|
nChrist
|
 |
« on: September 22, 2015, 06:14:46 PM » |
|
________________________________________
The Patriot Post Digest 9-22-2015
From The Federalist Patriot
Free Email Subscription
________________________________________
Daily Digest
Sep. 22, 2015
THE FOUNDATION
“The greatest good we can do our country is to heal its party divisions and make them one people.” —Thomas Jefferson, 1801
TOP RIGHT HOOKS
Exit Scott Walker1
Once the frontrunner of the GOP presidential race, Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker has called it quits. When he launched his campaign, Walker’s conservative record in Wisconsin and his tough-as-nails approach to leftist opposition had many conservatives excited about his candidacy. But it wasn’t to be. Good governance didn’t translate into good preparation for the national stage or a good campaign. Numerous self-inflicted wounds — including obviously pandering flip-flops on immigration and the ethanol mandate, as well as lackluster debate performances — and the entry of a certain celebrity apprentice sapped Walker’s lead. In fact, polling after last week’s Reagan Library debate2 had Walker’s support not even registering on the scale. He thus concluded he no longer had a path to the nomination. He wasn’t going to win back conservatives disillusioned with the establishment, and he wasn’t going to assure the establishment it could settle on him. Donors were heading for other candidates. Coming on the heels of Rick Perry’s departure3 last week, we find it notable that the first two candidates to exit the field are two governors with established records of reform. Isn’t that what the GOP base is supposed to want this year? Nevertheless, Badger State residents will benefit from his full and unencumbered return to the governor’s chair, and that’s no small thing.
On a final note, Walker encouraged other low-polling candidates to drop out so conservatives could coalesce and beat Trump. “I encourage other Republican presidential candidates to consider [leaving the race] so the voters can focus on a limited number of candidates who can offer a positive conservative alternative to the current frontrunner. This is fundamentally important to the future of the party and — ultimately — to the future of our country.”
Obama Uses Pope for Political Point4
In a rare instance when someone comes to the U.S. from Cuba not floating on a homemade raft, Pope Francis will arrive at John Base Andrews at 4 p.m. today for his six-day visit5 to the United States. In his first visit to the U.S., Francis will address the UN, visit a correctional facility in Philadelphia and meet with Barack Obama. Francis is controversial, not necessarily because of his doctrine — which does raise questions — but because of how the media, which does a dismal job covering religion, has portrayed him6. For example: In July 2013, the media breathlessly reported that Francis, when asked about homosexuality, responded, “Who am I to judge?” But the larger context was that Francis started his statement saying, “If someone is gay and he searches for the Lord and he has good will…” See, morality and faith are still in play, and the pope opposes same-sex marriage. Still, many people reject the nuance of Francis' statements, one of them being Obama. When the executive greets the pope, by his side7 will be LGBT advocates, openly homosexual Episcopal priest Vicky Imogene Robinson8 and a group of nuns that helped lobby for ObamaCare. While the pope speaks of liberation theology, a similar philosophy embraced by Obama’s former pastor Jeremiah Wright, the Holy See objected to these guests, saying images from the event could imply that the pope endorses those practices. But everything is political for Obama. Nuance or no, he will use Francis' visit as a way to further his ideology.
Climate Alarmists Want Dissenters Imprisoned9
On Sept. 1, twenty professors and climate scientists wrote a letter10 to Barack Obama, Attorney General Loretta Lynch and science czar John Holdren praising their regulatory assault on fossil fuels. That wasn’t the point of the letter, however. The disgruntled authors encouraged a more crushing strategy the White House should use to speed up compliance to Obama’s climate change agenda. The group stated, “We appreciate that you are making aggressive and imaginative use of the limited tools available to you in the face of a recalcitrant Congress.” But… “One additional tool — recently proposed by Senator Sheldon Whitehouse — is a RICO (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act) investigation of corporations and other organizations that have knowingly deceived the American people about the risks of climate change, as a means to forestall America’s response to climate change.” In other words, why not just prosecute and imprison those darn skeptics getting in the way?
Specifically, the authors cite RICO’s success in taking on the tobacco industry, adding, “It is imperative that these misdeeds be stopped as soon as possible so that America and the world can get on with the critically important business of finding effective ways to restabilize the Earth’s climate, before even more lasting damage is done.” As climate blogger Steve Goddard retorted, “They might want to consult with the Pope about this. The Vatican has considerable experience arresting heretics.” Investor’s Business Daily’s Kerry Jackson put it best: “We could be wrong about global warming. It might all be as the alarmists claim. We acknowledge this. Science is not static but always moving. Let’s see what it tells us. Yet has any true believer ever renounced his global warming faith or conceded that there is even the slightest chance that he might be just a bit wrong?” Who exactly are acting like cultish fanatics?
Oh, and by the way, George Mason University Professor Jagadish Shukla, a leader of the letter writers, reportedly profited from government climate grants to the tune of $1.5 million.
Don’t Miss Patriot Humor
Check out Escape11.
If you’d like to receive Patriot Humor by email, update your subscription here12.
FEATURED RIGHT ANALYSIS
Trump, Carson and the Islamic Controversy13
By Paul Albaugh
Over the last several days, the Leftmedia have worked themselves into a tizzy over two particular presidential candidates, Donald Trump and Ben Carson, following comments that were made — and not made — about Muslims. It’s one of those “gotcha” moments when a candidate must choose between speaking what he believes, dodging the question or simply not saying anything. Regardless of how the candidate answers, they will catch heat for it, primarily because they are Republicans.
During a town hall meeting in New Hampshire14, a questioner accused Barack Obama of being a Muslim, of not being American and stated, “We have [Muslim] training camps growing where they want to kill us, that’s my question. When can we get rid of them?”
Trump didn’t respond the way many in the Leftmedia thought that he should have. He didn’t rebut the questioner’s accusations about Obama’s religion or citizenship. (After all, Trump himself once questioned Obama’s citizenship.) Instead, Trump answered the question vaguely, stating, “We’re going to be looking at a lot of different things, and a lot of people are saying that and saying that bad things are happening out there. We’re going to be looking at that and plenty of other things.”
To be sure, Trump could have answered the question better, and he could have taken the bait to address the man’s accusations. But he didn’t — or rather, deliberately chose to ignore the accusations from the man because he foresaw the media onslaught that would surely follow. In his own words, Trump told ABC News15, “If I would have challenged the man … to put it mildly the media would have accused me of interfering with that man’s right of free speech. … A no win situation, do we agree?”
Perhaps Trump could have responded to the man’s accusation by recalling Hillary Clinton’s own veiled Obama-is-a-Muslim claim in 200816, or reminding voters of Obama’s interview with ABC’s George Stephanopoulos17 in which Obama mentions “my Muslim faith.” But Trump didn’t address it, and the media are having a field day.
None of this is to say that Obama is a Muslim. But his claim that he is a Christian is just as far fetched. Obama spent 20 years attending the “church” of the Marxist black liberation theology-spouting Jeremiah Wright18. It’s far more likely, based on his actions, rhetoric and narcissism, that he worships himself, and will say or do whatever is politically expedient.
As columnist David Limbaugh writes19, “It’s true we can’t know for sure what’s in a person’s heart, but we can observe his statements and behavior. … This is not a man with a track record of authenticity.”
“You will recognize them by their fruits,” Jesus said.
Meanwhile, Dr. Ben Carson stirred up controversy following an interview20 because of what he did say.
Keeping this question in context with Trump not correcting a questioner, when asked if a president’s faith should matter, Carson responded, “It depends on what that faith is. If it’s inconsistent with the values and principles of America, then of course it should matter.” He added that he “would not advocate that we put a Muslim in charge of this nation.” |
