Posts Tagged ‘obama’

Don’t believe the US federal government would support / encourage illegal activity? This is becoming a trend, unfortunately – like, for example Obama instructing Holder to not defend selected culturally unpopular laws still on the US books.

20140228-213634.jpg

Listen to the audio below, or download it here.
Listen to full audio here.

AlbertMohler.com – The Briefing 02-18-14

Putin talks directly to the United States people through New York Times – and minces no words, in his typical style. This “foreign presidential communication event” is pretty much unprecedented, or very rare at least, by the way.

Obama fumbled the Syria issue, clearly. Obama’s complete lack of foreign policy expertise comes to the fore in the most clear example yet.

The “anti-war president” is now scolded for wanting to start a massively volatile military intervention. Check the audio for the full picture.

20130916-202155.jpg

AlbertMohler.com – The Briefing 09-12-13. Listen to full audio here.

20130704-220705.jpg

Obama speaking in Africa telling all states where same-sex marriage isn’t legal yet to “recognize the supreme court” – clearly an out of line statement legally (and morally) speaking. Sure, run the US with “Federal force” Obama – show your true colors for all willing to see.

AlbertMohler.com – The Briefing 06-28-13 – Final Episode of the Season. Listen to full audio here.

Extract from Line of Fire Radio. Dr. Brown interviews Jonathan Cahn and talks about the state of the nation before God. Take some time to listen! Listen to full audio here, or download segments here and here.

See also: “the harbinger” – prophecy today? …instant ny times best-seller! – 48min


 

‘The Harbinger’ achieves ‘New York Times’ best-seller milestone

Messianic rabbi Jonathan Cahn’s novel, The Harbinger, marks a milestone in 2012 as the longest-running Christian title on the New York Times Paperback Trade Fiction list. The book has also sold 1 million copies.
The FrontLine/Charisma House Book Group title has ranked for 52 weeks [54 weeks at time of this quote] on the best-seller list, placing at No. 14 [13 at time of this quote].

The book has placed regularly on the Evangelical Christian Publishers Association (ECPA) Christian Best-sellers list, ranking at No. 1 on the January 2013 Fiction list and at No. 6 on the General list. It is also No. 3 on the latest CBA best-seller list.A new FrontLine title, The Harbinger Companion With Study Guide gives the story behind the story, taking readers deeper into the prophetic revelation in the novel. Featuring a 13-week study guide, photos of the actual harbingers mentioned in the novel, articles, maps and more, the companion work releases Jan. 8. – Source

giglio-news

A new chapter in America’s moral revolution came today as Atlanta pastor Louie Giglio withdrew from giving the benediction at President Obama’s second inaugural ceremony. In a statement released to the White House and the Presidential Inaugural Committee, Giglio said that he withdrew because of the furor that emerged yesterday after a liberal watchdog group revealed that almost twenty years ago he had preached a sermon in which he had stated that homosexuality is a sin and that the “only way out of a homosexual lifestyle … is through the healing power of Jesus.”

In other words, a Christian pastor has been effectively disinvited from delivering an inaugural prayer because he believes and teaches Christian truth. (more…)

By William Sullivan, americanthinker.com

The French government is wringing its hands in frustration about how to deal with wealthy French nationals who are expatriating to avoid France’s crushing new tax hikes.

World-renowned actor Gérard Depardieu, for example, has recently decided to take up residence just across the Belgian border to avoid the tax penalty he would incur by remaining in France. This is merely an allegation at this point, of course, but it seems a safe guess that Depardieu has noticed French politicians’ distaste for the wealthy — which is not a feat of consciousness, considering that the new socialist president François Hollande has famously quipped, “I don’t like the rich” while campaigning on promises to “tax annual income of more than one million euros per year at 75 percent.”

It’s just the latest of many black eyes for France’s new administration. France’s richest man, Bernard Arnault, has applied for Belgian citizenship, and according to The Telegraph, “among Mr. Depardieu’s new neighbors in the village of Nechin will be members of the Mulliez family, who own the Auchan supermarket chain.” And for months now, wealthy French families have been buying real estate in England, thanks in part to British Prime Minister David Cameron’s shrewd marketing. Seeking to poach tax revenue from France, he has promised successful French families and businesses that the U.K. will “roll out the red carpet” in welcoming them. Understandably, they find that message a tad more attractive than Hollande’s.

This presents problems for French socialists beyond the immediate loss of revenue which would finance their proposed top-down redistribution. There is also the issue of image. After all, convincing the world that France’s socialist government is successful is a pretty tough sell when the successful want absolutely nothing to do with it.

It is no coincidence that those who would be required to finance a Utopian redistribution of wealth are rarely supporters of implementing such a model. John Locke observed that natural laws exist, independent of any system of government, and among these are not only the individual’s fundamental right to life and liberty, but also a right to “property,” which can be described as the product of a person’s labor and enterprise.

Most Westerners would say that they accept this assumption in theory, but due to a curious caveat in human nature, many only limitedly accept it in practice. An individual will typically be far more concerned with the preservation of this natural right to “property” when it is his own “property” that is targeted for seizure. The Occupier of Zuccotti Park, for example, may find it a travesty that a homeless man steals his wallet to subsidize a livelihood, but when a homeless man has his livelihood subsidized by someone else’s wallet in a transaction brokered by the government, the incident somehow becomes noble and necessary.

It is the tragic flaw by which the grand ambition of socialism has always failed, and will always fail. Human nature resists any attempt to seize one’s property beyond what he would willingly give. This is the very basis of the social contract between a free man and a just government. A man chooses to take part. If that social contract is amended to be uniquely biased against his right to property, absent his consent, he may rightfully exercise his right to liberty and seek avenues to establish a new contract with a government, either by revolution or, more commonly today, expatriation.

France lacked the foresight to anticipate this natural outcome, which poses a massive problem for the country’s future. In a sense, the fate of the nation is tied to the outcome of its redistributive endeavors. And so, France finds itself it the distinctive, though not unique, situation where left-wing socialism and far-right nationalism have become symbiotic bedfellows.

Therefore, these wealthy individuals, who have the audacity to abscond with their own property that the government has decided belongs to the collective, are being vilified from all angles. Prime Minister Jean-Marc Ayrault stirs the anger of the socialism-loving French people by reminding them that “[w]e cannot fight poverty if those with the most, and sometimes with a lot, do not show solidarity and a bit of generosity.” Consumption minister Benoit Hamon called the move by Depardieu, in particular, “anti-patriotic.” Ever the tolerant ideologues, voices of the French left have kindly commented on Depardieu’s personal choice by labeling him a “drunken, obese petit-bourgeois reactionary.” And right-wing nationalists aren’t letting the leftists poke all the fun, as National Front leader Marine Le Pen said that wealthy exiles like Depardieu just want to “have their cake and eat it,” a phrase which arouses a particularly clever subtext in terms of the history of French nationalism.

Thankfully, Mr. Depardieu doesn’t have a guillotine in his future. The ol’ blade of French social justice is a bit grotesque for modern sensibilities, having recently been retired and all. (However, I absolutely anticipate French bloggers and upcoming political cartoons to make use of its symbolic value in calling for these greedy villains’ heads.) But punishments for expatriation are being offered, including the threat to strip these rich defectors of their French citizenship if they refuse to pay the required tribute to their motherland. I expect that these punishments will only become more creative and painful as expatriation creates an increasingly large shortfall in the redistributive pot.

France is now presented with a choice, and frankly, it is not so dissimilar to our own, considering that Barack Obama’s vision for America mirrors (though currently to a lesser extent) that of Hollande. France can continue on its projected path to discriminately seize substantially more property from the wealthy, and watch as its most successful producers leave the country with their ample resources, leaving an impossible burden upon the middle class to finance the collective welfare. Or it can continue on that same projected path, but choose to do what socialist governments have historically done when confronted with selfish well-to-dos who refuse to finance a collectivist paradise for the ne’er-do-wells. They can institute rigid policy to punish the wealthy brigands for their insolence and confiscate the demanded tribute by any means necessary — and it will be presented as necessary, as the survival of France will depend on it.

At any rate, either path leads to failure in terms of freedom and prosperity. This is a fate that France now seems doomed to suffer.

France could, of course, take the third way, and abandon the foolish endeavor to redistribute its way to Utopia. But I harbor little hope for that, at least with the current administration — on that side of the pond or this one.

Reza Khalili explains the meetings with Iran that started having effect already.

Check out – Aaron Klein Podcast. Listen to full audio here.

Check out Aaron Klein Podcast. Listen to full audio here.

Is the following written in Arabic on the ring Obama wears (or used to wear for years)?

I witness that there is no god except Allah.

 
Note also that the same phrase above is said in the Muslim call to prayer that Obama admitted to being his favourite music (details here). See the following for ring photos & analysis: Obama’s ring: ‘There is no god but Allah’ – WND.

Check out Aaron Klein Podcast. Listen to full audio here.

Obama doesn’t want to support the US & NATO missile defence system, but he can’t say so. He wants to be re-elected. Lies & deceit normal in politics? …if we let politicians get away with it, yes.

Washington and NATO argue that the missile shield is meant to protect Western nations against missile attacks from potential future nuclear powers such as North Korea and Iran. The US-backed system has been bitterly opposed by Russia and has remained one of the main stumbling blocks in Moscow’s recent relations with Washington.

 
If you can tolerate the view of stand-up comedian Jacky Mason on this topic, here’s the audio…

US President Barack Obama told Russian President Dmitry Medvedev overnight that he had little flexibility to address Russia’s objections to a US missile defence shield before his November reelection bid.

Obama was picked up on an open mic privately explaining his position to Medvedev in an exchange heard by some reporters, during their meeting on the sidelines of the nuclear security summit in Seoul.

US President Barack Obama told Russian President Dmitry Medvedev overnight that he had little flexibility to address Russia’s objections to a US missile defence shield before his November reelection bid.

Obama was picked up on an open mic privately explaining his position to Medvedev in an exchange heard by some reporters, during their meeting on the sidelines of the nuclear security summit in Seoul.

What they said:

The US leader told Medvedev, in their last meeting before Vladimir Putin is inaugurated president in May, that on all issues, but particularly missile defence it was important for Russia to give him “space.”

Medvedev replied: “Yeah, I understand. I understand your message about space,” according to a transcript of the exchange carried by ABC News.

“This is my last election. After my election I have more flexibility,” Obama said, pledging to “transmit this information to Vladimir.”

The exchange appeared to indicate that Obama believes he has little leverage to conclude deeply divisive foreign policy election issues in a campaign year, and also that he is confident he will win reelection.

The White House insisted it was committed to implementing the missile defence shield despite Russian objections, but said the longstanding and difficult issues meant it would take time to conclude a deal.

“Since 2012 is an election year in both countries, with an election and leadership transition in Russia and an election in the United States, it is clearly not a year in which we are going to achieve a breakthrough,” said deputy national security advisor Ben Rhodes.

“Therefore, President Obama and President Medvedev agreed that it was best to instruct our technical experts to do the work of better understanding our respective positions, providing space for continued discussions on missile defense cooperation going forward.”

The US-backed system has been bitterly opposed by Russia and has remained one of the main stumbling blocks in Moscow’s recent relations with Washington.

Washington and NATO argue that the missile shield is meant to protect Western nations against missile attacks from potential future nuclear powers such as North Korea and Iran.

Moscow fears the shield could make its own nuclear capabilities less effective and has sought to build a joint system in which it has an equal say.

NATO has dismissed the idea and sought to assure Russia that its nuclear deterrence would remain unaffected.

The alliance’s secretary general Anders Fogh Rasmussen said yesterday the bloc intended to announce the deployment of the first `”interim” phase of a missile defence shield for Europe at a summit in Chicago. – Source

Aaron Klein. Listen to full audio here.