Jack Abramoff Scandal: Ralph Reed, nothing; Kevin Ring, sentenced to mere 20 months (Author of a book praising Antonin Scalia)

In his 2004 book, "Scalia Dissents," Kevin A. Ring explored American law as seen by "the Supreme Court's Wittiest, Most Outspoken Justice." Now Mr. Ring will have a chance to form his own impressions of the justice system—from the inside.

Kevin Ring

Kevin Ring

On Wednesday, Mr. Ring was sentenced to 20 months in federal prison for his role in the Jack Abramoff corruption conspiracy....

via Kevin Ring, Author of Scalia Book, Gets 20 Months in Abramoff Scandal - Washington Wire - WSJ.

You can bet he's been sentenced to a country club too, just as was Bernie Madoff (who stole $65 Billion). As a Christian, I'm ready to forgive the repentant in a flash. I'm ready not to punish or to be bitter regardless. There's much more I could say here that would clarify those sentiments; but what I'm thinking about is how the American so-called system of justice is so skewed toward coddling the rich and their sycophants while it's ready to crush the poor.

The Jack Abramoff Scandal was hardly even that. Scandal's don't seem to exist or stick when they are about the rich, just so long as those rich aren't lower-level Italian Americans or Black Americans and a few other particular ethnic groupings. If you are Jewish or you are a neocon or a Zionist (Jewish or Christian or otherwise) and your sin is able to be couched in supposed financial terms only, then you are coddled by your fellows in crime in high places. Do you take exception to that? I'm sure there are exceptions that make the rule. Do you know what that means? It means the exceptions are rare enough that the rule still stands.

Is mine a racist or ethnically bigoted statement or observation? It's actually an observation about racists and the ethnically bigoted. Is it anti-Zionist? Absolutely it is anti-Zionist; but that's not anti-Jewishness (whatever that is these days). It's against Zionists colonialists and imperialists very violently horning into Palestine, stealing land via documented and even bragged about terrorism that is also called ethnic cleansing.

That said, the whole Neoconservative Movement is about supposedly making the world safe for democracy via violent revolutions while not only turning a blind eye to the sins of the Zionists but actually lauding them as epitomizing a democratic society. What a joke that is! The only argument they bring to this is contrasting some backward Arab notions against the "goodness" of second-class citizenship for Arab Israelis (Arabs living in Israel). That's hardly a goal worth aiming for. As a Christian and human being, I aim much higher than that for everyone's sake.

Someone who particularly has been more than coddled is Ralph Reed. Ralph Reed is what is meant by someone who gives Christianity a bad reputation. As far as I'm aware, the very public Ralph Reed has not repented about his obvious sins he committed in the Jack Abramoff affair(s).

Ralph Reed

Ralph Reed

Not only that, but Republicans have gone beyond merely resurrecting the "dead of the Holy Spirit of truth" Ralph Reed, they have sought to, and have, raised him up as if he never had any involvement (let alone some of the scummiest parts) with Abramoff. Even Jack Abramoff thought Ralph Reed was the most unscrupulous of Abramoff's clique.

Here's Ralph Reed's newest effort, which is about as anti-Christ as it gets (hence Jack Abramoff probably realizing just what a snake in the grass this Ralph Reed really is): Faith and Freedom Coalition. Now, that's so-called Christian-Zionist (there's really no such thing, as no real Christian is a Zionist but rather always anti-Zionist).

Well, I won't go on here in this one post. It's enough of a start. I just felt compelled to help expose this utter evil masquerading as Christian (wolf, devil, in sheep's clothing). Anyone agreeing with Ralph Reed (except for concerning some very narrowly defined areas, such as helping the poor, which issues Reed exploits to gain victims or suckers for his confidence-man games) calling himself or herself Christian and who thinks he or she is following Jesus Christ better look again.

Jesus hates what Ralph Reed is about. He has to if he is to be consistent and anti-hypocritical.

Nevertheless, may God bless Ralph Reed, which I'm thinking will include waking him up to his utterly evil entrance onto the broad way that leads to Hell.


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.