Attempting to feign in any way, shape or form the Hillary Clinton has a problem with the fork end of her tongue cooperating with her mouth. If I had to pick one candidate whose actions and words wax antithetical to the purpose and nature of their elected role – I’d have to say The Hildabeast wins the award. I’d have to agree with Milt Friedman who essentially said there isn’t a free in the constitutional guarantee… nor is there a fair. The language is nonexistent. So where do these sugar-coated, limp-wristed, idle-minded, sycophants get off interpreting our national destiny rather than submitting to the one already charted for us by its framers in clear and non-convoluted, easy to be understood mandate?

 

I’d like to argue Mrs. Clinton is certainly good at being [or at least looking] what it appears to be to answer the call. But what she fails to realize is that we have standards here and a foundation. They are set and not privy to alteration in any part, it’s a meet it – or beat it standard.  The First Amendment Guarantee of freedom of speech was not an endorsement to speak of replacing the existing form of government… with another one – which is exactly what her and her exptremeist comrades on the far-left are doing. But one should certainly take note of her complicitous and duplicitous manipulation of scripture even… to speak her points. Now, that will serve as the stage for what will be a revealing of what we are getting with a vote for Mrs. Hillary Rodham Clinton as president.

 

These words actually came from her mouth:

 

 We’ll get an appetizer of spiritual hypocrisy first.

 

“Let's not leave an educational vacuum to be filled by religious extremists who go to families who have no other option and offer meals, housing and some form of education. If we are going to combat extremism then we must educate those very same children.”                                                          - Hillary Clinton

 

The above is typical leftist rhetoric… however – how does she explain quoting scripture [out of context] here?

 

“ In the Bible it says they asked Jesus how many times you should forgive, and he said 70 times 7. Well, I want you all to know that I'm keeping a chart.”                                                                                       - Hillary Clinton

 

A more appropriate scripture would be:

 

-          “Brood of vipers! How can you, being evil, speak good things? For out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks”  - Matthew: 12:34

 

It is on the note we start, first off we have to have a descriptive of the terrain we are playing on here. America [constitutionally] is a republic, but we a federal republic… a slightly different application. Our over-arching federal umbrella over the states [provinces] is unique for the lay of the land we have here. We celebrate the states having a certain degree of individualistic endeavor… but all the states are on the same team bound by our constitution [a moral document by creation] espouses the way in we are to engage in making our daily way… by free market economics. We are a capitalist nation that practices some democratic philosophy in who we employ those ideals. Secondly we are not a democracy by description… our crafters were explicit in making clear we were not a “mob-rules” government. In our system, very little regulation of free markets have [by economic principal] rewarded its participants by being able to secure wealth by bringing their best idea, not ideal to the marketplace. Supply and demand… coupled with competitive practices have made it possible for anyone with a product or service valuable to the free market to do well. History has shown that interferences have always been over taxation… because taxes reassign wealth.  The money spent on extra taxes is never spent on the market place… which employs and consumes, it is lost period on government bureaucracy.  Which is why social conservatives [who may only be fiscal conservatives] cringe when they see social liberals happen upon new ventures to distribute the wealth of those who have earned their keep, with a garnishment system of their income to be spent on those who have not earned even a penny.. and promote crime and other social problems. This isn’t right at all… Hillary’s comments are not only an affront to the common sense of people she would consider constituents [not comrades in arms] but those who just simply know better. Here… enjoy:

 

- “I  am particularly horrified by the use of propaganda and the manipulation of the truth and the revision of history,

Liar… you will do whatever you need to in accomplishing your globalist agenda.

 

- "It's been said, and I think it's accurate, that my husband was obsessed by terrorism in general and al-Qaida in particular."  - Hillary Clinton: Dateline, NBC 4/16/2004.) He was too busy warding off the Monica Lewinsky impeachment, and Whitewater to be concerned with Al Qaida – if he’d done his job, we wouldn’t be at war now.

 

- "Many of you are well enough off that [President Bush's] tax cuts may have helped you. We're saying that for America to get back on track, we're probably going to cut that short and not give it to you. We're going to have to take things away from you on behalf of the common good.”                               – Hillary Clinton: San Francisco; SFGate.com   06/28/04                  

 

- “ I am and always have been pro-choice, and that is not a right any of us should take for granted. There are a

    number of forces at work in our society that would try to turn back the clock and undermine a woman's right

   to chose, and [we] must remain vigilant.

 

  We come to [the abortion] issue as men and women, young and old, some far beyond years when we have

  to worry about getting pregnant, others too young to remember what it was like in the days before Roe v. Wade.

  But I think it's essential that as Americans we look for that common ground that we can all stand upon.

 [Our] core beliefs and values can guide us in reaching our goal of keeping abortion safe, legal and rare

 into the next century.”  - Hillary Clinton:  To a NARAL conference, Washington DC Jan 22, 1999

 

 

- “We must stop thinking of the individual and start thinking about what is best for society."  -  Hillary Clinton: 1993

 

- “ Why do I have to keep proving to people that I am not a liar?"  - Hillary Clinton: "The Survivor," p. 382, by John Harris

    Hint: Maybe we don’t trust you.

 

- “The unfettered free market has been the most radically destructive force in American life in the last generation

    This woman what to preside over a capitalist nation?                              - Hillary Clinton: C-Span in 1996

 

- “We can’t afford to have that money [social security] go to the private sector. The money has to go to the federal government because the federal government will spend that money better than the private sector will spend it."

                                                                                                                    - Hillary Clinton

- “Other developed countries…are more committed to social stability [wealth redistribution] than we have been, and they

   tailor their economic policies to maintain it”                                              -Hillary Clinton: On entitlements

 

- “Too many people have made too much money”                                     - Hillary Clinton: On Insurance company profits

 

- “I could hardly breathe. Gulping for air, I started crying and yelling at him, 'What do you mean? What are you saying? Why did you lie to me?'                     - Hillary Clinton: on Reaction to Bill's lies about  Monica Lewinsky, from her 2003  

                                                                                                                                                            book 'Living History’

-“ Heavens, no! It could get subpoenaed [as evidence]. I can't write anything”        - Hillary Clinton: 1996 interview as US First Lady if she was keeping a diary, before a jury returned guilty verdicts against Clintons' business partners.

 

- “ The great story here for anybody willing to find it, write about it and explain it is this vast right-wing conspiracy that has been conspiring against my husband since the day he announced for president.    - Hillary Clinton
Hmmm…Hillary,  can you spell Whitewater, maybe you were under investigation? Hmmmm, remember that?

 

- “It takes a village [of other taxpayers] to raise a child.”                             - Hillary Clinton: DNC Convention, 1996.

 

- “One day after laying a wreath at the tomb of Martin Luther King Jr., President Bush appoints a federal judge [his job] who has built his career around dismantling [not interpreting law… but understanding and acting on it] Dr. King's [ who was a great guy but wasn’t an elected official] legacy.”                                                               - Hillary Clinton

 

- “Research shows the presence of women raises the standards of ethical behavior and lowers corruption.”
        Liar, she seem to forget we know her history… I wonder where her “research” came from?     - Hillary Clinton

 

- “The American people are tired of liars and people who pretend to be something they're not.”   - Hillary Clinton

    Get a hint…. You said it first.

  

-  "It's time for a new beginning [ignore the constitution], for an end to government [and over throw the government] of the few, by the few, and for the few...... And to replace it with shared [socialism] responsibility for shared prosperity."  

                                                                                              -Hillary Clinton: 5/29/07

Her statement deserves concern…  legally, she’s a sitting senator advocating replacing the government she is sworn to   

 uphold.                                                                              

 

- "We have to build a political consensus [revolutionaries & judges] and that requires people to give up [have a revisionist judge force a mandate on us] a little bit of their own turf in order to create this common ground."     - Hillary Clinton: 6/4/07

 

- “I certainly think the free-market has failed."  -Hillary Clinton: 6/04/07

- "I think it's time to send a clear message to what has become the most profitable sector in (the) entire economy that they are being watched."  - Hillary Clinton: 09/02/05

 

Readers… I think by her words she has told us why she could and would never be a reasonable choice for any decent citizen of the United States…. She is a rabid foaming at the mouth liberal, with not only communist and socialist tendencies – connections to boot. People need to learn how to read up on the backgrounds and affiliations of people they may want to govern them… otherwise they may end up on the loosing end of some liberties they were entitled too.

A scientific study was released recently followed by a book titled: Ex-Gay?: A Longitudinal Study of Religiously-Mediated Change in Sexual Orientation, authored by Mark Yarhouse & Stanton Jones is creating buzz and a bit or saber-rattling by opponents of the study as well. It proclaims in its general overview:


“Numerous “authorities” today proclaim that homosexual orientation is impossible to modify or change, and that the attempt to change is necessarily or usually harmful. Such pronouncements are made on the websites and in the official resolutions of such major professional organizations as the American Psychological Association and the American Psychiatric Association, and as recently as this month, psychiatrist Jack Drescher derided the effectiveness of attempts to change and pronounced the attempt often harmful. Drescher said, “Does it [the change attempt] work? The little scientific study done is not encouraging. Most who try do not change—and no long-term studies show that those claiming change remain heterosexual.”1 It was precisely to fill this gap of the absence of long-term studies that Jones and Yarhouse conducted and report on a study of individuals attempting to alter their sexual orientation through involvement in one of the groups associated with the religious ministry Exodus, a Christian group that views homosexual practice as immoral and the homosexual condition as changeable. This study is the most scientifically rigorous study of the possibility of sexual orientation change to date, following participants over time from early in the attempted change process over repeated assessments, using standardized measures of sexual orientation and of psychological distress. The authors report empirical evidence that change of homosexual orientation appears possible for some through involvement in Exodus ministries, either in the form of (a) an embrace of chastity with a reduction in prominence of homosexual desire, or (b) a diminishing of homosexual attraction and an increase in heterosexual attraction with resulting satisfactory heterosexual adjustment. Further, the authors found little evidence of harm incurred as a result of the involvement of the participants in the Exodus change process. These findings would appear to contradict the commonly expressed view of the mental health establishment that change of sexual orientation is impossible and that the attempt to change is highly likely to produce harm for those who make such an attempt.”


The study found [with no surprise here] that one could in fact redirect one’s sexual behavior from that of being orientated to a given proclivity back to one’s own natural role. Sharply against that of the official psychological evaluation of that of both APA’s the American Psychological and Psychiatric Associations wholesale blessing that somehow the behavior is not pathological and that because the study was done my Christian Scientists it lacked the some type of authenticity and was provoked by proselytizing efforts. The APA sharply responded on its website claiming "Efforts to repathologize homosexuality by claiming that it can be cured are often guided not by rigorous scientific ... research, but sometimes by religious and political forces opposed to full civil rights for gay men and lesbians." . Note the language used " ...to repathologize homosexuality' hello? the last time I checked, pathology is basis for a learned deviance. A given behavior is entertained [encouraged] until a certain comfort level is achieved in acting out then acceptance of a given proclivity if you do it long enough it becomes second nature or "pathological".


The same model can be used in identifying good behavioral as most behavior is learned -- again, good or bad. Who were they trying to fool with that thin veiled dribble? All they did was lash out but often nothing constructive. Certainly the mind in conflict requires confrontation [confession] and resolution [application]. Spiritual aspects cannot be denied as even medical science is beginning to acknowledge... so how is psychology getting off? One does not have to look far to see glaring hypocrites in their argument. Countering the overt rhetoric vented by the APA was their former President Dr. Nicholas Cummings he offered this to say ""This study has broken new ground in its adherence to objectivity and a scientific precision that can be replicated and expanded, and it opens new horizons for investigation,"

The claim seems a bit absurd coming from those how have made a concerted effort to normalize the behavior. However, the numbers released we quite modest stating “"Fifteen percent of our sample of about 100 claimed to actually have changed from homosexuality to heterosexuality," said Jones "It needs to be said that this process is not like flipping a light switch. Life is still complicated for these people, and some still have some residuals of their homosexual attractions." Dismantling the ideal that somehow gay behavior is inborn adding “… they report being able to function as heterosexuals, they're happy with their marriages, and they feel that their lives have changed dramatically," he said.” Numerous studies have wasted tax-payer dollar to attempt to prove once and for all the behavior is inbred therefore deserving of federal protection, this includes the study done by an openly gay “scientist” at the University of California San Diego. They studies entire control operations were biased and manipulated and was revealed to be a sham. However, for the APA to condemn the study whose placebo controlled double-blind study basics along with the Watson effect – was in fact the most truly scientific. We have to remember there is science which is objective in nature, and we have scientism… which is subjective in nature.


Scientism has no fact to it and has no desire to supply evidence, it simply subtracts by adding feeling for fact. Scientism is an impulse not a reality, it advocates and indoctrinates – but there is not actual basis for any of its postulations and if there was a reasonable point to be made – the one supplying the point lacks the ability to be intellectually honest. Scientism is the religion of the social engineer and it attacks opposing points of view but cannot stand on its own. The politically correct terminology “sexual orientation” is a phraseology of the last 30 or so years… if one searches government records for references… it is highly doubtful you’ll find it anywhere before then. Common grammar reveals what the word orientation’s context means? Basically to direct one’s self… in another direction.


But you can’t even get the straight definition from Merriam-Webster since they’ve gone completely PC and made sure they stuck sexuality in it’s definition.. therefore historically revising the meaning. It never used to mean what they claim it is now – including the revising of its grammatical context, it’s now an adverb as opposed to being a verb meaning a specific act of directing ones self is no longer useful to the PC crowd – it might leave the question open. Think I’m joking, do a little research. Find a text book dictionary of [say…] at least 10 years of age, the older the better. Then compare it with the online PC version, the differences will be curious to say the least.


One very interesting point to be made about scientism or any propagandistic rhetoric from leftists is [oddly enough no so much liberals – but nutters]. if you have a point you want to make, and you want to debate it… they won’t do it. They’ll just label you as usual and dismiss any other position of than theirs. How is that reasonable? The problem with that behavior is that it reinforces the fact that their position cannot stand own their own in the marketplace of free ideals and ideas. They actively silence anything that doesn’t advocate their position and ridicule anything else. That is exactly what earns them the well deserved label of being fascist and that is exactly what the APA is doing with these claims. I have a background in psychology [Industrial, clinical and abnormal behavior], six years of study and two years of internship in clinics, I am certainly credible in speaking on the matter. Medicine doesn’t respect psychology just for the same reasons solutions aren’t what you need them to be for what you want to accomplish socially. They are based on what they actually accomplish in the real world… but I supposed [in the end] that is why they are an association… they can play repeat-it-until-you-believe games without ever having to actually convince or prove anything to anyone.

The world is now morning the loss of an amazing patriot and mighty man of God, Dr. D. James Kennedy. Founder and Senior Pastor of Coral Ridge Presbyterian Church, Knox Theological Seminary and Westminster Academy in Fort Lauderdale, Florida peacefully passed in his sleep from complications of a heart attack suffered last December at 2:15am on the morning of september 5, family at his side just one week after officially resigning as head pastor of a splendidly effective ministry.  His wit, fire and clarity will sorely be missed... May God Almighty bless his family and grow his ministry beyond that of current plans. and more importantly raise up another within their camp that will be just as straight forward, dedicated to the mission of his constant fight to keep liberal activists from instituting their branded deviance on the legislative and cultural bodies in American politics. He is a frontline player -- with the formation of the Alliance Defense Fund, he has been a vaunted and venerated foe of the nutter politico. I held him in high regard and as one of my mentors... God Bless you as you rest.