Merry Christmas

This post is a wish for all to have a very Merry Christmas. Regardless of when Christ was born, this is the time of year when Christians celebrate the beginning of the fulfillment of God's promise to Eve to send a redeemer. Jesus Christ is that redeemer, God Himself, taking on a corporeal body to redeem all of mankind from Adam's sin. And that is well worth celebrating all year around. 

I said all and I meant it, just as did God when He said "whosoever will may come" I wish for those who are not Christians, that they would take this opportunity to ask themselves about the truth of their immortal soul. Have you considered it? If you believe you have one, can your life, the eternal one after you shed your mortal body, be affected by what you do here and now? If you haven't asked yourself these questions, don't you think you should? Forever is a long time. Jesus died for you too, but you must accept that gift. 

I would also like to thank Kel Fritzi of Red Fox Radio for hosting my show today, and to thank in advance all the guest hosts who will do my show for me while I am on complete vocal rest in an attempt to avoid surgery - even if it is a small surgery.

 ( I still need a few to fill in over the next month and a half - if you have hosted a show or thought about trying it out, kindly email me at wakingdragon@hotmail.com with the subject line "ITM guest host"  I will not even insist that you be a conservative, so if you wanted to voice a differing view of current events than I have offered, here's your chance.  Rudeness will not be tolerated.) 
Merry Christmas to all. And, in the words of Thomas Jefferson: "The care of human life and happiness, and not their destruction, is the first and only legitimate object of good government."


A second(third?-lol) thank you goes to Christopher J. Greene, who has kindly sent me his new book: "Death of the Family"True Stories of the Charlatans Who Deceived the World and Broke the Backbone of Our Society" to read and review. It will give me a good use for my time while I can't speak. 

From Answers in Genesis:
"So the Lord God said to the serpent: “Because you have done this, you arecursed more than all cattle, and more than every beast of the field; on your belly you shall go, and you shall eat dust all the days of your life. And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her Seed; He shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise His heel.” (Genesis 3:14–15)

Today’s big question: where is the first promise of the Savior?

The entire original creation and the Garden of Eden would have been absolutely spectacular. Imagine living in a world where the lion truly could lay with the lamb and where human beings could have walked unconcerned next to a T. rex. Living in God’s perfect creation with no carnivorous activity, no death, no suffering, and no natural disasters is something we can now only read about and imagine how it might have been. 

When the fateful day of disaster came, everything changed—and rightly so. God warned us that if we were to disobey Him then we would surely die. After sin, God fulfilled His warning in just manner. The serpent was cursed (more than all the other creatures) and mankind was to return to dust (i.e., die). Yet we should never overlook the first great working of God’s unlimited grace in the midst of His righteous judgment. God said to the serpent (Satan), “I will put enmity between you and the woman and between your seed and her Seed; He shall bruise your head and you shall bruise His heel” (Genesis 3:15). This coming Seed that will crush the head of Satan was promised by God. From this point on, we see in Scripture and understand our true need for the Messiah, Jesus Christ.

In theological terms, this is called the proto-evangelium (the first Gospel). God promised that through the Seed (i.e., descendant) of a woman (Eve) would come one who would crush the head of Satan. This is the first promise of a Savior and the first great act of God’s grace after our tragic act of rebellion.

When we read the account of Genesis, and particularly the first eleven chapters, we get a full historical foundation for understanding of the significance of this promise of a Savior, and the depth of our desperate need for salvation. Not only do we see that we are rebellious, and under the wrath of God, but Genesis also tells us that since that rebellion, sin is constantly and aggressively crouching at our door (Genesis 4:7), and that we are totally consumed by sin (Genesis 8:21). The promise of a Savior from man’s rebellious nature is something we see consistently throughout Scripture—from its origin in Genesis, all the way through to Christ’s ultimate victory in Revelation.

There is one last important fact that we should never overlook in this first wonderful display of God’s grace. After the first act of sin and the promise of a savior, God also provided a foreshadowing of the great act that must occur on our behalf. God provided animal skins for clothes, which required the shedding of blood to cover sin, and pointed to the substitutionary atonement accomplished by Jesus Christ on the Cross."

Trumpnado - Intellectual Froglegs 12.06.15

I am still examining candidates, but the point made at 8:07-8:17 makes this worth posting far and wide.

It Is Time To Wake Up

 I tend to not post the graphic things I see posted elsewhere. 

This I will share because it is time to wake up to the war that we face. 

That war is against islam.

 The followers of islam have no right to take freedom from the rest of the world. And the rest of the world has no right to let them 

The religious mandate of islam is world conquest. Because the followers of islam currently feel empowered to conquer the world, this is the war of our time. We must all become Charles Martel now, because this is the alternative.

I say again, it is time to wake up.

photo from tmz.com

"When thou goest out to battle against thine enemies, and seest horses, and chariots, and a people more than thou, be not afraid of them: for the Lord thy God is with thee, which brought thee up out of the land of Egypt." ~ Deut 20:1

"2 For yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night.

3 For when they shall say, Peace and safety; then sudden destruction cometh upon them, as travail upon a woman with child; and they shall not escape.

4 But ye, brethren, are not in darkness, that that day should overtake you as a thief." ~ 1Thess 5:2-4

The Yuge Case For Donald Trump – Part 2 (Intellectual Froglegs 11.16.15 )

Condolences to France

This blog extends sympathies and condolences to the people of France. 

1.  "He that dwelleth in the secret place of the most High shall abide under the shadow of the Almighty.
2.  I will say of the Lord, He is my refuge and my fortress: my God; in him will I trust.
3.  Surely he shall deliver thee from the snare of the fowler, and from the noisome pestilence.
4.  He shall cover thee with his feathers, and under his wings shalt thou trust: his truth shall be thy shield and buckler.
5.  Thou shalt not be afraid for the terror by night; nor for the arrow that flieth by day;
6.  Nor for the pestilence that walketh in darkness; nor for the destruction that wasteth at noonday.
7.  A thousand shall fall at thy side, and ten thousand at thy right hand; but it shall not come nigh thee.
8.  Only with thine eyes shalt thou behold and see the reward of the wicked.
9.  Because thou hast made the Lord, which is my refuge, even the most High, thy habitation;
10.  There shall no evil befall thee, neither shall any plague come nigh thy dwelling.
11.  For he shall give his angels charge over thee, to keep thee in all thy ways.
12. They shall bear thee up in their hands, lest thou dash thy foot against a stone.
13. Thou shalt tread upon the lion and adder: the young lion and the dragon shalt thou trample under feet.
14.  Because he hath set his love upon me, therefore will I deliver him: I will set him on high, because he hath known my name.
15. He shall call upon me, and I will answer him: I will be with him in trouble; I will deliver him, and honour him.
16.  With long life will I satisfy him, and shew him my salvation." 

~ Psalm 91

‘Complete anarchy’ as Obama invades girls’ showers

"The Department of Education is demanding that an Illinois school district allow a boy who identifies as a girl and plays sports on a girls team to have full access to the locker room and showers with the girls on the team.

Read more here:Complete anarchy’ as Obama invades girls’ showers
The reason this is so wrong is because it violates the most fundamental implied contract between the government and parents with regard to the public school system. That contract is one that says, you(parents) give me(government) access to your children to educate them and I am worthy to be trusted with that most valuable part of your family - your child(ren).

That implied declaration of trustworthiness means that the government does not get to traumatize your child, nor encourage them in harmful behaviors, nor to use them for social experiments.

Telling girls that they must allow males to use ladies bathrooms is bad enough, but to say that males must be allowed to be naked in proximity to themselves while they are also naked or in various stages of undress is harmful. 

It tells girls that they should disregard the feelings of discomfort that occur when another person is behaving in a way that is outside of the norms of that society. There is a good reason for those feelings of discomfort. It is to keep you safe.

When someone is behaving oddly, it is a signal that they may be mentally unstable or ill or about to engage in bad behavior. The natural impulse is to keep your distance from such people. And that's a good thing. Sure, artists play on such discomfort all the time, but schools are not meant to be social or artistic experiments. Because if they were, no one, except those who don't care about the mental health and well-being of their children would send their children there. 

And that is the proper response for the parents of this school and all schools across the nation - keep your children home. Homeschool them, get them a tutor, send them to a private school that is segregated by sex, but do NOT allow the government to engage in social experimentation with your children.

And don't just vote with your feet on this one, because that will leave other children subject to being the victims of this egregious abuse of the population. Go to your local school board meetings, call your state and federal legislators and your mayor and your governor and demand that the government cease using children for their social experiments. It is unethical and abusive of children. 

In fact, tell them the social experimentation is not the province of government at all, because it is not. 


Call. Because if there are no consequences for bad behavior, the behavior will not change. But, before you call, call your school and let them know that your child will not be in attendance until you can be assured that they will be safe from being forced to participate in such madness. You are the first line of defense for your children. Failure to protect them from this is failure as a parent.

"23 Then said the king, The one saith, This is my son that liveth, and thy son is the dead: and the other saith, Nay; but thy son is the dead, and my son is the living.

24 And the king said, Bring me a sword. And they brought a sword before the king.
25 And the king said, Divide the living child in two, and give half to the one, and half to the other.
26 Then spake the woman whose the living child was unto the king, for her bowels yearned upon her son, and she said, O my lord, give her the living child, and in no wise slay it. But the other said, Let it be neither mine nor thine, but divide it.
27 Then the king answered and said, Give her the living child, and in no wise slay it: she is the mother thereof." ~1st Kings 3:23-27

Answers 16 | Can Christians Drink Alcohol?

The Case for Donald Trump - Part 1 (IFL 10.30.15)

Hmmmm

Ted Nugent on a Cruz Missile with Donald Trump - Intellectual Froglegs

The WI GAB Has Got to Go

“We need to take this thing apart,” said Knudson told Wisconsin Watchdog in a Sept. 15 interview.

“We have had an eight-year failed experiment in Wisconsin, an experiment that said if you put nonpartisan judges in charge of overseeing a combination of the elections oversight and ethics/lobbying and campaign finance oversight, you put that all together so they are under the auspices of one bureaucrat, that would somehow be a national model. Well, now what we’ve seen is not a national model. In fact, it’s a failure and it needs to be replaced,” Knudson said.
Read more here.

18 Judges and officers shalt thou make thee in all thy gates, which the Lord thy God giveth thee, throughout thy tribes: and they shall judge the people with just judgment.

19 Thou shalt not wrest judgment; thou shalt not respect persons, neither take a gift: for a gift doth blind the eyes of the wise, and pervert the words of the righteous.

20 That which is altogether just shalt thou follow, that thou mayest live, and inherit the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee." ~ Deut 16:18-20

Playing the Trump Card (on a crooked GOP) Intellectual Froglegs 10.05.15

Don't You Dare

In video




after video:
https://youtu.be/QDJyhf1VQL4

 and article:
http://pamelageller.com/2015/09/document-muslim-migrants-raping-women-and-children-in-camp-in-germany.html/

after article:

http://www.wnd.com/2015/09/migrants-discuss-raping-robbing-other-travelers/#vWjHQo1umsrHFp4x.01

after article:

http://www.barenakedislam.com/2015/09/28/muslims-say-they-will-make-it-legal-to-rape-white-women-when-they-take-over-europe/

after article:
http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/6527/migrants-rape-germany

after article:

http://www.whyileftsweden.com/?p=415

after article:

http://www.ibtimes.com.au/report-says-1400-white-children-rotherdam-raped-muslim-men-1997-2013-1353223

we see indications that accepting muslims from an islamic culture or nation into a non muslim nation is a disaster waiting to happen. These sources are telling us that muslim men have no respect for women or the laws that protect them. That tell us that the followers of islam need not feel obligated to keep agreements they sign with non-muslims
http://www.apartheidsharia.com/muslims-are-not-obligated-to-the-agreement-they-signed-with-a-non-muslim-a-simple-explanation/

They tell us that muslims are to consider kaffirs to be a lower class of life than muslims: http://www.politicalislam.com/about/

And yet, the US is planning to allow thousands and hundreds of thousands of these people to come here for "refuge". Anyone who speaks out against such a risk is labelled a bigot or fearmonger.. Even a presidential candidate who speaks out against these barbarians, is immediately attacked, even when they make factual statements:

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/2015/09/28/washposts-fact-check-gives-four-pinocchios-carson-correctly-citing-taqiyya


It is time, right now, to speak before it is too late. If you are a woman or a parent, this affects you. See the article on Rotherdam. READ IT. Look at the rape rates in Sweden.

Call your Congressmen/women and tell them Don't You Dare to bring this here. Don't you dare to endanger America's women and children with these people who not only do not share our values, but who will view us as prey. Don't you dare do this. It does not make you an islamophobe or a bigot to want to prevent such things from happening to you and yours while there is a chance that it may be prevented. It makes you sensible.

"Whoso findeth a wife findeth a good thing, and obtaineth favour of the Lord."~ Proverbs 18:22

Donald vs the DC Machine - Everybody hates Trump but the voters (IFL Sep...

A Matter of Convenience

Because I seem to end up having this conversation very often of late, I am posting here the last reply I have made on it because It will be easier for me to simply come here and copy it and paste it into those conversations where it has become necessary to make the points therein or to grab the url and paste that. My apologies to those looking for something more substantive.

 As far as the government is concerned,(at least, when you strip away all the nonsense, it should be thus) the word "marriage" is a term that defines a specific legal contract. That contract, at it's most basic level, says:"The two parties to the contract agree that, if the resources of their bodies are to be used to produce children, they will be used in that manner only with the other party to the contract."

 It has the three required elements necessary to make a contract; an offer, an acceptance and a consideration.(The consideration being that they give up the right to produce children with the resources of their bodies with any  person aside from the other party to the contract.)

This contract neither requires the production of children, nor does it prohibit adoption. A same sex couple must go outside of that contract to produce offspring, therefore they may not make that contract - and, indeed, I should think that any court would void such a contract between same sex couples because it would deny them their self-evident and unalienable right to procreate. (This is not a problem for couples who are infertile or damaged in some way that would ordinarily preclude the production of offspring because, between a man and a woman it is always theoretically possible for them to produce a child.)

I am shocked that the members of the highest court in America decided to exercise WILL rather than JUDGEMENT(in the sense outlined in Federalist paper #78) in a matter so basic to the health and well being of society. They did the same thing a few days before this ruling, when they exercised WILL rather than JUDGEMENT to rule by the corruption of the dictionary, in the health care subsidies case. 

You (the individual to whom this was a reply said this)say that no individual has a "right" to the definition of a word - but societies, and particularly societies governed by the rule of law, do. A word in the law, MUST mean what it meant when it was first written, else the law becomes of none effect. A mere thing of clay in the hands of the judiciary. And, if you want to live in a society where the definition of words in the law is constantly changing to suit the whims of those in power, I suggest you move someplace where the rule of law is not respected. A communist nation perhaps. 

May the definition of a word be changed from time to time? Yes, but only with the gravest consideration and proper notice that from this time forward this word now means something other than what it has meant heretofore and even then, if one has a proper respect for history, there must be a new term created to describe what that term meant before it was changed, and all the laws containing the original term must be changed to the new term. Indeed, the whole process would be so cumbersome that I cannot imagine - especially with a term that has had such usage since the very foundation of this nation, a term such as "marriage" - that anyone would see it as the viable alternative to doing what should have been done in this case. 

To wit: find a term that describes the contract same sex couples could make and let them go through the same legislative process that married people went through to get the same benefits. To do otherwise is to essentially destroy the rule of law by creating a precedent that says an individual or group may gain a legislative shortcut to their desired goals by having the courts legislate through redefinition as has happened here. And, since the courts are prohibited from creating law by the Constitution, whether through outright declaration or through jiggery-pokery, the SCOTUS ruling is not law and should result in every member of that court who voted for it to be removed from the bench for bad behavior.  

Hebrews 13:4

Marriage is honourable in all, and the bed undefiled: but whoremongers and adulterers God will judge.

Judicial kings and Christian peasants - Intellectual Froglegs 09.07.15

Ben Shapiro: Do Black Lives Matter to Black Lives Matter?

"Trump Supporters Anonymous" Show Blocked by YouTube - Alternative Link ...

Hmmmm

Dear GOP... Intellectual Froglegs 08/16.15

Answers 07 | Don't All Religions Have Some Good In Them?

Trumping the GOP - IFL 08.06.15

Planned Parenthood or Planned Infanticide for Profit?

After the release of the videos showing the director of Planned Parenthood discussing the sale of body parts as though she were piecing out a discarded automobile, this author has been attempting to find the words to express the absolute horror with which she was afflicted in the watching. 

People are not animals. People are not objects. People are not disposable and people are certainly NOT to be dissected and sold in pieces to the highest bidder. Planned Parenthood is not alone in this perfidy. They are accompanied by those who are making the purchases. 

Is it not horrific enough that in this nation babies are being murdered by the millions since Roe v Wade? Must that horror be compounded by such a heartless, nay soulless traffic in their parts and pieces? 

For those who say that these aborted children are not human beings - you are wrong. The moment the egg and the sperm combine, when the child's unique DNA code is formed - at that moment, you have a new human being. If this first cell were found at a crime scene and analyzed to determine the identity of the person to whom that DNA belonged - it would not belong to either parent, but to the child alone. This newly formed human being can be allowed to grow and come to term without ever having spent a single second in the womb of the biological mother as we have seen by the children born from adopted embryos. This is a human being and more- it is the most helpless of human beings. The most dependent upon those of us who have already been born to protect it. 

Because the depth of the depravity in this situation is so great, I can only address it by stating that these children are human beings and posting something we seem to have forgotten - despite the vows of that generation. 

THE NUREMBERG CODE 

1. The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential. This means that the person involved should have legal capacity to give consent; should be so situated as to be able to exercise free power of choice, without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, overreaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion; and should have sufficient knowledge and comprehension of the elements of the subject matter involved as to enable him to make an understanding and enlightened decision. This latter element requires that before the acceptance of an affirmative decision by the experimental subject there should be made known to him the nature, duration, and purpose of the experiment; the method and means by which it is to be conducted; all inconveniences and hazards reasonably to be expected; and the effects upon his health or person which may possibly come from his participation in the experiment. The duty and responsibility for ascertaining the quality of the consent rests upon each individual who initiates, directs or engages in the experiment. It is a personal duty and responsibility which may not be delegated to another with impunity.

2. The experiment should be such as to yield fruitful results for the good of society, unprocurable by other methods or means of study, and not random and unnecessary in nature. 

3. The experiment should be so designed and based on the results of animal experimentation and a knowledge of the natural history of the disease or other problem under study that the anticipated results will justify the performance of the experiment. 

4. The experiment should be so conducted as to avoid all unnecessary physical and mental suffering and injury. 

5. No experiment should be conducted where there is an a priori reason to believe that death or disabling injury will occur; except, perhaps, in those experiments where the experimental physicians also serve as subjects. 

6. The degree of risk to be taken should never exceed that determined by the humanitarian importance of the problem to be solved by the experiment. 

7. Proper preparations should be made and adequate facilities provided to protect the experimental subject against even remote possibilities of injury, disability, or death. 

8. The experiment should be conducted only by scientifically qualified persons. The highest degree of skill and care should be required through all stages of the experiment of those who conduct or engage in the experiment. 

9. During the course of the experiment the human subject should be at liberty to bring the experiment to an end if he has reached the physical or mental state where continuation of the experiment seems to him to be impossible. 

10. During the course of the experiment the scientist in charge must be prepared to terminate the experiment at any stage, if he has probable cause to believe, in the exercise of the good faith, superior skill, and careful judgment required of him, that a continuation of the experiment is likely to result in injury, disability, or death to the experimental subject.

"1 At the same time came the disciples unto Jesus, saying, Who is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven?

2 And Jesus called a little child unto him, and set him in the midst of them,

3 And said, Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.

4 Whosoever therefore shall humble himself as this little child, the same is greatest in the kingdom of heaven.

5 And whoso shall receive one such little child in my name receiveth me.

6 But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea." ~ Matthew 18:1-6

Dr. Kent Hovind's first video in freedom! (test run)

The Official Unicorn Cookbook - Intellectual Froglegs 07.20.15

Planned Parenthood Uses Partial-Birth Abortions to Sell Baby Parts

Even if the money is not going to pp, but rather to the women having the abortions through pp, , this creates an incentive to get pregnant and have an abortion, which pp DOES get paid for, probably with money provided by the tissue procurement - to "help" economically disadvantaged women don't you know.
And, in the beginning, she talks about patients who want to DONATE the tissue - so it's unlikely they are getting anything. In addition, she said they have been asked to become a centralized provider for these tissues nationwide. That indicates a profit motive to me. $30-100/ tissue and how many tissues per baby? Liver, lungs, eyes, legs, kidney, heart, intestines, pancreas, muscle, brain - a conservative list of 10, not even including various glands and etc at $30/tissue = $300+/baby?
I could vomit.





"17 But when the time of the promise drew nigh, which God had sworn to Abraham, the people grew and multiplied in Egypt,

18 Till another king arose, which knew not Joseph.

19 The same dealt subtilly with our kindred, and evil entreated our fathers, so that they cast out their young children, to the end they might not live." Acts 7:17 - 19

Regulated Freedom - Intellectual Froglegs 07.08.15

Regulated Freedom - Intellectual Froglegs 07.08.15

Political Pistachio: Health Insurers Forced To Seek 54% ObamaCare Rate Hikes

"People don't give a damn how much something costs as long as they don't have to pick up the tab.  Government subsidies are always the anesthetic that spares the lumpenproletariat the pain that would otherwise alert them to the horrible things being done to them.  Like, for example, Barack Obama taking away the healthcare they had and liked and forcing them into this Cloward-Piven boondoggle.  And when carriers are denied permission to jack up rates to where the distortions of the health insurance market indicate they should go.....death spiral."

 Read More here: Political Pistachio: Health Insurers Forced To Seek 54% ObamaCare Rate Hikes

Answers 05 | Would Society Be Better Off Without God?

"Marriage"?

From the standpoint of our government,(not God), the word "marriage" refers to a very specific contract. [i.e. a contract between two parties wherein the offer, acceptance and consideration is that the parties to the contract are agreeing that if the resources of their bodies are to be used to create children they will only be used with the other party to the contract.]

The term "marriage" has, from the founding of this nation, referred to only a man and a woman. [And in, truth it can only refer to a man and a woman because same sex couples would be required to go outside of that contract to produce children. This would deny them their self evident and unalienable right to reproduce and therefore would not be a lawful contract for them.] In fact, in many states homosexuality was a capital offence.

What the SCOTUS has done, is to give a specific group a legislative shortcut to benefits by redefining the term marriage. This has, at it's essence, destroyed the rule of law. Because if words in the law do not mean what they meant when they were written, then the law is of no effect, because who knows what words may have their meanings changed tomorrow by such a capricious court? "Child", "Adult", "color", "speed" "limit"? Imagine the chaos that will ensue.

The proper course of action would have been for the SCOTUS to advise the homosexual community to get their own term to describe their contract and go through the legislative process just like married people did while leaving the decisions of whether or not to grant benefits of that nature to this new contract to the individual states. This is not what the SCOTUS did and for their destruction of the rule of law,(along with their usurpation of the powers of Congress to legislate and to "control the purse strings" in the deathcare ruling the day before the "marriage" ruling, they should be removed from the bench. Is it possible to remove a justice from the bench? Yes, and it starts in the House. Call your Rep.

"18 And he spake a parable unto them to this end, that men ought always to pray, and not to faint;
2 Saying, There was in a city a judge, which feared not God, neither regarded man: 3 And there was a widow in that city; and she came unto him, saying, Avenge me of mine adversary. 4 And he would not for a while: but afterward he said within himself, Though I fear not God, nor regard man; 5 Yet because this widow troubleth me, I will avenge her, lest by her continual coming she weary me. 6 And the Lord said, Hear what the unjust judge saith. 7 And shall not God avenge his own elect, which cry day and night unto him, though he bear long with them? 8 I tell you that he will avenge them speedily. Nevertheless when the Son of man cometh, shall he find faith on the earth?" ~Luke 18:1-8

Scalia: Supreme Court now a 'threat to American democracy' | WashingtonExaminer.com

"Scalia said he didn't care about the substance of the ruling, but said the way the Court ruled means the nine justices are now essentially in charge of Americans.

"Today's decree says that my Ruler, and the Ruler of 320 million Americans coast-to-coast, is a majority of the nine lawyers on the Supreme Court," he wrote." Read more here:

Scalia: Supreme Court now a 'threat to American democracy' | WashingtonExaminer.com

And the Death of the Rule of Law comes by Jiggery Pokery

"Scalia heavily criticized this reading, saying that the majority has erroneously interpreted the word "state" to also mean "federal government." He called parts of the majority opinion "interpretive jiggery-pokery."

"The Secretary of Health and Human Services is not a state," he wrote. "Words no longer have meaning if an exchange that is not established by a state is 'established by the state.'"

Why am I seeing that statement:"Words no longer have meaning" as a foreshadowing of the upcoming decision on marriage? Because that is what I have been saying about legislation by redefinition in regards to marriage for years now. Where is America?

I thought the end would come with the ruling on marriage, but the SCOTUS has decided to test the waters first. This ruling is nothing less than the oligarchy of the judicial branch feared by many of the founders asserting itself. It is also the end of the rule of law, for if the words of the law cannot be said to mean the same thing from one day to the next, then the rule of law is void.

Like the recent rush to approve fast track authority - in a bill held in secrecy from, not only the American people, but from the  very legislators charged with voting on it; an egregious affront to the very philosophical foundation of a nation that was said to be of the people, by the people  and for the people - the attitude that something, anything must be done and done now will be blamed for this insidious takeover of America. The logical  individual would say, no. If the choices are doing the wrong thing and doing nothing, do nothing. But that doesn't serve the current political agenda of fundamentally transforming America. 

It has been the opinion of this writer, that to be forced to use force to retake America would be a blot on our history, and so it will be. The fact that we are supposed to have peaceful mechanisms in place to remove any harmful people from office, to repeal harmful laws, rules and regulations was supposed to be the saving grace of the American form of government. 

Those mechanisms only work with a population of people who are self reliant, personally responsible and informed by Christian values as to the difference between right and wrong. In the absence of such a people, style overrules substance and disaster follows on the heels of the choices that are made.

If such mechanisms were working, there would be a lot more politicians in jail and every single member of the SCOTUS who ruled in favor of legislating through redefinition - even though it is a mild form - that of choosing one meaning over another, when the proper course would have been to send it back to Congress and tell them to make clear which meaning they intended - should be removed from their positions for "bad behavior". Because ending the rule of law in this nation, and usurping the right of Congress to legislate is very bad behavior indeed.

But then maybe "bad" = "good" now. How can we tell? 

The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour....

ARTICLE III, SECTION 1

jiggery-pokery

noun, Chiefly British

1.

trickery, hocus-pocus; fraud; humbug.

2.

sly, underhanded action.

3.

manipulation:

After a little jiggery-pokery, the engine started.

"30 The mouth of the righteous speaketh wisdom, and his tongue talketh of judgment.

31 The law of his God is in his heart; none of his steps shall slide.

32 The wicked watcheth the righteous, and seeketh to slay him." 

~ Psalm 37:30-32

Black Betty & the Psychedelic Pope - Intellectual Froglegs 06.22.15

Do Big Unions Buy Politicians?

And where are We the People? That's why public sector unions are wrong.

If their lips are moving... Intellectual Froglegs 6-07-15

Political Pistachio: A Religious Crusade?

Political Pistachio: A Religious Crusade?: The key to a successful free society is when a society is a virtuous society.  The success of the American System is primarily due to the fact that the foundation of our country is rooted in Judeo-Christian values and principles.

...

America began as a Great Experiment in self-government, a test on whether or not limitations upon a central government could succeed.  We are no longer that experiment.  We are an accomplishment, or at least we were.  The experiment succeeded beyond anyone's expectations.  The United States of America became an exceptional nation, an exception to the rule of tyranny, of which most nations are, and have been in history.  Liberty is the exception, in history.  America is a miracle.  The question is, can we restore the miracle, provide an opportunity for the miracle to occur again in the future, or can we squeeze out of the miracle a little more freedom, a little more Godliness, and a little more hope as we enter an age that is doomed to become darker with each passing year.

Regardless of the outcome, the fight is a noble one.  An American one.
Read the rest of this fine article at the link above.

Ronald Reagan: Memorial Day speech

Four Bible Verses Every Muslim Needs to Know

Be Prepared: Defense Against Terror, Hoodlums, & Disasters | Bill Whittle

The Camel Repairman only knocks once - Intellectual Froglegs 05.17.15

What is an enemy threat doctrine? with Michael Waller

Radical Islam Is the Religion of Intolerance, Not Christianity

Draw mohammed Everywhere 2

In my show, I said I would publish any drawings of mohammed here if people send them to me at wakingdragon@hotmail.com and here is the first submission. It is one of the ones that was entered into the Draw mohamed contest in Garland Texas.

This is America and all natural rights have natural limitations. Your freedom of religion ends where it impacts my freedom of speech or any other of my natural rights. Don't like that? Get out.

Political Pistachio: Communist Treason Murders Millions

Political Pistachio: Communist Treason Murders Millions

Reality trumps ideaology. Denial kills and the root of the word "utopia" is literally "no place". Communism, socialism and and cultural marxism likewise kill people.

Christianity, true Christianity is all about encouraging and protecting life. If one of these value systems must underlie a nation's cultural, legal and political systems, I know which one I prefer.

  “Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice. And…  

         moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue!” ~ Barry Goldwater 

I Support Free Speech, But... | Afterburner with Bill Whittle

Draw mohammed Everywhere

Because This is America and freedom of religion has natural limits as do all unalienable rights. You may not yell "Fire!" in a crowded theater and you may not kill someone for drawing a cartoon. If you don't like that, get out. 

This is the winning entry from the draw mohammed contest in Texas as posted on the American Thinker blog. The artist is former muslim Bosch Fawstin. I offer him my congratulations on his winning entry.  

Have you seen it on any of the MSM reports about the attack on that contest? Think about that. 

I recommend that all Americans draw mohammed and send those drawings to your local papers in support of free speech. 

"Ye that love the Lord, hate evil: he preserveth the souls of his saints; he delivereth them out of the hand of the wicked." ~ Psalm 97:10

Of COURSE We Should Draw Muhammad || Louder With Crowder

Muhammad cartoon contest winner Bosch Fawstin's full speech

CNN Promotes Sharia Blasphemy Laws (Alisyn Camerota vs. Pamela Geller)

Ben Shapiro: Indiana and the Gay Rights Lie

Praise the Lord & Pass the Ammunition - Intellectual Froglegs 4.28.15

The Media and Jihad

Dakota Wood: The Latest Defense Budget Battle: Implications for U.S. Mil...

Conservative Swagger - Intellectual Froglegs 4.16.15

The Rule of Law is Dead

Rodney Lee Conover posted this on Facebook:"So let me get this straight: This is the day when every independent thinking person in America turned from being a racist into a sexist?

This is the day when America realized that being a true Feminist is clinging to your cheating, lying, redneck husband to achieve your goals.

And don't forget, if fat 'n horny Bubba humiliates you and your young daughter in public - that's okay, it's worth it ladies! Stay with that man - he's your ticket.

Hillary is sad and angry and she's going to take it out on you."

This is my reply:

 I think that this is the day that Americans of all stripes got slapped in the face with the knowledge that the rule of law is no longer in force in America. 

Because when someone who has openly confessed to breaking the law has not even been arrested, much less charged because of who she is, then where are we as a nation? Does she get a pass because she's a former first lady(The only first lady in American history to have been fingerprinted - because she had been concealing documents regarding the Whitewater firm) or a former member of Congress or the Sec of State? 

Does holding high office make one automatically immune from the rule of law? Do we now have a ruling class that need not fear the government's decrees - which are only for lesser people anyway. If the rest of us can even be considered to be people to those whose aspirations are so high and pure that they must not be held accountable to the standards and laws of lesser men.

Notice, that in the section of code she has willfully and knowingly violated, it says that she is disqualified from holding ANY office under the United States. 

I am aware that she claims, however ludicrously, that she didn't know it was illegal. Please. She is a lawyer who served with (and was dismissed in shame from) the law firm that prosecuted President nixon. A lawyer who served as first lady whilst committing the same crime of concealing documents IN the White House. A lawyer who went on to serve as a Senator (illegally). A lawyer who was appointed to be the Secretary of State(also illegally). a LAWYER who is now claiming that she didn't know it was illegal for her to have her own private, insecure server for governmental correspondence, which she has since destroyed. And I am the Easter Bunny.


18 U.S.C. § 2071 : US Code - Section 2071: Concealment, removal, or mutilation generally

"(a) Whoever willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, or destroys, or attempts to do so, or, with intent to do so takes and carries away any record, proceeding, map, book, paper, document, or other thing, filed or deposited with any clerk or officer of any court of the United States, or in any public office, or with any judicial or public officer of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

(b) Whoever, having the custody of any such record, proceeding, map, book, document, paper, or other thing, willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, falsifies, or destroys the same, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both, and shall forfeit his office and be disqualified from holding any office under the United States. As used in this subsection, the term "office" does not include the office held by any person as a retired officer of the Armed Forces of the United States." [Emphasis mine]


If Ms. hillary rodham-clinton is not arrested and charged with the crime to which she has already publicly confessed, then the rule of law is dead. But then, no one is really surprised since it was pretty sick already, given the lawlessness and malfeasance of Mr. obama.


"And it came to pass, that there went out some of the people on the seventh day for to gather, and they found none.
And the Lord said unto Moses, How long refuse ye to keep my commandments and my laws?
 see, for that the Lord hath given you the sabbath, therefore he giveth you on the sixth day the bread of two days: abide ye every man in his place, let noman go out of his place on the seventh day."
~ Exodus 16:27-29