Has she met her match in Trey Gowdy and the House Select Committee on Benghazi?”
“Long before the Great Prevaricator Bill Clinton and his chief administrator Hillary duped their way to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, their tenure in Arkansas was defined by relationships with radicals, real-estate shenanigans, drug dealing associates, Ponzi schemes and “lucky investment returns” such as Hillary’s one-in-31-trillion cattle futures profits. However, none of that corruption stuck to the Teflon couple.
What follows is a concise record of Hillary and Bill Clinton’s deceptions, obfuscations and subterfuges, from Little Rock to Chappaqua. Given that Hillary is (for the moment) the national frontrunner for the 2016 Democrat presidential nomination, I’ve compiled some of the more ignoble examples of her abject corruption from the Clintons’ White House “co-presidency” years (recall that Bill promised “You get two for the price of one”) — and the years since. (For a complete chronological listing of our Clinton campaign coverage, check out the Clinton tags.) But don’t delay — the terminus of Hillary’s political aspirations may come sooner than she expected — if her email server lies results in felony indictments.” https://patriotpost.us/alexander/37087
Another good article outlining this woman’s lies (past present and more to come) BUT will it derail her run for the White House?
Well, the issue of two sodomites getting together and calling it marriage is confronting all of us in the face again. Those of the Sodom and Gomorrah lifestyle are almost evangelistic in pushing for the misnomer they call same-sex “marriage”.
In rural New South Wales, Australia “A Dubbo businesswoman and marriage equality advocate has accused the federal government of avoiding action on same-sex marriage, following reports a plebiscite on the issue may be delayed until 2017.”
This annoyed “Local Coffee Co owner Karen Payne, who opposes a plebiscite and subsequent costs, has criticised the delay.
‘The consensus is that marriage equality would pass through the upper and lower house if it went to a vote today,’ Ms Payne said.”
Ms. Payne “…suggested it could take a strike to prompt the politicians into action.”
She told the newspaper, “I sometimes wonder what would happen if all LGBTI people decided to go on strike until the marriage equality issue was resolved,”. http://www.dailyliberal.com.au/story/4113247/mps-do-your-job-payne/?cs=112 I hate to shock Ms. Payne but I think the world would go on in spite of the strike.
Now, of course I don’t for one minute think quoting the Bible to Ms. Payne or others in agreement with her on this sodomite issue will change anything but here goes. Genesis 2:20-24 “And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him. 21 And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof; 22 And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man. 23 And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man. 24 Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.”
The Lord Jesus said in Mathew 19:4-6 “And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female, 5 And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh? 6 Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.”
Then Romans 1:22-27 tells us that “Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,
23 And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things. 24 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: 25 Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen. 26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:
27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.” Pretty clear, I think!
Then there is 1Corinthians 6:9, 10 “Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, 10 Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.”
I relinquished my government approved religious celebrant’s license several years ago because I knew there would come a time when the government of the day would sanction two sodomites getting together and calling it “marriage”. However, God settled the issue in the beginning of time and no matter what a government or a nation decides I “ought to obey God rather than men.”
Mr. Obama, it is wrong to kill “innocent” people but is it wrong to kill non-Muslims?
This is from David and Roslyn Phillips of Family Voice Australia’s Voxpoint, August, 2016. “Is the Census – not to mention SBS – politically biased? You be the judge! An SBS TV journalist phoned FamilyVoice recently, wanting to interview us about the 2016 Census question on gender. In previous years, the Census has asked Australians whether they were male or female. But in 2016, we have been given three choices: male, female or “other”. “What do you think of this change?” the SBS journalist asked us. We replied promptly, with full references – saying (in part): The three gender options in the Census – “male”, “female” or “other” – officially endorse the unproven view that humans can have a sex different from that of the chromosomes in every cell of their body. When a boy, with male genitals and other sex characteristics, says he feels he is a girl, he is said to suffer from gender dysphoria. Gender dysphoria is not a condition he was born with. Research shows that identical twins may include one twin with gender dysphoria and the other without, even though each twin has the exactly the same genes and hormone exposure in the womb. Life experiences – including bullying by peers or older siblings, or mental illness in a parent, may contribute to this condition. Studies show that the vast majority of children with these feelings lose them before reaching adulthood. Encouraging irreversible interventions in childhood could be harmful. Gender dysphoria is similar to body integrity identity disorder, where a person feels uncomfortable with one of his or her healthy limbs, and seeks to have it amputated. Like gender identity disorder, body integrity identity disorder is a condition of the mind. It should be treated with compassion, but like other identity confusion issues, should not be affirmed. Gender dysphoria should not be given official endorsement in a Census question. But this compassionate, evidence-based answer was not what the SBS was looking for. A few days later the journalist got back to us, saying they no longer wanted an interview. They had decided to take a “slightly different angle”, she said, but declined to tell us what that angle was. Perhaps we did not fit the “bigot” image SBS was hoping to portray. Not long after this knock-back, The Australian (20/7/16) and other media revealed the irony that girls at Cheltenham Girls High School in northwest Sydney were no longer allowed to be called “girls”. At a staff meeting called to discuss the implementation of the controversial “Safe Schools” program, teachers were told they could be breaking the law if they did not support decisions of LGBTI (Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgender Intersex) students. Terms such as “girls”, “ladies” and “women” were to be replaced by gender-neutral language. Daily Telegraph columnist Miranda Devine commented (19/7/16, in part): “This is presented as a way to make a small minority of LGBTI students feel comfortable, but its insidious effect is to impose a transformation of the traditional view of male and female. “We are told that it is bigotry to have a ‘hetero-normative’ view of gender as binary — male or female — or to believe that heterosexual attraction is the norm. But children who don’t go along with the illogical sexual and gender fluidity agenda are finding themselves excluded.” Miranda quoted Joe Carolan, a former maths teacher at Wollongong High School of the Performing Arts, another “Safe School”. He quit his job in protest at the program, saying the banning of “hetero-normative” language such as “mum and dad” is just the start. “The whole program is marketed as being about creating safe schools but it’s creating the opposite,” he said. “It’s promoting extreme gender ideology that’s harmful to students in adolescence who are already going through issues and this is complicating things a lot more.” Cheltenham Girls High has a significant number of Asian students whose parents have been deeply upset by the ostracism and bullying of those who disagree with the “Safe Schools” agenda. Chinese concern about “Safe Schools” is believed to be a key reason why two inner-west Sydney electorates with many Chinese constituents re-elected Liberal MPs, while nearby seats went to Labor. Labor had fully endorsed “Safe Schools”, promising to increase federal funding. By contrast, the Coalition announced significant restrictions, including a requirement for parental consent. Education minister Birmingham said funding would cease when the contract signed by Labor in June 2013 ended next year. But the evidence of harm is already so great that the program and its funding should be cancelled immediately.”
“Reprinted from VoxPoint by permission of FamilyVoice Australia, 4th Floor, 68 Grenfell Street, Adelaide SA 5000.”
Nonsensical questions? Is the media partial to one group more than another? Is the media partial to one Presidential candidate more than the other? Does the media hold Obama to less accountability than they did Bush? Does the media report the news or make the news? Watch the video and then answer the questions.
This is who the American people are going to install in the White House? Start packing your bags.
“REVEALED: Huma Abedin was working as ASSISTANT EDITOR at her mother’s radical Muslim journal when it blamed America for 9/11 terror attacks,” Mailonline, August 22, 2016…”
Then there was THIS way back in 2007 “…Muchael Musto of the Village Voice: ‘As I recently said on MONICA CROWLEY’s radio show, whisper campaigns are claiming thatHILLARY CLINTON is GAYLE KING–ing her aide de camp, the glamorous HUMA ABEDIN, an Indian/Pakistani goddess from Kalamazoo, Michigan. In other words, Hillary may be putting Huma out there in the press and purposely making her more visible as a pre-emptive strike that amounts to her hiding in plain sight. This way, no Republican can later say, “Who is this gorgeous babe who spends so much intimate time with Hillary that the Observer called her Hill’s ‘body person’? Was GENNIFER FLOWERS’s book right about Hillary’s sexual taste?’” https://pamelageller.com/2007/11/hillary-lesbian.html/
All of this with Hillary really comes as no surprise to most who do any reading and have a conservative bent. If Hillary wins in November the total fall of America will only be a matter of time. However, if Trump wins, the inevitable fall of America may ONLY be delayed a few years. Why do I say delayed? The inevitable fall is due to the spiritual, moral, political and financial state of Americans in general and American churches in particular. Think about it! If Obama has over 50% approval rating now after all the mischief he has caused how could even four or eight years of The Donald undo the damage?
For instance, the move by some back to Rome. What Martin Luther did in the 16th Century is no longer valid as far as the Evangelical Luthern Church in America (ELCA) is concerned. The ELCA has taken “…several significant steps…moving forward the mission of this church as a church for the sake of the world.
By a vote of 931 to 9, the assembly overwhelmingly accepted the ‘Declaration on the Way,’ a unique ecumenical document that marks a path toward greater unity between Catholics and Lutherans. Following the vote, an emotional assembly stood to applaud the momentous decision.” https://www.elca.org/News-and-Events/7848
The Declaration on the Way “…is a unique ecumenical text that draws on 50 years of Lutheran-Catholic dialogue in preparation for the 500th Reformation anniversary in 2017. The declaration draws together a litany of 32 consensus statements, where Catholics and Lutherans already have said there are not church-dividing differences between them.” http://nisynod.org/10-things-you-didnt-know-about-the-churchwide-assembly/
It isn’t Rome changing but the ECLA! Understand, Rome hasn’t really changed since Luther. Just as it has in the past and will again in the future Rome will use the sword as a means of converting others to Catholicism just as Islam is doing today.
Then, consider those who carry the name Baptist who promote sodomy and the other gender bending terminoligies. For instance the Alliance of Baptists “…began in 1987 as a prophetic voice in Baptist life. Today, we are a faith community comprised of male and female laity and clergy, people of diverse sexual orientations, gender identities, theological beliefs, and ministry practices.” http://allianceofbaptists.org/OurAlliance/who_we_are
Then there is the NPR article stating “Attitudes toward homosexuality and same-sex marriage have become much more supportive in the United States over recent years. Evangelicals generally still consider homosexual behavior immoral, but by ever smaller margins. In 2007, just 23 percent of Southern Baptists said homosexuality should be accepted by society, according to the Pew Research Center. By 2014, that figure had risen to 30 percent. Attitudes toward same-sex marriage have shifted just as dramatically. In a 2001 Pew survey, just 13 percent of white evangelical Protestants (the most conservative religious group on social issues) said they favored same-sex marriage. By 2015, that number had almost doubled, to 24 percent, and it was becoming easier for LGBT individuals to find a church home.” http://www.npr.org/2016/05/10/476651599/acceptance-grows-slowly-but-steadily-for-gay-evangelicals
That percentage for the churches in the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC) isn’t so much a surprise as it is sickning sad. What is it that people attending a SBC church do not understand about Romans 1: 19- 32 and 1 Corinthians 6: 9-11? The clear message of these two passages has not changed!
All the above is an indication why Obama has an approval rating over 50%, why Hillary Clinton just may be the next President of the United States and why America is doomed!
It seems if you are a white conservative male, you are to keep silent unless asked to speak. Well, “A free speech revolution is just over the horizon. Several recent events are demonstrating that Australians are sick and tired of a political class that gets to decide the limits of public debate and restrict the free flow of ideas. Such a system is anti-democratic, and it is being rejected.
Three key events are shaping the debate on freedom of speech, and in particular, the infamous section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act 1975. This insidious provision infantilises Australians by presuming we are all so mentally feeble that the law ought to be used to protect us against being offended or insulted.
Section 18C makes it unlawful to offend, insult, humiliate or intimidate a person on the basis of race, colour or national or ethnic origin. This law has been the subject of sustained criticism for its clear restriction on freedom of speech.
The first of the three events that are leading to a growing understanding of the dangers of section 18C has its origins back on May 27, 2013. Alex Wood, then a 20-year-old engineering student at the Queensland University of Technology, was looking for a computer on campus on which to do some study. He found a computer lab and sat down to complete his homework at one of the free terminals.
A short time later, Alex was approached by a university administrator named Cindy Prior, who asked Alex whether he was indigenous. He replied that he wasn’t, and the administrator told him that the computer lab was reserved for indigenous students at the university and asked him to leave. Alex obliged, and went looking for another computer lab in which to complete his work. Once he had found another computer, he logged on to Facebook, and posted about his experience at the indigenous computer lab.
His post on the ‘QUT Stalkerspace’ page read: ‘Just got kicked out of the unsigned indigenous computer room. QUT stopping segregation with segregation.’
Several other students replied to Alex’s post. Prior, upon becoming aware of the post, had the comments scanned and sent them to an equity officer at QUT and asked that action be taken against the students. The officer contacted Alex and asked him to delete the post, to which Alex agreed. When he went back to the page, it had already been removed.
This sequence of events has snowballed into what has become a three-year legal saga. Prior first made a formal complaint to the university, but was not satisfied with the result of that process after a year of negotiating with QUT.
She then made a complaint under section 18C to the Australian Human Rights Commission. The AHRC investigated the matter without notifying the students that a complaint had been made against them. And finally, after the AHRC could not resolve the dispute, Prior lodged an application to the Federal Court of Australia. The case is ongoing and a decision is expected soon on whether it will proceed to trial.
This is not the sign of a healthy, thriving democracy. Students at university should be free to write on Facebook pages without racking up hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees, and risking official sanction. This is not acceptable in a liberal democracy based on the rule of law.
But the troubling conduct of the AHRC extends beyond conducting secret trials of university students for making remarks online. Just last week, race commissioner Tim Soutphommasane pleaded with the public to make 18C complaints to the AHRC about a cartoon in this newspaper.
The cartoon, by Bill Leak, depicted an indigenous man who appeared not to know the identity of his own son. There’s no doubt the cartoon was provocative – that’s the role of a cartoonist. They poke and prod accepted wisdom and social conventions in ways that people can find uncomfortable.
But a government bureaucrat using his position to make public pronouncements about what is acceptable to print in newspapers is intensely, classically undemocratic. And Australians are sick of it. One of those Australians is NSW Liberal Democratic senator David Leyonhjelm, who has shown his disdain for 18C by lodging a complaint under the provision he wants to repeal.
Leyonhjelm ignored Soutphommasane’s instructions and instead complained about an article by Fairfax’s Mark Kenny, in which Kenny described Leyonhjelm as an ‘angry white male’.
Leyonhjelm has been open about the fact that he is not offended by the description but that others may be. While there is obviously an element of mockery behind the complaint, the case will be a fascinating glimpse into the thinking of the AHRC, and whether there exist double standards depending on the ethnic group to which potentially 18C-breaching conduct is directed.
The tide is going out on 18C. ‘Offend’ and ‘insult’ must go. Watch this space.” http://ipa.org.au/news/3548/time-to-act:-curbs-on-free-speech-must-go