Senate's Bimbo-Pansies Ready to Roll Over for Iran Due to Fear?

President Obama’s agreement with Iran to limit immediate production of bomb-making radioactive materials in exchange for ending economic sanctions probably will strategically reshape long-range Middle Asian nuclear relations and fund an increase of terrorism in the short-term. It is difficult to understand why 34 Democrat Senators would support the deal except for reasons of craven fear. Though Iran may already have secret bombs bought from old Soviet stock in Kazakhstan, Senate Bimbo-pansies quaver like lemmings skiing off a fast ramp of dupe in panic and fear of Iran vaporizing them quick as a swoop-hawk clutches cute little bunnies.

The U.S. Senate can vote down the treaty, yet it must have fewer than 34 Senators in support of the agreement to override the President's probably veto of their disapproval. N.P.R. ran a story explaining that though the majority votes against it they really secretly consent. That sort of approach is disapproved of in sexual relations these days were some states require explicit consent to avoid rape. It is not enough to say that the Senate bimbos secretly consent. Though the President has the power in minority to force the nuclear doctrine through, overriding the majority in such an important issue-comparable to the Supreme Court butching the majority to force homosexual marriage on all the states-isn't a good idea. They make noises about representative democracy while practicing corporatist plutonomy wherein President Obama is the corrupt steward making deals to get financial favor ready for when he must move out of his job managing his master's house (the people of the United States and the executive branch). The issue raised in the N.P.R. report of the Senate bimbo non-consensual pose on the Iran deal really being consensual is pretty alarming political thought occurring in America's nominal democracy. Taking non-consensual to be consensual is an arrogated affection of elites expressed during the Bill Clinton administration et al and isn't a good direction of political development. It is consistent though with sham democracy and a Rohipnol media social environment disabling the immune system of the American body politic.

One must consider that sanctification of long-range Iranian nuclear weapons development by the United States such that if Iran complies with the terms of the agreement they will be free from American military dangers for a decade and soon thereafter free to resume unlimited nuclear materials production. If Pakistan were in the position of Iran with no known nuclear weapons would the United States support a long range development of nuclear weapons while allowing any sort of support development for any weapons program whatsoever in the interim?

One might wonder how the future would be set with an Iran in 15 years following that period of missile and even cruise missile and drone research accomplished before beginning advanced production of fissile materials. If Iran were to produce say-250 nuclear weapons on missiles able to reach Europe, Moscow, China, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and the United States, would that capability produce stable relations with the Sunni nuclear force leaders in Pakistan or with Chinese Communists, Indian Hindus, Russian Patriots, European and American Libertines etc,?

Once the United States enters into an agreement with Iran on nuclear materials production limits in the short-run, it will be unable in the long-run to work militarily or diplomatically to affect Iranian nuclear development long-range plans. To renege on the agreement would be to further damage U.S. credibility that suffered significantly when the Clinton-Obama administration supported destruction of the Qaddafi regime after the Bush administration had got it to forsake nuclear weapons development and terrorism in exchange for normal relations. If U.S. international agreements are not worth the paper they are written on, some nations will be reluctant to enter in to them.

While it is true that Iran is a threat to Israel, Israel in the absence of Iranian nuclear weapons is not a threat to Iran. Israel actually does seek Middle Eastern stability, yet Iran is a sponsor of Palestinian terrorism against Israel. The Obama doctrine allows Iranian prosperity sufficient to allow increased funding of terrorism upon Israel with a murky outlook for response to contain it. The Obama doctrine more so than being limited to Iran-Israel factors will alter the long-range strategic nuclear situation in the Middle East and Asia creating a new round of post-cold war strategic nuclear weapons proliferation and international weapons of mass human destruction tactical deployment possibilities.

American leftists supported the Iranian Khomeini revolution as a way to get rid of America's Imperial puppet government of the Shah. Once more they misunderstand Iranian demography. The American left is profoundly anti-Christian and believe in error that they can queer-up Islam in Iran through constructive engagement with the new butch principles of the U.S. government. They mistake the prospects for the increase of godless, queer atheist feminism in Iran the next decade, and do not comprehend that the imperial government of the Shah promoted libertine populism so far as it went in order to make imperial subjugation of civilians tolerable. In a way, so did Saddam Hussein in Iraq and the British government in a new form in recent years seeking to dumb down and financially colonize D.C. enlisting the help of domestic homosexuals enamored with all things British.

Iranian populism resides though in Islam more so than libertinism that is weak at national defense anyplace. The U.S. government butch atheist policy will disgust Iranian clerics the next decade and keep a dialectic of self-defense and fundamental Islam an advantaged party. in a decade of developing more contempt for D.C. Iran will be better set to start placing nuclear warheads on new and improved delivery vehicles. Even if libertinism has reached out to touch a significant number of Iranian clerics bringing corruption of their already in some instances corrupted principles, that will not help to stabilize Iran's nuclear development policy or support non-proliferation concepts.

Pres. Obama Puts Down Mt. McKinley -Raises Denali on Map

President Obama has put to rest the federal government name for the largest hill in North America. The mountain formerly known as McKinley is now named the stalwart name Denali-a name favored by cool insider cognoscenti.

There are at least 27 names for the great hill. I prefer Tenedos because it seems so much like the large island in the Mediterranean that may have travelled across Eurasia and Beringia long ago.

I suppose there may be a pancake restaurant (e.g. Denny's) opening there soon.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/obama-renames-mt-mckinley-denali-ahead-alaska-trip/story?id=33420405

Works vs Grace

 The WCF is not about dispensationalism as people commonly understand dispensationalism today. I believe there is a finite number of covenants God has has made for the benefit of the elect, and all of those serve the greater purpose of God in creating man to start with. Gershner has some good opinions. This is what I wrote about his lecture-it is largely a paraphrase...God is so high above us-so infinitely transcending us, so that we as creatures of the dust could never do anything to merit his attention-so the covenant is regarded as an infinite condescension from God to us mere finite creatures
The first covenant was a covenant of works- made with Adam - if Adam was perfect in obedience he'd be o.k.-That covenant was a condescension too, for how could Adam's obedience merit eternal life? God established the covenant with Adam that if he did such and such...whatever he did would never have merited eternal life though God was gracious to let it be good enough
Man by his fall made the covenant of works impossible, so God made another covenant-that of Jesus Christ-requiring faith in him, that they may be saved. God promised to make all those ordained unto life to have salvation; and to give all the Holy Spirit to make them willing and able to believe.
Adam's human works did not deserve eternal life. Covenant of grace though is pure grace-Adam at least had to do something in the covenant of works. The latter makes one think that he does something that lets him be saved. Covenant of grace alternatively has even faith being supplied with God's grace.
Jesus Christ-the testator-the word testament indicates the kind of agreement. God gave up his own Son for our death, and Jesus Christ agreed to atone for our sins. It was a testament bequethed by the testator.
The Westminster divines were opposed to dispensationalism. The church in the Old Testament was also a covenant of grace- (in a legal dispensation) administered differently though. In the OT the legal dispensation was a difference of mode rather than of essence. That legal dispensation put one in the right way of grace-one wasn't actually saved through works, such that dispensationalists think.
There are not two different covenants of grace-there is just one covenant of grace in the Old and New Testaments. There is just a difference in form.
Christ the mediator-it pleased God in His eternal purpose-to be the mediator between God and man. Two whole perfect, distinct natures-the Godhead and manhood, were joined together in Christ. Sinners does not belong in human nature-it was incurred by the fall. Christ did not take on a nature with sin. He was sanctified and anointed by the Holy Spirit. Son of God, eternally begotten of the Father, equal with the Father, yet when he took upon human nature he obeyed God as if he were a man.
Jesus willingly undertook the role of being crucified and died.

Wavefunction Kingdom of God (video)

Immortality of Soul & Eternal Punishment (video)

President Obama's Faulty Iranian Nuke Containment Policy

The President's liberal terms for ending sanctions on Iran in exchange for Iranian assurances that they will delay plutonium or highly enriched uranium production for 10 or 15 years makes me wonder about the logic that suggested that it has any merit to it.

Iran gets billions and billions of dollars of immediate economic relief. Civilian rights are important everywhere and civil prosperity is a large element of civilian rights. So I am sympathetic with that; the people should not pay the penalty for government corruption, malfeasance or insider kickbacks to the rich, yet of course they generally do. The Iranian government with all of the oil money will do what governments everywhere like to do; pend  a lot of military equipment and foreign intrigue-even going so far as to fund terror operation, covert and overt.

Iran probably bought enough nuclear material from Kazakhstan between 1992-2000 to build a few bombs some speculate. There was a lot of dumped, Soviet nuclear materials in Kazakhstan after the cold war. Iranian agents are known to have visited such places when  a few million might buy a few pounds of weapons grade fissile materials. Even if Iran agrees not to make their own highly enriched uranium for several years they can work on perfecting missiles and buying accurate guidance systems. maybe they can employ former Soviet weapons designers to instruct them on the finer points of developing MIRV and MARV systems. Iran isn't likely to use a nuclear weapon on Israel anytime soon anyway knowing that Israelis might vaporize all of their major cities as a courtesy reply. Perhaps President Obama was worried about Iranian nukes for other reasons.

Iran might allow some nuclear weapon to distro out to covert operatives gluing it to a ship hull or hiding it in a drone or plastic swimming fish maybe, if it wanted to nuke D.C. or Boston. If they already have a Soviet surplus nuke in stock the agreement won't affect that. That treaty cannot end the danger of the unknown existing outside the realm of Iranian inspectors who will assure D.C. and the I.A.E.A. they have no contraband material.

Iran will be given safety for a decade for developing missiles and perhaps cruise missile and drones (the C.I.A. delivered one of ours to Tehran) with lots of cash to afford it. Turkey and Iran will attack ISIS in one way or another, yet our Kurdish allies seem threatened by Turkey and Iran neither is especially friendly toward them.. Awash in cash and with substantive dangers from Sunni aggression Iranians that finance terrorism against Israel via Sunni terrorists in the Hamas territories probably look to the agreement as a good thing-something that will allow national security to finance terrorism better to proceed while they lose little or no nuclear development time.. A decade a nothing in politics form some points of view.

If one asks; will U.S. national security be better off a decade from now in regard to a potential Iranian nuclear missile attack. The answer would be no except for any secret anti-missile technology the U.S.A. may manufacture. Iran with a ready-to-wear nuclear missile assortment on which next gen warheads can be fit when the engines of plutonium production finally get rolling with President Barrack Obamas' blessing in a decade or more is the real threat happily accepted by too many in D.C. it seems.

If the Senators that sign off on the treaty are still around in a decade, that would be a surprise.  A next generation of Senators may better discover remedies-including peaceful remedies, to the faulty Obama containment logic. A good ecological economic economy innovated with minimal entropy and exported to benefit all of the people is an alternative approach that isn't used in D.C., and that has no leadership in politics. The same old worst case diplomatic criteria are instead used, and that leads to temporal conflicts and brinksmanship. Some day political and economic wisdom may appear as dual nature attributes that aren't uncommon in politics. Even so the Obama administration's willingness to allow Christians to be purged from the Middle east and endangered in Africa seems like a supporting element to a strategic leftist change to base American foreign and domestic policy on godless atheist principles rather than those of God and the Lord Jesus Christ; plainly that is not good.

A Note on Justification (of free grace)

A note from Gershner's lecture on justification

For justification

-those whom God effectually called he freely justified by counting their sins as paid for Christ's sake alone-Justification by Christ alone...justification by faith alone-not imputing obedience of faith as righteousness, instead it is by imputing the righteousness and sacrifice of Christ to themselves.

Faith-justification-works

not

Faith-works-justification (Rome's error)

It's not a work of faith that saves you, it is through unification through faith with Jesus Christ

not

Faith-justification-minus works (Protestant error)

Neccessary works vs. meritorious works; no works are meritorious

Elect Infants that Die in Infancy are Saved

All elect infants that die in infancy are saved. It also may be that all that die in infancy are of the elect. (paraphrasing Gershner's WCF interp). Maybe that applies to those aborted as well.

Does Planned Pandahood Harvest Body Parts of Aborted or Infant Dead Pandas?

All elect infants that die in infancy are saved. It also may be that all that die in infancy are of the elect. (paraphrasing Gershner's WCF interp). Maybe that applies to those aborted as well. Humans have better opportunities that wildlife-those innocents are not saved, yet neither are they doomed to eternal hell.

Obama Foreign Policy-Expansion of Muslim Threats

After seven years of the Obama administration even blind men can begin to discern the shape of the President's version of the Democrat Donkey of foreign policy. In his own modest way, like John F. Kennedy, and Harry Truman before him, the President has stimulated conflict in the second or third world generating hundreds of thousands or millions of casualties while increasing risk of nuclear attack on the U.S.A. It was an achievement subtly developed though-it began with a call for liberation of the oppressed in the Cairo speech like a muezzin's call to arms and insurrection.

The Arab spring began two administration's worth of civil unrest and revolution across the Middle East. As has been joked Iraq now is a state safe for terrorists. the Islamic State has grown and is expanding presently. http://blog.acton.org/archives/81004-5-facts-about-islamic-states-theology-of-rape.html

The President's continuing demand that Syria's President Assad step down stimulated a civil war that has generated hundreds of thousands of casualties and millions of displaced persons. A flood of Muslim Yet migrants from the war have joined those of Africa to bring Muslims to Europe wherefore some that are terrorists and jihadis will subvert security and increase costs for decades. Government armories that were taken over by rebels have provided terrorists from Syria to Libya with explosives, ordinance and demolition implements. Afghanistan has experienced a series of setbacks after the Presidential push to homosexualize the military kicked American moral pretenses regarding Muslim allies in the teeth.

The President has brought more series issues to fruition in his second term, some of which were enabled by the success in thwarting decades of careful American foreign policy in the first. While former Sect. of State Baker negotiated carefully with an Assad, the Obama administration simply supported war and provided training and money to build the raging conflict. At the same time the President signed a pact with Iran that provides immediate financial and trade relief by the tens of billions of dollars; Iran will be able to fund the Assad government and provide weapons and personal to sustain itself in its battle against American encouraged and Saudi-backed rebels, and also to battle against ISIS. President Obama ostensibly signed off with the Iran deal that will soon allow them to buy unlimited conventional weapons as sanctions end, in order to support the fight against Sunni ISIS. In short, the President has a non-rational, confused foreign policy that generally supports Islamic military and terror expansion and increased arms sales.

Beyond the Syrian issue the President has supported adverse relations with Russia and annexation of Ukraine-all of Ukraine, to Western interests. Ukraine has for most of history been a part of Russia-to skunk Russia is to ask for long-term enmity and distrust. Russia needs to have at least the land east of the Dnieper. Conflict may then wither away. The world needs peaceful relations with Russia in order to slow down global warming that will increase with significant development of the Arctic basin. Russia, the U.S.A. and Canada together can act to make the entire Arctic basin a development free-existential habitat for humanity continuity zone. If they fail at that, they may be doomed (I personally would like to move to Mars if it gets bad, and if their is free transport, housing and shelter-or at least good job prospects).