American Fascism

Fascism is authoritarianism, and the poster boy for American Fascism today is Donald J. Trump. Now, if you believe President Trump is a fascist then you also believe that Obama is a libertarian.

It’s obvious to everyone that under President Trump’s administration, individual rights have been trampled by the administration’s enforcement of the laws of the United States. According to the Pew Research Center, “Same sex marriages are on the rise.”1 So, the Trump Administration’s authoritarian posture has had a positive effect on the LGBT community.

The violence in Chicago is on track to top 700 homicides for the year.2 Is this an indication of authoritarian rule at the expense of individual rights? Seems Chicago needs a little more, not less, authoritarianism.

And then there’s Trump’s attempts to convert Americans to Christianity illustrated by the appointment of an Evangelical Christian to be deputy director of the White House Office of Management and Budget.3 An Evangelical in government service! What is happening to America? Thank God for the socialist, secularist, atheist, Marxist Senator from Vermont who took a stand for traditional American values.

Everyone these days seems to have a propensity to throw around the word “fascist” without really thinking (or knowing) what it really means. The word fascist comes from the Italian, “fascio” which means “a bundle,” “a sheaf,” or “league” according to Wikipedia. (No, I don’t speak Italian.) Given this definition we can try to apply it, as follows: Fascio delle Nazioni (League of Nations).

Also, don’t think that you will get a clear definition of fascism on the internet because most articles are screeds written by anti-Trumpers. As it stands, there are more and more slogans floating around but here’s one that you may not have heard recently, “All for one and all for the state,” that is, the state and its dictator.

Dictator form of government is the greatest form of government there is, if you have the right Dictator.

Will Rogers

In case one has forgotten, or have never been taught in school, fascism enjoyed widespread popularity in America in the 1920s through the 1940s. And, according to RationalRevolution.net, Some famous fascist sympathizers included such prominent Americans as: William Randolph Hearst, Joseph Kennedy (JFK’s father), Charles Lindbergh, John Rockefeller, and Andrew Mellon.

Look in my eyes, what do you see?
The cult of personality
I know your anger, I know your dreams
I’ve been everything you want to be
I’m the cult of personality
Like Mussolini and Kennedy
I’m the cult of personality
The cult of personality
The cult of personality4

You might already be aware of Columbia University’s Casa Italiana, a center for Italian studies which opened in 1927, but did you know that at the time it was controlled by Mussolini supporters who used it to dispense fascist propaganda.5

Now, let’s take a look at some quotes attributed to Mussolini, the Father of Fascism, taken from AZ Quotes. I leave it as an exercise for the reader to figure out which political ideology Mussolini’s quotes are most closely aligned with today:

  1. The state reserves the right to be the sole interpreter of the needs of society.
  2. Fascism accepts the individual only insofar as his interests coincide with the state’s.
  3. All within the state, nothing outside the state, nothing against the state.
  4. There is a violence that liberates, and a violence that enslaves; there is a violence that is moral and a violence that is immoral.
  5. You know what I think about violence. For me it is profoundly moral -more moral than compromises and transactions.
  6. Fascism is a religious concept.
  7. Journalism is not a profession, but a mission.
  8. Our future lies to the east and south, in Asia and Africa.

The Juche (North Korean) ideology fits right in with quotes 1-3 except that in the DPRK, the individual is more likely to wind up in a labor camp or face total re-education by anti-aircraft gunfire.

Quotes 4&5 provides the rationale for the anti-Trump, anti-American, Antifa black shirts who use violence and intimidation to suppress those holding opposing viewpoints. Look no further than James T. Hodgkinson, the congressional baseball practice shooter. Antifa is a leftist group and Mr. Hodgkinson was a Bernie Sanders supporter.

You hear a lot of chatter from the political commentators and analysts on why the mainstream media is so biased against President Trump, well it’s because journalism is no longer a profession, instead it is now on a mission to take down our rightfully elected president.

You might ask how could this happen? Well, it’s not just journalism, it’s happened to every major institution in America. They have all been synchronized (coordinated) with progressive ideology. This technique of coordination or “gleichschaltung,” was employed by the Nazis in Hitler’s Germany to get everyone and every institution to follow the Party line.

The Nazi policy of Gleichschaltung (standardization) was an attempt to rid the country of independent institutions. During the Third Reich, almost every public institution and instrument of policy had been altered to serve Nazi purposes (Gleichschaltung), so all such institutions and instruments were subordinated to the Party. Newspapers, schools at every level, banks, courts, publishing houses, theatres, museums, radio stations, and government offices were all coordinated. Political parties ceased to exist. Even the German Red Cross had been corrupted.6

But that was then, now the Alt Left has adopted the same tactics.

What is the “Alt Left”?

It’s a movement of phony self-righteousness and “compassion” that it uses to gain power. It will do anything and say anything to achieve its goal of hammerlock control not only of government, but every significant cultural institution – from schools, universities and the press to churches, foundations, Hollywood and unions.7

So, what happened to America you ask? Well, it has allowed itself to be converted from belief in a divine being to Statism. Naturally, none of the statists are going to admit that they are following a religion because they believe in America and the First Amendment to the Constitution.

Naturally, it follows that statist doctrines are grounded in state socialism imputed to us through Darwinian evolutionary theology. After which, Marx took the Darwinian belief system and applied it to economics and politics. Finally, Lenin took the principles from both and formulated a collectivist system of government.

As a result, now instead of church or synagogue leaders teaching us the precepts of God, we now have central planners in government intent on controlling every aspect of American life.

Click here for reuse options!
Copyright 2017 Gerard Sczepura

  1. “5 Facts About Same Sex Marriage,” Pew Research Center, published June 26, 2017, http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/06/26/same-sex-marriage/

  2. “Halfway through 2017, violence remains stubbornly high in Chicago,” Jeremy Gorner, Chicago Tribune, published June 30, 2017, http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/ct-chicago-violence-first-six-months-met-20170630-story.html

  3. “Bernie Sanders attacks Trump nominee for following teachings of Christ,” Todd Starnes, Fox New, June 09, 2017, http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2017/06/09/bernie-sanders-attacks-trump-nominee-for-following-teachings-christ.html

  4. Lyrics.com, STANDS4 LLC, 2017. “Cult of Personality Lyrics.” accessed April 29, 2017. http://www.lyrics.com/lyric/1001586

  5. “When Columbia University was on the Mussolini bandwagon,” Louis Proyect: The Unrepentant Marxist, August 09, 2014, https://louisproyect.org/2014/08/09/when-columbia-university-was-on-the-mussolini-bandwagon/

  6. “Gleichschaltung [coordination],” GlobalSecurity.org, accessed August 19, 2017, http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/europe/de-gleichschaltung.htm

  7. “Let’s take a look at the ‘Alt Left’,” Joseph Farah, WorldNetDaily.com, 08/28/2016, http://www.wnd.com/2016/08/lets-take-a-look-at-the-alt-left/

In the Crosshairs: Election Retrospective

In agile software development, it’s expected that Scrum project teams conduct a sprint retrospective. The sprint retrospective is a meeting attended by all project team members to determine what was done right during the sprint and what was not done so well. The team attempts to ascertain what actions that could be taken on future sprints to increase the team’s effectiveness or velocity.

In the old days, we used to call this retrospective type of meeting a post-mortem or “an examination of the corpse to determine correct cause of death.” In our case here, the corpse is the 2016 U.S. election. Or more accurately, the corpse in this case is what was said in the “Crosshairs” series published on this blog during the primaries and presidential campaign season. In other words, this post is a self-retrospective.

In the Crosshairs: Trump & the GOP

Published: August 06, 2015

Many Republican career politicians deserted Trump like rats from a sinking ship. Enter former presidential candidate John McCain. I admit I voted the McCain / Palin ticket in 2008 only because of Sarah Palin, I never really liked John McCain, there was always something about him…

Career politicians are only looking out for themselves, especially when they’re up for reelection.

Anyway, McCain dropped his support of Trump after the release of the infamous hot-mic tapes like a rat deserting a sinking ship, only the ship wasn’t sinking.

The so-called “fired up crazies” spoke and Trump won the presidency.

In the Crosshairs: Paris Attacks

Published: November 14, 2015

Our current president still refuses to acknowledge that the ISIL inspired Jihadis are Islamic, even though every name they use or ones that are given to them has the word “Islamic” in it.

So what’s the issue here? Will it give them more credibility if we in the West agree with them that they are Islamic? The “JV Team” seems to have no problem with credibility since they now have a presence in 18 countries around the world.

So, no matter what name you choose to give them, ISIL, radical Islamic terrorist, or Jihadis, you have to ask yourself, “What difference – at this point, what difference does it make?”

In the Crosshairs: Guns & Immigration

Published: December 01, 2015

I’ve heard Bill O’Reilly say, on more than one occasion in his Talking Points Memo on Fox News Channel, that America would never elect a socialist as president. Well, I think Bill O’Reilly is wrong since Bernie Sanders almost clinched the Democratic nomination were it not for the Clinton machine opposing him.

Maybe you don’t think there is a Marxist revolution going on in America, if not, then you haven’t been paying attention to the “Not My President” movement which surely advocates a globalist agenda with Marxist overtones.

So, if our Western democracy had worn a condom while fornicating with Marxian socialism we probably wouldn’t be in this situation today.

In the Crosshairs: “Yesterday Once More”

Published: December 05, 2015

This “Crosshairs” post was my tribute to Karen Carpenter and the good old ‘60s.

Check it out. I think I hit the nail right on the head with this one.

In the Crosshairs: Generals and Politicians

Published: December 25, 2015

So, in the fight against ISIS or the global Jihad, “What would Patton do?” Well, he’d win and that’s all he would have to say.

Yes, Donald Trump admires Generals Patton and MacArthur and so do I. History has proven Patton and MacArthur right and proven the politicians and some presidents wrong. As Trump might say, The generals “knew what the hell was going on.”

Coincidentally, Trump made many references to Patton and MacArthur during his campaign. Could he have been reading this blog?

In the Crosshairs: National Review’s Manifesto against Donald Trump

Published: January 30, 2016

The so-called conservatives at the National Review made idiots of themselves when they maligned Donald Trump in such a way that even the radical Left and Saul Alinsky would be proud.

The 2016 U.S. elections are over and Donald Trump is now the president elect. Remember during the primaries when Ted Cruz declared on many occasions that Donald Trump would not be the Republican Party’s nominee. Well, not only did Trump get the nomination, he won the election! What does that say about Cruz’s prophetic abilities or his credentials as an evangelical?

In the Crosshairs: Providence and the U.S. Election

Published: March 06, 2016

Although no one is really saying it, God spoke and Trump won the election. Obviously, God spoke through the voters. Notice that He didn’t speak through the elites, media pundits, experts, commentators, news reporters, pollsters, globalist, or progressives.

Most of the time when God speaks, no one really listens, but this time the whole world got the message.

In the Crosshairs: Looking Back to See Ahead

Published: August 28, 2016

The good news is that Trump won the election, the bad news is that all the loud mouth celebrities who said they would leave the U.S. if Trump won are still here.

So was I wrong to say that “America has been destroyed,” and “Donald Trump is running for president of a country that doesn’t exist anymore and that pretty much assures that Hillary Clinton will win the election?” I would have to say yes and no.

Yes, I was wrong in that Hillary Clinton didn’t win the election, but no, I wasn’t wrong to say America has been destroyed. Take a look around, see all the “Not my President” rioters and protestors. Obama met with Trump and was cordial but the President made no attempt to try to quell the violence his supporters are inflicting on our cities and institutions. I believe America as we knew it is gone—God just gave us a short reprieve. Maybe “for the sake of the elect?”

In the Crosshairs: The Last Election

Published: November 05, 2016

By the time I published this post, I was convinced that nothing could stop Hillary Clinton from becoming President of the United States. I was wrong…thankfully wrong. God intervened and pronounced His judgement.

And just when you thought it was safe to turn on the news and not hear a barrage of negative rants against Donald Trump that the corrupt mainstream media are working overtime to marginalize and ridicule his cabinet picks, wife and other family members during his transition to the White House. No doubt, the 2020 presidential campaign has already begun.

Yes, the Left was hoping this would be the last election. They had a candidate who they believed couldn’t lose. Who will they find to run against Trump for the 2020 election? Time alone will tell.

P.S. This concludes my series on the 2016 U.S. presidential election. I trust my insights and analyses were entertaining and hopefully even original at times. I tried to make analogies that were outside of the mainstream, maybe even outside traditional conservative circles. Nevertheless, I tried to make points that I felt others missed or neglected to some degree, particularly with reference to divine providence. All this with a healthy dose of sarcasm thrown in. As always, I welcome your comments.

Click here for reuse options!
Copyright 2016 Gerard Sczepura

In the Crosshairs: The Last Election

After this I kept looking in the night visions, and behold, a fourth beast, dreadful and terrifying and extremely strong; and it had large iron teeth. It devoured and crushed and trampled down the remainder with its feet; and it was different from all the beasts that were before it, and it had ten horns.

Dan. 7:7 NASB

It was also given to him to make war with the saints and to overcome them, and authority over every tribe and people and tongue and nation was given to him. All who dwell on the earth will worship him, everyone whose name has not been written from the foundation of the world in the book of life of the Lamb who has been slain.

Rev. 13:7-8

You may be asking yourself, “What does any of this have to do with the 2016 United States presidential election?” Well, maybe nothing…then again, maybe everything.

The biblical verses I quoted from Daniel and Revelation clearly predict a coming world leader or put another way, global governance on steroids. Additionally, if you read closely you will understand that this coming world leader will not be a friend to the Christian community. So, which presidential candidate supports policies that could lead to the loss of America’s sovereignty? I’ll give you a hint, it’s not Trump.

Hillary Clinton is running on a platform that seeks to preserve President Obama’s legacy, like Obamacare for example. Also included in Obama’s legacy would be the way he used every opportunity during his presidency to diminish and demean Christians of all persuasions. On the other hand, he has been an effective Islamic apologist, like refusing to admit ISIS is Islamic. Obama also likes to tout his immigration policy of allowing refugees into the U.S., but I bet you didn’t know that out of 6,726 Syrian refugees admitted to U.S. so far in FY 2016, only 23 are Christians!

And who can forget Obama’s many worldwide apology tours.

In order for a global leader to subdue the entire world, the United States, in particular, would have to be conquered or assimilated. I don’t think the U.S. could be conquered militarily, but I do believe it could be assimilated—and we are already well on our way! In my opinion, the results of this election will determine if the process becomes accelerated or decelerated.

So I think you need to ask yourself if you are really ready for Hillary because she is probably going to win the election. You know, having Hillary for President wouldn’t be so bad if it weren’t for her ideology. But then again, I suspect most voters have no idea what her ideology really is because she has been so good at putting the spin on her real opinions and beliefs.

Can you remember the last time Hillary held a news conference or agreed to interview with someone from a network other than CNN (Collusive News Network)? Then again, calling CNN a news network is seriously oxymoronic.

I found a pretty good way of deciding who I would vote for without even hearing any of the candidates’ positions. If you really want to know what a candidate stands for, just look at who is supporting the candidate. For example, George Soros and Lady Gaga are both supporting Hillary Clinton. In case you don’t know who George Soros is, you had better find out soon because he is a radical leftist ideologue who is determined to bring about an end to America’s sovereignty. If this sounds like your cup of tea, then vote for Hillary. On the other hand, if you’re looking someone with a strong desire to stand up for America, Steve Forbes and Jerry Falwell Jr. are both supporting Donald Trump.

Hillary’s campaign slogan is “Stronger Together” but she has no problem discriminating against those “irredeemable” folks that the Left have profiled as being un-American simply because of their belief in traditional values and American exceptionalism. Hillary’s definition of “inclusion” is to dispense all those who don’t support her leftist agenda into that “basket of deplorables.”

Left-wing bias is running rampant during this election cycle. The brazen mainstream media doesn’t even feel the need to hide it anymore. For those who love to criticize Fox News, you need to understand that there is a big difference between hard news reporting and commentary / opinion. Maybe your teachers and professors skipped over this subject in school.

Speaking of the news media, I have a habit of watching Water’s World on Fox News Channel and it’s really scary because I would have to say from what I’ve heard, almost 80% of the interviewees were totally clueless…and some will even be voting.

As an amateur photographer, I’m concerned with color and contrast in my photos. In the same way, I look for color and contrast in the current presidential candidates. Inarguably, Donald Trump is the most colorful candidate this country has ever seen while Hillary mostly appears in varying shades of gray. On the other hand, the contrast between the two candidates couldn’t be more lucid:

  • Nationalism vs. Globalism
  • < Regulation vs. > Regulation
  • < Taxes vs. > Taxes
  • Borders vs. Bridges
  • Law vs. Lawlessness
  • Truth vs. Lies…

Conspiracies abound, but since there are no Trump supporters lurking in the Bushes, we’re not hearing about that “vast right-wing conspiracy” anymore. No, instead we are getting barraged with Russia conspiring with the Republicans to influence the election. All this noise was generated by the media because Putin said that Trump was a “colorful candidate” and Trump said “wouldn’t it be nice if we actually got along with Russia.” What’s so terrible about that? Nevertheless, getting along doesn’t necessarily mean going along. Conversely, if Trump made some inflammatory remarks about Putin and Russia, the mainstream media would be accusing him [Trump] of trying to start a war.

The vast right-wing conspiracy has morphed into a two-man conspiracy to de-throne the Clintons.

Conspiracies aside, nothing sells better than sex, just ask Megyn Kelly of Fox News Channel. I was really shocked when she brought up the War on Women accusation against Trump at the first presidential debate. The mainstream media along with Megyn Kelly hammered the voters relentlessly with their coverage of the Trump NBC hot mic tape. Megyn Kelly has certainly done a lot to endear herself to the feminist movement or maybe she already is a card-carrying member.

Speaking of wars, we have lots of them now such as the War on: Coal (i.e., energy), Christianity, Law Enforcement, First and Second Amendments, Fox News, Conservative Talk Radio, Capitalism, American Values, etc., etc.

I’ve heard many commentators and pundits say that Trump’s achievements are unprecedented in modern political history, but so have Hillary’s accomplishments. She ran unsuccessfully against Barak Obama for the presidency and was then appointed as Secretary of State. Later, she successfully ran for office as senator from New York, all the while amassing a fortune of around $31 million. But her best achievement was being able to avoid any repercussions or consequences from using an unsecured private email server as Secretary of State. Hillary’s not worried, she could (hypothetically) “stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot somebody” and she wouldn’t get convicted.

Even so, I believe what Trump was able to accomplish without being a political hack is amazing to say the least. And whether he wins or loses, this 2016 election cycle will be discussed for many years to come.

If Hillary wins this election, she will be president for eight years. I don’t think it will be possible for the country to recover. This will be the last election.

Click here for reuse options!
Copyright 2016 Gerard Sczepura

Climatism

On May 6, 2016 we woke up to 54 degree temperatures here in parts of Lake County Florida. For those of you reading this who don’t live in Florida, I can tell you that 54 degrees is pretty chilly. Yes, climate change is real. Global warming? Maybe not so much.

The consensus at the United Nations’ IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change), has it that Big Oil and self-indulgent Americans, who drive their fossil fuel burning vehicles to work every day, are destroying the planet. How dare they do this!

The true believers in anthropogenic, i.e., man-made, global warming have somehow convinced themselves that a harmless greenhouse gas, namely CO2 or carbon dioxide, which we were all taught in elementary school to be necessary for life on earth, is now a pollutant! What changed?

So, was it really science that originated the idea of man-made global warming or was it something else? If I had to bet, I would put my money on politics—progressive politics to be exact.

Hey Bernie, it’s not climate change that we deniers believe is a hoax, it’s man-made climate change that we deniers believe is a hoax. Sorry, but I’m not “feelin’ the Bern.”

Hey, oh yeah, yeah
The sky is burnin’, I believe my soul’s on fire…

Oh yeah, oh yeah, yeah
Now the sky is burnin’, I believe my soul’s on fire…
1

In 2007, the anti-American, socialist Sweden’s Nobel Prize was awarded to and shared between the IPCC and none other than Al Gore “for their efforts to build up and disseminate greater knowledge about man-made climate change, and to lay the foundations for the measures that are needed to counteract such change.”2 Notice that the award spells out man-made climate change. The way I see it, the Nobel Prize wouldn’t have been awarded to the IPCC and Gore if their knowledge dissemination were for natural causes of climate change.

Socialist Europe, along with their surrogates in the United Nations, are using climate alarmism via the Kyoto Protocol and other agreements to force Americans into a position where they can’t compete economically with their laid back, sophisticated European counterparts.3 Amusingly, China, India, and over 100 other so-called developing countries were exempt from Kyoto.4

After all, isn’t there worldwide consensus that so-called developing countries’ carbon emissions are less harmful to the environment than developed countries’ carbon emissions? You could just replace “developed countries” with “United States” and you would then know who Kyoto is really targeting. This all sounds more and more like politics not science.

As a result of Gore starring in and promoting the fictitious documentary An Inconvenient Truth (or more appropriately entitled: The Sky is Falling) he pretty much single-handedly gave birth to a new movement called Climatism. The IPCC and Gore should have been awarded the Nobel Prize for their success in creating global climate alarmism because that’s exactly what they have done.

Narrator:   Chicken Little was in the woods one day when an acorn fell on her head.  It scared her so much she trembled all over.   She shook so hard, half her feathers fell out.

Chicken Little:   “Help! Help! The sky is falling!I have to go tell the king!”

Narrator:   So she ran in great fright to tell the king. Along the way she met Henny Penny.

Henny Penny:  “Where are you going, Chicken Little?”
Chicken Little:   “Oh, help!  The sky is falling!”
Henny Penny:   “How do you know?”
Chicken Little:   “I saw it with my own eyes, and heard it with my own ears, and part of it fell on my head!”
Henny Penny:  “This is terrible, just terrible!  We’d better hurry up…”

Narrator:   And they all ran in great fright across a field.  Before long they met Turkey Lurkey strutting back and forth…

Turkey Lurkey:    “Hello there, Chicken Little, Henny Penny, Ducky Lucky, and Goosey Loosey.  Where are you all going in such a hurry?”
Chicken Little:   “Help!  Help!”
Henny Penny:   “We’re running for our lives!”
Ducky Lucky:   “The sky is falling!”
Goosey Loosey:   “And we’re running to tell the king!”
Turkey Lurkey:   “How do you know the sky is falling?”
Chicken Little:   “I saw it with my own eyes, and heard it with my own ears, and part of it fell on my head!”
Turkey Lurkey:   “Oh dear! I always suspected the sky would fall someday. I’d better run with you.”

Narrator:   So they ran with all their might, until they met Foxy Loxy.

Foxy Loxy:   “Well, well.  Where are you rushing on such a fine day?”
Chicken Little, Henny Penny, Ducky Lucky, Goosey Loosey, Turkey Lurkey (together)   “Help!  Help!” It’s not a fine day at all. The sky is falling, and we’re running to tell the king!”
Foxy Loxy:   “How do you know the sky is falling?”
Chicken Little:   “I saw it with my own eyes, and heard it with my own ears, and part of it fell on my head!”
Foxy Loxy:    “I see.  Well then, follow me, and I’ll show you the way to the king.”

Narrator:    So Foxy Loxy led Chicken Little, Henny Penny, Ducky Lucky, Goosey Loosey, and Turkey Lurkey across a field and through the woodsHe led them straight to his den, and they never saw the king to tell him that the sky is falling. [iconic emphasis mine]5

The climate alarmist in our children’s story was Chicken Little, however, today we have a real-life Chicken Little in Al Gore. In our story we see there were many snuckered followers of Chicken Little. Now, instead of Henny Penney, Ducky Lucky, Goosey Loosey and Turkey Lurkey, we have Bill Nye, Paul R. Ehrlich, Michael E. Mann, and James Hansen—all on the alarmist bandwagon.

Before we leave this discussion, let’s not overlook the villain in our story, Foxy Loxy. Foxy Loxy (or Fox News) represents the global warming deniers of today who are getting in the way of the radical environmentalist agenda.

As I’ve pointed out so far, man-made climate change, i.e., climatism, is synonymous with climate alarmism. If you don’t think so then you haven’t been keeping up with current events.

Well maybe you haven’t heard what 2016 Democratic Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton said recently:

I’m the only candidate, which has a policy about how to bring economic opportunity, using clean renewable energy as the key, into coal country. Because we’re going to put a lot of coal miners and coal companies out of business.6

Ms. Clinton of course tried to backpedal her comments after she realized they were not going to help her chances of winning Kentucky and West Virginia so she offered the coal miners careers in clean, renewable energy. Really, like windmills, solar panels, and stuff? No, Ms. Clinton meant exactly what she said because the climate alarmists will propose and do almost anything to promote their agenda, up to and including destroying people’s livelihoods.

I don’t know about you, but I was caught completely by surprise recently by President Obama’s remarks at the Coast Guard’s Class of 2015 graduation ceremony. So what were those remarks that took me, and probably you also, totally by surprise? Well, it was his remarks concerning the hypothetical threat of [man-made] climate change as a serious risk to the United States. Yes, you got it right…climate change. The President and many others obviously can’t see the real threats that are right in front of their faces: IS and [Islamic] terrorism; the Iranian nuclear capability; recent Chinese expansion in the South China Sea; or even political correctness! On top of that, he went on to say that not only is climate change a risk to our national security, but that it is an immediate risk. You probably caught this soundbite on one of the nightly news broadcasts:

So I’m here today to say that climate change constitutes a serious threat to global security, an immediate risk to our national security.  And make no mistake, it will impact how our military defends our country.  And so we need to act — and we need to act now.7

Worse yet, the soundbite you probably didn’t hear was a remark the President made linking climate change with the unrest in Africa and the Middle East:

Understand, climate change did not cause the conflicts we see around the world.  Yet what we also know is that severe drought helped to create the instability in Nigeria that was exploited by the terrorist group Boko Haram.  It’s now believed that drought and crop failures and high food prices helped fuel the early unrest in Syria, which descended into civil war in the heart of the Middle East.8

I don’t know how the President can say that drought in Africa and the Middle East encouraged the rise of Islamic extremism given the position of one highly authoritative source who blames George W. Bush and Dick Cheney with inventing the Islamic State.9 Blame Bush, blame the Republicans, blah, blah, blah…nothing new from the unimaginative Left. Seriously though, haven’t there been numerous periods of drought and famine throughout the world, even in the United States? What about the Dust Bowl that devastated the Southern Plains during the 1930s?

So, what the President tried to convince the graduating Coast Guard cadets to believe is that climate change brought about the economic conditions which fueled the rise of terrorist organizations in Africa and the Middle East. Really, Mr. President? Unlike everyone else in the world who understands Islam to be a religion, you, Mr. President, obviously do not. The folks making up the Boko Haram terrorist organization aren’t a bunch of disgruntled workers upset over the meager wages paid to them by their oppressive employers; no, quite the contrary, they’re actually religious extremists trying to overthrow western influences in order to establish an Islamic State.10 In fact, anyone willing to face reality would acknowledge that this not about climate change or economics, it’s about religion; and it has always been about religion.

Speaking of religion, where should Bible-believing Christians stand on this issue? Well, it depends on where you think the Earth’s thermostat resides, on Earth or in Heaven. If it’s on Earth, then man could be responsible for how it’s set, but if it’s in Heaven then God is in control of the Earth’s temperature. I would bet good money that it is in Heaven.

While the earth remains, Seedtime and harvest, And cold and heat, And summer and winter, And day and night Shall not cease.11

So, if the Earth’s thermostat is truly in Heaven, then scientific evidence for natural causes of climate change or global warming should exist. But if we are to believe the IPCC, Al Gore, the media, and many deluded climatologists, there is no evidence for natural causes of climate change. As the alarmists like to say, “The science is settled.” and “There’s scientific consensus on climate change.” Are these statements true? Well, like I’ve said on other topics in the past, it depends on who you ask.

I began my research on this topic of climatism or climate change by picking up a few books written by authors who aren’t in collusion with the IPCC, Al Gore, and other climate alarmists. If you take the time to do a little of your own research, you will find the truth to be very interesting; in fact, not only interesting but frightening.

In my research, I’ve found two common words used to describe the man-made global warming scare: “scam” and “fraud.” On the other hand, I did not find words used such as: “unbiased” and “scientific.”

The following are some interesting quotes from the resources I’ve used to write this climate change post. I’ve grouped the quotes under my own headings for emphasis.

CO2 and Greenhouse Gases

As most of us learned in school, atmospheric carbon dioxide is just as necessary for life on Earth as oxygen. Without CO2 there would be no photosynthesis, and therefore no plants, and no animals, and no people either.12

Clouds also have a strong greenhouse effect, especially relatively thin high-altitude clouds. Water vapor and clouds account for about 90 percent of the Earth’s natural greenhouse effect, CO2 amounts to about 3.5 percent…13

The current warming trend is following the same pattern as the natural, solar-driven warmings in the previous 1,500-year cycles. The warming began too early and too suddenly for man-made CO2 to be a likely candidate as its driving force.14

…humans exhale about 2.8 lbs. each of CO2 every day, which adds up to over a half-ton per person per year, multiplied by a population approaching seven billion.15

While SUVs and power plants garner the most media and environmentalist attention, combustion emissions contribute about 2 percent of the greenhouse gases currently keeping our atmosphere habitable.16

Climatism and Politics

It was stunning how swiftly and uncritically the IPCC embraced the hockey stick.  Many years of published research supporting the existence of the Medieval Warm Period and the Little Ice Age were suddenly swept aside to make room for a revisionist climate history where there is no natural variability anymore, and where humans are in almost total control of the Earth’s climate.17

Despite a horrendous bastardization of science, Mann’s Hockey Stick has been accepted by millions. The United Nations still carries the Stick to compel global policy, while Al Gore carries it to the bank…18

The Keepers of All Climate Knowledge have erected a nearly impenetrable barrier to any new science that does not support the current paradigm of anthropogenic global warming, as defined and guided by those controlling the IPCC process.19

Cherry-picking data is not just a favorite weapon in the arsenal of alarmist activists, but it is also a beloved pastime of bureaucrats.20

Science normally involves the testing of alternative hypotheses, not picking the first one that comes along and then religiously sticking to it. But that is exactly what the IPCC has done.21

As with abortion on demand, homosexual marriage, and some other agenda items of the far Left, the fight to micromanage you in the name of global warming may find its best friends in unelected judges and unaccountable international tribunals.22

The Kyoto Protocol would drive up prices for all families, rapidly increase government (or UN) control, dramatically limit our ability to use energy, but would still not even prevent one-tenth of one degree of warming over the next fifty years.23

Any future famines will be humanity’s fault—caused by war, corrupt governments, or irrational opposition to new technologies—not the fault of climate.24

The United Nations, for its part, saw the greenhouse theory as a way to expand its influence and power. The greenhouse theory demanded that energy be scarce, and the agency that rationed energy would be powerful indeed.25

The UN views national sovereignty as the primary impediment to a UN-led system of global government, although this view is not often publicly expressed.26

Climatism and Anti-Americanism

For competitive reasons, Europe wanted to see the United States and its job-creating economy saddled with the same high energy costs that European employers and drivers already paid.27

Europe was overjoyed when Al Gore and the Clinton administration signed the American economy up for Kyoto’s energy constraints—and terribly disappointed when George W. Bush erased that U.S. commitment.28

Consider that communism and anti-Americanism remain vibrant and complementary political forces in those same areas of the world where environmentalists hold their greatest sway: mainly Europe.29

Finally, after decades of stealthy determination, the quixotic conjectures of Marx have seeped into the framework of the United States, with the most effectual being the supposed environmental crisis know as global warming or climate change.30

An elite brigade of zealots has cleverly created a new political platform to carry out the collectivist goals of redistributing wealth and destroying personal liberty, utilizing something that Karl Marx himself never envisioned: the environment, or more specifically, the climate.31

The problem with every generation is that a long-term memory of the past requires a determined and studied effort—a fact upon which modern eco-Marxists depend for success.32

Environmental pressure groups have no use for limiting governmental powers or expanding individual liberties. Instead, environmental claims are without fail invoked to advance the statist agenda.33

Climatism and Terrorism

If you penalize energy use, you destroy wealth, and when wealth is destroyed, the poor are the first to suffer.34

Penalizing the use of our most inexpensive energy sources will destroy wealth and will lead to starvation for many of the world’s malnourished.35

Cap-and-trade and carbon taxes are monsters spawned from the misguided theory of man-made global warming. These policies are inflicting real and sizable damage on citizens and businesses across the world.36

It is important not to glaze over the green antipathy toward people. In the eyes of an environmentalist, people are pollution.37

Climate alarmists point out that every human activity uses energy, and energy use emits greenhouse gases, therefore population control is essential to stop global warming.38

The Greens probably assume that even if they’re wrong about renewable energy, they’ll at least be pushing us in the right direction—toward much lower standards of living.39

In contrasting old-school naturalists and conservationists to today’s environmentalist, the twenty-first-century green begins to look not only anti-American or anti-capitalist, but nearly anti-human.40

Climate Science

Lots of the alarmists are computer modelers, that is, they make expensive mathematical guesses though with minimal background in the relevant sciences.41

Even the public understands that there is natural climate variability. It is the presumed experts—the climate modelers—who have rejected the concept of natural climate change.42

Nor is consensus important to science. Galileo may have been the only man of his day who believed the Earth revolved around the sun, but he was right.43

The key thing for us all to remember is that the 1,500-year climate cycle is not an unproven theory like the model-based predictions used by advocates of the theory of man-made global warming.44

…if researchers are not careful about distinguishing cause and effect when observing cloud and temperature variations, they can be fooled into believing that the climate system is more sensitive than it really is.45

The energy balance of the Earth is therefore, in some sense, simpler than the energy balance of a pot of water on the stove.46

The Earth continually warms and cools. The cycle is undeniable, ancient, often abrupt, and global. It is also unstoppable.47

All sorts of now-forgotten disease epidemics, from typhoid and typhus to diphtheria and whooping cough, afflicted communities during the Little Ice Age as they had during the cold of the Dark Ages hundreds of years earlier.48

Man’s activity has made the weather more damaging, they say…Whereas the greens will say we do this by driving too much, common sense reminds us that people increasingly develop and occupy storm-prone areas.49

Conclusions, for now…

The science is settled! Climate change is natural and unavoidable.

The so-called theory of anthropogenic or man-made climate change is either a hoax, scam, con, or fraud. Either way, pick your favorite noun—whatever fits. I’d even go so far as to add “evil” to the list.

I’m embarrassed to admit that James Hansen, a former NASA researcher, was one of the original climate alarmists.  If NASA used the same science to get to the Moon back in 1969 as it is using in today’s climate research, we’d still be out there somewhere trying to find it—forget about Mars.

Have you ever used a software application that never worked quite right? Well, the entire world is being turned upside down based on climate projections from computer models written by the very same kind of folks.

The UN, by exempting China, India, and over 100 other so-called developing countries from the Kyoto Protocol, has attempted to impose upon the United States a policy of wealth re-distribution on a global scale. The United Nations (UN) should rename itself to Nations United against America (NUaA).

Kim Jong-un is the leader of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK), better known as North Korea. Many would consider him to be the dictator of a totalitarian regime, but did you know there is another authoritarian Korean strongman at large by the name of Ban Ki-moon. Unlike Kim Jong-un, Ban Ki-moon’s totalitarian regime is the UN. I’ll let the reader decide which ruler poses the greater threat to America.

You know what they say, “Sometimes the cure is worse than the disease.” This saying is aptly used to describe the alarmists’ solutions to solve man-made climate change, a.k.a., the problem that never really existed.

Climate change is an immediate risk to the United States. That is to say, the belief in man-made climate change is the immediate risk.

Next time I’ll be posting a critique of Al Gore’s so-called documentary on climate change: An Inconvenient Truth. This will be my first viewing of the film. Afterwards, I hope I don’t get seduced by the “dark side,” if you know what I mean.

Icons made by Freepik from www.flaticon.com is licensed by CC 3.0 BY

 

Click here for reuse options!
Copyright 2016 Gerard Sczepura

  1. Bad Company.  Burning Sky. WB Music Corp., Badco Music Inc. http://www.songlyrics.com/bad-company/burning-sky-lyrics/#TI8Ovtl9bxwMBpCx.99

  2. “The Nobel Peace Prize 2007 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Al Gore,” Nobelprize.org, accessed May 07, 2016, http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2007/

  3. Christopher C. Horner, The Politically Incorrect GuideTM to Global Warming and Environmentalism, (Washington, DC: Regnery Publishing, Inc., 2007), 299. 

  4. “Kyoto Protocol Fast Facts,” CNN Library, updated March 30, 2016, http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/26/world/kyoto-protocol-fast-facts/

  5. “The Story of Chicken Little,” Eva L. Easton, updated: January 20, 2015, http://eleaston.com/chicken.html

  6. “Clinton backtracks on putting ‘coal miners, coal companies out of business’,” Adam Beam And Jonathan Mattise The Associated Press, The Salt Lake Tribune, March 14, 2016, http://archive.sltrib.com/story.php?ref=/home/3663165-155/story.htm. 

  7. “Remarks by the President at the United States Coast Guard Academy Commencement,” The White House Office of the Press Secretary, May 20, 2015, https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2015/05/20/remarks-president-united-states-coast-guard-academy-commencement. 

  8. Ibid. 

  9. “Sean Penn: Bush, Cheney ‘created’ ISIS,” Mark Hensch, The Hill, March 19, 2015, http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/236285-sean-penn-bush-cheney-created-isis. 

  10. “Who are Nigeria’s Boko Haram Islamists?” Farouk Chothia, BBC Africa, May 4, 2015, http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-13809501. 

  11. Gen. 8:22 NASB 

  12. Roy W. Spencer, The Great Global Warming Blunder, (New York, Encounter Books, 2010), XIX. 

  13. Ibid., 44. 

  14. S. Fred Singer and Dennis T. Avery, Unstoppable Global Warming – Every 1,500 Years, updated and expanded edition (Lanham, MD, Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc., 2008), 38. 

  15. Brian Sussman, Climategate, (New York, WND Books, 2010), 73. 

  16. Horner, Politically Incorrect Guide™, 69. 

  17. Spencer, Global Warming Blunder, 10. 

  18. Sussman, Climategate, 37. 

  19. Spencer, Global Warming Blunder, 64. 

  20. Horner, Politically Incorrect Guide™, 42. 

  21. Spencer, Global Warming Blunder, XIV. 

  22. Horner, Politically Incorrect Guide™, 30. 

  23. Spencer, Global Warming Blunder, 67. 

  24. Singer, Unstoppable Global Warming, 9. 

  25. Ibid., 226. 

  26. Steve Goreham, The Mad, Mad, Mad World of Climatism: Mankind and Climate Change Mania, (New Lenox, IL, New Lenox Books, Inc., 2012), 36. 

  27. Singer, Unstoppable Global Warming, 227. 

  28. Ibid., 233. 

  29. Horner, Politically Incorrect Guide™, 7. 

  30. Sussman, Climategate, ix. 

  31. Ibid., xvi. 

  32. Ibid., 20. 

  33. Horner, Politically Incorrect Guide™, 3. 

  34. Spencer, Global Warming Blunder, 65. 

  35. Ibid., 27. 

  36. Goreham, Mad, Mad, Mad World of Climatism, 44. 

  37. Horner, Politically Incorrect Guide™, 9. 

  38. Goreham, Mad, Mad, Mad World of Climatism, 32. 

  39. Singer, Unstoppable Global Warming, 247. 

  40. Horner, Politically Incorrect Guide™, 23. 

  41. Ibid., 109. 

  42. Spencer, Global Warming Blunder, 158-159. 

  43. Singer, Unstoppable Global Warming, 7. 

  44. Ibid., 28. 

  45. Spencer, Global Warming Blunder, 72. 

  46. Ibid., 41. 

  47. Singer, Unstoppable Global Warming, 3. 

  48. Ibid., 55. 

  49. Horner, Politically Incorrect Guide™, 153. 

In the Crosshairs: National Review’s Manifesto against Donald Trump

I’ve just read through the essays “Conservatives against Trump” in the National Review  and I must say that if you believe what these conservative elitists are saying, you would think that Donald J. Trump is the Antichrist incarnate or the Beast of Revelation.

The essays in the National Review are laced with nothing but vitriol towards Mr. Trump, so much so that it would make even the worst liberal hack green with envy. Nevertheless, the self-proclaimed apostles of conservatism decided to emulate the tactics and language of the very people and groups they claim to be against, namely Barack Obama and liberal Democrats.

Saul Alinsky wrote in his book Rules for Radicals: A Practical Primer for Realistic Radicals that “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.” I wouldn’t think that any of the conservative elites consider Saul Alinsky as one of their heroes, but none of them, except for maybe Glenn Beck and one other, had any hesitation whatsoever in heaping volleys of ridicule upon Mr. Trump as illustrated in the following quotes:

David Boaz – “He’s effectively vowing to be an American Mussolini, concentrating power in the Trump White House and governing by fiat.”

L. Brent Bozell III – “Trump might be the greatest charlatan of them all.”

Mona Charen – “The man has demonstrated an emotional immaturity bordering on personality disorder, and it ought to disqualify him from being a mayor, to say nothing of a commander-in-chief.”

“A pinball is more predictable.”

Erick Erickson – “Like the angels in heaven who rejoice for every new believer, we should rejoice for Donald Trump’s conversion to conservatism.”

Mark Helprin – “Forget hair like the tinsel on discarded Christmas trees.”

“…he has like a tapeworm invaded the schismatically weakened body of the Republican party…like Allah in Islamic theology, he is whatever he pleases to be at the moment, the only principle being the triumph of his will.”

“He doesn’t know the Constitution, history, law, political philosophy, nuclear strategy, diplomacy, defense, economics beyond real estate, or even, despite his low-level-mafioso comportment, how ordinary people live.”

William Kristol – “In sum: Isn’t Trumpism a two-bit Caesarism of a kind that American conservatives have always disdained…”

Michael B. Mukasey – “…we will need a president who summons our strength with a reality-based strategic vision, not one who summons applause with tantrums and homicidal fantasies.

R. Reno – “Our nation’s solidarity is being tested. It will only make things worse if we go Trumpster diving.”

Thomas Sowell – “A shoot-from-the-hip, bombastic showoff is the last thing we need or can afford.”

Cal Thomas – “Trump might also be compared to Elmer Gantry, the fictional evangelist who used religion to mask his dark side.”

Yep, with conservatives like that who needs liberal, progressive Democrats? And here is a prime example of what happens when you don’t suck up to the media and political elites; whether Republican or Democrat, conservative or liberal.

David Boaz, one of the contributors, wrote “Not since George Wallace has there been a presidential candidate who made racial and religious scapegoating so central to his campaign. Scapegoating? Really? The Democrats would be proud to have David Boaz on their team of race-baiters. Obviously David Boaz doesn’t have access to newspapers, TV or the internet because he is totally oblivious to what is going on in the world. I guess he’s never heard of Kate Steinle or the shootings in San Bernardino. Securing our border with Mexico isn’t about not liking or hating Hispanics, it’s about enforcing our immigration laws and keeping criminal and terrorist elements out. In case David Boaz hasn’t heard yet, there are many followers of Islam who have declared war on Western civilization. Isn’t it prudent for Mr. Trump to suggest a moratorium on immigration from Muslim countries? Is Mr. Trump’s proposals purely based on religious preferences or do they line up with the realities of the world we live in?

Thanks to David Boaz, Mark Helprin, William Kristol, and Cal Thomas, Mr. Trump has been compared to Mussolini, Hitler, the Godfather, Caesar, and Elmer Gantry. Is anyone buying any of this garbage? Based on many polls and judging from attendance at his rallies, there are many voters (hopefully) who like Mr. Trump because they believe he is a strong man or leader, not because they think he is a strongman.

So, should ideological conservatives, and evangelicals for that matter, support Donald Trump? Well, we’ve had eight years of Ronald Reagan and abortion hasn’t been overturned. We’ve also had eight years of George W. Bush and abortion still hasn’t been overturned—the Constitution, Congress and the Supreme Court always get in the way. Would electing another ideological conservative make any difference? Someone like Ted Cruz could capture the evangelical, conservative vote, but is that enough the win the presidency?

Barack Obama was elected to two terms as president. How could that have happened if the majority of Americans wanted a far-right, conservative candidate? I think Ann Coulter said it best, “In another few years, the whole country will be California and no Republican will win another national election.”1 The demographics in America have changed and they now favor the Democrats over the Republicans.

Evangelicals need to be wary of smooth talkers. Haven’t we had enough of polite, milquetoast, politicians who cave in and apologize every time they’re challenged or attacked by the media, pundits, and the political opposition? Haven’t we had enough of career politicians with their law degrees from elitist schools? The elites have nothing but contempt for ordinary people anyway. After all, an outsider presidential candidate is not without honor except within his own political party and among his own party elite.2 Isn’t it about time for a president from a different background?

Ted Cruz is probably the favorite candidate amongst evangelicals because he said “Not a lot of conservatives come out of Manhattan. I’m just saying.”3 Ted Cruz can criticize Donald Trump for being from New York but the “consistent conservative” was born in Canada, a country that is “notoriously liberal.” Evangelicals need to remember that Trump is not trying to be pastor of a church, he’s running for President of the United States. I hope evangelical voters can remember that. In a way, Ted Cruz may be right, not a lot of conservatives have come from New York but some of the best ones have like Michael Savage.

Michael Savage said that the best platform for a candidate to run on is “Borders, Language, and Culture.”4 I believe Donald Trump’s “Make America Great Again” slogan encapsulates those very things. Is there anyone who doesn’t agree that Mr. Trump is for securing our borders and dealing with illegal immigration?

Michael Savage has said that we need a “street fighter to fight against what’s coming.” Dr. Savage recognizes it and so does Mr. Trump. But that sentiment has not resonated well with everyone particularly Megyn Kelly at Fox News of all places. Megyn Kelly started the feud with Donald Trump during the first Republican Debate with her “war on women” question, or more accurately an accusation, almost right out of the gate. I was even embarrassed by her question so I can understand Mr. Trump’s feelings. The rift between them has not gone away as evidenced by the fact that Mr. Trump refused to participate in the latest Iowa debate because Megyn Kelly was selected as one of the moderators again.

As Tina Fey almost single-handedly brought down Sarah Palin and won the election for Barack Obama in 2008; now it seems that Megyn Kelly could be the only one to bring down Donald Trump. We’ll have to wait and see.

I’m an evangelical, a veteran, an American, and a voter, and I support Donald J. Trump for president.

Click here for reuse options!
Copyright 2016 Gerard Sczepura

  1. “Coulter: I Got 30 Million Reasons,” Ann Coulter, Human Events, July 3, 2013, http://humanevents.com/2013/07/03/coulter-i-got-30-million-reasons/

  2. Matt. 13:57 

  3. “Cruz Is Wrong and Trump Is Right: New York Has a Long History of Conservatives,” Grant Burningham, Newsweek.com, January 14, 2016, http://www.newsweek.com/cruz-wrong-and-trump-right-new-york-has-long-history-conservatives-416041

  4. “I KNOW HOW TO WIN: BORDERS, LANGUAGE AND CULTURE!” Savage Nation, YouTube, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1oRmPvhBAtg

In the Crosshairs: Guns & Immigration

Guns

There’s a prophecy in the Bible concerning a time when there will finally be a lasting peace between nations and men which up to this point the world has been unable to achieve. The prophecy I’m referring to is in Micah 4:3 which says:

And He will judge between many peoples And render decisions for mighty, distant nations. Then they will hammer their swords into plowshares And their spears into pruning hooks; Nation will not lift up sword against nation, And never again will they train for war.

Who is the “He” that is being referred to in the verse I just quoted? Unfortunately, according the prevailing belief amongst the populations of the world, including the United States, it’s some charismatic politician who claims to know what’s best for us. Much to their dismay, this prophecy is not about any of them, it is about Jesus, the coming Messiah.

Over two hundred years ago a group of men wrote a document that laid the foundation for a great republic which said that the rights and liberties granted to men (and women) were bestowed by God not government. This group of men were the authors of the United States Constitution which was, and still is, the greatest document given to the world, second only to the Scriptures.

Amendment II of the Unites States Constitution guarantees the right of the people to keep and bear arms. However, if you listen to certain politicians like Hillary Rodham Clinton for example, you would think that it is the NRA (National Rifle Association) not the Constitution that guarantees our right to keep and bear arms in the United States. The NRA may be an advocate of gun rights but it isn’t the guarantor of gun rights.

Nevertheless, the Scriptures predicted many false prophets would arise and would deceive many. One of those false prophets was Karl Marx who proposed a different gospel. Marx’s gospel preached the concepts of socialism and materialism. What Marx and his followers believed in was the class struggle between the industrial working class (proletariat) and the wealthy middle class (bourgeoisie).

Marx’s ideology came to be known as communism. The same communism embraced by [the former] Soviet Union, Cuba, China, North Korea, Laos, and Vietnam. While the United States is not listed among those communist countries, it is however, leaning towards socialism, maybe not the radical Marxian variety but a type of socialism nevertheless.

How did this leaning towards socialism come about? Well, it came about as a result of our Western democracy committing fornication with Marxian socialism which produced the bastard child called the ‘New Liberalism.’

So, what does this new liberalism, with its roots in Marxism, have to do with guns? The answer is everything! You need to understand that the goal of the Marxists is the overthrow of all capitalist societies—through revolution if necessary—so that they can bring about their dreams of a socialist utopia. Assuming this is true, then what is the last thing they (communists) want the bourgeoisie to have? Well, you guessed it, they don’t want you to have guns.

Not willing to let any good crisis go to waste, the radicals in the left-wing press were quick to invent new arguments to justify the government taking action, once and for all, to end the private ownership of firearms, i.e., to end the “pervasiveness of gun violence in the United States.” After all, “More Americans have died from guns in the United States since 1968 than on battlefields of all the wars in American history,” according to a recent article by Nicholas Kristof of the New York Times.

Of the 1,516,863 gun-related deaths since 1968, 63% were suicides. I guess you could argue that if guns had been confiscated in 1968 then all those gun-related deaths from suicides could have been prevented. Sounds good, but maybe those in the 63% would have found other ways to take their own lives, possibly by falling on their own swords.

Occasionally I’ll take a ride over to the Webster Flea Market in Sumter County, Florida to pick up some fresh local produce. I also like to wander around to check out all the odd and bizarre stuff they have for sale. It’s not unusual to find swords and knives; guns; and guitars out in the open for sale. As far as I can remember, I never saw a sword or knife leap off the table and stab anyone. Likewise, I never saw a gun load itself and shoot anyone; and I certainly never saw a guitar get up and play “Purple Haze” on its own. All these items are inanimate objects; they only become good or evil depending on how people decide to use them.

Since elements of the lunatic left-wing can’t get their gun confiscation laws passed, they’ve decided to turn their attention to the gun manufacturers. If they can somehow manage to hold the gun manufacturers liable for the deaths resulting from misuse of their products then they can put them out of business. Problem solved. Better yet, instead of going after Smith & Wesson why don’t they go after the Chinese who invented gunpowder and caused the problem in the first place?

It’s interesting that the New York Times columnist chose to compare gun-related deaths to war deaths but ignored some other interesting statistics such as comparisons to the number of auto related deaths or the number of abortions since 1968.

Let’s take a look at some statistics for comparison. Remember, according to the New York Times columnist, there were 120,130 or 9% more gun related deaths than war related deaths since the Revolutionary War (1,516,863 and 1,396,733 respectively).

Auto deaths since 1968:

Average of 45,000/year (roughly) over 48 years equals 2,160,000

Abortions since 1968:

Average of 1.2 million/year (roughly) over 48 years equals 57,600,000

So, now let’s compare the number of gun related deaths to auto related deaths and abortions since 1968:

643,137 or 42% more auto related deaths than gun related deaths

56,083,137 or 3,697% more abortions than gun related deaths

Based on the statistics I’ve just provided, maybe we need more automobile control not gun control. Is the hysteria over gun related deaths justified? For some reason, auto deaths are taken as matter of fact. I’m sure more people would be shocked if they could see just how gruesome auto accident deaths can be. Are auto related deaths less senseless than gun related deaths?

Of course no dyed-in-the-wool, politically correct, liberal, feminist would be incensed over all the abortion deaths that have occurred since 1968—the unborn fetuses, not the mothers. We’ve all seen videos of just how callous and insensitive the physicians and commandants in the abortion camps really are. No problem though, unborn fetuses are just so much tissue.

As we’ve seen, there are way more auto related deaths and abortions than there are gun related deaths or even war related deaths. Still, the Left’s righteous indignation is always directed towards guns and war.

Immigration

President Obama is quick to point out that the United States is not a Christian nation but a nation of laws. Apparently he forgot about our immigration laws, since 2.5 million illegal immigrants have come to the United States on his watch.

Naturally, to be against illegal immigration is to be against all immigration, Not only that, if you speak out against illegal immigration you are labeled a racist and a xenophobe. Furthermore, if you dare to be against settling Syrian refugees in Europe or the United States you are labeled an Islamophobe. Don’t believe it, just ask Donald Trump. By the way, how do they know that Syrian refugees are Muslim? I thought we don’t profile or give religious tests to potential immigrants.

The mainstream press, political pundits, and politicians like to mock the notion of building a wall along the southern border with Mexico. It’s even more ludicrous for them to believe that Mexico will pay for (and probably even build) the wall. The notion of building a wall with Mexico to secure our southern border is frequently likened to the East Germans building the Berlin Wall in 1961. Is this a legitimate comparison? After all, we are building a wall between two different countries, we’re not trying to build a wall through the middle of Washington, D.C.

Blah, Blah, Blah. Do we have borders or don’t we? Does it make any difference if there are 11 million or 34 million illegals in the United States? Let’s assume that 1% of those 11 million could be criminal or terrorists; that would leave us with a small army of 110,000 able to carry out acts like the Kathryn Steinle murder or the Boston Marathon bombing. How many more will be added if President Obama gets his way and lets in another 85,000 from Syria next year?

The loud voices want us to believe that it’s impossible to just round up all 11 million or so illegal immigrants and deport them. That would be un-American and inhumane, after all “that’s not who we are.” I wonder if there would be any problem if the government decided to round up all the Christians in the United States. I bet you wouldn’t hear a peep.

Besides, would it have made any sense for the government to have allowed Japanese, German, or Italian nationals to immigrate to the United States during World War II? Of course not! You would need to have your head examined if you thought so.

But now, President Obama is okay with allowing thousands of immigrants from countries with active Jihadist movements into the United States. During many of his public lectures, Obama never fails to remind us that “We are not at war with Islam. We are at war with people who have perverted Islam.” Well, technically Obama is correct, we are not at war with Islam the religion but we are at war with Islam the political system whether we choose to acknowledge it or not. I’m sure that the average man on the street in America has no idea what the differences between these two concepts are but they had better learn…and soon.

What we need now is a new sheriff in town. As a matter of fact, I think there’s one on the horizon.

Click here for reuse options!
Copyright 2015 Gerard Sczepura

In the Crosshairs: Paris Attacks

Last night all over the news were headlines of another horrific terrorist attack, this time in Paris.

It was not long ago that we made our first trip to Europe. Even though we planned to meet my wife’s Korean cousin and her husband in The Netherlands, I insisted that we also made a quick trip to Paris—on our own if necessary. Looking back, I’m glad we went when we did, when things seemed normal.

We stayed in the 7th Arr. (arrondissement) district in Paris and took the same Thalys train from Amsterdam that was attacked and subsequently thwarted by, who else, Americans.

On CNN last night they showed President Obama speaking where he condemning the attacks in the strongest language he’s ever used up to this point when he said the attacks were “outrageous.” I hope the French are feeling reassured. Our President gave his remarks in his usual self-righteous demeanor as If to say, “if only Charlie Hebdo didn’t publish that cartoon mocking the Prophet, everything would have been okay.” Do you think Donald Trump’s demeanor would be casual and nonchalant if he were president?

I was on the ground in New York during the attacks on the World Trade Center and there is one thing I can assure you of and that is that you are one your own, baby! Yes, help will arrive, but it may be minutes later at best—too late for most people. According to one account, the terrorists (protestors) were firing for 10 minutes in the concert hall. I wonder if as many people would have been killed (slaughtered) if someone in the crowd were armed.

On CNN, one survivor of the attacks described it as a “bloodbath.”

Maybe the French and the other tolerant, progressive Europeans will come to realize why Americans will never give up their guns. Aren’t there laws in France prohibiting people from purchasing AK47 assault rifles and then using them to attack and kill innocent civilians? Maybe they need more laws prohibiting law abiding citizens from owning and carrying weapons.

I’m sure I will be criticized for politicizing such a tragedy, but isn’t this sort of thing already being politicized when leaders of some of the most powerful nations in the world refuse accept or acknowledge the real nature of the threat which is an ideology derived from a religious belief system?

Let’s have a review for those who can’t see what’s right in front of them or for those who “can’t find their ass with both hands,” IS, ISIS, ISIL are acronyms for Islamic State, Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, and Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant respectively. The common denominator in all three is “Islamic.” If they identify themselves as Islamic, shouldn’t we?

I’m waiting for all the educated idiots, politicians, and media analysts to start playing the blame game. You know how it goes. HRC will try to tell you it was global warming that drove them (terrorists) to commit such acts of desperation. It was George W. Bush. No…wait, maybe it was income inequality or the minimum wage. Better yet, why not just blame the whole thing on capitalism. But seriously, I’m sure it was really caused by an excess of CO2 (carbon dioxide) emissions in the atmosphere that drove them crazy. Yea, that’s what it was.

My only hope is that France, as well as the U.S., will wake up and take this threat seriously.

Vive la France! Vive la liberté!

Click here for reuse options!
Copyright 2015 Gerard Sczepura

The End Times: Apostasy, Antichrist, and Politics

Apostasy

In a previous post I identified three things concerning Jesus’ return that are indisputable: visible and unmistakable; unexpected; and normalcy, as in the days of Noah and Lot.1 And now we have a fourth thing, apostasy in the Church.

In a letter the apostle Paul wrote to the church at Thessalonica, he reminded them that they shouldn’t be deceived into believing that the day of the Lord had come unless the apostasy has come first.2 So what is apostasy and how are we to identify it? Well, according to the online dictionaries: merriam-webster.com and dictionary.com, apostasy is defined as abandonment and departure respectively. To abandon something is to let go of it and you can’t let go of something unless you first had possession of it. Unbelievers, people who were never saved, cannot be apostate since they can’t let go of something they never had; only saved people can become apostate.

A common misconception is that apostates are Christians who have lost their salvation. However, I don’t subscribe to that theory; I believe apostates are Christians who have left their first love,3 that is, they have abandoned or compromised many or most of the fundamental doctrines of the faith. They hold on to the “Jesus loves me this I know for the Bible tells me so…”4 refrain from the well-known children’s song, but they put aside other biblical doctrines or strong teachings that conflict with the popular culture that we find ourselves in the 21st century. Everyone is familiar with the current social issues that are in conflict with biblical teaching: women in ministry; divorce; same-sex marriage; and abortion but not everyone would consider belief in evolution; man-made climate change; and economic inequality as qualifications for apostasy, but they are. And yes, a person’s political and religious beliefs are both interrelated and inseparable.

Antichrist

Children, it is the last hour; and just as you heard that antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have appeared; from this we know that it is the last hour.5

Who is the liar but the one who denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, the one who denies the Father and the Son.6

By this you know the Spirit of God: every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God;
and every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God; this is the spirit of the antichrist, of which you have heard that it is coming, and now it is already in the world.7

For many deceivers have gone out into the world, those who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh. This is the deceiver and the antichrist.8

Antichrist is anyone who doesn’t believe that Jesus is the Christ. Contrary to Hollywood’s misappropriation of the term, antichrist is not a specific person.9 The character Damien in The Omen is portrayed as the antichrist, but in reality, he is really the beast who the Bible introduces in Revelation chapter 13. Antichrist and beast are sometimes used interchangeably; I guess because “antichrist” has more of a ring to it than “beast.”

Christians can be apostate but they cannot be antichrist. But according to Jesus, it’s possible for false Christians (antichrists) to become assimilated in the Church such that they become almost indistinguishable from the true believers; nevertheless, God is able to differentiate the wheat from the tares.10

Politics

The theology of liberation or liberation theology is one such example of blending politics and religion. In liberation theology, Scripture is reinterpreted with a bias towards the poor. This brand of theology advocates its followers to engage in the struggle to liberate the poor from their male-dominated, rich, white capitalist oppressors.11 You know the old saying, “If it looks like Marxism and smells like Marxism, it’s Marxism.” So, the question becomes, can a person still be a believing Christian while embracing socialism and Marxism? Well, according to William Montgomery Brown, the answer would unequivocally be “No!”

The Rt. Rev. William Montgomery Brown, D.D. was a bishop in the Episcopal Church who published a very interesting and enlightening booklet in 1920 called Communism and Christianism Analyzed and Contrasted from the Marxian and Darwinian Points of View. In his booklet Rev. Brown describes the relationship between supernatural Christianity and science (Darwinism); Christianity and socialism; and Christianity and communism (Marxism). I present here some excerpts from Rev. Brown’s booklet. I have numbered them for later reference:

[1] No man can be consistently both a Socialist and a Christian.12

[2] It is, therefore, a profound truth that Socialism is the natural enemy of religion.13

[3] The Creation idea is unsupported by evidence, and is in conflict with every scientific law.14

[4] Religion, which is the ideal half, and politics, which is the practical half, of the same reality, human socialism, are like all else in the universe, constantly changing, and necessarily so, because life and progress are dependent upon change.15

[5] Yes, strange, even blasphemous, as the representation may seem, it is nevertheless true, the machine is the only name given under heaven whereby the world can be saved.16

[6] Darwinism and Marxism constitute one gospel, the only true, comprehensive and sufficient gospel which the world has ever had or can have, and there is no hope for the future of mankind except in it.17

[7] Christianity has held the world back from civilization instead of advancing it towards civilization.18

While Rev. Brown was never a real Christian, he definitely was a bonafide, dyed-in-the-wool communist. Note how in excerpt [5] and [6] he professes to worship the creation (the machine) instead of the creator (God) whereby the machine becomes the savior of the world not Jesus. In fact, Rev. Brown never actually believed that Jesus was a real person let alone the son of God. He vigorously denounced the supernatural or spiritual aspect of Christianity. (It’s Interesting to note that Rev. William Montgomery Brown remained a professing Christian even after he was convicted of heresy in 1925—the only person to be convicted since the Middle Ages.)19

In excerpt [4] he declares that religion and politics are really two sides of the same coin. That is to say religion being the theoretical side and politics being the practical side. In his mind, he attributes capitalism (the scourge of the working class) as being created and sustained by Christianity. Capitalism being the devil and Darwinism/Socialism/Marxism being the triune god that saves the world.

In excerpt [1] and [2] the battle lines are drawn; Christianity is declared the enemy of socialism. After reading Rev. Brown’s booklet, it should come as no surprise to the reader why the political Left is so hostile to Christianity. The Left believes that Christianity is hindering their entire agenda, namely wealth redistribution, income equality, social justice, and whatever else that goes along with it.

Since all public school curriculum has been coordinated along left-wing ideology, there’s no tolerance for creationism or intelligent design as inferred from excerpt [3].

Has Christianity really held the world back from civilization as stated in excerpt [7]? Certainly Rev. Brown thinks so, but so does President Obama based on his “pattern” of anti-Christian remarks such as his infamous comment made during an Easter breakfast held at the White House:

On Easter I do reflect on the fact that, as a Christian, I am supposed to love. And I have to say that sometimes when I listen to less-than-loving expressions by Christians, I get concerned.20

Or how about this comment:

In the United States, Eid also reminds us of the many achievements and contributions of Muslim Americans to building the very fabric of our nation and strengthening the core of our democracy.21

And this one:

Unless we get on our high horse and think this is unique to some other place, remember that during the Crusades and the Inquisition, people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ. And in our home country, slavery, and Jim Crow, all too often was justified in the name of Christ.22

So, based on his own words, Obama really is acknowledging that ISIS is carrying out terrible deeds in the name of religion; otherwise, why would he draw a comparison with the Crusades and the Inquisition which everyone identifies with the Roman Catholic Church. Furthermore, like Obama said, the ISIS threat is not unique; history records wars against militant Islam for almost four hundred years during the 7th, 8th, 15th, and 16th centuries.23 Even though the “Mohammedan Arabs with fire and scimitar had crushed and subjugated the entire Persian Empire and over half of Christendom,”24 it was the Crusaders who were the oppressors.

Nevertheless, the one thing President Obama can’t do is label ISIS for what it really is, an organization that wants to convert the world to its brand of Islam through terror and intimidation.

So then according to the Left’s rewriting of history, it really was the Christians who held back civilization. And “Yes, Virginia, there is a Santa Claus.”

Click here for reuse options!
Copyright 2015 Gerard Sczepura

  1. Gerard Sczepura, “The End Times: Arguments Against a Pre-Trib Rapture,” Theological Ruminations (blog), May 4, 2015, https://gerardsczepura.com/?p=627 

  2. 2 Thess. 2:3 NASB 

  3. Rev. 2:3 

  4. Anna B. Warner, Jesus Loves Me, 1860, http://library.timelesstruths.org/music/Jesus_Loves_Me/ 

  5. 1 John 2:18 

  6. 1 John 2:22 

  7. 1 John 4:2-3 

  8. 2 John 1:7 

  9. Gerard Sczepura, “The End Times: Hollywood’s Take,” Theological Ruminations (blog), March 7, 2015, https://gerardsczepura.com/?p=599 

  10. Matt. 13:29-30 

  11. “Christian Revolution in Latin America: The Changing Face of Liberation Theology,” Ron Rhodes, accessed June 21, 2015, http://home.earthlink.net/~ronrhodes/Liberation.html 

  12. Brown 1855-1937, William Montgomery (2010-02-16). Communism and Christianism Analyzed and Contrasted from the Marxian and Darwinian Points of View (p. 10). Public Domain Books. Kindle Edition. 

  13. Ibid., 12 

  14. Ibid., 17 

  15. Ibid., 44-45 

  16. Ibid., 53 

  17. Ibid., 54 

  18. Ibid., 60-61 

  19. “Bishop Brown,” Galion Historical Society, accessed June 22, 2015, http://www.galionhistory.com/about-bishop-brown/ 

  20. “Obama’s anti-Christian ‘pattern’ disconcerting to some,” Chris Woodward, OneNewsNow.com, April 8, 2015, http://onenewsnow.com/politics-govt/2015/04/08/obamas-anti-christian-pattern-disconcerting-to-some 

  21. “What Obama just said about Muslims and their influence on America is beyond disturbing,” Joshua Riddle, Young Conservatives, July 28, 2014, http://www.youngcons.com/what-obama-just-said-about-muslims-and-america-is-beyond-disturbing/ 

  22. “People are freaking out after Obama compared ISIS to the Crusades,” Colin Campbell, Business Insider, February 6, 2015, http://www.businessinsider.com/people-are-freaking-out-after-obama-compared-isis-to-the-crusades-2015-2#ixzz3divxEH1V 

  23. “On the Spanish Inquisition and the Crusades,” Dr. Miguel Faria, Hacienda Publishing, September 12, 2011, http://www.haciendapub.com/randomnotes/spanish-inquisition-and-crusades 

  24. Ibid.