Is Obama being "forced" to move to the left the way FDR asked to be made to do the right things but without where Obama is pretending not to be asking?

Obama has asked to be briefed about the mass murder of some 2000 Taliban POW's in 2001.

Obama's Attorney General, Eric Holder, is supposedly considering looking into torture.

Now Dick Cheney's deeper and darker secrets are being allowed to leak enough to cause a public uproar about illegal assassination squads that were supposedly not revealed to Congress.

Obama is backing Zelaya, although very slowly (plausible deniability at work). His Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, isn't handling things correctly. She's making the Obama administration appear duplicitous. Is it?

Obama is standing "tough" against Israeli settlements. Perhaps he's letting construction projects already started be completed but no new construction starts. Critics claim that Israel rush through some quick starts to get in under the wire — housing starts that were only started on paper at best.

Obama is holding firm on a portion of the healthcare reform being government paid. Private insurance companies and insurance agencies are concerned that the government portion will suck up the market by being too competitive. That's what I've always said: Capitalism is afraid to compete on the merits. I can say that while not being for coercive socialism.

I am though for everyone taking care of everyone. That's the Golden Rule. It's the teaching of my brother, Christ. Everyone ought to want to help everyone. That's the only way it is in the real Heaven where there is no evil. It's why I offer the Christian Commons.

Well, will Obama clean economic house? In the mundane, he must rollback the banker bailouts as having been illegal, which they were. He must create government-paid skilled jobs. See: BARACK OBAMA WILL BE A ONE-TERM PRESIDENT IF HE DOESN'T CLEAN HOUSE, ESPECIALLY ECONOMIC HOUSE, AND VERY SOON

Well, Tim Geithner is trying to make himself look a little better with his consumer protection ideas. Is it a real change of heart? It's extreme gradualism if it is.

Will he clean house of false-Zionists? Rahm Emmanuel contradicted Obama about the President's healthcare position. What else is Emmanuel up too?

Obama can't allow Israel to attack anyone. He has to stop giving ambiguous, fudged, hedged answers.

He has to stop militarizing and go the opposite direction across-the-board.

He needs to stop the Monsanto Corporation from ruining the natural food supply. Rather than doing that, he hires Monsanto executives.

The person [Michael Taylor] who may be responsible for more food-related illness and death than anyone in history has just been made the US food safety czar.

(Source: "You're Appointing Who? Please Obama, Say It's Not So!," by Jeffrey Smith. The Huffington Post. July 23, 2009.)

He must stop all the release of untested chemicals. If they haven't been proven to be non-carcinogenic or not to cause other diseases, they should be taken off the market. Chemicals from the chemical companies ought to be treated as guilty until proven innocent. That's far from the only industry that should be viewed in that light. The genetic engineering industry should also have to prove harmlessness before any of their creations are allowed.

He needs to push for sustainable energy and not more oil or coal fired or nuclear plants. Oil, coal, and nuclear need completely to be phased out.

So, we have Goldman Sachs in charge of the economy, Monsanto in charge of the food supply, and the neocons, who brought us all the lies and invasions, in charge of foreign policy. Porn king Larry Flynt would make a better national sex educator than Goldman Sachs, Monsanto, and the neocons are at the economy, food safety, and foreign policy; and I can say that while absolutely hating Larry Flynt's business. Give up capitalism, militarism, fake food, and smut too.


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)

  • Subscribe

  • Tom Usher

    About Tom Usher

    Employment: 2008 - present, website developer and writer. 2015 - present, insurance broker. Education: Arizona State University, Bachelor of Science in Political Science. City University of Seattle, graduate studies in Public Administration. Volunteerism: 2007 - present, president of the Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project.
    This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.