• DeliveranceNow.Com ~ www.deliverancenow.com ~ Deliverance Counseling Practice of Dr. Steven Lambert, ThD, DMin
  • The Premier Book on Authoritarian Abuse in Neo-Pentecostal Churches! MUST READ! Click to get!
    Charismatic Captivation book by Dr. Steven Lambert

    Real Truth Christian Emporium ~ Your online source for all things Christian

Category Archives: Barack Obama

Welcome to Spirit Life Magazine! We hope you'll return often!

64 Ways Obama is Sabotaging Trump

President Obama delivers his farewell speech in Chicago on Jan. 10, 2017 (Photo: Screenshot) WASHINGTON – It might seem outrageous and unprecedented that a newly departed president would devote himself to overthrowing his successor, but that is exactly what a mountain of growing evidence appears to indicate. “Obama’s goal, according to a close family friend, is… Continue reading “64 Ways Obama Is Sabotaging Trump’s Presidency” »

UN Security Council meeting room

By Michael Snyder

Because Barack Obama has cursed Israel at the United Nations, America is now under a curse.

Friday’s stunning betrayal of Israel at the U.N. Security Council is making headlines all over the planet, but the truth is that what Obama has just done is far more serious than most people would dare to imagine. Over the past several decades, whenever the U.S. government has taken a major step toward the division of the land of Israel, it has resulted in a major disaster hitting the United States. This keeps happening over and over again, and yet our leaders never seem to learn. And despite the fact that President-elect Donald Trump, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and prominent members of both parties in Congress strongly urged Obama to veto Security Council resolution 2334, he went ahead and let it pass anyway.

Because the United States has veto power on the U.N. Security Council, nothing can get passed without our support. And it has been the policy of the U.S. government for decades to veto all anti-Israel resolutions that come before the Security Council.

But this time around, it appears that the Obama administration was working very hard behind the scenes to get this resolution pushed through the Security Council before the end of Obama’s term. At least that is what Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is claiming:

“From the information that we have, we have no doubt that the Obama administration initiated it, stood behind it, coordinated on the wording and demanded that it be passed,” Netanyahu said in a statement. “This is, of course, in complete contradiction of the traditional American policy that was committed to not trying to dictate terms for a permanent agreement, like any issue related to them in the Security Council, and, of course, the explicit commitment of President Obama himself, in 2011, to refrain from such steps.”

I am sure that there will be a tremendous amount of debate about to what extent the U.S. was involved in creating and drafting this resolution, but there is one thing that is exceedingly clear.

The ultimate decision as to whether or not this resolution would be adopted was in the hands of one man. Barack Obama knew very well that he had this power, and in the end, he ultimately decided to betray Israel.

And now that our government has cursed Israel at the U.N., our entire nation will be cursed as a result.

In the Scriptures, we are repeatedly told that God will bless those that bless Israel and will curse those that curse Israel. When Barack Obama blocked a similar resolution that France wanted to submit for a vote in September 2015, it resulted in America being blessed, and we definitely have been blessed over the past 16 months.

But now that Barack Obama has reversed course and has betrayed Israel, we will most assuredly be cursed. In the days ahead, we will see how this plays out, and perhaps we can get some hints about what may happen by reviewing recent history.

There have literally been dozens of instances in recent decades when the U.S. has been hit by some sort of immediate disaster when it has made a move toward the dividing of the land of Israel. The following are 10 of the most prominent examples that stand out to me:

1. The last time the U.S. government refused to veto an anti-Israel resolution at the U.N. Security Council was in 1979. On March 22, 1979, the Carter administration chose not to veto U.N. Resolution 446. Four days after that on March 26, the Egypt-Israel Peace Treaty was signed in Washington. As a result of that treaty, Israel gave up a tremendous amount of territory. Two days later, on March 28, the worst nuclear power plant disaster in U.S. history made headlines all over the globe. The following comes from Wikipedia:

The Three Mile Island accident was a partial nuclear meltdown that occurred on March 28, 1979, in reactor number 2 of Three Mile Island Nuclear Generating Station (TMI-2) in Dauphin County, Pennsylvania, United States. It was the most significant accident in U.S. commercial nuclear power plant history.[2] The incident was rated a five on the seven-point International Nuclear Event Scale: Accident With Wider Consequences.[3][4]

2. On Oct. 30, 1991, President George H. W. Bush opened the Madrid Peace Conference, which brought Israelis and Palestinians together to negotiate for the very first time. In his opening speech, Bush told Israel that “territorial compromise is essential for peace.” At the exact same time, “the Perfect Storm” was brewing in the north Atlantic. This legendary storm traveled 1,000 miles the wrong direction and sent 35 foot waves slamming directly into President Bush’s home in Kennebunkport, Maine.

3. On Aug. 23, 1992, the Madrid Peace Conference moved to Washington, D.C., and the very next day, Hurricane Andrew made landfall in Florida, causing $30 billion in damage. It was the worst natural disaster up to that time in U.S. history.

4. On Jan. 16, 1994, President Clinton met with President Assad of Syria to discuss the possibility of Israel giving up the Golan Heights. Within 24 hours, the devastating Northridge earthquake hit southern California. It was the second worst natural disaster up to that time in U.S. history.

5. On Jan. 21, 1998, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu arrived at the White House but received a very cold reception. In fact, President Clinton and Secretary of State Madeleine Albright actually refused to have lunch with him. That exact same day, the Monica Lewinsky scandal broke, sending the Clinton presidency into a tailspin from which it would never recover.

6. On Sept. 28, 1998, Secretary of State Madeleine Albright was working on finalizing a plan which would have had Israel give up approximately 13 percent of Judea and Samaria. On that precise day, Hurricane George slammed into the Gulf Coast with wind gusts of up to 175 miles an hour.

7. On May 3, 1999, Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat was supposed to hold a press conference to declare the creation of a Palestinian state with Jerusalem as the capital. On that precise day, the most powerful tornadoes ever recorded in the U.S. ripped through Oklahoma and Kansas. At one point, one of the tornadoes actually had a recorded wind speed of 316 miles an hour.

8. On April 30, 2003, “the Road Map to Peace” that had been developed by the so-called “Quartet” was presented to Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon by U.S. Ambassador Daniel Kurtzer. Over the next seven days, the U.S. was hit by a staggering 412 tornadoes. It was the largest tornado cluster ever recorded up to that time.

9. In 2005, President George W. Bush (the son of George H.W. Bush) convinced Israel that it was necessary to remove all of the Jewish settlers out of Gaza and turn it over entirely to the Palestinians. According to the New York Times, the very last of the settlers were evacuated on Aug. 23, 2005. On that precise day, a storm that would be given the name “Katrina” started forming over the Bahamas. The city of New Orleans still has not fully recovered from the damage that storm caused, and it ranked as the costliest natural disaster in all of U.S. history up to that time.

10. On May 19, 2011, Barack Obama told Israel that there must be a return to the pre-1967 borders. Three days later on May 22, a half-mile-wide EF-5 multiple-vortex tornado ripped through Joplin, Missouri. According to Wikipedia, it was “the costliest single tornado in U.S. history.”

The U.N. Security Council resolution that was passed on Friday is the biggest betrayal of Israel in modern history. As I explained in my last article, I believe that America’s reprieve is now over, and all hell is about to break loose in this country.

When Barack Obama blocked the U.N. Security Council from dividing the land of Israel in September 2015, according to the Word of God, we should have been blessed as a nation as a result, and we were blessed.

But now Barack Obama has cursed Israel by stabbing them in the back at the United Nations, and according to the Word of God, we should be cursed as a nation as a result.

And as surely as I am writing this article, we will be cursed.###
___________________________________

Now the LORD said to Abram, “Go forth from your country, And from your relatives And from your father’s house, To the land which I will show you; And I will make you a great NATION*, And I will bless you, And make your name great; And so you shall be a blessing; And I will bless those who bless you, And the one who curses you I will curse. And in you all the families of the earth will be blessed.” So Abram went forth as the LORD had spoken to him; and Lot went with him. Now Abram was seventy-five years old when he departed from Haran. Abram took Sarai his wife and Lot his nephew, and all their possessions which they had accumulated, and the persons which they had acquired in Haran, and they set out for the land of Canaan; thus they came to the land of Canaan. Abram passed through the land as far as the site of Shechem, to the oak of Moreh. Now the Canaanite was then in the land. The LORD appeared to Abram and said, “To your descendants I will give this land.” So he built an altar there to the LORD who had appeared to him. (Gen. 12:1-7; emphasis added)

[* Editor’s Note: God’s promise to Abraham was to make his descendants a NATION, not just a great people. The miraculous rebirth of the NATION of Israel in 1948 was God making good on that promise! He will never forsake Israel, or allow it to be obliterated, despite being the smallest nation on earth, located at the geographical center of the earth. Jesus will return to the very spot God made this promise to Abraham, and physically stand on the Mount of Olives, where He delivered several of His most important “sermons.”

Canaan: So called from Canaan the son of Ham, lies between the Mediterranean sea on the west, the wilderness of Paran, Idumea, and Egypt on the south, the mountains of Arabia on the east, and the mountains of Lebanon and Phoenicia on the north. Its length, from Dan to Beersheba, is about 200 miles, and its breadth, from the Mediterranean sea to its eastern borders, about 90.]

The LORD said to Abram, after Lot had separated from him, “Now lift up your eyes and look from the place where you are, northward and southward and eastward and westward; for all the land which you see, I will give it to you and to your descendants FOREVER. “I will make your descendants as the dust of the earth, so that if anyone can number the dust of the earth, then your descendants can also be numbered. “Arise, walk about the land through its length and breadth; for I will give it to you.” Then Abram moved his tent and came and dwelt by the oaks of Mamre, which are in Hebron, and there he built an altar to the LORD. (Gen. 13:14-18; emphasis added)

The covenant which He made with Abraham, And His oath to Isaac. Then He confirmed it to Jacob for a statute, To ISRAEL as an EVERLASTING covenant, Saying, “To you I will give the land of Canaan As the portion of your inheritance,” When they were only a few men in number, Very few, and strangers in it. And they wandered about from nation to nation, From one kingdom to another people. He permitted no man to oppress them, And He reproved kings for their sakes: “Do not touch My anointed ones, And do My prophets no harm.” (Psa. 105:9-15; emphasis added)

“You shall not move your neighbor’s boundary mark, which the ancestors have set, in your inheritance which you will inherit in the land that the LORD your God gives you to possess. (Deu. 19:14)

The President’s Speech
Thomas Sowell

POTUS Obama gave speech to nation 12-06-15 in which he restated his views about recent California Terrorist Shootings, US response to continuing ISIS aggression, and related issues.

POTUS Obama gave speech to nation 12-06-15 in which he restated his views about recent California Terrorist Shootings, US response to continuing ISIS aggression, and related issues.

When the President of the United States asks the television networks to set aside time for him to broadcast a speech from the Oval Office, we can usually expect that he has something new to say. But President Obama’s speech Sunday night was just a rehash of what he has been saying all along, trying to justify policies that have repeatedly turned out disastrously for America and our allies.

This was not a speech about how the Obama administration is going to do anything differently in the future. It was a speech about how Obama’s policies were right all along. Obama is one of those people who are often wrong but never in doubt.

The president struck a familiar chord when he emphasized that we shouldn’t blame all Muslims for the actions of a few. How many people have you heard blaming all Muslims?

Even if 90 percent of all Muslims are fine people, and we admit 10,000 refugees from the Middle East, does that mean that we need not be concerned about adding a thousand potential terrorists — even after we have seen in San Bernardino what just two terrorists can do?

The first responsibility of any government is to protect the people already in the country. Even in this age of an entitlement mentality, no one in a foreign country is entitled to be in America if the American people don’t want them here.

Obama’s talk about how we should not make religious distinctions might make sense if we were talking about handing out entitlements. But we are talking about distinguishing between different populations posing different levels of danger to the American people.

When it comes to matters of life and death, that is no time for the kind of glib, politically correct rhetoric that Barack Obama specializes in.

Obama may think of himself as a citizen of the world, but he was elected President of the United States, not head of a world government, and that does not authorize him to gamble the lives of Americans for the benefit of people in other countries.

The illusion that you can take in large numbers of people from a fundamentally different culture, without jeopardizing your own culture — and everything that depends on it — should have been dispelled by many counterproductive social consequences in Europe, even aside from the fatal dangers of terrorists.

Most refugees in the Middle East can be helped in the Middle East, and many Americans would undoubtedly be willing to financially help Muslim countries like Jordan or Egypt to care for these refugees in societies more compatible with their beliefs and values.

The history of millions of European immigrants who came here in centuries past was fundamentally different from what is happening in our own times.

First of all, those immigrants were stopped at Ellis Island to be checked medically and otherwise, and were allowed to get off that island to go ashore only after they had met whatever legal standards there were. Otherwise, they were sent back where they came from.

More fundamentally, people came here to assimilate into the American society they found, not to become isolated enclaves of aggrieved foreigners, demanding that Americans adjust to their languages, their values and their ways of life.

Like so much that President Obama says, his talk of “stronger screening” of people coming into the United States is sheer fantasy, when even his own intelligence officials and law enforcement officials say that we have no adequate data on which to base a meaningful screening of Syrian refugees.

When Obama spoke of the danger of our being “drawn once more into a long and costly ground war in Iraq or Syria,” that was yet another fantasy, that wars are optional.

When terrorists are at war with us, we cannot simply declare that war to be over, whenever it is politically convenient, as Obama did when he withdrew American troops from Iraq, against the advice of his own generals. That is what led to the rise of ISIS.

Our only real choice is between destroying ISIS over there or waiting for them to come over here and start killing Americans. As in other cases, Obama has made a choice that reflects politics and rhetoric, rather than reality.

The Ben Carson Flaps
By Thomas Sowell

Dr. Ben Carson’s whole life has been very unusual, so perhaps we should not be surprised to see the latest twist — the media going ballistic over discrepancies in a few things he said.

Years ago, when I was writing some autobiographical sketches, I dug up old letters, to check out things that I remembered — and was surprised more than once to discover that my memory was not always exactly the same as the way things had happened and were recorded at the time.

In the current flap over some things that Dr. Carson said, the biggest discrepancy has been between the furor in the media and the irrelevance of his statements to any political issue.

For example, in a video that someone dug up, Dr. Carson said to an audience that his “theory” about the Pyramids is that they were used as storage facilities. He was smiling as he said this, so it is not clear whether he was using this theory just to illustrate some point. But, in any case, he was not claiming this as a fact.

More important, the Pyramids are not an issue in today’s American political campaign, except as a “gotcha” gimmick.

Yet the media have paid far more attention to Ben Carson’s speculation about what the Pyramids were built for, thousands of years ago, than to outright lies that Hillary Clinton told about tragic American deaths in Benghazi, within days after she knew the truth, as her own e-mails now reveal.

Another media tempest in a teapot has developed because of the mild-mannered Dr. Carson’s recollections about some childhood incidents in which he depicted himself as violent toward another child. Some people who knew the young Ben Carson have said that such behavior would have been out of character for him. But has no one ever acted out of character, especially in childhood?

Albert Einstein, as a child, once threw a heavy object at his little sister that could have injured her or even killed her. Yet Einstein grew up to be a mild-mannered pacifist, and no one ever brought up that incident to try to discredit Einstein’s scientific work.

What has been far more disturbing than anything Ben Carson has said or done has been the media’s search-and-destroy mission against the renowned brain surgeon. The utter irrelevance of the issues raised by the media, at a time when the country faces monumental challenges at home and overseas, makes the media hype grotesque. It tells us more about the media than about Dr. Carson.

By contrast, the media showed no such zeal to expose Barack Obama’s associations and alliances with a whole series of people who expressed their hatred of America in words and/or deeds. Here was something relevant to his suitability to become president. But the media saw no evil, heard no evil and spoke no evil.

Nor have the media launched such attacks on President Obama as they have on candidate Carson, even after Obama proceeded to abandon existing American commitments to provide defensive aid to countries in Eastern Europe and to directly promote the destruction of governments in Egypt and Libya that posed no threat to American interests — all the while undermining Israel’s ability to defend itself.

Meanwhile he cut back on our own military defense so drastically that even former Secretaries of Defense who had served during his administration have publicly criticized his policies. So have former top generals and former top intelligence officials.

But the media largely circled the wagons to protect Obama — and now to protect Secretary of State Clinton, who carried out the foreign policies that left America’s position in virtually all regions of the world worse than when the Obama administration took office.

It was much the same story on domestic issues. Obama’s outright lies, that people would be able to keep their own doctors and their own health insurance under ObamaCare, were far more consequential than Dr. Carson’s offhand speculation about the Pyramids. But did the media try to destroy Obama’s credibility?

Unfortunately, the moment Dr. Carson entered the political arena it became inevitable that the media would try to discredit him, since any prominent conservative black figure is a threat to the left’s vision and the Democrats’ voting base. The flimsy basis for the current attacks only demonstrates the media’s bias and desperation.###

Original article: http://townhall.com/columnists/thomassowell/2015/11/10/the-ben-carson-flaps-n2078002

Why on earth is there a problem with what Ben Carson said about the potential of a muslim POTUS?

We’ve had a muslim POTUS for seven years. This video (among many others) shows conclusively that Barack Hussein Obama IS A MUSLIM!

Moreover, he is intent on the Islamification of America!

Time to take the blinders off, America! It’s all true!

It’s time to get your head out of the clouds, American believers, and start praying in earnest and in truth to reverse this horrible situation while there’s still time!

It matters not HOW it happens, but it MUST HAPPEN!

And, then we need to pray earnestly that the American Church will not be so naive and, frankly, stupid in the 2016 presidential election.

The future of America is definitely and undeniably at stake!

Watch and weep! Then wipe the tears and begin to pray, for America and for wisdom by the American people!

Pat Boone, singer, author, activist, TV-host, and Born again Christian agrees. Click here to see what he has to say about Obama and his Muslim connections.

ANDREW NAPOLITANO: Tyranny of Obama’s drone killings

Thomas Cromwell was the principal behind-the-scenes fixer for much of the reign of King Henry VIII. He engineered the interrogations, convictions and executions of many whom Henry needed out of the way, including his two predecessors as fixer and even the king’s second wife, Queen Anne. When Cromwell’s son, Gregory, who became sickened as he watched… Continue reading “The Tyranny of One Man’s Opinion” »

Giuliani Versus Obama

By Thomas Sowell

Former NYC Mayor, Rudy Giuliani

Former NYC Mayor, Rudolph Giuliani, is being lampooned by the liberal media for his recent comments about President Obama not loving America

The firestorm of denunciation of former New York mayor Rudolph Giuliani, for having said that he did not think Barack Obama loved America, is in one sense out of all proportion to that remark — especially at a time when there are much bigger issues, including wars raging, terrorist atrocities and a nuclear Iran on the horizon.

Against that background of strife and dangers on the world stage, it may seem as if Barack Obama’s feelings, or Rudolph Giuliani’s opinion about those feelings, should not matter so much, especially when it is hard to know with certainty how anyone feels. Yet when someone is the leader of a great nation at a historic juncture, it is more than idle curiosity to know what drives him.

It is not clear what the basis was for so much outrage at Mayor Giuliani’s opinion about President Obama. Was it that what Giuliani said was demonstrably false? Was it that Barack Obama is supposed to be considered innocent until proven guilty?

Anyone who simply looks at the factual evidence as to whether Obama loves America, or does not, will find remarkably little to suggest love and a large amount of evidence, over a long period of years, showing his constant close association with people fiercely hostile to this country. Jeremiah Wright was just one in a long series of such people.

Barack Obama’s campaign promise to “fundamentally change the United States of America” hardly suggests love. Nor did his international speaking tour in 2009, telling foreign audiences that America was to blame for problems on the world stage.

President Obama’s record in the White House has been more of the same. Among his earliest acts were offending our oldest and closest allies, Britain and Israel, and betraying the country’s previous commitments to provide anti-missile defenses to Poland and the Czech Republic.

Obama’s refusal to let Ukraine have weapons with which to defend itself from Russian invasion was consistent with this pattern, and consistent with his whispered statement — picked up by a microphone that was still on — to tell “Vladimir” that, after the 2012 election was over, he would be able to “have more ‘flexibility.'”

Conceivably, these might all have been simply blunders. But such a string of blunders would require someone very stupid, and Barack Obama is by no means stupid. The net effect is that in Europe, the Middle East and Asia, America’s allies and America’s interests face far more setbacks and dangers today than when Obama took office.

His policies have been publicly criticized by two of his own former Secretaries of Defense, by two retired four-star generals who served during his administration, and a retired four-star admiral who also served in the Middle East during the Obama administration has called his policies “anti-American.”

Some people who are denouncing former mayor Rudolph Giuliani seem to be saying that it is just not right to accuse a President of the United States of being unpatriotic. But when Barack Obama was a Senator, that is precisely what he said about President George W. Bush. Where was the outrage then?

If all else fails, critics of Mayor Giuliani can say that a man is entitled to be considered “innocent until proven guilty.” But that principle applies in a court of law. Outside a court of law, there is no reason to presume anyone innocent until proven guilty. It is especially dangerous to presume a President of the United States — any president — innocent until proven guilty.

Whoever is president has the lives of hundreds of millions of Americans, and the fate of a nation, in his hands. It is those millions of people and that nation who deserve the benefit of the doubt. We need to err on the side of safety for the people and the country. Squeamish politeness to an individual cannot outweigh that.

We need to keep that in mind for the next president, and for all future presidents. We might have been better off if the question of Obama’s patriotism had been raised before he was first elected. Never should we ignore so many red flag warnings again.

There is little that can be done about President Obama now, no matter what he does. Impeachment, even if it succeeded, would mean Joe Biden as president and riots across the country. It is hard to know which would be worse.

Whites Held to Higher Standards Than Blacks

By Mychal Massie

Mychal Massie of the Daily Rant ~ mychal-massie.com

Mychal Massie, Social-Political Commentator

That neo-Leninist liberals hold white Americans to a different standard than they hold blacks is bad enough, but they hold blacks to a lower standard that is incompatible on any quantifiable level of propriety and civility.

Whites are expected to be respectful, civil and conscious of what they say – and, based on what is being taught in public schools, conscious even of what they think. Whites must be ever respectful of the feelings of other people, specifically blacks.

But blacks are not held to said expectations of social grace and relational benevolence. Blacks are not only given a pass for being rude and offensive, they are given a pass for going through life with a chip on their shoulders and behaving on levels of commonality that insure their being relegated to a future of lowered expectations and even lower meritocratic personal achievement.

The disgraceful prejudice of lowered expectations based on skin color is nowhere more evident than with the Obamas. It is even more heinous that everyone but the majority of blacks sees it and understands this class bigotry.

First Lady Michelle Obama on Jimmy Fallon Show

First Lady Michelle Obama on Jimmy Fallon Show

No first lady in history has behaved as this one has – and it is a certainty that no other first lady would have even entertained the idea of behaving in the uncouth ways she has. The late Jackie Kennedy, Rosalind Carter, or Laura Bush would never have been caught rolling around on the floor of a late-night television stage. They are justifiably held to a higher standard than that, but the Obama woman is expected to behave commonly and discourteously. She is expected to be angry and contumacious because, after all, she is a descendant of slaves. She has been mistreated by evil whites her entire life – at least, that is, if we are to believe her narrative.

It is the same with Obama. He has been soundly criticized at every turn and justifiably so. George W. Bush, Bill Clinton, Ronald Reagan and Jimmy Carter were viciously criticized for their policies. But is there anyone who would argue that they would have been permitted to finish their terms if they had been involved in an illegal gun-running operation that led to the murders of innocent Americans and hundreds of innocent Mexicans? Would any American president before Obama have been permitted to knowingly and openly lie about his abominable health-care bill with impunity?

The cultural Marxists in our public school systems, colleges, the media and politics promote an “Afri-centric” form of behavior that is self-limiting and self-defeating. Whites are expected to comport themselves decently.

Proper speech and self-decency have different meanings if you are black than they do if you are not. Those like Jehmu Greene, Al Sharpton and Eric Holder are rewarded for their bitterness and antipathy. Yet there is absolutely no question but that there would be hell to pay if any white person or group said the things in public that they do – the fact that whites are accused of thinking such things notwithstanding.

Blacks are destroying the neighborhoods in which they live, but when law enforcement officers have deadly encounters with these hoodlums and thugs, it is the white officers who are held to the higher standards.

Police departments and local governments are taken to task and called racist because they call for standards of public dress that any person with self-pride and dignity would never need to be reminded about.

Whether it is grammar, public/personal behavior, social skills, ad nauseum, blacks are held to lower standards, and tragically blacks accept same as their right.

We see it with race-based affirmative action. Blacks are given jobs in municipal departments that they qualify for only because the standards are lowered to the point of rendering the exams of no value. Whites are expected to perform at a higher standard of intellectual ability.

Blacks have been inculcated with the vile heterodoxy of “being owed” something juxtaposed to having to “earn” something. They are conditioned to see nothing wrong with a mentality that not only suggests, but also applauds their ability to gain access based on lowered expectations rather than meritocracy.

It is a fact that the behavior of many blacks is the primary causal factor for how they are viewed by others, but we are expected to overlook their behavior and blame racism for how they are viewed.

If blacks were held to the same standard of expectation as others, we would see an increase in the number of blacks accomplishing positive outcomes, and fewer of them spending decades behind bars for copying gangsters and amoral behavior.###
__________________

What If Whites Strike Back?

By Mychal Massie

It would serve race mongers well to consider that even a docile old dog will bite you if you mistreat it often enough and long enough. Tangential to same is the reality of the “laws of unintended consequences.”

I’m tired of seeing, reading and hearing white people blamed for everything from black boys not being able to read to whites being privileged because of the color of their skin. If I am tired of these Americans being used as scapegoats to further the agenda of race mongers, then it is a sure bet that those being unjustly vilified are especially weary of same.

This isn’t 1860, and it certainly isn’t 1955. There are no slaves in America, and there are no Jim Crow laws dictating access based on skin color. Specific to that point, it is time to remind people like Obama, Al Sharpton and the New Black Panther Party that the racial discord they are fomenting can become the harbinger of their own peril.

Obama foments racial unrest and a racial divide to further his neo-Leninist agenda. Sharpton foments racial unrest for personal gain. The New Black Panther Party foments racial hostilities and the demonization of whites in the foolish belief they can bring about a Western version of apartheid where blacks rule.

Too many blacks have lost sight of the fact that it was Africans who were responsible for the enslavement of other Africans. It was war, invasion, conquest and various caste systems that contributed to slavery. And although one would be hard-pressed to believe it from the invented myths that masquerade as fact, persons of color were not the only slaves.

From Genesis to the Sudan of today, slavery has been a staple around the world. And it should be noted that given the first opportunity in America, the former slaves of color became owners of those whose skin color matched theirs.

But unlike the rest of the world, America had the good sense and decency to end slavery. In America, there is no caste system, and yet at every turn we are bombarded with how bad blacks have it because of whites and how unfair the so-called “white system” is to blacks.

All people, including those who are here illegally, have it better in America than they would have it anywhere else on earth. And yet blacks are encouraged to blame their ills on whites.

Therein the “laws of unintended consequences” come into play. America has shed the blood of her people on her own soil to ensure the freedom of all Americans. Americans of all races joined hands with blacks to end Jim Crow. And, to the detriment of all concerned, political correctness and guilt have contributed to discrimination against whites vis-a-vis race-based affirmative-action initiatives.

Still the bastardization of whites continues. White law enforcement personnel are labeled racist for defending themselves against black criminals, especially when bad things happen to the black criminals.

To put it succinctly, the single greatest non-biblical truth today is that many times the majority of blacks are their own worst enemies. Many blacks go through life with a chip on their shoulder and bad attitudes toward whites. Many blacks growing up in dysfunctional single-parent or no-parent homes are loathe to realize that their lives are the result of bad decisions made by their families that adversely affect their adulthood – it’s not the white man.

But as I said, there is a thing called “the laws of unintended consequences.” To that end, sooner or later a pendulum reaches its arc and starts to swing back in the other direction.

How long before white people, many of whom are growing increasingly resentful at being falsely maligned, decide to respond in kind? How much longer will whites stand by and allow the likes of Sharpton and Obama to continually cast them as racist villains?

If the 1915 silent movie “The Birth of a Nation” by D.W. Griffith, which depicted blacks as unintelligent and sexual predators of white women (which was a lie), gave rise to the resurrection of the Ku Klux Klan, what can we expect to be brought about by the heathen behavior of many blacks today?

Many blacks are quick to attack those of us who condemn the untoward, barbaric behavior of some blacks. They curse us for not glossing over their behavior and for not engaging in “blame whitey.” But if a phony movie was able to give rise to at least two generations of condemnation of blacks, what will the in-your-face belligerent hostilities so many of them exhibit today ultimately result in?

America has figuratively bent over backward to assuage its perceived guilt, but for many blacks that is not good enough. They accuse and self-alienate but do nothing to incorporate the greatness of America into their lives.

How much longer will America allow blacks to vilify those who have done them no harm – even as blacks attack, terrorize and condemn those who truly do just want to get along?###

[Original Source: http://www.wnd.com/2014/12/what-if-whites-strike-back/]
_________________

Liberals’ Use of Black People (Part II)

Walter E. Williams

Rev. Al Sharpton (5-L) leading march in Staten Island, New York, USA, 23 August 2014, organized by Sharpton's 'National Action Network', to protest recent police shootings of black men in NYC and Ferguson, in which no indictments were handed down by grand juries.  [EPA/JUSTIN LANE]

Rev. Al Sharpton (5-L) leading march in Staten Island, organized by his ‘National Action Network’, protesting recent police shootings of black men in NYC and Ferguson, for which grand juries declined to indict. [EPA/JUSTIN LANE]

Last week’s column focused on the ways liberals use blacks in pursuit of their leftist agenda, plus their demeaning attitudes toward black people. Most demeaning are their double standards. It was recently reported that Rep. Steve Scalise (R-La.), the House majority whip, spoke at a 2002 gathering hosted by white supremacist leaders when he was a Louisiana state representative. Some are calling on Scalise to step down or for House Speaker John Boehner to fire him. There’s no claim that Scalise made racist statements.

Hardly anyone blinks an eye at the Rev. Al Sharpton‘s racist statements, such as: “White folks was in the caves while we (blacks) was building empires. … We built pyramids before Donald Trump ever knew what architecture was. … We taught philosophy and astrology and mathematics before Socrates and them Greek homos ever got around to it.”

Sharpton again: “So (if) some cracker come and tell you ‘Well, my mother and father blood go back to the Mayflower,’ you better hold your pocket. That ain’t nothing to be proud of. That means their forefathers was crooks.” Sharpton also offered, “If the Jews want to get it on, tell them to pin their yarmulkes back and come over to my house.”

Despite such racism, President Barack Obama has made Sharpton his go-to guy on matters of race. But not to worry. Obama himself spent 20 years listening to the Rev. Jeremiah Wright‘s anti-Semitic and racist sermons. The news media and intellectual elite don’t condemn Sharpton or Obama, because they have two standards of behavior: one for whites and a lower one for blacks.

The news media’s narrative about the police shooting in Ferguson, Missouri, is that a white cop shot and killed an unarmed black man who was holding his hands up. Their New York City narrative is that a white cop used a chokehold that killed a black man. The news media people and their liberal allies know the facts, but they need to promote the appearance of injustice to keep black people in a state of grievance.

During grand jury testimony about the Ferguson incident, seven black witnesses testified that Michael Brown was charging the policeman when he was shot. The autopsies, performed by three sets of forensic experts, including one representing Brown’s family, confirmed Officer Darren Wilson‘s version of the event. The news media’s narrative of Eric Garner‘s death in New York is that he died because a chokehold had stopped his breathing. He actually died later, in an ambulance, where his heart stopped while being taken to a hospital. The chokehold was instrumental in triggering Garner’s pre-existing health problems of acute and chronic bronchial asthma, obesity and heart disease, but he was not choked to death as claimed by the media. Both Brown and Garner would be alive today if they had not resisted arrest. But pointing that out would not serve the purpose of keeping blacks in a perpetual state of grievance.

I’m old enough to remember the racist lynching mentality of yesteryear. Regardless of the evidence, if a white woman merely accused a black man of raping her, the man was all but dead. Emmett Till, a Chicago teenager visiting relatives in Money, Mississippi, during the summer of 1955, was accused of flirting with a white woman. Klansmen took him to a barn. They beat him and gouged out one of his eyes. Then they shot him in the head and tossed his body in the Tallahatchie River.

The New York Times published the street name on which Officer Wilson lived. Had the frenzied mob caught up with him, regardless of evidence, he might have suffered the same fate as Till.

Multiethnic societies are inherently unstable, and how we handle matters of race is contributing to that instability. Decent Americans should see the dangers posed by America’s race hustlers, who are stacking up piles of combustible racial kindling, ready for a racial arsonist to set it ablaze.

[Original source: http://townhall.com/columnists/WalterEWilliams/2015/01/07/liberals-use-of-black-people-part-ii-n1938848]

NYC Mayor Bill de Blasio victory address
Liberals’ Use of Black People
By Walter E. Williams

Back in the day, when hunting was the major source of food, hunters often used stalking horses as a means of sneaking up on their quarry. They would walk on the opposite side of the horse until they were close enough to place a good shot on whatever they were hunting. A stalking horse not only concealed them but also, if their target was an armed man and they were discovered, would take the first shot. That’s what blacks are to liberals and progressives in their efforts to transform America — stalking horses.

Let’s look at some of the ways white liberals use black people. One of the more obvious ways is for liberals to equate any kind of injustices suffered by homosexuals and women to the black struggle for civil rights. But it is just plain nonsense to suggest any kind of equivalency between the problems of homosexuals and women and the centuries of slavery followed by Jim Crow, lynching, systematic racial discrimination and the blood, sweat and tears of the black civil rights movement.

The largest and most powerful labor union in the country is the National Education Association, with well over 3 million members. Teachers benefit enormously from their education monopoly. It yields higher pay and lower accountability. It’s a different story for a large percentage of black people who receive fraudulent education. The NEA’s white liberals — aided by black teachers, politicians and so-called black leaders — cooperate to ensure that black parents who want their children to have a better education have few viable choices.

Whenever there has been a serious push for school choice, educational vouchers, tuition tax credits or even charter schools, the NEA has fought against it. One of the more callous examples of that disregard for black education was New York Mayor Bill de Blasio‘s cutback on funding for charter schools where black youngsters were succeeding in getting a better education. That was de Blasio’s way of paying back New York’s teachers union for the political support it gave him in his quest for the mayor’s office.

White liberals in the media and academia, along with many blacks, have been major supporters of the recent marches protesting police conduct. A man from Mars, knowing nothing about homicide facts, would conclude that the major problem black Americans have with murder and brutality results from the behavior of racist policemen. According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, there are about 200 police arrest-related deaths of blacks each year (between 300 and 400 for whites). That number pales in comparison with the roughly 7,000 annual murders of blacks, 94 percent of which are committed by blacks. The number of blacks being murdered by other blacks is of little concern to liberals. Their agenda is to use arrest-related deaths of blacks to undermine established authority.

Liberals often have demeaning attitudes toward blacks. When Secretary of State John Kerry was a U.S. senator, in a statement about so many blacks being in prison, he said, “That’s unacceptable, but it’s not their fault.” Would Kerry also say that white prison inmates are also faultless? Johns Hopkins University sociologist Andrew Cherlin told us: “It has yet to be shown that the absence of a father was directly responsible for any of the supposed deficiencies of broken homes. … (The problem) is not the lack of male presence but the lack of male income.” The liberal vision is that fathers and husbands can be replaced by a welfare check.

Liberals desperately need blacks. If the Democratic Party lost just 30 percent of the black vote, it would mean the end of the liberal agenda. That means blacks must be kept in a perpetual state of grievance in order to keep them as a one-party people in a two-party system.

When black Americans finally realize how much liberals have used them, I’m betting they will be the nation’s most conservative people. Who else has been harmed as much by liberalism’s vision and agenda?

[Original Source: http://townhall.com/columnists/walterewilliams/2014/12/31/liberals-use-of-black-people-n1936579; accessed 7-8-15]

HOW THE NATIONALIZATION OF THE FAMILY, POVERTY AND POLITICS GO TOGETHER
By Joseph Mattera

Barack Obama State of the Union AddressSince World War II, the Great Society programs of the 1960’s and more, the federal government of the United States has been getting larger at the expense of individual liberty and freedom. The liberals in the federal government offer more and more freebies in exchange for votes. Hence, the more dependent America becomes upon big government, the less likely it becomes that America would ever vote against it. Continue reading “The Real Culprit Impoverishing Americans” »

By Thomas Sowell

Johnathan Gruber -- Primary Architect of ObamaCare

MIT economist Jonathan Gruber, a consultant on ObamaCare who was reportedly paid more than $2 Million for his expert advice, apologized in an appearance before the US House Oversight and Government Reform Committee on Tuesday, December 9, 2014 for what he characterized as “glib, thoughtless and sometimes downright insulting comments.” (See videos below.)

Jonathan Gruber‘s several videotaped remarks about the gross deceptions that got ObamaCare passed in Congress should tell us a lot about the Obama administration. And the way that the mainstream media hesitated for days to even mention what Professor Gruber said, while they obsessed over unsubstantiated charges against Bill Cosby, should tell us a lot about the media. Continue reading “What Jonathan Gruber’s Remarks Say About Obama Administration” »

Why the Safety of the American People Takes Second Place to the Goal of Helping People Overseas
By Thomas Sowell

The Ebola outbreak in West Africa is both a danger in itself and a wake-up call for Americans — about President Obama, about the institutions of this country, and, most important, about ourselves.

There was a time when an outbreak of a deadly disease overseas would bring virtually unanimous agreement that our top priority should be to keep it overseas. Yet Barack Obama has refused to bar entry to the United States by people from countries where the Ebola epidemic rages, as Britain has done.

The reason? Refusing to let people with Ebola enter the United States would conflict with the goal of fighting the disease. In other words, the safety of the American people takes second place to the goal of helping people overseas.

As if to emphasize his priorities, President Obama has ordered thousands of American troops to go into Ebola-stricken Liberia, disregarding the dangers to those troops and to other Americans when the troops return.

What does this say about Obama?

At a minimum, it suggests that he takes his conception of himself as a citizen of the world more seriously than he takes his role as President of the United States. At worst, he may consider Americans’ interests expendable in the grand scheme of things internationally. If so, this would explain a lot of his foreign-policy disasters around the world, which seem inexplicable otherwise.

Those critics who have been citing Barack Obama’s foreign-policy fiascoes and disasters as evidence that he is incompetent may be overlooking the possibility that he has different priorities than the protection of the American people and America’s interests as a nation.

This is a monstrous possibility. But no one familiar with the history of the 20th century should consider monstrous possibilities as things to dismiss automatically. Nor should anyone who has followed Barack Obama’s behavior over his lifetime, and the values that behavior reveals.

A few critics who, early on, sensed something un-American, if not anti-American, in Barack Obama, succumbed to the idea that he was not a native-born citizen. That claim blew up in their faces.

Nor was birthplace crucial anyway. People born overseas have put their lives on the line to defend America, and scientists who escaped from Europe in the 1930s played a major role in creating the nuclear bomb that made the United States a superpower. Conversely, the country’s most notorious traitor — Benedict Arnold — was born on American soil.

Whatever the reason, or combination of reasons, that led to President Obama’s foreign-policy disasters around the world — with the crowning disaster of all, a nuclear Iran, looming on the horizon — it cannot be a simple lack of knowledge or experience. Various former members of the Obama administration are telling the same story, of information and advice from knowledgeable and experienced officials being ignored by this vain and headstrong man.

Back in the 18th century, Edmund Burke pointed out that, whatever the institutions of government, most of the outcomes of what it does “must depend upon the exercise of the powers which are left at large to the prudence and uprightness of ministers of state.”

What did the American voters know about the prudence and uprightness of this untried man they elected president, as a result of his glib rhetoric and his racial symbolism? It is not just bad luck when a reckless gamble turns out disastrously.

No one knows at this point how big the Ebola danger may turn out to be. But what we do know is that official reassurances about this and other dangers have become worthless.

The erosion of Constitutional government over the years has become, under the Obama administration, a deluge of arbitrary edicts and defiant lawlessness protected by a grossly politicized Department of Justice.

It may be time to consider reorganizing the institutions of government, so that high officials who try to reassure the public about medical crises are not officials who serve “at the pleasure of the president.” Nor should the attorney general, whose duty is to enforce the laws, be part of an administration whose law-breakers the Justice Department can protect from prosecution.

[Source: http://jewishworldreview.com/cols/sowell100714.php3; accessed 10-08-14.]

Thomas Sowell, is an American economist, social theorist, political philosopher, columnist, author, photographer, and recipient of numerous awards for his prodigious work in all these capacities. His articles are republished in scores of publications online. He is currently Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University. His website is at: tsowell.com.

POTUS Obama speaking to press
The Islamic Ghost That Haunts Obama
By David Rubin

We are all influenced by our backgrounds. With the 2008 election of Barack Obama, who has fundamentally attempted to change America’s orientation in the world, thereby impacting Israel in very negative ways, I began to explore my relationship with the USA as one who was born and raised there.

I fully identify as an Israeli—I married in Israel, my children were all born in Israel, my message is fundamentally a message of Israel’s mission, and my work is totally focused on building Israel’s biblical heartland through the children of Israel. Furthermore, when I travel and speak to groups across the United States, Canada, and elsewhere, I am doing so as an Israeli, even though I may have insights into American realities that most Israeli natives probably don’t possess. Continue reading “Why Obama Won’t Take A Strong Stance Against Islamic Aggression” »

Dick Morris, Political Commentator

Dick Morris, Political pundit and former Clinton advisor

Political commentator and former advisor to President Clinton, Dick Morris, yesterday revealed in an article published on his site and NewsMax that the Democratic Party is with all their political might and muscle pushing a scheme that in essence negates the existing presidential election method via what is referred to as the “Electoral College” mandated in the U.S. Constitution with Amendments. His article follows. By no means have we always agreed with Morris’ expressed views, but with his political views and insights, we have frequently concurred. We believe he is a proven passionate patriot with genuine conservative values that by-and-large align with our own strongly held Biblical conservative values and principles. We publish such articles, as we did leading up to the 2008 Election, because, in short, we believe that the Church, as always, holds the “key” of authority to the outcome of the 2016 election and all political elections, though it failed miserably in its God-ordained duties and responsibilities with respect to the 2008 election. We pray it seizes the opportunity the 2016 Election presents to redeem itself.

DEMOCRATS RIG ELECTORAL COLLEGE

By Dick Morris

A plan, now stealthily making its way through state legislatures with astonishing speed, would junk the Electoral College and award the presidency to the winner of the popular vote.

The plan involves an Interstate Compact where states would commit to select electors pledged to vote for the national popular vote winner regardless of how their own state voted. When enough states pass this law — sufficient to cast the Electoral College’s majority 270 votes — it will take effect. Continue reading “DEMS Plotting to Bypass Electoral College” »

Many of my articles this year on Spirit Life Magazine have addressed issues relative to President Obama’s agenda for the Islamification and Marxization of America. I make no apologies for that. In fact, I firmly believe that in doing so I am complying with a Biblical mandate consigned to all Christians:  “Do not participate in the unfruitful deeds of darkness, but instead even expose them” (Eph. 5:11). I have no qualms or ambivalence about declaring Obama’s agenda as being the “unfruitful deeds of darkness” and that the goal of same being destruction of the constitutional “republic for which”—the flag Americans proudly fly on this the 237th Birthday of this great nation—”stands.” Continue reading “Give Me Liberty or Give Me Death!” »

Several weeks ago I published an article precipitated by an email and follow-up phone conversations I had with the sender of the email and his pastor, who self-identified himself as an African-American pastor of an African-American Church affiliated with a traditional African-American denomination.

To set up this resumption of the series, necessitates some reiteration. In the course of the conversation I rather naively asked the pastor how those who embrace the tenets and premises of the Social Gospel can possibly reconcile it to the Biblical Gospel of Christ. The composite of his response, accompanied with a tone of offense he was unable to conceal, was that he, his church, his denomination, and most Christian African-Americans consider them as being one and the same. Until that moment, I personally had never heard a Social Gospel adherent actually state that sentiment so blatantly and matter-of-factly. Regardless, such a proposition is utterly astonishing to me—that one could be so indoctrinated as to actually believe that the principles of the Social Gospel, especially when coupled with the theologically extreme component of so-called, “Black Liberation Theology,” as to truly believe that the Gospel delineated and elucidated in the Word of God, Scripture, is congruent with same. His response struck me as being totally mindboggling and a complete enigma. Prior to his comments, I guess my thinking was that most adherents of the Social Gospel and Black Liberation Theology knew that they were a theological departure from Christian orthodoxy, and that they believed the doctrines and dogmas of same were a different and more correct interpretation and application of the Gospel of Christ conveyed in the Holy Bible. It was stunning to learn that was not at all the case and that I had been completely wrong in that regard.

In this article I will present a few of the points of divergence of the Social Gospel and Black Liberation Theology from orthodox—i.e., Biblical—Christian teaching and orthopraxy. But, I promise to do my best to make what I say much more practical and understandable than such lexicon makes it sound. Continue reading “What’s Wrong With The Social Gospel?” »

“For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth.” (Rom. 1:16)

I’m old enough to remember a time when many promulgators of the so-called “Social Gospel” eschewed and took umbrage at the term. Over the last half a century, though, that has totally reversed. Now, proponents of the thoroughly false “gospel” embrace and rally around the assignation.

The time has come, I believe, to “speak the truth in love” but nonetheless straightforwardly about this heinously deceptive and insidious false gospel. Continue reading “The Fallacy and Ineffectiveness of the “Social Gospel”” »

“Blessed is the nation whose God is the LORD, The people whom He has chosen for His own inheritance” (Psa. 33:12).

“If the foundations are destroyed, What can the righteous do?” (Psa. 11:3)

“Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” –John Adams, 2nd US President

In a recent article, concerning the second Scripture verse above, I wrote that they,

like Adams’ statement, contains a latent clue for any group of marauders possessing malevolent and self-aggrandizing intents how to set about subverting a free society for the purposes of vanquishing it—namely, dismantle and decimate its ideological and spiritual substructure.

America’s morality always has been and remains the unseen bedrock of its unrivaled, enduring success. But, that success always has had and will have its villainous enemies who are intent on obliterating it.

I followed that by a poignant quote from Karl Marx, “who today is revered by the multitudinous global disciples of his radical agenda for world-hegemony as ‘The Father of Communism,'” and whose “anti-God religion of narcissism-centric humanism (now) permeates every segment of the existing societies of the world”:

“My object in life is to dethrone God by deifying man.” –Karl Heinrich Marx, Father of Communism

I also wrote:

Thus, as Marx further prescribed in the writings comprising The Communist Manifesto…the only way the agenda of communism can succeed in any nation is that God and all religions ascribing belief in God be entirely eradicated from the collective psyche of its citizenry and thus every facet of the society of the targeted nation. Indeed, that whole long-term, systematic process is the primary critical element of communism–”socialization.” Continue reading “America, You Were Warned 50 Years Ago!” »