Iran is a radical fundamentalist government that hates America, hates Israel, and defends our worst enemies. We can’t trust them. This deal was a mistake from the minute we sat down at the negotiating table and I’m asking patriotic Americans to express outrage and aggressively fight against this deal.

Here are 6 things you need to know about the Iran deal right now:

1. The United Nations, European Union, and the United States “will produce the comprehensive lifting of all UN Security Council sanctions as well as multilateral and national sanctions related to Iran’s nuclear program, including steps on access in areas of trade, technology, finance and energy.” Banking restrictions on Iran will end and trade will resume giving Iran a cash windfall it can use to fund its illicit activities, including funding of terrorism.

2. The international arms embargo on Iran will be phased out. This includes end points to sanctions on Iran buying and selling conventional weapons and deadly ballistic missile technology.

3. The deal rewards Iran with benefits no other state would gain under the Non-Proliferation Treaty.

4. Iran has agreed to nuclear inspections – but certainly not ‘anywhere and anytime’. Military sites are not included in the deal in any real way and many sites will remain hidden to inspectors. Furthermore, Iran has up to 3 weeks to approve inspections at facilities not on a pre-approved list.

5. If Iran cheats, the United States and EU must engage in dispute resolution rather than re-implementing sanctions.

6. Patriotic Americans everywhere need to oppose this rotten deal that Iranians preemptively celebrated by chanting “Death to America, death to Israel” in the streets of Tehran.

Posted by: conservativecritic | July 23, 2015

Why Jews hate Jesus Christ…

Conservative Critic's Blog

I happen to live in an area where both dyed in the wool atheists as well as atheistic and non-atheistic Jews have been phenomenally successful in getting opening benedictions banned from public meetings of city councils, etc.

The reason given by these people for public consumption is that they “…are offended” by the mention of Jesus Christ in Christian invocations or benedictions in the very few Council meetings that they  might attend. Actually, the real reason goes far beyond simply being “offended”.

From the time the Jews got off the boat on Ellis Island they began their warfare against Jesus Christ by litigating against prayer in public meetings, placement of biblical scriptures in halls of justice and Bible reading in America’s Public Schools.

Why do the Jews hate Jesus Christ so much? He who performed so many miracles for them, healing their sick, their blind, their paralyzed, and then, even…

View original post 429 more words

Posted by: conservativecritic | July 17, 2015

“His Majesty” Obama’s Perverted Social Justice

America meet “Obama’s social justice or better yet social injustice” a robin hood philosophy that circumvents the laws of our land attacking our freedoms and rights. In the past six years, Obama has sold us a pig in a poke wrapped up in pretty ribbon with all of the Liberal bells and whistles.

It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to know that our beautiful America and American citizens are slowly becoming the property of “big Government.” In six years Obama has changed the social landscape in our great Nation by redistributing our money, changing laws and picking and choosing who receives certain advantages and who are the recipients of certain disadvantages.

For 50 some odd years, a very small minority group has fought “God” Christianity, the Cross, memorials and a slew of other important things like our children and our children’s education.

Everyone knows the group that is described above and each year their war on Christmas grows as they litter our streets, highways and public areas with billboards and signs in their feeble attempt to remove “God” from our Nation. Every year a Liberal judge plays Robin Hood and gives them another slice of our God given freedoms.

Next comes Obama’s “social political justice” which merely means a selective process that buys votes and support for Barack Obama and the DEMS. Obama chooses include the LGBT community and illegal aliens over African Americans – African Americans are the recipients of the disadvantages. Selective is the keyword here – Obama perceives that he already has the African American votes in the bag so he turns on them chastising them when they express their grievances.

Big daddy Obama told the African American community to “Take off your bedroom slippers, put on your marching shoes. Shake it off. Stop complaining, stop grumbling, stop crying.” But notice that the LGBT community has managed to get everything their little heart’s desire.


This group of people are pretty savvy about the political process and they did two things; (1) They voted for Obama with strings attached – meaning Obama would have to pay them off just like he did with his big bundlers, and (2) They vetted him arming themselves with damaging information about Obama’s relationships and activities before he ran for office.

They forced Obama to flip flop on marriage – he retracted his statements that marriage was between a man and women. But their wish list kept growing and unlike the majority of Americans, they made the Government work for them.

Obama gave them ““Don’t ask, Don’t tell” in the Military, which probably wasn’t the safest decision for our brave Military men and women, but that will be an issue debated later after we have a few more wars under our belt.

It’s a mystery why they haven’t quite figured how what caused the HIV /Aids epidemic, but they don’t have a clue or do they? Anyway in order to continue their lifestyle they’ve asked for more money, lots more money from Obama in order to reduce the number of HIV infections via increased training and various support services.

Obama with that favorite pen he keeps talking about gave them more hate crime laws, supported their civil unions and followed by more and more discrimination laws. That my friends is “Political Social Injustice.”


Then along came the somewhat ugly face of what Obama calls social justice or economic disparity, which included Obamacare, Common Core, IRS, NSA and of course the not so famous “Dream Act” which benefits about 20 ml. illegals – this was a mere ploy to purchase Hispanic Votes for the 2012 Presidential Election. Obama’s pen at work again, as he says with or without Congress.

As is the President’s style he’s revised, changed amended and screwed around with the “Dream Act” to suit his fancy, but the bottom line is this – Obama has managed to give a safe haven to the illegals until he gets his way on immigration.

Obama’s State of the Union Address laid out his “social justice” plans for Americans in the next 3 years, which includes income inequality, more redistribution, raising minimum wage, climate change, further revisions of Obamacare and immigration changes – he threatens Congress and Americans that he will do this with or without them…

As mentioned earlier Obama picks and chooses who receives certain advantages and who the recipients are of certain disadvantages (and that would be us – the taxpayers). Obama’s robin hood philosophy of social justice has in fact harmed all working Americans, our economy, or job growth, our children’s education and has stalled the “American Dream” diminishing our freedom and rights.

The next time you hear Barack Obama speak of social justice, income equality or economic disparity grabbed your wallet and run, because he’s about to place one more costly burden on your shoulders.


“His Majesty” Obama has big plans for America, but like O’Reilly said to Geraldo Rivera, “I don’t think he has majesty! He’s not a king!” O’Reilly said, adding that he respects the office of the presidency but presidents still need to be held accountable. O’Reilly, let’s get one thing straight “accountable” to Obama is making sure that all hard working Americans contribute to his perverted social justice agenda – so far he’s won that battle!

Posted by: conservativecritic | July 17, 2015

Justice Kennedy — the lonely Promethean man of liberalism





Conjured as it was from Justice Kennedy’s imagination, the Supreme Court’s decision in Obergefell v. Hodges has little to teach us about the Constitution. It does, however, afford us keen insights into the liberal worldview. In the Court’s majority opinion, it is less Anthony Kennedy the Supreme Court Justice than Anthony Kennedy the aspiring liberal political theorist who speaks.

Woven throughout his wandering and obvious distorted musings on the dynamic synergies between the various clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment is the central premise of modern liberalism: individual autonomy. Ironically, it is the very first argument that the Court offers on behalf of the newfound “constitutional right” to same-sex marriage.

Indeed, in the opening sentence of the decision, Kennedy proclaims all individuals free “to define and express their identity,” thereby echoing his even more grandiloquent pronouncement in Planned Parenthood v. Casey that at “the heart of liberty is the right to define one’s own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life.”

On this foundation, the edifice of modern liberalism is built. We are all sovereign individuals, radically free to fashion and refashion ourselves into anything we so please at any point in our lives. Man is the undefined animal. He is auto nomos—self-legislating. Neither God, nor nature, nor tradition, nor the obligations he previously contracted may hem him in. Bruce Jenner may become Caitlyn whenever she so pleases—and then become Bruce again if he wants.

Beyond the rudimentary demands of refraining from harming others, nothing may constrain the choices we make in defining and redefining our identity. This is democratized, domesticated Nietzscheanism. Prometheus not fully unbound—just mindful of the rights of others. This, it should be pointed out, is also the starting-point of libertarianism—but also its end point. Not so for liberalism.

Loneliness, Insecurity, and the Need for Recognition

Liberalism’s exalted view of man’s limitless possibilities, paradoxically enough, is not accompanied by an equally exalted view of his inner strength and resolve. One might think that liberalism would encourage individuals to trust in themselves and to be scornful of society’s staid bourgeois conventions in defining and expressing their identity.

It doesn’t. For all his purported god-like powers of self-creation, liberal promethean man is actually a weak, insecure, and isolated individual. It is not enough that he define and express his identity. He needs others to recognize it, embrace it, and celebrate it. He needs the state to confer dignity upon it.

Beginning to recognize the  liberal, same-sex marriage initiative?

Otherwise, he may find himself marginalized by his peers, crippled by their disapproving looks, and insecure in his choice of an identity. After all, a particular lifestyle or living arrangement may not be illegal, but it can still be viewed as dishonorable by some.

Even before the Court’s ruling, gay couples could marry in a house of worship or banquet hall in any of the states that still defined marriage as the union of a man and a woman. But they carried the lack of state recognition for their marriages like the mark of Cain.

“Outlaw to outcast may be a step forward, but it does not achieve the full promise of liberty, ” explains Kennedy. The Court’s opinion is replete with references to stigma, hurt, and humiliation. “It demeans gays and lesbians for the State to lock them out of a central institution of the Nation’s society.” It is therefore incumbent upon the state to dignify them. As Matthew Franck wrote in Public Discourse last week: “In Kennedy’s mind, the Constitution has been converted into a great Dignity Document.”

An earlier generation of liberals would have told the man to go to hell with his marriage certificate. “We don’t need no thought control,” they would have yelled. “All in all you’re just another brick in the wall!” To have the suits recognize your alternative lifestyle would have defeated the whole purpose of embracing it in the first place.

Contemporary liberalism, by contrast, views man as a weak and fragile creature. Adversity doesn’t forge character. It stigmatizes and demeans. Unless others affirm our choices, they are worthless. We have no unshakable inner convictions or faith. We are all insecure.

Promethean man, it turns out, is a pathetic creature. He thinks himself the measure of all things, but must in fact have his solipsistic existence be publicly affirmed and dignified by the state. He is simultaneously everything and nothing.

Kennedy’s Feigned Appeal to Nature

Liberalism’s celebration of human autonomy is obviously incompatible with any conception of an unchosen nature that restricts our scope of action. Nevertheless, Kennedy twice appeals to the idea of a permanent nature in the decision. Homosexuals have an “immutable nature,” he asserts. They are born gay and cannot change. So are heterosexuals, bisexuals, and all other flavor-du-jour-sexuals for that matter: “sexual orientation is both a normal expression of human sexuality and immutable.”

The essence of liberty is the freedom to define and express one’s identity, just not when it comes to sexual orientation, which is innate and immutable. We can choose our gender—that is not fixed at birth—but our sexual orientation is handed down to us by the gods and must be accepted with passive resignation (for a contrasting view, see this Public Discourse essay by Paul McHugh and Gerard Bradley).

Turning to marriage, Kennedy implicitly carves out another exception to the realm of autonomy. Marriage, though clearly not possessing a permanent nature, is nevertheless “essential to our most profound hopes and aspirations.” This implies that happiness outside of marriage is not possible. No one will be forced to get married—but all who aspire to be happy (and who doesn’t?) will want to. Marriage is no longer what earlier liberals called an “obscene bourgeois institution” or “a comfortable concentration camp.”

Only marriage can respond “to the universal fear that a lonely person might call out only to find no one there,” writes Kennedy. Not to marry is to “be condemned to live in loneliness.” Lovers, friends, parents, siblings, cousins, aunts, uncles, nephews, nieces, neighbors, coreligionists, brothers-in-arm, colleagues—none of them can be counted on to respond to our lonely cries of anguish. All bachelors are not only unmarried—they’re also unhappy.

All this adds up to a really interesting coincidence. In deliberating on the question of gay marriage, Justice Kennedy proclaims that we are absolutely free to be who we want to be—except when it comes to gayness and marriage. Kennedy’s deviation from God’s definition of marriage is like a crashing cymbal.

Only Kennedy’s syllogism trumps autonomy:

Everyone has a right to pursue happiness.
No happiness is possible outside of marriage.
Sexual orientation being immutable, gay marriage is therefore a right.

Either Kennedy is a sloppy thinker who hasn’t thought through the implications of the autonomy he celebrates, or this is a calculated move on his behalf to elicit public support for his pronouncement by bending his argument to appeal to two widespread beliefs: people are not responsible for their genes, and marriage is good.

Either way, this is not a rigorous argument. But it is fitting that a decision that reveals the contradictions of modern liberalism should also reveal the contradictions of Kennedy’s arguments.

Justice Kennedy should put some time into reading the Bible that is likely gathering dust in his home library:

Romans 1:22

Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools

Posted by: conservativecritic | July 16, 2015


Conservative Critic's Blog

2 Corinthians 6:17

King James Version (KJV)

Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you.


This is Jesus’ instruction to Christians who are tempted to remain in the way of evil…in this case the Boy Scouts of America(BSA) who have now lowered their moral standards and accepted sodomites amongst themselves.

Churches such as the Mormans who for generations have stood for separation from the sodomites should be ashamed of themselves for now supporting this integration of homosexuals into a morally straight organization.

Actually, we should have accepted the fact this would eventually occur – since the decision was made by weak kneed BSA leaders…and not the parents whose kids now find themselves amongst young men whose sexual orientation could be a stumbling stone for their boys.

Shame on the BSA leadership…you will reap the…

View original post 99 more words

Posted by: conservativecritic | July 13, 2015



Remember the horror stories about 2014 being the hottest year since before Henry Ford took his date to the prom in a hay-fueled buggy?

The terrors posed by melting glaciers and rising sea levels threatening polar bears and Al Gore’s new coastal California residence? And oh yeah, mustn’t forget those historic first-time-ever droughts and tag team hurricanes — all caused, of course, by our CO2-belching smoke stacks and SUVs?

Well, maybe not. It seems that official surface temperature records upon which this panic has rested have been systematically cooked to indicate that Earth has recently been overheating just as alarmists, including some at NASA, wish us to believe. This will come as no surprise, however, to scientists familiar with data recorded from satellite and high altitude balloon instruments. That data shows that global mean temperatures have been statistically flat over the past 18 years.

Pseudoscientific chicanery reported last year by Steven Goddard’s Real Science blog illustrates shameless manipulation of some of the world’s most influential climate records.

His investigation reveals that many surface measurements originally recorded in NOAA’s U.S. Historical Climatology Network (USHCN) have been replaced with temperatures “fabricated” from theoretical computer models.

In doing so, original recorded temperatures were subsequently lowered, thereby exaggerating warming in recent decades by comparison. Whereas the original records show that the U.S. has actually been cooling since the 1930s, the hottest decade on record, NOAA’s manipulated graph based nearly half on fantasy data projects a high warming rate in excess of 3 degrees Celsius per century.

NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies based its recent mainstream media-parroted “2014 hottest year” canard on this same contrived data, but ratcheted up the hot spin cycle even more.

Yet when the Daily Mail asked the new NASA-GISS Director Gavin Schmidt why the press release failed to mention his own low confidence that the likelihood of 2014 being “the warmest year since 1880” is just 38 percent, he offered no response.

Incidentally, that alleged “record” amounted to a two-hundredths of a degree increase over 2010, the previously claimed “warmest year.” That miniscule difference falls within a margin of error broadly recognized to be several times higher.

More evidence of this feverish fraud was reported earlier this month by English journalist Christopher Booker in The Telegraph. Booker’s U.K. article discussed an investigation into “how we are being tricked by flawed data on global warming,” which was conducted by Paul Homewood who checked original temperature graphs for weather stations in Paraguay against subsequent substitutions. 

Booker noted that “the actual trend over 60 years of data had been dramatically reversed, so that a cooling trend was changed to one showing a marked warming.”

Homewood then checked a swath of other South American weather stations around the original three, finding the same one-way “adjustments” in all of them.
Latest News Update

The first of these again appeared in NOAA’s USHCN. These in turn, were then amplified by NASA-GISS and NOAA’s National Climate Data Center using hypothetical warming trends to estimate temperatures across vast regions of the planet where no measurements exist.

Yet, as Booker emphasizes, “these are the very records on which scientists and politicians rely for their belief in ‘global warming’.”

Homewood is now finding evidence of the same pattern of data fudging for weather stations across much of the Arctic between Canada and the heart of Siberia. In nearly every case the one-way tweaks show warming up to one degree C higher than actual original data indicates. Replaced versions also completely eliminate obvious evidence of Iceland’s “sea ice years” around 1970 when extreme cooling nearly devastated the country’s economy.

Homewood points out that even a 1987 NASA-GISS graph presented in a paper authored by its former director and lead climate alarmist James Hansen was doctored to “transform Arctic history.”

This falsification was first exposed in 2007 by Canadian statistician Steve McIntyre. Here, the original Arctic temperatures which were actually much higher than any time since had been lowered so much that they became dwarfed by those of the past 20 years.

Those who worry a lot about the vanishing Arctic ice caps and drowning polar bears we keep hearing about in order to sell the Obama administration’s EPA war on coal should be cheered to know that Arctic temperature shifts have virtually nothing at all to do with atmospheric CO2 concentrations. In reality they are caused by perfectly natural multi-decadal changes in Atlantic Ocean currents.

So now that the Atlantic is about to flip back to a cyclical cooling phase, perhaps we should begin to worry more about how to heat our homes with windmills and sunbeams. In any case, will someone please kindly inform Al Gore and those frantic polar bears they can finally relax?

Larry Bell is an endowed professor of space architecture at the University of Houston where he founded the Sasakawa International Center for Space Architecture (SICSA) and the graduate program in space architecture. He is author of “Climate of Corruption: Politics and Power Behind the Global Warming Hoax,” and his professional aerospace work has been featured on the History Channel and the Discovery Channel-Canada.

Posted by: conservativecritic | July 8, 2015

OBAMA – Converted Christian or Devout Muslim?

Conservative Critic's Blog

“Lest 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. In our home country,
slavery and Jim Crow all too often was justified in the name of Christ.” –
President Obama at the National Prayer Breakfast today (February 5, 2015)
comparing Islamist militants to events in Western history.

Now You Decide: Obama = Muslim??????

The following essay was read by Mike Gallagher on his radio talk show. It
was effective. He had so many e-mail requests about where to find it that he
posted it on his Face Book fan page. Mike said that a listener had sent it
to him, so he could not vouch for all of the listings included in the essay.
Even if there may be one or two that could be amiss…

View original post 678 more words

Posted by: conservativecritic | July 6, 2015

Hillary Clinton addresses the nation…



As you know, my dear people, the last year for me has been an annus horribilus. The Royal House of Clinton has been tormented by questions about our handling of finances and subjected to tiresome questions about the tragic events in Benghazi, in the farthest regions of our empire. And, sadly, there were also questions about my royal e-mails and why I am hiding them.

Nevertheless, I will not be daunted in my desire and commitment to serve you the people (at your great expense). For the next seventeen months I will be traveling among you pretending to be just like you, listening to your deepest longings and needs.

I will be with you in your Wal-Marts and beside you in your Burger Kings. I will drive with you down the busy interstate highways of our land, in hopes of convincing you that I actually care about your poverty and needs.

How well I remember the days when the Duke of Arkansas and I were impoverished. After we were expelled from our Washington Palace, we hardly had two mansions to rub together. We were so poor that we had to remove thousands of dollars of china, flatware, carpets, and gifts from the Washington Palace just to survive. But it was noticed and we had to return all of it. Now, happily, benefactors from around our empire have given just enough for us to scrape by.

During those difficult times we had to cut back when our daughter was married. We only had three million dollars to spend on her wedding, and I remember our hopes as she moved into her $10 million Manhattan apartment that one day she would be able to move on from that humble abode to something more fitting. And the job I was able to secure for her pays only $600,000 per year, barely enough for her wardrobe needs!

So, as I travel across our land to meet you all, I will be listening and sharing with you. Please remember – do not actually approach me until my PR staff can first arrange a photo opportunity. Then when the time for the royal election comes, I trust you will be sufficiently dense & naive to crown me as your rightful monarch so that we can all live happily ever after.

Posted by: conservativecritic | July 4, 2015

Children in Norway could change their sex at age 7!!

Norway bill would let kids change their sex at age 7

A bill tabled in Norway’s government at the end of June would allow children as young as seven to change their sex on legal documents.


“This is an important area where Norway has lagged far behind many other countries for many years,” said Health Minister Bent Høie in an announcement during the Oslo Pride festival, according to a report in The Local. “Now we can be proud that we are implementing this law.”

The legislation stipulates that children between 7 and 16 must consult with their parents about changing their legal sex. If the parents approve the children would then be able to decide for themselves, without the need for a psychiatric or medical evaluation.

Children would also be allowed to reverse the decision to change their legal sex without parental approval.

“The proposal is historic in that it will no longer be the health service but the individual who decides if he or she has changed sex,” Høie said.

The legislation is concurrent with another bill that would allow people to change their sex in the country’s population register without undergoing surgery.

Høie told Norway’s national broadcaster NRK that the current law, which requires that men be castrated or women sterilized if they want to legally change their sex, is unreasonable.

“I am clear that the present system is not acceptable,” Høie said. “The system we have in Norway today in this area is very poorly conceived.”

A representative of Amnesty Norway, Patricia Kaatee, delivered a petition to Høie calling for the law to be changed to allow men to simply claim to be women, and vice versa, for them to legally change their sex.

“The only requirement that should be needed to change gender is one’s own experience of gender identity, not a diagnosis or sterilization. It is a basic human right for people to express their own identity, even in official documents,” Kaatee said.

We are living in the End Times…the devil has infiltrated many countries at the highest levels…and  you can see that from the above….

It just had to happen…‘You can’t have’ marriage equality ‘without polygamy’


Motivated by the U.S. Supreme Court ruling legalizing homosexual “marriage,” a Montana polygamist has filed for a second marriage license, so he can be legally wed to two women at once.

“It’s about marriage equality,” said Nathan Collier, using homosexual advocates’ term to support marriage redefinition. “You can’t have this without polygamy.”

Collier, who has has appeared on the TLC reality show Sister Wives with his legal wife Victoria, and his second wife Christine, said he was inspired by the dissent in the Supreme Court decision.

The minority Supreme Court justices said in Friday’s ruling it would open the door to both polygamy and religious persecution.

“It is striking how much of the majority’s reasoning would apply with equal force to the claim of a fundamental right to plural marriage,” wrote Chief Justice John Roberts.

Collier and his wives applied for a second marriage license earlier this week at the Yellowstone County Courthouse in Billings, a report from the Salt Lake Tribune said.

Collier, who was excommunicated from the Mormon Church for polygamy, married Victoria in 2000 and had a religious wedding ceremony with Christine in 2007. The three have seven children between them and from previous relationships.

“My second wife Christine, who I’m not legally married to, she’s put up with my crap for a lot of years. She deserves legitimacy,” Collier said.

Yellowstone County officials initially denied the application before saying they would consult with the County Attorney and get him a final answer.

Bigamy, the holding of multiple marriage licenses, is illegal all 50 states, but Collier plans to sue if his application is denied. Officials expect to have an answer for him next week.

While homosexual “marriage” supporters have long insisted legalization of same-sex unions would not lead to polygamy, pro-life and family advocates have warned all along it would be inevitable with the redefinition of marriage.

“The next court cases coming will push for polygamy, as Chief Justice John Roberts acknowledged in his dissent,” said Penny Nance, president of Concerned Women for America, after the Supreme Court ruling. “The chief justice said “the argument for polygamy is actually stronger than that for ‘gay marriage.’ It’s only a matter of time.”

In a piece from the Washington Times, LifeSiteNews Editor-in-Chief and the co-founder of Voice of the Family John-Henry Westen stated the move toward legal polygamy is “just the next step in unraveling how Americans view marriage.”

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »