Sunday, February 1, 2015

Obama’s Chicago way with Netanyahu is nothing but a fool’s move



The latest in what’s brewing as the breach-of-protocol tiff between President Obama and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is that a team of Democrats with ties to the White House have touched down in the Jewish nation, rocked and ready to work on an election campaign – that could actually oust Bibi.

Another example of Obama’s famous Chicago way? Only a short-sighted administration would risk upsetting the hard line rule that Netanyahu represents – and that Israel needs, by the way, in the face of rising nuclear risks from Iran, tensions in Syria and ongoing instability in Egypt. The Islamic State – the recent terror attacks. Is Team Obama so petulant as to put pride before pragmatism?

In a word: yes.

Haaretz wrote that the group V15 – with a reputed mission of “anyone but Bibi” – has joined forces with U.S. political operatives, one of whom, Jeremy Bird, worked as Obama’s field director on his reelection campaign in 2012. The Israeli newspaper headlined its story this way: “The Obama campaign strategist who could break the Israeli elections wide open.”

Newsmax specified the group is made up of five Democrats, under the leadership of Bird. And the Washington Free Beacon, meanwhile, reported that the V15 group was actually working with the U.S.-based OneVoice, an activist organization that’s received two grants from the U.S. State Department in the past year.

OneVoice grants officer Christina Taler said that “we’ve formed a partnership with [V15], but … we’re absolutely nonpartisan. Our biggest emphasis and focus right now is just getting people out to vote.” She insists the OneVoice partnership with the anti-Bibi V15 group is simply a matter of convenience and manpower; the more who’ve united to knock on doors and get out the vote, the better.

Yes – because being perceived as using taxpayer dollars to fund a political campaign to drive Netanyahu from office would appear unseemly to most Americans, wouldn’t it? Taler denied in the Washington Free Beacon report that any grant dollars were being used for the Israeli election efforts. Still, the unseemliness of the White House ties to an anti-Bibi campaign isn’t a small thing. The team of White House-tied Democrats arrived in the Jewish nation just shortly after Obama decried Netanyahu’s acceptance of Speaker John Boehner’s invitation to speak before Congress.

Perhaps “decried” is a soft word. Rather, the White House came out swinging, putting on its Chicago way – its braggadocio and bravado – and, via an unnamed senior U.S. official, issued this statement: “There are things you simply don’t do. [Netanyahu] spat in our face publicly and that’s no way to behave. Netanyahu ought to remember that President Obama has a year and a half left to his presidency and that there will be a price.”

Really? What price would that be – that Obama won’t support Netanyahu? That already seems to be taking place, on the very grounds of Israel in the very lead up to the March elections.

Whether the timing of the Democratic landing for the anti-Bibi voter drive is coincidental – or whether it was actually driven by Obama’s anger with the Jewish leader for what the White House considers a serious breach of visiting protocol – is secondary to this: An Israel without the bold governance of Netanyahu at this time would be an even more dangerous place.

An American leadership that doesn’t see that reality, and that is, directly or with silent cheers, pressing forth an anti-Bibi campaign, is only working a fool’s deed that could lead to a dangerous tip in Middle East politics – in favor of evil-doers and terrorists.


Thursday, January 29, 2015

Jan Morgan, gun range owner: Business 'quadrupled' since I banned Muslim

Jan Morgan, the owner and operator of the Arkansas-based Gun Cave Indoor Firing Range, said business has been booming since September, when she first announced that she would no longer allow Muslims to utilize her services, as a matter of public safety.

She also said that the threats of lawsuits that have loomed since she announced the ban on Muslims have drifted away, the Daily Mail reports.

The American-Islamic Relations, for instance, recently called on Attorney General Eric Holder to look into her ban as a case of racial and religious discrimination, accusing Ms. Morgan of fueling "a hostile environment for ordinary Muslims in Arkansas," the Daily Mail reported. But Ms. Morgan said she's not backing down -- that such lawsuit threats have no teeth because Islam is not a genuine religion, worthy of constitutional protections, and that many Muslims want to kill people like her, she said, the news outlet reported.

In that sense, her ban is a "public safety" issue, she's said, in past interviews. And some attorneys agree that she stands on firm legal ground, particularly if she maintains her range is private -- which could therefore exempt it from certain federal civil rights regulations, the Daily Mail reported.

"We are dealing in lethal firearms," Ms. Morgan said to FoxNews.com. "I'm not going to let a Nazi shoot in here, or a Ku Klux Klan member in here, either."

Her message -- and ban -- has apparently been resonating with area gun enthusiasts.

Ms. Morgan said her range business has "quadrupled" since she first announced the ban on Muslims, in September 2014.

For more info:

Tuesday, January 27, 2015

Obama’s hug of Iran is a rebellion against God



If rebelling against tyranny is obeying God’s will – as both Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Jefferson stated – what exactly is President Obama doing when he reaches out to Iran with the equivalent of a White House hug? Answer: Leading America farther away from the safety and security of God’s grace.

Think about it.

In a speech before the Heritage Foundation, Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Arkansas) said the United States ought to enact “immediate and crippling sanctions” on Iran and quit the “sham nuclear negotiations,” the National Council of Resistance of Iran reported. Why?

“Iran is a radical, Islamist tyrannical regime … that has been killing Americans for 35 years,” said, the NCRI continued.

Cotton then cited Iran’s many offenses, including its repressive totalitarian government, its sponsorship of terrorism and terror groups the world over and its continued quest for nuclear weaponry. But Team Obama’s response to all these travesties has been conciliatory at best – an outright affiliation with evil at worst.

“U.S. negotiators have surrendered repeatedly to Iran’s demands, conceding a right to enrich uranium, allowing Iran to keep its plutonium-producing reactor, asking only that its centrifuges be disconnected instead of dismantled,” Cotton said. “In return for these concessions to Iran, the U.S. has given and will give Iran billions of dollars more in sanctions relief.”

Obama’s cave to Iran is so great that even his own political party is outraged.

Look at the exchange between Tony Blinken, deputy secretary of state, and Sen. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) during a recent Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Blinken admitted that the Obama administration wasn’t so concerned about shuttering Iran’s nuclear program as with striking an agreement that delays its development of nuclear weaponry – a stance that defies both logic and sanity. Or, as Menendez said: The Obama administration has “talking points that come straight out of Tehran.”

And after learning that it’s true, that Obama’s deal lets Iran enrich uranium and build as many plutonium light water reactors as desired, Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) weighed in with concern, saying such activities are “not consistent with a purely civilian program.”

No kidding.

There is not an eye in the international community that doesn’t blink in incredulity over the claim that Iran’s nuclear program is solely for peaceful, civilian purposes – except, it would seem, Obama’s. But his blinders are stubborn accouterments of his own doing. To the president, talk and diplomacy is the be-all of all foreign affairs – and the notion of labeling evil as evil, a queasy verbalization to be avoided at all costs.

But this is not the way to protect America from its enemies. You can’t cut a deal with the devil and expect good to come.

The matter of Iran strikes at the very core of nation’s founding: Either we are a country built on Judeo-Christian principles, emboldened by the very God who drove and inspired our founders to successfully fight for freedom against all odds – or we’re not. Either we’re a country that stands for righteousness, seizing the high moral ground that comes from knowledge and obedience to the very biblical principles that God bestowed on the leaders of His established nations – or we’re defeated, in all but admission.

Our leaders need to confront Iran with truth, first and foremost. The nation is evil, run by evil-doers, who seek to spread their evil into the West. The price for political correctness and falsehood is too great.

As William Penn, founder of Pennsylvania, said: “Those who will not be governed by God will be ruled by tyrants.”

Sunday, January 25, 2015

Colorado bakery under fire for refusing cake order with words, "God hates gays'

A Colorado bakery is facing fire for refusing a customer who wanted a cake that contained the words, "God hates gays."

Azucar Bakery's owner Marjorie Silva, told USA Today she received the order from Bill Jack -- who's the founder of the Christian group, Worldview -- back in March 2014. She said Mr. Jack also wanted the cake to include an image of two hand-holding men, with an 'X' drawn through them.

"After I read [the requested text], I was like, 'No way,'" Ms. Silva said to USA Today. "We're not doing this. This is just very discriminatory and hateful."

Mr. Jack, however filed a complaint with the Colorado Civil Rights Divison, alleging discrimination on the part of the bakery.

He said, KUSA-TV reported: "I believe I was discriminated against by the bakery based on my creed. As a result, I filed a complaint with the Colorado Civil Rights Division. Out of respect for the process, I will wait for the director to release his findings before making further comments."

Jeff Johnston, an issues analyst at Focus on the Family, based in Colorado Springs, Colorado, has said that his group supports the bakery and the right of the owner to exercise her First Amendment principles.

"This is a free speech issue and we support freedom of speech," he said, The Blaze reported. "It's also a religious or conscience issue -- the government should not force people to violate their core beliefs. Just as a Christian baker should not be required to create a cake for a same-sex ceremony, this baker should not be required to create a cake with a message that goes against her conscience."

Meanwhile, Ms. Silva claims that it's Mr. Jack who was "discriminating," she said, USA Today reported.

The Department of Regulatory Agencies has asked for an extension in the case, so it won't be resolved for at least a couple more months, USA Today said.


Saturday, January 24, 2015

Ted Cruz to oversee NASA – and the useful idiots are howling



Okay, so Sen. Ted Cruz has a new gig as chairman of the Senate Commerce Subcommittee on Science, Space and Competitiveness, and as such, will be the main politico in charge of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration.

To hear Democrats and liberals talk, you’d think the sky was falling. But why?

As Cruz pointed out in his statement about his appointment – entitled “Focus NASA on Its Core Mission: Exploring Space, and More of It” – his main goal is simply to return the U.S. space program to its once undisputed greatness.

“We have lost sight of that clarion call,” he said, referring to America’s past regard for space exploration as a “crucial front in the battle between freedom and tyranny.” And now? We hitch rides with the Russians to the International Space Station.

“The United States should work alongside our international partners, but not be dependent on them,” Cruz said. “We should once again lead the way for the world in space exploration.”

Agreed.

Really, all Cruz wants to do is turn back the clock to a time when America’s space exploration put exploration at the top of its mission list – above, say, special agendas. And it’s not as if his concerns about the agency are new. As far back as 2011, Rep. Lamar Smith called for federal investigations into the “politicization” of NASA and whether the space agency had been compromised by Democratic-fueled demands and its mission, usurped by President Obama’s utopian-style vision. Remember this?

NASA chief Charles Bolden told an Al-Jazeera crowd in mid-2010 that Obama charged him with three things – to inspire children to learn science and math; to expand the agency’s relations with other countries; and “perhaps foremost … to find a way to reach out to the Muslim world and … help them feel good about their historic contribution to science, math and engineering,” he said.

Fast-forward a bit to Obama’s 2013 full-court press for climate change regulations, and who emerges as one of his biggest fans? NASA.

“I have seen just how fragile our home planet it – and I’m committed to doing everything I can to help protect it,” said Boden, in a blog post that vowed NASA’s help in tracking Earth’s environmental degradations.

Wait a minute – isn’t NASA first and foremost a space exploration agency?

Cruz thinks so. But here’s where the fight gets really interesting – and the useful idiots of the left make their big splash.

The “We the People” section of the White House website touts not one, but two petitions aimed at removing Cruz from his oversight position of NASA. The first, with under 1,000 signatures, faults the Texas senator for proposed funding cuts for NASA, as well as for his “complete … disregard” of the EPA. The second, with nearly 35,000 signatures, calls for Cruz to be booted from his current NASA-oversight role, and to ban him serving on “any other science based committee.” The petition also labels Cruz as “scientifically illiterate,” and demands the White House sub in “a person worthy of the position.”

But how about a little political literacy – and awareness that the president of the United States is not a king who appoints members of Congress and committees to do executive bidding? Still, to the left, agenda trumps law, and hatred for Cruz apparently drowns out reason. What’s notable, though, is that tens of thousands of people would sign on to the petition in just a few short days – a sad commentary when a presidential election’s looming. Do these people actually vote?