Tag: congress

Syrian Sanctions Lifted

~ Randy Harris ~ Leave a comment

Not sure how this will play out, Syria is run by a former Al Qaeda terrorist. Israel and Syria seem to be trying to work out some sort of peace arrangement, and Trump is all in on the Syrian President. Hard to believe a leopard can change its spots. Trust but verify. Rh

Syrians are celebrating: Between Wednesday and Thursday night, the U.S. House of Representatives announced that it had approved the Defense Authorization Bill, which includes a provision lifting the sanctions imposed on Syria under the Caesar Act.

These sanctions were originally placed on the Assad regime for crimes against humanity committed during the civil war that erupted in the previous decade. The Senate is expected to approve the bill within the coming days, after which it will be sent to President Donald Trump for final signature.

The Caesar Act is named after the alias of a former Syrian military photographer who risked his life to smuggle out thousands of images documenting torture and executions of political prisoners by the Assad regime. Since fleeing Syria, he has devoted his life to seeking justice for the victims of Assad’s brutality.

Passed in late 2019, the Act enabled the United States to impose sweeping sanctions on the Assad regime for its crimes against humanity, including the use of chemical weapons and the torture of detainees. It also targeted individuals and entities that supported the regime, with the goal of weakening its economic capabilities.

The Defense Authorization Bill, which includes the repeal of the Caesar Act sanctions, is expected to take effect on January 1, 2026. However, in its current form, the bill grants the U.S. President the authority to impose new sanctions if circumstances require.

This marks a significant political victory for the government of Ahmad al-Shar’a. Despite the involvement of Islamist governing factions in mass atrocities against Alawites and Druze, al-Shar’a has continued to enjoy support from the Trump administration.

Following the de facto repeal of the Act, thousands of Syrians poured into the streets in celebration, as the sanctions had placed severe strain on the local economy. Celebrations were reported in Damascus’s Umayyad Square, as well as in Aleppo, Homs, and Latakia.

Syrian Tourism Minister Mazen al-Salhani stated that “the repeal of the Caesar Act is a historic turning point that corrects the path of international justice and opens wide horizons for the national economy.” Speaking to the state news agency, he added: “The tourism sector is still recovering. Lifting the restrictions will expand investment opportunities and ease the movement of tourism delegations. This will strengthen Syria’s position on both the regional and international tourism map.”

Syria’s Minister for Emergency and Disaster Management, Raed al-Salh, also welcomed the development: “For the first time in decades, Syria is free of American sanctions. The repeal of the Caesar Act ends a long era of isolation and punitive measures for which Syrians paid twice – suffering under the crimes of the previous regime and then enduring the economic and institutional collapse that followed.”

Lindsey Graham blocks House-passed bill to repeal shutdown deal provision allowing $500,000 lawsuits from senators

~ Randy Harris ~ Leave a comment

By Kaia Hubbard

November 20, 2025 / 3:51 PM EST / CBS News

Washington — Sen. Lindsey Graham, a South Carolina Republican, blocked a Democrat-led effort to approve a House-passed measure to repeal a controversial provision that allows senators to sue for $500,000 if federal investigators search their phone records without their knowledge. 

Sen. Martin Heinrich, a New Mexico Democrat, sought unanimous consent to approve the measure after the House unanimously passed the bill Wednesday, saying the provision many lawmakers are looking to repeal, which was tucked in last week’s funding package, represents a country that “is not serving the people.”

“Last week Republicans in Congress passed a government funding bill that denies affordable health care to millions of Americans,” Heinrich said. “But what most people don’t know is that they also voted to provide millions of dollars to a few Republican senators in a blatant, tax-funded cash grab.

Can someone please defeat this clown in the primary. Again why does Trump support him?? Rh

As Time Ticks Down, Congress Faces Its Biggest Hurdle Yet by Suzanne Bowdey

~ Randy Harris ~ Leave a comment

The shutdown may be over, but life doesn’t get any easier for Republicans. While Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) may be the target of his base’s disgust for reopening the government, his party did manage to redirect the conversation to an issue that the GOP has struggled for years to address: health care.

Before the ink on Obamacare was even dry, conservatives made it their mission to topple the law — a goal that they came within a whisper of achieving, but 15 years later, still haven’t. Now, with the GOP’s dire predictions about the misnamed Affordable Care Act coming true and costs spiraling out of control, Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) and Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) have little choice but to tackle what will almost certainly be a wildly complicated problem. Fortunately for them, though, it won’t be on Democrats’ terms.

By refusing to play Schumer’s games and refusing his absurd demands to keep propping up their doomed program with trillions of taxpayer dollars, Republican leaders have managed to expose the most important truth of all: Obamacare is a failure — just as they insisted it would be. The only way Joe Biden’s party managed to keep it afloat was to shovel enough money into the system to mask the spiking costs and keep the voters from turning on them. But their COVID-era subsidy system is about to come crumbling down, ripping the band-aid off the uncomfortable reality that these sky-high prices are the result of their incredibly flawed law.

As National Review’s editors explain, “From its implementation in 2014, enrollees were subject to dramatic annual premium increases, and the program struggled to sign up younger Americans, driving costs even higher and forcing many large insurers out of the individual market. Republicans were unsuccessful in replacing the program in Trump’s first term with something better,” they lament, “and so when Democrats retook power, they used the emergency of Covid as an excuse to funnel more subsidies to insurance companies. The temporary measure did not fix any of the underlying problems with Obamacare.” If anything, it just hid the impending disaster under a pile of taxpayer dollars.

“What was supposed to be a temporary measure during the pandemic was extended again in 2022 through this year,” the editors note. And let’s not forget, they point out, the subsidies were supposed to stop “when enrollees are at 400 percent of the federal poverty level. The 2021 actions removed that cap and also increased the amount of the subsidy that enrollees who were previously eligible received” — more than doubling the number of people on Obamacare marketplace plans. And although it was Schumer’s party that decided to sunset these credits in 2025 — something a handful of brave Democrats have tried to remind people — they thought they could use the shutdown to squeeze Republicans into extending them.

It’s all combined to create the perfect storm for everyday Americans, who are staring down premiums that are double what they were paying last time around. In part, that’s the sticker shock from the disappearing credits, but it’s also the result of unchecked insurance companies that have been ratcheting up prices for years. “The purpose of Obamacare, according to Democrats, was supposed to be making health care more affordable for everyone and subsidizing it for people with lower incomes. Over a decade later, Obamacare keeps raising costs for health insurance,” NRO’s editors shake their heads, “and Democrats now insist that everyone, regardless of income, should be eligible for larger subsidies than Obama signed.” Of course, “One group that is very happy about this state of affairs is health insurance companies, who are the recipients of the subsidies. ‘About half of all health care spending and the majority of health insurer revenue now comes directly from the government,’ according to analysis from the Paragon Health Institute.”

Unfortunately for both parties, the situation is a ticking time bomb. Open enrollment for Obamacare is already underway, and people who expect coverage in January have to sign up by December 15. That gives Johnson and Thune, who are already under water on appropriations bills and other backlogged business, less than a month (thanks to Thanksgiving) to try to dig the country out of this mess.

As for Obamacare, Dr. Andy Harris (R-Md.) points out, most people had come to understand the ugly truth about Obamacare before subsidies. “We were promised that if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. That’s obviously not true. If you like your insurance company, you keep your insurance company. That’s obviously not true.” Now, the premiums are astronomical. And frankly, he stressed, “The only reason anybody is on it is because the federal government, after COVID, subsidized 95% of the average premium. That’s ridiculous.”

As far as Harris is concerned, “We have to return the power over your health care to you. So that means price transparency. That means health savings accounts (HSAs). That means getting the providers to accept the lowest that they’ve negotiated with some of the big insurance companies to level the playing field between the insurance companies and the average person,” he told Family Research Council President Tony Perkins on Saturday’s “This Week on Capitol Hill.”

The result would be a “seismic shift,” Perkins agreed, where “health care decisions and funding [could be] taken away from government bureaucrats and big insurance companies and placed into the hands of the people with a direct relationship with their doctors.” That should be the goal, Harris nodded.

Over in the Senate, Bill Cassidy (R-La.) is taking the HSA idea and running with it. Under a plan he’s mulling, the government would take the money Democrats want to spend in extending the subsidies ($23 billion in 2026) and use it to create the health savings accounts. “HSAs,” The Washington Times underscores, “are tax-exempt accounts paired with high-deductible health insurance plans. The consumer can use money from the account for co-pays and deductibles, prescription drug costs and other out-of-pocket health expenses.”

“Who [wouldn’t] want to spend 100% of the dollars on the patient choosing the health care she wants, as opposed to 100% going to insurance companies and only 80% being spent on health care?” he told reporters Monday. “As a conservative, I love it. But I think it’s got a lot of appeal to people who are left-of-center, too.” Cassidy plans to unpack the concept more in a hearing this week.

That’s more than okay with House conservatives like Harris. “The fact of the matter is that right now, most people don’t have any control over [their health care]. It’s controlled by insurers who decide whether or not you’re going to get health care, whether or not you qualify for surgery, whether or not you qualify for some drugs. [It’s] crazy. That decision should be in the hands of the individuals,” he emphasized, “not the government, not the insurance companies. And we could expand this well beyond Obamacare. … What we can do is we can take some of those subsidies, those huge subsidies we’ve been paying to insurance companies, give the lion’s share of that [to] someone with an HSA, and then have them go out and buy their care if they want.”

Asked how quickly Congress could move on this, Harris was realistic. “Look, we can’t do a comprehensive overhaul of Obamacare before December 31st, but we could start down that path, and we could start making inroads. And then if we have to, we can revisit it after the first of the year. The Democrats want to extend these ridiculous Biden bonuses, these COVID-era enhancements for three years now.” The doctor paused before floating the idea of a temporary fix first. “Maybe we just extend some of them partially for six months while we negotiate all the rest of this. But in the end, there is going to be a negotiation on the high cost of health care premiums for the Americans who aren’t on Obamacare. That’s going to be part of this discussion.”

So will the loopholes for highly controversial “coverage” on abortion and gender transition procedures, which were never addressed. “The Affordable Care Act, the subsidies that we’ve been talking about,” Perkins broached, “they do not have the Hyde protections that prevent taxpayer money from being spent on abortion or transgender surgeries. Is that a part of the conversation?” Harris replied that it “absolutely is.” “With Mike Johnson as speaker of the House, he is not going to bring a bill to the floor that does not include Hyde protections,” Harris reiterated. The majority of Americanswould certainly appreciate that after years of watching helplessly as their dollars flow to the killing of innocent unborn children.

As always for Johnson, the to-do list is long and the road is rocky. But, as he told Perkins this past weekend, “Sometimes it’s an advantage to be underestimated, you know? I don’t know why they continue to do that. You and I both know the answer here is [that] God is doing this. We pray for these things. We work hard.” He smiled when he said, “I get accused of over- spiritualizing everything,” but, he added quickly, “I don’t think you can. I mean, we’re trying to do the right thing, and God honors that. And I expect that’s going to happen in the days ahead because we’re going to continue that same course.”

Topics:Congress, Health Care, Federal Spending, Federal Government, Obamacare

Suzanne Bowdey serves as editorial director and senior writer at The Washington Stand.

Why Democrat Analysts Warn Their Party Could Face ‘Deep Trouble’ CBN News / by David Brody

~ Randy Harris ~ Leave a comment

Let’s hope they stay clueless, we need about 10 years to begin to straighten the country out. That is if we can get true blood conservatives elected and do something about the spending spree. Rh

WASHINGTON – President Trump and Republican lawmakers have overcome tough odds to basically steamroll through his second-term agenda. That has left Democrats with a party in an identity crisis filled with questions about how they can recover.  

Ever since Kamala Harris lost the 2024 election to Donald Trump, Democrats have been soul-searching. As they try to diagnose the myriad of factors leading to their defeat, being out of touch on cultural issues stands out far above the rest. 

CNN commentator Van Jones said, “Calling everybody sexist and racist and transphobic and every other name and then say, ‘Please follow us?’ That’s not a good strategy, folks.” 

Rahm Emanuel, another Democrat who works as a CNN Commentator, said, “The reason why Democrats are where they are is we started talking about basically transgender issues, Latin X, defunding the police, a whole host of cultural topics.” 

Chuck Todd, the former host of NBC’s “Meet the Press” who now hosts “The Chuck Toddcast,” tells CBN News this disconnect is a potential pothole on the political roadmap. “If there’s another national election that’s more cultural based, the Democrats are in deep trouble,” Todd said.

There’s no doubt that the progressive wing is taking greater control of the Democrat Party. Almost a decade ago in 2016, 48 percent of Democrats considered themselves either liberal or very liberal. Today, that number has jumped seven points. 

“The energy is clearly in the younger progressive base of the party, and yet their problem is with swing voters who are slightly older,” Todd said. 

And that’s where the Trump train comes in. He has picked up many of those blue-collar Democrats, leaving the party in the political wilderness.  

Texas State Rep. James Talarico (D) said, “We have to do something different, something dramatically different.”  

Talarico, who wears his faith on his sleeve, is finishing up his seminary degree. He sees this rough patch as an opportunity. 

“God works out in the wilderness. And I think that can be true in politics, too. I think the Democratic Party should embrace this time in the political wilderness because this is where we can discover who we are,” he said. 

Right now, voters are still wandering, and part of the problem is that Democrats still haven’t found a Moses to lead them through the midterms and 2028 presidential race. 

“Normally, when Democrats are in the wilderness, they look for brand new,” Todd said. “In 1973, nobody was talking about Jimmy Carter. In 1989, Bill Clinton was not on the radar screen. And in 2005, Barack Obama was thought of as, oh, there’ll be somebody interesting in the next decade. Maybe he’ll run for governor of Illinois.”  

“If you’re naming the person now, they’re probably already too stale for where they’re going. I think that you will see, think ‘new and not from Washington’ is gonna be the two most important characteristics for the Democratic primary in 2028,” he said. 

But first things first: right now, Democrats are struggling within their own ranks. Just 23% expressed positive sentiments about their party; 35% called it weak or ineffective; and 73% felt that congressional Democrats have not done enough to oppose Trump. 

Democrat researcher Jonathan Voss said, “In focus groups, when we talk to voters and we ask them, what’s the animal that you think of when you think of the Democratic Party, people will say things like, ‘I think of a turtle,’ right? They move slowly and then they kind of hunker down within their shell when the going gets tough. 

“And right now, I think what Democratic rank and file want to see is they don’t want to see the turtle,” he said. 

Over the last few months, Democrats have tried to shed that image. Case in point, Cory Booker’s Senate filibuster against the president’s policies, where he declared, “It’s time for Democrats to have a backbone. It’s time for us to fight. It’s time for us to draw lines.” Then there was House Democrat leader Hakeem Jeffries’ marathon speech against the president’s Big Beautiful Bill.  

Voss said, “We need to make the case that we can do a better job helping people in terms of their mobility and their wellbeing without being saddled as the party of the status quo.”  

Indeed, the Democrats must change their stripes. Up until now, the question has been will it be toward the middle or left?

The recent trend in local primaries is far left as mayoral candidates in New York, Seattle, and Minnesota have defeated the more traditional liberal Democrat. Ultimately, however, the Democrats’ march toward a better political future may just simply ride on how Americans, especially those once blue-collar Democrats and swing voters, feel about Trump’s economy. 

“Either they like this economy and he can create a durable, long-term realignment, or if they continue not to like the economy like the previous turn, then those voters may reluctantly come back,” Todd said. “I think we’re still in a period where that group of voters is still vacillating.” 
 
Talarico said, “We’re the party of the New Deal. We’re the party of the Great Society, another Texas Democratic president. You know, that is our heritage, is fighting for working people, fighting for the people who are left out and left behind, not coastal elites and not billionaire donors.” 

Voss said, “If the Democratic Party can establish itself as a party of change, as a party that can make life better for people, I think it has a better opportunity in 2026 and 2028.” 
 
Until then, it’s safe to say the Democrat Party is a work in progress. 

Stupidocrisy: Dems signal a coming storm of nasty gaslighting

~ Randy Harris ~ Leave a comment

By Bill Wilson, KIN Senior Analyst

WASH—Jul 16, 2025 —KIN– 

Concise report of what matters to most in the BBB. I personally wish more spending cuts, we have plenty of pork to get rid of, but I definitely will take the taxi cuts! Let’s start working now for the midterms to elect physically conservative candidates. Rh

The “Big Beautiful Bill” (BBB) is shaping up to be one of the most consequential pieces of legislation for the American people in a generation. It delivers targeted, tangible benefits to workers, seniors, and small businesses—yet Democrats and their media echo chamber are doing everything they can to convince Americans it’s a disaster. What’s really going on here is a masterclass in gaslighting, where facts are buried under fear, and benefits are branded as betrayal. The Democrats’ strategy heading into the 2026 midterms is clear: demonize the BBB, punish President Trump, and discredit the will of the people who put him and a Republican majority in power. This gaslighting will be a constant drumbeat for over a year.

At its core, the BBB provides a clear lift for ordinary Americans: Working-class families will see more take-home pay through the elimination of taxes on tips and overtime; Senior citizens get a substantial Social Security tax exemption—individuals keeping an additional $6,000, couples up to $12,000—allowing 88% of seniors to avoid taxes on their benefits entirely; Middle-income families gain an expanded child tax credit and higher standard deductions, with some households seeing effective tax cuts of 16%; Small businesses, the backbone of the American economy, benefit from a permanent extension of the 20% pass-through deduction, first introduced in the Trump tax cuts. In addition, many of the popular Trump policies on immigration reform, government accountability, national and border security, and tax reductions become law.

They are real-world changes that immediately impact everyday Americans—especially those long ignored by Washington’s elite class. But instead of acknowledging these historic reforms, Democrats are in full-blown panic mode. Progressive firebrand Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez exploded over the bill, warning it would make current economic conditions “look like child’s play.” The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) has already branded the legislation the “Big Ugly Bill,” rolling out a multi-million-dollar messaging blitz that aims to vilify the very relief Americans just received. There’s no constructive policy coming from the left—only resistance. No counter-legislation, no competing tax plan, no alternative for seniors or small businesses. Just rage. Their complicit media shills will amplify the negative, while ignoring the benefits. 

Outlets have already led with claims that 10 to 12 million may lose Medicaid coverage, deficit projections, and warnings about benefits to the wealthy, while carefully leaving out what the bill actually does for lower- and middle-income Americans. Make no mistake: this is the same psychological operation we saw during COVID. Back then, fear ruled the day. Today, it’s political fear designed to overwhelm your senses, distort your judgment, and trick you into rejecting what’s in your best interest. Proverbs 22:3 says, “The prudent sees danger and hides himself, but the simple pass on and suffer for it.” Now is the time to double down on discernment. This is not just a political battle. It’s a test of whether common sense can still cut through the noise. Stay sharp. Stay free. Anything less is, say it with me…Stupidocrisy.

Sources:

·       Breitbart: AOC explodes over BBB – Breitbart News

·       Epoch Times: Democrats target BBB for midterms – The Epoch Times

·       White House Summary of BBB – WhiteHouse.gov

·       NY Post, The Sun, Vox: Analysis of tax cuts and social impact

—-

The Founders Meant to Keep Government Out of the Church, Not God Out of the Government

~ Randy Harris ~ Leave a comment

Paul Strand

This is a wonderful, factual article. The left has duped American to believe a lie. Our founders were terrified of a government run church. After seeing the overreach of government these last few years, their fear is well grounded. Enjoy the article. Rh

The 4th of July makes us think of our independence and freedoms. And legal battles in recent years over religious liberty in the U.S.A. raise serious questions about the freedom to worship in America. So when our Founders came up with the First Amendment, were they trying to keep the government free from religion, or religion free from government?  

These days, the phrase “wall of separation between church and state” has come to mean keeping God or His believers from having a big effect on government and public life. But that’s far, far from what the Founding Fathers were thinking of when they were separating church and state.

Fear of an All-Powerful State Church Wed to the Power of the Government

They were afraid of what so many of the Old World countries had: a religion established by the state as its one true religion, that would tyrannically rule over the faith and conscience of every citizen.

As the Providence Forum’s Peter Lillback put it, “They recognized having a monolithic church was a dangerous thing.”  That’s because it made the king not only their physical sovereign but also their all-powerful spiritual ruler.

Before the Pilgrims fled England, Wallbuilders’ David Barton recalled, “The Pilgrims’ pastor was executed because he made the statement that Jesus Christ is head of the church. And the monarch said, ‘Oh no, I’m the head of the church. You’re dead.’”

Wouldn’t Allow a Church of America Like the Brits Had the Church of England

Knowing of such terror and tyranny, AmericanMinute.com historian William Federer explained how the Founders felt: “Their big fear was the federal government was going to follow the blueprint of every country in Europe and pick one national denomination.”

So what they meant by saying in the First Amendment “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion” was that the federal government was banned from creating – or “establishing” – a national religion with the national government wedded to it.

“They didn’t want to have a national, established Church of America like you have the Church of England, forcing people to believe something that they didn’t believe in,” said Jerry Newcombe, host of the radio program “Vocal Point”.

“What they said was, ‘We don’t want a state church here. Consciously, therefore, they were separating the church from government,” Lillback said.

But that was strictly to protect the churches and each believer’s faith and conscience from the government.

All About Protecting Each American’s Conscience and Freedom to Believe

Not only did the First Amendment say, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion,” but it also said, “or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”

“What they wanted was the freedom that we have in the Bible: the rights of conscience,” Barton said. “And they didn’t want the state telling us how we could or couldn’t practice our faith.”

Lillback said the Founders keeping government control away from faith meant, “Each of us has a right to be who we are before God. It has been well said and it’s a classic statement of religious liberty that man is not free unless he is free on the inside.  We have to have the freedom to believe what we believe. That’s what the First Amendment protects.”

God: He’s on Both Sides of the Wall’

And that’s what Christian historian Eddie Hyatt explained Thomas Jefferson was talking about when he wrote the letter that first used the famous “wall of separation” phrase to a group of worried Baptists.

“He said that the First Amendment had erected a wall of separation that would protect them from any intrusion of the government,” Hyatt stated. “In Jefferson’s mind, the wall of separation was a uni-directional wall, put there to keep the government out of the church; not to keep the influence of the church out of the government.”

There was no antipathy towards the Lord in all of this, Lillback insisted, saying, “But the idea of God: He’s on both sides of the wall. And He’s welcome there. And He should be.”

The Government Is Reaching Over that Wall, Bossing Around People of Faith

But today, there’s been a complete flip.

Lillback said, “Those who once believed in this really high and impregnable wall of church and state, we now see the government reaching over that wall and saying, ‘but don’t preach that text of scripture.’”  

STAY UP TO DATE WITH THE FREE CBN NEWS APP – Click Here Get the App with Special Alerts on Breaking News and Top Stories

Barton added, “All of a sudden the government’s regulating religious activities, which is what Jefferson said they would not do because of separation of church and state.”

Hyatt lamented, “The Founders would be so distressed to see how that statement has been turned on its head.”

As Newcombe explained, “They absolutely did not mean the separation of God and government, which is what’s often being practiced today.”

No One ‘Under Government,’ but Each One ‘Under God’

Lillback encourages Americans to remember what the nation’s Founders intended.

“This is a theistic government. So God was not separated from government,” he insisted. “So any interpretation of the First Amendment that takes God out of government is turning the whole story on its head. Rather it was taking a formal state church out of the equation, leaving it up to each individual. But all, as we still say, ‘under God.’ That was the view of our Founders.”

They believed a nation based on liberty could only stay free if its citizens were godly people. As Barton pointed out, believers in God have their eyes on eternity, and it makes them practice self-control.  

Knowing You’ll Answer to God Makes You Govern Yourself

“When you’re God-conscious, you realize, ‘ya know, I’m going to have to answer to Him for what I do,’ and it limits my bad behavior,” Barton stated.

Newcombe added, “That’s something the Founders believed very strongly: that we’re going to be accountable before God.”

Hyatt said of those Founders, “They knew that they were creating a nation for a free people, but also for a virtuous people who would govern themselves from within.”

You need very little police power if people, because of conscience, will police themselves.

Green Bean Control Laws?

“Self-control is what you need,” Barton explained. “We can pass all the control laws we want. But unless you control the heart, you’ll never control behavior. I mean, I can kill somebody with a can of green beans. What are we going to do?  Pass green bean control laws if somebody does that? No. It’s on the inside.”

And the Founders knew to keep America true and free, they also needed the perfect law of a loving, all-wise God.

As Lillback put it, “There was a clear understanding that the government needed to have an ultimate check and balance, even beyond the people that ran it and their elections. And that is the transcendent law of God.  And so that is why when we look at our Declaration of Independence, there are four references to Deity.”

Going through the Declaration, Lillback laid them out: “‘We’re endowed by our Creator with certain inalienable rights.’ The laws of God and nature. And it tells us there’s an appeal to the Supreme Judge of the world. And, finally, a dependence on the Providence of God. Four references to Deity.”

Not Godless at All

But then came the US Constitution, which some say is a godless document because God isn’t mentioned in it. As soon as they were done with it, though, the Founders called for a day of Thanksgiving to God.

“They were not thinking ‘let’s get rid of God,'” Lillback stated. “They said, ‘We have been given now a new Constitution, and now amendments that give us our freedoms. And where do we turn? We turn to heaven and thank God for this.'”

“Now, if their intent was to get rid of God from government, boy did they miss their point,” Lillback said.  “Because they turned around and thanked Him for everything that they had. It shows the utter historical absurdity of ‘the godless Constitution’.”

Constitution’s Last Words Reference Christ

And God isn’t really absent from the Constitution or its authors’ lives.

“They are not godless,” Lillback insisted. “They are people who, at the very end of their work, said, ‘In the year of our Lord, 1787.’  The very last words in the Constitution are a reference to Jesus Christ.”

He concluded, “It’s no surprise then that the ultimate motto is We are One Nation Under God.”

It’s Treason

~ Randy Harris ~ Leave a comment

Any Congressman that votes for illegal aliens to receive one red cent of benefits, should be removed from office and tried for treason.  That is my money that I have paid into for decades.  They are not deserving of anything but a quick trip back to their homeland.

Being raised on a farm, I learned the value of hard work.  I learned how to drive a tractor at a very early age, probably around 10 or 12 years of age.  At fourteen I was hired out to a family member to work every day including Saturday from 7:00 AM till 7:30 PM.  I earned $10 a day.  Hard work and self reliance was instilled at an early age and has continued throughout my life.  I worked for almost 60 years, and so did my wife.

I know some will cry crocodile tears over this essay, but I said what I said.  Why are we as a people electing representatives who allow our country to be changed from what it was, to what it will become by illegals who care nothing about our way of life?  Look at the protests, they hate our government, unless they are receiving our money.  It is a fundamental changing of the values of America.  It is time to stop the insanity.  

Let me repeat, any Congressman who votes to approve any budget that gives our money away in benefits to illegals needs to be tried for treason.  They are contributing to the decline and fall of America.

God have mercy on us and save us from the stupidity and the purposeful destruction of this land that is a God ordained Republic. Rh

Yes!!

~ Randy Harris ~ Leave a comment

Just as separation of Church and State was given to keep government intrusion out of our lives.

Our Constitution was given to us to allow for freedom for the citizens of the United States. We are presently living under a tyrannical government that is unconcerned for the welfare of its citizens. Our very Republic may only be one election (2024) away from being lost forever. RH