Requirements for Office

-
Amidst all this scandal here with our wonderful Governer and all the hoop-la leading up to the Obama election, I've been thinking a lot about how to evaluate candidates. It seems to be that it simply comes down to two factors (in this order):

• Character
• Competence

To me, if someone has both of those things, then I'm good to go. Of course, there's a lot packed into those two words, but it seems to me that it boils down to that.

Character: This, to me, is the most important factor. No matter how competant, how experienced, how knowledgable a candidate might be, if they don't have that Moral Restraint, then there is a problem. They will be corrupted by the office - there's almost no way around it these days. However, on the flip side, if they have a good base of character, but are light on experience, they may apply their character, the value of hard-work, the value of reaching out for help and eventually become competent. It's very difficult to learn good character, but having good character, it's possible to learn competency.

Competence: A person must have some sort of background to qualify them for office. Relevant experience, training, previous office-holder, etc. seems invaluable to the position. A basic shrewdness and wisdom (I'm loath to use the term "intelligence" as that seems so elitist to me. Just having some good 'ol brains is what I'm talking about here.) seems indispensible. However, if the person is light on this count, but stong in Character, I believe that the job won't necessarily be a total disaster, but it would be a steep challenge.

Of course, the ideal is to have a generous supply of both of those. It seems that (in Illinois, at least) we seem to be distinctly lacking in both.
-

Anglican Church of North America Press Conference

-
Got some video on the new Anglican Church of North America.

Click here <-- to see the press conference.

Here's the most astounding quote at the 12:00 minute mark:

Archbishop Duncan: "I think what the LORD is doing, is that the LORD is displacing the Episcopal Church"
-

Meta-Blogging

-
Wow, you know you've hit the big time when there's people out there blogging on their blogs to comment on your blog.

The Corner has just that.

Maybe someday, they'll be a Turning Right meta-blogger...:-)
-

A New Anglican Province is Born with Great Unity

-
I know there's been a lot written about this already, but I wanted to relate my personal perspective on the events going on.

For me, this has been a witness of unity among different bodies of Christians that is rarely seen. I was fortunate to have been able to participate in that. The unity I saw was a very practical example of working together on specific tasks. To me, it's a model of how unity among Christians can be worked out.

It all began a couple weeks ago when I was asked to help coordinate the parking logistics for the event on December 3rd. From the very beginning, I was put in contact with someone from a different Anglican church who helped guide and advise me in this role. Our communication was very smooth and open from the beginning. I then came into contact with the Facilities Manager for the Wheaton Evangelical Free Church, which was hosting the event at their church building. Again, working with this person from a different church presented no problems, no underlying currents of disunity that I could perceive.

Then came the evening of the event. When I arrived, which was over 1 1/2 hours early, there were already a tremendous amount of people there and the parking lot looked pretty full to me. I began to get nervous and thought we should start directing the incoming cars earlier than planned. This is where the unity really began to show for me. I was eventually directed to the offices of the WEFC and talked to someone in the office about trying to start the parking direction earlier than planned. Well, this very nice gentleman stopped what he was doing and walked back to the foyer with me to personally connect me with the Facility Manager whom I'd never seen in person. On the way from the office to the foyer, I thanked this person for allowing us to use their facilities for the service. This person (I have no idea if he was a pastor of the church or what his role is) expressed in the most generous way possible that it was their privaledge and that they felt honored to be a part in what was happening. He genuinely seemed enthusiastic on our behalf. We were able to have a wonderful little conversation about inter-denominational unity and working together. He said, "It's about time and I'm so glad for what's happening here to promote that!" It felt really good to hear those common sentiments expressed between us.

Well, I managed to get all the volunteers gathered. There were about 6 or 7 of us and we were from at least 2 different local Anglican congregations. We then were briefed by the Facilities Manager of WEFC. In no time at all, we were working together very smoothly as a team - even though we were from 3 different congregations from 2 different denominations. Again, nothing too big, but (to me, at least) very illustrative of what can and is happening in the church.

So there I was out in the parking lot directing traffic. It was getting close to the start time of the service when I got to witness more expressions of unity. One of the cars stopped and rolled down their window. Inside was a sweet little old lady who was here for a seperate event taking place at the same time...

"Hi, we're here for the prayer meeting, is there any parking left?"

"Oh, umm, I'm doing parking for the Anglican thing tonight, but I think there's still some spots in the back."

"Well, we're praying for you guys tonight."

Wow! I was blown away by that. Here was this church that we have no relation to letting us use their facilities, taking up all their parking spots, and they were here to pray for us! It felt like all denominational bounderies were becoming rather thin at that moment.

On the way inside to the service, I mentioned this to Kevin (the Facilities Manager) and he said the pastor of the church has been talking this event up for several weeks now and was really excited about it. Wow!

Then, I go into the service, which has already started at this point. The sanctuary is packed with almost 1000 people from all over the country coming together to worship. On stage is the director of the Billy Graham Center at Wheaton College. Bishop Duncan later says that all the different groups unanimously approved all the articles of the constitution. This unanaminaty allowed the constitution to go from "draft" to "provisional." This allowed us to actually be a functioning new church and actually come into being! Wow! The power of unity.

I believe this unity is a wonderful witness to the world of what the church is supposed to be like and the more we can exercise it, the more attractive it will be for those not in the church. But this unity is also powerful for me. Being in the service, watching grizzled old men, young mothers, business professionals, children, Africans, Americans, Asians all worshipping together, all taking it in, all declaring their common belief really does my soul good. It tells me that I'm not alone in this world. I'm really not crazy for believing in God. This really is good and right and true. It's just really re-affirming to me.

I pray that this new Anglican Province will do good not only for me and others like me, but for the country as a whole. I believe it will.
-

First They Attacked the Mormons...

-
"In Germany, they came first for the Communists, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Communist;
And then they came for the trade unionists, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a trade unionist;
And then they came for the Jews, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Jew;
And then . . . they came for me . . . And by that time there was no one left to speak up."

I'm not a Mormon, but I've got to speak up.

I think what the gay activists are doing in California is absolutely wrong. Sure, let them fight for what they believe in.  But if they have to resort to bullying , intimidating tactics like they are doing, then something's wrong.

Plus, it's worrying to me. What if I'm in a situation to stand up for my religious beliefs? What will radical activists do to me? Frankly, it is intimidating and scary to me.

Read this article which says it much better than I could.

Click here <-- to read the article.
-

Fred Thompson at his Best

-
This sarcastistic humor really seems to work for Fred. It really drives home the point too of how crazy this whole thing has gotten.

Is there any hope at all that we can ever dig ourselves out of this mess?

Click here <-- to watch Fred
-

Yet More of the "New Tolerance"

-
eHarmony has been forced (coerced, pressured) to make matches for gay couples.

How long until all religious organizations must provide for gay couples?

Doesn't it bother you that religious organizations that have as part of their belief system the opposition to gay relationships are more and more forced (coerced, pressured) to compromise their beliefs and accomodate the gay lifestyle, or refuse and face lawsuits?

What organization will be free from this coersion (force, pressure)? Will churches be forced (coerced, pressured) to marry gay couples or face lawsuits and possibly lose their non-profit status?

And if the gay community is successful at forcing (coercing, pressuring) religious organizations to compromise on this tenant of their belief system in order to stay in business, what other groups will then be embolded to force (coerce, pressure) religious organization to compromise other tenants of their beliefs? Will religious organization be forced to completely drop all of their convictions in the face of political correctness and lawsuits?

Where will all this end?

Click here <-- to see the article about eHarmony.
-

What Does 'Conservative' and 'Liberal' Mean, Anyway?

-
I've been in the habit of using the terms "Conservative" and "Liberal" on this site. As I have a general idea of what they mean, I haven't bothered to actually define them. But I have had some comments from a few individuals at various times that the terms are just labels and don't necessarily convey ideas accurately. So, I thought I would try to actually define them. I went out to the net to try to find a straighforward definition of each one and I actually had a hard time. It seems that what's out there gets lost in a host of different shades, permutations, histories, etc. After some considerable searching, I found the following definitions that fit most succinctly with my personal view.:

Found at IRCPolitics.org
Conservative - Represented by the Republican party, or political Right. One who generally favors economic liberty, free markets, private property, privatization of business and lower taxes. They claim to want less, or limited Government. They prefer personal freedoms over equality and they support a strong national defense. Their champion is probably Ronald Reagan.

Liberal - Represented by the Democrat party, or the political Left. A Liberal is one who generally leans towards Democratic Socialism and even some degree of Marxism. They support the welfare state, Social Security and Socialized Healthcare. They believe that by raising taxes, and redistributing wealth, Government can eliminate the social inequalities they abhor. Their champion is probably Franklin D. Roosevelt.

I found the above definition of liberal to be a little extreme. I thing the key terms of this are "leans toward." I don't consider liberalism full-fledged Socialism or Marxism, but I would say that liberal thinking and beliefs is a strong bridge toward those things.

Ironically, I found the Wikipedia definition of liberalism to sound rather conservative to my ears:

Liberalism is a broad class of political philosophies that consider individual liberty to be the most important political goal.

Liberalism emphasizes individual rights and equality of opportunity. Within liberalism there are various streams of thought which compete over the use of the term "liberal" and may propose very different policies, but they are generally united by their support for a number of principles, including freedom of thought and speech, limitations on the power of governments, the rule of law, an individual's right to private property, free markets, and a transparent system of government. All liberals, as well as some adherents of other political ideologies, support some variant of the form of government known as liberal democracy, with open and fair elections, where all citizens have equal rights by law.

Modern liberalism has its roots in the Age of Enlightenment and rejected many foundational assumptions that dominated most earlier theories of government, such as the Divine Right of Kings, hereditary status, established religion, and economic protectionism. Liberals argued that economic systems based on free markets are more efficient and generate more prosperity.

The first modern liberal state was the United States of America, founded on the principle that "all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; that to insure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.


Well, after that, I had to look up conservatism on Wikipedia and here's what I found for that:


Conservatism is a political and social term whose meaning has changed in different countries and time periods, but which usually indicates support for the status quo or the status quo ante. In Western politics, conservatism refers to the school of thought started by Edmund Burke and similar thinkers. Scholar R.J. White once put it this way:

"To put conservatism in a bottle with a label is like trying to liquify the atmosphere … The difficulty arises from the nature of the thing. For conservatism is less a political doctrine than a habit of mind, a mode of feeling, a way of living."

Russell Kirk considered conservatism "the negation of ideology".

Conservative political parties have diverse views. For instance, the Liberal Democratic Party in Japan, the Conservative Party in Britain, and the Liberal Party of Australia are all major conservative parties with varying positions.

Cultural conservatism is a philosophy that supports preservation of the heritage of a nation or culture.

To me, that definition is pretty off. To me, conservatism is not a vague concept, neither is it a "negation of ideology." And it's much more than just to preserve what once was, although that is a part of it. But preserving what was just for the sake of preserving it is not the point. The point of preserving what was is to generally think that what was had a lot of things about it that are better than what we currently see. However, we need to have a basis for deciding what to preserve. To me, the reason to preserve things is because things were generally more conservative before than what they are now.

So, how would I define conservatism and liberalism?

Conservatism: The belief that government has a vital, but limited role to play in our society. Government is to provide for a common defense and an orderly society. The belief that individual freedom and liberty are worth defending, both domestically and internationally. The belief that for freedom to survive, it must rest on a moral and religious foundation. The belief that the free markets are the best way to lift up the general standard of living in a country.

Liberalism: (I actually had a hard time defining it, so this is more of what I see it as, my observations, than an actual definition, per se. I would be very interested to see what others say is the definition of liberalism.) I see current liberalism as driven by an over-riding sense of injustice in society. As such, it is the belief that government must provide for the equality of all. Government is generally regarded as favorable and should grow to encompass more programs to help more people. I see current liberalism as tending toward more secularism, more centralization of power, more government intervention on behalf of the "little guy."

So there it is. Maybe, this will help us get beyond just the labels and actually talk about what, specifically, we mean by these things.
-

"To Provide For the Common Defense"

-
You know, even I would sometimes get tired of hearing conservatives go on and on about how our national security is the most important thing. I’ve often gotten tired of that, thinking, “Yeah, yeah, I get the point. I know.”

But watching this video really puts it in perspective. Did you know that, right now, in as little as 33 minutes, a country can hit the US with a ballistic missile? I didn’t know that. And if that missile is armed with a nuclear warhead, we’re toast!

All our arguments over policy, all our disagreements over liberal or conservative ideas will be for nothing if our country is not protected. We MUST protect our country first! Then, and only then, are we safe to have our debates over how we should run our country.

This video is a must-see. And it’s just the “trailer” to the real movie coming out in February.

If you care about the safety of our country, please become well-informed, watch this video, and hold our leaders accountable!

Click here <--to watch the video.
-

The Surge in Iraq Worked

-
The Surge Worked. <-- Good video witness of that fact.
-

Proposition 8 is Becoming a Flashpoint

-
More of the "new tolerance" on display.

It seems that the current front in our cultural conflict right now is in California with the passage Proposition 8.

Below is a video that shows a pro-gay protest. An elderly lady and a couple of guys approach the group with a large cross. Almost immediately, the group of protestors take the cross and stomp on it, push the lady around a bit, and completely drown out the lady.

Yes, she may have been just trying to bait them, but they sure had no hesitation in taking the bait. Not a pretty scene at all.

Click here <-- to watch the video.
-

Palin Speaks at Governor's Conference

-
Governor Sarah Palin speaks to other governors.

She says we need to stop being addicted to "OPM" - Other People's Money. (At about 5:45 in the video)

She's great!

Click here <-- to watch the video.
-

The New "Tolerance"

-
So, there's this 8th grade girl who conducts an experiment just before the election. She wants to see what the reactions of her school would be if she wore two different shirts.

The first day, she wears a shirt that says "McCain Girl." The reaction was, shall we say, less than totally inclusive. There were people calling her stupid and saying that she should die. Very nice.

The next day, she wears a shirt that says "Obama Girl." Guess what? The reaction the next day was totally different.

You really have to read the whole story. Political correctness and "tolerance" have turned even a high school into a very intolerant place. I think it only gets worse when you get to college.

I wonder where this is all going?

Click here <-- to read the whole story
-

What's Your Worldview?

-

Sometimes, it seems that our beliefs are so disconnected from everyday reality, that they don't really matter.

Well, they do.

Here's an example from everyday life - riding a bus - where the beliefs of Christians are challenged. How many of us know people who may be wobbly on the issue of works vs. grace? How many are already in doubt as to the existence of God?

Although the Humanist group behind this story claims to not be trying to "change minds about a deity," they do say they are trying to "plant a seed."

Christians aren't the only ones planting seeds of thought in our culture.

Click here <--to see the story.
-

Christian Compromise on Abortion

-
BreakPoint has a post on the movie "The Boy in the Striped Pajamas." Within that post is a pretty scathing indictment of Christians who compromised on abortion. Here's the quote:

"But I think everybody needs to see it. ESPECIALLY this week when so many Christians have seen their way to compromising with the greatest social evil of our day - abortion. Our people voted to overlook a little thing like the slaughter of the unborn, because of other considerations like economic prosperity, climate change and the desire to have all the other nations in the world like us again."

I think the point is that abortion is no less of a holocost than what occurred during WWII. And, just like in Germany, it is perpetuated by people who choose to minimize it, look the other way, rationalize it, and/or justify it.

As Christians, what is our response to abortion? What should our response be? Are those two things the same? If not, why not?
-

Waiting and Watching

-
Prior to the election, I was involved in several debates with people who were strong Obama supporters. However, since the election, our debates have basically stopped. I think we all know that Obama won and we’re just waiting to see what he will do and what will happen. I think that once events start happening during his administration, the debates will start up again.

I’m looking forward to that time because:

• I really enjoy the back and forth of debate
• I relish the opportunity to sharpen my ideas and ability to articulate them
• I’m always hopeful of actually helping someone to come closer to a conservative point of view

Until then, I'll be here: waiting and watching.

-

Fight FOCA (Freedom of Choice Act)

-
If you are against the Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA), then sign the petition.

Click here <-- to sign the petition.
-

How Will Things Go for Obama?

-
Over this last week, I've been trying to get used to the idea of an Obama presidency. As I’ve emotionally recovered, I’ve been able to think a little clearer (at least I think so.). As I’ve thought about it, I’ve tried to envision what I think is a likely scenario for these next 4 years.

From my conservative perspective, I basically think things will look really good for about 6 months, and then everything will fall apart.

I really think Obama’s domestic agenda will be harmful to our country. His refusal to allow domestic oil drilling, his insistence on raising taxes, his cap-and-trade proposals among other things will cause a net effect of rising unemployment, rising interest rates, and lower consumer spending. Companies will have to scale back in the face of all of this. The recession will be extended and deepened.

I think his foreign agenda will not be good as well. I think aggressive countries (Russia, Venezuela, Iran, etc.) will try to push to see what the limits are of our new administration. I also think Obama will tend to react in such a way that will only encourage further aggression. The world will become more volatile and will have multiple hotspots. I’m not sure about Iraq. I’m hoping that he will not withdraw troops too soon. But I’m worried that he will be pressured to try to expedite it and if that happens, I foresee escalated violence breaking out there as well.

I think that by the end of summer 2009, Obama will be totally embroiled in trying to fight fires both domestically and abroad and will be pretty ineffective at that point.

In addition, I think his stance on social issues are harmful. I think his radical stance on Abortion will be one of the biggest things that really drives Christians away from him.

From a purely political point of view, these bad things would be good for the Republican and conservative causes. The American people will once again swing back towards the right and elect more conservative republicans in 2010 and possibly 2012 as well. But it’s just really sad to me that it seems like it takes disasters occurring for the other side to be able to make any progress in advancing their ideas.

From a personal perspective, I really hope I’m wrong about these bad things happening. I really hope that Obama can do a lot of good things for our country. But I’m doubtful.
-

When Bad Things Happen

-
I remember back when Bush was president, one of the things that sometimes happened was that the Democrats and media seemed to oppose him on everything. One aspect of that stood out to me in particular: when things were going well (i.e. the surge was working, the economy was good, etc.), they would oppose him about those things and seemed to even hope that bad things would happen just to prove that Bush was wrong. It seemed that when the war went badly, or the economy tanked, they were so enthusiastic about trying to prove Bush was wrong that it looked like they were actually happy that bad things happened. It gave them an opportunity to bash Bush.

Well, I've recently noticed a very interesting dynamic within myself. Now that Obama is going to be the president, I actually noticed myself having some feelings that were very similar. When the stock market went down the first two days after Obama was elected, I found myself reacting differently than I had in the past. Instead of feeling upset and sad about it, I found myself feeling vindicated - as if just because Obama is going to be the president, all bad things are now his fault.*

I condemn that in myself just as I condemned that when it looked like Democrats did that to Bush.

I think it's going to be VERY interesting having a president in office that I oppose. How many times am I going to catch myself doing the same things I opposed when Bush was president? How many times will the arguments I used against others need to be applied to myself? I think this will be a very enlightening and growing experience. Since I recognized things I didn't like about people's reactions to Bush, will I be able to not indulge in the same things now that Obama will be our president?

I pray that the answer will be "Yes." But I know myself well enough to know that it will not be smooth sailing. But I think it's an exercise worth pursuing. I think it's a very worthy goal to avoid acting in the same way as some of those I opposed, now that the situations are reversed.

If anyone reading this ever sees me doing things like that, can you let me know? I would really appreciate it.

(*I feel a need to clarify a point here. I think it's perfectly legitimate to oppose a policy or decision that I don't agree with. And if/when there are bad things that happen as a direct result of things he's done, that's fair game to talk about as well. These are not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about the tendency to hope, to wish, to yearn for bad things to happen just to say "Aha! See? I told you so. He's wrong." That is not right. One should never hope for bad things to happen to anyone.)
-

Roskam Wins!

-
One bright spot for Illinois conservatives is Peter Roskam. He won his district by 16% - an excellent showing in this state, in this Democratic year.

Click here <-- to listen to his victory acceptance speech.
-

What now?

-
Well, the election is over and we have a new president-elect: Barack Obama.

As a conservative, I did everything in my power and within my sphere of influence to fight against his presidency and for McCain’s victory. My focus, especially, in the final weeks, was very narrow and concentrated on the person and character of Obama.

But that person is now elected to office.

So what will this conservative Christian do now?

I will concentrate on ideas. I really don’t want to become a bitter contrarian who only criticizes, analyzes, and tears apart every word, action, and motive of the guy I didn’t support. He’s president now (technically, not until January 20th, but you know what I mean). In every way that does not contradict my conscience, I will endeavor to respect and support the President.

However, I will continue to focus on trying to persuade, broadcast, and propagate both conservative and Christian ideas. I personally believe there is a great deal of overlap between the two and I hope to expound upon the links between conservative thought and Christian thought. Even though I don’t have it all thought out, my gut leads me to think that conservative thought is actually a natural extension of Christian thought. I would very much like to explore that theory.

As such, my primary audience is other Christians with whom I do not agree. I’m really interested in how our Christian beliefs get translated into political beliefs and actions and why they are so often on divergent paths. I hope to trace those paths and pinpoint the area(s) of divergence and camp out at those very spots.

My hope is that by concentrating on that area, we can discover more deeply what the truth is. In areas where I feel I am correct, I hope to be able to persuade and clearly articulate my views and bring others to those ideas as well. In the places where I am incorrect, I want to be as open and honest and receptive to change and growth as I can be. Just as I am painfully aware of how difficult it is for me to acknowledge my faults and change my thinking, I am aware of that tendency in others as well. There is no illusion here of a wholesale migration of “liberal Christians” to the conservative Christian viewpoint. Neither should there be an illusion of my swift and painless movement to more liberal ideas.

But, I do believe that this is a worthy discussion to have. I do believe that there is hope for greater unity among Christians in all areas of life, including political. That is my particular focus. This unity is not achieved through blind adherence to ideas. It’s achieved through deliberation, discussion, debate, and dialogue. I also believe that personal and world events will contribute their fair share of persuasion to the discussion.

In the end, my vision is for a body of Christ that is in much more agreement on a much wider and deeper scale than what we currently see. That, contrary to what our culture may say, is a good thing. When the Church is in greater agreement, we are then in a much better place to make a positive impact on our culture at large. That is really what this is all about. I’m not out just to prove that "I’m right and you’re wrong." I’m out to bring about greater unity, not through avoiding conflict, but through embracing it as the path to a hard-fought unity based on a firm foundation of truth discovered and articulated through our sweat and blood.

Please, whether you agree with me or not, join me on this mission. I’d love your company.
-

Congratulations on the Obama Victory

-
On this day, I wanted to follow the example of John McCain and give my congratulations to Obama and all of those who support him on his victory last night.

Tomorrow, we'll tussle and debate some more, but for now: Job well done.
-

The Invisible and Forgotten in Chicago

-
This is powerful.

More of Obama's legacy from Chicago.

Click here <-- to watch how Obama handled things while a State Senator in Chicago.
-

Go to McD's Again!

-
From Concerned Christian Americans:

McDonalds Straightens Up and Fries Right

Because the McDonald’s boycott by American Family Association has been so successful, McDonalds has now told AFA that they will remain neutral in the culture war over marriage. As a result AFA has stopped their McDonald’s boycott, which began in May, after McDonalds joined the National Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce.

McDonald’s Vice President Richard Ellis has resigned from his seat on the board of the National Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce, and no one from McDonalds will be replacing him there. McDonalds has also stated that when their membership in the NGLCC ends in December, they will not be renewing it.

An email to the McDonald’s franchise owners, stated: “It is our policy not to be involved in political and social issues. McDonalds remains neutral on same-sex marriage or any ‘homosexual agenda’ as defined by the American Family Association. It would be appropriate to thank your local McDonalds manager for the change in policy by McDonalds. Congratulations to Donald Wildman and the American Family Association for their effective efforts. If you would like to send a note of thanks to the American Family Association, their address is P.O. Drawer 2440, Tupelo, MS, 38803.
-

Still Undecided?

-
Still can't make up your mind? Maybe this will help.

Click here <-- just in case you're still undecided about Obama.

(I know, I know. I just said I was burned out and just waiting and watching. But seeing these things makes me want to shout from the rooftops and sound the trumpet and blow the whistle - DON'T VOTE FOR OBAMA! VOTE MCCAIN!)
-

Holding My Breath

-
I know it's been a little light on the postings around here lately. I'm basically in the hold-my-breath-wait-for-the-results-to-come-in mode and I'm also a little burned out.

I'll be posting more regularly after the election.

Until then, GO VOTE!
-

McCain on Saturday Night Live

-
Hilarious!

Click here <-- to watch the video.
-

Links and Original Thoughts

-
I know I've again been posting a lot of links to other sites and videos and such. With the frenetic pace of the election at this late hour, it seems like there's so much going on that it's hard to discuss.

After the election, I will most definitely be posting more original thoughts. In fact, I've been thinking about talking about the post-election strategy and work that needs to be done. That is something that is occupying more and more of my mind these days.

Stay tuned!
-

Change. Change. Change.

-
Obama's definition of rich keeps changing. Who's he going to tax next?

Change. Change. Change. That's Barack.

Click here <--to watch this video.
-

McCain is Israel's Friend

-
Another great reason to vote for McCain.

Click here <--to watch this confidence-building video.
-

Wright's Home

-
Yikes! This is pretty tough. But I think it puts together two of the biggest problems people have with Obama:

- His associations and what that says about his character,
- His idea of spreading the wealth around and what that says about his policies and philosophy.

Click here <-- to watch the video.
-

A Perfect Storm

-
Thomas Sowell on Obama.

Click here <--to read the article.
-

Tardy Obama

-
This is really funny. It says something, but I'm not sure what. Obama's a really busy guy...?

Click here <--to watch.
-

Obama Worried?

-
This is so funny! I think Obama just might be a little worried about Tuesday...

Click here <--to watch this very funny and very telling video.
-

Obama and Wright

-
I'm honestly not sure what I think about this video spot about Obama.

What do you think?

Click here <-- to watch the video.
-

The Misery Index

-
Started during LBJ's administration and made famous by Carter.

I'm wondering if the misery index will enjoy a resurgence in popularity if Obama is elected?

According to http://www.miseryindex.us/, "The misery index was initiated by economist Arthur Okun, an adviser to President Lyndon Johnson in the 1960's. It is simply the unemployment rate added to the inflation rate. It is assumed that both a higher rate of unemployment and a worsening of inflation both create economic and social costs for a country. A combination of rising inflation and more people of[sic] out of work implies a deterioration in economic performance and a rise in the misery index."
-

Obama's Tax Plan

-
Obama promises not to raise your taxes if you make less than a certain amount per year.

First it was $250,000 (click here).

Then, it fell to $200,000 (click here It's at the 0:30 mark in this commercial.).

After that, Biden indicated that it's at $150,000 (click here It's at the end of this clip.) .

Where will it stop? $100,000? $50,000? Who is "safe" from Obama's tax increases?

And if they finally settle on a number, how can we believe they will actually keep that promise as they've broken this one twice in the space of a week?
-

re: Obama a US Citizenship?

-
I posted a link the other day concerning Obama's citizenship. That link was, by some, deemed just internet goofiness and mis-information. I really thought about that and was going to post my apologies for jumping the gun in my conservative enthusiasm at thinking Obama might be disqualified to be president. [UPDATE: I've been thinking about this some more. Regardless of whether or not the original link was legit or not, I think I did jump at wanting it to be true. I'm starting to realize how easy it is to simply believe something just because I want to believe it. For that, I am sorry and hope to continue to grow in that area.]

Since then, however, I've seen more noise on other sites that seem to further legitimize the original question. While I don't know what the ultimate answer will turn out to be, I think the question itself is legitimate and needs to be investigated.

You think the New York Times, MSNBC, or CNN will take up the question and doggedly pursue it to the end?

Me neither.

Click here, here, and here. <-- to see what I've found since last week.
-

Obama be Thy Name

-
-Obama be thy name,
-Thy change shall come,
-Thy will be done,
-As it is in an American dream.

Click here <-- to watch this eerie video.
-

Obama and Infanticide

-
WARNING: Watching this may tear your heart out.

I just can't understand how people can brush this off and minimize it. I'm sorry, it's just disgusting. At the end is a dramatization that just twists my stomach in knots. This is really awful.

Click here <-- to watch this video.
-

McCain on Fire

-
I've been posting a lot of negative things about Obama. I must admit that there's a bunch of material to choose from and I've been trying to point out the most relevant things.

But I'm not just voting AGAINST Obama - I'm voting FOR McCain.

This is one of the most inspiring, awesome videos yet. I especially like the background music.

Click here <-- to watch this inspiring video.
-

More Obama Redistribution of Wealth/Anti-constitution

-
You have to get through the first 45 seconds or so until he starts talking about redistribution of wealth and then complaining that the court didn't "break free" from the contraints placed on it by the constitution. This is some pretty amazing audio.

Please think very carefully before casting your vote next week!

Click here <--to listen to the audio.
-

McCain on Biden on Obama

-
A good McCain commercial. Biden "guarantees an international crisis" if Obama is elected president. Yikes! Do we really want that?

Click here <-- to see the video.
-

Fred Thompson on Obama

-
Fred Thompson articulates this country's ideals and values better than most. He also articulate what an Obama presidency would look like. Not a pretty picture.

Click here <-- to watch the 12 minute video. It's definitely worth your time!
-

"I'm Joe the Plumber"

-
I know, I know, I'm going nuts with these videos. There's just so much good stuff out there.

If you're trying to grow your business, I hope for your sake that Obama does not get elected and pass his tax hikes.

Click here <-- to watch the video.
-

Just Look and Tell Me What You See

-
Do we purposefully shield our eyes from what God says is plain to us? (Romans 1:19)

Why are so many people so dead-set (pun intended) on making this a matter of choice? Would you choose to end what you see here?

Click here <-- to look.
-

Exterminate 25 Million U.S. Capitalists?

-
Here's a pretty shocking video.

There's a direct line from this to Obama:

Weather Underground --> Bill Ayers --> Barack Obama

I used to think that Obama is just basically mis-informed. I gotta tell ya, I'm not so sure anymore. Everything this man touches and associates himself with is worse than I imagine.

Click here <-- to watch this video. But I've got to warn you: it may send chills down your spine.
-

McCain Gets My Vote

-
Here's an excellent, succinct article on why to vote for McCain

Click here <-- to read the article.
-

Welfare and Church

-
One of the themes that I have touched on a few times is the idea of encouraging less dependence on governement for meeting our needs. I have heard of and (I think) spoken about a "culture of dependency" that encourages and perpetuates a welfare, nanny state and how we should try to change that. As a firm conservative, I totally believe that government should play a minimal role in our lives and be constrained to basically providing social order and protection to allow the individuals within that society the freedom to pursue their dreams in a free market society. That's all well and good.

I've also said that the church is the one who rightfully ought to be the leader in looking after the poor, the church is the one who ought to provide most of the social needs of society. The church OUGHT to be doing these things. That's all well and good also.

But I've been challenged by some wonderful people lately. I've been asked, "But what if the Church falls down on the job? What if they don't come through?" I've heard heart-breaking stories of Christians who have reached out to the church in their time of need, only to hear a deafening silence. What then?

Frankly, I'm starting to think that if the Church is not performing the functions as it should, it's only natural that the government would step in and fill that role. My view of government would definitely support that, as I believe government bureaurcracy has a natural tendency to expand it's scope and powers. If the church is falling down on the job, I can no longer just completely blame the government for providing all these social services. It seems to me that the church must accept at least part of the responsibility for this as well.

As such, I am examining myself along these lines and I want to call all Christians to do the same. Are we stepping out to help those who are in need? What might God be calling you and your church to be doing in this area?

If needy people get re-buffed by the church, what are they to do? At that point, I really don't blame them for turning to the government to help them in their time of need.
-

Is Obama an American Citizen?

-
You decide.

Click here <-- to read the charge.
-

Is the Obama Campaign Deliberately Accepting Bad Donations?

-
This is a very eye-opening article. You be the judge - is Obama doing this on purpose?

Click here <-- to read the article.
-

Presidential Election Process

-
Ok, I must admit that I've always been a little confused on how a president is actually elected. I knew there was something about the electoral college, but it's always been a little fuzzy to me.

This is the best explanation of the process I've seen so far. It's really clear and makes sense.

Enjoy!

Click Here <-- to watch the video.
-

Obama and Palin

-
This is 3 short interviews with Obama supporters who also seem to support Sarah Palin as his vice-president. Make you wonder if people support Obama for rational, reasonable reasons or if it's just because he's Obama.

Click here <-- to listen to the audio.
-

Obama and Rocky IV

-
As a huge Rocky fan and also a conservative opposed to Obama, I just had to post this! :-)

It seems pretty light-hearted, but also pointed in what is said.

Click here <-- to watch the video.
-

Obama and Marx

-
"I think when you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody." - Barack Obama

"From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs." - Karl Marx
-

Capitalism vs. Socialism

-
When I say "Capitalism," what do you think of?

Do you think of negative things? Do you think of greedy CEOs? Low-wage workers with no rights or benefits? Wal-Mart? Big Oil? Other?

Or do you think of positive things? Do you think of free markets, opportunity, the American Dream, the ability to move up the socio-economic ladder? Other?

What about when I say "Socialism?" What do you think of?

Do you think of negative things? Do you think of Communism, Hitler, Stalin, re-distribution of wealth, economic slow-downs? Other?

Or do you think of positive things? Do you think of caring for the little guy, fairness, equality? Other?

I'm wondering if a lot of our disagreements comes from a focus on the negative aspects of one and the positive aspects of another or vice-versa?

I'm one who tends to see the positive aspects of Capitalism, to see it's potential and one who tends to see the negative aspects of Socialism, to see other examples where it was really destructive.

I don't doubt that both Capitalism and Socialism are imperfect. They are both human institutions run by fallen human beings, so will by definition be imperfect. The question, then, is which one is better? I tend to think that Capitalism is 90% good while Socialism is 10% good (if that). To me, it's not even close.

Is there an objective way to measure these two systems on their rightness or goodness? How does one determine that?

If anyone has any information on that type of thing, I would love to see it!
-

An Extensive Argument Against Obama

-
This is a pretty big article with lots of video footage. They are up front in that they say that they are coming from the conservative point of view, which I thought was good of them to do. They then go through and list several areas and give reasons for doubt about Obama and have lots of video to go with it. Pretty effective, I thought (but I would, wouldn't I? :-))

Click here <--to go to the article
-

Debating Politics with Christians

-
As I mentioned earlier, I have been engaged in conversations about politics with others who hold a different perspective than I do. Most (if not all) of those people were also Christians. I must say that through it all, I have been very impressed. In the back and forth, a very unique thing has bubbled up to the surface – Christian charity to one another. I have said some ignorant things, made assumptions about others, put them into pigeon holes, etc. Others have said things that I strongly disagree with. In the midst of all of that, though, I have had the pleasure to be witness to encouragement, building up, gentle rebukes (much less harsh than deserved), and an underlying unity that belies the vigorous debate at the political level. I have seen an amazing compassion expressed, love for one another, God, and our neighbor, and an incredible concern for others. I have seen an openness and willingness to struggle and strain toward a greater understanding of the truth.

I think that we all bring God’s spirit into the discussion that helps to infuse the conversation with grace, graciousness, and mercy. It has been an honor and a privilege to do so and I hope to continue to do so. It has been a witness to me and an encouragement to me.

Sometimes, I’m afraid that our political differences will become the most important thing and there will be no fellowship after the debate. However, I have seen a much deeper and stronger force beneath the debate – Christ Himself coming through. I am greatly heartened by that.

Of course, I still feel that I am absolutely correct on every single issue (tongue firmly in check)! :-) Seriously, I do still feel strongly about my opinions and I think it’s natural to some extent for people to think that the opinions they hold are the correct ones. From that, I will, of course, want to continue to debate and try to convince people to be come to what I believe are the right ideas on things. However, I pray that I will also be open and willing to honestly examine areas where other people also challenge me. And I will do my best to do so in a gracious and generous manner, not being judgmental or condescending.

I must confess that an honest gut-level assessment of how I generally feel about others who don’t agree with me is that they are either deceived or just missing some facts. To me, my opinions and beliefs are very consistent, make sense, and seem to agree with biblical principals. So, my first reaction when others don’t agree is to be astonished – “How can they possibly think that?” I’m beginning to see how judgmental and condescending that can be.

But I struggle as well. Being firmly convinced that 1) there is an absolute truth and 2) that truth can be applied to every area of life (including politics), it’s very difficult to simply be content with others just having a different perspective and let that be. My instinct is to want to convince them that I am right. In our post-modern culture where everyone has their own truth, it’s especially hazardous to work under these assumptions. But I am becoming more aware of these assumptions and wrestling with how to deal with them. I am definitely still on a journey with all of this and I beg your patience as I struggle with how to hold in one hand my strong opinions that I believe are right, with a respect and openness to what others say in the other hand. I’m pretty sure that in my humanness, I will drop one or the other of these many times to come. If I focus too strongly on banging away on getting my point made, I may fall into the trap of being judgmental, harsh, condescending, etc. If I focus too strongly on being respectful and listening to others, I may fail to challenge or make any sort of difference. I don’t want either one of those. I DO want to make a difference and challenge others. But I also want to do it in a gracious, open way, knowing that for every finger pointed outward, there are four fingers pointed at myself.

Given this context and feeling a stronger trust in God’s Spirit of unity among believers, I say, “Let the debate commence!”
-

Re: My Attempt to Get into the Mind...

-
To all impacted readers,

First of all, I want to thank everyone who responded to this post. I've definitely learned a lot and I hope that I can add more productively to the conversation in the future.


Before I do that, however, I must first apologize. In my haste and enthusiasm, I made two critical errors: 1) How I said what I said could have been a lot more sensitive. I was not thinking through how it would come across - I was just intensely focused on WHAT I was trying to say, and HOW I said things was secondary. That was not right and I'm sorry to anyone who was hurt by that. Like I said up above, I'm learning and I hope to constructively add to the conversation in the future. 2) How I distributed the blog to others was inappropriate and hurtful as well. Again, I just didn't think through the implications and how it might feel to others. For anyone who was offended by that, I apologize. It was rash, ignorant, and insenstive.


In the end, I think that I should have titled that blog something more like, "A look into my heart" because it showed much more about myself than any "liberal Christian."


If anyone needs a more personal discussion about this, please feel free to e-mail me at the address in my profile.

I've got a lot of thinking and reading to do, so I may not post again for several days.

Sincerely,
Stew
-

My Attempt to Get into the Mind of the Liberal Christian

-

I must give a disclaimer up front: The following post is an honest attempt to analyze why my beliefs are different than others. I've tried not to be explosive, but the topic itself may end up stirring up very strong reactions. I welcome your comments and e-mails on this. Please point out where I've made errors. I'm honestly just trying to understand.

-
I've had a really interesting experience these last few weeks.

As I've become more active and outspoken in my political stances, I've run into and had several conversations with people who hold a different opinion than me on politics. The interesting thing is, is that most of those people were also committed Christians. Some I know personally, some I do not know personally. But I'm pretty sure that most of them are sincere, committed Christians who love the Lord and really want to live a good life.

On the surface, you might think that our opinions of politics would be similar. Politics touches on many things moral, so wouldn't you expect that people of the same faith would also hold similar stances politically? And yet, in debating politics with other Christians, I'm finding some of us at totally different ends of the spectrum and very passionate about our stances. Why is that?

As I mentioned earlier, I don't believe that politics is morally neutral. It's not like Christians who disagree on the color of lenoleum tile or something. To my way of thinking, there must be something deeper going on that's different. We're seeing the same news stories, the same debates, the same events and yet coming to completely different conclusions. It's like we have different colored glasses that we're looking through and everything we see is through those glasses. And of course, I believe that my viewpoint is the correct way to see things and they believe there's is correct also.

What is that lense that we're looking through? What kind of assumptions, presuppositions, and foundational beliefs do we hold that are different that cause us to lean one way or another?

It seems to me that until we can see that there are radical differences, even among the body of Christ, on these foundational issues, we will continue to see the increasing divide in our country that we are witnessing. And arguing the issues doesn't seem to do anything to bridge that divide.

I submit to you that one group of people are falling prey to some very unbiblical lies and those lies are informing their political beliefs and decisions.

One such lie is liberalism.

I'm not an expert, but let me see if I can trace this out. From what I've read, liberalism began back in the nineteenth century. It was then that the influences of humanism in the form of the Enlightenment and rationalistic thinking really began to influence the church.

Francis Schaeffer says this in How Should We Then Live?: "As the Renaissance had tried to synthesize Aristotle and Christianity and then Plato and Christianity these men [theologians] were attempting to synthesize the rationalism of the Enlightenment and Christianity. This attempt has often been called religious liberalism. The rationalistic theological liberalism of the nineteeth century was embarrassed by and denied the supernatural."

R.C. Sproul Jr, in Dollar Signs of the Times picks up the theme. He says that "nineteeth-century liberalism provoked a crisis by opting for materialism. If, as the liberals supposed, there was no historical resurrection, no virgin birth, no atoning death, no miracles, then what was the abiding significance of Christianity in a modern world? What was the church's mission?" He goes on to describe two options for the liberal church. One was the total rejection of Christianity altogether. Or, "the liberal church's second option was to focus attention on the relevant, abiding virture of Christianity - it's ethical system. After all, the church was a powerful human institution in a position to influence millions of people in the area of social concern....What emerged was a social gospel reducing Christianity to a concern for man's present suffering in this space/time world. Now the agenda was to carry out Jesus' mandate of feeding the hungry, giving shelter to the homeless and clothes to the naked, and caring for the prisoner, the widow, the orphan, and all who were poor and oppressed. Christianity was now seen as an ethical force with a social action agenda."

I'm not saying that liberal Christians today would deny the supernatural or miracles. However, I believe that they have been influenced by the thinking that produced an over-emphasis on a social agenda.

I'm not exactly sure how this works it's way in, but I believe that another outgrowth of humanism in the church is the idea that man, not God, is the ultimate answer to problems. Somehow, government became a substitute for the Church in implementing this social agenda. I'm sure there's dynamics here I'm not aware of, but what I'm now seeing are liberal Christians with a strong emphasis on social concerns believing that the government is ultimately the source and vehicle to solve these problems.

Naturally then, which party and which system of thought would these liberal Christians believe to be the best? The party that has the most aggressive programs to fight the "war on poverty", the party that purports to look out for the little guy: the Democrat Party.

And what about conservatives and Republicans? With the class warfare line of thinking constantly touted, Republicans and conservatives are seen as people who really do hate the poor, the down-trodden and just want to give tax breaks to the rich. They just want to pollute the Earth, surpress the poor, discriminate. They are the ultimate enemies of the compassionate liberals and their social agenda.

But it's all predicated on very unbiblical thinking. The tricky thing is that this thinking is perpetuated over generations so that those today are merely influenced vaguely by those ideas without the ideas ever really being expressed out in the open. I don't doubt that many sincere, ardent liberal Christians would of course give ascent to miracles, the supernatural, etc. They would undoubtedly say that humanism in its purest form is wrong and unbiblical. But the very beliefs of humanism and materialism is what has influenced the modern liberal thinking. It's just that these things are buried too deeply to be noticed and all that is left is a compassion for the poor and social justice.

To me, conservatism is a return to the way things ought to be. When you reject materialism, you believe in miracles. When you reject humanism, you believe that God, not man, is the center of the universe. What you have, then, is a belief that God is the ultimate source of all our solutions and that He is able to work miraculously to accomplish that.

How do those beliefs translate into politics? For one, you don't believe the government to be the one responsible for or able to solve our problems. God, through His church, becomes the primary vehicle by which our society's problems are solved. Second, you have a healthy balance of spiritual and material emphasis. Our highest aim is NOT, in fact, to end poverty in the world. Our aim is to reflect God's Kingdom here. That is done through an emphasis on human dignity, freedom, and life. To conservatives, welfare strips man of his dignity, government impositions strips man of his freedoms, and tyranny strips man of his very life. To conservatives, government has a necessary, but limited role to play. And that role is NOT to end poverty or clean up the environment. The government is to provide order and protection to society and then get out of the way to let society proceed to work on solving these problems.

Why are liberals so threatened by conservatives? Because conservatives want to limit and shrink the influence of the ultimate source of salvation for liberals: the government.

Liberalism basically denies God and liberal Christians are influenced by that denial. It follows, then, that liberal Christians, if they are sincere in their faith in God, must seriously and soberly consider their fundamental beliefs and see if there is that denial of God in their pattern of thinking.
-

Candidate Calculator

-
A friend let me know about this. It's pretty cool, especially if you're not sure on where you stand on some issues.

Candidate Calculator <--click here

h/t: On This Road Called Life
-

Something on the Lighter Side

-
I've been personally feeling pretty strung out emotionally about this campaign. I've found these types of funny breaks to be really helpful to me. Hope you enjoy it!

Click here <-- Very funny video
-

Value Voter Guide

-
This link is a PDF that describes how each voter stands on the key issues of values. Please take a few minutes to look at this and then vote your conscience.

Click Here <-- to download the Value Voter Guide.
-

McCain is One Funny Guy!

-
If McCain would just give this speech everywhere he goes, he might have a chance!

McCain Speech <--click here to watch the video. It's in two parts, and it's definitely worth seeing the second part as well.
-

Power Lunch and Politics

-
So, I was at work and had to go to sort of an impromtu lunch with a bunch of Senior Management folks. Although the lunch as a whole was pretty good, there was one part that really made me laugh. It reminded me pretty strongly of my thoughts on Politics and Religion (here).

There were 8 of us all sitting around a round table that was meant for six, so we were all very close to one another. All these people have known each other for quite some time. They were in a pretty spunky mood and the cuts and jabs were flying fast and furious. It was one of those conversations where I personally had a hard time following all the inside jokes that were going on. There was a lot of jabs, parries, back and forth, etc.

Then the really interesting part came when one Sr. Manager said: "Ok, next topic. What do you think about Obama and McCain. George, we'll start with you."

What was interesting about this was that in the midst of this conversation, that question wasn't even meant to be answered. It was strictly used to make George feel awkward and put him in a position and watch him squirm.

I just find it incredibly interesting that Politics has become so awkward and so taboo to talk about seriously in public, that the topic itself is used as a tool for social shame. I'm sure all these people think about it and have an opinion, but it's just not something that is discussed seriously.

Is it just me, or is that not a good thing? Why is it that Politics has become so taboo that it absolutely cannot be talked about, except in special circumstances?

I think that's just a shame. And if it's so taboo, doesn't it feed into people's desire to just totally dis-engage with politics? Wouldn't our country be a better place if more people engaged with politics? If we seriously cared enough about it to be able to talk about it, wouldn't that raise the general level of awareness and informness of people? That can only be a good thing.

It's just so sad to me that politics is so divisive and so taboo. I think it just plays into the hands of those who want to manipulate the system and hope nobody notices.

I, for one, want to try to change that.
-

I Missed the Debate

-
I had a church meeting this evening, so I missed the debate.

Anyone want to comment on what they thought? My first source I go to is Nationalreview.com, but they're site is hit pretty hard with traffic during these debates and I currently can't get in.
-

The Assumption of Safety and Freedom

-
So I went out walking the precinct again for my congressman in the 6th district. As I'm going from house to house and talking to people, I find myself struck with something that's sort of simple, but pretty amazing to me.

It's amazing to me just how many people are NOT aware of what's going on with their elected officials.

I mean, in almost any other situation, don't we care who is our leader?

When you get a new boss at your work, don't you want to know what he's like? Is he mean? Or is he nice? Will I be able to work with him? Or will he be a jerk? What about when you start a new semester at school? Isn't there always an intense chatter before the first day of school about the new professors? What's he like? Will he be easy? Does he assign essays, or just give multiple choice tests? Can I skip class, or will he be tight with the attendance?

We CARE about who's in charge. We want to know what they're like. We deeply and immediately feel the connection with us and how we'll be impacted.

Why, then, do more people not care and are totally uninformed about their elected officials? At some level, I can understand people not knowing who their representative is and what he's about. But shouldn't we care? Shouldn't we stay informed and keep tabs on what's going on? During my walk, there were even some people who were amazingly uninformed about the Presidential race.

What's going on here?

I think I have at least a partial answer. Many of these people were just totally engrossed in their own lives. They were so busy when I talked to them that they barely had time to talk to me. They were on the phone. They were getting their kids ready for a game. They were mowing their lawn or doing laundry. Those are all fine and good. But many of these people were also totally ignorant of the political issues.

Underneath all of these daily goings-on is a fundamental assumption of freedom and safety. I mean, we've always been free. Our neighborhoods have always been basically a safe place to be and we can just live our lives without worrying about anything. Why should we question that?

So, what happens is that our leaders get elected, but nobody pays attention to them. They can then basically get away with anything. Nobody's watching them. Well, there's some clever people out there who realize this and will use that to their advantage. They are not very scrupulous and are without the Moral Restraint and want to get into office for their own power. Okay. But take it a step further.

There's also those who, at heart, hate America. They hate what America stands for and they want to change it. In the past, they have tried to use direct actions (protests, bombings, etc.) to accomplish their goals, but people push back. Now, they are a lot smarter. These anti-American people are running for office as normal, moderate people and getting elected. Once elected, they know that the vast majority of people won't really pay attention and they can then get to work to enact their anti-American agenda. If that goes on long enough, judges will be able to legislate from the bench. (Oh, wait, they already can.) Pretty soon, you'll see unelected officials making bald power grabs (Oh, wait, the Treasury Secretary already did that). Maybe they'll try to socialize our banking systems (Oh, wait...). Maybe they'll try to nationalize our health care system...Maybe they'll try to appease our enemies...Maybe they'll allow a mass amnesty for illegal aliens...Maybe they'll try to...what's next???

People, WE'VE GOT TO WAKE UP! When are we, as a nation, going to wake up and realize that we, the people of the United States of American must each and every one of us do our part to protect our freedoms and our basic safety?!?! The time for assuming that they will always be there is past. We must stand up and take notice and hold our elected officials accountable. Just as a soldier's duty is to protect our nation, so is our duty.

If we fail in this duty, our elected officials will grab so much power our head will swim (if we're even paying attention) and this country will change and we won't even know what hit us.

I don't care (at this level at least) whether you're a Republican or a Democrat or an Independent. Get out there. Get involved. Get informed. Make a difference.

If we don't, our freedoms and basic safety we've always taken for granted may not be there anymore. And when that happens, God help us all.
-

Blogging Friends

-
I just wanted to take a moment to direct you to some excellent information. I obviously am limited by my own resources and experiences, so it's always good to take a look at what others are saying also. I am cross-linked with several of the blogs listed on the left side of this page and I highly recommend you visit those sites as well. I get much of my own information from there; they definitely inform and enlighten. Please take a moment to visit them.

As the old JI Joe cartoon goes, "Knowing is half the battle."
-

Obama's Friends

-
A friend e-mailed this to me.

Obama's Friends.

Again, I ask, who is this man, Barack Obama? Why should we trust him with the highest office in the country?
-

A Voice in the Chatter

-
I know I've been doing a lot of posting of links, videos, articles, etc. One might think that it's just a cop-out and I don't have an original thought of my own. Perhaps.

But here's my thinking.

I do have a lot of opinions and things to discuss. But when I find someone else expressing those thoughts better than I could, I'm not going to hide it just because it didn't come from me. I'm more interested in the ideas getting communicated than in who is actually doing the communicating. If my role is to pass on what others have said better than I could, so be it. The main thing is that conservative priniciples and ideas are amplified and expressed, not who is doing it.

What's important is WHAT is being said, not WHO says it.
-

Don't Give Up on a November Victory

-
An encouraging article for conservatives. Don't give up! Keep the faith!
-

More on ACORN, CRA, Obama, Fannie/Freddie, Sub-prime, etc...

-
Oh, what tangled webs we weave! It's absolutely amazing how all of this ties together with each other.

Click here <-- This video puts more pieces together of all this stuff. And who's right smack dab in the middle of all of this...?

BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA!
-

A Socialist Takeover of America

-
Well, the emotions are really starting to heat up out there...

Click here <--to see a sense of how fearful and angry conservatives are when it comes to Obama.
-

"Health Insurance is a Right" - Barack H. Obama

-
And with that quote, Obama demonstrates one of the many reasons this country is having so many problems.

When you create, foster, and encourage a mentality that says that things are a "right" and the government owes me, you create all sorts of problems. Look at welfare. What you have is a system that was originally intended to be a safety net to help those who are in trouble twisted and manipulated into something that enables people to sponge off of the government for their living. They grow to depend on these monthly checks and lose all incentive to try to find work or gain independence.

If Health Insurance is a right, it will be mandated by the government. If it's mandated by the government, you and I will have to pay taxes into the system to ensure that everyone in the country receives this "right."

Do we really want a country that believes that more and more things are "rights"? People get really demanding when they feel their rights are violated. If more things becomes rights, more people will get more demanding. And Mr. Joe Taxpayer is going to have to foot the bill, as always. Whatever happened to personal responsibility? Whatever happened to being thankful for what we have instead of whining and complaining about what we don't have? Whatever happened to turning to our neighbors, our friends, our families, our local network of support to help us achieve our goals? Must the government provide us with everything?

When the country thinks the goverment "owes" us stuff, we are abdicating our responsibility and giving all the power to the government.

Remember, whatever the government has the power to give us, it has the power to take away.
-

CNN Report Details the Obama-Ayers Connection

-
This is a report completely done by CNN, especially for those of you who may be suspicious of the "conservative media." It talks at depth about who William Ayers is and his connection to Obama.

Keep in mind that Ayers has never - to this very day - said that he was sorry for bombing the Pentagon. In fact, he said that he wishes he did more.

This is the type of people that Obama chooses to associate himself with.

Do you feel safe knowing that he might be our next President? I don't.

CNN Video <-- click here for video.
-

Is there a Difference between Republicans and Democrats?

-
I was having a really interesting conversation with some friends and we were discussing politics and all the corruption in politics. It came up that there always seems to be plenty of blame to go around and it's always Republicans blaming the Democrats for everything and the Democrats blaming the Republicans for everything. As often happens, the conversation ends up saying that both parties are bad and isn't it a shame. It got me thinking and it actually strikes me as a form of Fashionable Cynicism. It's so easy to just let go of distinctions and say that everyone is bad and why don't we just form a 3rd party where everything will be hunky-dory?

It seems to me that the more difficult work is taking the time to actually determine if there is, in fact, a qualitative difference between the two parties. I'm not an expert or a historian, but it seems to me that there REALLY IS a qualitative difference. From my layman's perspective, it seems that whenever there is a Republican scandal, the person is always impugned by not only the media and Democrats, but his own party talks tough about it and he/she eventually quits/leaves office, whatever. It also seems to me that whenever there is a Democratic scandal, it's covered up or minimized in the press, and their fellow Democrats "circle the wagons" and defend it and try to shift the blame elsewhere. That person fights to stay in power as long as possible. That seems like a qualitative difference to me.

Another qualitative difference in the parties is some of the issues they stand for. It's more often than not the Democrat party that defends the criminal, defends the terrorist, but pushes for a woman's right to choose to kill her baby. It's the Democrat party that declares the Iraq war a defeat, accuses the military of blatanly killing civilians, threatens to withdraw funding for the troops in the middle of war, wants to talk to our enemies on a presidential level, pushes higher taxes and more spending. These are all issues that stem from a fundamental difference in worldview on what is right and what is wrong.

I know that the Republicans are not perfect. There is a distinct segment of the Republican party, of which McCain is a part, that is "moderate" and, frankly, shares many of the values with the Democratic party. That definitely muddies the waters when trying to look at the two parties.

However, I DO believe that there is a qualitative difference between the two parties. The Republican party is more on the conservative side of the spectrum and the Democrat party is more on the liberal side of the spectrum. The Republican party tends to favor the free market system; the Democrat party tends to favor more government involvement.

Yes, it takes a little bit of work to not just throw up your hands and declare the whole system corrupt. But I think if you do that work, you will find there is a big difference between the parties.

My biggest plea is to not check out and give up. Stay in there and figure out what you believe and figure out what others believe. Stay involved. If you do, you're choice will become clear.
-

A Refreshing Defense of Conservatism

-
Check out this video.

I find it a refreshing, encouraging defense of conservatism.

Click here <-- To watch the video
-

Obama, Ayers, and Weathermen

-
This is an incredible video that gives some background about the Weathermen underground and then Obama's links to people in that group. Again, please, please think very, very carefully before deciding to cast your vote for Obama.

This is about your personal safety and our national security.

Obama, Ayers, and Weatherman <--click link to view video
-

Is Obama an Existential Threat to the USA?

-
I know that may sound kind of alarminst, but I was thinking about this and just had to verbalize the question:

"Is Obama an existential threat to the USA? If Obama becomes President, will that threaten the existence of America?"

Consider the following:
- Attended the church of Jeremiah Wright for 20 some-odd years. Jeremiah Wright, who made famous the quote "God damn America."
- Friends and co-worker with William Ayers. William Ayers is co-founder of Weathermen, a domestic terrorist organization. Obama calles Ayers "respectable," "mainstream," and "just another guy in the neighborhood."
- Accepted more contributions from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac than anyone except for Chris Dodd. Accepted these contributions in little over 3 years, whereas Chris Dodd took 20 years to accept more contributions. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are arguably part of the main reason for our current economic crisis.
- Former CEOs of Fannie Mae, Jim Johnson and Franklin Raines are advisors to Obama.
- Former member of Davis, Miner, Barnhill & Galland, a law firm that sued banks to pressure them to give sub-prime loans.
- Member of ACORN, a community organizing group that consistently practices voter fraud and "direct action" activities such as storming board meetings of banks to pressure them to give sub-prime loans.
- Received campaign contributions and participated in questionable financing deal with convicted felon, Tony Rezko.
- Voted to cut off funds to troops.
- Voted 4 times to not allow medical help to infants who survice abortions.
- Endorsed by Hamas.
- Willing to sit down with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad without pre-conditions, but is unwilling to appear on Fox. (UPDATE: I forgot about the appearance on Bill O'Reilly's show. Thanks Dawn!)

These are just the things that I know of. I'm relatively well informed, but by no means an expert. These are just the things I could think of off the top of my head. I'm guessing there is more out there that I am not aware of.

Obama has demonstrated a willingness to associate himself with people who are clearly enemies of the United States. He demonstrates a threat to America on an economic level, a philosphical level, a military level, a social level, and a cultural level. It seems that in every measure, the man just wants to harm the United States.

Imagine if he gets elected and the likes of Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid are in charge of congress. With the only opposition from a minority in congress, he will be able to implement much of his radical, left-wing, downright dangerous agenda. That, too me, constitutes an existential threat to America.

One of the coolest things I've seen in a while...

-
This is really cool. And inspirational.
-

A Very Simple Question

-
I've been thinking about a very simple question (again)...

When the chips are down, who do you trust?

This country was founded on the principles of religious freedom, private property, a democratic and free society.

And yet...

In times of crisis we turn to the government to "bail" us out. Every time there is a crisis in this country, we now instinctively turn to the government to rescue us. Does a larger, more powerful federal government represent the principles of the founding fathers? I think not.

For the sake of preventing bad things from happening, we sacrifice the principles on which this country was founded. We sacrifice the democratic process and freedoms in society "for the greater good."

Do we believe in our founding principles or not?

If they are such great principles, shouldn't they be depended on in bad times as well as good? Or are they only worth believing on when things are going well? Those principles that this country was founded upon were a reaction to the results of the very things we are now turning to. There was religious persecution, so we wanted freedom of religion. The king was the law of the land, so we wanted a land ruled by ordinary citizens. There were serfdoms and multitudes in servitude, so we wanted a free land. All these things are good.

But now, we are restraining religion more all the time. We are actually contemplating in our current financial situation to hand the responsibility of "securing the economic security" of our country to one man - the treasury secretary. We are taking the power away from the everyday person and giving more of it to the federal government.

Are we so ignorant to think that we will forever be safe from the abuses that are so clearly on display? Do we really think that government will ever shrink from what it's already taken? Do we think that the abject manipulation of every system in this country will not consolidate power to the point of someday being able to re-organize the very structures of this country?

I, for one, do not want to place my trust in the federal government to take care of us to that extent - government led by corrupt individuals is fundamentally untrustworty.

What if all the Christians stayed silent?

-
I haven't posted for a few days now. My life has been a little hectic lately.

I've had a question running through my mind, though, that I don't have a specific answer to, but I do have a general sense of what that answer would look like.

What if all the Christians stayed silent?

What if all the Christian politicians decided to stay silent? What if all the Christian doctors quit their practice? What if all the Christian actors left Hollywood? What if all the Christian journalists stopped writing? What if all the Christian broadcasters stopped telling stories? What if all the Christians just hunkered down and retreated into monestaries? I'm not even talking about Christians in "Christian work." What if all the Christians who had positions out in the "secular" world decided to give up and throw in the towel? What would our world look like?

A world without Christians is a world that I don't want to live in.

Here's the point. I have met and can claim that I know a Representative in Congress from my district. This Representative happens to be Christian. This same Representative has also consistently been an advocate of all the things I hold dear. He is conservative. He wants to be fiscally responsible. He wants to limit government and empower citizens. He wants to do the right thing. I'm thankful and grateful that he's there. If he were not, there would be one less voice, one less vote, one less representative for my views in this country. This country, my state, and my district would be greatly empoverished. He is a man who is not hiding from the enemy, he's not staying silent, he's not giving in. He's an inspiration to me.

But how many other Christians are NOT out in the world doing what they ought to be doing? How many are ruled by fear? Or too distracted by their own issues? Or is too disgusted with the world to engage with it?

We need more Christians to raise their voices, to defend the weak, to seek justice, and do good - OUT THERE - out in the marketplace, out in the world.

I'm becoming daily more convinced of the wisdom of the saying, "All it takes for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing."

Are you willing to stand up and be counted? You never know who might be inspired by what you do.

Obama's Truth Squad

-
This is serious people! Obama has formed a “Truth Squad” in Missouri to target advertisements that they deem are misleading or lying about Obama.

So much for free speech!

http://www.kmov.com/video/index.html?nvid=285793&shu=1

A Must-See Video on the Financial Crisis

-
This just might change your vote.

The Financial Crisis

Fashionable Cynicism

-
I was in the break room of my workplace the other day and they had the TV on (to CNN, of course) and it was talking about the financial issues that were going on. So, I was standing there watching it for a minute when another co-worker came in. Without provocation, he said something like, "Bah, might as well just vote for Ralph Nader" and then left.

I've had other occasions where I've asked family or friends what they thought about the elections and they have almost invariably gone the way of criticizing both candidates and criticizing the whole process. They bemoan the corruption in the system and write it all off as not worth following.

While I totally understand the frustration with the corruption in the system (see here), these two examples strike me as what I call "Fashionable Cynicism" There is the kind of cynicism where someone is fully aware of the faults and expects the worst. That I can understand.

However, this fashionable cynicism strikes me as fundamentally false. By decrying the whole political landscape and lumping everything together as bad, these people are actually failing to engage with the issues. They are actually choosing to blow it off and just think about something else.

I can understand, believe me. Sometimes it's just too overwhelming to think about all the issues going on in the world. Sometimes it's really scary to think about it. Or you just feel helpless to do anything. Or it's just inane and doesn't make any sense. These, to me, are honest, authentic responses.

But when people stand on the sidelines and criticize the whole process, and yet are too uninformed to even understand what's really going on, that to me is just a cop out. It's their way of just not dealing with it.

But deal with it we must. The consequences of going through life uninformed are too grave. We must do our part to make sure this country remains strong.

If you're just angry with all politicians, do something to make it better! Don't just complain about it. If it's overwhelming to you, start with a small area and become familiar with that and let that lead you into more and more broad areas of knowledge. If you feel helpless to do anything to change things, rebuke that lie! You are not helpless! You can start by becoming informed. You can give money to a cause. You can volunteer. You can talk to friends and family. You can start a blog. :-)

The way I see it, people who are just generally critical of the whole political process are not much different than someone who is just talking in their sleep. I just want to shake them and say, WAKE UP! There's a whole world out there in need of engaged people making a difference and your cynicism isn't helping at all.

Also, once you start to really get informed of the events going on around us, you will begin to see that not everything is just bad. I want to shout out kudos to all the Republicans in the House. They have been fighting valiantly for us and I feel personally grateful to them this day.

If you're out there and you feel a general level of cynicism toward the whole political process, I want to challenge you to take a hard look inside yourself and see if you aren't just avoiding it. Don't avoid it! Do something about it!

The Moral Restraint

-
In a previous post, I touched on a theme that I'd like to build upon here.

Earlier, I said that "I do believe that human nature tends to hunger for more and more power without ever being satisfied and those who already posses a great amount of power are especially susceptible to this hunger...human nature being what it is, those in power are constantly trying to find the loophole, go around, change, or just run ramshod over any rules that get in their way. It's a constant struggle between their power and the rules in place.

Given that our human nature is inherently greedy and hungry for power (and that belief is foundational to a conservative and Christian perspective), what do we do? How do we contain this tendency? I think this is the very question that our founding fathers wrestled with.

In order to have some sort of civilized society, we must have structures in place that necessarily puts some people in a position of power over others. How do we contain those powers?

One thing to try and do is to create a system that has as many checks and balances as possible and spread that power around so that no one person has all the power. That's one of the crucial things that was established in this country. However, as can be clearly seen in just the most recent financial crisis, the government tends to take more power when it can - especially during times of crisis. Just look at the Great Depression and the New Deal. Look at the executive powers given to the president during WWII. Look at the consolidation of power on the Supreme Court. Historically, those 9 justices did not have the power they have today.

No, even the best of systems will eventually fall due to the power-hungry, greedy nature of mankind.

So, what do we do? Is all lost?

No.

There was one other critical element that the founding fathers knew about. It was, in fact, the very foundation and life-blood of our democracy. That other critical element was the Moral Restraint. The only way to counter-act the natural tendency within politicians and those in power from currupting the system and claiming more power is to have a counterbalance within themselves to keep them from those actions. It is this Moral Restraint that allows a leader to serve in office for the good of the people and not for his own gain. It is this Moral Restraint that can keep an elected official from taking bribes. It is this Moral Restraint that can keep a judge from declaring from the bench what the law should be, rather than what it is.

This element of Moral Restraint is why the character of the person running for office is so important. In fact, if a person running for office is experienced, has plans, judgment - whatever - but his character is proven to be bad, that person should not be elected to a position of leadership. It's that simple.

Would you trust your money to a currupt banker? Would you trust your children with a depraved babysitter? Would you trust your aging parents to cruel doctors?

Then why in the world do we trust our country to corrupt, power-hungry politicions with no moral restraint?!?

That has GOT to change! We must no longer discount Moral Restraint as an optional characteristic in those we elect to office. It MUST become a priority again.

But how are we going to find leaders that have Moral Restraint when the Moral Restraint in our country is generally falling? We won't.

We must begin by building up Moral Restraint on a local level. Our country must recover its roots of belief in God. Our country must turn back or we are destined to fall. It's that simple.