Stealth Islamic Jihad and Progressive Cultural Perversion

 

Some entity or individual(s) in the Muslim community In Columbus, Ohio and in other cities in the United States recently purchased billboards insulting to Christianity. This incendiary advertisement, during the most sacred of Christian holiday seasons, which culminates with Easter, was meant to test the Christian response. Would there be apathy? Is this the prelude to further insult or injury? Who knows?

Well not all Christians stood idly by and ignored this travesty. Several Christians organized a rally to protest the false message being portrayed and propagated on the billboard. The billboard was changed once the media began to cover the story. The new message as I saw it today read “Muslims love Jesus, too,” which was quite a different message.

At the morning protest, held despite the leftover winter weather – 36 degrees and a cold biting rain – drew a crowd of between 50 and 100 people. Actually this "protest" could actually be considered a praise rally, where the name and nature of the real Jesus was raised up.

 

There was one lone Islamist with a megaphone across the street under the billboard spouting his falsehoods. I paid no attention, except that he said something to the effect that we were telling lies about Islam. What nerve, a case of the teapot calling the kettle black!

 A half dozen men or so Christian activists and leaders along with one recently returning veteran woman, gave speeches accurately describing the truth about Islam and pointing out the inconsistencies and lies that the preachers of this false so-called religion so easy inflict on the sheeple of America.

One of the speakers perceptively described the truth about the “Jesus is Muslim” billboard. He said that in a court of law, making such a testimony would be considered perjury. He said that in a civil lawsuit, it would be considered slander or defamation of character. He stated that in the church, that statement is considered heresy. An in regard to the bible, that statement would be considered blasphemy against God. Above all “Jesus is Muslim” is a lie straight from the pit of hell.

The Progressive Movement in many ways parallels that hypocrisy and bigotry of Islam. Much of the Progressive Movement is built on lies, like the “fact” that abortion is merely the exercise of a woman’s so-called reproductive rights, while ignoring the basic right to life of the aborted child. The left touts its stand against discrimination against homosexual and lesbian behavior and calls for “marriage equality.” Essentially this is calling for the institutionalization of perversion. Global Warming and Evolution are also part of the Progressive religion’s creed.

The progressives’ agenda of mainstreaming and forcing the acceptance and approval of abortion and homosexuality on our society, climate change, evolution, etc. is dangerous. Likewise, Islamists are using the freedom permitted in this country to spread their perverse, vile, and violent political-militaristic-religious system on America, which is equally destructive. One of the speakers pointed out that in Saudi Arabia there was no freedom of religion, except for Islam. In the United States more and more it seems that unless you fully embrace the Liberal or Progressive Agenda you are flat out wrong, haters, intolerable and bigoted.

Islamist and Liberal Progressives seek to anesthetize and desensitize Americans, hoping we will disregard or treat as irrelevant the principles and values that made America great and exceptional in the first place. The church and Christians, conservatives, and all patriots need to wake up and begin to plug the holes in the dyke holding back the water that, if uncontained, will drown our culture.

 

Here are some of the signs I saw today in the crowd included:

*   Jesus is God and He Loves the Muslim (the sign I brought)

*   Wake up Church

*   Jesus is Lord

*   Jesus is the Standard

*   Jesus Lord of Lords

*   Stop Supporting Pagan Traditions

Here is more information about the "Jesus is Muslim" billboard controversy by Dave Daubenmire, one of the key organizers of the praise and protest rally.

 

 

 

Maurice Clarett: Sports Star, Cellmate, & Saint

Last weekend the church that I attend had asked Maurice Clarett to speak. In the morning service an interview was conducted by the pastor of the church. Sunday evening Mr. Clarett spoke for about an hour telling his story. What follows is a bit of what I captured of the interview and his talk.

This is a story of grace, mercy, reality, and truth. It is an account of a young man from the ‘hood, who made good on the football field, but never really fully understood.

Mr. Maurice (Reese) Clarett was the product of his environment. Growing up he wanted to prove himself to the guys in his inner city Youngstown, Ohio neighborhood. In doing so, within one three month period of time he got picked up by police three times and was headed to juvenile detention, but for the intervention of an “angel,” a man who took him under his wing convincing the judge to allow Mr. Clarett to spend the summer being mentoring him in lieu of time in the juvenile detention center. This would be Mr. Clarett’s first taste of grace (which is an instance where you don’t get what you deserve; instead you get what you need).

Truth is that in the cities of America – especially among the poor minorities – gangs and a variety of thugs substitute for missing fathers in the lives of young men. These lowlifes companions teach the young men the ways of their evil world. The young men emulate these lousy “role models” to the chagrin and dismay of their mothers and grandmothers.

Star Athlete

In Mr. Clarett’s case he was “saved” by a couple of adult men who saw potential in him and stepped up and encouraged him to pursue his athletic talents. They took him under their wings and taught him discipline and raised his expectations. Therefore Mr. Clarett became very successful throughout his high school career. He and his team under his leadership excelled.

He ended up going to Ohio State University, where as a freshman he led his team to a national championship in 2002. He even scored the winning TD in the BCS national championship. Accolades of all kinds came his way. He had a phenomenal freshmen season. He was a superstar, the next LeBron James. However, it didn’t take too long before his world was shattered.

Shackled  

Unfortunately others wanted a piece of the Clarett action and glorly. The good ‘ole boys from the Youngstown ‘hood came back into his life, and he lost his focus, his concentration. Drugs, alcohol, girls, he was basking is his celebrity and glory. He got suckered into the kind of lifestyle that leads one astray. He had several run-ins with the law. He got tossed off the football team, lost his scholarship, left school his sophomore year.

Depression led him deeper into the lifestyle that sidetracked his brilliant, promising football career. He tried to escape by going to the West Coast. But he got mixed up with an even more intense and care-free party crowd than the one he fellowshipped with in Ohio.

He attempted to get into professional football after he was drafted in the third round by the Denver Broncos. He knew he was not in shape to be a professional football player after wasting himself in Ohio and California. But he went to the Broncos training camp. He said he was a poor teammate, a chronic complainer and not as dedicated to the game as he should have been. He was released. Another failure he felt.

He returned to Ohio but soon got reconnected to the Youngstown boys from the ‘hood and returned to his immature and drug dulling depression pattern. He didn’t want to face reality.

It wasn’t until he was incarcerated in the penitentiary that he began to see the light, thanks to a warden who advised him to put himself on the right track. Mr. Clarett heeded the warden and the example and mentoring of very helpful lifer inmate, who shared the things of God with him.

Saint

When he got out of prison he was better prepared to face reality. He even played professional football again in Omaha, Nebraska, where under the direction and instruction of a pastor he said that he eventually gave his life to God as a Christ-follower in 2012.

Mr. Clarett now speaks to groups about his restored life and he helps young men to avoid taking the wrong path that he chose to take. At 30 years of age he plans to return to school to complete his degree. He wants to pursue an entrepreneurial endeavor in the field of geriatric services. While in prison he received a lot of help and encouraging letters from seniors who gave so much of themselves to him while he served almost 4 years of a 7-year sentence. Mr. Clarett seems to have made some better decisions in his “old age” of 30!

Lessons Learned

What can be learned from this young man’s journey from football star to cellmate to saint?

·        God is a gracious God, a God of second and third chances, etc. He is a merciful God. Recognize that you are a sinner and have missed the mark and accept His provision, Jesus, to completely redeem your life.

·        Be careful in choosing your friends.

·        As long as you stay focused on purposeful pursuits you are not likely to fall into temptations that will foil your plans and ruin your life.

 

·        Use your time, talent and treasure wisely.

 

You can see or hear the interview for yourself by going here.

The Conservative Movement 1964-2014 from Barry Goldwater to Barry Soetoro

I received this encouraging article in my in-box today. I reprint it here because it is a good summary of the Conservative Movement the past 50 years through the eyes of a conservative journalist. Emphasis added is mine...


My First 50 Years In The Conservative Movement: Reflections and Observations

March 17, 2014

By Don Feder

        It's been 50 years since the Goldwater campaign, when conservatism as a political force came of age.

       This year also marks my first 50 years the conservative movement.

       Like many conservatives of my generation, it started with the Arizonan's quixotic quest for the White House. I was too young to vote, but headed my high school chapter of Students for Goldwater. One thing the campaign should have taught us is that it's not enough to hold the right positions. You need be able to articulate them without sounding like a cross between Vlad the Impaler and Crazy Guggenheim.

       The one bright spot in an otherwise dismal campaign was a late October speech ("A Time for Choosing") by an ex-actor who 17 years later became our greatest president of the 20th century.

       Although I didn't know it at the time, with the Goldwater campaign, I had enlisted for life. In college, I started a chapter of Young Americans for Freedom at my alma mater, Boston University. YAF was then the largest and most active national conservative organization. Eventually, I helped to start YAF chapters at a dozen Massachusetts colleges and universities.

       In the 1960s, I encountered a neo-Marxist movement called the New Left, which would become the most corrupting force in American politics. With the triumph of Alinsky disciple Barack Hussein Obama, its banner now flies over the White House.

       In the 1970s, I joined the burgeoning anti-tax movement, becoming the first executive director of Massachusetts Citizens for Limited Taxation. I helped defeat a graduated state income tax and was involved with a property-tax cutting initiative called Prop 2 ½. That was followed by two years on the West Coast running the Second Amendment Foundation, where we fought to preserve a constitutional right the left claimed was nonexistent.

       That led to 19 years as a columnist (lightly syndicated) and editorial writer at The Boston Herald (1983-2002). During those years, The Herald published over 2,200 of my columns.

       Since then, I've been a free-lance writer, media consultant and communications director of the World Congress of Families. To recap, since 1964, I've been part of the campus-conservative, anti-tax, gun-owners rights, and family-values movements, while championing conservatism as a commentator.

       I'm not boasting – others have contributed far more – but I have been around, fought for diverse causes and experienced the best and worst of a movement which has shaped America more than any other in the post-War era.

       Here are the lessons I've learned along the way, most of which you won't hear on talk radio or read in the blogosphere.

       1. Many who call themselves conservatives have a comic-book view of conservatism. Talk to anyone under 35 at the Conservative Political Action Conference (the annual orgy of self-congratulation and muddled thinking just ended) and you're likely to hear the following: "I'm an economic conservative." (In other words, "I have no idea of what a conservative is.") "I don't care about marriage, abortion and stuff like that." ("I'm a conservative who doesn't care about morality, the family and protecting innocent human life.") Ask what they believe and the answer you're likely to get is "Freedom, freedom, freedom! We need to cut taxes and have a smaller government." This is a pathetic reductionism that tries to distill two centuries of conservative thought, from Edmund Burke to Russell Kirk, to "Government bad. Fortune 500 good!" This is to authentic conservatism what a sad clown done with paint-by-numbers is to Rembrandt.

       2. Our cause is faith, family and freedom. These are building blocks. We start with faith, because liberty, morality and human nature (on which the first two are based) are of God. The family because it is the foundation of social order and the cradle of civilization. Freedom because it gives us the chance to find our way to God, and the ability to have families and make life's most important decisions.

       3. Conservatives are patriots, not nationalists. We love America; we don't worship the nation state. We understand that, internationally, America isn't always right. A nationalist says: "My country right or wrong." A patriot says: "I love my country and will strive to see that it's in the right."

       4. Conservatives believe in the concept of American exceptionalism – that America is unique in its contributions to freedom, prosperity and civilization, at home and abroad. And that, for more than two centuries, America has blessed humanity – materially and spiritually. You can disagree with the patriotic consensus on almost anything else – including defense and foreign policy – but dispute this, and you're merely a resident of the United States and not an American.

       5. Conservatives believe in representative government, not democracy. The Founding Fathers disdained democracy (or "mobocracy" as they called it) which is why the word is not to be found in the Declaration of Independence or Constitution. The latter speaks of securing "the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity." As America has become more of a democracy and less of a republic, we've become less free. De Tocqueville warned that democracy becomes a nation's undoing when the majority discovers it can vote itself benefits out of the treasury (out of the pockets of the more productive). Any limitation on governmental power – like the Bill of Rights – is anti-democratic, which is why the left keeps telling us that the Constitution is outmoded.

       6. Conservatives aren't libertarians or soft anarchists. Libertarians and conservatives support the free market. That's where the similarities end. Libertarians (utopians of the right) believe in the separation of morality and government, as if such was even possible. A consistent libertarian opposes laws against drugs, prostitution, child pornography, abortion and euthanasia, and even age of consent laws. But, without a moral foundation, liberty becomes license. (John Adams explained: "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.") The type of "freedom" libertarians advocate would lead to an unraveling of the social order, which would eventually result in a new tyranny, as the masses clamor to escape the chaos libertarians have unleashed. Libertarians understand the human drive for freedom, but miss the corresponding drives for security and order. The business of conservatives is to balance the three.

       7. Private property and the free market lead to prosperity and are bulwarks against tyranny – The genius of the free market can be seen in comparing the economies of North and South Korea, East and West Germany (before reunification), and Costa Rica and Cuba. In the U.S., states with lower taxes and less regulation have more robust economies and better job growth. Private property and the free market also lead to a diffusion of power, one reason the concentration of power in Washington over the past century – which has accelerated under Obama -- is so dangerous. The power to tax and regulate can easily lead to control over every human activity – from how we raise our children to our speech and even our thoughts. The current regime would put the nation's health care in the hands of politicians and bureaucrats, literally giving them the power of life and death.

       8. There is no conservative foreign policy, though there are some guiding principles. Isolationism and interventionism is a false dichotomy. If the Founding Fathers were inveterate isolationists, why did Jefferson send the Marines to the shores of Tripoli in the first decade of the 19th century? Sometimes, intervention in foreign conflicts is unavoidable. (World War II, Korea and Vietnam being cases in point.) And sometimes, the net result of intervention is building a better infrastructure for the Taliban or creating another Muslim republic in the Balkans. The Crimea? It hard to imagine a region whose fate is less related to our national interest. (Outer Mongolia? Fiji?) All intervention doesn't lead to a quagmire, and every crisis isn't Munich. Here are a few principles on when to intervene and how: 1. Don't use the U.S. military like the Peace Corps – an international force of community organizers. 2. Don't make threats you're not prepared to follow through on. 3. Even when our just national interests are at stake, apply as little force as necessary. Military intervention should always be the last resort. 4. A thug with an ideology is always more dangerous than a thug without one. 5. Support your friends; frustrate your foes. 6. The world is a perilous place. It always has been. Without a strong military, we will lose everything.

       9. Islam is the principal external threat to America. Islam is as much an ideology as a religion. For most of its 1,300-year history, its goal has been conquest – a worldwide caliphate. (By comparison, communism and fascism are the new bullies on the block.) In normative Islam, there can be no separation of the political and spiritual. (Freedom of conscience, prized in the West, doesn't exist.) It's no coincidence that terrorism comes almost exclusively from the Islamic world – the Muslim Brotherhood and Tehran, Hamas and Hezbollah, al-Azhar University and al-Qaeda, Shiite, Sunni and Wahabi. Churches and synagogues don't preach holy war.

       10. Leftism is the principal internal threat to America. Liberalism has morphed into a monstrosity which would have been unrecognizable to the liberals of old. Today, its drive for conformity by crushing dissent is relentless. With speech codes, anti-discrimination legislation, IRS harassment, and social sanction (political correctness) – and forcing abortion, contraception and homosexual "marriage" on believers – it has created a new totalitarianism, a drive to dominate every aspect of life and try to reshape human nature (the age-old dream of totalitarians). This is no longer a war of ideas but a struggle to preserve civilization.

       11. The GOP is a necessary evil. The conservative movement has principles. The Republican Party has positions which it dangles before unsuspecting voters. There isn't an issue on which the party isn't willing to betray one or another of its core constituencies – from life and the family, to spending and immigration. The reward the Tea Parties got for delivering a Republican victory in 2010 ranged from sneering contempt to outright hostility by establishment Republicans. The "conservatism" of the GOP is transitory – until the next opinion poll do us part.

       12. The Republican Party is all we have. A conservative third-party, which would do more than collect protest votes, is an illusion. The last major party to emerge from the ashes of one that failed is the GOP of the 1850s. That was before the age of mass media and billion-dollar budgets for presidential campaigns. The conservative goal should be a hostile takeover of the Republicans. We should enter the primaries, full force, to nominate the right candidates. Once they're elected, we should maintain unremitting pressure to keep them honest. We should take every opportunity to defeat RINOs, to weaken the establishment's hold on the party, even if it means voting for Democrats in general elections. In 1964, the enemy was George Romney and Nelson Rockefeller. By 2012, it was Mitt Romney and Karl Rov-efeller.

       For all our shortcomings, conservatives are the only political force interested in rational analysis and open debate. Minds on the left are closed so tight that they might as well be hermetically sealed. "The discussion is over" should be stamped on their foreheads. "It's time to move forward on me telling you what to do – and you doing it."

       In 1964, American culture was still relatively sane. Today, the savages make movies, report the news, control corporate boardrooms and run the public schools. America's survival depends on the triumph of conservatism.

Don Feder is a former Boston Herald writer who is now a political/communications consultant. He also maintains his own website, DonFeder.com.                  

The following story can be found on the GrassTopsUSA website at http://www.grasstopsusa.com/df031714.html.  Permission to reprint or quote this commentary on the Internet is granted provided you include a byline to Don Feder, attribution to GrassTopsUSA and link back to the article at the URL above.

GrasstopsUSA respects the privacy of our members. We will never sell or rent your name to third parties.

GrasstopsUSA
8230 Catbird Circle 302
Lorton VA 22079
888-864-1964
888-239-9306 FAX

.

Obama is Putin’ his foot down on Crimea!

 

Cartoon by Henry Payne on Townhall.com 3/26/2014

NewsMax.com regularly emails me a feature they call “Late Night Jokes.” It shares some of the “jokes” of hosts of the late night shows. I always ignore Letterman. Most of the jokes are not retelling, a few are and here is one:

The Tonight Show Starring Jimmy Fallon

·    President Obama has convinced the leaders of the world’s biggest economies to move the G-8 summit out of Russia this summer and meet in Brussels instead. Then Vladimir Putin said, “All good. By summer, Brussels will be part of Russia.”

Fraudulent Phraseology: "Undocumented Immigrants"

"UNDOCUMENTED IMMIGRANT"?

Here's a Feisty Floridian (@peddoc63) tweet I just saw tonight. Thought it was right on the money... when it comes to the phraseology used by the Left and those who advocate for amnesty for illegal aliens:

The Bible is the Only Real Answer to Abortion

Read the following article here:

http://www.personhoodusa.com/blog/no-pro-life-fanatic-could-ever-possibly-dispute

Here is my take on this work.

Number 1 presupposes that person being argued with believes in parental responsibility.  But it is obvious that she does not.

I disagree with numbers 2 and 3 because these are based on arguments which presuppose that the baby was conceived through consensual means (i.e. not by rape).  But it is just as wrong to intentionally kill an unborn baby conceived by rape as it is to intentionally kill any other innocent human being.  These arguments only have the ability to convince a murderer to murder fewer people.

I disagree with number 4 because, what if a baby were implanted in the mother's uterus by artificial means (in vitro fertilization, cloning, etc.)?  It would be just as wrong to kill that baby as it would be to kill a baby conceived by natural means.

Number 5 is a good point, but again, suppose that a baby could be removed from the mother's uterus and left to die without "actively" killing the baby?  Again, it would be just as wrong.

Number 6 makes the assumption that other person doesn't actually believe in absolute bodily autonomy and that it has found a counterexample.  But some extreme libertarians actually would go that far--to the point that parents can simply abandon their children knowing that that would result in their deaths.  The author offers no reason why this is immoral as an argument against such extreme libertarians.  And the argument that he does use might even drive a reprobate like the one he is arguing with to conclude that such an extreme position is reasonable. 

Number 7 has the same flaw as number 6.  It presupposes that the person that he arguing with would find late term abortions unacceptable.  This is even more unlikely to work than the abandonment argument.

Number 8 is basically the same as number 6.

Number 9 is an example of what an extreme libertarian would permit as long as the man was not trespassing on private property.  Furthermore, this is not an example of someone being forced to do something (which was the crux of Rachel's argument), but rather a prohibition.

Number 10 is a simply a generalization of all the previous arguments.

You can find similar (moderately) libertarian pro-life arguments here:

http://www.l4l.org/library/index.html

But none of these arguments would work on someone like Murray Rothbard and some might even be persuaded by these to become more like him.

When it comes right down to it, the Biblical command to put people to death for murder (Genesis 9:6) is the only sure fire argument.  If someone does not accept the Bible as God's Word, then they most likely will not accept any other argument no matter how clever or well thought out, and even if they do, they will still be unbelievers who we should "come out from them and be separate" and with whom we should not be "unequally yoked".  A bad tree cannot bear good fruit.  There are places in the Bible where God gave commandments to kill infants.  God can make any exception to any rule He wants and therefore any set of arguments would necessarily have to take God's Sovereignty into account, but Matt Walsh's arguments do not.   

I sincerely hope that Matt Walsh's arguments will convince some of their hypocrisy and inconsistency so that they will come to the knowledge of Yahshua Messiah (Jesus Christ).  But spiritual things cannot be discerned by the natural mind until the person is regenerated. 

Calling Islam a Religion is a Misnomer!

Americans of all ilk need to wake up and discern the essence of Islam.  The quote below is a good summary of the nature of true Islam. President George W. Bush and others are absolutely wrong when they declare the misnomer that Islam is a 'religion of peace,' let alone even a 'religion'!

Have Speaker Boehner, Leader McConnell, and the GOP lost their way?

Saw this on twitter, that says it all... H/T to @Shaughn_A...

All I can say is #DitchMitch, #BenchBoehner in 2014!

Trump “Eulogizes” Ex-President Jimmy Carter at CPAC

NewsMax.com regularly emails me a feature they call “Late Night Jokes.” They share some of the “jokes” of hosts of the late night shows. I always ignore Letterman. Most of the jokes are not worth retelling, however, a few are, and here is one:

The Tonight Show with Jimmy Fallon:

"The Conservative Political Action Conference is still going on down in Washington, D.C. And yesterday, Donald Trump was giving a speech, when he accidentally referred to former President Jimmy Carter — who’s still very much alive — as "the late, great Jimmy Carter." Trump immediately apologized, and then said, “He wasn’t THAT great.”"

Unveiling Grace

Mormonism is a false religion which is based on salvation by works and righteousness.  In real Christianity, salvation is a free gift, and works and righteousness are result of the grace that God gives to the believer.

Many years ago, when I was an undergraduate, a group of my friends tried to witness to some Mormon missionaries.  We got into some really deep discussions with them over a period of several weeks.  As time went on, other Mormons came along besides the two missionaries.  They were obviously higher-ups in the church.  But some other guy who came with Mormons named Jeff didn't talk much and didn't wear a white shirt or tie and didn't have a name tag on.  At the end of one of our sessions, we shook hands with the Mormons as usual.  But this time when Jeff shook my friend's hand, he slipped my friend a note.  The note said "help me" and asked us to meet with him at a particular place and time.  After they left, my friend read the note to us.  Then we all prayed.  I prayed like I had never prayed before.

We met with Jeff.  He explained that he was not really in trouble, but wanted to warn us that Mormonism is a false religion.  He explained that he had joined the Mormon Church only because he had dated some Mormon girl.  But the girl had dumped him and he had since found Christ (the real Christ).  He had decided to stay in the Mormon Church so that he could thwart the efforts of the missionaries.  He bought a large number of copies of a book, an exposé of Mormonism called "The God Makers".  He would put a copy of this book in the mailboxes of the potential converts targeted by the missionaries.  But being college students, we didn't have accessible mailboxes so he contacted us with the note instead.  He told us that he had decided to quit going along with the missionaries and to leave the Mormon Church because it was dishonest to deceive them into thinking that he was a sincere Mormon.

As the video indicates, Mormonism is riddled with contradictions.  In first three chapters of the book of Jacob (one of the books in the book of Mormon) it specifically states that David sinned when he married more than one wife.  But the 132nd chapter of Doctrine and Covenants (another book considered to be scripture according to the Mormon Church), it specifically says that David did nothing wrong when he married more than one wife.  Mormons are liars.  Mormon political candidates lie and say that they are pro-life with no exceptions (if it is politically expedient for them to do so), but then they take the position of the Mormon Church (which is that abortion is acceptable in cases of rape, incest or certain birth defects).  I will never knowingly vote for a Mormon candidate for any office.  Anyone who voted for Mitt Romney should repent.  The Bible says not to be "unequally yoked with an unbelievers" and to "come out from them and be separate, and touch not the unclean thing" for "what fellowship can Christ have with Belial?"  To the best of my ability, I will only vote for real Christians.

Hat tip to the Seppi blog for posting the video at the beginning of this post. 

Lawless Lois Lerner, an Internal Revenue Scoundrel (IRS)

WHAT IS THE LEARNED LOIS HIDING?

When I first saw the report this afternoon that Lois Lerner again refused to answer any questions of the House Oversight Committee, the first word that popped into my mind was “scoundrel.”  Lawless Lois Lerner perfectly represents the current Administration, as well as the current Internal Revenue Scoundrels (IRS) Organization. There is no longer any Service in that scandal-ridden bureaucracy.

scoun·drel

/ˈskoundrəl/

noun: scoundrel; plural noun: scoundrel

1.   a dishonest or unscrupulous person; a rogue.

:	rogue, rascal, miscreant, good-for-nothing, reprobate; More cheat, swindler, scam artist, fraudster, trickster, charlatan;   synonyms:   wretch, scumbag scumbucket, scuzzball, sleazeball, sleazebag, ratfink;

 

Two minor rogue agents working in the bowels of the Cincinnati office (just like the deliberate false accusation blaming a YouTube video being responsible for BenghaziGate?) were responsible for targeted the Tea Parties? Hogwash! The pattern of lying and deceit is clear with this corrupt administration.

 

Trace the scandal and I bet it lands at the door of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. The IRS under the direction of the current regime is a renegade agency, out of control and is being used by this administration to target its political “enemies” - Conservative Citizen Groups and Tea Party Participants - actually anyone who opposes the regimes’ radical transformative socialist agenda.

 

Not satisfied with past misconduct and election “achievements,” the Left led by Democrat US Senators endangered in losing their jobs wanted the IRS to institutionalize their scandalous targeting practices by proposing new regulation.  They did this hoping that the public would not notice when they put them out for comment around the holidays to further hoping to further stifle the voice of the citizen activists.
 

 

MY COMMENTS TO THE PROPOSED RESTRICTIVE NEW IRS REGS

Thanks to watchful organizations like True the Vote and Heritage Action they aroused the public making us aware of the unscrupulous regulations and urging the public to comment. Despite the fact that the comment period covered much of the holidays (deliberately done so to discourage public input,) people did comment. Boy, did they comment. There were nearly 150,000 comments to these liberty-restricting regulations. I heard that this was the greatest number of comments ever made to proposed regulations.
 

Here are the comments that I wrote to the IRS regulation titled, “Guidance for Tax-Exempt Social Welfare Organizations on Candidate-Related Political Activities”:
 

My First Comments

1. By what law or authority or basis does the IRS have to make these regulations, which seem to role of Congress? Has Congress through legislation given the IRS direction?

2. Actually, the law that oversees 501(c)(4) organizations has been on the books for over 50 years. The law, written by Congress and signed by the President, doesn’t put any restrictions on political speech by these citizen groups. These new regulations are not needed. The IRS should follow the original law.

3. Why were 501 C (5) Unions and 501 C (6) Business Associations exempt from these new IRS regulations, while 501 C (3) Citizen Groups are being targeted for the curtailment of political activity? This seems to be blatantly unfair and unjust. It discourages to the point of silencing the united individual citizen voices, but permits the powerful united labor and united business organizations to shout their views and political opinions in the political process to an unequal and unfair degree!

4. The information required by the IRS of these citizen groups is excessive and burdensome. It would discourage individual participation in the political process.

5. Further input should be obtained from the American public through a series of Public Hearings in every region of the country – North, South, East, West, Midwest, etc. IRS must justify the necessity of these burdensome regulations.

6. If the IRS insists on burdening this class of organizations, (then) it is only fair that they require the same restricted political activity of the moneyed labor unions and business associations!

 

My Second Comments

These proposed regulations distinguish between professional lobbying versus grassroots lobbying done by ordinary citizens. The regulations consider lobbying done by citizen grassroots groups as "political activity" but professional lobbying remains status quo. Does the IRS want only professionals involved in political activity?

These regulations limit the sources of information for the individual voter. This is very undemocratic. Why does the IRS seem to discourage -through these regulations - such activities as candidate debates, candidate forums, and open-to-the-public town hall meetings? These activities are surely more informative and helpful than seriously biased and partisan TV and radio ads. Classifying certain activities by 501 C (4) organizations as "candidate-related" even if they are not related to an election actually gets in the way of important sources of information for the individual voter even more, squelching legitimate issue ads trying to impact the legislative process.

Overall these proposed IRS regulations seem to be meant to discourage like-minded individuals uniting together to influence the political process from start to finish. It would only seem fair that Business and Union groups be subject to the same rules as liberal and conservative citizen groups.