2016 election rigged? More so than Watergate

TRUTH BOMBS: Yep Land of the Free…. Home of the Sucker.. And liberals will still keep on believing in their failed ideologies.


ARTICLE: Where’s the special prosecutor?

Where are the House and Senate hearings?

Where are Woodward and Bernstein?

Yes, the 2016 election has been corrupted. Fraud has been perpetrated on the American people and the rule of law. The multiple scandals – provable now through prima facie evidence – actually make this political year, from primaries through general campaigns, represent something bigger than Watergate!

Do I exaggerate?

You be the judge.

First of all, let me begin by saying I am old enough to thoroughly understand Watergate. It was the political development that inspired me to enter journalism as my profession. I followed it carefully, meticulously, methodically – from the early newspaper reporting to the resignation of President Richard Nixon.

I can assure those who were not conscious at that time, those not yet born, that what is taking place in 2016 is indeed bigger and more shocking than this mythical scandal of all American political scandals. The only thing missing is any attempt at justice, prosecution of guilty parties, accountability.

There is no special prosecutor. There isn’t even any national discussion about the possibility of naming one.

There are no House and Senate hearings. Instead, many Republicans are denying there is any widespread or systematic attempt at “rigging” the election.

There are, however, some Woodward and Bernstein upstarts exposing what’s going on. That would be James O’Keefe and his compatriots at Project Veritas.

If James O’Keefe wanted to be rich and famous, author of a bestselling book, seeing himself portrayed on the big screen, all he would have to do is switch his focus and point of view. Unfortunately, for this courageous and intrepid young man, he’s taking on a much bigger and more powerful conspiracy than did Woodward and Bernstein.

O’Keefe is the young man who exposed the “dirty tricks” or “black ops” component of the Hillary Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee for all to see. Without question, in a just world, he would be the runaway choice for the Pulitzer Prize for Public Service.

The trouble is the major media, totally, 100 percent in the pocket of the DNC and Hillary campaign and actually an essential part of the Democrats’ strategy for electoral victory, have no interest in giving O’Keefe’s Project Veritas and its stunning revelations any exposure – none, zip, zilch, nada.

Without question, however, as a Watergate baby, I can tell you what O’Keefe and his intrepid team have exposed is the dark underbelly of fraudulent, corrupt American politics at its worst – meaning business-as-usual Democratic Party politics that puts the biggest political scandal of the 20th century to shame by comparison.

That’s right. I said what O’Keefe uncovered and documented is bigger than Watergate – much bigger. And I say that as a guy who became a journalist because of Watergate.

At the end of the day, Watergate stunned the nation because it demonstrated that the Committee to Re-Elect the President, or CREEP, as it was unfortunately acronymed in 1972, resorted to “dirty tricks” in its efforts on behalf of Richard Nixon. Those responsible for the “dirty tricks” were called “plumbers.” Among other things, they broke into the office of the Democratic National Committee inside the Watergate Hotel.

Thirty-four years after Watergate, we know Nixon was shielded from the plans for the break-ins at the DNC office. Two years later, he was forced to resign for his participation in the cover-up of the black ops perpetrated by his campaign and some of his former staffers. The revelations of the activities in the Washington Post and, later on, nationally televised House and Senate hearings and the work of two special prosecutors led directly to the resignation of the president.

While Hillary Clinton is not the incumbent president in 2016, she is the closest thing possible – Barack Obama’s handpicked successor, his former secretary of state, the candidate he is actively campaigning for, the opponent of a challenger he calls “unfit” for the presidency.

Are the “dirty tricks” of the Hillary campaign, the DNC, the White House and their allied organizations that served as black ops “plumbers” equivalent to the scandals of Watergate?

Even without the benefit of House and Senate hearings, special prosecutors and a press eager to ferret out corruption by one party in a presidential election, what we know about the fraud perpetrated by the Hillary team indeed rivals, in many ways, the seriousness and impact of Watergate.

  • George McGovern and the Democrats never had a chance to win the presidential election of 1972. The biggest question about Watergate was always “why?” Why did the Nixon campaign resort to dirty tricks in a race that was virtually uncontested – with no serious challenger?
  • There is no reason to believe the bugging devices planted in the Watergate headquarters of the DNC had any impact on the outcome of the election.
  • At the end of the day, the Watergate break-in really did amount to a “third-rate burglary.”
  • The voluminous subsequent investigations in the House, Senate and by special prosecutors never turned up evidence of efforts to conduct voter fraud and intimidation of political opponents by the Internal Revenue Service, though there was misappropriation of campaign funds.

By contrast, in 2016, there is overwhelming proof – including dramatic undercover video recordings – of Clinton surrogates boasting about organized voter-fraud campaigns, “dirty tricks” including the successful incitement to violence at her Republican rallies and events, active collusion between Hillary’s “plumbers,” the campaign, the DNC and even the White House, which held daily calls with the rogue operators and meeting with their leader, Robert Creamer – a convicted felon and husband of a sitting Democrat member of Congress from Chicago – an astonishing 342 times and with Obama himself 47 times.

A key source in O’Keefe’s videos, Scott Foval, the national field director of Americans United for Change, was fired after the videos were released, and Democracy Partners head Robert Creamer resigned in a bid to deflate the scandal.

Foval says on the video recording: “It’s a very easy thing for Republicans to say, ‘Well, they’re busing people in.’ … We’ve been busing people in to deal with you f—–‘ a——- for 50 years, and we’re not going to stop now. We’re just going to find a different way to do it.”

For instance, Foval says, personal vehicles for each voter arouse less suspicion than busing in a large number of people from out of state. Foval also discusses planting people at rallies for Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump. Those chosen are sent to incite violence and are even given scripts and training.

Creamer – who is married to Rep. Jan Schakowsky, D-Ill., is shown on video being asked about circumventing voter registration laws for Hispanics.

Interestingly, a major campaign theme for Hillary Clinton is doing away with all voter identification requirements, which, she suggests, “suppress” the vote.

Ironically, there is even a direct tie-in between Watergate and Watergate 2, which I hereby dub “Hillarygate.” That historical and ironic link would be Hillary Clinton herself.

Few remember, or care to remember, that Hillary Clinton played a significant role in the Watergate scandal. Her role was scandalous itself.

Hillary Clinton, as it turns out, was one of the staff investigators of the House Committee preparing an impeachment case against Richard Nixon, but she was fired by her boss, lifetime Democrat Jerry Zeifman, general counsel and chief of staff, for being a “liar” and “an unethical, dishonest lawyer.” He said Clinton was collaborating with allies of the Kennedys to block revelations of Kennedy-administration activities that made Watergate “look like a day at the beach.” In addition, he said, a brief Hillary wrote for the committee was so fraudulent and ridiculous, she would have been disbarred if she had submitted it to a judge.

Hillary’s brief argued Nixon did not have the right to counsel in an impeachment case because of lack of precedent.

To make that case, Clinton deliberately ignored the then-recent impeachment case of Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas, who was, indeed, allowed to have a lawyer during the impeachment attempt against him in 1970. Zeifman claims Clinton bolstered her fraudulent brief by removing all of the Douglas case files from public access and hiding them in her office, enabling her to argue as if the case never existed.

Not much has changed in the character of Hillary Clinton since then. In fact, her propensity to lie, cheat and steal set the stage of Hillarygate in 2016.

Source: 2016 election rigged? More so than Watergate

Terminally ill mom denied treatment coverage — but gets suicide drug approved

TRUTH BOMBS: Every Conservative saw this coming years ago. Thank you all; every one who allowed these liberal progressives to take over our healthcare.


ARTICLE: Stephanie Packer wants to be the face of a Right to Live movement — for as long as she draws breath.

“I just want to spend every last second with my kids,” Packer, a terminally ill, married mother of four kids, ages 7 through 13, tells me.

Nearly two years ago, Brittany Maynard, at just 29 years old, became the face of the Right to Die movement now sweeping across the United States. In Oregon, surrounded by loved ones, she took her own life, legally, before a brain tumor could do it for her, with a self-administered overdose of physician-prescribed barbiturates. I supported her choice to end her agony.

But at what cost?

Packer struggles to open her eyes each blessed morning. And the cultural landscape to which she wakes has shifted dramatically of late into one of pro-death. In June, her home state of California enacted a law permitting doctor-assisted suicide. And something terrible happened.

Premature passing away with medical help is now widely seen as preferable to painful, prolonged living, Packer says. But she’ll fight to live with every last labored gasp drawn from her oxygen tube before ultimately accepting a natural end.

“I want my kids to see that death is a part of life,” she says.

At age 29, Packer was diagnosed with scleroderma, a chronic autoimmune disease that causes scar tissue to form in her lungs. A doctor told her she had three years to live. Now 33, she has outlived the death sentence.

But as her condition deteriorates, she’s finding little support for her fight to stay alive.

Since California’s End of Life Option Act took effect, attitudes expressed by sick members of support groups she’s run or been involved with have changed to the grim. Where once members exchanged messages of hope, “people constantly are talking about, ‘We should be doing this [dying].’ ”

“I just wanted no part of it,” says Packer, a devout Roman Catholic.

Modal Trigger

Stephanie Packer and her family

Then her doctors suggested that switching to another chemotherapy drug might buy her time. Her medical insurance company refused to pay. She says she asked if the company covered the cost of drugs to put her to death. She was told the answer is yes — with a co-payment of $1.20.

“My jaw dropped.”

Months later, after Packer threatened to tell her story to the media, the drug was approved. Sean Crowley, media relations director for Compassion & Choices, a “death with dignity” advocacy group, told me that treatment delays or rejections are “not uncommon” in the cost-conscious insurance industry.

“We’re heartbroken for this woman,” Crowley says. “People battle drug companies every day. They go through awful pain and suffering just to get well. We think people should be able to do whatever they want” — including continuing to live.

“There’s a bright line that shouldn’t be crossed,” Jennifer Lahl, founder and president of The Center for Bioethics and Culture Network, tells me. Patients are entitled to refuse medical care, Lahl points out. But “doctors shouldn’t be killers. They should be healers.” Lahl co-produced, co-directed and co-wrote a documentary in which Packer presents her case against aid in dying — “Compassion and Choice DENIED.”

Doctors legally may help aid the deaths of mentally competent adults believed to have six months or less to live in Oregon, Washington state, Vermont, California and Montana. A proposal to join them is on Colorado’s ballots in the Nov. 8 election, and similar initiatives are being considered in the Council of the District of Columbia and the New Jersey and New York state legislatures.

Assisted suicide is also available in Canada, Japan, Colombia and parts of Europe. Last year, a severely depressed 24-year-old woman received government approval to obtain a lethal injection in Belgium. The woman reportedly changed her mind and decided to live.

Lawmakers in the Netherlands are considering a proposal to allow older people who don’t suffer from terminal illnesses, but feel they have “completed life,” access to aid in dying.


For Stephanie Packer, the only route to a dignified demise is to battle to the finish. I applaud her bravery.

I wish everyone would back her choice.

SOURCE: http://nypost.com/2016/10/24/terminally-ill-mom-denied-treatment-coverage-but-gets-suicide-drugs-approved/



Clinton’s derision of Catholics, evangelicals is revealed | Letters to the editor | stltoday.com

TRUTH BOMBS: HMMMM…. I would love to know what Catholics are really thinking right now.

ARTICLE: Imagine supporting a presidential candidate and then discovering that your preferred candidate and her election team have utter contempt for you and your dearly held faith-based beliefs.

Well, in this regard, there is no need to resort to your imagination, because in reality, a batch of recently released WikiLeaks emails have torn back the curtain on the religious bigotry of the Hillary Clinton campaign. It is clear: The Clinton team despises Catholics and Christian evangelicals. Among other things, we should ask, what does Clinton’s revealed campaign derision say about her respect for the First Amendment and freedom of religion?

In Clinton’s view, her infamous “basket of deplorables” comment seems to include Christians, too. But I have news for her: Those same law-abiding American citizens she arrogantly dismisses as “deplorable” and “irredeemable” have already been deemed to be saved by the sacrifice of Jesus Christ. We don’t want or require Clinton’s imprimatur of government-subsidized redemption.

But at the very least, she should apologize to Catholics and evangelicals who don’t appreciate her campaign’s ugly comments of religious defamation and intolerance. After all, confession is good for the soul.

Source: Clinton’s derision of Catholics, evangelicals is revealed | Letters to the editor | stltoday.com

Germany: 743 Christians Attacked by Muslims in Refugee Camps

TRUTH BOMB: More Christians attacked in Germany!!! I wonder if the local news is putting a spin on this story to blame the Christians.

ARTICLE: Persecution watchdog group Open Doors reports that in 2016, Muslim refugees attacked some 743 Christian refugees while they were living in camps in Germany.

Open Doors officials say there could be even more unreported cases.

“The documented cases confirm that the situation of Christian refugees in German refugee shelters is still unbearable. As a minority they are discriminated against, beaten up by and receive death threats from Muslim refugees and partly by the Muslim staff (securities, interpreters, volunteers) on grounds of their religion,” according to a major survey published by Open Doors Germany in October, representing a number of organizations, such as Persecuted Christians and the Needy, European Mission Society Fellowship, and the Central Council of Oriental Christians in Germany.

“Taking these new cases into consideration there are now 743 Christian refugees who have reported religiously motivated attacks. With more staff at hand, a significantly higher number of cases could have been included in the survey,” it added.

The refugees had fled from Syria and other regions, escaping terror groups and the violence from war. Instead, the Christian refugees found violence within what were supposed to be safe camps.

“As a Christian charity, Open Doors is not against Muslims, as CEO Markus Rode has already made clear in a comprehensive statement in January 2015. It is a constitutive element of Christian faith that Muslims are loved by God and are to be met with love and compassion,” the report said.

“At the same time it has to be stated that Islam, which is the majority religion in most of the refugees’ home countries, is responsible for the massive violation of the human right to freedom of religion.”

Source: Germany: 743 Christians Attacked by Muslims in Refugee Camps

Christians Forced from Iraq Now Face Persecution in Turkey

TRUTH BOMBS: Christianity is the most persecuted religion in the world and there is only one reason for that: Without Christianity, you cannot prove anything true or false. Atheism, paganism, hedonism…… no other belief system can give you a rational explanation for the existence of objective truth. All others are left with autonomous epistemology which is self-refuting. Christianity is the ONLY hope for mankind and most will hate it because it exposes their sins.


ARTICLE: Thousands of Christian refugees who fled their homes in Iraq due to persecution are only finding more persecution in Turkish refugee camps.

ChristianToday.com reports that about 45,000 refugees who fled Iraq are now living in poverty in Turkey and are discriminated against by their Muslim neighbors.

Juliana Taimoorazy, president of the Iraqi Christian Relief Council and a senior fellow with the Philos Project, discussed the stark plight of the Christians.

They cannot reveal their faith, she said, because then their Muslim neighbors would persecute them. She added that mosques would also refuse to help them if their Christian faith was made known.

The refugees are hoping to come to the U.S. or another country where they would be able to live out their faith without fear, but the U.S. State Department is slow to take any action to help them.

Taimoorazy said it may be up to churches to do something about this humanitarian crisis.

“There have been some churches that extended help, financial or prayer, but this is such a monumental situation that we need more churches to wake up,” she said.

One way Christians can help the refugees is to hold prayer vigils, Taimoorazy said. Her organization has even provided a prayer vigil kit called “Rise Vigil” for Christians to use to raise awareness for their brothers and sisters in Christ in the Middle East.

“If we don’t talk to our fellow Americans, our fellow Christians, in our churches, and if we don’t pray unitedly for the body of Christ, the Middle East will be empty of Christians,” she warned.

Source: Christians Forced from Iraq Now Face Persecution in Turkey

‘Non-Theistic’ Satanic Temple Seeks to Offer Invocation at Boston City Council Meeting | Christian News Network

TRUTH BOMBS: This is the rise of Pagan America. There is a distinct increase in the influence of paganism in our culture. From school clubs to the “Burn Man” festival. The worship of self and false gods are becoming the norm. And you thought that the Christians were just panicking back in the 80s when we warned this would happen.

ARTICLE: BOSTON, Mass. — The Boston chapter of the Satanic Temple recently sought to offer an invocation during their city’s council meeting, but the request was rejected.

“The religious oppression felt by those outside the Christian community in Boston is a blight on an otherwise liberal state,” the request letter, written by chapter head Travis LeSaffre, read. “Consider what your actions could do to increase the diversity of the city council’s current invocation schedule and the light it can shine on religious plurality within the great Commonwealth of Massachusetts.”

He told reporters that the purpose of the mission was to ensure that various religions are represented during city council meetings—not only Christianity.

“Our goal in this specific endeavor is to either receive equal religious protection from the city of Boston or to prove the inequity and hypocrisy of the city’s leadership,” LeSaffre explained to the Boston Globe.

His plans were to use the invocation time to outline the tenets of the Satanic Temple and to speak about the separation of Church and State.

LeSaffre told the Boston Herald that he believes the city council misunderstands the Satanic Temple, as members are not conventional Satanists, but rather “non-theistic Satanists.”

“It is the position of The Satanic Temple that religion can, and should, be divorced from superstition. As such, we do not promote a belief in a personal Satan,” the group’s website reads. “To embrace the name Satan is to embrace rational inquiry removed from supernaturalism and archaic tradition-based superstitions.”

The national organization views Satan as a metaphor for rebellion rather than an actual living entity.

“Satan is symbolic of the Eternal Rebel in opposition to arbitrary authority, forever defending personal sovereignty even in the face of insurmountable odds,”the group outlines. “Satan is an icon for the unbowed will of the unsilenced inquirer—the heretic who questions sacred laws and rejects all tyrannical impositions.”

He sent requests to three entities to ask for sponsorship—Councilors Tito Jackson and Mark Ciommo, and City Council President Michelle Wu—but Jackson and Ciommo did not respond, and Wu declined.

“It’s individual councilors’ choices who they invite,” Wu told the Boston Globe. “It’s not based on anyone’s religious preference, but it does often recognize figures that have done work in the community and are representative of the district.”

As previously reported, in July, Satanic Temple member David Suhor was permitted to deliver a Satanic invocation during the Pensacola, Florida City Council meeting. He delivered a loud song, belting out, “That which will not bend must break” and “That which is destroyed by truth should never be spared. Its demise, it is done. Hail Satan!”

Suhor admitted that the invocation was offered to combat what he saw as “Christian privilege.”

“Adopt some [expletive] rules. Stop pandering for votes. Quit pushing Christian privilege as we’ve seen with the Bayview cross and so many other issues and instead go to a moment of silence, that lets everybody pray or not according to their own conscience,” he declared to councilors, angrily smacking his notebook on the podium.

Source: ‘Non-Theistic’ Satanic Temple Seeks to Offer Invocation at Boston City Council Meeting | Christian News Network

Church of England may scrap Sunday services – CNN.com

TRUTH BOMBS: Churches in every country are reporting this same issue. I often wonder: I have heard the same church growth strategy touted by ministers and Church leaders everywhere since I was a child and history teaches me that this movement has been occurring since long before I was born. This is what I call the “Love without Law” gospel. Under this we agree to disagree instead of excommunicate an unrepentant sinner. We ignore difficult scriptures so as not to offend anyone. We change the definitions of biblical words to better fit the unbelievers thinking. And we even poll the heathen to tell us how a Christian worship service should be conducted! Vanity, Vanity all is Vanity! Maybe we should try to obey what the Bible says instead of what the satanic world says.

ARTICLE: London (CNN)Canon laws, which have been in the books for centuries, require churches to hold services every Sunday. In the morning and in the evening.

But there’s a hitch.
Attendance is declining. And there are just way too many churches.
So the Church of England is now thinking of scrapping that law — particularly because many parishes are failing to hold services at all of their churches and consequently, are breaking the law.
“For decades, ever since we started having parishes with more than one church, it has been humanly impossible for the clergy to get around to all of them every Sunday,” a Church of England spokesman told CNN. “[So] according to canon law those clergy and those parishes are breaking canon law and it would be impossible for them not to.”
Earlier this year the Church published its 2014 attendance statistics which revealed there was a 12% decline in attendance over the decade and that only 2% of England’s population attended services.
But the Church of England’s spokesman denied the changes were to do with declining number in church attendances and said it was “purely to do with normalizing the current situation.”

Source: Church of England may scrap Sunday services – CNN.com

Progressives aren’t a threat to American Catholicism. Donald Trump is. – The Washington Post

TRUTH BOMBS: WOW, the liberals are really desperate. I have read articles about facebook shutting down Christian accounts and now there is this full on irrational spin about the Clinton emails. So we should ignore these emails from only 5 years ago but be offended at Trump for statements made over 10 years ago? The problem is this: The democrat party is comprised of many (not all) people who are “morally flexible”. In fact they are completely ok with the corruption of HilLIARy Clinton because of their fallacious unethical thought processes. The different conservative parties are comprised of people who are principled and not morally flexible. The base of which is evangelical Christians. Brothers and Sisters, please understand that one day the King is coming, until that day, NO Candidate will be perfect. Pragmatic choice is all we have in a vote.



“A good Catholic,” Pope Francis says, “meddles in politics, offering the best of himself, so that those who govern can govern.” It seems like a straightforward proposition put forth by the universal leader of the Catholic Church, a sentiment that has been communicated in some way or another by his recent predecessors.

But this past week, meddling in politics has become a “scandal” for some of my fellow Catholics, who’ve tried to spin a 2011 private email conversation between friends into something far more nefarious. In the alleged stolen email threads, John Podesta — who now chairs Hillary Clinton’s campaign — and some of his progressive colleagues have a candid conversation about the internal workings of the Catholic Church.

Since the release of these stolen five-year-old emails by WikiLeaks weeks before the November election, many conservative critics have suggested that these conversations represent damning evidence of a wide-ranging “anti-Catholic” conspiracy to undermine and destroy the church. Ross Douthat of the New York Times cast them as an entry in a “Catholic civil war,” and prominent Republicans, including House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.), and members of Donald Trump’s campaign have called upon Clinton to apologize for the supposed bigotry in the conversation. Others claimed the progressive Catholic groups mentioned are fake, or worse, secretly anti-Catholic.

Clinton campaign chief questions ‘awfully curious coincidence’ of email leak timing

Embed Share

Play Video1:20
Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman John Podesta blamed Russia for the hack into his emails that WikiLeaks published on Oct. 7. While speaking to reporters on the campaign plane, he said he believes Trump, “had advanced warning about what Assange was going to do.” (Reuters)

It’s absolute malarkey. And I would know: Since November 2013 — nearly three years after the emails were sent — I’ve been the executive director of Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good (CACG), one of the groups mentioned in the emails.

I take accusations of being part of an anti-Catholic conspiracy personally, because there’s nothing that matters to me and my colleagues more than our faith in Jesus Christ and our love for the Catholic Church. In short, it’s everything to me. So let’s set the record straight: Every day, our group works tirelessly to promote the social mission of Pope Francis and the Catholic Church in American politics, media and culture.

My group lives in the almost impossible position of trying to exhort fellow Catholics to respond to the social teaching of the church, which guides us to lift up the poor and oppressed, while working within a generally secular progressive movement that isn’t friendly to our views on the sanctity of life. For nearly a decade, the abortion rights community has railed against CACG’s consistent support for the dignity of the unborn child. In 2009, Catholics for Choice released a scathing 30-page report on how we were working to build an antiabortion movement within progressive politics. Then, in 2013, conservative Catholic activist Bill Donohue called us a “bogus Catholic entity” because we said Rush Limbaugh was wrong to rip Pope Francis as a practitioner of “pure Marxism.” Our group was once derided as “radical right wingers” and a “lapdog for liberals” by two different national commentators in a single month; and this past summer, I was accused of being a “feminist” on Fox News one week and a “mansplainer” in the Huffington Post the next week.

If we’re nothing but surrogates for the Democratic Party and shills for Clinton bent on collapsing the church from within, we probably should be fired, because we’re doing a pretty bad job.

In July, we fought tooth and nail to stop the Democratic Party from ditching the Hyde Amendment. When they refused to, we said it was growing evidence that Democrats were slowly defying their progressive ideals to become a “party of exclusion.” Catholics are right to strongly protest Clinton and the Democratic Party’s hard-line position on abortion. As we’ve said time and again, we think there’s nothing progressive about abortion. But if conservatives are going to be quick to deride Clinton’s campaign as “anti-Catholic,” they should take an honest look at Trump before doing so.

In March, a group of conservative Catholic intellectuals wrote in the National Review that Trump was “manifestly unfit” to be president of the United States and that his campaign was “offensive to any genuinely Catholic sensibility.” Trump has no history of any antiabortion action — indeed, he’s self-identified as “very pro-choice” in the past — and as recently as March maintained that women who have abortions should be punished, a view held by few if any in the mainstream antiabortion movement. Trump has been openly hostile toward immigrants and refugees throughout his campaign, going so far as to suggest banning Muslims from entering the United States. Meanwhile, Pope Francis has called on Christians worldwide to accept refugees into their countries and homes, and has invited several Syrian refugees to live in the Vatican. As for that border wall Trump has promised? When, back in February, the pope said that good Christians build bridges instead of walls, Trump called him “disgraceful.” And that wasn’t the only time Trump had taken shots at a pope: In a February of 2013 radio interview, he said Pope Benedict XVI — a meek, thoughtful pope considered by many Catholics, myself included, to be a hero of our faith — “should just give up and die. He looks so bad.”

Trump’s entourage hasn’t been much better. Steve Bannon, Trump’s campaign chief executive, claimed that Catholics only support hospitality toward immigrants and refugees because “the church is dying”; and Trump spokeswoman Katrina Pierson tweeted in 2011 that it’s “sad” that Catholics believe the Catholic Church was founded by Jesus. Trump’s running mate, Indiana Gov. Mike Pence, attempted to pressure local Catholic charities into refusing refugees aid during his tenure as governor. Add in Trump’s recently released lewd remarks and the mounting allegations of sexual assault levied against him, and it’s impossible to argue that Trump is a good ambassador for Catholic values in public life.

To me, it’s pretty clear: If conservatives want to fight for Catholic values in this election, then perhaps they should save their fire for a candidate who doesn’t praise Russian President Vladimir Putin and slam the pope.

Catholics can disagree on our politics. And we should: That’s a sign of a healthy culture of debate within the church. Genuinely Catholic politics should challenge both Democrats and Republicans — because our love of Jesus Christ and the Catholic Church always goes before politics. To me, there’s no doubt that Trump’s vision for the United States represents a greater threat to the practice of our faith than those of us who take seriously Pope Francis’s message on the dignity of life, the scandal of poverty and the need to tackle immigration reform and climate change.

Given Trump’s trouble with Catholics at the polls, it’s no surprise that he and his allies are fabricating a falsehood about anti-Trump Catholics trying to divide and destroy the church we love.

Don’t fall for it for a second. No candidate has won the White House without winning the Catholic vote since 1972. And if Donald Trump continues down the same path this year, he’ll lose both in record fashion.

Source: Progressives aren’t a threat to American Catholicism. Donald Trump is. – The Washington Post

More Than 1 Million to Lose Obamacare Plans as Insurers Quit – Bloomberg

TRUTH BOMBS: Because liberalism always generates the exact opposite of it’s stated intent! Now we have no healthcare, and are fined for not having it. THANK YOU OBAMA!!

ARTICLE: A growing number of people in Obamacare are finding out their health insurance plans will disappear from the program next year, forcing them to find new coverage even as options shrink and prices rise.

At least 1.4 million people in 32 states will lose the Obamacare plan they have now, according to state officials contacted by Bloomberg. That’s largely caused by Aetna Inc., UnitedHealth Group Inc. and some state or regional insurers quitting the law’s markets for individual coverage.

Sign-ups for Obamacare coverage begin next month. Fallout from the quitting insurers has emerged as the latest threat to the law, which is also a major focal point in the U.S. presidential election. While it’s not clear what all the consequences of the departing insurers will be, interviews with regulators and insurance customers suggest that plans will be fewer and more expensive, and may not include the same doctors and hospitals.

It may also mean that instead of growing in 2017, Obamacare could shrink. As of March 31, the law covered 11.1 million people; an Oct. 13 S&P Global Ratings report predicted that enrollment next year will range from an 8 percent decline to a 4 percent gain.

Vanishing Plan

Last year in Minnesota, Theresa Puffer, 61, used Obamacare to sign up for a BlueCross BlueShield plan after leaving her job following a skin cancer diagnosis. “I would have had a hard time finding any sort of coverage before the ACA,” Puffer said by phone.

Next year, Puffer’s plan is disappearing from Obamacare — making her one of about 20,000 Minnesotans in the same situation. To make matters worse, premiums for other plans in the state will rise by at least 50 percent, though subsidies under the law can help cushion the blow.

“Trying to determine which would be the best plan for my situation is not easy,” Puffer said. Her dermatologist appears to be out of network in other plans, she said. “I’m willing to pay a higher premium to see him, because when you have cancer you want to stay with the same group of doctors,” she said. “I’ve spent so much time trying to figure out what my options are.”

Bloomberg contacted officials in all 50 states and Washington, D.C., and the 1.4 million-person estimate includes 32 states and only plans sold on the individual “exchange” markets. In Texas, Arizona, Georgia and Missouri, insurers have pulled out, but regulators couldn’t or wouldn’t say how many people are affected. Three states didn’t provide sufficient data.

Eleven states said they weren’t affected. In Washington, D.C., because one insurer withdrew some of its offerings, about 7,800 customers will need to choose new plans.

Normal Disruption

The U.S. agency that oversees Obamacare has said that some disruption is normal, and that choosing a new plan can help people get the best deal.

“It’s part of the normal business cycle for insurers to discontinue, change, and replace plans from year to year,” Benjamin Wakana, a spokesman for the Department of Health and Human Services, said by e-mail on Oct. 5. “Such changes don’t prevent people from obtaining coverage. People can shop for new coverage through a transparent market.”

HHS said Thursday that it will contact people losing their coverage and encourage them to sign up with new plans. The law requires all Americans to have insurance or pay a fine.

Nationwide estimates of the number of people losing their current plans are higher. For example, Charles Gaba, who tracks the law at ACASignups.net, estimates that 2 million to 2.5 million people in the U.S. will lose their current plans, compared with 2 million a year ago. Gaba’s estimate is based on insurance company membership data.

Fewer Choices

For the people losing plans, there are fewer and fewer choices. One estimate by the Kaiser Family Foundation predicts that for at least 19 percent of the people in Obamacare’s individual market next year there will be only one insurer to choose from.

In North Carolina, for example, a BlueCross BlueShield insurer will be the only option in 95 of the state’s 100 counties after Aetna and UnitedHealth said this year that they would leave. That will leave 284,000 people looking for a new plan, according to the state.

“Without any significant statutory and regulatory changes on the federal and state levels, we may face the crisis again,” said North Carolina Insurance Commissioner Wayne Goodwin, a Democrat who’s up for election this year. “There needs to be a wholesale re-evaluation by leaders in Washington.”

Losing Access

In Tennessee, UnitedHealth and the state’s BlueCross BlueShield plan are pulling back, and about 117,000 people will lose the plans they have now.

Amanda Page Cornett, a 34-year-old musician and athletic trainer in Nashville, is among them. For 2015, Cornett was careful to pick a BlueCross BlueShield plan that covered specialists at Vanderbilt Health, to treat nerve pain stemming from a 2013 accident. Her condition worsened recently, she said, and she’s worried about losing access to her doctor.

“I’m hopeful that he’s going to be able to help me,” she said of her current physician. “I feel like now I have two and a half months to figure it out before they shut me out.”

Source: More Than 1 Million to Lose Obamacare Plans as Insurers Quit – Bloomberg

Baptist Minister Defends Aborting Her Baby: “God Helped Me Make the Best Decision” | LifeNews.com

TRUTH BOMBS: If your actions are different than your stated beliefs then you really don’t believe in the first place. If your stated beliefs and actions are antithetical to Christ’s teaching, you are not a Christian.

ARTICLE: Thousands, maybe even millions, of women sit in American churches each week, hurting silently because of a past abortion.

Abortion is tragically common even among American Christians, despite Christian teachings about the sanctity of life. In 2014, 24 percent of women who had abortions identified as Catholic, 17 percent as mainline Protestant and 13 percent as evangelical Protestant, according to the Guttmacher Institute.

For many years, Susan Chorley, a Baptist minister from Boston, Massachusetts, was one of the women who remained silent about her abortion in church. Chorley shared her story with The Daily Beast this week and urged churches to offer compassion, empathy and healing to women who have abortions.

Unfortunately, Chorley also argued that churches should accept that women’s decisions to have abortions. She never mentioned how that decision destroys the life of an innocent human being in the womb, or how Christianity teaches that killing an innocent human being is wrong.

The Baptist minister said her decision to have an abortion was “wrenching,” and it left her feeling “sad” with a sense of “loss.” Still, she justified her decision to abort her second child 12 years ago.

She wrote:

I was serving in a congregation in New England at the time I realized I was pregnant. I was far away from family and friends. I had always imagined I would have a second child and I knew that it would be a struggle on our family financially as well as add to the stress of our marriage, which was starting to fall apart. I didn’t want to bring a baby into the world that would feel it was a burden—and I prayed to God to help me make the best decision I could in a situation that seemed impossible.

Later, she added:

Faith is so much more than judging right from wrong. Faith is about how we make meaning in our lives, how we understand our God, and how we live our values. Decisions about whether and when to grow one’s family carry the deepest meaning, and religious women make this decision in conversation with God, just as we do every decision.

Chorley is correct that churches need to do a better job of reaching out to women who have had abortions, but she never acknowledges that the root of these women’s pain is the abortion itself. To prevent more pain, churches should not accept abortions. Rather, they should be doing more to help stop abortions by offering pregnant and parenting families love and support.

Abortions are not the answer. They are not good for women or their unborn children. Not only do abortions kill unborn children, they often cause mothers to suffer intense emotional and sometimes physical pain. A number of studies have linked abortion with depression, post-traumatic stress disorder, drug abuse, suicidal tendencies and other psychological problems. Abortions also can have profound emotional effects on other members of the family, especially fathers and siblings of the aborted child.

Churches should be places where women and families can find healing and forgiveness when they are suffering because of an abortion. Debby Efurd, director of Post-Abortion Support for Involved Life in Dallas, Texas, explained that churches must reach out with compassion and understanding toward those who are hurting and need forgiveness.

“Understand their need for forgiveness,” Efurd wrote in 2013. “Many believe that because they knew it was wrong and did it anyway, abortion is a sin too big for God to forgive and often are unable to forgive themselves.”

Source: Baptist Minister Defends Aborting Her Baby: “God Helped Me Make the Best Decision” | LifeNews.com