OFFEND, OFFEND! Jesus “Offended” and Believers/Conservatives Should Follow!

“Clearly the show is not the right fit for you,” …… “I also do not want the show to be so extreme that it alienates the left.”….. Wrote the producer of a new online show allegedly created for Christian, conservative and libertarian female viewers. The producer terminated me in Facebook messenger after her dissatisfaction of my “passion” of the truth and disagreeing with the main host. The producer also included her bullet points for the show which was not shared with me until the termination – two of the points were rather interesting: “To avoid alienating listeners who may be affiliated with an entirely different set of beliefs and political views. * To avoid projecting intolerance and/or disrespect towards those who do not share their belief system including fellow co-hosts.”

No wonder America has a growing Marxist and anti-God movement! Even Obama boasted that America was no longer a Christian nation.  Americans have become far too sensitive to opposing views, the truth and God’s word. Unfortunately far too many Christians have concentrated on a few verses and not the whole context of scripture to just keep turning their other cheek sitting back while the so-called “progressives” aggressively take over the country and remove God from the public square.

Ephesians 6:14

“Stand firm then, with the belt of truth buckled around your waist, with the breastplate of righteousness in place…”

A couple weeks before the show I received yet another facebook message from a fellow entrepreneur who shared they had “unfriended” another business associate, for which we are both friends, due to their passionate political timeline posts. This entrepreneur, whom I highly respect, stated when it comes to business we should not be vocal about our views publicly. Unfortunately this is an opinion shared by many in network marketing. The Bible is clear we are to be equally yoked in all relationships which include business. (John 15:18-19: “Do not be yoked together with unbelievers. For what do righteousness and wickedness have in common? Or what fellowship can light have with darkness?”) Therefore I respectfully disagreed with my associate and cited numerous successful, famous businessmen and women who did not shy away from publicly telling their political or religious views. Did my fellow associate became offended or hurt by my stance? No as a matter of fact, he appreciated the dialogue and we continued with a very lovely chat proving that disagreements can be a moment of enlightenment and growth for all participants.

Other individuals must also be frustrated with the whole kumbaya practice within conservative circles as well because recently I have read numerous articles with writers frustrated with the “shrinking violet” mentality of the “right” while the “left” continues their bullying and oft times violent attacks.

Thomas Jefferson once stated: “Question with boldness. Hold to the truth. Speak without fear.” Wise words advised in order to hold onto true liberty. The Founding Fathers verbally argued and even physically brawled due to their own disagreements. They did not concern themselves with “disrespecting or offending” those with opposing viewpoints. If these men had shied away from conflict, a Republic form of government with a Constitution would never had been formed. In fact George Washington warned: “If citizens start to take liberty for granted, if their culture — molded by journalists and writers, preachers and teachers — starts to hold other values in higher esteem, then the spirit that gives life to the Constitution will flicker out.” Obviously the likes of radical Saul Alinsky and Karl Marx took note and devised schemes to transform culture which indeed “molded” today’s media, entertainment, education and religious arenas. Today we are part of a society in which people of faith and conservative values are out-voiced by those with opposing views. In fact one can often hear republican-types apologizing for their words and offering that they are not a “racist” with homosexual and black friends. How many times do we hear those on the left apologizing and stating they have heterosexual and church-attending friends?

Nearly two decades ago a popular Christian book series began – The “Left Behind” novels told an end times story based on the Book of Revelations. In the second book, TRIBULATION FORCE, the Anti-Christ character, Nicolae, shares “…..the opportunity to achieve my lifelong dream, I want peace. I want global disarmament. I want the peoples of the world to live as one….” In the series, Nicolae leads the UN and takes over global communication demanding one viewpoint. Sound familiar?

Indeed the Anti-Christ’s mission is one shared by radicals like Karl Marx and Saul Alinsky, both of whom “honored” Satan in their work. In fact Alinsky declared that Satan was truly the “first radical”. Clearly we see the force of “liberal” views in society today by all means including physical violence. This same group constantly declaring they want “world peace” while showing strong intolerance of Godly and conservative morals.

1 Corinthians 2:14

“The person without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God but considers them foolishness, and cannot understand them because they are discerned only through the Spirit.”

We should not ever expect those with opposing views to agree or listen to us. God instead commands us to be “the salt of the earth” and with boldness and without apology spread both the Good News and moral truth. We should never cower or be afraid to rebuke a brother or sister in Christ who holds a false view. Remember Jesus so “offended” others that he was crucified to death. One should be honored when they “offend” others for speaking the Godly truth. Jesus even comforted believers to be bold with the following words: John 15:18-19: “If the world hates you, keep in mind that it hated me first. If you belonged to the world, it would love you as its own. As it is, you do not belong to the world, but I have chosen you out of the world. That is why the world hates you.”

The producer was absolutely correct, her show was not a match for me as I refuse to be silenced or to lose my passion for truth and liberty. Those affiliated with the show may have good intentions, but alas the teachings of Jesus misunderstood. Recently I read a blog on the subject of “offending” and “disrespecting” others which reminded believers to be bold and to “offend” – do not let the title fool you: https://answersingenesis.org/bible-questions/christians-should-never-offend-anyone/

For those who read and study scripture they know there will NEVER be “peace” with the wicked. Yes, there will be a period of a false “peace” in which the Anti-Christ rules and believers will be “underground” while still witnessing to save others from eternal death, but the wicked will continue to plot and force their one world agenda. Thus we should heed the words from Proverbs 28:1 – “The wicked flee when no one pursues, but the righteous are bold as a lion.”

A few years ago I listened to our church pastor give a sermon on why the “church” was losing membership in our society. He cited a poll in which participants proclaimed they thought Jesus was cool, but they did not like Christians. They provided many reasons including both hypocrisy and not being “truthful” with their messages. Apparently those polled wanted to hear believers share the Gospel truth instead of sugar-coating their messages. However they were attracted to Jesus for his courage and honest ministry regardless if they agreed or not.

Perhaps the thirst for bold truth is one of the reasons, the very outspoken Donald Trump was elected President of the United States, instead of the more “tolerant, meek” republican candidates. Ann Coulter is a both a best-selling author and popular television guest who is always bold and never concerned about “offending or disrespecting” those who disagree with her views. Both Mark Dice and Paul Joseph Watson are rising alternative news voices due to their very outspoken and brash commentary. In fact “liberals” are constantly verbally attacking these two yet they still “listen” to their messages. Why? Because deep down that group wants to hear the truth as we are ALL made in the image of God, thus everyone craves Godly morality, even if they reject it in their own lives! If we intend to reach those who need to hear the truth, then we must do so by following Jesus’ example. Bear in mind, Jesus never said, “Please listen to me. I have a friend who was a prostitute. I do not want to come across as intolerant.”…..no, instead he boldly demanded, “Give up your life and follow me!”. He even lost his temper in the public square due to the rebellion of those with “opposing” beliefs.

Time for the “right” to stop worrying about “alienating” the “left” or “offending/disrespecting” others with opposing views! This “tolerant” practice is not winning souls or even minds! Wake up and follow the teachings of the Bible: Acts 28:31 – “Proclaiming the kingdom of God and teaching about the Lord Jesus Christ with all boldness and without hindrance.”

If we start practicing boldness and true liberty “free” speech, we will then be able to reach those who oppose us. Like those polled years ago shared, they truly want to hear the courageous TRUTH without apology! Although I do not share the same religious beliefs as Ghandi, I do agree with this famous quote: “First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.” And “winning” is what we want to accomplish in order to change minds, hearts and souls for eternal life!

 

 

 

 

`

Dear American Voter, Pussycat Loving Trump or Spirit Cooking Hillary?

Do you all remember when Michelle Obama declared during the 2008 election season that she was proud of “her” country for the first time in her adult life?  Well friends unlike Ms. Obama, I have enjoyed being an American my entire life, however for the first time in my adult life, I am sad for “our” country!

Tomorrow is “E” Day and all of us in this country, including illegal aliens and dead people, will be voting for our next President of the Divided United States. In past elections the choice seemed simple for most, “who is on my party ticket”? But this election cycle is more complex either vote for the pussycat loving Trump or the spirit cooking Hillary. Perhaps on the surface the choices seem more comical or surreal, however no, this time the choice is more than just ideology, it is truly a spiritual battle.

Prior to being selected elected “president” Barry Hussein Soetoro, in a speech mocking Jesus, bragged with a twisted smile that America was no longer a Christian nation. Tuesday will definitely confirm whether Barry is correct or incorrect.

Fellow voters, it has been a very long 8 years of radical change! Beloved Martin Luther King, Jr. must be rolling over in his grave to see that instead of his “dream” being realized, a nightmare has been created instead with some “black lives” only believing “they” matter; in addition, the resurrection of the violent Black Panthers threatening “white lives” without any type of federal investigation. In fact while a blind eye has been seen for their group, the peaceful Tea Party has been closely evaluated – remember the IRS bullying?

Personally, I am more disturbed by the undercover videos exposing the fact that Planned Parenthood butchers aborted babies and chops them up for organ and limb profits. Scarier than any Frankenstein movie, these cold-hearted Planned Parenthood employees gloated and dreamed of Lamborghini futures from their sick and twisted experiments!

Proudly the Clinton and Obama supporters have been excited about the direction of this country which includes more violence (here and here), more division, more hate, more debt and more poverty! But a closer examination dear voters shows a much darker reason! Both Obama and Hillary are self-admitted Saul Alinsky students. Saul Alinsky wrote “Rules for Radicals” in which he credited “Angel Lucifer” for being “the first radical known to man who rebelled against the establishment”. Uh-hum – Satan did not rebel against bankers, politicians, entertainers, media or government – he REBELLED AGAINST GOD! So per Saul Alinsky’s OWN words, GOD is the “establishment”! In addition in a 1972 Playboy magazine interview (because men read the articles), Alinsky stated the following:

ALINSKY: … if there is an afterlife, and I have anything to say about it, I will unreservedly choose to go to hell.

PLAYBOY: Why?

ALINSKY: Hell would be heaven for me. All my life I’ve been with the have-nots. Over here, if you’re a have-not, you’re short of dough. If you’re a have-not in hell, you’re short of virtue. Once I get into hell, I’ll start organizing the have-nots over there.

PLAYBOY: Why them?

ALINSKY: They’re my kind of people

Thus confirming that the radical regressive “left” are actually rebelling against GOD and merely use “issues” as a front for their true agenda!

Now my dear Americans, there is more evidence of the radicals’ allegiance which includes current democrat candidate, Hillary Clinton. Although the mainstream-media (silence is consent) is not reporting the latest Wikileaks #SpiritCooking news, many alternative outlets have shared the disturbing information. In case you are unfortunately relying on the controlled-biased television propaganda networks, Hillary’s campaign chair, John Podesta was invited to satanist-performance-artist Marina Abramovic’s “Spirit Cooking dinner” via email for which Wikileaks exposed. Spirit Cooking is a bizarre occult involving eating cake baked with menstrual blood, sperm, breastmilk, honey and oil. Another Wikileaks revelation includes Hillary asking Huma if Marina will be attending an event. Also worth noting Ms. Abramovic donated the maximum campaign amount to Hillary Clinton for President.

Other disturbing Wikileaks emails include Podesta being invited to a hot tub party with little boys and some details regarding a “hot dog-pizza” party with some special “waitresses” implying a Stanley Kubrick “Eyes Wide Shut” secret event.

Dear Voters other information which has surfaced includes FBI intel regarding Bill Clinton traveling the Lolita Express and both he and Hillary making several trips to an “Orgy Island”. The hacker Gucifer, along with an ex-secret service agent reveals Hillary’s alleged “High (coven) Priestess” position.

One would think my dear Americans that the media would not only be reporting all these facts, but the FBI would be seriously investigating and arrests made. I personally find it very unsettling of all the Hollywood celebrity support for the Clintons which begs the question, how many of them are involved in all of these weird sex magik parties and occult rituals? (Take a look at this creepy photo of Lady Gaga with evil Marina eating blood off a human body.)

Obviously as a diversion tactic instead of real journalism, we the people had to suffer with 24/7 non-stop coverage of audio with Donald Trump discussing groping and pussy-cats with Billy Bush from 11 years ago. Perhaps the “locker-room” talk was distasteful but “he who has not sinned, let them cast the first stone”. Since this 11 year old chat took place, Mr. Trump has remarried and committed his life to Christ. Anyone seen Hillary and Bill pray to the Christian-Judeo God during this election season? (Bill too busy perhaps experiencing occult out of body experiences like he wrote about in his own book.) Clearly Donald and Melania asking sincerely for prayer in this interview is a stark contrast from the #spiritcooking and orgy news from the Clinton camp!

God does not choose perfect men (or women) to lead – Moses anyone? But clearly God helped Trump and the #TrumpTrain movement overcome big mountain type challenges including the #NeverTrump’ers, the GOP RINO “establishment” and the MSM hit-puppets to name a few!

So my dear voters we have a spiritual battle to win this POTUS election and the choice is clear – VOTE FOR GOD!!! And God has presented us with the LION who loves pussycats, Donald J. Trump!

I exhort therefore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men; 2  For kings, and for all that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty.  1 Timothy 2: 1-2

Trump, Cruz – Patriots or Partners with World Elite?

A recent Breitbart article captured my attention with the headline “Bill Kristol has Strategy to Give White House to Hilary IF Trump Should Win!” Now why would a leading Republican voice want to risk dismantling the GOP by helping the party lose to a criminal democrat who should really be behind  bars?  The true reason behind this declaration needs a closer inspection.

According to the Breibart report William (Bill) Kristol, the editor-in-chief of the Weekly Standard, was on MSNBC’s Morning Joe discussing Donald Trump’s campaign.  Kristol boasted he had a plan to deprive Trump of the 50% delegates required to secure the Republican nomination and force a brokered convention. He further declared that his scheme included cutting a deal which awards enough delegates to an “acceptable” candidate.  He also told Joe Scarborough that “we” have to stop the momentum and ensure Trump loses in both Florida and Ohio in order to keep the race open for another candidate to gain the nomination.

For the past few years the registered Republican numbers were on decline, however since Trump entered the race for POTUS, the numbers are once again increasing.  In fact the numbers are up a full 7% with larger than expected voter turnout for the primaries.  Logically would it not benefit the party to support such an historic populist front-runner?  It appears that the voting majority disagree with Bill about “the Donald” not being an “acceptable” candidate, so why did he state “we” must stop the momentum (of WE the People)?  The answers become apparent after a deeper investigation.

First, besides operating The Weekly Standard, who is Bill Kristol?  Bill was also the Co-Founder of Project for the New America Century a neoconservative think tank based in Washington DC with the stated goal of “promoting  American global leadership” via wars and aggressive foreign policies.  Quite the contrast of George Washington’s sage advice in his farewell speech in which he firmly stated “Observe good faith and justice towards all nations; cultivate peace and harmony with all”, in addition: “It is our true policy to steer clear of permanent alliances with any portion of the foreign world.”  Washington’s speech should be read in entirety by all Americans to confirm that he believed true liberty meant not being aggressive with other countries, but instead not entangle with foreign alliances and focus on the sovereignty of the Republic. Yet the Project’s other co-founder, Robert Kagan, defined himself as “a liberal interventionist”.  Others who signed or funded the New America Century included former Vice-President Dick Cheney, former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, and media mogul Rupert Murdoch (FOX News). PNAC released a statement back in June 1997 which included the following statement:

“We need to increase defense spending significantly if we are to carry out our global responsibilities today and modernize our armed forces for the future; we need to strengthen our ties to democratic allies and to challenge regimes hostile to our interests and values; we need to promote the cause of political and economic freedom abroad; we need to accept responsibility for America’s unique role in preserving and extending an international order…”

Although some Americans may believe the statement sounds positive, this was not the vision the Founding Fathers laid forth. For instance in 1799 Thomas Jefferson wrote a letter advising

“I am for free commerce with all nations, political connection with none, and little or no diplomatic establishment. And I am not for linking ourselves by new treaties with the quarrels of Europe, entering that field of slaughter to preserve their balance, or joining in the confederacy of Kings to war against the principles of liberty.”

Clearly PNAC’s goal was the complete opposite of the Founder’s intentions. So where did PNAC’s ideas originate?  Bill Kristol’s very own father, the late Irving Kristol was nicknamed “the Godfather of Neoconservatism”a label he proudly wore.

CHANGING AMERICAN POLITICS

Irving Kristol was born in 1920, Brooklyn, New York to Jewish immigrants from Eastern Europe. He was schooled with and supported radical socialism in the 1930s.  He later would become a contributing writer to “Commentary” which was a liberal Jewish Monthly Review magazine.  “Commentary” provided the intellectual roots for neoconservatism.  He also was an active member of the Council on Foreign Relations.

The neocon movement was formerly established in the 1960s by a group of socialist democrats which included both Irving and Max Shactman who was a prominent member of the Communist Party USA and considered a leading Marxist theorist.  However this group of socialist-communist democrats rejected the hippie counterculture movement and decided to vacate the democrat party and infiltrate the republican party instead.

By 1979 the neoconservative movement had gained notoriety and became the basis of the book released that year titled The Neo-Conservatives: The Men who are Changing America’s Politics.  Irving was prominently featured in the book.  When he was asked “What is Neo-Conservatism?”, he answered “it is not ideology but persuasion” and that neocons were truthfully “a liberal who has been mugged by reality”.

Why did American politics need to change?  Neocons may occasionally refer to the Constitution which is the foundation of our politics but their agenda is clearly not Constitutional.  Since the Founding Documents are supposed to be our politics which formed a limited government model espousing the ideals of individual freedom and liberty, then what did they “change” in our form of government?  Former President George H.W. Bush, a neocon, announced in a state of the union speech, “We have before us the opportunity to forge for ourselves and future generations a new world order……….an order in which an incredible United Nations can use its peace keeping role to fulfill its promise and vision of the UN’s founders.” He did not affirm to keep the promise and vision of the Republic’s Founding Fathers, but instead the UN’s.

The United Nation’s is a one world government organization promoting “international cooperation”and was established after World War II to replace The League of Nations.  During his Nobel Peace Prize speech, United States Diplomat Ralph Bunche sounded “It is worthy of emphasis that the United Nations exists not merely to preserve the peace but also to make change – even radical change..”    Years later Americans would be bombarded with the word “change” during Obama’s 2008 presidential campaign stating “Yes we can”.

Thomas Jefferson and company established America to be a country in which the people governed and were represented by individuals who defended the people’s rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness without government dictatorship.  In fact, Jefferson confirmed by stating:

“A Bill of Rights is what the people are entitled to against every government, and what no just government should refuse, or rest on inference.”

Scalia’s Death Confirms POTUS Constitutional Eligibilty Crucial

By now everyone in America is aware that Honorable Justice Antonin Scalia died over Valentine’s Weekend. Unfortunately this was not a Valentine gift for any Constitution defending American, especially considering the possibility that this will be the third “judge” appointed by Saul Alinksky fan, Barrack Obama. Furthermore, if the GOP does not stop the appointment during an election year and Obama once again strong-arms his way, then the lifetime appointment will fundamentally transform the court into a “liberal” majority not honoring the Founders’ original intent of the Constitution.

In fact 4 years ago while in Cairo, former President Bill Clinton appointed justice, Ruth Ginsburg, declared to a group of Muslim “revolutionaries” during an interview, “I would not look to the U.S. Constitution, if I were drafting a constitution in the year 2012. I might look at the constitution of South Africa. That was a deliberate attempt to have a fundamental instrument of government that embraced basic human rights, have an independent judiciary. It really is, I think, a great piece of work that was done.” Indeed “social justice” was used by the liberal court members when they “legislated” instead of protecting the Constitution during the aggressive “marriage” debate. A fact that Scalia knew and warned Americans in his dissent: “The opinion in these cases is the furthest extension in fact—and the furthest extension one can even imagine—of the Court’s claimed power to create “liberties” that the Consti­tution and its Amendments neglect to mention. This practice of constitutional revision by an unelected commit­tee of nine, always accompanied (as it is today) by extrav­agant praise of liberty, robs the People of the most im­portant liberty they asserted in the Declaration of Independence and won in the Revolution of 1776: the freedom to govern themselves.”

Unfortunately the “revision” of the Constitution is not just isolated with the highest court in the land, but also with the highest office of the country, the President of the United States. Back in 2008 before Obama was elected, I watched a video created by a democrat attorney declaring that Obama was not eligible for POTUS. After listening intently, I decided to start researching the possibility that his ineligibility could be true by reading words from the very first supreme judge of the land, John Jay. Judge Jay wrote the following words to George Washington on July 25, 1787: “Permit me to hint whether it would not be wise and seasonable to provide a strong check to the admission of foreigners into the administration of our national government; and to declare expressly that the command in chief of the American army shall not be given to, nor devolve on any but a natural born citizen.” In addition, the authors of the founding documents, relied on the works of Swiss Diplomat Emer de Vattel who wrote the following in “The Law of Nations”, “The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. As the society cannot exist and perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights. The society is supposed to desire this, in consequence of what it owes to its own preservation; and it is presumed, as matter of course, that each citizen, on entering into society, reserves to his children the right of becoming members of it. The country of the fathers is therefore that of the children; and these become true citizens merely by their tacit consent. We shall soon see whether, on their coming to the years of discretion, they may renounce their right, and what they owe to the society in which they were born. I say, that, in order to be of the country, it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen; for, if he is born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country.”

In conclusion of extensive review, yes the Constitutional eligibility of a candidate for POTUS is of extreme importance to prevent any type of foreign influence, enemy infiltration, or radical transformation of America. This criteria was extremely important to the Framers of America and in fact there are many famous quotes from speeches, letters, and books to validate this position. Perhaps the most relevant is from Washington’s farewell speech in which he warned against the abuse of political party power and their allowing for enemy infiltration: “It serves always to distract the Public Councils, and enfeeble the Public Administration. It agitates the Community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms; kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot and insurrection. It opens the door to foreign influence and corruption, which find a facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passions. Thus the policy and the will of one country are subjected to the policy and will of another.”

Many modern day liberty defenders have loudly tried to educate other voters on being concerned about this very crucial Constitutional matter which shockingly has gone ignored by the mainstream. One would think that every American would be concerned about sovereignty, security, liberty, life, property and country and the ‘executive’ who can, with their power and influence, destroy every aspect. Instead those of us who attempt to awaken and educate are mocked and even labeled “birthers” as if we are the ones on the wrong side. Even self-proclaimed ‘conservative’ radio host Mark Levin has declared us to be “kooks” and “goofballs” yet admits he has “not” even “studied the issue” which according to him “is not a constitutional issue.” (Say what??) No Levin, it is not “interpretive” for just your non-researched “opinion” as the Constitution is quite clear Article 2, Section 1, Clause 5 states:

“No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.”

For those who believe eligibility is a “non-issue”, the Founders held many debates regarding the establishment or not of common law and what it meant to be American. President John Adams perhaps summarizes it best, “Loyalty to country ALWAYS. Loyalty to government, when it deserves it.” Thus since America was established by the text of the Founding Documents, then our loyalty should be to those words and intent versus the words of paid media puppets, power hungry deceptive politicians and special interest lobbyists, corporations and organizations who each display self-interest instead of genuine interest in defending the Constitution. Veritably some of these self-interest individuals and organizations have attempted to abuse the 14th amendment in order to confuse voters, however the amendment did not change the Article 2 requirement for the Oval Office and in reality was just intended for slaves. In fact Minor vs. Happersett confirmed that the 14th Amendment did not grant any right to vote, regardless of sex, age or citizenship, thus no right for political office either. The following is an excerpt from the final decision:

“Additions might always be made to the citizenship of the United States in two ways: first, by birth, and second, by naturalization. This is apparent from the Constitution itself, for it provides [n6] that “no person except a natural-born citizen, or a citizen of the United States at the time of the adoption of the Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President,” [n7] and that Congress shall have power “to establish a uniform rule of naturalization.” Thus new citizens may be born or they may be created by naturalization.

The Constitution does not, in words, say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common-law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners. … “

Ironically Obama declared on Saturday, “I plan to fulfill my constitutional responsibilities to nominate a successor in due time. There will be plenty of time for me to do so and for the Senate to fulfill its responsibility to give that person a fair hearing and a timely vote. These are responsibilities that I take seriously, as should everyone.” How can an unconstitutionally eligible “President” honor the very document he ignored to gain office? In a country filled with individuals educated with the principles of liberty, he would have never been a candidate for the highest office, since the educated voters would have rose up in unity to prevent his unlawful campaign.

Regrettably now the conservative and libertarian communities are voicing both concern and outrage on social media. Republican members of congress are threatening to block any nomination and reminding democrats of their resolution 334 written back in 1960, “Expressing the sense of the Senate that the president should not make recess appointments to the Supreme Court, except to prevent or end a breakdown in the administration of the Court’s business.” Plus the reminder of Senator Chuck Schumer’s words that President Bush should not be able to confirm Roberts during his final year in the White House in order to represent all Americans and not just conservative cliques.

However none of these reminders, threats, and concerns would be present today had the American people been more troubled by the danger of corruption and possible foreign infiltration of the executive branch of America. If one wants to destroy a nation, it is easiest to accomplish from within. Why the American people show little regard for the Constitutional eligibility of any candidate is not only a rather disturbing question, but also an easy opening for enemy aggression. Besides Obama, there are currently two ineligible republican candidates, Cruz and Rubio, for which conservatives show rabid support despite their lack of Constitutional requirements for POTUS. Literally their supporters will verbally attack you and question your patriotism for bringing up any evidence to support the truth.

America the Republic was buried decades ago, in fact some people claim as far back as Lincoln’s presidency. (Personally believe the final death nail was at the inception of the Federal Reserve.) Nonetheless, America could be restored if voters became truly interested with freedom and liberty launching a serious study of the Founding documents and the Framers’ intent by reading their books, speeches and letters. Once educated on true liberty, voters may be more inclined to not merely trust the words of a candidate or base decisions based on personality and/or image.

Sadly Scalia’s death is clouded with terrifying suspicion due to shared details that he was discovered dead with a pillow on his head. Furthermore, the local democrat judge, Cinderella Guevara, announced that there was no foul play although there was no investigation or autopsy to confirm her declaration. In fact his body was embalmed immediately. Plenty of other news articles and blogs are addressing this controversy. But these details and suspicions may have never occurred in the first place if we had an honest government filled with representatives who honored their oaths and carried out the will of the people, rather than the will of banks, corporations, investors, secret cabals, special interests and foreign influences all with malicious intent to advance their nefarious agendas.

Sadly this country lost a Supreme Court Judge who actually understood the Constitution and honored his oath even when his decisions upset special interest groups. Now as a consequence of voters who do not understand or care about the text of the Articles of the Constitution, the United States now faces the complete radical transformation of the Judicial Branch in an attempt to completely shred and rewrite the law of the land with social “justice” personal preferences.

In conclusion, all parts of the Constitution, not just sections, matter which includes the section detailing the eligibility of a presidential candidate. This executive branch criteria should be of utmost importance to voters. Today would be quite different had Obama never unlawfully taken office or had been lawfully removed from office. May Scalia’s untimely death and the new appointment process be a wake up call for all voters regardless of political party affiliation!