boehner-gavel
    Just one day after plans for a sit-in at House Speaker John Boehner’s office were released, to protest the Republican Congress’ unwillingness to move against abortion, one of the organizers is telling WND the stakes are so high it’s worth the risk of civil disobedience.
    And it might not be the last event of its kind, said Troy Newman, president of Operation Rescue and one of the organizers behind the event planned for 11 a.m. EST on March 25 outside Boehner’s office.
    “We have to implement a backbone policy for Mr. Boehner,” Newman told WND. “It means we’re serious. We’re willing to take this to another level.”
    He noted it’s been 42 years since abortion was decriminalized, and Congress now has the largest pro-life majority since then.
    “We expect them to act,” he said. “It’s exactly why the voters put them there. It was in their platform, what they ran on.”
    He told WND the civil-disobedience campaign will be launched at Boehner’s office, but it may continue.
    WND reported Monday longtime pro-life activist Jill Stanek plans to join with the Christian Defense Coalition for the sit-in.
    Congress was supposed to vote earlier this year on a ban on abortion after 20 weeks gestation, but the vote was canceled at the last minute when Boehner apparently was unsure of the support he would get for the plan.
    It was a ban that had found approval in Congress earlier, but not only did it not get support this year, it also has not been rescheduled for a vote.
    The bill is the “Pain Capable Unborn Child Protection Act,” which bans abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy but includes exceptions for victims of rape and incest.
    Stanek, a former nurse, rose to national prominence after confronting then-Illinois State Sen. Barack Obama over his opposition to legislation that would require medical personnel to take every measure possible to save the life of a baby born alive after an attempted abortion.
    Newman called the developments in Congress a “slap in the face of the pro-life movement.”
    “We want a whole lot more,” he said. “We expect a whole lot from this Congress.”
    The GOP expanded its majority in the U.S. House during the 2014 midterm elections and took control of the U.S. Senate for the first time in years.
    “It’s something that cannot be ignored,” Newman said. “This speaker is weak, his policies are weak, his plan for implementing pro-life legislation is weak.”
    He said if it becomes necessary, there may be future events at additional congressional offices.
    Such civil disobedience has been used before by the pro-life movement. Some of the efforts by Joe Scheidler and the Pro-Life Action League were so effective in the 1980s that abortion advocates took them to court and accused them of racketeering.
    It took 28 years and three trips to the U.S. Supreme Court to finish the case – a decision in which the pro-lifers’ actions were vindicated entirely.
    However, the extent of the attacks on the Christians, the pressure under which they operated and the fear that such tactics would be launched against more Christians prompted a lower level of such activism.
    Civil disobedience, in which someone risks arrest for a cause, also was used effectively by civil rights protesters such as Martin Luther King Jr.
    WND’s original report on the Boehner sit-in included an interview with Stanek.
    “I, as a nurse at a hospital in Chicago, held an abortion survivor for 45 minutes until he died, and he was 21 weeks old,” she said. “An abortion ban such as this would save babies like I held. This is very real to me. I have actually seen and held the babies that the House is just playing around with willy-nilly right now.”
    Listen to the WND/Radio America interview with Jill Stanek:
    She noted the bill wasn’t given a vote even though the previous GOP-run House had passed it.
    “When we protest on March 25, it will have been two months. We’ve been patient, more than measured in our response, more than muted. I, among others, am just not going to stand for this anymore,” Stanek said.
    The sticking point in the legislation centered on the exception for rape and incest victims, who would be required to provide a police report of the crime before receiving an abortion. Stanek thinks the exception is a bad idea altogether.
    “There should have never been a rape-incest exception to begin with,” she said. “We’re talking about five months along in pregnancy. Certainly by that time, mothers should know that they’re pregnant. And certainly, babies, even if they’re conceived in rape or incest, are innocent victims, too, and shouldn’t be put to death.”
    Speaker Boehner and House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., had tapped Republican women to be the face of this legislation, but it was ultimately two GOP women who forced the bill back on the shelf. Reps. Renee Ellmers, R-N.C., and Jackie Walorski, R-Ind., made it clear at the GOP retreat before the vote that they had problems forcing victims of crime to bring a police report with them to get an abortion.
    Stanek said if you’re going to have the exception, not requiring women to present a police report would make the law virtually meaningless.
    “Late-term abortions aren’t good for women to begin with, but taking out this reporting requirement would just give a huge loophole to abortionists to check that box every time a woman came in for a late-term abortion and says she’s been raped,” said Stanek, who argued the reporting requirement also makes women safer.
    “Making women report their crime to police protects other women from being victimized by these sexual perpetrators and protects the very women themselves against these perpetrators from violating them again,” she said. “Some of these women are victims of incest, and girls are victims of incest. If they don’t have to report the crime, then the evidence is covered up, literally killed when the abortion is committed.”
    Stanek said the bill never should have been sidelined.
    “They didn’t even take a headcount to see if they had the votes. They had the votes. At the last moment, the chief opponent, Renee Ellmers, said she would vote for the bill, but they just chickened out, and they took advantage of the pro-life movement.”
    The protest does carry some legal risks for participants, but Stanek believes the cause is worth it.
    “It’s going to be a sit-in,” she said. “We’re going to risk arrest, but this form of civil disobedience is nothing compared to what is happening to these children every day.”
    Organizers are inviting pro-life activists from across the nation to join. Speaker Boehner’s office is located at 1011 in the Longworth House Office Building in Washington, D.C.


      Read more at http://mobile.wnd.com/2015/03/civil-disobedience-at-boehners-office-could-spread/#1Ax6RO8GIvKWmKZ6.99

      Jackie Mason: Obama Insults Bibi Instead of ISIS

      image: http://www.wnd.com/files/2015/03/Jackie-Mason.jpg
      Jackie Mason
      Jackie Mason
      Legendary comic and “ultimate Jew” Jackie Mason blasted Barack Obama’s reaction to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin (Bibi) Netanyahu’s speech to a joint session of Congress on Tuesday, by claiming the president saves his ire for Israel istead of Islamic terrorists.
      Mason was speaking with host Aaron Klein of “Aaron Klein Investigative Radio,” broadcast on New York’s AM 970 The Answer and Philadelphia’s NewsTalk 990. WND obtained a copy of the audio before it aired.
      Aaron Klein said, “We had the Obama administration waging a war against Bibi. … You would think [Netanyahu] was coming to America to plot attacks against the U.S. government or something, to plot some extremely evil plan that he wanted to unfold against the United States and the western countries based on the way the White House was reacting. And yet he came to warn against Jihad; he came to warn against Iran. What do you think about Obama’s war against Bibi for coming to a joint session of Congress?”
      “It’s unbelievable. It’s unimaginable,” said Mason. “Everybody calls Israel the greatest ally America ever had. Every day you read in every paper, from every announcement, from every side of every party, that the greatest ally America has in the Middle East, that protects our interests in the Middle East, and representing only democracy in the Middle East; and as they’re praising them, you always hear from the president: ‘Bibi gets on my nerves, and this country gets on my nerves, and the settlements get on my nerves.’
      “Everybody howls that [Israel] is the best thing America ever discovered, that they protect America’s interests more than anybody. You would think, like you say, that America is their greatest enemy you would never know that they’re friends. Because when [Obama] talks about it he can’t say ‘Islamic terrorist’ because the word Islam offends him, and the word terrorist disturbs him.
      “So he can’t find anything bad to say about ISIS while they’re killing people by the thousands all over the world. But Israel, which is the greatest ally, he finds easy ways to say to say the worst. Every negative thought and every negative word [Obama] can think of, he saves only for Israel and for Netanyahu. When Netanyahu came here, [Obama] was hiding from him. Every time he saw him, he was talking negative things about him. Every time the microphone was off he was abusing him.
      “And you can’t figure out if this is the greatest ally and the greatest enemy at the same time. To the whole country [Netanyahu] is the greatest ally, to [Obama] it’s the worst problem he ever had. He can’t tolerate him, he can’t stand him, he can’t talk to him. Everybody was praising the speech – brilliant, fantastic – you know what [Obama] said? ‘Ehhh, it’s nothing. Nothing new, nothing new.’ Who says it has to be new? If I’m telling you, ‘Watch out, there’s a fire,’ and you’re not listening to me, so I have to repeat it again, do I have to say something new? I have to say, ‘Watch out, there’s a fire, I told you this before and you wasn’t listening so I’m telling you again.’ Does it have to be new? It wouldn’t have to be new if you were listening in the first place.”

      Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2015/03/jackie-mason-obama-insults-bibi-instead-of-isis/#oRGcAofY9L3JAWIO.99

      Wednesday, March 4, 2015

      Check out this website:
      http://www.westernjournalism.com/exclusive-investigative-reports/the-mystery-of-barack-obama-continues/

      My name is Jeff Lovitt.  I am a minister/evangelist working with the church of Christ in Morganton, NC.  This blog will provide opportunities for discussion on the topics of religion and politics.