About these ads

Attempting to obey God and follow Jesus Christ our Lord

Posts tagged “laws

Promises to Pass On

Mark 10:17-31, reveals the story of an exchange between a rich young man and Jesus. The young man, who had amassed great wealth, came to Jesus and asked what he could do to inherit eternal life. Jesus, despite how the man had appropriately addressed Him, saw past the list of laws he claimed to have upheld, and recognized the root of pride held in his heart. “Jesus looked at him and loved him.” – (Mark 10:21a) In His great love, Jesus told him truthfully, what it would cost for the young man to follow Him.

Jesus does not ask all of us to sell everything we own, nor are we often expected to give it all away. However, He does ask that we place Him above all else. He saw that wealth was in the highest position of honor in the young man’s life, so He directly exposed its root. Our eternal security is not something that we can earn, but rather a gift that is freely given, if only we are willing to believe and receive in faith. As we trust Him, He directs our heart in the ways we are meant to go, and keeps our path straight. When we are submitted to our Savior, we will hear what He is asking of us along the way. We are not promised wealth, nor security, nor a cushy bank account; but we are promised hope, faith, love, and a peace that surpasses all understanding, as we have His Spirit with us to navigate this adventure of a life.

‘Tis not to be earned,Promises to Pass On

this glorious gift;

our treasure to hold,

all praises we lift.

Forever our hope,

is founded in Christ;

not temporal things,

though they can be nice.

For Jesus alone,

is our only Source;

redeeming Savior,

our holy true course.

As we fix our eyes,

our hearts and our minds;

true treasure is found,

the eternal kind.

Dear Heavenly Father, thank You that You look upon us with love, regardless of where we are in the process of moving closer to You. Thank You that You lovingly show us the way we are meant to go, and that You redirect us when we get off course. Forgive us for not fully submitting all that we are and all that we have, unto You. Teach us to trust You completely, as You alone are our true Source. May we recognize all that we have and all that we are is a gift from You that is meant to be shared. Help us to hear You well, so that we love as You call us to love. May many come to know the eternal hope that is held in You alone, as we live in the love You have so generously poured upon us. Be glorified, our great and mighty God. Amen.

© Shannon Elizabeth Moreno and Revelations in Writing, May 2011 – present.

Is anyone happy? Let him sing songs of praise. – James 5:13

About these ads

This Is How a Secret Gun Provision Made its Way Into Obamacare Legislation | TheBlaze.com

Obamacare Legislation Includes Secret Gun Rights Provision | Harry Reid, Affordable Care Act

This Is How a Secret Gun Provision Made its Way Into Obamacare Legislation | TheBlaze.com.


Questions To Be Asked 2

President Barack Obama gives his weekly addres...

Image via Wikipedia

I originally wrote this post in Febuary, but I wanted to come back to it and review it. There are more question to be asked, but I wanted to ask something further. Since Barack Obama has been serving as President there have been many questions about whether he actually was legally able to claim “natural citizenship.” I am not a lawyer, but there are many challenges out there that seem to be reasonable. The fact that he put a fake birth certificate out the other day is truly disturbing and just adds to the questions.

It seems as if that is the plan of the Obama administration at times. Why would you put false papers out, knowing they would be challenged? But the pattern of this White House seems to be to stir up controversy on all fronts. They lie to the public in ways that it only takes a few moments to prove that they are lying, but they keep on doing it.

What bothers me even more than the chaos that they are causing, is the question of what would happen if we find out that Barack Obama does not fit the requirement for the President of the United State? What would happen? If the Supreme Court ruled in the favor of those who are challenging him, what happens next? Who makes Barack Obama give up the office that he would not legally be in? Do we really believe that a man and a party, the Democrat Party leaders have to have known, would give up power? Would they just not go to the public and say that the Supreme Court was in the wrong?

Then what would happen? Could we force his own justice department to remove him? Eric Holder? A man that only follows the laws that he likes and ignores the others? A man that is only in the position that he is in because of Barack Obama? And if he wouldn’t, who would? The FBI? What kind of crisis would that cause?

Is that their goal? To cause a Constitutional Crisis and divide this country? That is a truly scary thought, but it seems that with a lot of the policies that they are putting into place, they are pushing us into that direction. They care little about the rule of law. That is obvious from the way all the ABC agencies are pushing their agendas on the American people, the States, and business from small to large. Many of the questions I asked are still relevant so I won’t rewrite the whole post, I will just give you a chance to read it and consider the situation that this President and the actions of the Democrat party have put us in and ask you, my readers, “How In The World Do WE Change A President That May Refuse To Go?”

Where are we headed in this country? Why are the unions telling our President what to do? Or is it the other way around? Is our President the head of the unions? Why does the President or his aides meet with or talk to the unions everyday?Especially when he doesn’t bother to meet with his own cabinet ministers at all.

Does it seem strange to you that a man that is the leader of a great nation with a diverse cabinet, doesn’t even bother to gather them in one place and meet with them once a month, or even once every six months? Why is our President inserting himself into the state governments, while not bothering to make inroads into the massive debts that we have. Which is the job of the President? To take care of the federal government or the state government?

Who is benefiting both from the unrest here in the United States and in the rest of the world? What is the real goal. Is this good against evil? Or is there some agenda being played out that we are not aware of? Why is the press not covering all the things that are going on?

Why is the President so determined to abandon Israel? It does seem as if the President has much more respect for the Muslim religion than he does for the Christian, and he seems to have a literal hatred of Judism and Israel. Why? Is it his upbringing. Is this why our founders wanted to make sure that a President was a natural born citizen? Did they understand that only a natural born citizen would love this country enough to keep it safe?

Where does that leave the American people when the leader of the country does not share their love for the country? What are our options? If a President is trying to bring the country down from within, what can we do? We were asleep at the wheel when this President was elected. We didn’t think that someone could hate this country, and yet pretend to love it and want to make it better. We didn’t know that this country was vulnerable to someone who was determined to destroy it by using some of the laws and ignoring any that didn’t serve their purpose.

We are in a Constitutional Crisis and yet it seems as if most of our leaders are simply ignoring the fact and pretending that everything is normal. We have a leader, the President of the United States, Barack Obama, who is actively violating the constitution of the United States. Whether you like Mr. Obama or not, whether you agree with him or not, he is the President of the country.

As a leader, he has the obligation to not only obey the laws, he has the obligation to enforce and to make sure that those under him,obey the laws of the country. He took an oath when he was sworn in, to obey the laws of the country, and to protect the country. He has shown over and over that he does not believe that the laws apply to him and if he does get a judgement that goes against him, he either ignores them or pretends that they say something else.

Bombshell: U.S. government questioned Obama citizenship ……Said it lacked documents to determine birth country

https://randysright.wordpress.com/2011/05/10/bombshell-u-s-government-questioned-obama-citizenship-said-it-lacked-documents-to-determine-birth-country/

Appeals court hears Obama birthplace arguments

May 2nd, 2011, 2:57 pm · 60 Comments · posted by Martin Wisckol, Politics reporter

http://totalbuzz.ocregister.com/2011/05/02/appeals-court-hears-obama-birthplace-arguments/52367/#more-52367

Enhanced by Zemanta

Is This A Foretaste Of Our Future?


Lest We Forget: 9/11


Obama: Driving Us To Revolution?

The Bill of Rights, the first ten amendments t...

Image via Wikipedia

When you have a government that ignores the laws that they don’t like and place new laws upon the people by way of regulation, ignoring the will of Congress, the body established to write the laws, you have a lawless government. Most people recognize that laws are what holds the foundation together, like the mortar in bricks. Without laws, chaos rules.
What we have now is a lawless government. They have decided that the rules and the laws do not apply to them. This is not just the Obama administration, but the Bush administration before them to a certain extent too. Admittedly, the Barack Obama and his administration are going way beyond what the George W. Bush administration did.
But the results are the same. Our system of government is going into overload and beginning to break. We see it in the failure to enforce the laws to protect the border. We see it in the way that they pick and choose which states are eligible for aid, or able to skip the requirements that other states are required to obey. We see it in how some people are exempted from the law, while others are held to the strict letter of that same law.
Where do the people go when their government fails? Do they just keep on doing what they do, or do they get to a point where they decide that enough is enough, and start to hold that government accountable? We have seen the beginnings of that accounting with the Tea Party and others beginning to protest and question the leaders in the government. But if those leaders keep ignoring the people that they are elected to serve, and yes, those leaders are elected to serve, not rule, what happens then? Will the people decide that the next step is to revolt?
With the “Gunwalker Scandal”, we have seen some of the costs of a government that decides that they will do whatever they want, regardless of the cost to the people. Will they be held accountable? Or will this be swept under the rug and ignored by a media that has been complicit with this governments lawlessness?

In political science, legitimacy is the popular acceptance of a governing law or régime as an authority. . . . Political legitimacyis considered a basic condition for governing, without which, a government will suffer legislative deadlock(s) and collapse. In political systems where this is not the case, unpopular régimes survive because they are considered legitimate by a small, influential élite.The Enlightenment-era British social theoretician John Locke said that political legitimacy derives from popular explicit and implicit consent: “The argument of the [Second] Treatise is that the government is not legitimate unless it is carried on with the consent of the governed.” The German political philosopher Dolf Sternberger said, “Legitimacy is the foundation of such governmental power as is exercised, both with a consciousness on the government’s part that it has a right to govern, and with some recognition by the governed of that right.” The American political sociologist Seymour Martin Lipset said that legitimacy also “involves the capacity of a political system to engender and maintain the belief that existing political institutions are the most appropriate and proper ones for the society.” The American political theorist Robert A. Dahl explained legitimacy as a reservoir; so long as the water is at a given level, political stability is maintained, if it falls below the required level, political legitimacy is endangered. — Wikipedia.

If political legitimacy is a reservoir, the past twenty years of chronic two-party corrupt misgovernance and federally assisted crony capitalism, interspersed with periodic bloody fits like Ruby Ridgeand Waco, and culminating in the sacking of the public treasury in the bailouts and the debasement of the currency presently under way combines catastrophic drought and dam failure. The federal government is now morally. ethically, economically and spiritually bankrupt. The once-mighty reservoir is now a tiny rivulet of wishful thinking.Nothing illustrates this more than the Gunwalker Scandal, a cynical, bloody-minded conspiracy to subvert the Second Amendment by arranging the mass murder of Mexicans with American arms to justify further restrictions on law-abiding American firearm owners and more power and money for the federal bureaucrats who planned it.

Read more at sipseystreetirregulars.blogspot.com

Enhanced by Zemanta

Obama: Above The Law?

Barack Obama

Image by transplanted mountaineer via Flickr

What do you do with a President that decides the law does not apply to him. Every time a decision goes against Barack Obama, he just declares that it does not matter, he will do what he wants anyway. Where does it stop? If this what the Democrat party wants in a President? If it is, it tells all of the rest of us that they do not believe in the Constitution.
If they do, when are they going to stand up and tell Mr. Obama that he must stop? Even if he doesn’t listen to them either, at least they would be on the record in favor of the Constitution and the laws of this country. If Barack Obama gets away with it, what will they do when a Republican President takes command. I would argue that if they don’t stand now, they do not have a stand later.

Amplify’d from volokh.com

Via Althouse, I learn the following from Jake Tapper:

One rider [to the bill] – Section 2262 — de-funds certain White House adviser positions – or “czars.” The president in his signing statement declares that he will not abide by it.

“The President has well-established authority to supervise and oversee the executive branch, and to obtain advice in furtherance of this supervisory authority,” he wrote. “The President also has the prerogative to obtain advice that will assist him in carrying out his constitutional responsibilities, and do so not only from executive branch officials and employees outside the White House, but also from advisers within it. Legislative efforts that significantly impede the President’s ability to exercise his supervisory and coordinating authorities or to obtain the views of the appropriate senior advisers violate the separation of powers by undermining the President’s ability to exercise his constitutional responsibilities and take care that the laws be faithfully executed.”

Therefore, the president wrote, “the executive branch will construe section 2262 not to abrogate these Presidential prerogatives.”

This raises an extremely serious constitutional question: if Congress has refused to fund the “czars,” where exactly does President Obama get the authority and funding to pay them?

Remember Iran-Contra? The problem for the Reagan Administration there was that Congress banned the president from allocating money to the Contras. The Administration, quite illegally in my view, tried to get around that ban by using funds from arm sales to Iran to subvert the Congressional ban.

Read more at volokh.com

Enhanced by Zemanta

Obama: Shredding The Constitution

WASHINGTON - OCTOBER 20:  Volunteers help roll...

Image by Getty Images via @daylife

Once again Barack Obama has shown that he thinks that he is above the law. We have seen this in the way that he has ignored laws that he doesn’t agree with such as DOMA, and with the way he has ignored the rulings of Judges in the Healthcare Bill. He has basically told the Congress that they are irrelevant and that he is going to do whatever he wants, regardless of what the Constitution says.
I just have to ask, if he doesn’t think the Constitution or the Congress are relevant, what does he think is relevant? Has Barack Obama declared that he is now the Emperor of the United States? Does he intend to follow the law and run for re-election?
We now have a President who is even more lawless that Mumar Quaddafi! Since Quaddafi is a dictator, he makes his own laws and does not feel the need to answer to anybody else. In what way is Barack Obama acting any differently? He has decided that the only laws that apply are the ones that he wants and likes. Isn’t that the same as a dictator?
The question is “What do we do about the petty dictator in the Oval Office?”
We are hearing impeachment from both sides, but I have news for you, friends, the man who doesn’t believe in the Constitution and the Congress will ignore the rulings of both those bodies. Then what? Do we use the military to remove the Commander of the military? Will we start a cival war with ourselves in order to remove the lawless man who pretends to lead the country?
What would the reactions be of those who support him? Who would be left standing when the fighting was over? Who would take advantage of the weakness that we would be left in? Is this the real objective of Barack Obama?

Amplify’d from floppingaces.net

Hillary Clinton has declared that Barack Obama is now above the Constitution of the United States. The person who as candidate for President said:

“The President has the solemn duty to defend our Nation. If the country is under truly imminent threat of attack, of course the President must take appropriate action to defend us. At the same time, the Constitution requires Congress to authorize war. I do not believe that the President can take military action — including any kind of strategic bombing — against Iran without congressional authorization. That is why I have supported legislation to bar President Bush from doing so and that is also why I think it is irresponsible to suggest, as some have recently, that anything Congress already has enacted provides that authority.”

Now says

After Wednesday’s briefing, legislators said Clinton told them the administration acted within the requirements of the War Powers Act and needed no congressional authorization for further decisions on the mission.

Got that? He don’ need no stinkin’ Congress

Read more at floppingaces.net

Enhanced by Zemanta

Obama: Changing America or Ending It?

Changing of the Guard, Inaugration Day, Washin...

Image by Beverly & Pack via Flickr

When Barack Obama told the world that he wanted to “fundamentally change” America, most of the people who voted for him, assumed that he wanted to make it better. Some people suspected that it was not what he had in mind, but it was ridiculed and discarded, by the media, and most Americans. After all, that wasn’t what they wanted. They were so hungry for things to be better than they were getting under George W. Bush. They were afraid that their finances were disappearing, and Obama was the “One”, he was going to make it all better.
But once he was elected, it seemed that he had plans, that most people weren’t aware of. It was not that he hadn’t told people, it was that they really didn’t listen. Mostly because they just listened to what they wanted to hear, and many in the media, didn’t bother to report it. The ones that did report it, were ignored by a lot of the people, because they were portrayed as supporting the other side, and by that standard were not to be trusted.
As each month passed, many people began to understand that what Mr. Obama was giving them, wasn’t quite what they had expected. Many of those started looking at those who were protesting the changes that were beginning to appear, some with delight, others with fear or unease. More and more people started questioning exactly what kind of change that Barack Obama intended.
It seems that the idea of creating jobs, was to alter the lifestyle of everyone in American, by destroying the jobs that they had in mining, oil wells, insurance, and many other industries. It no longer appeared that what Mr. Obama wanted, was what most of the rest of America wanted. The fears of many were returning, and becoming stronger. The confidence that things would improve was beginning to get worse.
Barack Obama seemed to be intent on apologizing for the actions of everyone who came before him, and it seemed that everything that the United States had ever done, was bad. The fact that this was the place that most of the world wanted to come, to when their country let them down, didn’t count. It didn’t matter that we had one of the best standards of living in the whole world. In fact, Barack Obama seemed to feel as if we should lower our standard of living. As if we would be more respected, and admired if we had the same standard of living as the Middle East , or Africa.
If fact that was the direction that he intended to take us. No matter if that was what we wanted or not. The faster he could get us there, the better. It didn’t matter if he overloaded the system. If we were unable to pay our bills, there was always China. So don’t worry, we will just borrow more money. If China says enough one of these days, no problem, we will just devalue our money, and print more.
The article below brings reason to the argument that this is all by design. I have felt that way for a long time. I don’t pretend to know the purpose, maybe no one but Barack Obama will ever know that. However, although the article lays out the reasoning, it doesn’t ask the further question of what will Barack Obama do if he loses re-election in 2012? He has shown that the Constitution and the law of the land have no meaning for him and his administration, so, you have to ask, what happens next? What is to stop Barack Obama from declaring some emergency, and putting a halt to the elections? Would the military step in to stop him? Would the National Guard? Are there enough Democrats who believe in the country to stop him? Or is it what he plans? Is driving this country into a cival war the real goal? Is there anybody else out there who wonders if Barack Obama believes that he is in any way bound by a Constitution that he doesn’t believe in?

Amplify’d from americandigest.org
glumobamaportrait2left.jpg
We can survive many traits in presidents,
but malice is not among them. In the unfolding saga of the Libyan adventure I note that, even though it is early innings, a popular strain of conservative criticism centers around the always popular idea of ‘stupidity in government;’ with a variant on the subset of ‘the president is not as smart as he thinks.’ The popular variant this time is: ‘deep down, Obama is shallow.’ This notion includes various complimentary subsets such as ‘he is lazy,’ ‘he is incompetent,’ ‘he’s hooked on the perks and doesn’t care for the work.’ All comfortable notions that imply that the critic is, conversely, smarter, more diligent, and more fit to make governmental decisions than the president. The problem here is that the critic is not the president and hence has no power to do anything remotely presidential.
‘m no friend of conspiracy theories. The truthers who imagine that hundreds of people have all kept the federal government’s dark roll in 911 hold no attraction to me. Too complex and with a membership that is too substantial to keep such secrets. The birthers who look to finally exposing the odd origins of the president who seems to have sprung from the brow of Zeus? Too irrelevant if true, sinc

e it will not alter the election, and, if false, pure fritterware.

At the same time, I acknowledge that there are conspiracies in the world. By extension, the most successful conspiracies would involve a very few people with a lot of access to money and power. Taking one more step, one would have to posit that the perfect conspiracy would not involve even a few people, but only one person with access to money and power.

That person would be a sociopath but if he was the right sociopath in the right place at the right time his native intelligence, high or low, stupid or smart, wouldn’t really matter. What would matter would be the level of his maliciousness. It would not matter what his real IQ was but rather his level of cleverness and his innate shrewdness. Indeed, to the clever and shrewd person a critical conversation involving whether he was being “stupid” or “lazy” only works to his advantage since is draws attention away from malice and gives him more time and space to pursue his goals. As Machiavelli knew, and Stalin proved, when the ends secure pure power, the means are irrelevant and history rewritable.

Read more at americandigest.org

Enhanced by Zemanta

Tammy Bruce Interviews Jedediah Bila


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 2,990 other followers