Connect with us

Opinion

Christian Voters In Georgia, Republican & Democrat, Must Save America From Socialism (Opinion)

Spread the word…

Published

on

Reverend Raphael Warnock clearly represents the deterioration of the Judeo-Christian values that truly “make America great.” He is at the very least a severely flawed candidate for Senate in perhaps the most important runoff election in American History verses incumbent GOP Senator Kelly Loeffler.

A few weeks ago, Fox News’ Tucker Carlson Tonight released what was then, exclusive police body-cam footage of an escalated domestic dispute between Warnock and his ex-wife, Ouleye Ndoye. Warnock denied his ex-wife’s claim that he intentionally ran her foot over, but Ndoye is seen in the video telling one of the officers that her husband is “a great actor” that is “phenomenal at putting on a really good show.”

We have also recently learned that Warnock was arrested for his interference in a police investigation of abuse claims against a Christian camp run by a church that he was working for at the time. That facility, who parents had entrusted with the safety of their children, had been long plagued with health code and abuse violations.

Warnock was taken away in handcuffs after interrupting police and attempting to block another camper from directing officers to other witnesses to the long list of violations, according to a Baltimore Sun article that recently resurfaced.

take our poll - story continues below

Did SCOTUS make the right decision on medical mandates for large businesses?

  • Did SCOTUS make the right decision on medical mandates for large businesses?  

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Flag And Cross updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

This extremely disturbing behavior is not coming from a troubled youth, or a recently released felon. It is coming from a man that purports to teach the word of God. And speaking of the word of God and Churches, Warnock has been known to attack the 2nd Amendment that protects our God given right to self-defense.

Warnock was quoted making light of the potential tragedy that would have easily occurred at West Freeway Church of Christ in Texas if not for the actions of an armed Church goer. “So somebody decided they had a bright idea to pass a piece of legislation that would allow for guns and concealed weapons to be carried in churches. Have you ever been to a church meeting? That’s the last place,” Warnock would say with a laugh.

This comes on the heels of Warnock’s recent claim of being a “Pro-Choice Pastor.” This is particularly bothersome as the barbaric practice of abortion has been responsible for millions of black deaths and has had a particularly devastating effect in Georgia, a state with a sizable and growing black community.

Additionally, Warnock’s anti-Semitism has also been documented in the past. He was one of the signers of a very controversial letter that was distributed by a group called the National Council of Churches.

This letter was released after a visit to both Israel and Palestine by a group of Black American and South African church officials. The theme of this letter was extremely concerning, as it compared Israel’s border to the Berlin Wall and unfairly implied that Israel has behaved in a manner reminiscent of apartheid-era South Africa and Nazism.

This could only happen in 2020/2021, as some Democrats may have unfortunately been conditioned to accept that voter fraud in the name of removing a President that they find themselves offended by, is acceptable.
But did Dems make a gross miscalculation in hitching their proverbial wagon to Warnock, a man that most Christian southerners would quickly denounce as a religious fraud?

Part of the reason for that potential mistake may very well be the fact that Georgia could be seen as an easy target for anyone looking to illegally win an election, in part because of a recent hack on October 7th of 2020 that targeted Hall County, GA, and disabled the county’s voter signature database. The DoppelPaymer ransomware gang was responsible for victimizing the county that is home to approximately 180,000 Georgians. 

The State of Georgia ranks as the 8th most religious state in America according to a survey conducted by the website World Population Review. Christians and Jews in the state must ask themselves whether Warnock’s brand of Christianity and anti-Semitism falls in line with their traditional southern values. If they could not tolerate the kind of questionable behavior that Reverend Warnock continually exhibits from those who inhabit their circle, then how can they trust this severely flawed candidate in perhaps the most important Senate race in American history?

Julio Rivera is a business and political strategist, the Editorial Director for Reactionary Times, and a political commentator and columnist. His writing, which is focused on CyberSecurity and Politics, has been published by websites including The Hill, Breitbart, Real Clear Politics, Newsmax, American Thinker, Townhall, The Washington Times and BizPacReview.

Opinion

Biden Mandate Busted Again, This Time in Lone Star State

It was a BRUTAL smackdown at that!

Published

on

From the very moment that Joe Biden began to speak about a federal vaccine mandate, there were concerns about its constitutionality.  You see, this is a nation founded on the ethos of freedom, and there is nothing more authoritarian than forcing a population to undergo unwanted medical procedures.

And, thusly, in the weeks following the Commander in Chief’s declaration, a number of judicial bodies took up the argument, and with devastating results for the White House.

The latest smackdown comes to us from Texas.

A federal judge in Texas Friday blocked the federal government from enforcing President Biden’s vaccine mandate for federal employees, arguing that he didn’t have the authority to do so “with the stroke of a pen and without input from Congress.”

take our poll - story continues below

Did SCOTUS make the right decision on medical mandates for large businesses?

  • Did SCOTUS make the right decision on medical mandates for large businesses?  

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Flag And Cross updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Biden has pushed several different iterations of vaccine mandates in recent months, including one for large businesses which the Supreme Court blocked and another for healthcare workers which it allowed to go into effect.

There was no beating around the bush, either.

Judge Jeffrey Vincent Brown of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas Friday ruled against the administration on a separate mandate generally applying to federal employees.

“While vaccines are undoubtedly the best way to avoid serious illness from COVID-19, there is no reason to believe that the public interest cannot be served via less restrictive measures than the mandate, such as masking, social distancing, or part- or full-time remote work,” Brown wrote. “Stopping the spread of COVID-19 will not be achieved by overbroad policies like the federal-worker mandate.”

And, given the narrowest of margins in Congress, there is little doubt that any attempt to ratify this mandate legislatively would fail.

From the very moment that Joe Biden began to speak about a federal vaccine mandate, there were concerns about its constitutionality.  You see, this is a nation founded on the ethos of freedom, and there is nothing more authoritarian than forcing a population to undergo unwanted medical procedures. And, thusly, in the weeks following the Commander in Chief’s declaration, a number of judicial bodies took up the argument, and with devastating results for the White House. The latest smackdown comes to us from Texas. A federal judge in Texas Friday blocked the federal government from enforcing President Biden’s vaccine mandate for federal employees, arguing that he didn’t have the authority to do so “with the stroke of a pen and without input from Congress.” Biden has pushed several different iterations of vaccine mandates in recent months, including one for large businesses which the Supreme Court blocked and another for healthcare workers which it allowed to go into effect. There was no beating around the bush, either. Judge Jeffrey Vincent Brown of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas Friday ruled against the administration on a separate mandate generally applying to federal employees. “While vaccines are undoubtedly the best way to avoid serious illness from COVID-19, there is no reason to believe that the public interest cannot be served via less restrictive measures than the mandate, such as masking, social distancing, or part- or full-time remote work,” Brown wrote. “Stopping the spread of COVID-19 will not be achieved by overbroad policies like the federal-worker mandate.” And, given the narrowest of margins in Congress, there is little doubt that any attempt to ratify this mandate legislatively would fail.

Continue Reading

News

Fact Checkers Make Exception for Liberal-Leaning News Outfit

Perhaps one of the several other “fact checking” corporations would like to take a stab at it?

Published

on

If there was ever a reason to doubt the authority and authenticity of the mission of the so-called “fact checker” organizations it is this:  There are more than one of them.

You see, if “facts” and “truth” were binary, there wouldn’t be a glut of competing companies out there attempting to sell their services to social media corporations and other media outlets.  We wouldn’t have any disparity whatsoever.  There would be one fact-checking group because, as stated in their creeds, there should be but one set of “facts”.

The entire industry is a bit of a scam, if we’re ready to be that honest with ourselves.  And, if we’re not, there are plenty of examples out there of these companies massaging the narrative in order to maintain their lucrative contracts.

NewsGuard, the establishment “news rating” project that claims to fight untrustworthy media outlets, is cautiously defending NPR as the establishment media outlet continues to claim that U.S. Supreme Court justices Neil Gorsuch and Sonya Sotomayor are at odds over masks, even after a statement from both Justices and Chief Justice John Roberts debunking the story.

take our poll - story continues below

Did SCOTUS make the right decision on medical mandates for large businesses?

  • Did SCOTUS make the right decision on medical mandates for large businesses?  

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Flag And Cross updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

On Tuesday, NPR released a story claiming that Justice Sotomayor had opted to work remotely after Justice Gorsuch refused a request from Chief Justice Roberts that all justices mask up when on the bench.

Later in the day, a Supreme Court source told Fox News that neither Justice Roberts nor Justice Sotomayor had made any such request.

But then:

Despite the total breakdown of the initial story, Newsguard refuses to make any judgments on NPR’s reporting, arguing that the situation is still unfolding.

Prior to the statement from Chief Justice Roberts, Newsguard maintained that the facts of the story were still unclear.

“There are two conflicting reports, one from NPR and one from Fox News, both citing anonymous sources,” said Matt Skibinski, general manager of Newsguard. “It’s hard to say anything definitive about either report without more information.”

But Newsguard cannot hide from this fact:

However, even after all three Justices named in the story – Gorsuch, Sotomayor, and Roberts – made public statements debunking it, while NPR refused to issue a correction, Newsguard maintained that the story was still unfolding.

Perhaps one of the several other “fact checking” corporations would like to take a stab at it?

If there was ever a reason to doubt the authority and authenticity of the mission of the so-called “fact checker” organizations it is this:  There are more than one of them. You see, if “facts” and “truth” were binary, there wouldn’t be a glut of competing companies out there attempting to sell their services to social media corporations and other media outlets.  We wouldn’t have any disparity whatsoever.  There would be one fact-checking group because, as stated in their creeds, there should be but one set of “facts”. The entire industry is a bit of a scam, if we’re ready to be that honest with ourselves.  And, if we’re not, there are plenty of examples out there of these companies massaging the narrative in order to maintain their lucrative contracts. NewsGuard, the establishment “news rating” project that claims to fight untrustworthy media outlets, is cautiously defending NPR as the establishment media outlet continues to claim that U.S. Supreme Court justices Neil Gorsuch and Sonya Sotomayor are at odds over masks, even after a statement from both Justices and Chief Justice John Roberts debunking the story. On Tuesday, NPR released a story claiming that Justice Sotomayor had opted to work remotely after Justice Gorsuch refused a request from Chief Justice Roberts that all justices mask up when on the bench. Later in the day, a Supreme Court source told Fox News that neither Justice Roberts nor Justice Sotomayor had made any such request. But then: Despite the total breakdown of the initial story, Newsguard refuses to make any judgments on NPR’s reporting, arguing that the situation is still unfolding. Prior to the statement from Chief Justice Roberts, Newsguard maintained that the facts of the story were still unclear. “There are two conflicting reports, one from NPR and one from Fox News, both citing…

Continue Reading
The Schaftlein Report

Latest Articles

Best of the Week