Obama says that equating the United States war on Iraq with terrorism is inexcusable and offends him. Too bad! It's the truth. The U.S. Shock and Awe Campaign was deliberately designed to strike terror into the hearts of the people to give them the sense that resistance is futile. It isn't the only example of the U.S. terrorizing people, by any means. Holding people for years and torturing them to break them is also designed to plant seeds of hopelessness and fear and terror into the hearts of millions and even billions. If Obama doesn't know these things, what business does he have leading the world? If he does know these things and lies about them, how is he any better than George W. Bush? Obama will be just as capable of severely blundering and lying in either case. The same applies to Clinton and McCain.
I've heard much lately about how religion and politics should be separated and that we shouldn't want a religious or spiritual leader to be our leader in all matters. Well, that's wholly unchristian. But for the non-Christians I say that they don't know what they are missing.
A truly holy leader such as Jesus Christ if religiously followed politically would reveal that politics and religion are truly inextricable. Love of God, the real God of love, and having that in the heart of the leader and following that, would lead, and will lead to ending all the problems of the world.
Why do we have to settle for compromising with evil? Ultimately, we don't have to. Why do we have to settle for a lesser standard for state office holders than with pastors? We don't have to. The salvation of the Earth lies in raising the standard to higher in both to as high as possible, as conceivable, and understanding that the leader is the leader. There is no division in real leadership. Jesus wasn't to become our spiritual leader but not the leader of our state. Our state and our spirituality are to conflate.
If you are a Democrat and all you want to do is win, then understand that many of the Whites who are Democrats and who have cast their primary votes for Hillary would not vote for Obama in November. They would vote for McCain, because he is White and has a history of leaning to the left on many issues. Once the primary season is over and the conventions are over, McCain will definitely swing left to grab as many in the middle and into the left as possible. The right will threaten to boycott or to run independently, but they will dread the thought of another Clinton in the presidency, especially with a Democratically controlled Senate and House.
Also, Hillary will fight dirtier than would Obama. Hillary has been toughened up. She would be willing to match McCain and Karl Rove with whatever it takes short of rigging the paperless voting equipment that insanely enough, the Republicans still control even after nearly eight years and two obviously fraudulent presidential elections. She would probably fight in court if necessary and to the bitter end rather than walk away as John Kerry did.
Lastly, McCain isn't willing to throw illegal blows the way George W. Bush has done.
I'm staying out of it. That worldly house is not real as Jesus used the term "real." He didn't vote for whom would be the leader of the worldly world. He was by rights the leader but was rejected. His truth though will fall on them and grind them to dust as they have ground others. When they fall on it, they will be broken up as they have broken up others.
The following should appear at the end of every post:
According to the IRS, "Know the law: Avoid political campaign intervention":
Tax-exempt section 501(c)(3) organizations like churches, universities, and hospitals must follow the law regarding political campaigns. Unfortunately, some don't know the law.
Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are prohibited from participating in any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. The prohibition applies to campaigns at the federal, state and local level.
Violation of this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes. Section 501(c)(3) private foundations are subject to additional restrictions.
Political Campaign Intervention
Political campaign intervention includes any activities that favor or oppose one or more candidates for public office. The prohibition extends beyond candidate endorsements.
Contributions to political campaign funds, public statements of support or opposition (verbal or written) made by or on behalf of an organization, and the distribution of materials prepared by others that support or oppose any candidate for public office all violate the prohibition on political campaign intervention.
Factors in determining whether a communication results in political campaign intervention include the following:
- Whether the statement identifies one or more candidates for a given public office
- Whether the statement expresses approval or disapproval of one or more candidates' positions and/or actions
- Whether the statement is delivered close in time to the election
- Whether the statement makes reference to voting or an election
- Whether the issue addressed distinguishes candidates for a given office
Many religious organizations believe, as we do, that the above constitutes a violation of the First Amendment of the US Constitution.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
That said, we make the following absolutely clear here:
- The Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project not only do not endorse any candidate for any secular office, we say that Christianity forbids voting in such elections.
- Furthermore, when we discuss any public-office holder's position, policy, action or inaction, we definitely are not encouraging anyone to vote for that office holder's position.
- We are not trying to influence secular elections but rather want people to come out from that entire fallen system.
- When we analyze or discuss what is termed "public policy," we do it entirely from a theological standpoint with an eye to educating professing Christians and those to whom we are openly always proselytizing to convert to authentic Christianity.
- It is impossible for us to fully evangelize and proselytize without directly discussing the pros and cons of public policy and the positions of secular-office holders, hence the unconstitutionality of the IRS code on the matter.
- We are not rich and wouldn't be looking for a fight regardless. What we cannot do is compromise our faith (which seeks to harm nobody, quite the contrary).
- We render unto Caesar what is Caesar's. We render unto God what is God's.
- When Caesar says to us that unless we shut up about the unrighteousness of Caesar's policies and practices, we will lose the ability of people who donate to us to declare their donations as deductions on their federal and state income-tax returns, we say to Caesar that we cannot shut up while exercising our religion in a very reasonable way.
- We consider the IRS code on this matter as deliberate economic duress (a form of coercion) and a direct attempt by the federal government to censor dissenting, free political and religious speech.
- It's not freedom of religion if they tax it.
And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute money came to Peter, and said, Doth not your master pay tribute? He saith, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers? Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, Then are the children free. (Matthew 17:24-26)