COMPANIES AT WAR WITH THE CHURCH

TYRANNY BLOG copy

March 30th, 2016   By Mario Murillo

 

General Zod ordered them to activate the world engine.  Suddenly, downbursts of inconceivable power began squashing and pulverizing an entire city and its innocent citizens.   A wise scientist discerned what was happening—aliens are terraforming the earth.  Terraforming is a science fiction device that dates back to at least 1941.  Machines transform atmospheres so they can be colonized—essentially, absorbing an existing world in favor of a new matrix.

By now, many recognize this as a scene from the movie Man of Steel.  Last night wasn’t my first time to see the film.  Seeing it on television is not the same as a theater on a gigantic screen with deafening sound and a responsive audience.   It should have been an amusingly tepid affair—but for some reason—the terraforming scene disturbed me.  Now I know why.  It is because it is happening right now.

terraforming

Walt Disney Studios, American Airlines, Delta Airlines, Coca Cola, IBM, the NBA (to name a few) are and terraforming North Carolina and Georgia.  They are absorbing Christianity.  These corporations are pounding, pulverizing and eradicating an existing culture in favor of a new culture.

Their world engine says, “You will allow boys into the girl’s showers and bathrooms—you will not call homosexuality a sin from the pulpit—you are not allowed to operate a Christian adoption agency unless you place children in gay and lesbian homes—you will do this or we will blast your economy back to the stone age.”

If you believe their motivation is to advance equality and human rights…then you couldn’t sell bogus bonds to your mother.  It has nothing to do with rights.  It has nothing to do with equality.  It has everything to do with the world engine.

cared

If they cared about women’s rights and gay rights these corporations would stop doing business with Moslem countries where women are mutilated and gays are executed.  They would stop doing business with China because of gross human rights violations.   The world engine cannot say Islamic terror no matter how much blood flows.  It cannot call the mass extermination of Christians in the Middle East genocide.  Here is a headline that came out today:

Saudi government ‘wants to EXECUTE gay people who show their sexuality in public & online’

SAUDI law makers could impose the death penalty on gay people who show their sexuality in public and on social media, according to reports.  The government in the Sunni Kingdom is reportedly demanding tougher punishments on those found guilty and claimed social media has caused a boom in homosexuality.   According to Okaz newspaper, the last six months has seen 35 cases of homosexuality and 50 cases of cross-dressers as well as cases of “sexual perversion” in Saudi Arabia.

NONE OF THESE COMPANIES ARE TRYING TO PUNISH SAUDI ARABIA THE WAY THEY ARE PUNISHING GEORGIA AND NORTH CAROLINA

It is all about the world engine…a complicated device indeed.  This engine operates on a double standard.  Because of the World Engine, Mayor Ed Lee of San Francisco bans flights to North Carolina but does not ban murderers in San Francisco.   Kate Steinle was walking on a busy pier in San Francisco with her father when there was a single popping sound in the air. She fell to the ground, struck by a bullet, the victim of what police say appears to be a random killing. The man who fired the deadly shot—45-year-old Juan Francisco Lopez-Sanchez—an illegal alien, a repeat felon who has been deported five times to Mexico—but protected by S.F.’s sanctuary policy.

silence

The world engine is why you hear all about the horrors of Christianity and nothing about Islam.  Mosques face no economic threat from these corporations.   If this were about equality they would not be trampling freedom of speech and freedom of religion.  Even gay activist Milo Yiannopoulos is disgusted with the open persecution of Christians in the name of gay rights.

Since Moslems and illegal aliens vote democratic they are protected.  The world engine sees Christianity as the sole obstruction to its brave new world.  The world engine has decided that the one last unprotected and unrepresented group should be the Christians.  They are fair game for insults, illegal arrests search and seizure and financial tyranny.

What is the end game of the world engine?  To complete its terraforming, it must create a herd of low information—amoral—drug addicted—government dependent people.  To do so, the engine forms strange alliances.   Feminists and Moslems—Seeker pastors and atheists—greedy corporations and socialists—all natural enemies gleefully work together.  They are united by hate not by love.

What the companies are doing to Georgia and North Carolina is not human kindness but a cold cynical marketing scheme.  Right now hurting Christians sells.   If enough people felt strongly about the oppression of devil worshipers, we would have Satan day at Disneyland.  Why do politicians cave to anti-God policies?  Because opposing churches gets you reelected.   Why do seeker pastors refuse to stand with their brothers for righteousness?  Because by looking anti-biblical, anti-judgmental gets you a crowd.

The behavior of these corporations is not just illegal it is felony extortion and intimidation…they have called the church out.  They have declared war on us.  They are testing the early version of the mark of the beast.   Here is the most important thing to know: When you are in a war–you must know you are in a war–prepare like you are in a war and fight like you are in a war.

engine

This world engine can be a very easy excuse for a fearful church.  But we must not violate scripture and fashion a doctrine in order to justify our fear.  Certainly things are going to “wax worse and worse” but Jesus forever sealed the issue in Matthew 24:14 when He declared a worldwide impact of His Gospel before the world would be allowed to end.

In a segment of the church today it is fashionable to want revival.  It is “in” to talk revival talk.  Satan has not wished to bury revival talk but, rather, he wants to congratulate us for only saying we want it. He is amused by our pompous symbolic effort to bring revival.  The devil delights in the fact of our pride.  We are so pleased with our awareness of the needs for revival that it seems enough to just want it.

There is a young crop of Christians that is entirely different from swooning saints.  I told you in a recent letter that the youth will bring a Lion Revival!  These young Christians ask disturbing questions about why we always seem to want something that we never deliberately try to get.  If the church is not careful, we may be passed over in favor of this new breed of believers who don’t have our religious childhood diseases.

announce

II Chronicles 7:14 says, “If my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then will I hear from heaven and will forgive their sin and will heal their land.”   That is a promise that we have all heard and believed, but probably never realized its true significance.  A promise and instructions are embedded in that verse that will remove Satan’s vile talons from the throat of our nation.

The eyes of the Lord see everything but they focus on what is going on with His people.  Let us come before Him now, aware of our total helplessness.  Let us announce that we are His people and that we do not fear our time, but we fear the Lord, and we have come to stand before His presence on behalf of a new demonstration of His glory on earth.  Then we will see the barriers removed and the long-awaited revival explode!

Rise of the Conservative Latinos

latino conservatives

Rise of the Conservative Latinos

By Geraldo L. Cadava

 

WHY YOU SHOULD CARE

Democrats may want to dismiss Chris Christie’s success with Latino voters, but if they do, they may just miss out on one of the biggest and most influential voting blocks in 2016.

TED CRUZ IN 2016?

Elephant sitting steps with American flag

Chris Christie’s re-election as governor of New Jersey earlier this month sparked another round of speculation that he would run for president in 2016, and, this time around, that he might choose New Mexico’s Republican Governor Susana Martinez as his running mate. In the homestretch, Martinez stumped for Christie in areas of New Jersey densely populated by Latinos. Statewide, he won a majority of their votes, even more than the vaunted 40 percent that George W. Bush won in the 2004 presidential race.

Susana Martinez in blue suit speaking at podium

SOURCE: GETTY

Gov. Susana Martinez

Democrats dismissed Christie’s success among Latinos as an anomaly that was due to his charisma and praiseworthy response to Hurricane Sandy. They noted the different outcome in Virginia, where Democrat Terry McAuliffe defeated Republican Ken Cuccinelli, who drew attacks for mentioning rat control and immigration policy in the same breath. Perhaps such parries and thrusts are only public pronouncements, and Democratic strategists behind the scenes are dissecting what happened. I hope so, because counting on your opponents to screw up isn’t a sound political strategy.

Counting on your opponents to screw up isn’t a sound political strategy.

Republicans are eager to avoid an embarrassment in 2016 like the one they experienced in 2012. They attributed Mitt Romney’s defeat in no small part to his poor showing among Latinos. Almost the morning after, Republican National Committee chairman Reince Priebus began a hard and steady drumbeat calling for “Hispanic outreach,” a term that paints a picture of aimless Latino voters who are there for the plucking if candidates just show up. Last month, the RNC allocated $10 million to outreach, hiring directors such as Jennifer Sevilla Korn — the former director of the conservative Hispanic Leadership Network — and sending foot soldiers to more than a dozen states to convert Latinos.

So far, Senators Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz have captured most of the headlines, but with support from groups like the Republican National Hispanic Assembly, established in the late 1960s, and newer ones including the Latino National Republican Coalition and the Future Majority Caucus, scores of Latino conservatives have won elected positions across the country. The Future Majority Caucus wants to recruit more than 100 Latino Republicans to run for office in the near future, boasts about its multimillion-dollar fundraising successes and claims responsibility for helping to elect 15 new Latino Republicans in nine states in 2012 alone. This is the Latino conservative political machine at work.

Will a generally conservative platform that largely avoids appeals to the politics of ethnicity win the support of Latino voters?

As Latinos have spread across the country, so have Latino conservatives. Rep. Robert Cornejo hails from Missouri, Rep. Paul Espinosa from West Virginia, state Sen. Art Linares from Connecticut, and state Sen. Ernesto “Ernie” Lopez from Delaware. They’re lawyers, businesspeople and educators. Cornejo graduated from Washington University in St. Louis and is a partner at a law firm in Columbia. Espinosa is the general manager of a communications company and has served as president of a local Rotary Club and chamber of commerce. Before he ran for office, Linares volunteered for Sen. Marco Rubio. And Lopez is an administrator at the University of Delaware.

Thirty-something Rep. Marilinda Garcia of Salem, New Hampshire, is also on the way up, according to the RNC. She was first elected to the New Hampshire House of Representatives at the age of 23, after graduating from Tufts University. Like other young Latino Republicans, Garcia aspires to higher office and is expected to run for the U.S. congressional seat currently held by Rep. Annie Kuster, a Democrat.

Marco speaking, standing left side of frame

SOURCE: GETTY

Marco Rubio

Some younger Latino Republicans identify with the histories that shaped Latino conservatism during an earlier era. The 25-year-old Linares says he’s influenced by his grandparents’ escape from Cuba after the failed Bay of Pigs invasion in 1961. But most up-and-coming Latino Republicans walk in step with new-wave conservatism. They advocate policies indistinguishable from the mainstream or far right elements of their party: pro-growth business measures, lower taxes, smaller government, curtailed entitlements, pro-life, school choice, anti-Affordable Care Act. The list goes on, begging the question: What’s Latino about them at all?

Many seem to want to pull the GOP more toward the center on comprehensive immigration reform, a goal supported by some 80 percent of Latinos. But legislators such as Rep. Raúl Labrador of Idaho, who bailed on bipartisan deliberations this summer, cast doubt on even this mildly moderating influence. Others, including Governor Martinez of New Mexico and Gabriel Gomez of Massachusetts, who lost his bid for a U.S. Senate seat earlier this year, emphasized that their bootstrapping work ethic and traditional religious beliefs somehow stemmed from their Latino upbringing. On her website, Marilinda Garcia mentions her mixed Italian-American and Spanish-American heritage. But more often, conservative Latinos eschew their ethnicity — note the absence of accents over their names — and any discernable connections with something that might be called Latino politics.

Some younger Latino Republicans identify with the histories that shaped Latino conservatism during an earlier era.

Will a generally conservative platform that largely avoids appeals to the politics of ethnicity win the support of Latino voters? Perhaps. This is another reason to take Christie’s success among Latinos seriously. Many have noted that Latinos aren’t a politically coherent group. To win their support requires microtargeting specific Latino communities. President Obama used this strategy to great effect, placing distinct ads among Cubans and Puerto Ricans in Florida, for example.

Woman with american flag on her head in color.

SOURCE: JACK KURTZ/ZUMA PRESS/CORBIS

A woman uses an American flag for shade during an immigration reform march in Phoenix, October 2013.

Clearly, Democrats aren’t just sitting at home on their hands, watching a tide of Latino conservatives roll over them. They’re fighting for immigration reform, economic justice, educational opportunity and other things that many Latinos care about.

At the same time, Republicans still have a long way to go. Poll after poll suggests that Latinos view them as less sensitive to their needs than Democrats. Latinos hold them responsible for blocking immigration reform and causing the government shutdown.

But as part of Christie’s re-election campaign, a Mexican American from New Mexico appealed — apparently successfully — to the largely Puerto Rican and Dominican Latinos of New Jersey, where Mexicans and Mexican Americans account for only 14 percent of the Latino population. Might this suggest the potential of a generically conservative crossover appeal? If I were a Democratic strategist, I wouldn’t bet that it doesn’t.

Geraldo L. Cadava teaches Latino and U.S.-Mexico borderlands history at Northwestern University. He is the author of Standing on Common Ground: The Making of a Sunbelt Borderland.

Read more: Latinos and the Right | Fast forward | Ozymandias
Follow us: @ozy on Twitter | ozy on Facebook

KRAUTHAMMER: RUBIO IS MOST LIKELY TO WIN GOP NOMINATION

 Marco Rubio

KRAUTHAMMER: RUBIO IS MOST LIKELY TO WIN GOP NOMINATION

 Columnist Charles Krauthammer named Florida Senator Marco Rubio his pick as most likely to be the GOP nominee on Friday’s “Special Report” on the Fox News Channel.

Krauthammer was asked by fellow panelist Steve Hayes how he would allocate his money if he was given $100 to go Las Vegas and bet on who will be the nominee. Krauthammer put the most money, $40 on Rubio, with $30 going to Jeb Bush, $15 to Scott Walker, and the remaining $15 on booze. He added “he’s [Rubio] my underestimated dark horse candidate who threads his way, young, energetic. He’s got a program and I think if he runs against Hillary, the contrast say the vigor, the energy that Kennedy-esque idea will be be a major one.”

Amy Walter, National Editor of the Cook Political Report put the most money on Walker, giving him $40, with $25 going to Bush, and the remaining $35 split evenly among the entire field.

Hayes gave Walker and Rubio $30 each, $15 to Jeb Bush, and $10 to Ted Cruz, with the remaining $15 going to the field as a whole.

Follow Ian Hanchett on Twitter @IanHanchett

House Defunds Obamacare, Keeps Govt Open. Only Obama wants to shut down the government.

House Defunds Obamacare, Keeps Govt Open

Image: House Defunds Obamacare, Keeps Govt Open

Speaker of the House John Boehner is cheered on Sept. 20 after the House of Representatives passed a bill that would prevent a government shutdown while crippling Obamacare.

Friday, 20 Sep 2013 11:27 AM

The U.S. House voted to finance the federal government through mid-December and choke off funding for President Barack Obama’s healthcare law, setting up a showdown with the Senate and the White House.

The Republican-controlled House today passed, 230-189, a stopgap measure to fund government operations after current authority expires Sept. 30. The bill preserves across-the-board spending cuts at an annual rate of $986.3 billion and permanently defunds the Affordable Care Act.

“The fight to delay Obamacare doesn’t end next week. It keeps going on until we get it,” Representative Paul Ryan, a Wisconsin Republican and his party’s 2012 vice presidential nominee, told reporters today in Washington.

 

The spending measure now will be sent to the Senate where it will pass without defunding the healthcare law, Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada said yesterday. Obama administration officials said the president would veto the House bill if sent to him by Congress.

If the Obama administration and lawmakers can’t agree on the stopgap funding, most, though not all, operations would come to a halt in less than two weeks. Republicans are using the stopgap spending bill as a vehicle to try to choke off funds for the health program the party has opposed since 2009.

Sen. Ted Cruz, a Texas Republican and chief Senate opponent of the health law, said he’s willing to do “everything necessary and anything possible,” including holding a filibuster, to block action on the spending measure as a way to end funding for the health-care law.

The Senate is expected to start considering the legislation on Sept. 23 with goal of finishing by Sept. 26.

Procedural Tactic

Democratic leaders are considering a procedural tactic that would put Cruz and his allies in an awkward spot and upend their efforts.

Under Senate rules, they could have a simple majority vote that would strip the health-care defunding language once they end debate on the House measure.

House Republicans haven’t decided how to proceed once the Senate passes the measure after stripping out the health language.

If Boehner allows the Senate bill to proceed, he would need enough Democratic votes join Republicans to pass it and avoid a government shutdown.

House Republican leaders also could decide to continue revising the measure and send the amended version back to the Senate for a vote, complicating the process and raising the risk of a shutdown as time runs out.

Debt Ceiling

The House spending measure also includes a provision directing the Treasury on how to prioritize payments if the debt ceiling is breached.

House Republicans said today they’d start working next week on legislation to raise the nation’s debt limit and attach a one-year delay in the health law, cuts to entitlement programs and approval for the Keystone XL pipeline.

“The next 10 days are very important for our country,” said Representative Tim Graves, a Georgia Republican, who has pushed for defunding the health-care law.

Ryan of Wisconsin said the measures Republicans will attach would reduce the U.S. budget deficit in the long term.

Related article:

Rubio: Only Obama Wants to Shut Down Government

Rubio

Wednesday, 18 Sep 2013 01:51 PM

By Jim Meyers and John Bachman

Republicans should do “anything and everything” to prevent the “disaster” of Obamacare, Sen. Marco Rubio tells Newsmax. But he insists it can be done without shutting down the government.

The Florida Republican asserts that President Barack Obama actually wants a government shutdown to achieve a “political win,” and the administration is going to fight to the bitter end to defend its healthcare reforms.

Elected in 2010, Rubio is considered a rising star in the Republican Party. He delivered the GOP’s response to Obama’s State of the Union address in February and has been mentioned as a presidential candidate in 2016.

 

His committee assignments include the Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship.

In an exclusive interview Wednesday with Newsmax TV, Rubio discusses efforts to stop Obamacare and the possibility of a government shutdown.

“Every single member of the Republican conference agrees that Obamacare should be stopped, but the disagreement is about the tactic,” he says. “I’m not in favor of shutting down the government. The president appears now politically to be in favor of shutting down the government.

“I’m in favor of funding the government at the levels that were agreed to last year in the Budget Control Act and not spending a single penny more of hardworking taxpayer dollars on a disaster, which is Obamacare.

“Actually, the administration has admitted it’s a disaster because they’ve had to delay major portions of it. Labor unions that strongly supported Obamacare are now asking to be exempted from it.

“So we should be doing anything and everything we can to prevent this law from going into effect, because once it starts to hurt people, it’s going to hurt our economy in ways that are very difficult to undo later.”

The House will pass a plan to delay and defund Obamacare but to keep the government  open, Speaker John Boehner says.

“That’s very positive news,” says Rubio. “It’s now going to call attention to the fact that we can keep the government open, we can fund the government, but we don’t have to shut down the government, and we don’t have to fund Obamacare.

“It’s the president who’s threatening to shut down the government because he is saying, and it’s the position his allies in the Senate so far have taken, that unless they fund Obamacare, they won’t fund the government.

“The president’s basically looking for a political win, and I guess his political people have told him that this is a political win: shut down the government and blame the Republicans. The problem is that’s not the Republican position.”

obama_angry_2012_8_6

Rubio predicted that the House will pass a short-term budget to keep the government running.

“If in fact the government shuts down, it will be unfortunately because the president and his allies believe that Obamacare is so important to them that they are willing to shut down the government over it.

“That’s shortsighted, primarily because they are going to fight to the end to defend a disaster, something that even their own allies and labor unions are asking to be let out from.”

 

It’s a no brainer…Conservatives must vote to defund Obamacare. Here’s why.

Conservatives and the Fight to Defund Obamacare

By 

train tax insertSome in Washington claim that defunding Obamacare would not prevent the implementation or enforcement of the law’s statutory requirements and new regulations. They seem to be unaware of the federal Antideficiency Act (ADA), which makes it illegal to spend money in excess of appropriations.

If a fight over such a defunding provision led to a shutdown of the government, not all elements of the law could be implemented. Moreover, supporters of Obamacare would be put in the unenviable position of trying to explain why they are willing to interrupt the normal functioning of the federal government in order to fund an unworkable law that Americans do not like and do not want to see implemented.

Movement to Defund

Senators Ted Cruz (R–TX) and Mike Lee (R–UT) have been in the news with their Defund Obamacare Act (S. 1292), which Representative Tom Graves (R–GA) has also introduced in the House as H.R. 2682. One of their proposals is to attach it to a must-pass continuing resolution (CR) before the federal government runs out of money on October 1. Under this bill, “no Federal funds shall be made available to carry out any provisions” of Obamacare. No “entitlement to benefits under any provision of” Obamacare will remain in effect, and all “unobligated balances” will be rescinded.

Nancy

No one disputes that Obamacare would stay on the books and that defunding would not change the existing law. But all federal funds already appropriated for the implementation and enforcement of Obamacare could not be used by any federal agency to take any action—whether it is issuing new regulations or filing an enforcement action against an individual or an employer for not complying with the new health insurance mandates. The termination of all “entitlement to benefits” would stop the automatic appropriation of new entitlement spending for things like the law’s Medicaid expansion. The rescission of “unobligated benefits” would return to the Treasury appropriated funds that have not yet been spent on items such as the payment of outside contractors—navigators—for enrolling participants in Obamacare, although it would probably not relieve the government of the contractual obligation to pay for services already rendered.

There is no question that such a defunding bill can stop entitlement spending. The Hyde Amendment, which bans federal funding of abortions and is part of yearly discretionary appropriations bills, has prevented federal funds in the Medicaid entitlement program from being used for abortion coverage for almost four decades.

Antideficiency Act

This type of appropriations and funding ban is given teeth by the ADA,[1] which prohibits federal employees from:

  • Making or authorizing any expenditure or obligation in excess of the amount available in an appropriation or fund unless authorized by law; or
  • Involving the government in any obligation to pay money before funds have been appropriated for that purpose unless otherwise allowed by law.

Section 1342 of the ADA prohibits federal employees from accepting voluntary services or employing personal services not authorized by law. That is one of the reasons that federal employees have to be furloughed whenever Congress fails to pass a continuing resolution—federal employees cannot volunteer their services even if they want to, and the government cannot accept outside assistance.

Obamacare poison

The ADA has both administrative and criminal penalties as well as a notice requirement. Section 1349 subjects federal employees to “administrative discipline” including “suspension from duty without pay or removal from office.” They can be fined or go to jail: Section 1350 imposes a fine of up to $5,000 and two years in jail. Under Section 1351, the head of any federal agency violating the ADA has to “report immediately to the President and Congress all relevant facts and a statement of actions taken” if anyone in the agency has violated the ADA through unauthorized spending. Pursuant to instructions issued by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), that report has to include the actions taken to correct the ADA violation.

Federal bureaucrats are well aware of the ADA, and its penalties deter violations.

If a Shutdown Occurs

The smartest thing the House of Representatives could do is pass a CR as soon as possible that funds the government with the exception of Obamacare. That would force the President and his supporters to explain why they would shut down the government to fund an unfair, unaffordable, and highly unpopular law that is so unworkable that the Administration has itself admitted it cannot manage to implement major portions on time such as the employer mandate to provide insurance.

Senator Richard Burr (R–NC) calls this approach “dumb.” Senator Tom Coburn (R–OK) is circulating a July 2013 research memorandum from the Congressional Research Service (CRS) that concludes that many aspects of Obamacare could continue to be funded despite the ADA if there is a government shutdown.[2] But the CRS memo assumes there is no defunding language passed (as is being proposed) and that the government simply shuts down because there is no CR.

There is an exception in Section 1342 of the ADA for “emergencies involving the safety of human life or the protection of property,” which as the CRS correctly notes, has been “broadly” read by OMB and the Justice Department to give executive agencies a certain amount of discretion over how to spend their remaining funds during a government shutdown. But in 1990, Congress amended Section 1342 in response to a 1981 opinion issued by Attorney General Benjamin R. Civiletti to make it clear that “emergencies” do “not include ongoing, regular functions of government, the suspension of which would not imminently threaten the safety of human life or the protection of property.”

The CRS concludes, based solely on press reports, that if the government shuts down, the Administration would likely “rely on alternative sources of funding” to continue “substantial” implementation of Obamacare. But to do that during a shutdown, the Administration could only provide funds that are not dependent on annual discretionary appropriations or fit within the exceptions to the ADA outlined in the CRS memorandum.

The CRS says, for example, that “cost-sharing payments to health plans” from Treasury would likely not be excepted. The CRS also speculates that the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) might be able to keep its employees involved in Obamacare on payroll, comparing it to the Social Security Administration keeping its employees on payroll during the shutdown fights of 1995–1996 because they were, “by necessary implication,” integral to making entitlement payments.

ted copy

But this analogy may not work with the Obamacare insurance exchanges, since they are not an entitlement and are not funded by mandatory spending. The entitlement comes through the insurance subsidies, and while IRS employees may be essential to administer the subsidies, HHS employees might not necessarily be essential to administer the exchanges.

The point is that even if a government shutdown occurs without a defunding bill, while the Administration may have some funding available from other sources to continue to implement parts of Obamacare that fall within exceptions to the ADA, it would not be able to legally implement all of the many different parts of the law, and it is doubtful it would have the funds to implement all of the law.

Making Collapse More Likely

In the absence of full repeal, Americans will be better off if any parts of Obamacare are stopped from going into effect. And the more parts of the law that are delayed because of a government shutdown, defunding, or the Obama Administration’s own incompetence, the more likely it is that this horrendously complicated law, which is built on many different interdependent factors, will fall apart like a house of cards.

Hans A. von Spakovsky is a Senior Legal Fellow in Edwin Meese III Center for Legal and Judicial Studies at The Heritage Foundation.

America is waking up to Obama’s cynical racial and religious profiling.

Romeike-Family-jpg

America is waking up to Obama’s cynical racial and religious profiling.

By Mario Murillo

Jesus said, “They strain at a gnat and swallow a camel.”  

First the camel:   Why are they violently pressing for amnesty for 11 million immigrants who are here illegally?  Why are they so intent on paying all of their bills, including free abortions?  Why are they delirious to grant them the college tuition that they took away from our men and women in uniform?

It is all about demographics, er, democrats.   Obama wants America to veer left and remain dependent on Government money.  To do this he must find new democratic voters.  His means to this end is pure racial and religious profiling.  He believes that Latino Catholics will become democratic voters and suspects that white Protestants and military families will not.  He is abusing his power through the Department of Justice to reach his goal.

This leads us to the gnat.  Obama is the champion of immigration right?  Not when you are white, protestant and German.

The Romeikes a German Christian family that home schools their children were granted asylum in 2010 by Immigration Judge Lawrence O. Burman after fleeing their native Germany where they were subjected to criminal prosecution for homeschooling their children, a practice which is largely illegal in Germany.

Holder

Eric Holder, while keen on flooding American with illegal immigrants does seem to want even one white Christian family to come here legally.  He went after them with a vengeance.  Finally, Judge Burman’s decision was overturned by the Board of Immigration Appeals in 2012. Represented by HSLDA, the Romeikes appealed the decision, but a three-judge panel of the Sixth Circuit issued a unanimous decision against the family on April 23rd.

On May 28th, Michael Farris, founder and chairman of Home School Legal Defense Association , filed an appeal to the entire 15-judge panel of the Sixth Circuit. Farris states that the brief for the appeal “focuses considerable attention on the fact that the [three-judge] panel never mentions the German high court’s admission that Germany’s ban on homeschooling is motivated by the desire to suppress religious and philosophical ‘parallel societies.’”

In addition, Farris asserts, “The panel also never mentions that the German government targets homeschoolers in order to prevent ‘the damage to the children, which is occurring through the continued exclusive teaching of the children of the mother at home.’”

“It’s one thing to enforce truancy laws because a child refuses to go to school,” said Farris. “It’s another thing to force children to go to school because the German government doesn’t want religious or philosophical parallel societies to exist.”

obama-wants-to

HSLDA also initiated a White House petition that has received nearly 125,000 signatures, urging the Obama administration not to deport the Romeike family.

The weirdness of the White House is not lost on Americans.  An outrage has come on the heels of several scandals with Benghazi, the IRS, and Fox News.

A White House petition with nearly 125,000 signatures, is urging the Obama administration not to deport the Romeike family.

Not only this, but William Estrada, Director of Federal Relations of the HSLDA, said that Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) has taken the lead in the Senate to draft a letter to Attorney General Eric Holder, urging him to allow the Romeike family asylum in the United States.

With all of the heat that Holder is taking right now including the specter of being prosecuted for perjury, you better believe he is going to rethink ignoring another possible scandal.

Estrada said that Rubio has joined with Sens. Roy Blunt (R-MO) and Tim Scott (R-SC) to move ahead with a letter that will complement one that has already been sent to Holder from members of the House. Led by Rep. Marlin Stutzman (R-IN), a coalition of 27 congressmen have signed a letter urging the Department of Justice to rescind an order to deport the Romeikes.

“Sens. Rubio, Blunt, and Scott have all been very supportive,” said Estrada. “This is a family seeking freedom in this country–they are true pilgrims. These are the kinds of people we want to welcome in this country, those who value freedom.”

Americans are waking up to the insanity of socialism and the cold cynical way that Obama has sought to expand his power.

Prayer is the key!  We are watching agenda after agenda to dismantle America being foiled by prayer.  Keep praying and keep speaking out!