Democrats Think Muslims Worse Off Here Than Christians Are In Muslim World

worse-off

It’s True! Democrats Think Muslims Worse Off Here Than Christians Are In Muslim World.  Explain to me what liberalism does to your brain…

Democrats Think Muslims Worse Off Here Than Christians Are In Muslim World

Rasmussen Reports Tuesday, February 07, 2017

 

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey finds that 62% of Likely U.S. Voters believe most Christians living in the Islamic world are treated unfairly because of their religion. Just 17% disagree, while 21% more are undecided.

These findings have changed little in surveys since early 2015.

By comparison, 39% feel most Muslims living in the United States are treated unfairly because of their religion. That’s up from 31% last year and is the highest finding in surveys to date.  A plurality (46%) still believes Muslims are not treated unfairly because of their faith, while 15% more are not sure.

Fifty-six percent (56%) of Democrats, however, believe most Muslims in this country are mistreated, a view shared by only 22% of Republicans and 39% of voters not affiliated with either major party. Fewer Democrats (47%) think most Christians are mistreated in the Islamic world, compared to 76% of GOP voters and 64% of unaffiliateds.

The survey of 1,000 Likely Voters was conducted on February 2 and 5, 2017 by Rasmussen Reports. The margin of sampling error is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence. Field work for all Rasmussen Reports surveys is conducted by Pulse Opinion Research, LLC. See methodology.

Most voters favor the president’s temporary ban on refugees and on visas for those from seven Muslim-majority countries that the State Department views as terrorist havens. Trump wants to ensure that the government can adequately screen out potential terrorists before letting any more newcomers into the country.

Majorities of voters across most demographic groups agree that most Christians living in the Islamic world are treated unfairly because of their religion.

Women are more likely than men to think most American Muslims are mistreated here but less likely to believe Christians are mistreated in the Islamic world.

egyptian-christians-persecuted

Nearly as many voters under 40 think most Muslims are mistreated in America (51%) as think most Christians are mistreated in the Muslim world (57%). Older voters by a two-to-one margin believe the treatment of Christians in the Muslim world is worse than that of Muslims in this country.

A majority of black voters (52%) believe most Muslims here are unfairly treated, compared to 37% of whites and 42% of other minority voters.

Among voters who do not believe Muslims here as mistreated, 76% say most Christians living in the Islamic world are persecuted. Among those who feel most Muslims in America are mistreated, only 56% agree that most Christians suffer in Muslim countries.

The United States remains a majority Christian nation.  But 94% of voters also rate freedom of religion as an important right, including 80% who say it is Very Important.

28671148

Following the massacre by a Muslim terrorist at an Orlando nightclub last June, only 21% of all voters said the Islamic community in this country has been vocal enough in its condemnation of terrorist attacks.  Forty-nine percent (49%) think Islam as practiced today encourages violence more than most other religions, and 71% say Islamic religious leaders need to do more to emphasize the peaceful beliefs of their faith.

Most voters continue to believe the United States is at war with radical Islamic terrorism.

Boom! Justice Department demolishes case against Trump order

President-elect Donald Trump speaks at the USA Thank You Tour 2016 at the Giant Center on December 15, 2016 in Hershey, Pennsylvania.  / AFP / Don EMMERT        (Photo credit should read DON EMMERT/AFP/Getty Images)

James Robart, the U.S. district judge in Washington State, offered little explanation for his decision to stop President Trump’s executive order temporarily suspending non-American entry from seven terror-plagued countries. Robart simply declared his belief that Washington State, which in its lawsuit against Trump argued that the order is both illegal and unconstitutional, would likely win the case when it is tried.

 

Justice Department demolishes case against Trump order

By BYRON YORK (@BYRONYORK) • 2/5/17 7:31 PM

James Robart, the U.S. district judge in Washington State, offered little explanation for his decision to stop President Trump’s executive order temporarily suspending non-American entry from seven terror-plagued countries. Robart simply declared his belief that Washington State, which in its lawsuit against Trump argued that the order is both illegal and unconstitutional, would likely win the case when it is tried.

Now the government has answered Robart, and unlike the judge, Justice Department lawyers have produced a point-by-point demolition of Washington State’s claims. Indeed, for all except the most partisan, it is likely impossible to read the Washington State lawsuit, plus Robart’s brief comments and writing on the matter, plus the Justice Department’s response, and not come away with the conclusion that the Trump order is on sound legal and constitutional ground.

Beginning with the big picture, the Justice Department argued that Robart’s restraining order violates the separation of powers, encroaches on the president’s constitutional and legal authority in the areas of foreign affairs, national security, and immigration, and “second-guesses the president’s national security judgment” about risks faced by the United States.

Indeed, in court last week, Robart suggested that he, Robart, knows as much, or perhaps more, than the president about the current state of the terrorist threat in Yemen, Somalia, Libya, and other violence-plagued countries. In an exchange with Justice Department lawyer Michelle Bennett, Robart asked, “How many arrests have there been of foreign nationals for those seven countries since 9/11?”

“Your Honor, I don’t have that information,” said Bennett.

“Let me tell you,” said Robart. “The answer to that is none, as best I can tell. So, I mean, you’re here arguing on behalf of someone [President Trump] that says: We have to protect the United States from these individuals coming from these countries, and there’s no support for that.”

Perhaps Robart has been briefed by the intelligence community on conditions in Yemen, Somalia, Libya, and the rest. Perhaps Robart has received the President’s Daily Brief. Perhaps not. In any event, the Justice Department argued — reasonably but not successfully — that it is the president, and not a U.S. District Court judge in the Western District of Washington State, who has the knowledge and the authority to make such decisions.

“Your Honor, I think the point is that because this is a question of foreign affairs, because this is an area where Congress has delegated authority to the president to make these determinations, it’s the president that gets to make the determinations,” Bennett said. “And the court doesn’t have authority to look behind those determinations.”

Robart rejected that position outright. Later, in its emergency brief filed Saturday night with the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco, the government argued that a U.S. District Court judge has no legal right to stop a presidential action in which the president exercised his own constitutional power to conduct foreign policy, as well as power delegated by him to Congress in the area of immigration. The political branches of government have plenary authority over those areas, the government argued, citing cases from 1950, 1952, and 1999:

Judicial second-guessing of the president’s determination that a temporary suspension of entry of certain classes of aliens was necessary at this time to protect national security would constitute an impermissible intrusion on the political branches’ plenary constitutional authority over foreign affairs, national security, and immigration. See, e.g., Harisiades v. Shaughnessy, 342 U.S. 580, 588-89 (1952) (“[A]ny policy toward aliens is vitally and intricately interwoven with contemporaneous policies in regard to the conduct of foreign relations, the war power, and the maintenance of a republican form of government.”). “[I]t is not within the province of any court, unless expressly authorized by law, to review the determination of the political branch of the Government to exclude a given alien.” Knauff, 338 U.S. at 543; see also INS v. Aguirre-Aguirre, 526 U.S. 415, 425 (1999).

In addition, the government argued, “courts are particularly ill-equipped to second-guess the president’s prospective judgment about future risks.” The reason: “Unlike the president, courts do not have access to classified information about the threat posed by terrorist organizations operating in particular nations, the efforts of those organizations to infiltrate the United States, or gaps in the vetting process.”

The government brief supported the president’s decision on both legal and constitutional grounds, starting with the law. And that starts with the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, which states:

Whenever the president finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate.

Quoting cases from 2016 and 1977, the Justice Department argued that, specifically in the context of immigration, “the Supreme Court has ‘long recognized the power to expel or exclude aliens as a fundamental sovereign attribute exercised by the government’s political departments largely immune from judicial control.’” “When Congress delegates this plenary power to the executive, the executive’s decisions are likewise generally shielded from administrative or judicial review.” BOOM!

OBAMA OPERATIVE HINTS AT MILITARY COUP

coup

“A former Defense Department official under the Obama administration has raised the specter of a military coup to remove President Donald Trump from power.

OBAMA OPERATIVE HINTS AT MILITARY COUP

“A former Defense Department official under the Obama administration has raised the specter of a military coup to remove President Donald Trump from power.   In an editorial penned for Foreign Policy, senior Pentagon policy official Rosa Brooks publicly suggested a military insurrection against the Trump administration may be the only option to oust one of the most divisive presidents in American history.

“Donald Trump’s first week as president has made it all too clear: Yes, he is as crazy as everyone feared,” Ms. Brooks wrote. “[One] possibility is one that until recently I would have said was unthinkable in the United States of America: a military coup, or at least a refusal by military leaders to obey certain orders.”

For the first time in her career in public service, including three years as senior counselor to the Pentagon’s policy chief from 2009 to 2011, “I can imagine plausible scenarios in which senior military officials might simply tell the president: ‘No, sir. We’re not doing that.’” -Carlo Muñoz – The Washington Times – Thursday, February 2, 2017

In my vigilant effort to keep you informed—not with hysteria or extremism but facts—I submit this crucial information to you.  We are witnessing a joint effort by the left to overrule your vote and topple our government.

The riots are not by accident.  The incessant railings from Movie Stars, Pop Stars are scripted for maximum impact.  We are watching a concerted effort to take down of the Constitution of the United States.

Anarchy is a part of the plan.  Democrats staying away from committee meetings to stop Trump appointments is part of the plan.  Placing operatives to leak information from the White House are a part of the plan.

Even the Super Bowl is not safe…Lady Gaga will use her half time performance at the Super Bowl to rail against our values, against you, me, and our newly elected president.

Look for rioters to take to the streets—burning and looting their way across America—with the tacit approval of the Democratic Party.  In the name of equality, they will go after our rights.  In the name of justice, they will practice total lawlessness.

How poignant is it that the rioters in Berkeley who snuffed out free speech were holding signs that said “Hate free Zone?”   They also did something prophetic: They screamed against fascism by practicing fascism.  No one can verify the origin of this statement but it certainly fits the current situation: “The fascists of the future will call themselves anti-fascists.”  (For some reason the left truly hates that quote and tries to call it right wing extremism).

fascists

The left understands that if the Supreme Court is balanced by Conservatives, the left will lose power for at least a generation.  Their goal is clear: Discredit Trump and force their way to power.

If ever you prayed for our president, pray for him now.  Think of this…there have been 12,000 tweets in the last 24 hours calling for his assassination.   How is that possible without advance planning?

What I am about to say will never appear in a Christian Magazine.  You will never hear this in a mega Church pulpit.  I will—once again—be accused of abandoning my calling.   Many leaders will totally shy away from the words I am about to speak:

THE AMERICAN CHURCH HAS BEEN CALLED OUT AND SHE FALLING BACK ASLEEP.  It has only been days since God granted a reprieve from certain destruction and already pastors have fallen back into passivity and lukewarm ministry.  Never forget, it was the people in the pew that put Trump in office.  This movement was not led by a majority of pastors.  Most sat it out and only complimented Trump only after they saw the ground swell of support.  Now that the heat is on, they are scurrying back to their safe place.

We are faced with the greatest threat to freedom of our lifetime.  How will we explain to our children and grandchildren—who will live under this tyranny—that we did nothing?

So, who am I to say anything?  I am not the famous leader of a denomination or a Christian movement.  I am just a simple man with a simple voice.

Unlike some of your favorites, I am a preacher beholden to no one but Jesus.  I do not have the clout of others, but I do have the courage.   It is time for Christian leaders to condemn this anarchy with one voice.   It is time for true awakening.  It is time for reformation.  It is time for the Word of God to be loudly and majestically declared to a sick and confused generation.

THE DEMOCRATS ARE DIGGING THEIR OWN GRAVE

digging

My prediction is that Dems are digging their own grave and their revolt against his legitimacy will, in the short term at least, boost Trump’s popularity. Most Americans will conclude he is honestly trying to fulfill the mandate he won and that the fevered rush to destroy him is neither principled nor patriotic.

THE DEMOCRATS ARE DIGGING THEIR OWN GRAVE

By Michael Goodwin

Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi, the top Dems in Congress, led a raucous demonstration Monday night, as if they are community organizers. And Obama couldn’t bear the irrelevance after eight days out of office and felt compelled to encourage disruptions.

This is Third World behavior and it’s now the M.O. of one of America’s two political parties.

Then there’s California, the epicenter of Dem strength. Radicals there, spurred on by pro-Mexico immigrants, are ginning up an effort to split from the United States and they might get a proposal on the ballot. I say we take their wine and let them go.

If California secedes and its 55 electoral votes come off the board, Dems will never win another American election. On the other hand, Hillary Clinton could become president of the breakaway state and the rest of us would be free of the Clinton stain.

cali_sink

Secession is one way the swamp could drain itself. Sally Yates’ way is another.

The acting attorney general was rightfully sacked the instant after she climbed a soapbox and refused to defend Trump’s executive order in court. It would have been a more admirable gesture if she had the decency to resign. Instead, she thought she could defy the president and keep the job.

Her choice was not a minor act of insubordination. It was a public challenge to the constitutional authority of the president, a power left to Congress and the judiciary.

As a result, she was shunned and hid in disgrace. Oh, wait, that’s what would happen in a better world.

In this one, Democrats hailed her as a “patriot” amid predictions a political star is born.

My prediction is that Dems are digging their own grave and their revolt against his legitimacy will, in the short term at least, boost Trump’s popularity. Most Americans will conclude he is honestly trying to fulfill the mandate he won and that the fevered rush to destroy him is neither principled nor patriotic.

There is a catch: Our cultural impatience won’t give Trump endless time or big room for error. He must pick his fights with discretion and wage them with smart, methodical moves that bring clear results.

Equally key, he can’t become a prisoner of Washington. While social media is important, he must get out of town regularly to meet people where they live and remind them that he’s fighting their fights.

He should continue to court core Democrats, especially members of manufacturing unions and open-minded black and Latino voters.

If he does all that, and if he’s lucky, America will be great again. That’s what matters.

Donald Trump: Working to improve the lives of people who hate him

working

Donald Trump is working to improve the lives of those who hate him.  He is working to make life better for every demographic group that is calling for his removal and even his death.

Donald Trump: Working to improve the lives of people who hate him

Donald Trump is working to improve the lives of those who hate him.  He is working to make life better for every demographic group that is calling for his removal and even his death.

Even though only 8% of blacks voted for him and many black leaders vilify him, he is working to reduce crime, fix crumbling streets and buildings and bring real jobs and real hope to the inner city…I can see why you hate him.

He is working to improve the lives of women.  He built a multi-billion-dollar empire on a system of merit that promoted men and women equally.  He wants to make the workplace family friendly with maternity leaves that are stronger than our current federal law.

He wants to get government off the back of small business—women are the fastest growing group of small business owners.  I can see why women don stupid hats and cuss him out and call him Hitler.

Donald Trump is working for the native people of America.  No, the pipeline from Canada will not go through your burial grounds.  The president wants to make us energy independent so our enemies cannot turn our nation into a burial ground.

The President is working for the environmentalists who hate him.  Everyone knows the future is in renewable energy but we need a bridge to that future.  They remind me of the new-age midwives who want women to give birth cold-turkey just to feel all the pain. Environmentalists want to shut down all fossil fuels and create calamity for the rest of us—especially poor people.

A lot of these tree huggers don’t have to drive a semi to feed their family.  They will fly around in private jets polluting the air while they lecture they poor fighting to get to work in the only car they can afford.  Refusing to build this bridge to renewable energy is a great way to kill the mother and the baby.

He is working for the poor by securing our borders.  When a criminal or a terrorist enters our country where do they go?  They immediately set up shop in the inner city.  They take the jobs from those who need them most—they plan their mischief in the ghetto.  I can see why Americans hate Trump…he is putting them first.

When will you wake up from your liberal media induced coma?  Obama had eight years to make black lives matter in Chicago.  He could have sent in the national guard and stopped the killing.  He was more concerned about Syrian refugees than you—I can see why you love him.

To the overwhelming number of millennials who live in your parent’s basement: I can see why you love Obama, he was more militant about putting men in women’s restrooms that he was about putting you in a real career.

And finally, to all of you celebrity Pastors still afraid of support Trump because he is not “pastor” material, let me say this: Would you stay in a church where half of the people lied about you every day and wanted you out.  Would you—knowing there were greener pastures, a bigger church with a higher salary and more adulation—stay and serve?

Government work?  Trump didn’t need it.  But tell me, where else could Obama have gone?  Can you see Barack trying to build a business in New York City?  He couldn’t do anything but government…and, in my opinion, he was deplorable in government—buttressed by the fantasies of the liberal left.

With all bias against him and the massive unfairness heaped on him…Trump still wants to make America great.  How easily—Mr. celebrity pastor—could Trump say, “the heck with all this, I don’t need this for me and my family.

There are many areas Donald Trump needs to grow spiritually but in one area he has zoomed ahead of most preachers: Matthew 5: 44 “But I say to you, love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who spitefully use you and persecute you…”

Here’s a list of what Trump did in just 60 minutes as president

sixty-minutes

In case you are wondering if Trump will keep his promises…

 

In the first hour as president he did the following:

He rolled back an 11th-hour Obama administration rule that lowered home borrowers’ mortgage insurance costs.

The Federal Housing Authority uses that money to underwrite banks when low-income – and therefore high-risk – borrowers default on their loans.

Republicans argue that unless the FHA has significant cash reserves, all taxpayers including those with no stake in the housing market would be forced to pay for bailouts.

This happened in 2013, when the FHA required a $1.7 billion taxpayer cash infusion to keep going.

Back at the White House before a string of three inaugural balls, the new president inked formal commissions for a pair of retired Marine Corps general whom the U.S. Senate confirmed in their new cabinet roles.

Vice President Mike Pence swore them both in immediately.

Retired Gen. James Mattis is now the U.S. secretary of Defense. Retired Gen. John Kelly is secretary of Homeland Security.

Just as consequential were a pair of orders marking the Trump administration’s first firepower volley against Obamacare and signaling a massive, government-wide regulatory freeze.

The Obamacare executive order directs government departments and administrators to limit the cost of complying with the Affordable Care Act in every way possible while preparing for a Republican-dominated Congress to repeal and replace the law.

The regulatory memo, in the form of a memorandum from White House Chief of Staff Reince Priebus, orders federal agencies to cancel new regulations that haven’t yet been officially published and to delay for 60 days all those that are in place but haven’t yet taken effect.

It also orders bureaucrats to stop submitting most new regulations without first seeking White House approval.

Trump pledged during his campaign that he would pare back the American regulatory state in order to liberate the financial, energy and manufacturing sectors.

He also vowed to eliminate two federal regulations for every new one that takes effect.

 

LOOK AT WHAT TRUMP HAS JUST DONE ABOUT OBAMACARE

action
President Donald Trump directed government agencies on Friday to freeze regulations and take steps to weaken Obamacare, using his first hours in the White House to make good on a campaign promise to start dismantling his predecessor’s healthcare law.

By Jeff Mason and Roberta Rampton | WASHINGTON

President Donald Trump directed government agencies on Friday to freeze regulations and take steps to weaken Obamacare, using his first hours in the White House to make good on a campaign promise to start dismantling his predecessor’s healthcare law.

Heading into the Oval Office shortly after the conclusion of his inaugural parade, Trump signed an order on the Affordable Care Act that urged government departments to “waive, defer, grant exemptions from, or delay the implementation” of provisions that imposed fiscal burdens on states, companies or individuals.

It also called for efforts to give states greater flexibility in implementing healthcare programs while developing “a free and open market in interstate commerce for the offering of healthcare services and health insurance.”

Health experts had speculated that Trump could expand exemptions from the so-called individual mandate, which requires Americans to carry insurance or face a penalty, or the requirement that employers offer coverage.

President Donald Trump is joined by the Congressional leadership and his family before formally signing his cabinet nominations into law, in the President's Room of the Senate, at the Capitol in Washington, January 20, 2017. From left are Vice President Mike Pence, the president's wife Melania Trump, their son Barron Trump, and Speaker of the House Paul Ryan, R-Wis. REUTERS/J. Scott Applewhite/Pool
President Donald Trump is joined by the Congressional leadership and his family before formally signing his cabinet nominations into law, in the President’s Room of the Senate, at the Capitol in Washington, January 20, 2017. From left are Vice President Mike Pence, the president’s wife Melania Trump, their son Barron Trump, and Speaker of the House Paul Ryan, R-Wis. REUTERS/J. Scott Applewhite/Pool

Experts also believe the administration could try to reduce the “essential benefits,” such as maternity care and mental health services, that insurance plans must cover.

The White House did not provide further details about the executive order.

Trump’s spokesman Sean Spicer said the White House also directed an immediate regulatory freeze for all government agencies in a memo from Trump’s chief of staff, Reince Priebus. He did not offer details.

Repealing and replacing the Affordable Care Act, one of former President Barack Obama’s signature laws, was a central pledge for Trump during the presidential election campaign. Republicans in the U.S. Congress have not yet laid out a plan to recast the insurance program.

In a hastily arranged ceremony, surrounded by some of his aides, Trump sat behind the presidential Resolute Desk and signed the order. He also signed commissions for his newly confirmed defense secretary, James Mattis, and his homeland security secretary, John Kelly.

Trump spoke briefly about his day with reporters. “It was busy, but good. It was a beautiful day,” he said.