Wednesday, September 30, 2015

Putin isn’t Strong. Obama is Just Weak.

While the United Nations and the United States chitchat about how they’ll try to put together a transitional government once Bashar al-Assad’s regime in Syria falls, Russia is busy doing everything they can to prevent that from happening. Everyone else seems to understand this other than President Obama’s administration in general and Secretary of State John Kerry in particular.

Whatever he thinks he’s hearing from his counterpart in Moscow, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, it’s either getting lost in translation or falling to the hopeful whims of an administration that missed their opportunity. You see, Lavrov might be talking hypothetically about what a transitional government might look like once Assad falls, but he knows that his boss isn’t going to let that happen. Russian President Vladimir Putin has no intentions of allowing a populist rebel uprising to take down another Middle Eastern nation, particularly an ally.

This doesn’t reflect a love for Assad. It’s Putin’s passionate hatred for populist uprisings in general. He views Syria as a great place to get entrenched in the Middle East, but more importantly he wants to maintain a stability that has been systematically destroyed by the United States and United Nations for the last decade.

Don’t get me wrong. I’m not supporting Putin by any means. Rather, I’m pointing out how he feels in regards to intervention. He gave the United States the opportunity to get involved when Assad crossed President Obama’s “red line.” To understand this, we have to speculate intelligently about how all of that went down.

Intelligent Speculation

Vladimir Putin Barack Obama

Let’s look at a hypothetical but very likely scenario that probably unfolded in 2013. When it became very likely that the red line was crossed by Assad’s use of chemical weapons, President Obama’s phone rang. It was Vladimir Putin. He said that he frowned upon any use of force on Assad. He promised that he would work with Assad to get rid of any remaining chemical weapons.

He probably threatened Obama with “supportive action” if the Americans got involved.

Let’s look at the two primary red line statements by the President:

“I didn’t set a red line. The world set a red line.”

— President Obama, news conference in Stockholm, Sept. 4, 2013

“We have been very clear to the Assad regime, but also to other players on the ground, that a red line for us is we start seeing a whole bunch of chemical weapons moving around or being utilized.  That would change my calculus.  That would change my equation.”

— Obama, remarks to reporters, August 20, 2012

Somewhere along the lines, his calculus was changed, but not by the red line. It was changed by Vladimir Putin. The Russians made a threat and the Americans blinked. That was the beginning of the end for the rebels. All Putin needed was a valid excuse to save Assad’s regime. The Islamic State gave him that excuse.

Obama’s JFK Moment

Obama's JFK Moment

This was it. This was the time for President Obama to do what other Presidents had done. He was virtually face-to-face with an enemy in the form of Russia and he had every right to initiate another regime change in the Middle East. Assad used chemical weapons on its citizens. Russia threatened. Obama was poised to show his strength and the might of his country by opposing evil and the monsters who defended it.

When John F. Kennedy faced a similar situation, one that posed an existential threat to the United States in the form of the Cuban Missile Crisis, he acted decisively. When Ronald Reagan faced a Soviet Union that wanted very much to destroy him, he was bold and allowed the strength of the United States to stare down the arguably more powerful USSR. The Cold War ended as a result.

President Obama had less on the line. The enemies were weaker. The direct threats to the United States were minimal. The importance was high for both the Syrians as well as our Israeli allies. Most importantly, he had the mandate of the world that was outraged at Assad and ready for the United States to save the day.

Instead, he caved. He demonstrated a weakness towards the Russian interests that has resulted in tens of thousands of additional deaths, a crisis that is now spreading to Europe and other countries in the form of millions of refugees, and a gift wrapped base through which the Russians can now influence the entire Middle East.

After much thought, it’s impossible to claim that this is pure weakness. President Obama is without a doubt the worst foreign relations President in recent history, possibly ever, but this particular scenario goes beyond his failings. There are only two plausible possibilities and one of them is pretty crazy.

The first possibility is that his Nobel Peace Prize has never really been earned and he’s been trying desperately to live up to it ever since he won it.

The other possibility is more of a conspiracy theory – he’s under orders from someone else to not act when action was clearly warranted. We’ll go ahead and dismiss that option as paranoia and focus on the overly-peaceful option.

Earning His Peace Prize

Obama Nobel Peace Prize

The President has a legacy domestically. He forced Obamacare through and he painted the White House with rainbow colors. While both will go down in history as tragedies, he’s happy with what he’s built. On the foreign relations side, his best claim to fame is that he was in office when Osama bin Laden was killed. Otherwise, the world around us has fallen apart on his watch and in many ways as a direct result of his actions… or inaction.

In the hypothetical situation above, I would imagine that Putin invoked the Nobel Peace Prize in his appeal to prevent Obama from acting on his threats. He doesn’t want the world to regret his Presidency any more than it already does. This more than anything is what prompted him to take such a weak stance on Syria.

Keep in mind that he expected aid to the rebels to do the trick. He didn’t anticipate the rise of the junior varsity Islamic State. He didn’t realize that leaving Iraq would open the doors to the worst turmoil the region has seen in decades. He didn’t think that the Arab Spring would result in the chaos that has ensued nor the rise of Islamic extremists pulling the strings and forming makeshift theocracies where once there was secular stability.

Vladimir Putin has learned that Barack Obama is weak. He didn’t anticipate that the US President was incompetent as well. That was just a bonus. Now, Assad’s regime will remain indefinitely, Russia’s position in the Middle East will be solidified, and ISIS will flourish outside of Syria as a result.



via Soshable http://ift.tt/1JER5XU

Why We Listen to (some) Analysts More than Polls

Depending on a where you stand as a candidate, you’ll either point to the polls or the analysts. Rarely do they match this early in the race and the discrepancy can be huge. We tend to look towards the analysts this early for two reasons: the polls are based upon minimal information consumed by most voters that makes it basically a name-recognition contest, and the shifts in campaign momentum throughout a primary season requires an understanding of how these things flow.

If we looked at polls at the end of September to determine winners, Hillary Clinton would have own the Democratic nomination in 2008, Rudy Giuliani would have won the Republican nomination in 2008, and Rick Perry would have won the 2012 Republican nomination. Even if you concede that Perry blew his chances with his “oops” debate performance, Herman Cain was doing better in the polls than the eventual nominee.

The point is this: most Americans don’t understand the landscape of the primaries, the fundamentals of campaign funding, or the volatility of the voters at this early stage. The wildcard that most of the analysts (and by most, we mean all of the ones we’ve watched so far) have missed so far is the permanence of social media. This is why the majority of analysts were anticipating the Donald Trump’s campaign would sputter in July. Then August. Then September. Now, it’s apparently October, and it baffles them why he hasn’t fallen already.

Social media creates artificial loyalty. When people start spouting out about a particular candidate on social media, they’re put into a position of having to either explain themselves or eat crow if and when they change their minds. Trump hit social media harder than any other candidate, even harder than President Barack Obama did in his two elections. Now, he has people who might have dropped their support in the past when it was private, but now that everything’s public more people are all-in early on.

Still, the analysts are picking other candidates and we tend to agree. Jeb Bush and Ted Cruz are best positioned to be in for the long haul because of the fundraising they’ve done and the contrasts they present. Bush is a moderate pretending to be a conservative and Cruz is the most conservative of all the candidates. When the other players start to fall, their bases will choose between these two.

Trump has peaked. He has the highest poll ratings but he also has by far the highest “would never vote for” percentages. People either love him or hate him and when the haters watch their chosen candidates fall, they’ll go for the nearest alternative other than Trump. That will be Bush and Cruz, though Rubio and Carson are nicely positioned between them as possible alternatives.

There’s something that should be noted. We are very selective with the analysts we watch. While it’s impossible to be completely unbiased with any analysis, we can hear in the reasoning behind the predictions to see if they’re choices are based upon personal hopes or facts.

The polls are currently all about Trump because he’s the most well-known candidate. The analysts looking to the actual primaries see Bush or Cruz because the positioning is right for both of them despite drops in the polls. We’ll see who’s right next year.

The post Why We Listen to (some) Analysts More than Polls appeared first on Conservative Haven.



via Conservative Haven | RSS Feed http://ift.tt/1POYedj

The Unfair Advantage for Cruz is March 1: The Texas and Southern Primaries

As usual, everyone in the media is focused on the February primaries. Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, and Nevada will play a big role in shaping the race for the GOP nomination because it’s the time for candidates to build momentum in the press and funds in the coffers in preparation for March 1. It will be the last day for some of the campaigns that do not perform well.

In the past, Texas has been an important state by size but being so late in the primary cycle (May 29 in 2012) the case was almost always decided before the second biggest state in the country had its say. Next year, it’s intermixed with the first Super Tuesday contests. This is why Ted Cruz is so well positioned to win the nomination. As long as he can fair well in the first four primaries, he will be able to pick up the most delegates and take the lead starting in March.

One of the keys will be how the other Texas favorites – Rand Paul and Jeb Bush – do in the early primaries. Paul’s campaign is already on “deathwatch” and is in jeopardy of not qualifying for the main stage at the coming CNBC debate.

As for Bush, his current problem with dropping poll numbers is minor. He could definitely be the player that pulls in the moderate Republican voters. The question is whether or not he will resonate in the south well enough to overcome his bigger competitor – Donald Trump. That particular wild card is impossible to predict at this point. The closer we get to the primaries, the better the picture will be.

Other than Texas and its 155 delegates, there are other southern states up for grabs that could go to Cruz if he has the momentum built up in the South Carolina and Nevada primaries. He won’t have to win. He simply has to place well enough to make a statement and infuse fundraising. His focus will be to hit the airwaves, grassroots, and social media targeting Texas, Alabama (50 delegates), Arkansas (40), Georgia (76), Oklahoma (43), and Tennessee (58).

The final factor in the equation will be the other three major contenders: Marco Rubio, Ben Carson, and Carly Fiorina. While they aren’t the wildcards that Trump represents, they still must fair well in the February primaries to be alive and well for Super Tuesday. Carson has the best chance of taking from Cruz in the southern states.

Speculation this early in the race is always futile, but it’s important for voters to understand the potential future landscape based upon a primary attack strategy rather than relying on flawed polls and media-manipulated buzz. The path to the nomination is much more complicated than a sound bite.

The post The Unfair Advantage for Cruz is March 1: The Texas and Southern Primaries appeared first on Conservative Haven.



via Conservative Haven | RSS Feed http://ift.tt/1j1HdT9

Ronald Reagan on Government Spending...


via Facebook http://ift.tt/1MHxH14

#Besties.


via Facebook http://ift.tt/1PO59U3

United Nations highlights food waste in coolest way possible

We aren’t the biggest fans of the vast majority of the United Nations’ actions. Their attempts to help are, in most circumstances, very poorly planned and terribly executed. That doesn’t even touch on the motives which are often questionable at best.

Despite all of that, they did something today that was pretty darn cool. Rather than the posh meals that normally get served to delegates when the United Nations is in session, they were served something completely different: food waste. Before you get grossed out, this is the type of food that most of us would actually enjoy. It was done to highlight the millions of tons of viable food that is discarded every year while we have billions of people starving.

The post United Nations highlights food waste in coolest way possible appeared first on WeHeartWorld.



via WeHeartWorld | RSS Feed http://ift.tt/1PNZg9p

Destroying ISIS isn’t Putin’s Goal. It’s His Excuse to Stop Uprisings.

The amount of admiration that is being lobbed towards Russian President Vladimir Putin is sickening. The media is doing it. He’s the new darling on social media posts Americans. There’s even a Presidential candidate who seems to admire his strategies.

Let’s take a closer look at Putin’s actions and the motivations behind them. He’s being glorified by the masses as a strategic genius who pulled a successful end-around on US President Barack Obama and the western political establishment. That assessment is understandable, but the boldness with which he’s acting is artificial. He’s not brilliant. He’s playing the only role he really knows: fear, accuse, and react cautiously while masking it all in bravado and strength.

Fearful of Western Influence

This is something that we started seeing in 2011 with the Libya situation. He was in quiet but not silent opposition to the support of ousting dictator Muammar Gaddafi, but he didn’t react.

As   astutely pointed out in her article, it was his fear of two things – western influence and populist uprisings in general – that caused the stance he’s had for years and the actions he’s taken in the last week in Syria.

The one thing Putin fears more than western influence is the possibility that the people he governs will do what others around the world are doing. He’s fearful of Islam, not as a religion but in the way that it replaces secular governance with theocratic rule. He doesn’t love Bashar al-Assad or the Ayatollah Khamenei, but he needs both of them to be the stable partners for maintaining a semblance of influence in the Middle East.

Air Strikes are Coming, but They’re Just an Excuse

To the international community, Putin will talk about the Islamic State as an existential threat to the people of the Middle East and the world. He will bolster his position by being the man of action that President Obama has conspicuously avoided being. He will have his Air Force hit targets to drive back the Islamic State and they will by strangely more effective than anything that the United Nations or other countries have been able to accomplish with the same strategy.

Behind the scenes, he will be fighting the rebels that truly oppose Assad. They are his bigger fear. They are the ones who can take out Assad with assistance from the west and that’s something Putin absolutely does not want.

Vladimir Putin Hat

Further behind the scenes in the darkest corners of Syria, Putin will work with the Islamic State to embarrass the United States, solidify their position in Iraq, and even hold their positions in eastern Syria. This will give him victories in western Syria that will justify his presence while the Islamic State grows in influence outside of Assad’s portion of the country.

More importantly, this will give him leverage to keep Assad in power against the wishes of Saudi Arabia, to keep Hezbollah in play against the wishes of Israel, and to keep his presence in the Middle East growing over time.

These are bold, even wild accusations against a man that some Americans have grown to admire. These accusations would be borderline insane if they weren’t likely true.



via Soshable http://ift.tt/1FESN0z

Tuesday, September 29, 2015

Congressional Leadership Must be Changed Before the 2016 Election

JD Power of the Purge for Ted Cruz

Conservatives in Congress are under attack. It isn’t the liberals on the other side of the aisle casting the stones. It’s the Republican Establishment, the “mainstream” that was mandated by the American people to rein in President Obama’s lawless agenda and outrageous spending. Many have chosen to play politics as usual, to do what they can in backroom deals that accomplish nothing rather than to boldly accomplish what the citizens have empowered them to do.

John Boehner is out. Hopefully his replacement will be stronger. Mitch McConnell is next. There are those who will bend to the moderates for the sake of playing the political games. This is unacceptable.

Change must happen now. We still have time to shake things up and stabilize before next year’s election. If we don’t, we risk being a party of turmoil and inaction. That, too, is unacceptable.

We must support Republicans like Ted Cruz who are doing everything they can to make the Republican Establishment do what they promised they would do when we elected them the last two cycles. The saddest part is this: they don’t realize that working from the middle to get nothing accomplished is the easiest way for the Republicans to lose control of Congress. People want action. They want promises fulfilled. They want the conservative ideals that were touted in campaigns to shine through in the form of results in Washington DC.

Many will attack Cruz and his conservative allies. We must do what we can to let them know that we won’t tolerate it. This isn’t a question of scale. It’s not about the far right versus the moderates. It’s about doing what they said they were going to do when they were given the majorities in the first place.



via Soshable http://ift.tt/1FHhnO8

Membership had its privileges.


via Facebook http://ift.tt/1iZOfYG

Trump’s Poll Numbers are Almost as Good as Giuliani in ’07 and Perry in ’11

If there’s a kiss of death in the world of Presidential primary politics, it’s peaking too early. From Herman Cain to Michele Bachmann, Howard Dean to Hillary Clinton, the “unbeatable” frontrunners the year before an election year invariably fall once the primaries actually take place.

Donald Trump is currently peaking. He just unveiled his tax plan that cuts taxes for everyone rich and poor. This is giving him a nice bump in the polls, as expected. It is also likely indirectly the kiss of death. More on that in a moment.

There are those who look at the polls and have already crowned Donald Trump as the Republican nominee. It makes me laugh. In September and October the year before a Presidential election, the polls are purely a popularity contest. That’s it. Name recognition plays a big role. Individual talking points play a big role as voters here something they can latch onto.

Trump is hovering between 20%-30% on the various polls with a RealClearPolitics average of 24%. That puts him close to the levels that Rudy Giuliani had at the same time period in 2007. Some of his polls had him at over 32%. in 2011, Rick Perry was at 26.5% average on October 1 before the wheels fell of the bus following the “oops” moment. Then, Herman Cain held the lead on November 1 at 26%. Newt Gingrich peaked at 35% in December. Eventually, Mitt Romney won the nomination while never leading in the 2011 polls other than a short spurt between Perry and Cain.

Rudy and Donald

Perhaps the clearest indicator of why the polls are meaningless this early in the race is Hillary Clinton in 2007. Her October domination of 53% makes Trump’s lead look very tiny.

Now, the Trump kiss of death. His tax plan is pretty straight forward and rather appealing as it was intended to be. The problem is that with a tax drop like this, one has to reduce spending dramatically. That goes contrary to his proposed policy changes that include extremely expensive items like building up the military and fixing the country’s infrastructure. The problem is that his proposed solution is that he’s going to cut extraneous spending. When he’s pushed back on that, he comes back with making so much because he’s going to bring back jobs from Japan, China, and Mexico. When there’s push back there, he comes back with how he’s going to make the country rich.

It’s not going to stand up when scrutiny increases among voters.

Analysts are usually only a little better than polls, but they’ve been more accurate. Other than President Barack Obama in 2008 when analysts were unwilling to go against Clinton’s 32% lead, the analysts were correct with their choices this early in the race since 2000. I remember the ridicule some were getting for picking John McCain in late 2007. This bodes well for Ted Cruz.

The poll leaders the last two Presidential elections in September and October were Rudy Giuliani, Rick Perry, Herman Cain, and Hillary Clinton. If the trends continue, Donald Trump is in serious trouble.



via Soshable http://ift.tt/1OEkSYm

As it Should Be…

It shouldn’t matter if you’re liberal or conservative. The Constitution has been clearly demonstrated to work as a document designed to liberties and lives from oppression within the government. It’s only when politicians regardless of their affiliation trample on the Constitution to push the wrong agenda that Americans truly suffer.

The visual nature of social media means that from time to time we will be sharing messages that should resonate for our audience. To see more of them, which are great for sharing on social media, simply click on the Messages category.

The post As it Should Be… appeared first on Conservative Haven.



via Conservative Haven | RSS Feed http://ift.tt/1iH5KMA

Ted Cruz on the Free Market System

Ted Cruz Free Market System

One of the greatest misconceptions in American politics today is that capitalism is evil. While there are aspects of capitalism that allow for wrongdoings, greed, and abuse of power, the system itself allows for those who can spread success to do so. When we take away that freedom, we solve much fewer problems than we create.

The visual nature of social media means that from time to time we will be sharing messages that should resonate for our audience. To see more of them, which are great for sharing on social media, simply click on the Messages category.



via Soshable http://ift.tt/1JzKpdo

Monday, September 28, 2015

Why are American officials surprised that Putin made a coalition without U.S.?

It isn’t surprising that Russia makes an agreement to share intelligence on ISIS with other countries, not including the U.S. So why were American officials so surprised that the Iraqi military’s Joint Operations Command was part of the intelligence agreement with Russia?

Obama said that compromise is required to end the fighting, specifically referring to the removal of Assad and his regime. Meanwhile, Russia sweeps in as the hero who tries to destroy one of the worst terrorist organizations of our time.

A recent article written on RedState described exactly what’s going on, and that is that Russia is filling in the gap that Obama has created. Obama looks like the, dare I say wimp, because the reality on the ground is that Assad ain’t leavin’ anytime soon. In the mean time ISIS/L grows stronger.

Putin accuses America of creating the terrorist organization by arming rebels in Iraq and Syria. However, Obama believes it is Assad’s crackdown that allowed the terrorist group to enter Syria, which enabled the group to expand their control. Thus, Obama feels Assad needs to leave and all the problems will be solved. I suppose over 200,000 deaths from the Syrian war and the massive influx of refugees isn’t a sign that we are past that point?

The sad part is that any new leader that the administration feels would be appropriate for the region will still need Russia’s help.

The post Why are American officials surprised that Putin made a coalition without U.S.? appeared first on Uberly.



via Uberly | RSS Feed http://ift.tt/1LYMMIL

Obama, Trump in Lockstep Over Syria and Russia

Most Americans couldn’t care less about foreign policy, especially as it pertains to the Middle East. Call it fatigue. Call it a short attention span. Whatever it’s called, there are two things happening right now that would have had people warming up typewriters for letters to the editor two decades ago. Today, we’re barely hearing anything about it.

The first was a sound bite in GOP Presidential candidate Donald Trump’s interview with 60 Minutes. When asked about how he would handle the Islamic State, one of his suggestions was to allow Russia to take care of it. They’re already in Syria. Let them wipe out ISIS and the Syrian rebels for the Bashar al-Assad regime. This is a ridiculous proposal for many reasons, not the least of which being that doing so would give Russia the strategic foothold they need in the Middle East and the moral high ground they’ve never had in the region. There’s only room for either the United States or Russia to hold influence over the most important strategic lands in the world. Giving it over to Russia is a bad idea, one that even the left has opposed… until now.

The second is encapsulated in a terrifying headline:

The American taste for war has been tainted by the our invasions in the Middle East over a decade ago. We pushed President Obama to get us out of their prematurely and now the region is facing the consequences. America is facing the consequences as well in the form of increased hatred and reduced influence in the region. The more that Middle Eastern countries turn to Russia, the less sway we’ll hold on the future of the region. This, too, is a very bad thing.

The saddest part is that many of Trump’s supporters will decry President Obama’s actions without even knowing that their own candidate of choice advocates the exact same thing.

We may not be able to get the current President to what must be done in the Middle East, but we can certainly elect a new President that doesn’t hold to the same insane ideas about Russia. Unfortunately, most Americans won’t even notice that portion of Trump’s speech.

The post Obama, Trump in Lockstep Over Syria and Russia appeared first on Conservative Haven.



via Conservative Haven | RSS Feed http://ift.tt/1Gdzt5g

The Planned Parenthood Debate isn’t Life versus Choice or Right versus Left. It’s Good versus Evil.

There are many who are positioning the fight over Planned Parenthood as different types of battles. Some say it’s government versus women, the so-called “war on women” that Republicans are allegedly waging. Others say it’s Pro-Life versus Pro-Choice with the future of abortion law hanging in the balance. Still others look at the divide among lawmakers and conclude that it’s right versus left with the Democrats wanting to fund it and the Republicans wanting to defund it.

All are partially correct but mostly wrong. This is a fight about criminal activity. It’s a battle over whether or not the United States government is willing to continue to fund an organization that has been publicly questioned over morals and inquired about from a legal perspective. We don’t have all of the answers. We need the answers before we can decide whether they are worthy of taxpayer money or not.

It’s for this reason that the fight is about good versus evil. There’s a distinction that should be noted: we’re not saying it’s about right versus wrong. In that debate, one’s perspectives on abortion come into play. Whether one believes that it’s right or wrong is not the question. Have they taken taxpayer money and used it to break the law? People who are on the side of good and lawfulness, regardless of their political affiliation or perspective on abortion, will want to know the answer before continuing to fund this organization. Those on the side of evil would fund without prejudice and willfully ignore the allegations without investigating them.

Am I accusing people supporting Planned Parenthood funding of being evil? No. Good people can be swayed to do evil things based upon their values. Just as many support Planned Parenthood regardless of their potential criminal activities, others would support conservative institutions if they were accused of breaking the law. If a conservative organization such as National Right to Life received federal funding and videos were released demonstrating that they may have broken the law, everyone with a conscience should demand defunding while an investigation is performed. Even though they might match a conservative ideologically, our values would demand that we probe first before continuing with funds.

The same should be the case with Planned Parenthood. The allegations are serious and the video evidence is compelling enough to demand an inquiry. Citizens paying half a billion dollars in taxes to fund the organization have a right to know the truth about whether they are breaking the law or not before we give them another dollar. That’s not political. It’s lawful. If you are pro-choice and believe in two things -the quality of work that Planned Parenthood does for women and the sanctity of law in the United States – then you should not be opposed to defunding. In fact, you should be demanding that the organization be defunded as quickly as possible and that an inquiry is made because you’ll want one of two things: the truth to come out in favor of Planned Parenthood or the reassignment of the funds to an organization that helps women without breaking the law.

It’s okay to be pro-choice and pro-lawfulness at the same time. It’s time to put the politics aside in this issue and discover whether or not Planned Parenthood is breaking the law or not. Blind support is dangerous.

Planned Parenthood Blind Support



via Soshable http://ift.tt/1OCuGlI

Ronald Reagan on Entrepreneurs

The fair market system works. It’s what helped to make America and other countries great. The push towards a world of socialism, while altruistic in its senses, is arguably the most deplorable methodology for governing business in the world. Capitalism isn’t perfect but it works.

The visual nature of social media means that from time to time we will be sharing messages that should resonate for our audience. To see more of them, which are great for sharing on social media, simply click on the Messages category.

The post Ronald Reagan on Entrepreneurs appeared first on Conservative Haven.



via Conservative Haven | RSS Feed http://ift.tt/1O4e32x

Sunday, September 27, 2015

Donald Trump’s Plan is Absolutely Impossible to Fulfill

The uninformed voters who watched Donald Trump’s 60 Minutes interview are certainly pumping their fists and embracing the things they heard. Like the high school student council presidential candidate, he’s promising to put soda pop in the water fountains and to eliminate homework on weekends.

It cannot work. None of it. I went in with a relatively open mind begging the GOP frontrunner to say something that would convince me he knows what he’s doing. I left with a terror that is actually higher than the first time I heard President Barack Obama’s plans. At least with Obama he acknowledged that the only way to make the math work was to raise taxes. Trump wants to increase spending even more than Obama AND he wants to do so after lowering taxes for almost everyone.

His positions in a nutshell:

  • Military: Make is “so strong, so powerful, so modern” by giving them the best technology in the world. Then, he wants to wipe out ISIS in Iraq. Those propositions alone would increase spending by hundreds of billions at the least.
  • Immigration: Build a wall. A cheap wall. That’s impenetrable. Then, deport people. Sounds good even if we acknowledge that a “cheap” wall and an “impenetrable” wall are two different things. However, it must be paid for somehow.
  • Infrastructure: The roads, grids, bridges, dams, and other infrastructure components are desperately in need of modernization and repair. I agree. Again, it must be paid for. What many don’t realize is that to truly fix infrastructure to the degree that Trump is promising won’t cost millions. It might not even cost billions. The fix that he describes could cost over a trillion dollars and take just shy of two decades.
  • Healthcare: Repeal Obamacare. We agree. Then, he wants to work with hospitals to get everyone healthcare. Who will pay for it, he was asked? The government. Wait… umm… seriously? Isn’t that… wouldn’t that be the same… aren’t we then talking about socialized medicine that would cost hundreds of millions if not billions of dollars per year?
  • Taxes: Okay, so everything at this point in his positions seem very liberal, which means that he’ll have to raise taxes, even if only on a temporary basis. These promises are extremely expensive, more expensive than anything that has been proposed since before the Vietnam War. That’s fine. We disagree with raising taxes but as long as we know the plan we can look at everything piece by piece and allow Congress to control the spending and declare what can be spent. At this point in the interview, reality fell into an alternate universe. He’s going to lower taxes. In fact, he’s going to allow many to not pay taxes at all. Then, he’s going to raise taxes for those who can afford it like dirty hedge fund managers. In essence, what he described is socialism but without a grain of mathematical sanity worked into the mix.

What Donald Trump has proposed is utterly and indisputably impossible. When asked how he’s planning on making the math work, he says he’s going to bring break free trade agreements and impose tariffs to force companies to hire American workers. Again, that’s not possible. He says he’s going to renegotiate these agreements because he’s the ultimate deal maker. Unfortunately, he cannot. Not only does he not have the power, but he would do tremendous harm to the credibility of the nation if he arbitrarily ignores the agreements that the country has made.

Donald Trump Plan

The only saving grace is that he’s incapable of doing what he says he’s going to do. He doesn’t have the ingenious loopholes that the current President has used to circumvent the laws because what he’s describing requires Congressional approval. In essence, his plan is to propose things that cannot happen mathematically and then blame Congress for not giving him money that isn’t there.

There should no longer be a fear of Donald Trump becoming President. His proposals are contradictions of themselves and this will be made apparent before the general election. Unfortunately, if the Republican voters don’t realize this in time, then we’re destined to nominate a candidate who is incapable of winning. Considering how fiscally liberal his perspectives are, it would be better to have a Democrat in the White House again rather than an illusionist like Trump.



via Soshable http://ift.tt/1iVtOfc

The system isn't broken. Those managing the system are not properly held accountable.


via Facebook http://ift.tt/1P0xng4

In the Middle East, Unnecessary Show of Weakness as Bad as Unnecessary Show of Force

The way we invaded Iraq and Afghanistan were asinine. The debacle of our Middle East policies the first decade of the century created a terrible atmosphere. Rather than correcting it, we’ve decided to make it much, much worse the last five years.

Let’s look at the situation in reverse order. The conclusion is that we messed things up by going in and then we made it worse by getting out before the job was done. Too much unnecessary force followed by excessive demonstrations of weakness did not cancel each other out. The combination established the worst possible situation in the Middle East.

Things are only going to get worse from here if we don’t act decisively very soon.

Now that we have the conclusion, let’s look at the rant about poor choices followed by a rallying call for the only possible solutions.

The Middle East Rant

Barack Obama George W. Bush

It’s with soberness and no feelings of pride that I recall debates I used to have when I opposed the wars. Back in the days when even a good number of liberal lawmakers followed President George W. Bush into misguided demonstrations of force, I was labeled as unpatriotic. My arguments that we were creating instability for no reason by going after people who had nothing to do with 9/11 fell on deaf ears.

These policies helped to arm the enemies of our enemies. Doing so arguably helped in the short term but led to the creation of enemies who have the potential of being far worse than anything Osama bin Laden ever dreamed. It helped to bring about the Arab Spring. It weakened Iraq to the point of dependency and turned Afghanistan into the ultimate spawning point for radical Islam to build roots.

The only thing worse than starting a fight that should never have happened is to not finish it. It’s the worst possible scenario – destabilize and weaken those who were holding the Middle East together, then abandon the mission before it’s done. It doesn’t really matter which was worse. We shouldn’t have gone in and we shouldn’t have left when we did. These are concepts that the US government doesn’t seem to understand and that the American people have chosen to ignore.

There are two different factors at play, here. For the people, it’s a matter of conflicting politics. We went in with the approval of citizens and we pulled out at the request of citizens. With that understood, this is one of those all-too-common situations where the citizens have been manipulated to believe what the agenda wanted us to believe.

In essence, our accumulated efforts for the last 14 years have had the opposite effects of what we were told. Iraq wasn’t liberated. It was harmed beyond repair. Afghanistan wasn’t cleansed of dangerous enemies. It was built up as the safe haven for emerging enemies.  Peace and Democracy weren’t established through the Arab Spring. A crumbled semblance of governance was inserted to disguise the unpopular truth that the previous secular regimes, while obtuse to our western sensibilities, were better for the people than the turmoil that has followed.

President Bush lived up to his hawkish reputation. President Barack Obama is trying to live up to the Nobel Peace Prize he never earned. The results have been catastrophic for the Middle East and it’s now spreading around the world.

Weakness Invited Russia and Pushed the Migrant Crisis

Vladimir Putin Watching

It would be easy to write a detailed book about how the Bush/Obama policies have created the atmosphere conducive to Russia’s emergence as the rising force in the Middle East. They are rapidly taking the role that the United States has abandoned. We talk. We frown. How could we have expected anything else, particularly after the Syrian red line was crossed without repercussions?

The Obama Administration has demonstrated so much weakness that we’re on the verge of losing all influence in the Middle East outside of Israel and Saudi Arabia (even though the Iran Deal has changed the calculus with both of those relationships). It’s as if we barged into the Middle East unwelcomed, made a mess of things, and departed like a bad party guest who made a mess and bailed out.

The migrant crisis is a direct result of these combined policies. Those who are fleeing righteously feel like they have no choice based upon the atmosphere we created. Those who are “fleeing” with them to plant seeds of the caliphate in western culture are laughing at the situation knowing that we laid down the elements that could lead to our own demise.

Strength and Decisive Sensibility is Required

Voting

There is a good chance that by January 20, 2017, it may already be too late to salvage the situation. Russia may be so entrenched that they’ll essentially replace the United States as the dominant force. We have to act now.

Unfortunately, that may not be possible. The President is in legacy-building mode. The chances of him addressing Russia, the Islamic State, or any of the other players in the region are slim. That’s not to say that the citizens shouldn’t act; if it’s possible at all to create enough awareness of what’s happening, lawmakers may be forced to take the actions required over the next few months. It’s highly unlikely but if we don’t try, it definitely won’t happen.

Plan B is to push for the right person to take over the White House and bring the appropriate level of strength to our Middle East policy. The last time I worked on a Presidential Election was as a College Republican in 1992. Since then, I have only loosely endorsed or attacked candidates. It’s not that I didn’t care. It’s that I’ve always understood the power of the President rests in the sentiment of the people and the situations we’ve faced for the last two decades were minor.

9/11 changed that. Now the situations are dire, but I had nobody to support. Bush was wrong. His opponents were wrong. John McCain didn’t offer a strong alternative. Mitt Romney never had a chance and his opponents in the GOP weren’t much better. Despite the importance of the situations we’ve faced over the last three election cycles since 9/11, I allowed futility to push me towards addressing the issues in other ways.

This election cycle is different. We are in the middle of the most important primary season since Ronald Reagan fought George H. W. Bush for the nomination in 1980. Who the Republicans choose as their nominee will have a dramatic effect on the course of the world. We are facing multiple existential threats and the right person must be nominated.

After carefully weighing the opinions, track records, and abilities of the major GOP candidates, I’ve come to the conclusion that Ted Cruz is the only one who will handle foreign affairs properly in the coming years. There are other good candidates; four or five of them would have been a better choice than anyone in the field the last two election cycles. However, for America to sensibly and appropriately utilize our strength to address the tumult that surrounds us, Cruz is the most qualified by a long shot.

On January 20, 2017, certain things have to start happening for our country to move forward and for the world to not fall apart. If the right actions aren’t taken, we will be seeing a much worse situation before the 2020 election. We may even see a world that has crumbled.



via Soshable http://ift.tt/1FtqqT1

Kevin McCarthy would be Just Like Boehner as Speaker

The tumultuous reign of John Boehner is coming to an end. Few would deny that fighting conservatives in the House played a major role in his departure even if, as he claims, he felt comfortable with his chances of retaining the seat had he chose to stay. His battles with conservatives were often more spectacular than his battles with Democrats.

He wanted so desperately to be a peacemaking, unifying statesman that he leaned too far to the middle on almost every issue. He couldn’t get the Democrats to budge on most issues and he couldn’t inspire the right to help him fight the wars. It wasn’t his policy choices or leadership skills that doomed his reign. It was his unwillingness to embrace true conservatism over politics-as-usual that made him ineffective.

His departure is greatly welcomed by those of us who hold to conservative values. However, a bigger problem looms with his most likely successor Kevin McCarthy from California. Another moderate, McCarthy has similar credentials and perspectives that Boehner has. The difference is that he’s even less willing to fight.

To understand this, we have to look past his handful of conservative perspectives. He’s against the Export-Import Bank and very vocal against Planned Parenthood, for example, which are the talking points that he’ll cling to when wooing Tea Party conservatives to support his bid. However, if we look deeper at his voting record, we’ll see that something very alarming happened. Initially, he was pretty darn conservative. Then, when political standing in the House became an important issue to him, he shifted dramatically.

He was voted to be Whip but ended up moving up to Majority Leader with the primary defeat of Eric Cantor. Since then, he has voted more and more liberally, falling in line with the goals of Boehner and ignoring the conservative values that have helped him to run unopposed in primaries in his district for years.

Consistency is an important trait. It means that you’re driven by personal values and the values of your constituents rather than the political games that are rampant in Congress. Shifting so quickly for the sake of ambition is something that we’ve seen before in Congressmen like Boehner and Cantor. It’s a trait that the party and more importantly the country cannot afford.

So, who should the Republicans pick if not McCarthy? We like Mark Levin’s choice in Jim Jordan, but there are two problems there. First, he’s very effective leading the conservative right in Congress. Second, it would be challenging for him to get the support necessary without having to make promises that we wouldn’t want him to keep.

Someone we’re watching closely is Jeb Hensarling from Texas. He’s conservative and would be more likely to get the votes necessary, but he probably won’t pursue. Our fall back alternative to McCarthy would be Daniel Webster from Florida. He’s as far left as one can get without losing his Tea Party membership card, but he’s still to the right of McCarthy and has demonstrated a nice combination of guts and gravitas that would offer a stark contrast to years of failed sessions of Congress.

Under normal circumstances, we push to the right. This time around, we’ll settle for as right as we can get. McCarthy is not the guy to make things different than they were under Boehner. He’s the most likely to keep things going in the exact same direction.

The post Kevin McCarthy would be Just Like Boehner as Speaker appeared first on Conservative Haven.



via Conservative Haven | RSS Feed http://ift.tt/1iCThtj

Thomas Sowell Discusses Time

Economist. Political pundit. Thinker. We know all of these things about Thomas Sowell, but now we can add humorous philosopher to his list of credentials. Anyone who has heard him speak or read his works know this about him already, but having a visualization of one of his nifty quotes helps to make the point. Time is so important, yet wasted by so many.

The visual nature of social media means that from time to time we will be sharing messages that should resonate for our audience. To see more of them, which are great for sharing on social media, simply click on the Messages category.

The post Thomas Sowell Discusses Time appeared first on Conservative Haven.



via Conservative Haven | RSS Feed http://ift.tt/1KMkz82

Regarding the Islamic State Threat

Stop ISIS

The Islamic State represents an existential threat to the whole world. They are concentrated in the Middle East now but their influence can be felt in western countries. Their goals are to unite the Muslim world under their caliphate and enslave, imprison, or kill all non-Muslims. They must be stopped.

The visual nature of social media means that from time to time we will be sharing messages that should resonate for our audience. To see more of them, which are great for sharing on social media, simply click on the Messages category.



via Soshable http://ift.tt/1LeARvZ

Saturday, September 26, 2015

Matthew 28:19 #JesusChrist #Faith #Bible #TeachAllNations


via Facebook http://ift.tt/1OAcLw6

In a World Where We can See Everything, We Choose to See Nothing

Over the last year, I’ve blamed several different groups of people for allowing the Islamic State, Boko Haram and other players to systematically annihilate Christianity in Syria, Iraq, North Africa, and other regions of the world. I’ve pointed at the US government, ISIS-sympathizers in the region, Saudi Arabia, the Vatican, and pretty much anyone else with the  power to stop it but the unwillingness to act decisively.

Today, I turn inward. This is my fault. It’s your fault. It’s the fault of all of the millions in western cultures who have chosen to put the attempted Middle East genocide on the backburner of our consciousness so we can focus on other things. It’s not just the petty millions who are more concerned about Taylor Swift’s latest fling or Tom Brady’s amazing touchdown throw. It’s also those who are conscientious of the world but who choose other more “pressing” issues to take over our focus.

While I wrote about the Pope bringing religion into the American political perspective, I should have been pointing out the torturous and sexual persecution that is thriving under the radar.

Before I spent time endorsing Ted Cruz, I should have noted the futile, symbolic efforts by the government to “address” the issues of Christians getting chopped up around the world for pleasure and sport.

I spend hours every day looking at religious and political news. I write for several publications on multiple topics. For this reason, I am to blame as much if not more than others for not doing everything I can to let people know about events like these:

We cannot look to the government to solve these problems. We have to tell them to do so. Looking at how Donald Trump has shifted the political conversation isn’t just based upon his exaggerated personality or strong platform within the media. It’s because people started nodding their heads and wondering the same things.

This needs to be done for Christians in the Middle East and around the world who are persecuted, tortured, raped, enslaved, and murdered. Their homes are burned. Their lands are taken. They are suffering much worse than 99% of what people complain about on social media.

Technology has allowed us to have the greatest and most vivid view of the world that we’ve ever had. The internet is even more important than television because we have control. We can see these things happening. We can share them with our friends, communicate with our leaders, and support the causes that can address them. Unfortunately, this all-the-access-all-the-time age has turned the technology into more of a distraction than a tool for communicating the important issues. In essence, our ability to see everything that we want has limited our view of the things we should be seeing, the stories we should be hearing.

Churches Destroyed in Middle East

If I don’t stop now, this is going to turn into one of my 3000 word posts and the point may be lost. Better to break this up into focused points spread across multiple mediums. This discussion isn’t over. It’s just beginning for me. I hope it begins soon for you as well.

It’s the people who control the sentiment, the sentiment that controls the perspectives in government, and the perspectives that control the actions. Nothing beyond symbolic motions and rhetoric can possibly happen to fix this situation until we let the leaders know that we care about this issue. To help, you first have to make it a priority. I care, now. Do you?



via Soshable http://ift.tt/1NTG239

How Old are the Republican Candidates?

One of the hardest pieces of news for me to believe was when I learned that President Ronald Reagan had Alzheimer’s. He wrote a letter to America nearly six years after leaving office, but reports started coming in that it had an effect on the latter days of his 2nd term in the White House.

Age has always been a concern for candidates. We have to look at where they are today, how old they’ll be in four years, and even how old they’d be at the end of a second term. Health science is progressing and it’s easier to keep a President fit, but in these turbulent times it’s important to know that failing health wouldn’t put the country in danger.

This year, we have an odd mix. There are plenty of Republican candidates in their 40s. Meanwhile, Hillary Clinton is 67, several years younger than Bernie Sanders or Joe Biden. The Democrats seem to be the “old fogies” this election cycle.

Here are the remaining major GOP candidates ranked by the age they would be when they take office on January 20, 2017. Add eight years and you’ll know where they’ll be if they win a second term.

  1. Marco Rubio – 45
  2. Bobby Jindal – 45
  3. Ted Cruz – 46
  4. Rand Paul – 54
  5. Chris Christie – 54
  6. Rick Santorum – 58
  7. Lindsey Graham – 61
  8. Mike Huckabee – 61
  9. Carly Fiorina – 62
  10. Jeb Bush – 63
  11. John Kasich – 64
  12. Ben Carson – 65
  13. Donald Trump – 70

Joe Biden would be 74 and Bernie Sanders would be 75 when they took office if either of them won the election. Is the GOP positioned to relate better with younger voters?

The post How Old are the Republican Candidates? appeared first on Conservative Haven.



via Conservative Haven | RSS Feed http://ift.tt/1KC8dRY

James 3:10 – ‘blessing and cursing’

Out of the same mouth proceedeth blessing and cursing. My brethren, these things ought not so to be.James 3:10 (KJV)

Most of the time, what a particular verses says is really what it says. There are times when interpretation is simply not necessary. This is one of those. Throughout the chapter, James discusses the fallacy of blessing and cursing coming from the same person, how small members are enough to steer the whole body. Just as a fountain does not bring forth good and bad water, so too should blessings and curses not mingle.

The post James 3:10 – ‘blessing and cursing’ appeared first on Judeo Christian Church.



via Judeo Christian Church | RSS Feed http://ift.tt/1gX8Bjl

Two Years Ago Today, Ted Cruz Prayed Before the White House

After the disastrous loss by the Republicans in 2012 that gave President Barack Obama his second term, many potential candidates started exploring the potential of 2016. Ted Cruz was certainly one of them, but his prayer before the White House two years ago today had nothing to do with a Presidential Run.

Pastor Saeed Abedini is still wrongly imprisoned in an Iranian jail despite our government’s willingness to release an insane amount of money to the Iranian government. We’ve already covered why the Iranian deal is such a bad thing. Politics is politics. This is the story of two men – one who is in jail for spreading the Gospel and one who has been fighting for his freedom.

There is a lot that has been written about Saeed, though apparently not enough to get the attention of President Obama or Secretary of State John Kerry. If you aren’t familiar with his plight and the impact on his family, stop reading this right now and learn more about Saeed’s story. Here’s we’re talking politics, but a man’s life is more important than that. Today marks the three year anniversary since he was imprisoned.

If you know of Saeed, it would be interesting to see Senator Ted Cruz doing something you won’t see many candidates do. He hit his knees. He prayed in front of the White House for Saeed’s sake. This wasn’t a well-publicized event; it was hard to find a good video on YouTube and it wasn’t covered by mainstream media at all. That wasn’t the point. This was just a group of people praying for safety for one of our brother’s in Christ.

This is a stark contrast to the current frontrunner. While Cruz was praying two years ago, Donald Trump was busy with a handful of Tweets playing around with the idea of running for President.

I have nothing against Trump as a person. He has some great talking points and he’s changed the conversation in this election to tackle important issues. However, I do have something against strong evangelical Christians who support his secular values over the values of a man like Cruz. Donald Trump will get plenty of support from non-believing Republicans. The fact that there are conservative Christians supporting him is unfathomable.

Ted Cruz has demonstrated over and over again during the campaign that he’s a man of faith. It’s good to see that it’s not just campaign rhetoric, that he practiced his faith when the biggest camera shooting video was an iPhone.

Ted Cruz Saeed Abedini



via Soshable http://ift.tt/1iRGmo4

Friday, September 25, 2015

The Best Part of the Pope’s Speech to Congress Didn’t Happen

As you’ve likely heard, Pope Francis didn’t do the one thing he really should have done when addressing the United States Congress. He chastised over the issues, quoted intelligent people from history about modern day events, and discussed many secular concerns with secular examples.

He did not, however, mention the Lord and Savior once.

When Peter, described by most Catholics to be the first pope, was told not to mention Jesus Christ, they couldn’t stop him.

28 Saying, Did not we straitly command you that ye should not teach in this name? and, behold, ye have filled Jerusalem with your doctrine, and intend to bring this man’s blood upon us.
29 Then Peter and the other apostles answered and said, We ought to obey God rather than men.Acts 5:28-29 (KJV)

The opposite occurred with Pope Francis. Many men and women have invoked the name of Jesus Christ when addressing Congress; they would not have stopped him and would have even encouraged it. This particular pope, the “people’s pope,” conspicuously chose not to use the name that he allegedly adores. He demonstrated that he’s a spiritual leader, a political leader, and an inspirational speaker. There are plenty of those in the world. There’s one pope (technically there are two right now, but that’s just semantics) and if anyone should use the platform of the United States Congress to reach the audience with the Gospel, it’s him.

At least that’s what one would think.

This is not an attack on Catholics, many of whom are strong in their faith of Jesus Christ. This is purely disappointment in a man who made a poor choice. The mainstream media might enjoy it. Liberals, atheists, and secular practitioners probably support his choice. Protestants and even Catholics should be appalled by the strange omission.

The post The Best Part of the Pope’s Speech to Congress Didn’t Happen appeared first on Conservative Haven.



via Conservative Haven | RSS Feed http://ift.tt/1JuTt3m

Addressing the ‘Ted Cruz Can’t Win’ Fallacy

Three times in the last five election cycles, the Republican establishment has made a terrible mistake. They believe that if someone is too conservative, they can’t win the general election. Let’s look at Ted Cruz and compare him to his Democratic counterpart, President Obama.

First, let’s take a look at the credentials that won President Obama the White House:

  • 1st-Term Senator in a major state
  • Extreme views that many in his own party considered too polarizing
  • Minority
  • Attended Harvard Law School where he was an editor of the Harvard Law Review and graduated magna cum laude
  • Young, energetic, passionate
  • Strong speaking (with a teleprompter) and passionate debater
  • Universally hated by the opposing party for radical opinions and proposed solutions

I don’t think it’s necessary to list the credentials for Ted Cruz since they are precisely the same. The only difference is that he doesn’t need a teleprompter.

The Democrats recognize that polarizing views win. The biggest fallacy that blinds the GOP is the perception that independents are all moderates. That’s not the case. They’re open-minded. They reserve the right to go as far left or right as they want. They simply need convincing. The Democrats convinced them the last two election cycles that their candidate’s extreme perspectives were more valid than the moderate perspectives of Mitt Romney and John McCain. They did the same thing with Bill Clinton when he went against Bob Dole and George H. W. Bush.

One can argue, despite two terms that were more liberal than promised, that the two George W. Bush campaigns were successful because they were further to the right than John Kerry or Al Gore were to the left. The platforms were extremely conservative even if the President turned out to be more moderate on all things other than the military.

Ted Cruz can Win

I hear all the time on social media and talking to “pundits” that they like Ted Cruz but they don’t think he can win. They say he’s too divisive (like President Obama), too controversial (like President Obama), and too unorthodox (like President Obama). They say he’s too polarizing… like President Obama.

Polarizing works. The Democrats understand this, now. Many Republicans are still clinging to the moderation trap, the conservatives-can’t-win fallacy that yielded Romney, McCain, and now possibly Jeb Bush. Ted Cruz is exactly the person who can win the general election for the same reason that President Obama has won the last two.

If Ted Cruz can win the nomination, I am certain that he will win the White House. The sooner that the Republican party realizes this, the better our chances are of not having another liberal in the White House in 2017.



via Soshable http://ift.tt/1LSqiZG

Why the Press isn’t Attacking Jeb Bush

There are conspiracy theories, and then there are conspiracies. We don’t dwell in the former, but the latter seems to be in play as we watch the press conspicuously not attack Jeb Bush despite being so very attack-worthy.

The four nonconformists – Donald Trump, Ted Cruz, Ben Carson, and Carly Fiorina – are getting their fair share of attacks. Trump probably deserves more, but we’ll discuss why he’s not getting more shortly. Marco Rubio, Rand Paul, and John Kasich are getting ridiculed by the leftist media. Most of the other candidates are getting occasional swipes. Jeb Bush, the darling of dissent from the media a few months ago, is practically being propped up by them.

So, what’s the conspiracy? What’s the problem with not addressing Jeb Bush’ problems? For this, I turned to a friend in the liberal media who wisely chose not to have me include her name.

“He’s losing too soon,” she said. “We’ve been told to hold off on him until he rises back up in the polls.”

That was all I was allowed to quote, but the discussion went much further. They, the mainstream media, see Jeb Bush as the easiest to beat if Hillary Clinton wins the Democratic nomination. They had thought it was Trump, which is why he has been given so much press time, but that strategy seems to have the potential for backfiring. He might actually be able to pull off a win if he can get the nomination and that’s simply not acceptable. Expect the attacks on Trump to start very soon, she said.

Of course, there have already been attacks on Trump… from the right. Fox News has been “unfair” in his words. Meanwhile, CNN, MSNBC, and other traditionally leftist news organizations have been much more fair.

There have been attacks from the left as well, but not nearly as much as there will be if he actually wins the nomination. It’s like saving ammunition; they have so many angles from which they can attack him that they want to save the juiciest for the unlikely scenario that the Republicans actually nominate him.

This isn’t the type of conspiracy that has a name or a central organization promoting it. It’s an unspoken salivation that gets communicated over private lunches and public winks.

If you ever want to see who the left fears, look at who they attack the most. Right now, it’s Cruz, followed by Carson and Fiorina. Trump is getting some attacks because it’s hard for them to hold back all of their ammunition. With Bush, it’s practically a ceasefire until he gets his traction back under him.

The post Why the Press isn’t Attacking Jeb Bush appeared first on Conservative Haven.



via Conservative Haven | RSS Feed http://ift.tt/1LBpmgH

Thursday, September 24, 2015

The One Thing Pope Francis has Gotten Right in His Visit to America

Yes, there are many who will bash me for criticizing the Pope. He’s the “people’s Pope” after all and any dissent is somehow considered to be paramount to hatred. I don’t hate the Pope, nor do I hate all of his ideas. The way that he’s presented them and the solutions he’s proposing are preposterous, but there’s no need to go into details about that. You either see it or you don’t.

One thing that I agree with that most, even moderate conservatives, probably wouldn’t agree with is the idea of allowing religion to guide the political discussion. That’s not to say that I’m promoting a theocracy or the idea of allowing religion to influence policy, but the guidance that religious principles (and for me, those principles are reflected through the Bible) can bring to political agendas has always been one of the most important factors in the greatness of the United States until the last couple of decades.

It’s easy to allow the messenger to taint the message one way or another. For example, the silliness of the Pope insinuating that we should embrace amnesty and basically open the borders is easy for someone who lives behind an impenetrable wall. It’s easy knowing that a higher percentage of immigrants from Mexico and South America will be Catholic than the percentage of Catholics in the overall United States population. It’s easy when the numbers surrounding crimes perpetrated by illegal immigrants have been hidden since 2008.

Vatican Wall

On the other hand, the Pope’s attempt to instill a sense of morality within the value systems of America is a righteous cause even if his chosen causes such as climate change are not appropriate. There’s a reason that his call for other countries, in particular the United States, to help out with the migrant crisis in the Middle East and Europe ring hollow to me. The Catholic Church has the resources to solve the problem on their own without any outside assistance and it wouldn’t even register as a blip on their balance sheet, but that’s not their cause.

True change cannot come from a single individual, even one as influential as the Pope. For change to truly occur, there has to be a shift in the focus of citizens. We once allowed conservative Christian values to guide politics. This changed recently and the change has been clearly demonstrated as being for the worse. It’s not a particular candidate, a President, or a Pope that can make this happen. The shift has to happen within the people.

There’s a reason that the Obama Administration labeled groups such as “constitutionalists” and “evangelicals” as the primary targets of their watch lists. They realize that their agenda can only work if conservative Christians continue to remain relatively silent. We’re the juggernaut they don’t want to fight and sadly we have failed to act on their fears. In other words, they’re winning. We’re silent. We’re allowing the liberal- and atheist-agendas to keep us from rising up.

I’m not talking about a revolution. Some would disagree when I say we haven’t reached that point yet, but I believe that an electorate and an activist body that is willing to fight through standard political methods can still shift the country’s direction. In our current situation, “rising up” means allowing our proper Christian values to guide our actions. We can’t let our religious beliefs be secondary to other issues like immigration or tax reform. If we allow our Christian values to guide our votes and our actions, then individual issues will be addressed as a result.

#CCV2016

Now is the time to truly vet out candidates. Where do they say they stand? Where do their actions now and in the past tell us that they stand? Talk tracks are easy. Actions are more telling.



via Soshable http://ift.tt/1G6fq8Q

Proper #Cupcaking. #ProTip #FoodHack #DaddingDoneRight #ResemblesCrabbyPatty


via Facebook http://ift.tt/1L9Wxcw

Romans 5:8 #Grace #TrueLove #JesusChrist


via Facebook http://ift.tt/1KFhxCq

Wednesday, September 23, 2015

Russia’s Middle East Presence is President Obama’s Fault

The Middle East has been essentially under United States control since the second Gulf War. Then, we gave up control two years ago when the red line was crossed and President Obama chose to do nothing about it. His weakness, and ours, was placed in clear view for the world to see.

Nobody stepped up immediately and we were given another unfortunate opportunity to reestablish control with the Islamic State. With ISIS, we have the most valid reason to go in and fix the situation than we’ve ever had in the past. Unfortunately, the disastrous aftermath of the invasions of Iraq and Syria under the Bush Administration made it more politically correct to essentially ignore the Islamic State and give them free reign over the region. We went in when we shouldn’t have and we didn’t go in when we should have.

Now, Russia is making a play to be the dominant superpower in the region thanks to our Nobel Peace Prize winner’s inability to act for peace.

Perhaps more telling of this administration’s failures is the fact that Israel, our longtime ally and a country that has been worried about Russia since before the USSR fell, is actually stepping in to talk to Vladimir Putin and put their concerns at ease. According to Newsweek, they felt that they had to do it since President Obama wasn’t apparently not going to.

Netanyahu may have thought that Russia was no worry, given simple geography and the fact that American foreign policy and military strength had kept the Russians out of the Middle East for a half century. But then along came Barack Obama, and now the Russians have made a major move in Syria.

The American reaction—thus far, one phone conversation by John Kerry and one by Ashton Carter—will not have deterred Putin, so Netanyahu on September 21 flew to Moscow to talk with the Russians.

I’ve resisted being critical of President Obama because there has never been a shortage of voices speaking out about him, but this is different. This level of weakness by an American President is unprecedented. He’s making Jimmy Carter seem like a pit bull by comparison. The end of this disastrous Presidency cannot come soon enough.

President Obama Middle East



via Soshable http://ift.tt/1Mrn2re

Ted Cruz is the Real Outsider America Seeks

There are three political outsiders running for the GOP nomination for President. Ben Carson and Carly Fiorina are obvious ones, but what needs to be understood is that Ted Cruz is just as much of an outsider as anyone. His politics ring true for conservatism and for America without appealing to the spineless Republican-led Congress.

Americans have voiced their early opinions in the form of polls that show outsiders leading the way. In the most recent polls, Carson, Fiorina, and Cruz are joined by party-favorites Jeb Bush and Marco Rubio, depending on which poll you read. This preference for outsiders is resonating. It means that Americans in general and Republicans in particular are tired of the business-as-usual style that lawmakers on both sides of the aisle seem to promote. They say they don’t like the status quo in campaign speeches but the actions of Congress since the Republicans took control last year speak to a status quo agenda.

Around 1/4th of the voters seem to like Donald Trump early on. They are doing this because he too promotes the idea of being an outsider, but he’s about as “insider” as anyone can get. He’s never held office, but he’s admitted to buying off people in office. He’s never received a vote, but he’s spent plenty of money to get votes for whichever Republican or Democrat he needed the most at the time. He doesn’t vote on laws in Congress but he’s been able to shift support for the passage of many of them. His opinions and actions have made him a bigger DC insider than half of the candidates running.

Ted Cruz is the only candidate who has the fortitude to stick with the values that will help to rebuild America. Carson and Fiorina seem to be very strong and capable people and they have the outsider status that many Americans seek, but their histories are tainted with liberalism and poor judgment, particularly Fiorina. Cruz, on the other hand, wasn’t acting liberal before he was a Senator. His record, opinions, and actions have demonstrated a willingness to be guided by conservative values. Unlike all of the other candidates, he won’t have to do any sidestepping or apologizing for liberal errors in judgment he’s made in the past. All of the other candidates will. All of them.

The country is looking for an outsider to come to their rescue. The fact that Cruz has been in Washington DC since 2013 doesn’t mean he’s an insider. He’s proven more than anyone else in the last three years that he’s an outsider on the inside making things happen for Americans. We support Cruz for the GOP nomination for President in 2016.

The post Ted Cruz is the Real Outsider America Seeks appeared first on Conservative Haven.



via Conservative Haven | RSS Feed http://ift.tt/1FgLNa5

Trump’s Boycott of ‘Unfair’ @FoxNews is Further Proof He’s Incapable of Being President

Donald Trump is going to teach Fox News a lesson. They aren’t bowing down to him like the liberal media that is salivating over the possibility of him winning the nomination, so he’s lashing out like a student council candidate.

Don’t get me wrong. I think that Fox News is far from deserving of any defense. They are barely more tolerable than the liberal media giants because all of them tend to distort the truth to fit someone’s agenda, but they’re also the only ones who are treating Trump properly. What Mr. Trump and his followers don’t seem to understand is that the liberal media is being “fair” to him because they so greatly desire for him to get the Republican nomination. Their ratings will shoot through the roof as they unveil scandal after scandal about him. Their candidate of choice, whichever one emerges from the Democratic mess, will be assured a victory once they unleash jounalistic hell on him.

They aren’t being fair because they believe in fairness. They are being fair because they no he absolutely cannot win the general election. Donald Trump is their best chance of having another Democrat in the White House for four more years. It’s very clear to anyone other than those under the spell of Trump’s illusionist’s delusion.

Many of his supporters are cheering him on. Some are starting to see a trend here. He doesn’t take criticism well. He doesn’t like to be treated as anything other than the winner that matches his self-perceptions. He punishes those who oppose him. He’s no longer just sounding like a version of President Obama with a couple of conservative talking points spewing from his mouth. He’s sounding much worse than the President.

Mr. Trump, if you’re so concerned that Fox News isn’t being fair, how can you possibly expect to succeed as President? The condemnation you’ll receive if you win the nomination will far exceed the unfair treatment you’re getting from Fox News.

Maybe he’s secretly still friends with NBC after all.

Donald Trump NBC



via Soshable http://ift.tt/1ixrmL3

Christian Persecution is Very Real Despite Claims Otherwise

In America, it’s very easy to get complacent about faith. While many are waking up to the fact that Christian values are under attack in the United States, it’s hard to feel bad about our rights when those in other countries risk true persecution in the form of death.

There are battles that must be fought for the faith in America and other western cultures, but it’s imperative that we never forget our brothers and sisters in the Middle East and other regions. The Islamic State, which we’ve covered in the past, is an existential threat to believers in Christ in the very place where early Christianity formed its roots. Assyrian and Coptic Christians are being forced from their lands, kidnapped, and martyred on a daily basis. A recent report from Christian Freedom International reveals that a Christian is martyred every five minutes, making them statistically the most persecuted religion in the world.

It isn’t just the fact that Christians are dying. The way they are being tortured before death is inhumane. Add to that the fact that women and children are kept as slaves following the murders of their husbands, sons, and fathers and it’s clear that the atrocities being committed against Christians can only be attributed to the influence of Satan himself. This is pure evil being perpetrated in the name of the false god Allah.

Americans are, for the most part, shielded from these truths. One might say that they get to see it on Fox News or online news publications, but the reality of the situation is so appalling that the American population doesn’t get an appropriate level of exposure:

  • While Cecil the Lion’s death was tragic, it did not deserve to get exponentially more coverage than human being being tortured and beheaded in the same region.
  • As the Republicans fight the Iran nuclear deal, making for multiple discussions during debates and in speeches, the future risk of a savage Iran shouldn’t be superseding the current crisis on the other side of the border.
  • Donald Trump might have a hard time fielding questions about Muslims, but that news is minuscule compared to what actual Muslim extremists are currently doing to Christians around the world.

There are always going to be important issues to cover and we don’t want to downplay the importance of other events, but it seems as if American media feels we don’t have the stomach to hear about and address the catastrophic death and destruction being perpetrated every day against Christians around the world. The concept that Kentucky County Clerk Kim Davis is being called a “martyr” by some is an insult to the faith she claims to follow. She’s not a martyr. She spent a few days in jail. She’s fighting for her right not to issue licenses with her name on them. Christians in Syria, China, and other countries are fighting for their right to live as Christians.

This isn’t just a problem with the media wanting to appease an audience that wants fresh stories. It’s about the people themselves not wanting to hear about it. True believers in Yeshua as our Lord and Savior should never shield our eyes or cover our ears when stories about Christian persecution hits our screens. We should be sharing the news with our circle of influence and doing everything we can to help. It goes beyond awareness. We must act.

In this political atmosphere with so many people running for office, it’s time to start asking what will be done. We need to vote from our Biblical perspective with the world in mind. The United States has relinquished its leadership role in many ways and for many people around the world. In the battle against the Islamic State and others who persecute Christians, we must use our resources and great might to lead the fight. Instead, we are sending in a few drone strikes, making diplomatic maneuvers, and calling it a day.

If the media and the government are unwilling to give us the facts, then we must seek them for ourselves. If the government is unwilling to act, then we must do what we can as individuals to help those in need.

The post Christian Persecution is Very Real Despite Claims Otherwise appeared first on Judeo Christian Church.



via Judeo Christian Church | RSS Feed http://ift.tt/1gP1SI4