The Horse Sense Blog compares the nonsense in today's news with good ol' fashioned horse sense


“…I shall speak forth my sentiments freely and without reserve.… It is only in this way that we can hope to arrive at truth, and fulfill the great responsibility which we hold to God and our country. Should I keep back my opinions at such a time, through fear of giving offense, I should consider myself as guilty of treason towards my country, and of an act of disloyalty toward the Majesty of Heaven, which I revere above all earthly kings.” - Patrick Henry, March 23, 1775


"The further a society drifts from truth the more it will hate those who speak it." - George Orwell

(c) copyright 2011-2016 Doug Johnson All Rights Reserved. All site content is copyright protected and subject to penalties for infringement of copyright laws.

Tuesday, December 25, 2012

Obama Does Nothing To Defend Largest Persecuted Religious Group

Here's the Nonsense:  Christians are trying to get people to think they're persecuted, but it's nothing compared to what others are going through for their beliefs in the world.

Here's the Horse Sense:  More people on earth claim to be Christian than any other religion.  America is mostly made up of people who claim to be Christian.  Yet President Obama, who "claims" to be Christian shows no interest in helping them even though they are the most persecuted religious group on the planet.

It's Christmas afternoon and I decided to write this blog post today because of a story I read yesterday that I cannot get out of my mind.  The Telegraph is reporting that Christianity is almost extinct in the Middle East.  The article cites a report by the think tank Civitas which says, "It is generally accepted that many faith-based groups face discrimination or persectution to some degree.  A far less widely grasped fact is that Christians are targeted more than any other body of believers."  It goes on to say that 200 million people, or 10% of those who claim to be Christians worldwide, are "socially disadvantaged, harassed or actively oppressed for their beliefs."

The report focuses on the political view of the cause of these problems and believes that governments in the oppressive countries see Christianity as a political move being exported by America to undermine the character of their governments.  It focuses primarily on seven countries:  Egypt, Iraq, Pakistan, Nigeria, India, Burma, and China and also points out that 20 countries are judged to be unfree on the grounds of religious tolerance according to the human rights think tank Freedom House.  Of those 20 countries, 12 of them have a Muslim majority.  The report also says that "between half and two-thirds of the Christians in the Middle East have left the region or been killed in the past century" and the "early 21st century has seen a steady rise in the strife endured by Christians."

Everything from harassment, to where they are allowed to live, to how much money they may earn compared to Muslim counterparts, to torture and even death is the price many Christians pay for their faith around the world.

So with all his rhetoric about standing for those who are persecuted and downtrodden in the world, where is President Obama in all of this?  If he really is a Christian, as he has claimed, he should have a natural tendency to stand up for his spiritual brethren.  But does he?  Of course not!  He not only ignores Christian mistreatment and persecution around the world, he stands up for other religions more than Christianity.  But then again, he isn't really a Christian anyway.  The closest he comes is being a former attendee of a church that teaches black liberation theology, which is as far from Christian as the east is from the west.

Barack Obama attended Rev. Jeremiah Wright's church in Chicago (where they embrace and teach black liberation theology) for about 20 years.  When it came out in his first campaign for the White House the media ignored it and acted like Obama's claim that he became a Christian there was accepted at face value.  The media scorned anyone who dared question Obama's true commitment to his "faith" and what Wright's church was really all about.

While the topic of Wright's church has been mentioned a lot in the right wing media, many are still not familiar with what Wright was teaching.  According to gotquestions.org:  


Black liberation theology focuses on Africans in general, and African Americans in particular, being liberated from all forms of bondage and injustice, whether real or perceived, whether social, political, economic, or religious.

Black liberation theology focuses primarily on the African-American community with its goal to "make Christianity real for blacks." The primary error in black liberation theology is its focus. Black liberation theology attempts to focus Christianity on liberation from social injustice in the here and now, rather than in the afterlife. Jesus taught the exact opposite, "My kingdom is not of this world" (John 18:36). Have blacks/Africans and especially African Americans been treated unfairly, unjustly, and evilly in recent history?  Absolutely!  Should one of the results of the Gospel be the end of racism, discrimination, prejudice, and inequality? Again, yes, absolutely (Galatians 3:28)! Is deliverance from social injustice a core principle of the Gospel?  No.

The message of the Gospel is that we are all infected with sin (Romans 3:23). We are all worthy of eternal separation from God (Romans 6:23). Jesus died on the cross, taking the punishment that we deserve (1 Corinthians 5:21; 1 John 2:2), providing for our salvation. Jesus was then resurrected, demonstrating that His death was indeed a sufficient payment for the sin penalty (1 Corinthians 15:1-4). If we place our faith/trust in Jesus as Savior, all of our sins are forgiven and we will be granted entrance into Heaven after death (John 3:16). That is the Gospel. That is to be our focus. That is the cure for what is truly plaguing humanity.

When a person receives Jesus as Savior, he/she is a new creation (2 Corinthians 5:17), and the indwelling Holy Spirit begins the process of conforming him/her to the image of Christ (Romans 12:1-2). Only through this spiritual transformation can racism truly be conquered. Black liberation theology fails because it attacks the symptoms, without truly addressing the disease. Sin/fallenness is the disease; racism is just one of the many symptoms. The message of the Gospel is Jesus' atoning sacrifice for our sins and the salvation that is therefore available through faith. The end of racism would be a result of people truly receiving Jesus as Savior, but the end of racism is not a part of the Gospel itself.

Because of its extreme over-emphasis of racial issues, a negative result of black liberation theology is that it tends to separate the black and white Christian communities, and this is completely unbiblical. Christ came to earth to unite all who believe in Him in one universal Church, His body, of which He is the head (Ephesians 1:22-23). Members of the Body of Christ share a common bond with all other Christians, regardless of background, race, or nationality. "There should be no division in the body, but . . . its parts should have equal concern for each other" (1 Corinthians 12:25). [Note:  The term "body" here is a term referring to the church in Scripture.]  As such, we are to be of one mind, having the mind of Christ, and have one goal, glorifying God by fulfilling Christ's command to "go into all the world," telling others about Him, preaching the good news of the Gospel, and teaching others to observe His commandments (Matthew 28:19-20). Jesus reminds us that the two greatest commandments are to love God and love others as ourselves, regardless of race (Matthew 22:36-40).


Rev. Wright, along with many so-called "Christian" black leaders adhere to the phony theology of Black Liberation Theology that even claims Jesus was black.  They completely ignore the fact that Jesus was semitic, not white.  But then again, their theology teaches a Marxist viewpoint.  And Marxism is very anti-semitic.  It teaches an all-out hatred of Jews.  There is no way a Marxist could be a Christian.  After all, how could a Christian hate Jesus and be a Christian?

It seems far more logical that what Edward Klein said when he wrote his book, The Amateur, is true, That is that Obama never became a Christian, even Jeremiah Wright admits that.  In fact, Jeremiah Wright said that he told Obama he'd make him comfortable being around Christians with his (Obama's) Muslim faith.

So here we are in America, a nation that proclaims to be primarily made up of Christian people, and our own president won't even take a stand to help persecuted Christians around the world.  He'll stand up for the Palestinians who are led by the known terrorist group Hamas against Israel.  He'll lead the charge for political correctness that does not allow anything negative to be said against radical Islam, but he won't stand up for Christians.  (Don't forget such things as our government, under Obama's leadership, not referring to the Ft. Hood shooting massacre as a terrorist attack, but rather as workplace violence.)

No, when our government behaves like it does, especially our president, just look at who he is and what he believes and it becomes pretty easy to understand why he does the things he does.

Christmas is a time to celebrate the birth of Christ and the gift of salvation He offers to the world.  Let us be thankful that man's future depends on God and His plan, not on the plans of political leaders.


Thursday, December 20, 2012

The GOP Better Learn To Plan For The Future Or It Will Be Lost Forever

Here's the Nonsense:  There's plenty of time to worry about future elections.  Right now the GOP needs to deal with other things.

Here's the Horse Sense:  If the GOP starts working hard on future elections now they might have a chance to catch up to the Democrats who already well into their plans for those elections.

According to a report by Tony Lee at Breitbart, the White House pressured Cory Booker, the mayor of Newark, New Jersey, to change his mind about running for governor in that state.  Rather, he seems to have changed his interest to a Senate seat.  This, it is said, puts New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie in a very strong position not just for re-election, but also for a presidential bid in 2016.  Why would they do that when Booker is clearly the strongest challenger that Christie could face?

Booker is the outspoken mayor who challenged Obama’s attacks on businesses.  Of course he quickly walked that back when confronted by the President’s campaign.  But for a brief moment he appeared to be a Democrat with a spine who would stand for principle.  Nonetheless, that was when Booker became somewhat of a national celebrity to many because he had openly voiced his views that differed from the president.  (Don’t forget that you can save face with the left if you disown a statement you make against them and start talking about how right and good they are.)

What attracted so much attention in the media was the fact that Booker not only spoke out, but he’s black.  And it seems the media can never understand how a black person could disagree with the president.  They assume all blacks automatically agree with him and if a white person disagrees with him then they say that is proof that the white person is a racist.  I guess people aren't allowed to disagree on principle anymore.  Disagreement with the left means that you are evil.

But the real issue here is why they would back Cory Booker off of challenging Chris Christie when Booker is so highly thought of, and when it makes Christie even stronger as a potential candidate for 2016.  (Currently Chris Christie is the frontrunner for the 2016 GOP nomination.)  I have a few ideas about why these things are happening.

Cory Booker may be the strongest challenger that could be offered against Christie, but it would still be an uphill battle.  Christie enjoys a very high favorability rating in New Jersey.  Why would the Democrats take such a strong candidate as Booker and take a chance that he might lose a race and tarnish or weaken his image as a candidate for any other office?

And since he is such a strong potential candidate, why not use him somewhere that he can help strengthen the Democrat control in Washington?  By running him for Senate he helps continue the stranglehold that the Democrats have on the Senate, thereby making a very important part of the legislative process even more secure for their party.

But that’s not all.  If Chris Christie wins re-election as governor that’s fine.  He’s already shown he’s willing to embrace the Democrats in ways that give great credence to them.  (Anybody remember how he praised President Obama after Hurricane Sandy?  It seems that was a major factor in the final days of the campaign that helped give Obama his 2nd term.)

And since Christie, who is far from a conservative and carries the same establishment Republican mindset as people such as John Boehner, Mitt Romney, John McCain, and Bob Dole, is the leading contender for the nomination in 2016, it’s important for the Democrats to continue to build him up to make sure he runs and gets the nomination in 2016.  That will, once again, assure another Democrat victory in the presidential election.  After all, don’t you remember how the Democrats said for a long time before the Republican primaries even started that Mitt Romney was their greatest fear?  Don’t you think they were hoping that would cause the GOP to be stupid enough to choose him for the nomination? Of course that’s what they hoped.  They would much rather run against someone who is a moderate because it’s much easier to beat them than a conservative.

Democrats plan well ahead of time for their next election cycle.  Part of that planning is to start to position people to run on both sides of the aisle.  That gives them a much better chance at winning.  Establishment Republicans don’t think that way.  They have no concept of advance planning or the subtle ways in which the Democrats work.

It’s time for conservatives to start to set the stage for both the 2014 mid-term elections and the 2016 presidential election.  Right now America is lost.  We may never be able to save it, but there is a chance if we start work now.  The talk of the fiscal cliff and other issues is moot because we went past the fiscal edge long ago.  Even though it is a harder path to fix things now, if we can turn the tide in 2014 and 2016 we can see the opportunity to bring America back to its greatness.  But we cannot wait to start working toward those goals.  Work must begin today.

Tuesday, December 11, 2012

Why Democrats Win With A Losing Argument

Here's the Nonsense:  The Democrats are winning the argument on the fiscal cliff and other issues because they have the best solutions.

Here's the Horse Sense:  The Republicans lose over and over again because they have no idea how to market a winning argument.

The Democrats won the election with a losing argument.  They are winning the battle on the fiscal cliff with a losing argument.  The Republicans lose these things because they have no clue how to articulate a winning argument.  Winning is not always about having the best answers.  It's about articulating your answer better than your competitor.  It's like the old story about the two guys who go hiking and come across a grizzly bear.  You don't have to be the world's best runner to get away from the bear.  You just have to be a better runner than the guy you're with.  The Democrats are lousy runners who just happen to run a little faster than the Republicans.  That's why they won the election and why they are winning on the fiscal cliff argument.

The Republicans are telling people the fiscal cliff is about controlling overspending and fiscal responsibility.  The Democrats counter by saying it's about fairness.  Now let's face it, which sounds more like something you would want to embrace?  

Here's the problem:  The mainstream media believe the Democrats and pass that along as truth to the public.

Here's the bigger problem:  Most Americans believe the garbage that the mainstream media tells them and don't think for themselves.

Any thinking, responsible person would reject out of hand the ideas that the president and his party are selling.  They make absolutely no sense and have us headed on a fast track to doomsday for our nation with no recovery possible should they succeed.  But that is not what most Americans do.  Most Americans blindly accept what they're told by these people without any analysis or critical thinking.

Americans have been taught to take the easy way out.  For years Madison Avenue has sold us on the idea that you don't have to pay for things right away.  In fact, they've been so successful that it's caused people not to feel pain or effort when they buy things.  Buy it on time.  Make payments.  Don't worry about debt.  Those are the messages we, as consumers, have been sold.  When you buy something that is considered a large purchase you are rarely told the price anymore.  You're told the monthly payment.  There has probably been no industry in history as successful in a sales pitch as the banking industry.  Credit, they tell you, makes your life easy.  Just pay a little payment instead of for the whole purchase.  (Sure, you end up paying two and three times as much for things as you would if you paid cash, but it's so easy!)

The Democrats (and even the establishment Republicans) are selling us the same message:  "Blame someone else.  Don't take responsibility for the mess you've allowed this country to get into.  You don't have to pay for that, let someone else do it."   That's their message when they tell us that it's not fair that we should have to pay for things, we can just charge the rich a little more and everything will be fine.

The problem is that the Republicans are right, but no one wants to listen.  It's about spending and fiscal responsibility, but that's uncomfortable and it's a hard path to take.  It's much easier to keep our goodies and blame the rich and make them pay for it.  The problem is that the rich don't have enough money to pay for it.  Not only will Obama's solution to tax the rich not cover the cost (see my recent post that addresses how the taxes from the rich won't even scratch the surface by clicking here), taking EVERY CENT that every millionaire and billionaire in America have will not cover our budget deficit, let alone our national debt. 

The only people interested in solving this problem are the conservatives.  Not the Republicans and not the Democrats.  It's the conservatives in the Republican party who want to fix it.  The Republican leader in the House, John Boehner, and his buddies certainly don't want to fix it.  And the Democrats don't want to fix it.  Only the conservatives who happen to be Republicans are trying to fix it.  But the message of spending cuts and fiscal responsibility won't work.

Americans, unfortunately, must be "sold" what to do to fix the problems we face.  They are not willing to do the work to determine it for themselves.  So we have to hope and pray that the people with the pure motives will win in the marketplace of ideas by being more effective at selling their ideas than anyone else.  And that's not easy.  Try selling your children on cleaning their room and doing their chores instead of going out to have fun.  Guess which one wins if you leave it up to them?

We don't have a parent to tell us to clean the mess up.  We have to be convinced to do the right thing.  And that message is falling on too many deaf ears.  It is up to each of us who understand it to educate other citizens and wake them up.  If we don't do that, we will never turn this around.  You can't outsell irresponsibility and never ending freebies with a message of responsibility unless you're willing to do the work to educate people on the importance of understanding the big picture and the importance of putting the long term results over immediate gratification.

The only thing that will save America from not just the fiscal cliff, but from the long term bigger picture of our national debt and spending irresponsibility is for us to all get involved in winning our fellow citizens over.  If we don't, it will all be over for America sooner than you can imagine.

Monday, December 3, 2012

Forget The Fiscal Cliff, Obama’s Bigger Goal Is Far Worse

Here’s the Nonsense:  President Obama wants to get the fiscal cliff dealt with to save America from a financial crisis and get the economy moving forward again.

Here’s the Horse Sense:  The fiscal cliff that everyone is talking about isn’t the real issue to worry about.  President Obama has economic plans for America that will result in far worse damage than anything the fiscal cliff could cause.

Everybody’s worried about the fiscal cliff, but no one is paying attention to much bigger problems.  Sure, the fiscal cliff may bear some importance, especially if the Republicans handled it right.  But it really is a phony problem that was made up by politicians to spread fear and allow them to intimidate the American people so they can be manipulated into supporting things that will do more damage to the economy and America’s future.  Yet with all that, Obama’s bigger goal is far worse for America’s future.

The fiscal cliff is not about doing what’s best for America, it’s about power and control.  But on a much bigger scale Obama’s only economic goal is to destroy the American economic system so he can replace it with something far worse.

It’s been an obvious fact for some time that the mainstream media, along with the Democrats and establishment Republicans, have sold themselves out and forsaken America’s future.  So what happened in the recent election with them should be no surprise.  But the fact that so many American citizens have sold their children’s future out in return for more benefits for themselves and/or have refused to be involved in America’s well-being by holding their government accountable is not just disappointing, it’s disgusting.

Where are the Americans who made this country the great country it once was?  Are they asleep or gone?  The intolerable rejection of the responsibilities Americans carry will have a day of accountability, and I wouldn’t want to be one of them on that day.

While the price is now far higher than it was before the election, we can still save America and turn this nation around.  But the days are very numbered and the opportunity limited to do it.  It must start with Americans realizing what we face and who it is who is trying to change America into something more reminiscent of a Marxist regime than to the America that gave us prosperity and opportunity beyond that of any nation in the history of mankind.

People don’t like to hear it, but the truth is often the hardest thing to face.  The fact is that Americans have elected into office many people who are out to destroy the unique country of America as we’ve known it.  They do not understand America’s unique and exceptional nature.  They do not understand that America has done more good for the rest of the world than any other nation in history.  From freeing more people from tyranny to rebuilding countries destroyed by war and natural disaster, America has been there to help other countries more than any other.  And America has never asked to be repaid.  Even more than through our government, Americans as a people have given more in money, time, and labor to help others both at home and abroad than any nation in history. 

Those are the character traits of a great nation, an exceptional nation like no other now or ever in world history.  And those characteristics are dying.  We have sold them and our children out for a few more benefits to keep our lives as easy as possible.  But it’s getting harder and harder for it to be easy anymore.  And that’s because of the decisions we’ve made.

Now we have in office a group of people out to destroy what is left of it.  And leading them is President Barack Obama.  A man who many think is just another liberal American, just another Democrat.  But what’s sad is that America missed who he really is.  Let me share with you in the following paragraphs some things I covered in my book, No Tomorrows: How To Halt America's Imminent Collapse And Return To The American Dream.

Barack Obama has had sealed all information about his past so that no one can see it.  From school records to medical records to work records, we have virtually no information about who he really is.  Yet over time we’ve found out a few things.  We’ve found out that he was raised by a family who embraced Marxist ideology.  He was mentored by Frank Marshall Davis, who was a card-carrying communist who taught him to embrace Marxism.  He has admitted that he sought out radicals, Marxists in friendships and as professors to sit under in college and graduate school.  And, maybe the most telltale of whether all this had an impact on him, he was a student of Saul Alinsky’s teachings and not only learned them, he then was trained by Alinsky’s organization, worked for Alinsky’s organization, and taught others those same ideals.  He said that Alinsky's teachings were more important to him even that what he learned in school at Columbia or Harvard.

Who was Saul Alinsky? His name is not familiar to many citizens, but his influence in today’s political system is huge.  Many people on the political left and in the Democrat party are advocates of Alinsky’s teachings. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama are both ardent followers of Alinsky. Saul Alinsky wrote a book titled Rules for Radicals to teach his followers how to infiltrate and overthrow the American system of government.  He was a Marxist who believed there was another way to overthrow the government that would be more effective than trying for a violent revolution.  He believed that all evils come from capitalists’ exploitation of wage earners and, as a result, his philosophy requires the end of capitalism and a change to a Marxist based system.

Alinsky, who was from Chicago, worked to move into positions of influence. Al Capone’s top henchman was Frank Nitti, and as Alinsky developed a close relationship with him, he saw his influence increase in the community. Alinsky also got close to the upper power structure in the Chicago Catholic church.  People such as Bishop Bernard Sheil were able to give him an air of importance and acceptance.

Alinsky also started the Industrial Areas Foundation to train radicals. He called them “community organizers” and Barack Obama became one of them.  Over the years Alinsky influenced many people in government. When President Lyndon Johnson started his War on Poverty in the 1960s, Alinsky’s radicals were able to work themselves into the program and direct government funds into Alinsky projects. But quite possibly the biggest feat he accomplished was to win over Hillary Rodham (now Hillary Rodham Clinton) through a radical church group in which she was involved. Later, she wrote about Alinsky for her senior thesis at Wellesley College in Massachusetts. Alinsky offered her a job as a community organizer but she chose to go to Yale Law School instead. She remained a close friend of Alinsky’s throughout his life and his influence on her was significant.

Barack Obama trained under Alinsky’s Industrial Areas Foundation and taught Alinsky’s methods. He worked for some Alinsky influenced groups in Chicago, including the Developing Communities Project, ACORN, and Project Vote.  Alinsky’s philosophy has infiltrated and become the primary force of influence in the Democrat Party under the term “progressivism.”  

Beginning their movement in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, progressives believed that most of the problems in society were due to what they deemed as the injustice of capitalism, primarily economic disparity.

They believed the industrial revolution had brought about greed that had led to the problems that many people faced, and that only government intervention could rectify the imbalance.  Progressives defined the wealthy as a greedy class that lavished a leisure lifestyle on itself, and they started referring to them as the conservative class. 

In 1913 Charles Beard published An Economic Interpretation of the Constitution of the United States, which was a Marxist view of history that attacked the success of capitalism and put forth a picture of America’s founders as greedy white men who had created an America to feed their personal greed.

Progressives called for a complete transformation of government in America.  They did not want what the founders of America had put forth in the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights, the core belief that the job of government was to protect the liberty of the individual. Instead, they wanted it changed so that it became a government that would handle any disparity in society, from economic to social. The government, in their view, would be involved in whatever the immediate circumstances needed to be rectified.

The progressive elite (people like we see in government today that include Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton) believed they were a select few who were far more qualified to decide what was best for Americans than the citizens themselves were. Unlike socialism, which was a movement of so-called common people, progressivism, though it does place the right of the government above the right of the individual, was a movement of elitists who saw themselves as intellectuals. Progressives believe in the principles of Marx, although they often call Marxism by other names and they lean heavily on the idea that they represent democracy. They believed they knew better than ordinary citizens what was best for them.  They also started referring to the Constitution as a “living” document that would evolve as the circumstances dictated. There were no absolutes in their view, but rather, the needs of the times would dictate what the Constitution should deem correct. Essentially, progressivism was the idea that situation ethics should become the law of the land.

The goal of progressivism is larger control by the state and increased size of government. It moves toward that goal through a process that evolves the system to the progressives’ planned end. The progressive moves into key positions and institutions in society and slowly takes them over to change them. The takeover includes churches, media, schools, labor unions, and government.

A few progressive leaders in American society have included such people as President Woodrow Wilson, President Theodore Roosevelt, President Franklin Roosevelt, Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis, Democrat presidential nominee William Jennings Bryan, Andrew Carnegie, John Dewey, NAACP cofounder W.E.B. Du Bois, Margaret Sanger, and more recently, President Lyndon Johnson, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, and President Barack Obama.

And if you think the number of people pushing the Progressive agenda is small, then you are mistaken. The Congressional Progressive Caucus is an organization of which Americans should pay attention. You can see a membership list and what they stand for at their website (http://cpc.grijalva.house.gov/). These people are representatives in our own U. S. House of Representatives. This is the group of people that Congressman Allen West was recently criticized for pointing out how their views are communist in nature.

One of the key ways to take over is to destroy the capitalist economic system by overloading it with overspending and debt.  When it collapses the progressives can then step in with a Marxist based economic model.  This is exactly the path that Barack Obama has the United States on.

The fiscal cliff is just one step in confusing and manipulating the American people and the economy to drive it to destruction.  The progressives have spent years, in fact generations, developing their plans and infiltrating American society and government.  Only an educated and committed public has a chance to stop them and keep America from failing economically.  And that is what it will take to save the future of our nation.

America blew it in the last election.  Now it will take much more hard work and sacrifice to save America.  Are you willing to do what’s necessary, or will you allow America to become broken and impoverished so that we have no legacy except debt to leave to our children and grandchildren?