May 21, 2013

Christianity outlawed in US Dept of Justice as Explicit Affirmation of Homosexually Becomes Mandatory  

May 20, 2013 ( - Under President Obama, “justice” is anything but blind. Neither is it deaf. In fact, based on recent revelations, it appears to be watching your every move and listening to your every word. Still, if you happen to be a federal employee, now it’s even listening for your silence.
The only thing this Obama White House seems to generate is scandal. Well, here’s yet another to add to the growing list. In addition to the Benghazi cover-up, IRS targeting of political dissenters and the illegal seizure of media phone records, whistleblowers within DOJ have contacted Liberty Counsel to express grave concerns over this administration’s latest attack on freedom.
Our sources have provided Liberty Counsel an internal DOJ document titled: “LGBT Inclusion at Work: The 7 Habits of Highly Effective Managers.” It was emailed to DOJ managers in advance of the left’s so-called “Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender (LGBT) Pride Month.”
The document is chilling. It’s riddled with directives that grossly violate – prima facie –employees’ First Amendment liberties.
Following are excerpts from the “DOJ Pride” decree. When it comes to “LGBT pride,” employees are ordered:
  • “DON’T judge or remain silent. Silence will be interpreted as disapproval.” (Italics mine)
That’s a threat.
And not even a subtle one.
Got it? For Christians and other morals-minded federal employees, it’s no longer enough to just shut up and “stay in the closet” – to live your life in silent recognition of biblical principles (which, by itself, is unlawful constraint). When it comes to mandatory celebration of homosexual and cross-dressing behaviors, “silence will be interpreted as disapproval.”
This lawless administration is now ordering federal employees – against their will – to affirm sexual behaviors that every major world religion, thousands of years of history and uncompromising human biology reject.

Pros and Cons of Obama's Impeachment

A few GOP strategists say that impeaching Obama will hurt the GOP in 2014 because of the perception of the meaness on a poor African American by the GOP that will evoke sympathy from the Liberals who will then respond by stacking Congress with Democrats.  I think that bleeding heart argument does not give people enough credit.  Even Liberals and Democrats see what a mistake Obama is and how asinine his policies have been.

So, in my opinion, it is best to get rid of Obama as soon as possible to stop the hemorrhage while there is a republic to salvage.  As long as he is the president, he has power to throw our monies away and commit our resources to his personal agenda - with or without our consent, not that that has stopped him before.  The list of benefits is endless so rather that considering possible strategic losses, I say we need to have the tactical gain of stopping him completely.  Having Biden replace him is not bad.  Better to have an American fool that an Islamic Communist tyrant.

The question is: can he be impeached?  Do we as a people have the resolve and determination to make this happen?

Jesus Being Crucified Again? Will you help rescue him? (video)

Glenn Beck talks to Raymond Ibrahim author of "Crucified Again: Exposing Islam's New War on Christians" for more about the book go to: and for more books discussed by Glenn Beck go to

Crucified Again: Exposing Islam's New War on Christians is a shocking and thorough expose of the new wave of persecution of Christians in Muslim countries, and by radical Muslims worldwide. Raymond Ibrahim combines a wealth of examples with the historical context of Islam's anti-Christian sentiment to demonstrate the urgency of this human rights crisis.

Clinton sold Stingers to Al-Qaeda. Stevens doing clean up.


The former diplomats inform PJM the new revelations concentrate in two areas — what Ambassador Chris Stevens was actually doing in Benghazi and the pressure put on General Carter Ham, then in command of U.S. Africa Command (AFRICOM) and therefore responsible for Libya, not to act to protect jeopardized U.S. personnel.
Stevens’ mission in Benghazi, they will say, was to buy back Stinger missiles from al-Qaeda groups issued to them by the State Department, not by the CIA. Such a mission would usually be a CIA effort, but the intelligence agency had opposed the idea because of the high risk involved in arming “insurgents” with powerful weapons that endanger civilian aircraft.
Hillary Clinton still wanted to proceed because, in part, as one of the diplomats said, she wanted “to overthrow Gaddafi on the cheap.”
This left Stevens in the position of having to clean up the scandalous enterprise when it became clear that the “insurgents” actually were al-Qaeda – indeed, in the view of one of the diplomats, the same group that attacked the consulate and ended up killing Stevens.

Dead men tell no tales.  No wonder the administration stopped all rescue efforts.

Popular Posts

Blog Archive