By continuing to act as the most secretive White House in modern history, the Bush Administration has once again placed itself above the law in order to hide its abuse of our justice system from the American people. On the first day of an Obama Administration, we will launch the most sweeping ethics reform in history to shed sunlight on the decisions made by government and put the interests of the American people at the center of every decision that's made.
That was then U.S. Senator Barack Obama in 2007. He was chosen and anointed by the plutocrats to be the supposedly elected President of the United States. Now that he's in, he has of course, changed his tune to continue suiting the plutocrats.
It is spun too. He's been careful always to talk about looking forward.
Well, if you don't make the sins of the past extremely stark then you'll walk in a circle and fall in the same holes.
False-Hearted American Dream
That's why things are becoming starker and starker — to take away the excuses of everyone.
Those who fall into the bottomless pit and don't rise out will have no excuse. They won't be able to blame God for their evil choices with terrible payments due. They'll try, but that only makes matters worse.
God sent Jesus to warn and to give sound advice to serve one another as the lowliest. Then all will rise. Hallelujah. You won't ever get that via the American system or by seeking the false-hearted American Dream.
The president is very sympathetic to those who want to find out what happened," Craig told The Washington Post. "But he is also mindful as president of the United States not to do anything that would undermine or weaken the institution of the presidency. So, for that reason, he is urging both sides of this to settle.
(Source: "Obama, not Bush, now seeking delay of Rove deposition," by John Byrne. The Raw Story. February 17, 2009.)
That was Obama's White House Counsel, Gregory Craig, published Saturday, February 14, 2009.
This is all to do with whether or not Karl Rove will have to testify to Congress.
U.S. Constitution Fatally Flawed
Congress was walked on by the Imperial Presidency of George W. Bush, the most Imperial President in U.S. history without doubt.
What should Congress do? Well, I'm not an advocate of the mundane system. I don't vote for anyone in it. They claim to want three co-equal branches, balanced and checking each other. They certainly haven't had it, not that it's even possible on top of a coercive root that sits as the basis of the United States' system of government.
That system doesn't work and never will. No amount of tweaking it or trying to go back to what some people think it was will make it work. It is inherently wrong. It is fatally flawed. It was designed by would-be plutocrats — empire builders, private-estate builders, would-be aristocrats. The common people have nothing in it.
It is not a government of, by, or for the people. It is a government of, by, and for the bankers. Just look at who's giving the orders. You'll have to look between the lines, but it is as clear as can be.
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)