OBAMA IS WRONG, BUT THE REPUBLICANS ARE NOT RIGHT

Obama's $787 billion stimulus package hasn't created jobs because the funds were misapplied. The way to create jobs with government tax dollars is to hire people on the public payroll to do needed work, not make work. Obama's plan was designed to fail so that socialistic tendencies would be blamed when the jobs failed to show up quickly. The only alternative to be offered would be the same old, worn out, and failed policies of the past that the Republicans always trot out. Those who are ideologically invested in the Republican Party just go along with the misdirection.

The government could easily have been used to hire people. Rather than that, trillions of dollars were pumped into propping up failed huge businesses that should have been nationalized if anyone feared that those entities were too big to just let fail in a way that would produce falling dominos.

Make no mistake about it, Obama's team knows these things. They avoid doing the right things. Doing the right things would work, and that would prove the selfish path wrong. It's that simple.

The huge spending is not the problem. The problem is where and how it is spent. That's all. Obama is ruining it for the right approach. He knows that. He's paid to ruin it. He gets money and backing from those who do not want the right things to be allowed to show results.

It's why rather than follow Jesus's advice, the Sanhedrin murdered him.

So you have Dick Cheney, Newt Gingrich, Rush Limbaugh, Sarah Palin, Bobby Jindal, Mitch McConnell, John Boehner, and Frank Luntz (who may have come up with the deceptive slogan "government takeover of healthcare," which is a completely false concept), and others.

These people and others are just afraid the way the Sanhedrin was afraid of losing their truly worthless positions where value is truth. Where were they when the deregulators were setting everything up for the crash? They were helping to facilitate it. Where were they when all the lies were being pumped out to take the nations to war? They were chiming in lending their support to the lies. Why trust them now? They haven't changed a lick. Where are they on the Honduran coup? They're playing into the deception that Zelaya is a would-be dictator while they shed crocodile tears for Neda of Iran.

Posts covering Honduras

Donate


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.