Bluegrassrivals

Congressional Dems used to sowing the seeds of deceit and reaping a harvest of fools, have run up against the steely missiles of reality in the person of Benjamin Netanyahu. In the Dem's own classic style of political reverse psychology, they are accusing Israel's Prime Minister with the intent to make political overtures in his upcoming address to the US Congress. While behind the scenes---ARTICLE EXCERPT "Two senior US Senate Democrats invited Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Monday to a closed-door meeting with Democratic senators during his upcoming visit to Washington, warning that making US-Israeli relations a partisan political issue could have "lasting repercussions." http://www.jpost.com/Israel-News/US-Sena...sit-391968

So, an open address to the US Congress would be politicizing the Iranian issue, while a "closed door meeting" to include only Democrats headed by the vacuous Feinstein and dubious Durbin would not? LOL, I suppose the Dems just sort of got used to Republicans being locked out of important deliberations during the last congressional session. So used to it in fact, that a little threat affixed to the invite seemed apropos.

Incredibly, no lame streamers are even comparing the recent congressional arm twisting of England's Prime Minister and our President with regard to enhanced congressional sanctions.

And it doesn't stop there! Kerry is talking about how much terrorism has recently declined while a US intelligence officer, James Clapper, has just declared 2014 as the worst year on record for global terrorism.


"When the final accounting is done, 2014 will have been the most lethal year for global terrorism in the 45 years such data has been compiled," Clapper told the Senate Armed Services Committee.

A day earlier, Kerry testified at a separate hearing that, "Despite ISIL, despite the visible killings that you see and how horrific they are, we are actually living in a period of less daily threat to Americans and to people in the world than normally; less deaths, less violent deaths today, than through the last century."

And on a side note, why do the Democrats refer to ISIS as ISIL??? Surely this isn't Obama's desperate attempt to prove Jihad John isn't Muslim....

Granny Bear Wrote:And it doesn't stop there! Kerry is talking about how much terrorism has recently declined while a US intelligence officer, James Clapper, has just declared 2014 as the worst year on record for global terrorism.


"When the final accounting is done, 2014 will have been the most lethal year for global terrorism in the 45 years such data has been compiled," Clapper told the Senate Armed Services Committee.

A day earlier, Kerry testified at a separate hearing that, "Despite ISIL, despite the visible killings that you see and how horrific they are, we are actually living in a period of less daily threat to Americans and to people in the world than normally; less deaths, less violent deaths today, than through the last century."

And on a side note, why do the Democrats refer to ISIS as ISIL??? Surely this isn't Obama's desperate attempt to prove Jihad John isn't Muslim....

The "side note" first. They will not refer to them as ISIS because that stands for Islamic State of Iraq and Syria. And as everybody knows, what tends to be uncomfortable or does not fit the administration narrative is simply sidestepped. The L in ISIL stands for Levant which is the typically repackaged and respun liberal variant.

Here's a quote and a link to explain that fully----- "IS simply stands for the Islamic State, while ISIS stands for the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria. ISIL is the acronym for the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, which seems remarkably similar to ISIS. The differentiation between the word ‘Syria’ and the word ‘Levant’ is actually quite significant, however, given the usage of the term by President Obama and his administration."

Source: http://www.glennbeck.com/2014/09/15/why-...tcopy_link



As for Clapper. He already ate a bullet for the administration and found it to be a bit unpalatable, remember the deal with the data mining?

^^
I didn't remember it at first, until I ran across it last night.

You always hear folks who "worry" about the government and their direction, but in all seriousness, it's terrifying to think where we could be in five years.

Granny Bear Wrote:^^
I didn't remember it at first, until I ran across it last night.

You always hear folks who "worry" about the government and their direction, but in all seriousness, it's terrifying to think where we could be in five years.

I'm with ya on that one. The digital profile that already exists out there on each person in the US is a bit more than revealing. Add to that NSA data mining and now the control that government has over the internet and secrets have become a thing of the past.

It's interesting to note that in October of 2013 Mr Obama nominated Tom Wheeler, "Cable Industry Lobbyist and Campaign Bundler, New Head of
FCC". When asked about how he felt about the Wheeler appointment former FCC Commissioner Nicholas Johnson had this to say--- "Well, I think it's somewhere between bizarre and outrageous. And there are three things that we can start with that are wrong with it, and then we'll come to a couple more."
READ INTERVIEW---- http://therealnews.com/t2/index.php?opti...ival=10189

Then on Feb 4, 2015 "The chairman of the Federal Communications Commission (Tom Wheeler) on Wednesday proposed the "strongest open Internet protections" the Web has ever seen." http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-...ules-ever/


I believe it has become obvious that liberals want to force the rest of us to conform to their values, (whatever that means) and are willing to use the courts and government to legislate conservatives into submission. It makes it harder to do that as long as the internet is filled with mavericks like Glenn Beck, Mark Levin, and Laura Ingraham who are out there putting forth a differing view from the White House narrative. So how does one control anything in this country? Well, how about charging people for their internet surfing, sort of like a cellphone bill. If they can charge for data usage going and coming, that would mean a lot of people just could not afford to surf anymore. Problem solved.

See, liberals think that as long as they continue to give people stuff, they will continue to vote for them. And thus they will stay in power and in a position to properly manage their liberal terraforming project, which now that the US is on board seems to have nearly gone global that is, among the Eurozone nations. However, other 'bigs' like China, Russia and the Arab World soon to include a nuclear Iran, and of course North Korea, will never buy into their pipe dream, but then since when did the constraints of reality ever limit the liberal mind? At any rate, liberals don't need conservative talking heads out there quoting the Constitution all the time and I believe they simply want to shut them up.

Like they say, elections have consequences. If Hillary follows up Obama for another 8 year stint in La-La Land, I would expect most everybody might be a little terrified in five years.

Net Neutrality

"The decision comes after a year of intense public interest, with the FCC receiving four million public comments from companies, trade associations, advocacy groups, and individuals. President Obama weighed in as well, asking the FCC to adopt the rules using Title II as the legal underpinning. The vote was 3-2, with Democrats voting in favor and Republicans against."
http://arstechnica.com/business/2015/02/...-title-ii/

Conservatives get a lot of heat for what seems to be some pretty invisible charges from the left these days. And yet every time one of these fundamental transformations goes down, it is always a cohesive and partisan Democrat posse running over their outmanned Republican counterparts. How anybody can buy into the idea that it is the Repubs that are the causing congressional division is beyond me.

Netanyahu did not disappoint in today's address to the Joint Session. The shameless Democratic response was very well thought out by DNC standards. Never far from the accepted playbook, they said Netanyahu did not know what he was talking about. :please:

Netanyahu is a grad of MIT and Harvard. A commando who was wounded in battle twice. The Prime Minister of Israel not once but twice, and that is just hitting the high spots. I sincerely doubt that many in either house would be worthy to legitimately challenge Netanyahu on any level whatever. But, like their lambasting of Mitt Romney, since when does reality enter into the equation when a kool aid drunken Dem gets up in front of the microphone?

I still believe that Republicans need to grow a backbone and do whatever it takes to get the upper hand against Obama- fight fair or fight dirty, it doesn't matter. Just fight. Speeches do nothing.

I just want to point out it was not the left that did not want to fund homeland security for some political point

As far as the Isreal's P.M. showing up yesterday...good for him but he is a diplomat...period please go to the U.N and speak there... I know the House has nothing better to do then to invite diplomats up to speak because life is so great in America right? I mean they passed a pipeline! Job Done! Way to Go! Great in the meantime in Southern Kentucky for the passed 30 years... life is horriable! Yet, there is hope in the President's Budget of 1 Billion Dollars to Southern Kentucky. Yeah we don't need it! The Promise Zones have produced 100 Million last year! Yeah we dont need it. 600,000 people have health insureance, yeah we dont need it! Have a good week. Hope that it is a safe one and that your local communittees have good road equipment! Be safe!

Truth Wrote:I still believe that Republicans need to grow a backbone and do whatever it takes to get the upper hand against Obama- fight fair or fight dirty, it doesn't matter. Just fight. Speeches do nothing.

They're between a rock and a hard spot. After all, did not Obama himself make on-record-comments on 22 separate occasions stating the Constitution did not grant him the power to grant amnesty and/or federal benefits to illegal immigrants? Once the midterms were over the tooth fairy or somebody, changed all that and now he can do whatever he wants.

I'm hoping the SCOTUS wakes up and rules to correct their own error on ObamaCare. That will restore some measure of order to our system of government, once the envy of the world. Then maybe folks (especially congressional Republicans), will understand the absurdity of a President who openly rejects the Constitutional authority of the Congress of the People.

tvtimeout Wrote:As far as the Isreal's P.M. showing up yesterday...good for him but he is a diplomat...period please go to the U.N and speak there... I know the House has nothing better to do then to invite diplomats up to speak because life is so great in America right? I mean they passed a pipeline! Job Done! Way to Go! Great in the meantime in Southern Kentucky for the passed 30 years... life is horriable! Yet, there is hope in the President's Budget of 1 Billion Dollars to Southern Kentucky. Yeah we don't need it! The Promise Zones have produced 100 Million last year! Yeah we dont need it. 600,000 people have health insureance, yeah we dont need it! Have a good week. Hope that it is a safe one and that your local communittees have good road equipment! Be safe!

No, actually he is the elected leader of one of most powerful and strategically important nations on this earth.

He is the elected leader and I think had a tie yesterday, so all those foreign policy experts in Eastern Kentucky, how does that work? Also, I thought it was the President's job to deal with diplomacy, am I mistaken on this? Is there some document that outlines this?

tvtimeout Wrote:He is the elected leader and I think had a tie yesterday, so all those foreign policy experts in Eastern Kentucky, how does that work? Also, I thought it was the President's job to deal with diplomacy, am I mistaken on this? Is there some document that outlines this?

Do you ever check your liberal cheer leader sources before you come on here and embarrass yourself? It's all over the news today that Bibi will have no trouble at all in being returned for his 4th term as Prime Minister. Obama was evidently so all-in to see Netanyahu unseated that couldn't make himself call and offer his congratulations for having been reelected. Instead, he had Secretary Kerry call him. And we all know how much respect Netanyahu has for Kerry after his miserable performance during Israel's last military skirmish with Hamas, right?

Let's see... diplomacy. di·plo·ma·cy
(dĭ-plō′mə-sē
n.
1. The art or practice of conducting international relations, as in negotiating alliances, treaties, and agreements.

Tell you what, why don't you try and square what he did to influence the election of maybe our closest ally with this definition, and then we'll talk some more?

I guess we should be grateful for small victories. It seems Netanyahu's speech before the Congress did him a world of good, both in the US and back home in Israel. As the result, many Americans have a much clearer view about the threat Iran poses to our respective countries. And his (Netanyahu's) masterful display of statesmanship caused his approval rating to soar, again in both countries. Added to that is the fact that John Boehner now looks much more brilliant than Obama would like for having invited Bibi in the first place. As does the now famous open letter written to Iran and signed by 47 recently heartened Republican Senators.

The aggregate of which has been the rising demand by US citizens for Congress to have a say in any nuclear agreement between the US and Iran. :biggrin:

Excellent Post. Great Job. Way to Go! Write Letters! Isreal and the whole Middle East problems have been around my entire life. I say let Isreal take care of their own problems, let us stay out and follow the advice of George Washington. Each to their own though.

tvtimeout Wrote:Excellent Post. Great Job. Way to Go! Write Letters! Isreal and the whole Middle East problems have been around my entire life. I say let Isreal take care of their own problems, let us stay out and follow the advice of George Washington. Each to their own though.

God speaking with Abraham---
Genesis 12:2-3 (KJV)
2 "And I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great; and thou shalt be a blessing:
3 And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed."


It is readily obvious that we Americans have come to the point where we don't have a lot of respect for the Almighty, that is, among those who are lost. However, it is not often that one runs across a Christian, especially one who says he is a Deacon, that does not understand the relationship of the nation Israel, (the Olive Tree) and Christian Church (based largely in the US and often referred to as the "grafted branch" or Wild Olive). In view of the declaration God makes in the verses above, I certainly would not want to be counted among those who would dare to curse Israel. Nor would I want to take a middle of the road approach in supporting Israel. In fact, I would contend that it is impossible for one to claim Christianity and indifference, toward God's chosen people in the same breath. To love Christ is to love the Church, is to love the nation Israel. After all, was it not the great Apostle Paul himself who said the following? Romans 2:10 (KJV)
10 "But glory, honour, and peace, to every man that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile:"

See, that's the problem with regard to the global unrest we see these days. There is no ducking it or ignoring it. We've tried that approach for the last 6 years in Iraq. Our having crawfished in such manner has seen the rise of ISIS and the birth of what they're calling the Caliphate. That's IN Iraq mind you. I hear activist media types the likes of Sheppard Smith being caustically critical of any who would oppose the 'deal' the administration is presently cooking up with Iran. Insisting that we have only two choices; 1) accept the deal and see what happens 2) or reject the deal and keep sanctions in place. According to him, rejecting the deal would lead to war with Iran, Russian and China.

Now, I don't take my cues from Sheppard Smith by any stretch. But, his media activism does demonstrate the validity of prophetic texts within the Scripture. Man is moving towards war whether he wants it or not. And since America has chosen to turn her back on God, her leaders and many of the common folks have been stricken with the following curse (of sorts); Romans 1:21-22 (KJV)
21 "Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. 22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,"

So, the moral of this story goes like this. If one wants to sell the Brooklyn Bridge, he seeks out a fool, does he not? It follows, if Iran wants to negotiate their way into nuclear status who would they seek out?