Elitists really do conspire, folks. For one, they murdered Jesus. Think!

Yesterday, I posted "Insanely shortsighted and selfish: 'Obama won't back off drilling plans, but pledges safeguards' | McClatchy" on this blog. I posted a link to Twitter that was picked up by FriendFeed that posted it to my Facebook Wall. Mike Braam, who is a Facebook "friend," added a comment there on Facebook. The thread is revealing. I didn't want it to remain bottled up on Facebook. Here it is as of the time stamp of this post:

This is what is on Facebook where Mike has commented about my blog post:

Tom Usher: Insanely shortsighted and selfish: "Obama won't back off drilling plans, but pledges safeguards" | McClatchy http://bit.ly/cyqXWP Yesterday at 8:38pm via FriendFeed · Comment · Like · View on FriendFeed

The comment thread is as follows:

Mike Braam: Well C'mon Tom....There is always politics involved with stuff like this. If Obama came out so quickly and said that..the Republicans and the Press would eat him alive!!!
Yesterday at 8:48pm ·

Tom Usher:
That view of yours there is total hogwash, Mike. He'd reinvigorate all the disillusioned ones who voted for him thinking they'd have an environmental champion. Wow, don't become a political advisor for the left. You'd be their death knell, not that I'm a lefty. I am though for Creation Care.

He's missed the perfect timing on purpose because he's not an environmentalist. The Republicans are nearly silent about "Drill, Baby, Drill" right now. They know it's terrible. In the face of Obama saying that he's deciding to put offshore drilling on hold pending the outcome of the current disaster, only an absolute idiot Republican would defend offshore drilling right now without huge qualifying language that Republicans would never have used just a few weeks ago. Besides, who cares how the Republicans would react?

You obviously are unaware that you're reacting exactly the way the Republican psy-ops conditioning "experts" want.

Look, you stand up for what's right and use the bully pulpit. The only reason the Presidents rarely use it is because their in it for the wealth and fame and not to do what's right. Didn't you know that? Well, now you do.

No President is going to do what's right without being forced by public opinion. With the weakness that you're showing here, it won't happen. Don't be a voice of weakness, Mike. Add your voice to the ones calling for what's right without fear of what idiot, Republican polluters will say.

I thought you were at least a social democrat. You often sound more like a centrist at best. Why is that? Are you some kind of reverse shill? Wow!
11 hours ago ·

Mike Braam: Good points Tom, The thing is...the timing was NOT right....and I don't believe the public opinion has changed...YET...and I will say it again, Yet! I am very much a "Social Democrat". But this country is not. The kind of progress we "Social Dems" are looking for does not happen overnight....to many forget that point. Obama IS a Centrist,,,always has been, and nobody, if they really followed his speeches during the election should be surprised. The key to EVERYTHING we want is making sure Obama wins that 2nd term....THAT is where he will be able to really move forward. Have you noticed that things He can do on his own, executive orders, things like that...have been very much progressive policy, but if it is something that must go thru the House and Senate, well that is when it becomes much harder, We don't even have all the Democrats on our side!!! Politics is and will always be about comprimise. You don't always get what you want, so you have to get what you can get, littlr by little. Progressives would be very wise to keep remembering this point because if we don't, if we continue to eat our own when things don't always go the way had hoped...well we will lose out on that chance to keep moving this coutry forward...not backwards. Our job is as you said...keep he pressure on...but learn one lesson from the Republicans.....STICK TOGETHER...if we can do that, we will prevail, if we don't....Well how does President Sarah Palin sound? Very scary indeed.
10 hours ago ·

Tom Usher:
"...eat him alive!!!" John McCain sure didn't eat him alive. If Obama had been more to the left, he would have won by an even larger margin.

The biggest mistake for the left via Obama is playing footsie with all the "don't look back" talk (don't investigate Dick Cheney, etc.) that's just been a stupid ploy to continue the imperial presidency.

Look, he's weak. He was weak, and he still is. He was handpicked by the elitists to be weak. They are allowing some movement on some issues only slightly to the left until they swing the pendulum back a bit. Obama is the perfect person to do as little as possible while barely placating the center-left.

That's how it is. That doesn't mean I'm not going to call him on it though and to tell people that, that's what's going on.

He could be strong. He knows it. Don't be fooled, Mike. The superrich who are not in the spotlight call the shots. The voters are not in charge. They vote the way the TV tells them to.

Understand though that I'm speaking here about the mundane and that regardless, I'm not for punishing people.
10 hours ago ·

Tom Usher:
Look, it's very late at night here, and I have to get up and on with other things tomorrow.

You are wrong. Obama is not a centrist. He's an opportunist. He's bought. He knows what his family's future is going to be (he thinks). He's arrived. He's going to be astronomically rich. His children and his children's children are going to be "royalty."

Second terms are typically weaker than first terms, my friend. The time for a New New Deal and better has gone by. The only thing that can change that is changing the minds of the masses too much for the boob tube to swing them back.

You don't wait for public opinion to change. You change public opinion.

Your views are so wrong. We don't have single-payer for the simple reasons that the superrich didn't want the people to have it and Obama knew that before he was "elected." When the healthcare debate began, single-payer was in the majority. It was banned from the Senate hearings and TV commentary. That's why it lost. However, had Obama come out for it hard and taken it to the people, the rich would have had to kill him if he didn't back down but made it an all-out struggle for the people with their full knowledge because he would have been telling them incessantly what he needed them to do to insure victory after victory.

You are brainwashed by the elitists, Mike. Wake up.
10 hours ago ·

Mike Braam: God I REALLY hate when people throw the "He was Hand picked" phrase out there. Can you prove that? Do you know whose hands picked him out?Do you have the names? That is such a disrespect to not only President Obama but to everyone who voted for him! Is it not possible that when he says something or does something, that THAT is how he truly feels? It is just way to easy to throw that "Hand picked" phrase out there to explain everything away that you do not agree with!
10 hours ago ·

Tom Usher:
Oh brother, are you ever naive.
10 hours ago ·

Mike Braam: I believe it was FDR who said that if the public REALLY TRULY wanted something...they needed to MAKE him.. MAKE him do it! Our nation, at this time is to divided to get enough people to pool together and MAKE anyone in Washington have to do anything!

Again....more names of all these so called "elitists" that are bringing you down. Personaly I don't believe I am aware of any of them around me ....ever. :)
10 hours ago ·

Tom Usher:
Can I prove it? Do you know the tree by its fruit? Who the Hell has a monopoly on the money, friend?

Whose media empires plastered Obama all over everything before the people started chanting for him? Which came first?

They checked him out and tested him and received assurances from him.

Both Barack and Hillary sneaked off together to the Bilderberg meeting with the news reporters save a few libertarians all being in the wrong place wondering where they both were.

He received his money from Wall Street, Mike - more than anyone else did. Whose running his economic policies? He wasn't going to hire lobbyists either.

You're star struck. Wake up.

Compromise my foot.
10 hours ago ·

Tom Usher:
What's with the Batman getup?
10 hours ago ·

Tom Usher:
Goodnight.
10 hours ago ·

Mike Braam: WELL if I am so "naive" and you are so aware, then OK like I said just give me the names of this big group that sits around and hand picks our Presidents by seeing just how willing they are to do what these So called Elitist say!

I gotta say, that boy these guys were VERY Adventurous this past election...finding a 2 term State Senator, who was very young, oh and BLACK...and then not only did they figure out away for this unknown Black guy to defeat the, the one time power brokering machine of the ex-President Clinton election machine, and it;s leaders Bill and Hillary, but i also was able to hand pick a inexperienced Black guy to defeat the money making machine of the Republican party.

Wow those were some pretty risky moves for a group of guys...hey maybe gals too??? to actually allow this person to win the election! Brilliant move folks!
10 hours ago ·

Mike Braam: Oh Batman....Well Adam West is still the ONE and ONLY true batman....and that is Adam West in the photo...not me :)
10 hours ago ·

Mike Braam: Oh Tom...so many things.....ah it is to late for more...I will "Correct" you in the morn..well actually it the morn...so I will just say later for now.
10 hours ago ·

Here's my reply to Mike. I'm posting it here and will give him the link on Facebook:

Mike, you have little appreciation of the power of mammon to facilitate the machinations of those who have both created it and acquired it as few others. You are not in their meetings. They don't let you in. You don't hear their private conversations. When they plan, they don't consult you or include you in private notices. They control what is termed the "mainstream mass media," and they control it lock, stock, and barrel. Nothing that runs contrary to their objectives gets to the top in that sphere. They can crush any "News" they want and do. Why do you think that Barack and Hillary slipping off to the Bilderberg meeting right in the middle of when the two of them were being dogged more than at any other time in their lives didn't hit the front pages? Are you really that hypnotized not to be able to put two and two together? Was that meeting less important than what Obama had for lunch in a diner with the rubes? Even after all the reporters found out that they had been literally flown off in the wrong direction, those reporters were not allowed (pay attention now), not allowed to write critical pieces that were then published in the mainstream media. Do you need an anvil to fall on your head? Read that again at least three times.

"Even after all the reporters found out that they had been literally flown off in the wrong direction, those reporters were not allowed (pay attention now), not allowed to write critical pieces that were then published in the mainstream media."

"Even after all the reporters found out that they had been literally flown off in the wrong direction, those reporters were not allowed (pay attention now), not allowed to write critical pieces that were then published in the mainstream media."

"Even after all the reporters found out that they had been literally flown off in the wrong direction, those reporters were not allowed (pay attention now), not allowed to write critical pieces that were then published in the mainstream media."

Has it hit you yet? Is it sinking in? Don't just blast by this. Dwell on it and not on embarrassment or upset or whatever. To Hell with that. Be glad to see something you haven't seen. Don't be as the vast majority who will only go so far in seeing.

This is not designed to offend you, although you are easily offended concerning your "intellect." It is intended to help break the spell you're under.

Yes, you have not been aware. You appear to have a real problem with realizing when you've been told something that shows you that you have not been aware. Why is that? It feels like ego getting in the way. In other words, it feels like you getting in your own way. Oh, if I start thinking that there are elitists, I'll have to admit that I haven't known whatever. Yes, that's how it is. If you've read the Gospels, you'll see that the whole point is to wake people up. I was asleep concerning many things about which I am no longer sleeping. It hasn't harmed me one bit to admit that. You should follow suit.

With their wealth, power, and control going back to the beginning, they have created the Empire, Mike.

You claim to be a Christian, but you speak as one who had he been their when Jesus was preaching against the conspiring serpents would have pooh-poohed Jesus to his face. You are sleep walking about what's going on spiritually in the private meetings of the greediest of the greedy.

I already pointed out that Barack Obama was splashed everywhere before the youth were taught to chant for him, before their now great disappointment. The evil powers that be knew the details that they deemphasized to the youth who have been conditioned to have short attention spans and to look at image rather than substance. You saw that Obama was making centrist statements, but the elite have there levels to deal with the likes of you too, obviously. You're following the "two-party" line.

As for the Clintons, Hillary is the Secretary of State, Mike. Obama used Clinton's triangulation methods (not really his but inserted by the "intellectuals" under the thumb of those who feed them). The elite want Blacks and Latinos and Orientals to be co-opted. The richest of the rich in China and India are those who have been sucked into the system under those who wield the most power via the global media.

As for the Republican Party, it's under the elitist just as is the Democratic Party.

Well, if you can't see it, then so be it.

You picked this post to attempt to refute me. Did you read and consider the next one?
http://www.realliberalchristianchurch.org/2010/04/30/the-progressive-movement-is-officially-dead-fdl-action.html
Jane Hamsher did an excellent job showing the foot-dragging. What she didn't go into is the root cause. I do. I have right here with you.

Now, "Social Democrat" is going nowhere vis-a-vis Christianity. You need to revisit all of your assumptions.

I spent time on this with you and don't want it to be only in this little corner of the Internet that is compartmentalized via Facebook. I intend to post this stream on the blog, which is also walled off by the elitists (they think).

You might want to read this PDF too.

Chris Bryan commented on Norman Solomon's link:

Hey, where is the outrage from progressives about majority whip Dick Durbin "bleeding heart liberals" that they need to be willing to accept cuts to Social Security and Medicare benefits for the economic well-being of the nation? The silence on the cutting of SS and Medicare by Democrats and so-called progressive grass roots organizations is deafening!

Gary L. Goss commented:

Why would anyone think that the Democratic Party is united by principles? It's a Big Tent coalition that ranges from pro-choice to anti-abortion. If you want a united party, vote for Republicans—they purge those who fail to toe the party line.

Norman Solomon wrote:

I think Chris is correct in pointing to the new economic measures — "class warfare from the top down," we might say — that are in the air and on the Capitol Hill agenda. The big picture includes steady big boosts in military spending and pseudo-realism that claims the standard of living of most people must continue to erode, whether through high unemployment/underemployment or reductions in safety-net and retirement/security funding.

Peace,

Tom

Mike Braam: WOW...Probably should have asked me if it was Ok to use ME in your theories...but hey whatever... It was interesting reading. I did do a little fact checking on this so called Secret meetings. Ok so if these things are SO secretive????

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Bilderberg_meetings
about an hour ago ·

Mike Braam: or this !!!

http://www.businesswire.com/portal/site/google/?ndmViewId=news_view&newsId=20080605006246&newsLang=en
about an hour ago ·

Tom Usher:
Should have asked you "if it was Ok to use ME [you] in your theories"? What the Hell is that about? Did you ask me to post your comments on my Wall? Are you hiding? I didn't mess with your wording, did I? My Facebook profile and wall are wide open. I have my privacy settings set to as open as Facebook allows. Anyone logged into Facebook (that's tens of millions at any given time less a few spammers and others I've ended up blocking) can see my posts. You don't have any reasonable expectation of privacy here, Mike. Your writings at me are not yours alone once you post them at me.

I used to fuss over such things about Facebook, but now it's practically ubiquitous other than behind the Chinese firewall and that sort of thing.

Also, if I should have asked then you would have said that I should not have posted. That's not what you're saying here though, so stop messing around but stick with the subject matter.

Really, Mike, the reason Bilderberg is on the Wiki as it is, is because people have shined the spotlight on them. Try doing some research on them from back in the 1950's, 1960's, 70's, 80's, and even 90's. How old are you?

When was the first time you ever heard of the group?

You apparently think that people don't change based upon the exposure they receive.

The following is so common knowledge now that I shouldn't have to post it here, but I will:

We are grateful to the Washington Post, the New York Times, Time magazine, and other great publications, whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years ... It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subject to the bright lights of publicity during these years; but, the world is now more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto-determination practiced in past centuries. — David Rockefeller, June 1991.

Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as "internationalists" and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure—one world, if you will. If that's the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it. — David Rockefeller, from his Memoirs.

Now, you can't condemn that just from an isolated reading. You have to have studied global politics, especially in light of the "Cold War" and fascism.

In case you do what is your pattern, read this too at least three times: "intellectual elite and world bankers," "intellectual elite and world bankers," "intellectual elite and world bankers." Do you see "elite" there, or are you hypnotized to not see it? Do you understand that self-determination of nations is to give way to that "elite" there? That's the "elite" you have been saying here doesn't exist.

Can you also see that Rockefeller thanked them for their decades of secrecy? Can you see that he was directing that to the mainstream mass-media of the day? Now, are you able to say "conspiracy"? He was thanking them for conspiring with him to bring the world to the place where the elite, not the "common" people, determine the fate of nation-states of the whole world, Mike.

Hello, Mike,

Wake up. It's time to come out of the spell.

Now look, Mike, I'm not interested in some endless, fruitless back and forth where you concede nothing. You're wrong on this, and before you throw the result of some quick search you do at me, go away and dig into it for several months. Then maybe you'll have something new for me. That's not arrogance or conceit on my part. It's just fact. Plenty of people could say the same thing to me concerning certain subject areas. There's nothing wrong with it.
36 minutes ago ·

Tom Usher:
@Mike

You are an endless arguer. You pulled out the Wikipedia but didn't address the fact of what I said happened during the primaries and that the reporters at the time were silenced. You really need to see that you have been conditioned/programmed to automatically defend your denial by means of ducking/ignoring.
21 minutes ago ·

Mike Braam: Tom...I was talking to YOU about why I did not have a problem with Obama's stance on Offshore Drilling. I did not sign up to be some sort of an example to prove a point you were attempting to make. I would never do that to anyone of my facebook Friends, without asking them. But hey whatever you are right it is an open forum. I do not want to be associated with this particular theory.I DO NOT believe in anyway that there is some Mythical regime out there that decides the fate of the world. It made for a GREAT TV show in the X-Files..but that is it. My point to these links was that these so called "Secret Meetings" are hardly secret, as is well pointed out by the fact that we know when and where everyone of these meetings has taken place since 1954!
In fact I am very glad you brought this subject up. I have always heard about this so called secret klan that controls the world....and it made me do a bit of quick research ,,and found out just as I expected , there is NO there there! In fact I am gonna go now and read up some more.

I gotta tell ya Tom, I am always very skeptical, and I always question everything that needs to be. I find very often that there are many conspiracy theories that I find to be very possible if not probable, JFK, MLK, The Pentagon on 9/11...so I do npot dismiss these things easily.. But the idea that this Group Picks our President or runs the world is simply insane!

I think you would serve a much better purpose if you stuck to talking about Religion, and Jesus and Salvation. I will not argue about that..well I probably won't? :)
47 minutes ago ·

Tom Usher

Okay, Mike,

Mike, it's completely irrelevant what you did or "didn't sign up for." I responded to your comments. I didn't seek you out to make an example of you.

We're done on this topic then. You wouldn't do something to any of your Facebook friends, but you will call me "insane." Is that consistent? Please don't answer. It's rhetorical.

I really don't care on the level you intend it what you would or wouldn't do to your Facebook friends. I did nothing wrong, and you aren't going to make me feel that I have just because you wouldn't do what I did.

There are plenty of things you do and have done here that I wouldn't do.

Yes, go study some more, not that it will help you since you couldn't even bring yourself to acknowledge what Rockefeller said clearly and plainly what it meant than and still means.

I'm sorry you don't understand the message of Christ and how it fits in exactly with everything I've just said to you.

You're offended but don't mind being pretty nervy telling me I'd be better off not speaking on this issue. I'm doing as the Holy Spirit moves me, not as someone who is clearly wet behind the ears on the subject comes along and tells me.

I'm not favorably impressed, Mike.

Nevertheless, may God bless you with the Truth about the evil combination that runs the planet right now.
a few seconds ago ·

Mike Braam: What is your problem? When did I become the "Enemy" I thought you were a pretty reasonable chap Tom..but I am starting to have my doubts?

How in the name of the Lord Jesus MY savior, can you even remotely suggest that I do not "understand: the message of Christ!!!! Why because I do not believe in your "Notion" of this mythical gang of world rulers?

By the way I am very much not impressed either. I guess that my bad...Obviously YOUR favorite Biblical verse is not the same as mine.... Do unto others as you would unto yourself.

I am not into deleting people because I think that is a chicken bleep way of dealing with them, however I highly doubt I will interact with any more of your posts from here on out.

Life is to short to be so caught up in whatever you are caught up in.. as for me... I try to keep life as simple as possible, and keep a smile on my face. I have recently been working with Mentally Disabled adults...and I don't know.. it just makes all this crap you are talking about seem so pointless. A great day for one of my guys is just being able to get out...go to there favorite diner, have a there weekly cheeseburger and diet coke, and watch them smile. :)
41 minutes ago ·

Tom Usher

Mike Braam,

You can dish it out ("it just makes all this crap you are talking about seem so pointless"), but you can't take it. I'm not interested in meeting your standard of being a "reasonable chap." You are very unreasonable and stiff-necked in fact. This subject area is not "crap." Satan is the god of this fallen world, but you go on ahead and trash Christians for standing up against the greed, violence, and other depravities.

You are brainwashed. There are sociopaths at the tip of the wrong-side up pyramid, but you go on your merry way and leave me to be concerned with the souls who are falling prey.

You can't hear the alarm, but the blood is not on my hands.
a few seconds ago ·

Mike Braam: Tom...Do you believe you are doing the Lords work, by demeaning a fellow Christian?
3 hours ago ·

Tom Usher

Mike, you might not look so utterly hypocritical had you not engaged in demeaning language here. It's all a one-way street with you. That's a major problem. You just don't know when to stop feeling hurt no matter what you've said.

Now look, I'm going to be vindicated here. You will see the political tide pushing back against Obama. You will only be able to look back upon your incorrect starting position. Obama will come off as a complete jerk about the environment because the money wants him too. The more he does, the more he'll be hated by what was his supposed base. His advisors have already been consulting heavily with the representatives of those who make the final decisions (the elitists you have been thinking don't have that kind of power).

Well, why do you think that leak even happened right now? It's real power against worldly power. You're a Christian you say. Are you going to tell me that it was just a "mere" coincidence? If so, you may as well profess atheism.

I'm still prophesying. That's how it is.

Yes, I'm doing the LORD's work telling you that you are working against what is righteous here. If you don't like that, too bad. I'm not going to tell you you're right just to make you feel better in falsehood. Christians are supposed to love a proper rebuking.

There is an evil elite that is bound and determined to take away the people's rights. That elite is anti-Christ. All real Christians know that. That elite is not about serving as Jesus served. That elite is about being served. I've shown you this in no uncertain terms. You're blind to it.

Go away and think. Quit commenting here until after you've thought it all through and seen the light of it.
about a minute ago ·

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.