The House of Representatives overwhelmingly approved H.R.3504, The Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act.
In short, it does two things. It protects life. And it grants the newborn all the rights and protections under the law that any other newborn has under the law.
The fact that nearly every democrat in the House voted against life, is evidence how much abortion is the Holy Sacrament of the Democrat Party. They voted in lock-step with President Obama and the First Lady who believe infanticide is just fine. A woman’s right.
Don’t you wonder what the Pope, who is in Washington, would have to say about this bill, and what the vote says about the moral standards of his host?
Can you say ‘Sharia Law’ Mr. Zogby? The term sharia comes from the Arabic language term sharīʿah, which means a body of moral and religious law derived from religious prophecy, as opposed to human legislation, like oh say, State and Federal government as guided by the Constitution.
Carson made himself perfectly clear that one’s religion does not matter as long as it is consistent with American principles and values. He also said that if a Muslim were to uphold American values and principles then that would be fine. And Muslims trying to institute Sharia Law in the United States is fact, not playing. But you’re not hearing that from the media, are you? Ben Carson is more right than anyone on the Left cares to admit. And he doesn’t do PC either.
For Zogby to deny Sharia is to deny the inseparable nature of Islam and governance. In this respect, Islam and a secular government is incompatible. Islam is the religion and the controlling governance of its believers. It’s what one says and does that matters. Obama can say he’s a Christian. He can say he’s a Witch for all I care. It’s what he does that matters. Trading a traitor for the release of 5 Muslim terrorists should tell you all you need to know.
In fact, if James Zogby wants to call out bigoted and hateful comments from politicians, he should look at Hillary Clinton who has made ‘Muslim’ the new N-word.
Alexis Tsipras has hailed a “victory of the people” after his left-wing Syriza party won Greece’s fifth election in six years. Mr. Tsipras said his decision to call an early election was vindicated and that he had been given a clear mandate.
Since Greece produces very little in terms of manufacturing, they rely on imports to exist. Manufacturing is down 40% and imports are down 33%. The Greek economy was growing in the second half of last year. Businesses began hedging their bets for expansion when ‘capital control’ started in July. Now, investments have dried up completely. Now the Tsipras government is poised to take even more of their profits.
Many businesses can’t pay their suppliers without getting special permission for a loan from the central bank. How’s that for instilling business confidence? Unemployment is over 25% and youth unemployment is over 50%. And Greece’s economy is tanking.
Rejecting the EU, IMF, the ECB, Greece seems to have given Tsipras a mandate to suicide.
In the latest media attempt to derail the Trump campaign, it only shows who the real ‘racists’ are. Forget for a moment that Islam is not a race, but a religion. But remember that in this country, there is a First Amendment that guarantees freedom of religion for everyone. Even politicians.
So, if I may borrow a phrase from a loser of a Secretary of State who is running for president on her record, on whether Obama is a Muslim, what difference, at this point, does it make? He could be a Christian, a Muslim, or a frigging Witch. That’s all protected by the First Amendment and as such, is irrelevant.
The faux controversy is about why Donald Trump did not defend Obama at a press conference (something Hillary does not do without pre-screened reporters, attendees, and questions) from a member of the public who said he believed that Barack Obama was a Muslim, leading up to his question which was, what are we going to do about terrorist cells having training camps in this country? Trump laughed at his opening shot, and otherwise ignored it. But did answer the question (which no media outlet has bothered to mention) by saying he’s heard about that kind of stuff and would look into it if elected president. In short, it was a pretty generic answer without any controversy.
So from that, Hillary Clinton, the slavish media, and the DNC are going bonkers attacking Trump for something he did not do and did not say. Hillary calls that not acting presidential. Debbie was-a-man Shultz called Trump a racist.
What did Hillary say about the (probably planted) incident? She said that Trump should apologize. As though it is everyone’s duty to defend Barack Obama when anyone says something, true or untrue, about him. And because he didn’t do that, she retorts that Trump “should start behaving like a president.”
You know what the real dialog was. Now this is NBC’s interpretation. The meme . . .
A man at Trump’s event in Rochester, New Hampshire, asked the Republican presidential frontrunner how the U.S. can “get rid” of Muslims and asserted that Obama was a Muslim who was not born in this country.
Suffice it to say, this is not the first time that NBC has cut-n-pasted an event to change its meaning. (Zimmerman case comes to mind.)
Here is CNN’s reporting of the same event . . .
At a Trump event in New Hampshire on Thursday, an unidentified man said, “We have a problem in this country. It’s called Muslims. You know our current president is one. You know he’s not even an American. … That’s my question: When can we get rid of them?”
Cool. You have a pretty good idea of the meme over this fake controversy from the mainstream media and the struggling (for ratings) Cable News Network. Now notice those three little dots that precede “That’s my question.” Here’s what they failed to mention with those three little dots and, as you might expect, it changes the entire context of the dialog.
“Anyway, we have training camps growing where they want to kill us,” the man, wearing a “Trump” T-shirt, continued. “That’s my question: When can we get rid of them?”
From Hillary’s reaction, you would think that being Muslim, or accused of being a Muslim, is like calling someone an illegal alien, or the N-word. She was “appalled” of all the “hatefulness.”
“I was appalled,” Clinton told reporters here. “He should have from the beginning repudiated that kind of rhetoric, that level of hatefulness in a questioner in an audience that he was appearing before.”
Is being called a Muslim, or being a Muslim, something all that appalling? It should be instructive to note who the bigots, racists, really are. The media also conveniently forgot to mention who started the whole birther thing on Obama. It was Hillary’s own 2008 campaign.
If anything, it’s Muslims who should feel offended by Hillary’s reaction. Why, she’s not acting very presidential is she?
He doesn’t like anything that gets in the way of his remaking America, like the Constitution, and the entire principle that the government is by, of, and for the people. To this president, these are obstacles, not principles.
His latest scheme is how to fool more Americans into buying into his Marxist/Socialist agenda by using behavioral science. Knowing full well that he could not persuade the public into accepting what he wants to do, and not being interested in the least for what the people he is supposed to serve may want him to do, he’s looking into ways to train, to condition you into accepting something that you would not otherwise accept. You know, like training a pet, Obama wants to train you.
It’s no surprise that Obama and his regulatory czar Cass Sunstein operate this way. What is surprising is how the media and his fellow democrats will fall for it.
If the Iran nuclear deal is ratified by the U.S. Congress and Senate, the first guaranteed casualty would be Saudi Arabia followed by all the Sheikdoms around the Persian Gulf and Jordan; Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Palestine and Yemen belong already to Iran’s sphere of influence.
The Middle East and North Africa will not be the same in the future for two reasons: 1) Either the Shia-Mullah regime of Iran will live up to the agreement, and stop all or most of their efforts to pursue developing atomic bombs; or 2) they would defy the agreement and continue developing the bombs. In either case, Iran’s subversive and terroristic activities will continue until the end goal is reached by taking over Saudi Arabia and Mecca, controlling the entire Islamic world, their huge wealth and the proceeds from the pilgrimage; a dream of the Shiites and the Shia mullahs since Imam Ali was not recognized by the Sunnis as the first caliph, which split Muslims into Sunni and Shia sects ending up with Sunni’s dominance.
Saudis are not only being threatened by the Shia mullahs; ISIS/ISIL is just as serious of a threat to the existence of the Kings and Sheiks in the Middle East. Since ISIS/ISIL wants to take Islam back to the early days of Islam, and restore the reign of caliphate in the Middle East and North Africa, Kings and Sheiks have no place in that concept.
Some uninformed people may welcome the demise of the Kings and Sheiks in the Middle East for their lavish lifestyle and imposing the Sharia laws, but neither Shia-Mullahs nor ISIS/ISIL are a right replacement.
A bleak future can be seen not only in the repeat of events after the demise of the Shah of Iran in 1979 (mass execution, exodus of educated people, refugees, etc.), but also the escalation of war and killing in the Middle East and North Africa and drastic rise of radical Islam due to rising poverty and despair in those regions.
Further, devastating development could take place if Israel’s existence is seriously threatened by the Shia mullahs forcing them to make use of an atomic bomb in that region, which would definitely lead to the most predicted Armageddon.
The Middle East and North Africa have plenty of huge and different problems. However, Iran’s nuclear deal and its ratification would not put a single dent in reducing other problems of that troubled region, much less resolving it.
If the U.S. policy-makers and their advisors were well-informed and knowledgeable about all the factors and forces involved with regard to economics, politics, religion, social issues, oil, energy, environment, etc., all the efforts would be made to change the Shia-Mullah regime of Iran by supporting Iranians to do it themselves and with no U.S. military involvement; it would definitely be the first major step toward a right direction. Below are the facts:
A friendly regime in Iran means:
Ending Iranian support for terrorism.
Balance between Shias and Sunnis in the region.
Ending the nuclear threat.
Blocking the spread of radical Islam to Europe and the U.S.
Recognition of Israel by the largest country in the Middle East, with friendly relations and trade.
Ending Iran’s drive to dominate the region and the threat to Saudi Arabia.
Neutralizing Russian influence in the region.
Protecting the U.S. Dollar’s reserve currency status.
A huge new market for U.S. business, civilian and military, hundreds of billions of dollars in new trade agreements.
Secure, stable energy supplies for the world,
Avoiding another protracted and expensive war in the Middle East.
Ratification of the nuclear deal with Iran does not eliminate the threat of war, but only postpones it while the Shia-Mullahs grow stronger.
Most people think there are only two options: accept the nuclear deal, or go to war with Iran. The nuclear deal will elevate the Shia-Mullah regime to the dominant power in the region with devastating results for the U.S. and its allies. War with Iran would destroy the global economy and bring death and suffering to millions.
However, there is a Third Option: peaceful regime change by the Iranian people themselves, with no outside military action. Conditions are ripe, and this kind of regime change can be accomplished rapidly and effectively. A friendly regime in Iran would eliminate the nuclear threat, end Iran’s support for international terrorism, stabilize the Middle East, secures energy supplies for the world, and more, as shown in the chart below.
CONSEQUENCES OF THREE OPTIONS FOR DEALING WITH IRAN
REGIME CHANGE BY THE IRANIAN PEOPLE, NO WAR
IRAN NUCLEAR DEAL, POTENTIAL FOR WAR
WAR WITH IRAN
Ends Iranian support for terrorism, replaced with a civilized, friendly regime consisting of experts in different fields.
Makes the Shia-Mullah regime the top power, expands terrorism, leading eventually to war.
Immediate disruption of oil and gas supplies and the global economy.
Establishes balance between Shias and Sunnis in the region, leading to weakening and eventual dismantling of ISIS/ISIL.
Rise of terrorism and radical Islam worldwide, and control of Islam by the Shia Mullahs.
Massive casualties on all fronts, millions dead and disabled.
Recognition of Israel by the largest country in the Middle East, with friendly relations and trade.
Rising threat of annihilation of Israel and occupation of Saudi Arabia.
Tens of millions of refugees.
Ends Iran’s drive to dominate the region and the threat to Saudi Arabia, Israel and Gulf states; blocks the spread of radical Islam to Europe and the U.S.
Dominance of radical Shia Islam, and the end of kings and sheikhs in the Middle East.
Collapse of the world economy.
Abolishment of torture and capital punishment; political and social freedom based on modern civil law, not Sharia Law.
Rise of Sharia Law and execution of political opponents.
Potential end of the civilized world as we know it.
Neutralizes Russian influence in the region.
Gives Russia access to the Middle East and North Africa.
Protects the U.S. Dollar’s reserve currency status; continuing prosperity for the U.S.
Weakens the U.S. Dollar as world reserve currency, leading to shrinking prosperity in the U.S.
Opens the huge Iran market for U.S. businesses, civilian and military; hundreds of billions of dollars in new trade agreements.
Loss of the huge Iran market to Russia and China.
Ends the nuclear threat and defuses the nuclear arms race.
Rise of nuclear arms race in the Middle East.
Secure, stable energy market for the world, especially for the U.S. and western allies.
Insecure energy market worldwide.
Peace and prosperity for the Middle East, North Africa and the world.
Rising social costs of all kinds for the world economy and growing poverty worldwide.
The lowest cost option of all, with the greatest benefits to the U.S., Iran, and the region. Regime change would cost less than $20 million. Part of the $150 billion in frozen assets will be used to implement an economic plan which creates millions of jobs.This money is recovered from the booming economy. Most of the money is distributed to the people of Iran, boosting U.S. and European economies as well.
Costs of this option are very high. Much of $150 billion of frozen Iranian assets ends up in Russia and China. At least $50 billion to protect and police the region, $10 billion or more per year related to refugees; $10 – $50 billion in foreign aid to Israel, Egypt, Turkey, Iraq, and other friendly nations in the region; $2 – $5 billion over 10 years for monitoring nuclear activities in Iran.
Would cost millions of lives and $10 Trillion or more, while destroying the global economy.
Dr. Farid Khavari is a noted independent economist and author of 10 books, including the classic Environomics (1993) and Oil and Islam: The Ticking Bomb (1990) which predicted that Iran, not Saddam Hussein, would become the biggest threat in the Middle East. He is the creator of Zero Cost Economics and was on the ballot in 2010 and 2014 for Florida Governor. More information is at www.zerocosteconomy.com Dr. Khavari can be contacted by email at firstname.lastname@example.org
Debbie Was-a-man Shultz comes out. In her fear campaign to raise money, Debbie says she is “pissed off.” “I’m going to be frank,” she says. (Could have been an uppercase F.)
Willing to shut down the government for preserving $500,000,000 of taxpayer money to 700 Planned Parenthood butcher shops instead of giving it to 13,540 federally qualified women’s health clinics that don’t kill babies and sell their remains, Shultz demonstrates how abortion, not women’s health, is the Holy Sacrament of the Democrat Party.
In her DNC fundraising letter, she also bemoans how those evil republicans want to repeal Obamacare. The program that was forced down America’s collective throat. The program that is so bad that it won’t even be fully implemented (if not repealed first) until Obama is out of office. Obama doesn’t want to be around to face the mess he made.
In our tri-state area of Alabama, Florida, and Georgia, there are 1144 (abortion free) clinics that provide comprehensive women’s healthcare to low-income, medically under-served populations. By comparison, there are 29 Planned Parenthood clinics in the same tri-state area.
The next time you hear a politician scoff at the idea of stopping federal dollars (500,000,000 of them) from going to 700 Planned Parenthood sites, the nation’s largest abortion provider (327,653 in 2013), remind him or her that there are 13,540 other federally qualified health centers (FQHCs) and rural health clinics (RHCs) nationwide that do everything Planned Parenthood does, and more, but do not perform abortions and sell the remains. Something taxpayers should not be forced to support.
Critics of Planned Parenthood are not against women’s health. On the contrary. And if proponents of Planned Parenthood were for women’s health, they too would be calling to send that half-billion dollars to the thousands of other locations women go. Because there are 20 comprehensive health care clinics for every Planned Parenthood.