The rogue fraud “president” outed. “This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come. For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God; having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof; from such turn away. For of this sort are they which creep into houses, and lead captive silly women laden with sins, led away with divers lusts, ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth … so do these also resist the truth: men of corrupt minds, reprobate concerning the faith. But they shall proceed no further: for their folly shall be manifest unto all men, as their’s also was.” ~ II Timothy 3:1-9
Let us begin, shall we, with the forces and faces of evil … First off, there’s this guy, one Saul Alinsky … Who declared: “Lest we forget at least an over-the-shoulder acknowledgment to the very first radical: from all our legends, mythology, and history … the first radical known to man who rebelled against the establishment and did it so effectively that he at least won his own kingdom. – Lucifer”
Who also wrote in Rules for Radicals: “The Revolutionary force today has two targets, moral as well as material. Its young protagonists are one moment reminiscent of the idealistic early Christians, yet they also urge violence and cry, ‘Burn the system down!‘ They have no illusions about the system, but plenty of illusions about the way to change our world. It is to this point that I have written this book.”
Memo to Saul Alinsky and his demonic followers on “he at least won his own kingdom”. You idiots – your “hero” hardly “won his own kingdom” – he was thrown out of heaven, and a third of the intransigent angels with him. Didn’t you GET it, Saul? Did you lead your followers astray? (well, what an oxymoron – he certainly gets it wherever he’s residing now, since he’s likely surrounded by them all – what an eternal misery that so easily could’ve been avoided). The rogue fraud “president” outed.
Alinsky’s tactics were based, not on Stalin’s revolutionary violence, but on the Neo-Marxist strategies of Antonio Gramsci, an Italian Communist. Relying on gradualism, infiltration and the dialectic process rather than a bloody revolution, Gramsci’s transformational Marxism was so subtle that few even noticed the deliberate changes.
Like Alinsky, Mikhail Gorbachev followed Gramsci, not Lenin. In fact, Gramsci aroused Stalin’s wrath by suggesting that Lenin’s revolutionary plan wouldn’t work in the West. Instead the primary assault would be on Biblical absolutes and Christian values, which must be crushed as a social force before the new face of Communism could rise and flourish. Malachi Martin gave us a progress report on the rogue fraud “president” outed:
“By 1985, the influence of traditional Christian philosophy in the West was weak and negligible…. Gramsci’s master strategy was now feasible. Humanly speaking, it was no longer too tall an order to strip large majorities of men and women in the West of those last vestiges that remained to them of Christianity’s transcendent God.”
Then there’s this almost unrecognizable, very often invisible, intransigent, and disengaged (as someone describes him who knows him) well-known community organizer from the South Side of Chicago, who somehow, nobody from the neighborhood can seem to recollect, nor explain how he was miraculously elevated to the highest office on the planet. “Dumbfounded” is the expression to describe the rogue fraud “president” outed.
“For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ. And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works.” ~ II Corinthians 11:13-15
This, from Richard Fernandez, PJ Media:
There is about the White House staff something of the lying mischievousness of a coven of evil children. White House press secretary Josh Earnest told reporters that the former mayor of New York can never live down the shame of criticizing president Obama, a downfall Earnest sincerely regrets. “I can tell you that it’s sad to see when somebody who has attained a certain stature and even admiration tarnishes that legacy so thoroughly,” he intoned. “There is no element of schadenfreude that people are feeling around here.”
No schadenfreude , but there might be a savage glee. The sort a brat might feel when he has successfully framed the school janitor by planting property in the old man’s lunch pail and accusing him of theft, causing him to lose his job. The kind of thrill an amoral youngster might get from a leaving a thumb tack on a classmates seat or dipping the pigtails of the girl sitting ahead of him in a bottle of ink. It is the careless, cruel, one-upsmanship of juveniles who have never been denied anything in their life and never stopped at anything for a laugh.
And by such nasty pranks they think they can run rings around the befuddled old ex-mayor. When Giuliani told an audience ”I do not believe – and I know this is a horrible thing to say – but I do not believe that the President loves America,” he was only half right. He should have added, ”nor loves anything else”. Giuliani isn’t guilty of racism. He’s guilty of earnestness in describing the rogue fraud “president” outed.
Don Surber, The Scorekeeper:
Hillary Clinton couldn’t do it. Sarah Palin couldn’t do it. Fox News couldn’t do it. But America’s mayor — Rudy Giuliani — has finally forced Americans to look at the origins of Barack Obama, and his lack of any act of patriotism. Indeed, getting Obama to say anything kind about his country of birth (no, not Kenya) is about as hard as getting him to admit that any Muslims are terrorists.
It began on Wednesday, when Mayor Giuliani spoke on behalf of Governor Scott Walker to Republican New Yorkers (all 60 of them). The mayor said, “I do not believe, and I know this is a horrible thing to say, but I do not believe that the president loves America. He doesn’t love you. And he doesn’t love me. He wasn’t brought up the way you were brought up and I was brought up through love of this country.”
Today, the New York Post quoted the mayor on the president’s influences: “From the time he was 9 years old, he was influenced by Frank Marshall Davis, who was a communist,”
And this: “He spent 17 years in the church of Jeremiah Wright, and this is the guy who said ‘God damn America, not God bless America.’ Obama never left that church.”
And this: “He doesn’t talk about America the way John Kennedy and Ronald Reagan did, about America’s greatness and exceptionalism. He was educated by people who were critics of the US. And he has not been able to overcome those influences.”
Rudy Giuliani speaks for many of us. He is forcing Americans to face up to the fact that we elected a Fifth Columnist to the presidency. His fellow Fifth Columnists are all huffy about someone questioning Barack Obama’s patriotism — you know, that thing they mock all the time.
The rogue fraud “president” outed. GOOD.
Hizzoner the Mayor from the New York Daily News (hardly a conservative rag):
“Look, this man was brought up basically in a white family, so whatever he learned or didn’t learn, I attribute this more to the influence of communism and socialism” than to his race, Giuliani told the Daily News. “I don’t (see) this President as being particularly a product of African-American society or something like that. He isn’t,” the former mayor added. “Logically, think about his background . . . The ideas that are troubling me and are leading to this, come from communists with whom he associated when he was 9 years old through family connections”.
When Obama was 9, he was living in Indonesia with his mother and his stepfather. Giuliani said he was referencing Obama’s grandfather having introduced him to Frank Marshall Davis, a member of the Communist Party.
And finally, from Debra J. Saunders in American Spectator:
On November 20, when Obama announced the expansion of DAPA to include undocumented adults, he said, “To those members of Congress who question my authority to make our immigration system work better or question the wisdom of me acting where Congress has failed, I have one answer: Pass a bill.”
George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley is an Obama voter who is appalled. Testifying before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Turley charged that partisan “division is no license to go it alone as the president has suggested. You have only two choices in our system when facing political adversaries: You can either seek to convince them or to replace them. This is obviously frustrating for presidents (and their supporters) who want to see real changes and to transcend gridlock. However, there is nothing noble in circumventing the Constitution. The claim of any one person that they can get the job done unilaterally is the very siren’s call that our Framers warned us to resist.”
The Constitution charges the president to “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed”; Obamaland contends that it is simply engaging in executive discretion. But Judge Hanen countered, “Exercising prosecutorial discretion and/or refusing to enforce a statute does not also entail bestowing benefits” — such as Social Security cards, work permits, and the ability to travel.
House Speaker John Boehner has a chance to be relevant by pushing a bill that would grant legal status to immigrants brought here illegally as minors. Such a bill also would continue funding for the Department of Homeland Security before a February 27 budget deadline. The Senate and White House would bristle about a package less generous than the big bill passed by a Democratic Senate in 2013, but if enacted, such a measure would be the law of the land until and unless a new Congress and president overrode it.
Unless, that is, Americans decide the Constitution doesn’t mean anything anymore…
Note, I removed the satirical post of the young black guy as it was inappropriate to the story … what I was attempting to portray was how the left will use any and all means to demean the real story, even planting a piece of satire into the message … It sure worked well for awhile though(!)