Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘Obama’


Refer to Step 10: I believe that God still has a purpose for my life—a purpose for good and not evil.

 

You’re afraid of making mistakes. Don’t be. Mistakes can be profited by.

—Ray Bradbury

In America, we have the notion that “flawless people” are the ones who should be in charge, which means that our elected officials and religious leaders are those who have no negative “check marks” next to their names. Somehow, being without blemish—at least outwardly—is a sign of being worthy to lead. Those who have experienced difficulties have a negative check mark against them, which makes them less desirable, whether as a political candidate or as a religious leader.

In God’s Kingdom, where all have sinned and fallen short of perfection, the exact opposite is true. It’s the people who have sinned much that have the capacity to love the most. They understand the value of being forgiven, of being restored, and of being used by God.

Once a person has been broken of his or her self-will and self-serving ways, that person has a far greater capacity to seek God’s will. Brokenness produces character qualities that God esteems in men and women, particularly as we face the daunting task of rescuing Christendom from narcissistic religious abusers. This is also true for anti-Christian political leaders who promote traditions diametrically opposed to the ways of our Founding Fathers. We need God’s help more than ever as we attempt to wrestle control of our nation from those whose self-will and worldview is consistently at cross-purposes with God’s will.

Now that you have gone through the difficulties associated with religious abuse, can you begin to see your value? Can you understand why it was important for the abuse to occur? Do you understand why you are far more important to God than you were before your difficult experiences?

Now that you’ve experienced substantial recovery, you are in a unique position to help the myriads of others who have had debilitating experiences equal to yours. Recognizing that, does the necessity of having gone “through the wringer” make sense to you now? If so, you are in a position to thank God for everything that has happened, and you can say, “Father, what do you want me to do next?”

I waited patiently for the Lord; and He inclined to me, and heard my cry. He brought me up out of the pit of destruction, out of the miry clay; and He set my feet upon a rock making my footsteps firm. And He put a new song in my mouth, a song of praise to our God; many will see and fear, and will trust in the Lord. (Psalm 40:1-3)

Jack Watts   Recommended Resources

Advertisements

Read Full Post »


COMMON SENSE 2012

If Obama knew the incident in Libya was a terrorist attack from the beginning, as he clearly stated in the second Presidential Debate, and then left his post to fly to Las Vegas for a fundraiser, he has just disqualified himself as unfit to continue serving as Commander-in-Chief.

Furthermore, he knowingly and willing deceived the American people repeatedly, telling us the attack was caused by an anti-Mohammed movie clip. In an effort to fool the rest of the world, he perpetuated his lie at the United Nations six times. Predictably, As moderator, Candy Crowley tried to save him, but she didn’t. Romney caught him. Obama has got to go.

Jack Watts

Read Full Post »


I originally posted this a year-and-a-half ago.

When asked what mistakes he has made in the first two-and-one-half years of his Presidency, a startled Obama couldn’t come up with an answer, which seemed to surprise many but certainly not me. The reason he didn’t have an answer is simple: He doesn’t believe he has made any mistakes.

What’s more important than his answer is the reason behind it.

He’s a narcissist, and narcissists don’t believe they ever make mistakes—not specific ones anyway. From the perspective of a narcissist, when something goes wrong, it’s always someone else’s fault—not theirs.

Before you dismiss this as anti-Obama rhetoric, let me point out that George W. Bush couldn’t answer the question either—for the same reason. He, too, has a problem with narcissism.

Because of similar responses by Obama and Bush 43, especially after two terms of Clinton, whose narcissism had an aggressive sexual component to it, I have done some reflecting about the Presidents during my adulthood, based on whether or not any of the rest of them have had narcissistic tendencies. Here is what I have concluded:

  • Nixon was not only narcissistic, but paranoid as well, which proved to be a disastrous combination for our nation.
  • Ford, who was not elected by the people, was genuine and forthright, as well as dull and unexciting, displaying no such tendencies.
  • Carter still thinks his administration was successful, which those of us who lived through it, recognize as ridiculous. He is unable to come to the truth because it’s not in a the nature of a narcissist to do so.
  • Reagan was quick to admit when he was wrong and extremely adept at self-deprecating humor, which the fragile ego of a narcissist would never permit.
  • Bush 41 lacked the leadership skills of his predecessor, but he seemed like a pretty normal guy, as did most veterans of World War II.
  • As previously mentioned, Clinton, Bush, and Obama all display various degrees of narcissism.

Looking back to earlier generations, Teddy Roosevelt is the only other obvious narcissist in the past century. Perhaps there were others, but my point is that we seem to elect chief executives that either have narcissistic tendencies or full-blown narcissistic personality disorders, which says more about the voters than it does about the Presidents.

As our nation ramps up for the next presidential election, voters need to spend greater effort measuring the contenders, adding a narcissistic criterion to the list of items that should disqualify a candidate. Below, I have listed the nine indicators of a Narcissistic Personality Disorder. If a candidate displays five or more, withhold your support. Remember, a narcissist is always charismatic but never a good leader.

A narcissist:

1. Has a grandiose sense of self-importance, exaggerating achievements and talents, and expects to be recognized as superior without commensurate achievements.

2. Is preoccupied with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance, or beauty.

3. Believes that he of she is uniquely “special” and can only be understood by people of similar stature.

4. Requires excessive admiration.

5. Has a sense of entitlement and has unreasonable expectations of automatic compliance with his or her expectations.

6. Is interpersonally exploitative, taking advantage of others, especially underlings.

7. Lacks empathy. It’s all about them, and a narcissist is unwilling to recognize or identify with the feelings or needs of others.

8. Is often envious of others or believes that others are envious of them.

9. Shows arrogant, haughty behaviors or attitudes.

While most politicians exhibit some of these characteristics, to be a narcissist, one has to meet at least five of these criteria. Sadly, we have had close to twenty continuous years of narcissism in the White House. In my humble opinion, “Enough is enough.”

At bare minimum, we need someone who can admit when he or she is wrong. If you have ever been married to someone who can’t admit being wrong, you know how dysfunctional the family becomes. Perhaps you’ve had a boss like that—one who makes the workplace unnecessarily difficult. It’s the same for a President. Because we have had so many of them, is it any wonder why our nation is so dysfunctional?

Jack Watts

Read Full Post »


Lord,

Once we were many, but now we are few—

Those who call upon Your Name,

Knowing who You are, and who You are not.

Our leaders have turned their backs on You.

Our President has proudly announced that

We are no longer a Christian nation,

Which he did with brazen contempt for You.

 

In my heart, I know he is right. We are not.

We have abandoned Your ways in favor

Of a worldview that delights in serving strange gods—

A perspective assuring the masses that all avenues are equal.

As I witness what is happening around me, I marvel.

I watch those who mock You, delighting in their mischief,

Wielding self-serving power, scoffing at Your ways,

Insisting their regulations are wiser than Your precepts.

They oppress Your sheep, regulating wrong, calling it right.

In their hearts they believe there will be no consequences,

As they greedily line their pockets will ill-gotten gains.

Their demise is at hand, and their destruction assured.

In their arrogance and pomp, they have convinced

Themselves they are all powerful, but they are not.

For a while—for a short period—they bask in the sun,

Thinking their way will set a new course for our nation,

As they grind down and ridicule the rights of Your children.

 

When I was young, I never imagined that this blight would come;

But now that I am old, here it is; and it breaks my heart.

We have lost our way and are being led to certain destruction

By a Scoffer—an arrogant imposter who thinks he is Eye Candy.

Lord, do not let this stand. Spare us, I implore You.

Rise up, Lord, and call Your sheep by name to rid

Our land of the evil miscreant who leads us.

Be gracious Lord, and do not chasten us any longer.

Spare us from further calamity by those who arrogantly

Mock Your name and speak lies about You.

Jack Watts

Read Full Post »


As the results from the South Carolina primary came in, it became clear that Newt Gingrich not only beat Mitt Romney; he beat him handily. The political commentators on Fox and CNN attributed the win to Newt’s debate skills and his feistiness, coupled with his answers to slanted questions in both of the debates by members of the press who hoped for a “gotcha” moment. While all of this played into Newt’s victory, it wasn’t critical. It was superficial.

He won because he tapped into the the heart and soul of millions of Americans who feel increasingly disenfranchised. He clearly articulates the frustration of these people, but he does much more than that. He stirs them with something they have not had for nearly a quarter of a century: Hope. He believes in the American dream and is an unabashed proponent of it.

I suspect his victory is just the beginning. He is poised to have a groundswell of support that will quickly overwhelm his primary opponents and lead him to a head-to-head confrontation with President Obama. Because Newt shares the values of this generation’s “Silent Majority,” he will win like Reagan did—in a landslide.

For that to happen, several things must occur. First, he must make peace with the Republican establishment—all of whom are terrified that he cannot beat Obama. Newt can assuage their concerns by remaining humble and by staying on message. As his support grows, which it will all over America, the doom-and-gloom Republican establishment will come along.

Second, he must keep the focus on Obama’s record. When Newt’s tawdry past comes up, which it will constantly, he has to maintain an attitude of mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa. He should not try to defend his failures but continue to explain that he has grown by them—never becoming angry by those who taunt him.

He might use this biblical example. Moses was ready to lead the children of Israel when he was forty. As his first act of leadership, he murdered a man and had to flee into the wilderness for forty years. When he was old, God was finally ready to use Moses. The same is true of Newt. His time has come.

Few believe Newt can be disciplined enough to stay on message. I’m not one of them. At the beginning of the 1980 contest, people feared Reagan couldn’t stay on message either. In fact, commentators referred to “Reagan’s gaffes” often but, when it really mattered, Reagan became tough. Newt can be just as tough, and it’s essential that he does. After all, it is for such a time as this that Newt has been raised up to lead.

Those who think Newt will be easy to defeat have no idea what they are up against.

Jack Watts

Read Full Post »


When asked what mistakes he has made in the first two-and-one-half years of his Presidency, a startled Obama couldn’t come up with an answer, which seemed to surprise many but certainly not me. The reason he didn’t have an answer is simple: He doesn’t believe he has made any mistakes.

What’s more important than his answer is the reason behind it.

He’s a narcissist, and narcissists don’t believe they ever make mistakes—not specific ones anyway. From the perspective of a narcissist, when something goes wrong, it’s always someone else’s fault—not theirs.

Before you dismiss this as anti-Obama rhetoric, let me point out that George W. Bush couldn’t answer the question either—for the same reason. He, too, has a problem with narcissism.

Because of similar responses by Obama and Bush 43, especially after two terms of Clinton, whose narcissism had an aggressive sexual component to it, I have done some reflecting about the Presidents during my adulthood, based on whether or not any of the rest of them have had narcissistic tendencies. Here is what I have concluded:

  • Nixon was not only narcissistic, but paranoid as well, which proved to be a disastrous combination for our nation.
  • Ford, who was not elected by the people, was genuine and forthright, as well as dull and unexciting, displaying no such tendencies.
  • Carter still thinks his administration was successful, which those of us who lived through it, recognize as ridiculous. He is unable to come to the truth because it’s not in a the nature of a narcissist to do so.
  • Reagan was quick to admit when he was wrong and extremely adept at self-deprecating humor, which the fragile ego of a narcissist would never permit.
  • Bush 41 lacked the leadership skills of his predecessor, but he seemed like a pretty normal guy, as did most veterans of World War II.
  • As previously mentioned, Clinton, Bush, and Obama all display various degrees of narcissism.

Looking back to earlier generations, Teddy Roosevelt is the only other obvious narcissist in the past century. Perhaps there were others, but my point is that we seem to elect chief executives that either have narcissistic tendencies or full-blown narcissistic personality disorders, which says more about the voters than it does about the Presidents.

As our nation ramps up for the next presidential election, voters need to spend greater effort measuring the contenders, adding a narcissistic criterion to the list of items that should disqualify a candidate. Below, I have listed the nine indicators of a Narcissistic Personality Disorder. If a candidate displays five or more, withhold your support. Remember, a narcissist is always charismatic but never a good leader.

A narcissist:

1. Has a grandiose sense of self-importance, exaggerating achievements and talents, and expects to be recognized as superior without commensurate achievements.

2. Is preoccupied with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance, or beauty.

3. Believes that he of she is uniquely “special” and can only be understood by people of similar stature.

4. Requires excessive admiration.

5. Has a sense of entitlement and has unreasonable expectations of automatic compliance with his or her expectations.

6. Is interpersonally exploitative, taking advantage of others, especially underlings.

7. Lacks empathy. It’s all about them, and a narcissist  is unwilling to recognize or identify with the feelings or needs of others.

8. Is often envious of others or believes that others are envious of them.

9. Shows arrogant, haughty behaviors or attitudes.

While most politicians exhibit some of these characteristics, to be a narcissist, one has to meet at least five of these criteria. Sadly, we have had close to twenty continuous years of narcissism in the White House. In my humble opinion, “Enough is enough.”

At bare minimum, we need someone who can admit when he or she is wrong. If you have ever been married to someone who can’t admit being wrong, you know how dysfunctional the family becomes. Perhaps you’ve had a boss like that—one who makes the workplace unnecessarily difficult. It’s the same for a President. Because we have had so many of them, is it any wonder why our nation is so dysfunctional?

Read Full Post »


Let’s just fast-forward to 2015 and take a look at the landscape, if president Obama is successful in establishing a “single care provider” in the United States. In other words, government run health care.

Currently, the public outpouring is universally against the government choosing doctors and what will be covered by the plan, but there’s another issue, which has not yet been addressed.

What role will the ACLU play, if government-run health care becomes a reality?

Since everything would be run by the government, the ACLU would step in and demand that any hint of religion be excluded from health care. For most Americans, this would be a bitter pill to swallow. It’s one thing to be prohibited from having a prayer said before the start of a football game; it’s quite another to not be allowed to pray for your dying mother or beloved husband moments before their death.

Does this seem far-fetched to you? It shouldn’t, because that’s exactly what will happen. The agenda of the ACLU is to create a secular society—devoid of any spiritual content. Stories like the following would dominate the news.

  • Mary Kate Sullivan has been charged with saying the Rosary for her mother shortly before the older woman’s death.
  • Jim Bob Mason will stand trial for having communion with his twin brother, Billy Joe, before surgery to donate a kidney at Birmingham General Hospital.
  • Father Romano was arrested when he tried to give Extreme Unction to one of his dying parishioners last night in Brooklyn.

Death, and near death experiences, are deeply personal. They are also inevitable. When it’s your turn, do you want the ACLU to be part of the equation, telling you what you can and cannot do—what is legal at a government run facility and what is not?

If you think this is not what will happen, just go back to sleep for the next five or ten years. When you awake, just like Rip VanWinkle, the world will have changed—and not for the better. With the type of appointments to the Supreme Court Obama is certain to make, this outcome is virtually assurred.

The time to stop Barrack Obama is now because just as ants are inevitable at a picnic, so is the ACLU wherever Obama goes. And just like ants, the ACLU is hungry to devour your spiritual rights.

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »