Owen's World

Buy Guns Here or Buy Guns There

2009-04-17T16:56:00.003-05:00

The presidents of Mexico and the United States are busy commiserating over all those nasty guns coming into the hands of the drug cartels allegedly from the United States. Suppose for the sake of revealing their insanity that they are right about where the guns come from. Does anyone with more than half a brain believe that there are not lots of other places in the world ready and willing to take drug cartel money in exchange for weapons? This is another example of the socialist Obama's mantra, 'never let a good crisis go to waste.' What they cannot accomplish under the constitution, they will try to accomplish by executive orders and unconstitutional actions to strip the hated 2nd Amendment rights from every American citizen.

We have now been treated to the odious display of both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama junketing down to Mexico to apologize for the disintegration of the Mexican nation. Mexico has been a cesspool of official corruption and oligarchical rule by an elitist handful for centuries. They have tried over the past several decades to export all of their problems to the United States via illegal immigration and keeping their economy afloat on remittance from these illegal immigrants working illegally in the United States. How disgustingly typical of a Democrat Party in power. The very nation that has created chaos in our country is tagged the victim, and the legal citizens of the United States, who are the real victims, are labeled as evil oppressors.

Stay tuned - next we get to watch Obama and Clinton, et al, groveling before the evil Raul and senile Fidel Castro, apologizing for the gulag that the Communist Party has inflicted on the Cuban people for the past 50 years. Oh, and don't forget that we'll have to send billions of our tax dollars to that benighted island nation to make up for all the bad stuff we did to them, as well. Ka-ching, ka-ching, ka-ching -- Another day, another trillion dollars wasted on socialist nightmare programs.

Another Day, Another Trillion Dollar Dream

2009-04-16T17:11:00.002-05:00

President Obama, in the midst of what he has portrayed as the worse economic crisis since the Great Depression, is wandering the world announcing more spending, more government, and more massive government debt and taxes. The latest dream program (read nightmare) is the building of a national highspeed rail system. We've had a government controlled passenger rail system inthe United States for nearly 40 years now. And how has that worked out for the taxpayers? Texas Governor Rick Perry came close to calling for seccession during an anti-tax "Tea Party" yesterday. If the President continues to propose another trillion dollar Federal Government program every day, I suspect there will be more States Rights governors jumping on that bandwagon soon. What do you think?

Obama's Vietnam

2009-03-26T08:37:00.002-05:00

Hillary Clinton is on a mission to Mexico. I fear that this is the prelude to disaster for the United States. Just as Lyndon Johnson’s presidency was brought to ruin in the mountains and jungles of Vietnam, so will Barack Obama’s presidency come to ruin in the mountains and deserts of Mexico if he insists on making war rather than legalizing and decriminalizing drugs.

American troops will march through the streets of Mexico City, and die by the thousands in Juarez and Monterrey. This is one more war that the American people do not want, and that we cannot win. Hillary Clinton is right in this much - the United States has an insatiable appetite for drugs, and the Mexican cartels have an insatiable appetite for money and weapons. Both will be satisfied, regardless of how many billions of dollars and thousands of American lives are wasted on a needless and hopeless prohibition that has long since been proven futile. Empty our prisons and jails of the hundreds of thousands of American citizens whose lives are being ruined by this war. Stop it before the United States Armed Forces become unwanted occupiers in a dozen more foreign lands.

The coming war in Mexico will not end at the border, but will be fought as well in the streets and along the highways of every city and state in this country. It has already begun. The hundreds of kidnappings in Phoenix will turn into hundreds of thousands throughout our nation if the Obama Administration chooses war. Mr. Obama will be remembered not as the historic first African American president, but the president who led us to death and ruin beyond anything that the battles of the war on terror have prepared us for. I pray that he has the courage to stop it now, rather than sinking us deeper and deeper into the quagmire as did Johnson in Vietnam. And I pray that our elected leaders at all levels have the courage to do the right thing and stand up for an end to the war on drugs before it is too late.

State Sovereignty Movement Needs You Now!!!

2009-03-13T15:51:00.004-05:00

What the State Sovereignty Movement is all about is simple - the affirmation of the 9th and 10th Amendments to the United States Constitution, and the expression of the will and intent of the individual Sovereign States to insist on the rights guaranteed by these two final Amendments in the Bill of Rights in the face of a Federal government evidencing an increasing inclination toward despotism. These Amendments are concise and clear in their substance and intent. However, the Federal government, with the complicity of the States, has consistently ignored the rights guaranteed to the people and the States under the 9th and 10th Amendments since the inauguration of Abraham Lincoln. Every American should know what has been lost, and be able to recite these Amendments from memory:

Ninth Amendment – The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Tenth Amendment – The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.

The fight to restore the rights of the people and of the States will not be easy. Centralizers, epitomized by the Democrat Party, but with plenty of Republican scalawags acting in concert with their leftist allies, will fight tooth, nail and claw to keep the money flowing to the central government and to continually burden the people with ever more laws, regulations, and taxes. See the recent post about activity in state legislatures for an update by following this link:

http://blogcritics.org/archives/2009/03/08/203349.php

If you have not already done so, write, call, email, or visit your State senators and representatives and insist that they pass State Sovereignty legislation in your state. Then insist that your United States senators and congressional representatives heed the will of the people and dismantle the vast Federal bureaucracy before it is too late to regain our freedom by peaceful means. Your governor and other State office holders who lack the will or the courage to stand-up to the Centralizers in the Federal government should be turned out of office at the next election and replaced with men and women who believe that the entire Bill of Rights is important, and who will resist every Federal attempt to deny our rights under the 9th and 10th Amendments.

Another Obama Appointment Blunder

2009-03-13T15:30:00.002-05:00

Becoming more and more reminiscent of the Jimmy Carter Administration, the Obama Administration has made another major blunder in appointing a man tainted by an ongoing FBI investigation to be the first Chief Technology Officer for the United States. Vivek Kundra was formerly head of the District of Columbia's IT department. This past week, the FBI raided Kundra's old offices and arrested two of his former subordinates. Unclear at this time is whether Kundra is also a target of the FBI investigation. At a minimum, this incident will call into question his management and leadership of that office while some very unsavory events were unfolding. Along with all of his other failed and tainted appointments (mostly for tax fraud or unpaid taxes), one has to hope that the grown-ups soon will be back in control of the executive branch of the Federal government.

Reject Proposed ELCA Social Statement, "Human Sexuality: Gift and Trust"

2009-02-22T18:30:00.003-06:00

This paper does not purport to be a thorough analysis of the proposed Social Statement, “Human Sexuality: Gift and Trust” issued February 19, 2009, by the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America “Task Force for ELCA Studies on Sexuality.” A copy of that Proposal is necessary for understanding the following comments. The Proposal provides line numbers for reference, and those numbers are used below. A link to the Proposal is contained in an earlier posting on this subject.

1. Lines 72-73 states that, “Central to our vocation in relation to human sexuality, is the building and protection of trust in relationships.” Throughout the document, ‘Trust’ is listed as the paramount value in determining what is right. Where is concern for the Word of God? The mother and son engaged in an incestuous relationship that was condemned by the Apostle Paul in I Corinthians 5 no doubt trusted one another. But trust was not and is not the determinative factor – God’s Word is.
2. Beginning in line 79, the Proposal makes an appeal to the Lutheran Confessions, naming the Reformation Principles of solus Christus (Christ alone), sola gratia (by grace alone), and sola fide (by faith alone) as guiding the Task Force in understanding what is sin. However, they have conveniently left out the starting point for understanding God’s plan of salvation for a fallen humanity, the foundational Reformation Principle of sola Scriptura (by Holy Scripture alone). A real Lutheran understanding must always start with acknowledging that Holy Scripture is the sole source and norm for all Christian doctrine (teachings). This is saddening, though not surprising, since, influenced by 19th century liberal theologians, the ELCA long ago abandoned Martin Luther’s 16th century battle cry, sola Scriptura! Instead, the ELCA has chosen to put the “wisdom of man” ahead of the “wisdom of God.”
3. Beginning in line 206, the Proposal distorts an orthodox Lutheran understanding of Law and Gospel. Lutheran theology has a highly developed and carefully, closely reasoned doctrine of the three-fold nature of the Law: Mirror, Curb, and Guide. First, the Law serves as a mirror, showing us the depths of our sin and driving us to despair. Only when, in our despair, we realize our total inability to save ourselves are we prepared to turn to the life-giving Gospel and receive the gift of salvation that is freely ours in Christ. Second, the law also serves as a curb on sin, protecting individuals and society from the horror of total anarchy that would prevail if God simply abandoned us to act on our sinful natures. Third, the Law provides a guide for living-out our new lives in Christ according to the will of God as revealed in Holy Scripture. The Proposal totally dismisses the third use of the Law. In a footnote on page 6, it defends this dismissal as necessary to “streamline its discussion of law by focusing solely on the “two uses,” but does recognize the role of law as a guide for Christians.” Having thus relegated the third use of the Law to a footnote, it appears that the Task Force feels that it has justified itself in ignoring the plain meaning of all of the biblical injunctions against homosexuality.
4. Beginning in line 252, the Proposal makes the statement that “Promiscuity and sexual activity without a spirit of mutuality and commitment are sinful because of their destructive consequences for individuals, relationships, and the community.” Logically it then follows that promiscuity and sexual activity entered into with a spirit of mutuality and commitment would not be sinful because the spirit of mutuality and commitment would remove the destructive consequences. Ignored are the biblical injunctions forbidding such behavior. Promiscuity is sin because God forbids it, without regard to the “spirit” with which the sinner enters into such activity. Even a casual review of the literature on the “swinging lifestyle” (in which couples and singles exchange partners for sex, or engage in sex with multiple partners simultaneously) reveals that swingers continually lay claim to entering into swinging with a spirit of mutuality and commitment.
5. The entire Proposal seems to be founded on a mistaken belief that trust between people is the highest good, rather than trust in the cross of Christ. One example of this humanist approach to a denial of sin is found beginning at line 432. Repentance is forsaken for a celebration of acting out perverted sexual orientations.

These five points barely skim the surface of the profound errors in biblical interpretation and understanding and the absence of trust in the Triune God; Father, Son, and Holy Spirit; evident in the work of the Task Force. However they should serve to illustrate how fatally flawed this Proposal is. Any informed Lutheran with even a passing knowledge of the Bible and the Lutheran Confessions will be able to poke similar holes in the flimsy reasoning evidenced by both the proposed Social Statement and the Report and Recommendation on Ministry Policy.

In prayerful humility for our own sins and Christian love for our brothers and sisters still in the ELCA, it is incumbent on all Christians to urge the ELCA to reject these proposals and return to the clear witness of Holy Scripture as the sole source and norm for determining all doctrine.

An Open Letter to Barack Obama and Rick Perry: Restart Sub-prime Lending Now

2009-02-22T15:39:00.004-06:00

Dear President Barack Obama and Governor Rick Perry:

Our Federal Republic, the United States of America, and the individual States which compose that Republic are facing daunting economic problems that result from generations of misguided and often unconstitutional policies, malfeasance by those who viewed their role in government as primarily self-enrichment rather than the common good, and regulators who chose to curry favor from the industries that they regulated rather than do their jobs. The current crisis was precipitate in large measure by ill-informed and inexperienced investors and Wall Street financial managers who didn’t know what they didn’t know, and didn’t want to see the inevitable collapse because they were personally profiting from the unsustainable housing finance market.

There is more than enough blame to go around. While generalizations risk tarring both the innocent and the guilty with the same brush, it is safe to say that there have been a great many consumers who lied and cheated to obtain real estate secured loans that they would not have obtained had they been honest. There have been thousands upon thousands of mortgage brokers who either aided and abetted consumer fraud, or in even more cases instigated and encouraged it. Lenders by the hundreds turned a blind eye to the fraud and misrepresentation, not wanting to risk losing fee-generating business and the disproportionate commissions they received. Both at the loan officer level and at the senior management level, a great many mortgage lenders are complicit.

Crooked real estate appraisers also played a part, knowing that if they failed to inflate values to support loan applications they would lose future business from the lenders and brokers they depend on for their livelihood. Rating agencies grossly overstated their ability to determine risk and value in the securities they rated, insurers failed to exercise due diligence before assuming default risk and failed to maintain capital ratios commensurate with the risk they were insuring. Finally, and perhaps worst of all, the Government Sponsored Enterprises (GSEs) and the Wall Street investment bankers who created liquidity in the marketplace undercut those responsible for any serious government oversight of the housing finance industry. Ill-informed elected officials were too reliant on staff who were being wined and dined by the armies of lobbyists for these disreputable and arguably “Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations.”

So where do we go from here? The process of sorting out the guilty and punishing them will drag on for years, and the reality is that the vagaries of the criminal statutes and criminal justice system make it unlikely that any significant number of those responsible will ever be punished. While the wheels of justice grind slowly, we need to get our Federal Republic and our State back on the road to financial health and prosperity.

We must recognize that housing, and housing finance, are primary drivers of our economy. We must restore a housing finance system that responsibly enables the millions of deserving Americans now being denied the benefits of home ownership to once again be able to buy and maintain private homes. I have had the opportunity to travel internationally on several occasions, including trips to the United Kingdom and Australia, and each time observed that, in general, housing in the United States is far superior in terms of quality and affordability. To maintain that superiority, and allow more deserving Americans and Texans to be homeowners, we must once more create a robust, profitable, and fair housing finance system throughout the United States and in Texas in particular. We must expand the universe of potential home buyers and users of home finance dollars in order to support housing values and restart the whole economy. We must have a robust sub-prime mortgage lending industry to do this. Here are a number of crucial factors:

First, stop demonizing “sub-prime” mortgage loans.
For many years, millions of Americans were able to realize their dreams of owning and maintaining private homes because we had a robust and thriving sub-prime housing finance industry. The seeds of the current disaster were sown when the GSEs and Wall Street investment bankers hijacked the sub-prime segment of the housing finance market and threw out commonsense.

Second, a sound regulatory regimen is vital.
This industry was not without problems in earlier decades, and we must capture the lessons learned from the past in re-creating this industry for the 21st century.

Sound regulation at the State level is needed. One size does not fit all – we are a diverse nation with diverse housing conditions and diverse practices that have grown up over centuries to deal with local needs. A contributing factor to the “housing bubble” was the failure by the GSEs, Wall Street, rating agencies, and regulators to recognize regional and local differences. Moving regulation to the State level allows for innovations to be tested in one or a few states without putting the entire nation at risk. Local regulators understand local markets and can better identify risks.

Third, a diverse and robust base of capable lenders must be restored.
Support the creation of a great many “sub-prime” mortgage lenders, and require that these lenders hold and service the loans that they originate. This is important for several reasons:

First, we must never again create behemoths that distort the market and are “too big to fail”, thus requiring government bail-outs. No GSEs, no lenders allowed to have more than a 1% market share nationally, and no lobbying by these lenders for favored treatment by regulators.

Second, lenders must be forbidden to sell off the loans that they originate. There is only so much money to be made in any housing finance transaction. As loans are packaged into securities, sold, and resold, every player along the chain siphons off a bit of the revenue – despite the popular wisdom that the GSEs and investment bankers reduced final costs to consumers by their participation, the reality is that they only deferred the costs that we are now paying in bail-outs and broken hearts over homes lost to foreclosure. When a lender must hold and service the loans it originates, it retains all of the revenue, enabling lower overall costs to consumers, and ensuring that it uses sound and responsible lending practices to avoid excessive defaults. Part of requiring lenders to hold the sub-prime loans that they originate must be a rationalization of the “mark-to-market” accounting rules that have contributed so disastrously to the current situation.

Third, all of the knowledge gained over the past decades must inform the regulatory environment. No more “stated income, stated assets, stated value” loans – in other words, no more “liar loans”. No more predatory loans. No more rating agency and investment banker no-nothings making the rules. No more mortgage brokers getting in the middle between lenders and borrowers to manufacture phony documents, coach borrowers to lie, and siphon off tens of thousands of dollars in points and fees for doing nothing that the borrowers couldn’t do for themselves more efficiently and honestly. Only actual lenders, with capital and “skin in the game”, are needed. Mortgage brokers are parasites on the industry, and the magnitude of the role they have played in creating the current debacle will probably never be fully understood. And no more circus acts demanding that lenders make loans to unqualified borrowers.

Fourth, prime the pump by making capital and other incentives available to local banks, savings and loan associations, and finance companies to be able to originate and hold on their balance sheets the “non-prime” mortgages they originate. “Certificates of Net Worth” in lieu of actual government dollars would serve well as one means of jump starting this industry. Ready access to the Federal Reserve’s Discount Window is another necessity. Responsible lenders should be encouraged, rather than discouraged, when it comes to getting into the sub-prime segment.

Fifth, a surcharge on every housing finance loan made in the State of Texas would provide revenue for the State to hire, train, and deploy the examiners and regulators to ensure that the business is being done in a safe, sound, and fair manner. The same could be done in every other State. Florida long used ‘Document Stamps’ on loan documents. Texas and other States should explore this, as well.

Sixth, and finally, no more revolving door between the regulatory agencies, the rating agencies, and private industry. Examiners and regulators have an incentive to curry favor with those they regulate when they see the opportunity for a quid pro quo, a high paying job in private industry when they leave government service. All employees and staff of government regulatory agencies, or rating agencies, should be barred for a minimum of five years after leaving government or rating agency employment from accepting a position in any part of a business enterprise that their agency regulated or rated.

Why is this especially important to Texas? The Dallas - Fort Worth Metroplex provides a vast reservoir of talented, experience, and capable sub-prime lending management and staff. There are key people here who know how to do this business in a way that benefits consumers, shareholders, and society. Put them back to work doing what they did so well before the rating agency, GSE, and Wall Street gurus forced idiotic practices on the industry, and before regulators caved in to industry pressure to eliminate commonsense controls.

Thank you for your consideration.

Open Letter To Barack Obama: End Drug War

2009-02-22T15:03:00.004-06:00

Dear Mr. President,

Mexico is a failing nation, and we are complicit in its failure. The drug policy of the United States is the single most important factor causing the disaster unfolding in Mexico. As Mexico collapses into anarchy and chaos, the United States; and particularly the border states of Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, and California; are being sucked in like matter disappearing into a black hole. Every day, Mexican drug cartel violence erupts on the streets of Dallas and Fort Worth. Simply ignoring the problem is not an option. We cannot afford to waste trillions of dollars on this problem. We can not afford to deploy our military as an occupying force to stabilize Mexico, but if we continue on our present course, that will be the inevitable outcome.

The solution to this vital national security issue is both so obvious and so logical that no politician appears willing to recognize or embrace it. That is why you, Mr. President, must stand up and take responsibility for bringing sanity to this issue. What must we do to save both Mexico and the United States? Legalize drugs. There, I've said it. Sell them over the counter at pharmacies, and tax them modestly to generate funding for drug treatment and rehabilitation programs. Open the prison doors and release all of our brothers and sisters incarcerated for non-violent drug offenses. Taking these courageous steps would free up billions of dollars now being wasted to imprison people needlessly. At the same time, it would turn hundreds of thousands of convicts into taxpayers, generating billions more dollars for productive purposes.

There are certain policies that never, ever work. Among these are the appeasement of bullies (whether Hitler, Saddam Hussein, or the brat on the school playground) and the prohibition of substances that people want (whether alcohol, tobacco, or drugs). Appeasement inevitably leads to greater loss and bloodshed later on when the bully, emboldened by appeasement, escalates the violence that could have been stopped at the outset. Prohibition inevitably leads to vast, wealthy criminal enterprises to supply the prohibited substance and to suborn and subvert public officials, judges, police, and military personnel with the unlimited money they receive as a result of high prices caused by the artificial shortage created by the prohibition.

We should have learned our lesson with the Volstead Act. Now this War on Drugs, a legacy of the Nixon administration, has destroyed countless lives and is about to destroy an entire sovereign nation on our southern border. So blame Nixon. Admit he was a misguided psychopath, and end the war before it kills any more police officers in Juarez, Tiajuana, Phoenix, or Dallas.

Legalize drugs and we will save the lives of thousands of our young people who die of overdoses every year. These children don’t set out to commit suicide, but they have no way of knowing the purity or potency of drugs bought on the street. If Wal-Mart or Walgreens sold tainted drugs, the trial lawyers would quickly put an end to that problem.

Our drug policies are racist, corrosive to societies around the globe, and endangering our national security. Toss them out, and end the prohibition before it is too late for Mexico and for the United States. We must totally change our paradigm - drugs are a public health policy matter, not a criminal justice matter. The "War on Drugs Lobby" is firmly entrenched in Washington, D.C., Albany, New York, and in all of the rest of the fifty states. Political payoffs from police unions, prison guards unions, and the thousands of corporations that profit from the current policy have thus far prevented any meaningful reform.

With daily mass killings on both sides of the border, how much longer will our elected officials continue to bury their heads in the sand? Use your "bully pulpit" to break through the barriers to change, and lead us to become a wiser and more humane people by ending the War on Drugs now.

Thank you for your consideration.

No Longer Lutheran; No Longer Christian?

2009-02-21T17:22:00.010-06:00

This past week, it was with profound sadness that I read the proposed "social statement" from the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA) "Task Force for ELCA Studies on Sexuality". Entitled, "Human Sexuality: Gift and Trust," this proposed social statement, along with its companion document, "Report and Recommendation on Ministry Policies", has the potential to take the ELCA far outside of the boundaries of the one holy, catholic, and apostolic Christian Church. And it will most certainly do so if adopted by a Churchwide Assembly (CWA) to be held in Minneapolis in August 2009. What is being proposed is nothing less than idolatry, placing human desires and deviant currents in modern society in the place of God. A reading by any informed laity in any orthodox Christian church exposes the utter bankruptcy of the ELCA - intellectual, scholarly, theological, and moral bankruptcy.

Though hardly the first of the so-called 'mainline protestant churches' to go down this path, for me this step by the ELCA is especially tragic, since I was for many years a member of various ELCA congregations. However, when the ELCA abandoned the gospel of Jesus Christ by deciding that it could re-interpret the Holy Bible whenever it seemed convenient to do so, and by entering into full altar and pulpit fellowship with denominations that do not stand on the firm foundation of the plain Word of God as revealed in Holy Scripture, I was forced to recognize that what I had for so long thought of as "my church" had left me. I diligently sought out a church that affirms God's plan of salvation in Jesus Christ alone. There remain many wonderful Christians in ELCA congregations. However, they must now think seriously, as I did several years ago, about this very important question: by continuing their relationship with the ELCA, will they be denying the the Lord Jesus Christ and entering into idolatry?

What is in the documents released by the ELCA on February 19, 2009? A denial of the plain meaning of God's Word as received by his church through Holy Scripture, and a substitution of human reason and personal preferences over the Word of God. This is a violation of the First Commandment - ignoring God in favor of following after human desires. The ELCA proposes to allow homosexual marriages to be blessed within its congregations, to allow practicing homosexuals to be admitted to its rostered ministry positions, including that of called pastors and bishops, and to condone sex outside of marriage. This is only a partial list of what is implied by the proposals that have been offered to the ELCA by its Task Force for ELCA Studies on Sexuality. Rather than calling sinners to repentance and dealing with sin pastorally, the ELCA proposes to reject God's Word and tell sinners that they should remain in their sin and celebrate it as a gift from God. One must be especially concerned for the generations of youth who will be confused and led into sin and error by the very people who should be leading them to trust God. These ELCA leaders are promoting their manipulative social and political agendas over God's Word!

The reasoning and biblical interpretation tricks used by the Task Force logically lead to condoning and celebrating plural marriage, incest, bestiality, and a host of other sinful perversions. Though strenuously denied in the proposals they put forward, the same logic and techniques of biblical interpretation that allowed the Task Force to recommend celebrating homosexuality and fornication, if followed to their inevitable conclusions, would essentially destroy the doctrine and concept of sin. Whatever an individual feels necessary to "experience one's sexuality" becomes permissible. "Bodies do not suddenly become sexual at puberty..." - what logically follows from this? Some sort of elementary school classroom instruction in masturbation and intercourse along the lines of Aldous Huxley's "Brave New World"? The Task Force appears to envision a continuum of sexual activity for adolescent (and pre-pubescent?) children, beginning with casual touching and moving on toward sexual intercourse as "trust and commitment develop"... between how many people or people of what gender is rather vague. Developing and maintaining a healthy body image, promoted by being sexually active, appears to trump the Ten Commandments.

If you take the time to read the documents presented by the Task Force, and the supplemental documents available on the ELCA website (www.elca.org/faithfuljourney), the duplicity and selective use of resources in order to achieve a pre-determined conclusion will be readily apparent. Among approximately 100 pages attempting to justify the "politically correct" conclusion, only one page is provided for the dissenting opinion, and that is followed immediately by a one and a half page dissent calling for even more radical and unbiblical actions to promote the homosexual agenda in the ELCA. (See the the "Report and Recommendation on Ministry Policies") An excellent resource that refutes the conclusions reached by the ELCA Task Force, and which is based on sound and faithful biblical interpretation, can be found at following site: http://www.lcms.org/ca/worldrelief/resources/insights/The_Contemporary_Debate_on_Homosexual_Clergy.pdf

It is almost impossible to overstate the damage already done by the Task Force for ELCA Studies on Sexuality. However, its recommendations have several hurdles to clear before it becomes the official policy of the ELCA. The ELCA Conference of Bishops will review it during thier March 5-10 meeting. The ELCA Church in Society program committee will review it during their meeting on March 13-14. Their comments and recommendations will be considered by the ELCA Church Council, which meets from March 27 through March 29. After that, the next step will be consideration by the ELCA Churchwide Assembly during its August 17-23, 2009, meeting. The ELCA has been working up to this point for decades. But that should not stop all faithful Christians from being in prayer during the coming weeks and months, asking that God would send the Holy Spirit to change the hearts and minds of the heterodox leadership of the ELCA and call them to repentance and a rejection of these sinful and idolatrous proposals.

If the worst happens and the ELCA adopts the proposals, or amended proposals that accomplish substantially the same ends, Christians then must view the ELCA in the same manner that they view the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (the Mormons) - as pretenders to the name "Christian" - wolves in sheeps' clothing that are leading many to eternal damnation. In introducing its proposed new social statement and ministry policies, the ELCA of course recognizes that the risk of schism is enormous. Faithful Christians will realize that they must separate themselves from the apostasy of their leaders. Thus the numerous pleas for ELCA members not to leave over this issue. Such pleas are likely to be in vain. True Christians cannot remain in a church that is no longer Christian. Using pretty phrases such as, "respect for the bound consciences of others", the Task Force would have the ELCA toss an anchor rather than a life preserver to their drowning neighbors. As Christians, we are called to hate the sin, but love the sinner. When we encourage our neighbor to remain in their sin, rather than to repent and be forgiven, we are acting hatefully toward them. It is not the "conscience bound belief of the neighbor" that determines what is sin - it is the Word of God that tells us plainly what sin is, and calls us to repentance. A church that places its opinions and current fads over the Word of God is no Christian church.

It appears that the ELCA has entered its death spiral, and this is truly a tragedy for all of Christendom. However, God is greater than the egos of all of those who are perverting his Word. Perhaps a reinvigorated church will rise out of the ashes of the ELCA. Jesus Christ, who went willingly to the cross to pay for the sins of all the world, and who rose from the dead triumphant on the third day, loves our Christian brothers and sisters of the ELCA, and desires that all would repent and be saved. This must be our prayer, as well.

RealClearPolitics Censorship Exposed

2008-11-28T13:40:00.003-06:00

I caught the following post that was briefly up on RealClearPolitics.com, before their censors took it down:

http://heavensent2100.blogspot.com/2008/11/deepak-chopra-on-cnn-commenting-on.html

Why is RCP protecting the hate-speech of Deepak Chopra? What is there about Chopra that makes RCP afraid to expose his anti-American rants from CNN? Many of you probably heard him on Larry King and other CNN programs, reciting the same litany of abuse that CAIR, et al, continue to spout concerning the brave men and woman of America's military. Chopra needs to be sent packing along with all of his brainwashed followers. His hate for Christianity and all things American was revealed for everyone to see on CNN, and no amount of censorship by RCP or any other apologists for this phoney guru will change that.

Secession - Our Only Hope

2008-11-15T16:35:00.004-06:00

A nation sliding rapidly into socialism. A Federal bureaucracy unresponsive to the taxpayers. Daily raids on the national treasury for the benefit of the chosen ones - transnational corporations that have given enormous sums to the two indistinguishable political parties that have shared power since the mid-19th Century. The solution today is the same as it was in 1860 and 1861 – secession. But is there a single State legislature left with the courage to do what South Carolina’s did on December 20, 1860, that is, to pass ordinances of secession? Our Federal Republic was founded on a system of checks and balances – not the lies that you learned in elementary school about the United States Congress, the Supreme Court, and the Executive Branch serving as checks on the lust for power that was natural to the other branches, but rather the unquestioned right of each State to withdraw from the Union when it determined that remaining in the Union was antithetical to the best interests of its citizens. This from the Declaration of Independence:

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, 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 secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.” (emphasis added)

Our Federal Government ceased to offer any pretense of believing in these great principles when, without a declaration of war by Congress, Mr. Lincoln waged war on the people of the Southern States, suspended habeas corpus throughout the land, sent his soldiers to destroy printing presses and imprison his critics in the North without trial or charge, exiled his most articulate critic in the United States Congress by arresting and deporting him (Clement Vallandigham of Ohio) and expressed his contempt for African Americans in the most racist of terms. After repeatedly and publicly stating that he would withdraw from Fort Sumter and not re-supply it, Lincoln sent ships to re-supply the Fort so as to provoke South Carolina into firing the first shot. This rich lawyer for the Illinois Central and other big corporate interests was perhaps the slyest politician ever to capture the Whitehouse.

We live under a Federal Tyranny today that is answerable only to itself. In 1861, Maryland voted to secede from the union. Lincoln responded by arresting and imprisoning the entire state government, and installing a puppet government of Republican Party hacks. When the people of the South, in 1860 and 1861, chafing under confiscatory taxes, withdrew their consent to be governed by the Federal government in Washington, D.C., Lincoln ignored the “right of the people to alter or abolish…” the government that was oppressing them, and instead waged the most brutal war in history against them. Adjusted for today’s population, the proportion of the populace killed in the War for Southern Independence would be about 8.2 million – far eclipsing the 6 million killed by Hitler in the holocaust. Rape squads didn’t originate in the Balkans or in Somalia – Lincoln used them most effectively in the 1860s, turning loose his rabble to rape first all the slave women and girls, and then the whites. International Law already by 1860 prohibited armies from making war on civilians – Grant and Sherman with Lincoln’s permission, totally disregarded the Geneva Convention. These are reasons why the European Powers at the end of 1862 and the beginning of 1863 were ready to come in on the side of the Confederacy. But Lincoln changed what the war was about in January 1863 by issuing the Emancipation Proclamation, which freed no slaves, but had its desired political effect in Europe. Had his life not been ended by an assassin’s bullet, Lincoln would have continued to use the massive war machine he had created, and the brutal generals he had produced, to conquer Mexico, then Canada, and then the island nations of the Caribbean and the fledgling nations of Latin America. He would have gone down in history as one of the most brutal, despotic rulers ever produced by the human race. But instead, the “Lincoln Myth” is taught as historical fact in schools in States from Maryland to California, even including all of the States of the old Confederacy.

From time to time the Tree of Liberty must be watered by the blood of patriots – can you recall the Founding Father who made that statement? We have no way forward apart form secession. It is the natural tendency of tyrannical governments to concentrate ever more power in the center (Washington, D.C.), and to restrict freedom and liberty of both persons and thought. Political correctness, a never ending torrent of new laws and regulations, and rising taxes are evidence that we are well down the road to being completely enslaved by the Federal Government. Is there a State with the courage to just say no, and to resurrect the Declaration of Independence for a new generation? One cannot help but be pessimistic after the most recent elections.

Who Slew the Elephant?

2008-11-05T10:20:00.003-06:00

Who slew the elephant? No one, but the GOP is in grave condition, suffering from morbid obesity. Having gone back to its roots, it proceeded to eat them all, once again becoming the clear champion of big Federal government, highly centralized power in Washington, D.C., imperial military conquests, confiscatory tax rates, and corruption in doling out public funds to its friends and supporters. In short, the Republican Party in the past two decades became only what it always was, only more so. To find the reasons for the Democratic Party triumph of November 4, 2008, one need only look back at the history of the Republican Party in American politics. There is nothing new under the sun, as spoke the Preacher in Ecclesiastes.

In the 19th Century, the Democratic Party held the legacy of Thomas Jefferson and the other leading lights of the founding of these United States of America. It championed limited Federal government, decentralized authority through strong Sovereign State governments, low taxes, free trade, personal liberty, and personal responsibility. But in 1860, the newly minted Republican Party came roaring in, led by Abraham Lincoln, wealthy champion of large corporations and railroads, intent on increasing taxes, consolidating power in Washington, and plundering the Federal treasury for his personal benefit and the benefit of his political allies. As the legitimate successors to the Whigs, the Republicans accomplished what the now defunct Whig Party had only dreamed of.

What Lincoln dreamed of was perpetual rule for the Republican Party, and imperial conquest that would ever enlarge the opportunity to levy taxes and fund the corruption that he brought to Washington, D.C. As his favorite generals, the butchers Grant and Sherman, were mopping-up the Americans who were putting up military resistance to Lincoln’s grand designs, largely supported by the Democratic Party in the South, Abraham Lincoln was already making plans on how he might use his massive war machine to conquer first Mexico, then Canada, and then all of the Western Hemisphere. As fate would have it, he was dead before he could put those plans into effect, but for the rest of the 19th Century, the Republican Party largely controlled the levers of power in the United States and distributed the public treasury to its friends in corrupt schemes such as the “Whiskey Ring Scandal” of 1875. Corruption continued into the 20th Century, with “Teapot Dome” and “Watergate” among the most notorious.

By the 20th Century, the Democrats finally saw the light. “If you can’t beat ‘em, join ‘em”. Adopting much of the Republican playbook, they began to achieve some national successes, including the election of the “Jimmy Carter of the early 20th Century” in the person of Woodrow Wilson. Wilson embroiled us in World War I, something no 19th Century Democrat in the tradition of Thomas Jefferson would have ever considered. For the remainder of the 20th Century, the Two Party System traded power, but no matter whether it was the Democrats or the Republicans on top, all of these corrupt politicians worked tirelessly to expand the power of the Federal government, limit personal liberty and freedom, strip powers from the States, pursue imperial goals, increase real tax rates, and distribute the Federal treasury to their friends. Well before the arrival of the new millennium, the labels “Democrat” and “Republican” became a distinction without any real difference. Each party now does its best to out-do its rival in tyrannizing the populace and plundering the Federal treasury.

There is much talk of differences in social policy, but precious little real difference. When given the power and opportunity to press for moral reforms, the Republicans have hidden-out and kept their heads down. Someone once said that the only thing worse for a politician than finding him in bed with a dead girl was finding him in bed with a live boy. We’ve had plenty of both, figuratively and literally, with both parties – recall Sen. Ted Kennedy and Rep. Barney Frank as two glowing examples. True, the public tends to be more forgiving of the Democrats, but that is only because of the Republican penchant for fulminating on their higher moral standards, which is of course a lie. The Democrats are the new Republicans and the Republicans are the new Democrats.

Several months ago, during the Primary Election season (another grotesque structure created to serve the joint and common purposes of the two indistinguishable parties), I wrote that the Republicans were ignoring and marginalizing Congressman Ron Paul (R-TX) at their peril. The king-makers who run the Republican Party were enamored with the likes of Mitt Romney (one of the Wall Street insiders responsible for the current economic collapse), Rudy Giuliani (the former New York City mayor whose corruption provided inoperative radios to hundreds of NYC Firefighters who, as a result, died in the World Trade Center on 9/11), and John McCain (co-author of the odious McCain-Feingold Act, member of the “gang of 14”, and more at home among Democrats than among most Republicans). The Republicans ignored all advice to the contrary, and continued to offer voters candidates that look like, quack like, and walk like Democrats. The voters have responded predictably. Why accept an imitation when you can have the real thing? Why vote for a Republican who differs not from a Democrat when you can just go ahead and vote for a Democrat who isn’t afraid of the label?

Until and unless the Republicans decide to become what the Democrats were in the first half of the 19th Century – the party of Thomas Jefferson – they don’t deserve our votes. Until and unless the vaunted “Two-Party System” is thrown into the dustbin of history, America is in for a long, tough slog. With ever increasing taxes and Federal intrusion into personal lives, with ever more military adventurism and imperial designs on the world, Americans will continue paying not only with their treasure but with their blood, as they did under Lincoln, and have ever since. (Adjusted for the present population of the United States, the tally of dead in Mr. Lincoln’s War would come to approximately 8.2 million, eclipsing by far the total killed in Hitler’s Holocaust.) Can the Libertarians or some new third party capture the hearts and minds of enough Americans to restore the Federal Republic that is our rightful legacy from the Founding Fathers? The next decade is sure to be interesting as we begin to find out.

There is an ancient Chinese curse that goes, “May you live in interesting times.” It seems that, for now, we are doomed to live in such times – with new economic depressions, new wars, and new social upheavals enough to fill the history books of tomorrow. America’s ship of state has been drifting toward “National Socialism” since the mid-19th Century, the most recent election are just one more tack in that direction. Christian America takes comfort in the certain knowledge that, regardless of who wins an election, God is still in charge, and history is, in the end, “His story”. For the rest of you, know that we are praying for you, too. Your lack of faith doesn’t lessen in the least the objective reality that this is God’s world, and we are His people. May the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, and the power of the Holy Spirit, guard and keep you now and always, Amen.

Adding Insult to Injury - Anti-drug Zealots Declare War on Veterans

2008-10-21T20:22:00.002-05:00

As if suffering grievous wounds for one's country isn't sacrifice enough, the anti-drug zealots are now targeting for prosecution those veterans who have the audacity to use prescription drugs to relieve their pain. In a front page story in today's "USA Today" newspaper, and in a follow-up story on page 2, we are given a one-sided account of how a few wounded veterans shared pain medication, thus running afoul of the law. As a result, they were subjected to additional pain and suffering at the hands of Federal military officials and, in at least some cases, brain-washed into believing that it was they who were in the wrong, rather than the Nixon-era "War on Drugs" laws that criminalize what should be free choices made by competent adults. One is left to wonder, is there nothing that the anti-drug zealots will not stoop to in their desire to keep the tax-payer dollars flowing freely to support their senseless and destructive activities? It is clearly not the drugs that are toxic, but rather the "War on Drugs" that has caused so much needless pain, suffering, death, destruction, official corruption, and wasted resources on a global scale.

Returning wounded veterans and active duty military personnel are now on notice: if you are in pain, and ask for the safest, most effective, and least inexpensive drugs to relieve your pain, you will be placing yourself in the cross-hairs of the anti-drug zealots and the prison-industrial complex that feeds on those who fall victim to those zealots, whether they be from the DEA or any other police agency, now including the Military Police (MPs) and the military tribunals that mete out punishment. "USA Today" should be ashamed of running this one-sided sensationalized account of events spoon-fed to it by the anti-drug zealots.

Can anyone begin to imagine the vast numbers of wounded soldiers who will now be forced to suffer in silence, rather than risk asking for the pain medication that they so desperately need? Can anyone quantify the chilling effect on the doctors who will now be afraid to prescribe pain medication for their suffering patients? The investigations and prosecutions reported are an insult to every man and woman in uniform.

The statement that the "USA Today" article attributes to Capt. Kyle Van De Water, the Army prosecutor, demonstrates beyond a shadow of a doubt that this wasn't about caring for our wounded soldiers, it was about creating a climate of fear and intimidation among those wounded and the doctors that care for them: "Capt. Kyle Van De Water, the Army prosecutor, argued at Thompson's court-martial that authorities had to 'send a message' to soldiers abusing prescriptions. 'That is a crime, and it must be punished,' he said." No doubt the message will be heard loud and clear by the doctors caring for our wounded soldiers and veterans, and no doubt thousands of those soldiers and veterans will suffer in silent agony to satisfy the anti-drug zealots who were launched on their destructive trajectory decades ago by a now long dead disgraced former president in one of his paranoid delusional fits of rage at some unknown list of imaginary enemies.

Abraham Lincoln First Inaugural Address Annotated

2008-10-20T18:01:00.002-05:00

Fellow-Citizens of the United States:
In compliance with a custom as old as the Government itself, I appear before you to address you briefly and to take in your presence the oath prescribed by the Constitution of the United States to be taken by the President before he enters on the execution of this office."

I do not consider it necessary at present for me to discuss those matters of administration about which there is no special anxiety or excitement.

Apprehension seems to exist among the people of the Southern States that by the accession of a Republican Administration their property and their peace and personal security are to be endangered. There has never been any reasonable cause for such apprehension. Indeed, the most ample evidence to the contrary has all the while existed and been open to their inspection. It is found in nearly all the published speeches of him who now addresses you. I do but quote from one of those speeches when I declare that - I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so.

Those who nominated and elected me did so with full knowledge that I had made this and many similar declarations and had never recanted them; and more than this, they placed in the platform for my acceptance, and as a law to themselves and to me, the clear and emphatic resolution which I now read:

Resolved, That the maintenance inviolate of the rights of the States, and especially the right of each State to order and control its own domestic institutions according to its own judgment exclusively, is essential to that balance of power on which the perfection and endurance of our political fabric depend; and we denounce the lawless invasion by armed force of the soil of any State or Territory, no matter what pretext, as among the gravest of crimes.

I now reiterate these sentiments, and in doing so I only press upon the public attention the most conclusive evidence of which the case is susceptible that the property, peace, and security of no section are to be in any wise endangered by the now incoming Administration. I add, too, that all the protection which, consistently with the Constitution and the laws, can be given will be cheerfully given to all the States when lawfully demanded, for whatever cause--as cheerfully to one section as to another.

There is much controversy about the delivering up of fugitives from service or labor. The clause I now read is as plainly written in the Constitution as any other of its provisions:

No person held to service or labor in one State, under the laws thereof, escaping into another, shall in consequence of any law or regulation therein be discharged from such service or labor, but shall be delivered up on claim of the party to whom such service or labor may be due.

It is scarcely questioned that this provision was intended by those who made it for the reclaiming of what we call fugitive slaves; and the intention of the lawgiver is the law. All members of Congress swear their support to the whole Constitution--to this provision as much as to any other. To the proposition, then, that slaves whose cases come within the terms of this clause "shall be delivered up" their oaths are unanimous. Now, if they would make the effort in good temper, could they not with nearly equal unanimity frame and pass a law by means of which to keep good that unanimous oath?

There is some difference of opinion whether this clause should be enforced by national or by State authority, but surely that difference is not a very material one. If the slave is to be surrendered, it can be of but little consequence to him or to others by which authority it is done. And should anyone in any case be content that his oath shall go unkept on a merely unsubstantial controversy as to how it shall be kept?

Again: In any law upon this subject ought not all the safeguards of liberty known in civilized and humane jurisprudence to be introduced, so that a free man be not in any case surrendered as a slave? And might it not be well at the same time to provide by law for the enforcement of that clause in the Constitution which guarantees that "the citizens of each State shall be entitled to all privileges and immunities of citizens in the several States"?

I take the official oath to-day with no mental reservations and with no purpose to construe the Constitution or laws by any hypercritical rules; and while I do not choose now to specify particular acts of Congress as proper to be enforced, I do suggest that it will be much safer for all, both in official and private stations, to conform to and abide by all those acts which stand unrepealed than to violate any of them trusting to find impunity in having them held to be unconstitutional.

It is seventy-two years since the first inauguration of a President under our National Constitution. During that period fifteen different and greatly distinguished citizens have in succession administered the executive branch of the Government. They have conducted it through many perils, and generally with great success. Yet, with all this scope of precedent, I now enter upon the same task for the brief constitutional term of four years under great and peculiar difficulty. A disruption of the Federal Union, heretofore only menaced, is now formidably attempted.

(NOTE: Emphasis added to the following paragraph. Mr. Lincoln’s interpretation was so completely at odds with the understanding of the political establishment of his day, and of the Founding Fathers, that one can only understand this as a liar boldly asserting a lie as a pretext for a wrongful action, and then defying anyone to call him a liar. Every one of the Founding Fathers, and every Constitutional scholar, credible Supreme Court Justice, and common citizen understood that the Constitution of the Union was in no way intended to be perpetual. Unlike the Articles of Confederacy, which it replaced, it intentionally contained no language that expressed any intention that a perpetual union was intended or contemplated by any of the Sovereign States that ratified it. In fact, some of those States expressly included language in their ordinances of ratification that clearly stated that they were reserving the right to withdraw from the Union whenever they determined that it was in the best interest of their citizens to so do.)

I hold that in contemplation of universal law and of the Constitution the Union of these States is perpetual. Perpetuity is implied, if not expressed, in the fundamental law of all national governments. It is safe to assert that no government proper ever had a provision in its organic law for its own termination. Continue to execute all the express provisions of our National Constitution, and the Union will endure forever, it being impossible to destroy it except by some action not provided for in the instrument itself.

Again: If the United States be not a government proper, but an association of States in the nature of contract merely, can it, as a contract, be peaceably unmade by less than all the parties who made it? One party to a contract may violate it--break it, so to speak--but does it not require all to lawfully rescind it?

(NOTE: Mr. Lincoln’s argument in the paragraph above is another outright lie. As a highly paid lawyer for the Illinois Central Railroad and other highly prosperous corporations and private clients, he well knew that parties to contracts may withdraw from those contracts for any of a variety of reasons – in the case of the Constitution of the United States, it was clearly intended that any and all States could withdraw whenever they determined that the Federal government had breached the agreement by its actions, or failure to act, or at any time that the State determined that continued participation in the Federal Union was counter to its interests and/or the interests of the citizens of that State.)

Descending from these general principles, we find the proposition that in legal contemplation the Union is perpetual confirmed by the history of the Union itself. The Union is much older than the Constitution. It was formed, in fact, by the Articles of Association in 1774. It was matured and continued by the Declaration of Independence in 1776. It was further matured, and the faith of all the then thirteen States expressly plighted and engaged that it should be perpetual, by the Articles of Confederation in 1778. And finally, in 1787, one of the declared objects for ordaining and establishing the Constitution was "to form a more perfect Union."

But if destruction of the Union by one or by a part only of the States be lawfully possible, the Union is less perfect than before the Constitution, having lost the vital element of perpetuity.

It follows from these views that no State upon its own mere motion can lawfully get out of the Union; that resolves and ordinances to that effect are legally void, and that acts of violence within any State or States against the authority of the United States are insurrectionary or revolutionary, according to circumstances.

I therefore consider that in view of the Constitution and the laws the Union is unbroken, and to the extent of my ability, I shall take care, as the Constitution itself expressly enjoins upon me, that the laws of the Union be faithfully executed in all the States. Doing this I deem to be only a simple duty on my part, and I shall perform it so far as practicable unless my rightful masters, the American people, shall withhold the requisite means or in some authoritative manner direct the contrary. I trust this will not be regarded as a menace, but only as the declared purpose of the Union that it will constitutionally defend and maintain itself.

(NOTE: Remarkably, in the paragraphs immediately above, Mr. Lincoln makes threats of violence against Sovereign States that are the exact opposite of what he said in the opening paragraphs of this Address, in which he declared that the Southern concerns about threats to their security and property were baseless.)

In doing this there needs to be no bloodshed or violence, and there shall be none unless it be forced upon the national authority. The power confided to me will be used to hold, occupy, and possess the property and places belonging to the Government and to collect the duties and imposts; but beyond what may be necessary for these objects, there will be no invasion, no using of force against or among the people anywhere. Where hostility to the United States in any interior locality shall be so great and universal as to prevent competent resident citizens from holding the Federal offices, there will be no attempt to force obnoxious strangers among the people for that object. While the strict legal right may exist in the Government to enforce the exercise of these offices, the attempt to do so would be so irritating and so nearly impracticable withal that I deem it better to forego for the time the uses of such offices.

The mails, unless repelled, will continue to be furnished in all parts of the Union. So far as possible the people everywhere shall have that sense of perfect security which is most favorable to calm thought and reflection. The course here indicated will be followed unless current events and experience shall show a modification or change to be proper, and in every case and exigency my best discretion will be exercised, according to circumstances actually existing and with a view and a hope of a peaceful solution of the national troubles and the restoration of fraternal sympathies and affections.

That there are persons in one section or another who seek to destroy the Union at all events and are glad of any pretext to do it I will neither affirm nor deny; but if there be such, I need address no word to them. To those, however, who really love the Union may I not speak?

Before entering upon so grave a matter as the destruction of our national fabric, with all its benefits, its memories, and its hopes, would it not be wise to ascertain precisely why we do it? Will you hazard so desperate a step while there is any possibility that any portion of the ills you fly from have no real existence? Will you, while the certain ills you fly to are greater than all the real ones you fly from, will you risk the commission of so fearful a mistake?

All profess to be content in the Union if all constitutional rights can be maintained. Is it true, then, that any right plainly written in the Constitution has been denied? I think not. Happily, the human mind is so constituted that no party can reach to the audacity of doing this. Think, if you can, of a single instance in which a plainly written provision of the Constitution has ever been denied. If by the mere force of numbers a majority should deprive a minority of any clearly written constitutional right, it might in a moral point of view justify revolution; certainly would if such right were a vital one. But such is not our case. All the vital rights of minorities and of individuals are so plainly assured to them by affirmations and negations, guaranties and prohibitions, in the Constitution that controversies never arise concerning them. But no organic law can ever be framed with a provision specifically applicable to every question which may occur in practical administration. No foresight can anticipate nor any document of reasonable length contain express provisions for all possible questions. Shall fugitives from labor be surrendered by national or by State authority? The Constitution does not expressly say. May Congress prohibit slavery in the Territories? The Constitution does not expressly say. Must Congress protect slavery in the Territories? The Constitution does not expressly say.

From questions of this class spring all our constitutional controversies, and we divide upon them into majorities and minorities. If the minority will not acquiesce, the majority must, or the Government must cease. There is no other alternative, for continuing the Government is acquiescence on one side or the other. If a minority in such case will secede rather than acquiesce, they make a precedent which in turn will divide and ruin them, for a minority of their own will secede from them whenever a majority refuses to be controlled by such minority. For instance, why may not any portion of a new confederacy a year or two hence arbitrarily secede again, precisely as portions of the present Union now claim to secede from it? All who cherish disunion sentiments are now being educated to the exact temper of doing this.

Is there such perfect identity of interests among the States to compose a new union as to produce harmony only and prevent renewed secession?

Plainly the central idea of secession is the essence of anarchy. (NOTE: In this remarkable sentence, Mr. Lincoln has condemned the Founding Fathers as anarchists, for what they did was nothing less than to secede from England. The Founding Principle that any legitimate government must derive its just powers from the consent of the governed is hereby repudiated by the tyrant Lincoln.) A majority held in restraint by constitutional checks and limitations, and always changing easily with deliberate changes of popular opinions and sentiments, is the only true sovereign of a free people. Whoever rejects it does of necessity fly to anarchy or to despotism. Unanimity is impossible. The rule of a minority, as a permanent arrangement, is wholly inadmissible; so that, rejecting the majority principle, anarchy or despotism in some form is all that is left.

I do not forget the position assumed by some that constitutional questions are to be decided by the Supreme Court, nor do I deny that such decisions must be binding in any case upon the parties to a suit as to the object of that suit, while they are also entitled to very high respect and consideration in all parallel cases by all other departments of the Government. And while it is obviously possible that such decision may be erroneous in any given case, still the evil effect following it, being limited to that particular case, with the chance that it may be overruled and never become a precedent for other cases, can better be borne than could the evils of a different practice. At the same time, the candid citizen must confess that if the policy of the Government upon vital questions affecting the whole people is to be irrevocably fixed by decisions of the Supreme Court, the instant they are made in ordinary litigation between parties in personal actions the people will have ceased to be their own rulers, having to that extent practically resigned their Government into the hands of that eminent tribunal. Nor is there in this view any assault upon the court or the judges. It is a duty from which they may not shrink to decide cases properly brought before them, and it is no fault of theirs if others seek to turn their decisions to political purposes.

One section of our country believes slavery is right and ought to be extended, while the other believes it is wrong and ought not to be extended. This is the only substantial dispute. (NOTE: This is another bold-faced lie by Mr. Lincoln. The real question that was on the table had nothing to do with slavery. Lincoln was an avowed racist. He stated repeatedly, including in the opening paragraphs of this Address, that he had no object of changing the status of slaves or of slavery. The issues on the table that were dividing the States were issues of economics – First, should the Federal government dispense public monies for the benefit of the friends of the Republican Party, contrary to the clear language in the Constitution? Second, should the Federal government impose ruinous taxes on one section of the country {namely, the South} and dispense the proceeds of those taxes disproportionately in another section of the country {namely, the North} via contracts, subsidies, and concessions granted to friends of the Republican Party?), The fugitive- slave clause of the Constitution and the law for the suppression of the foreign slave trade are each as well enforced, perhaps, as any law can ever be in a community where the moral sense of the people imperfectly supports the law itself. The great body of the people abide by the dry legal obligation in both cases, and a few break over in each. This, I think, can not be perfectly cured, and it would be worse in both cases after the separation of the sections than before. The foreign slave trade, now imperfectly suppressed, would be ultimately revived without restriction in one section, while fugitive slaves, now only partially surrendered, would not be surrendered at all by the other. (NOTE: Another bold-faced lie by Mr. Lincoln. There was no danger of any widespread restoration of the slave trade by the South; rather, the opposite was the case. Any danger that existed came from greedy Yankee merchants desirous of the proceeds of transporting slaves. 90% of the slaves transported from Africa to the Americas had been transported to South and Central America and the Caribbean islands, by Yankee slavers. The South had no economic reason to import more slaves, and was on the verge of emancipating those that were being held in slavery, and would have done so sooner had it not been for the financially ruinous taxes imposed by the Federal government and the greed of Northern business interests desirous of the products of slave labor.)

Physically speaking, we can not separate. (NOTE: This assertion is so absurd as to defy all logic. There were well defined boundaries already in existence between the States, most of which boundaries remain to this day, with the exception of those illegally changed by Mr. Lincoln for the convenience of the Republican Party, namely the creation of West Virginia out of counties in the western portion of the Commonwealth of Virginia.) We can not remove our respective sections from each other nor build an impassable wall between them. A husband and wife may be divorced and go out of the presence and beyond the reach of each other, but the different parts of our country can not do this. They can not but remain face to face, and intercourse, either amicable or hostile, must continue between them. Is it possible, then, to make that intercourse more advantageous or more satisfactory after separation than before? Can aliens make treaties easier than friends can make laws? Can treaties be more faithfully enforced between aliens than laws can among friends? Suppose you go to war, you can not fight always; and when, after much loss on both sides and no gain on either, you cease fighting, the identical old questions, as to terms of intercourse, are again upon you.

This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing Government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it or their revolutionary right to dismember or overthrow it. I can not be ignorant of the fact that many worthy and patriotic citizens are desirous of having the National Constitution amended. While I make no recommendation of amendments, I fully recognize the rightful authority of the people over the whole subject, to be exercised in either of the modes prescribed in the instrument itself; and I should, under existing circumstances, favor rather than oppose a fair opportunity being afforded the people to act upon it. I will venture to add that to me the convention mode seems preferable, in that it allows amendments to originate with the people themselves, instead of only permitting them to take or reject propositions originated by others, not especially chosen for the purpose, and which might not be precisely such as they would wish to either accept or refuse. I understand a proposed amendment to the Constitution--which amendment, however, I have not seen--has passed Congress, to the effect that the Federal Government shall never interfere with the domestic institutions of the States, including that of persons held to service. To avoid misconstruction of what I have said, I depart from my purpose not to speak of particular amendments so far as to say that, holding such a provision to now be implied constitutional law, I have no objection to its being made express and irrevocable.

The Chief Magistrate derives all his authority from the people, and they have referred none upon him to fix terms for the separation of the States. The people themselves can do this if also they choose, but the Executive as such has nothing to do with it. His duty is to administer the present Government as it came to his hands and to transmit it unimpaired by him to his successor.

Why should there not be a patient confidence in the ultimate justice of the people? Is there any better or equal hope in the world? In our present differences, is either party without faith of being in the right? If the Almighty Ruler of Nations, with His eternal truth and justice, be on your side of the North, or on yours of the South, that truth and that justice will surely prevail by the judgment of this great tribunal of the American people.

By the frame of the Government under which we live this same people have wisely given their public servants but little power for mischief, and have with equal wisdom provided for the return of that little to their own hands at very short intervals. While the people retain their virtue and vigilance no Administration by any extreme of wickedness or folly can very seriously injure the Government in the short space of four years. (NOTE: Lincoln used his “short space of four years” to bring about the death of at least 700,000 Americans. Adjusted for today’s population, this holocaust was the equivalent of approximately 8.2 million American dead, eclipsing by far the holocaust created by the Nazi Party under Hitler in World War II. Among the dead were countless civilians, both black and white. The rape squads of the Federal Army targeted slave women and young girls first, and did their work with a zeal that is still being echoed in regions such as Darfur in Africa and in the Balkan countries of Europe. And all of this carnage for reasons of financial greed by an avowed racist and willing partner of the wealthy ruling elite of the Northern States.)

My countrymen, one and all, think calmly and well upon this whole subject. Nothing valuable can be lost by taking time. If there be an object to hurry any of you in hot haste to a step which you would never take deliberately, that object will be frustrated by taking time; but no good object can be frustrated by it. Such of you as are now dissatisfied still have the old Constitution unimpaired, and, on the sensitive point, the laws of your own framing under it; while the new Administration will have no immediate power, if it would, to change either. If it were admitted that you who are dissatisfied hold the right side in the dispute, there still is no single good reason for precipitate action. Intelligence, patriotism, Christianity, and a firm reliance on Him who has never yet forsaken this favored land are still competent to adjust in the best way all our present difficulty.

In your hands, my dissatisfied fellow-countrymen, and not in mine, is the momentous issue of civil war. The Government will not assail you. You can have no conflict without being yourselves the aggressors. You have no oath registered in heaven to destroy the Government, while I shall have the most solemn one to "preserve, protect, and defend it."

(NOTE: Another lie – Lincoln precipitated the shooting war by sending ships to re-supply Fort Sumpter, after publicly and repeatedly promising that he would not do so. His personal secretaries, John Nicolay and John Hay, both stated that Lincoln did so to goad the South into firing the first shot, so as to dampen the widespread sympathy for a peaceful secession in the North. When numerous newspapers condemned Lincoln’s transparent ploy, he sent the Federal Army to smash their presses and to arrest and imprison their publishers without trial.)

I am loath to close. We are not enemies, but friends. We must not be enemies. Though passion may have strained it must not break our bonds of affection. The mystic chords of memory, stretching from every battlefield and patriot grave to every living heart and hearthstone all over this broad land, will yet swell the chorus of the Union, when again touched, as surely they will be, by the better angels of our nature.

(NOTE: That Lincoln wanted war is indisputable. That the Sovereign States of the North, the South, and the Middle had a right to secede is indisputable. Secession was being actively considered by all three regions when Fort Sumpter was fired upon, not to mention New York City’s rapidly advancing plans to secede and form a new nation state by itself for reasons of free trade. That the legacy of Lincoln is a tyrannical Federal government answerable only to itself is self-evident. The Federal system created by the Founding Fathers, in which the power of the central government was held in check by the virtue of each State retaining the right to withdraw its consent to be governed by the Federal government {i.e., secession}, was seen by Mr. Lincoln as an annoying impediment to his desire to install a permanent ruling Republican Party free to loot the national treasury at will. That the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, which stripped away State Sovereignty, was never legally ratified is indisputable. It remains to be seen whether the legislatures of the 50 States will ever muster the gumption to stand-up to the Federal government, on behalf of their citizens, and declare the 14th Amendment null and void, thereby stopping the Federal behemoth from its continued quest for power, booty, and control over the most intimate and minute detail of every person’s life. Nevertheless, it is the duty of every man and woman elected to one of those bodies to do so.)

Bail-out Prelude to What?

2008-09-28T18:02:00.001-05:00

The $700 Billion and counting bail-out of financial institutions that made stupid loans should provide the final impetus for abolishing the Federal Reserve Bank System and a return to sound money backed by precious metals or other tangible commodities. But it won’t. Congress long ago capitulated to the Hamiltonian vision of a nation run by and for the benefit of a plutocracy made up of robber barons and their bought and paid for politicians. What better example than Barack Hussein Obama? His highest aspiration after a privileged childhood as the grandson of a prosperous banker and an Ivy League education was to become just another Chicago politician. His grandmother taught him well. Follow the money.

Washington and Jefferson must be spinning in their graves, as the democratic republic that their generation fought and bled for finally abandons all pretense of being a nation of free people. We are all now enslaved by the puppet-masters on Wall Street and in Washington, DC. Abraham Lincoln’s vision of a nation bereft of the liberties thought to have been enshrined in the Constitution and the original Bill of Rights has been accomplished. Lincoln spent his entire political career ignoring or trashing these founding documents and all that they stood for. His successors have created a vast ocean of money for the corruption of the political process that far exceeds even Lincoln’s greed.

With hundreds of billions of dollars to play with, ran off by the Federal Reserve controlled printing presses, who will ever know how many hundreds of millions are siphoned off by the crooks who manufactured the crisis, then created the bail-out bill for the benefit of their cronies and themselves. Inflation will rob retirees and taxpayers as a whole of much of what they’ve worked for their entire lives, and higher taxes will take anything that is left. One is left to wonder: What would the Founding Fathers do? Perhaps take up their guns, before the powers of graft and corruption come to take them away as well, and foment a Third American Revolution.

The First American Revolution succeeded, in large part because people of honor guided the new republic through the long war necessary to throw off the yoke of oppression. The second failed, when the Southern States’ were defeated by terrorist war criminals: Lincoln, Grant, and Sherman. Sooner or later, there must be a Third American Revolution, as life under the tyranny of Washington, DC, becomes unbearable. It would be preferable that it could be accomplished peaceably, by the power of the people exercised wisely at the ballot box. However, the continuous campaign of disinformation and deception by our political leaders has left the public so disgusted and confused, that most of them have given up on the idea of any meaningful reform. Perhaps we shall be so unfortunate as to live in “interesting times,” during which the roots of the Liberty Tree will once more be watered and fertilized with the blood of patriots.

Igor - Movie Review

2008-09-28T16:52:00.005-05:00

In a nutshell: wait till this film comes out on DVD, then don't buy the DVD. Director Anthony Leonidis had an excellent vocal cast for this animated film from Exodus Film Group. Unfortunately, all that talent was wasted on this piece of toxic waste. The film, which opened on September 19, 2008, was showing on one screen at our local multiplex. I saw it along with 2 of my grandchildren, ages 10 and 13. We were among about a dozen people scattered around the auditorium. I only heard laughter once during the entire film. It appears that people are wisely staying away in droves. The advertisement for "Igor" in our local Sunday paper included a quote allegedly from the Chicago Sun Times film reviewer Bill Zwecker, "Sweet and entertaining." He must have been referring to the candy he bought at the counter before coming in, and a fly crawling across the lens of the projector in the theater where he saw the film. Rated "PG" for gratuitous potty humor and animated gore, NO STARS for "Igor".

Who Is Jesus Christ?

2008-09-28T12:31:00.001-05:00

Some people think of Jesus Christ as someone who lived and died 2,000 years ago. But that is only half the story. Yes, Jesus did live and die 2,000 years ago. Every year we commemorate the day of His death on the cross when we observe Good Friday. On the afternoon of that first Good Friday, Jesus’ dead body was taken down from the cross and laid in tomb carved into solid rock. Then that tomb was sealed with a huge and heavy stone rolled in front of the opening, and Roman guards were posted to make sure no one tampered with Jesus’ burial place.

But on the third day, the day that we celebrate every year as Easter Sunday, very early in the morning, a few followers of Jesus came to the tomb to complete the embalming process that had been delayed because of the Jewish Sabbath, which began at sundown on Friday and lasted till sundown on Saturday. What they found changed human history forever. The stone had been rolled away, and the tomb was empty! Moments later, one of His followers was met by the risen and living Lord Jesus Christ in the garden where the tomb was located. And now, as radio commentator Paul Harvey likes to say, you know the rest of the story. Yes, Jesus lived and died 2,000 years ago, but then He rose from the dead and lives forevermore.

You see, in the Christian Church, we serve a living Lord Jesus Christ. And Jesus wants to be just as alive for you and me as He was for His disciples, who saw him, talked with him, touched him, and ate with him 2,000 years ago. What a life changing experience that must have been for the hundreds of people to whom the Risen Lord and Savior Jesus Christ appeared! And do you know what is just as remarkable? Jesus Christ is still changing the lives of the hundred and thousands and millions of people who encounter the living Lord today. Is Jesus as alive for you as He was for His disciples 2,000 years ago? Are you taking time every day to talk with him, in prayer, and to listen to Him, by reading God’s Word, in the Holy Bible?

It is impossible to have a vigorous Christian spiritual life without making time for Jesus regularly. Satan is always trying to destroy our relationship with Jesus Christ. That’s why, no longer how long you and I may have been Christians, Christ calls us to know Him even better. Even the most faithful Christian can fall away from the faith when that faith isn’t regularly nurtured and fed by participating in worship and Bible study and the sacraments. In the Gospel of John, chapter 10 verse 10, Jesus says, “The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy; I have come that they may have life, and have it to the full.” Later, in John 14:6, Jesus says, “…I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.”

My friends, in these words of Jesus, we’ve just heard the reason why we must be involved in Bible study, and why you are reading this. Jesus wants us to not just have life, but to have life to the full – to be alive in Him. “We want to know Christ better – not just know truths about Him, but know Him. We want Him to be a personal, pulsating reality in our daily lives.”

I want to share with you one of the times when my personal faith was shaken, and I was in mortal danger of falling away from the faith. The congregation that I belonged to at the time was, to put it bluntly, more of a social club than of community of faith. The doctrine followed by that congregation took a low view of Holy Scripture, believing that it could pick and choose, and reinterpret the Word of God as circumstances and social norms evolved. So I read and studied widely, seeking to know God better. I came across a Reformed theologian and teacher, and listened to a lot of what he had to say, and that led me to pick up a book one day, up in Archer City, Texas, at one of Larry McMurtry’s many used book stores in that town. It was entitled, “Steps to Salvation – the Evangelistic Messages of Jonathan Edwards”, by John H. Gerstner. I knew that the late Dr. Gerstner was the mentor of the reformed theologian and teacher to whom I had been drawn. So I thought that surely this book would be helpful to me. I couldn’t have been more mistaken!

For those who may not be familiar with Reformed theology, or Calvinism, it teaches something called double predestination, or the false and heretical doctrine that God has destined some for eternal life in Heaven and some for eternal damnation in Hell. We contrast this with the Biblical Doctrine of Election, by which we understand that God has chosen, from all eternity, the elect for eternal salvation, but not that God has chosen anyone for eternal damnation. How this can be is a mystery, but it is clearly taught in the Bible.

As I read Gerstner, my despair grew and grew, until I finally became convinced that I might as well eat, drink, and be merry in this life, for there was only Hell to look forward to. My thinking was, if God, before He made the world and all that is in it, had chosen some people for salvation and others for damnation, how could I possibly be so arrogant as to think that I was among the elect chosen for Heaven? I knew my own evil heart. I knew that there was nothing in me that merited God’s grace. Following Reformed theology, I could never, ever be certain of God’s grace, and I knew I deserved eternal damnation. I was in complete despair spiritually.

Through many long months, I knew no hope. I kept going to church, but I was spiritually dead, and filled with dread. But then something wonderful happened. The Gospel was preached, and the Holy Spirit used it to convert me again, and to open my heart and mind to the love that God demonstrated for me in the person and work of Christ Jesus. Once more, I heard God’s word, and learned all over again the lesson that I need to re-learn continually – it isn’t what I have done or what I do that saves me – it is what Jesus has done. It is the cross of Christ.

In his classic novel, “The Hammer of God,” the late Bishop Bo Giertz of Sweden wrote this exchange between his characters, the Reverend Bengtsson, the old experienced Pastor who has come as a guest preacher, and the Reverend Torvik, the young Pastor who has been influenced greatly by rationalism, historical criticism, and all of the other heresies of liberal theology that have invaded the church. Bengtsson asks Torvik whether he understands the Gospel, and is sure of his own conversion before they go to preach. Torvik replies that he has been converted not only once, but twice, and asks with some indignation, how many times does a man need to be converted? Bengtsson replies, as many times as there are days that he is alive. How true this is!

As we read in Ephesians 2:1-10, “As for you, you were dead in your transgressions and sins, in which you used to live when you followed the ways of this world and of the ruler of the kingdom of the air, the spirit who is now at work in those who are disobedient. All of us also lived among them at one time, gratifying the cravings of our sinful nature and following its desires and thoughts. Like the rest, we were by nature objects of wrath. But because of his great love for us, God, who is rich in mercy, made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions—it is by grace you have been saved. And God raised us up with Christ and seated us with him in the heavenly realms in Christ Jesus, in order that in the coming ages he might show the incomparable riches of his grace, expressed in his kindness to us in Christ Jesus. For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— not by works, so that no one can boast. For we are God's workmanship, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do.”

My friends, we need to continually be in the Word. We need to have our faith nourished every day by the reading and the hearing of God’s Word, by Bible Study and by being in the Body of Christ that is the church. I’ve talked a little about a spiritual crisis in my own life. This process of getting to know Jesus as a vital presence in our lives isn’t the same for everyone – but for all who come to enjoy the peace that passes all understanding, there is must come the recognition of God revealing Himself to us in the person and work of our Savior Jesus Christ.

Our salvation isn’t dependent on us; it is dependent on Jesus Christ alone. It isn’t a matter of if we do something, then God will grant us salvation. Rather, it is a matter of because of what Jesus Christ has done in His holy innocent death and resurrection, therefore we are reconciled to God. The first way of thinking glorifies human beings. The second glorifies God. Sola Dei Gloria – all glory must be given to God alone. Amen.

By Grace Alone

2008-09-28T12:14:00.001-05:00

Why do we need God’s grace? For the answer, we turn to the Bible. Starting with Romans 3:23, where we read: for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God; and continuing in Romans 3:19, where we read, Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law, so that every mouth may be silenced and the whole world held accountable to God. In Galatians 3:10, we read, All who rely on observing the law are under a curse, for it is written: "Cursed is everyone who does not continue to do everything written in the Book of the Law."} - Who among us, or among all humanity, has ever done everything perfectly as written in the Book of the Law? No one, save Jesus Christ alone – And what is the result of our failure to keep the Law perfectly? We read the terrible verdict in Romans 6:23 - For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord. Again, in Romans 3:20, we read, Therefore no one will be declared righteous in his sight by observing the law; rather, through the law we become conscious of sin. Salvation by the merit of our works is impossible; therefore, divine grace is a necessity for us to be saved! Holy Scripture is abundantly clear on this point: We cannot save ourselves, and only by the grace of God can we be saved.

The grace of God is not our imagination that something has happened, or our dream of the possibility that something will happen; it is a divinely revealed fact. Moved by His love and compassion for humankind, God resolved to save His people by the death of His own Son, as we read in John 3:16, "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. In Romans 5:8 &10, we read, But God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us….For if, when we were God's enemies, we were reconciled to him through the death of his Son, how much more, having been reconciled, shall we be saved through his life! This good news of reconciliation with God is also recorded in Titus 2:11, where we read, For the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men. Note the past tense – it has appeared; it is an accomplished fact, not some pie in the sky ideal future. In Ephesians 2:8-9, we read, For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— not by works, so that no one can boast. Note that not even the faith which saves us is a work that we do, but instead is a gracious gift from God. This is truth is also revealed in Romans 4:16, where we read, Therefore, the promise comes by faith, so that it may be by grace and may be guaranteed to all Abraham's offspring—not only to those who are of the law but also to those who are of the faith of Abraham. He is the father of us all.

This doctrine of salvation by grace sets Christianity apart from every other religion in the world. Other religions teach that humankind has sinned, and therefore must do something to earn God’s favor, and salvation. Christianity alone stands on the promise of God’s grace alone, which we receive by the faith which He also give us freely, not because of any merit on our part, or any effort on our part. This sounds insane to the world, but it is the wisdom of God for salvation. We read of this in I Corinthians 2:6-10 We do, however, speak a message of wisdom among the mature, but not the wisdom of this age or of the rulers of this age, who are coming to nothing. No, we speak of God's secret wisdom, a wisdom that has been hidden and that God destined for our glory before time began. None of the rulers of this age understood it, for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory. However, as it is written: "No eye has seen, no ear has heard, no mind has conceived what God has prepared for those who love him"— but God has revealed it to us by his Spirit. The Spirit searches all things, even the deep things of God.

This plan of salvation by grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone, sounds like foolishness to the world. As we read in I Corinthians 2:14, The man without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned. This doctrine of being reconciled with God by God’s act of grace, which is the chief doctrine of our faith, marks the Christian religion to be of divine origin – all others are human inventions.

When we speak of saving grace, we are speaking of a personal attribute or quality in God, which manifests itself in His attitude toward humankind and in His promises and gifts, but which is not imparted to humankind. I like another shorter definition, too: “The grace of God by which we are saved is the “favor Dei”, which is the merciful, affectionate disposition, that good will of God toward humankind, according to which He forgives sins to those who are worthy of eternal death.” In our definition of saving grace, we do not include that general grace or goodness which God shows to all His creatures, as we find in Psalms 145:9, The LORD is good to all; he has compassion on all he has made. Or in Romans 15:15, where we read, I have written you quite boldly on some points, as if to remind you of them again, because of the grace God gave me. And finally in I Peter 4:10, which reads, Each one should use whatever gift he has received to serve others, faithfully administering God's grace in its various forms. This is general grace. The rains fall on the fields of the wicked and the godly alike. No, here we are talking about saving grace, which we find in John 3:16, where it is written, "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.” And also in Titus 3:4-5, where we read, But when the kindness and love of God our Savior appeared, he saved us, not because of righteous things we had done, but because of his mercy. He saved us through the washing of rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit.

IT is critically important here to understand that the grace of God and the merit of humankind are mutually exclusive terms. Romans 11:6 tells us, And if by grace, then it is no longer by works; if it were, grace would no longer be grace. Likewise, in Romans 3:24 we read, “and are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus.” Now, there are those who trust in the grace of God but reject the vicarious atonement of Christ. My friends, they are trusting in something that does not exist. They will find one day that God is a consuming fire, as it is written in Hebrews 12:29, “for our "God is a consuming fire." Saving grace is given to us only in Jesus. I Corinthians 1:4 tells us, “I always thank God for you because of his grace given you in Christ Jesus.”

The grace of God is universal. In Titus 2:11 we read, For the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men. Note that Titus doesn’t say to some men, or to the elect, or to the men who have earned it. No, It says to all men. 1 Timothy 2:4 says, This is good, and pleases God our Savior, who wants all men to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth. Way back in the Old Testament we learn about God’s desire that all people should be saved. Reading from the Prophet Ezekiel, at 33:11, we find, Say to them, 'As surely as I live, declares the Sovereign LORD, I take no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but rather that they turn from their ways and live. Turn! Turn from your evil ways! Why will you die, O house of Israel?' And in the Epistles of the New Testament we also find this proclaimed, as in 1 John 2:1-2, My dear children, I write this to you so that you will not sin. But if anybody does sin, we have one who speaks to the Father in our defense—Jesus Christ, the Righteous One. He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world.

Now, the fact that only a few are saved, and that they are saved only by the grace of God, does not invalidate the truth that God is gracious to all of humankind. Matthew 7:13-14 records Jesus’ own words: "Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it. Both propositions, that grace is universal, and that grace alone saves, must be maintained on the basis of Holy Scripture. Now this is critical, my friends: If the grace of God did not include all humankind, then no one could be sure of it, because each must then be in doubt whether God’s grace is really intended for him or her. Neither can anyone be sure of God’s grace if in any way it depends on his or her merit, because no one could ever be certain the he or she had personally done enough to be worthy of it.

The grace of God is active! God did something, and God is still doing something! As we read in John 3:16, "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. Also in Romans 5:8 - But God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us. By the preaching of the Word, God continues to offer to all people the saving benefits of Christ’s redemption. In Acts 20:24, we read, However, I consider my life worth nothing to me, if only I may finish the race and complete the task the Lord Jesus has given me—the task of testifying to the gospel of God's grace. All the acts of God by which people are brought to faith, justified, sanctified, preserved, and finally saved through faith, are motivated by His grace.

God’s grace is serious and sincere. Recall what the Prophet Ezekiel says, in 33:11 - Say to them, 'As surely as I live, declares the Sovereign LORD, I take no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but rather that they turn from their ways and live. Turn! Turn from your evil ways! Why will you die, O house of Israel?' In the Gospel of Luke, we read how Jesus wept over the unbelievers, in chapter 19, verse 41 - As he approached Jerusalem and saw the city, he wept over it. Similarly, in Matthew 23:37, we read the Savior’s words: "O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets and stone those sent to you, how often I have longed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, but you were not willing.

The grace of God is efficacious. Efficacious simply means having the power to produce a desired effect. The declaration and offer of God’s grace in the Gospel possesses inherent power to impress and move the heart and to work acceptance of the offer. The Word of God, which offers this grace, works effectually in them that believe. As we read in I Thessalonians 2:13, And we also thank God continually because, when you received the word of God, which you heard from us, you accepted it not as the word of men, but as it actually is, the word of God, which is at work in you who believe. Now this is very important friends: The reason that God’s offer of grace does not always move the sinner to repentance and to faith lies in the perverse will of humankind. It is never because of any deficiency in God’s offer or power. In Matthew 23:37 we read, "O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets and stone those sent to you, how often I have longed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, but you were not willing. Also, in Acts 7:51 are recorded the words that Stephen, the first Martyr, spoke to the Sanhedrin: "You stiff-necked people, with uncircumcised hearts and ears! You are just like your fathers: You always resist the Holy Spirit!”

Holy Scripture clearly teaches these two facts: First, God’s offer of grace is universal; second, but not all will be saved. For those who will not be saved the fault lies not with God, but with their own stubborn and persistent resistance to the Holy Spirit. For those who are saved, the merit lies not with themselves, but is wholly the merit of Christ, which they receive by faith, and that faith is not something they decide, but it is a gift of God, “lest anyone should boast.”

It is my prayer that, as you read this, and search the Scripture, you will not harden your heart, but will receive the grace that God so earnestly desires to give you. Trust in the Lord Jesus Christ, for there is no other name given among men by which we can be saved. Amen.

The West Shall Rise Again!!!

2008-09-05T15:25:00.004-05:00

With two Western state politicians on the Republican ticket, the elitist Eastern Establishment duo fielded by the Democrats must be feeling pretty bummed out right about now. Comparing Senator Obama's choice of career Washington, DC, insider Joe Biden for his running mate to Senator McCain's choice of Alaska Governor Sarah Palin is like comparing watching the Super Bowl with watching paint dry as spectator sports. Boring!!! The deification of their candidate in a faux Greek temple did nothing to enhance his image as a man of the people. To the contrary, it only added to his reputation as an out of touch Chicago politician - another cog in the Democrat Machine that has controlled Chicago and Illinois politics for the past 6 decades.

The Republicans have an opportunity to be different, and to restore the United States to constitutional government. It remains to be seen whether they will have the courage to do so after the January Inaugural Ball has ended. The Democrats are toast. Start making your wish list for the McCain Administration, and include your top priorities in the same envelopes with your campaign contributions. Who knows? That may even get them read by someone who matters. There has been some progress on the Supreme Court - we need more. The Second Amendment has been supported in the most recent Supreme Court term. We need the unconstitutionally enacted 14th Amendment struck down during the first four years of McCain - Palin, to restore the Federal system of checks and balances that our Founding Fathers established when the Bill of Rights was ratified effective December 15, 1791. We need the Internal Revenue Service abolished, in favor of a tax system that doesn't rely on tens of thousands of pages of regulations that not even those charged with enforcing them understand. We need a lot more - but these two steps would start us in the right direction.

As the Governor of what the Founding Fathers intended to be a Sovereign State not subordinate to an out of control Federal Government, perhaps Sarah Palin can be the catalyst for a return to a real democratic republic. The Founding Fathers envisioned a nation made up of Sovereign States with veto power over unconstitutional usurpation of power by the politicians in Washington, DC, who deem themselves answerable only to the big money interests that pay for their campaigns and junkets. Up till now, neither of the two major political parties in the United States has shown any real interest in being either truly democratic or truly republican, despite their high sounding names. Maybe, just maybe, McCain and Palin will turn out to be different. For now, patriots from every corner of the nation have no other choice. Absent a viable third party, the so called Republicans are the only game in town. Let's hope that they look to Washington and Jefferson for their models of how to run a democratic republic, rather than to Lincoln and Bush - neither of whom exhibited any knowledge or respect for the Constitution or the Declaration of Independence in their painful administrations.

War on Drugs Insane

2008-05-19T11:38:00.000-05:00

One popular definition of insanity is doing the same thing that has, over and over again, failed, but expecting a different outcome this time. This is precisely where the United States of America finds itself in the so-called “war on drugs.” We continue to pursue the same old failed policy of treating drugs as a criminal justice matter, rather than a public health issue, and yet somehow we expect a miracle to occur that will solve the problem. This is governmental insanity at every level. Prohibition, which is the Federal Government’s underlying philosophy with regard to drugs, has never worked and never will work. It didn’t work when the United States experimented with a prohibition on alcoholic beverages during the “Roaring Twenties”, and it hasn’t worked with drugs since President Richard Nixon declared a “war on drugs” in 1972.

Just as the “law of unintended consequences” worked to make the cure (prohibition of alcoholic beverages) worse than the disease during the first third of the 20th Century in America, it has worked to make the war on drugs one of the most destructive Federal misadventures in our era. Just as the Government prohibition on alcohol created wealthy and powerful organized criminal enterprises that still haunt America 75 years after Prohibition ended, so the Government prohibition on drugs has spawned wealthy and powerful drug gangs that are undermining society at every level, both at home and abroad. In 1920’s America, it wasn’t illegal alcohol that was the problem, it was that alcohol was illegal. And so it is in 21st Century America – it isn’t illegal drugs that are the problem, it is that drugs are illegal. Despite all of the propaganda poured out from a criminal justice system and prison industrial complex that are deeply invested in and deeply beholden to the war on drugs for much of their funding and profits, the American people overwhelming believe that current policies are misguided and harmful. They only have to pay attention to the news each day to know that we are in a bad situation that is growing ever worse as a result of the Government’s unswerving devotion to its current drug policy.

As a result of misguided drug prohibition, Mexico is becoming a war zone on our southern border. Latin American nations have been destabilized and corrupted beyond belief by the combination of drug profits and U.S. anti-drug aid programs. Now President Bush is proposing that we send another $1.4 Billion to help Mexico and Central America fight the drug traffickers. Does any sane person really believe that this money will change the outcome? The $1.4 Billion will disappear into the coffers of police and politicians corrupted by the war on drugs. Or worse, it will flow into the hands of the terrorists who have found the United States’ obsession with the war on drugs a lucrative source of funding for their terrorist cells and operations. It is time for Congress and the States to just say no to the war on drugs. It is time to declare an end to prohibition, and abandon the criminal justice approach.

How many more of our children must die, and how many more lives must be destroyed by unjust imprisonment and political corruption before we the people demand an end to this insanity? People die from drug overdoses because they have no way of knowing the purity or the potency of the drugs they are using. That doesn’t stop them from using them, however. Wouldn’t it be better to allow the legal sale of drugs, with the same safeguards on purity and potency that cover all other medications and food and drugs sold in the United States? For those who need help with addiction or over-use, wouldn’t it be better to apply proven therapies rather than locking them away in prison to be raped and abused by hardened criminals? Wouldn’t it be better to allow recreational drug users to remain taxpayers rather than to make them wards of the state in prisons? Only the giant prison industrial complex profiteers should logically prefer the current system. No sane parent, grandparent, spouse, or friend of a drug user would want to see their loved one trapped by the vampire we know as the war on drugs.

Is there any politician with the courage to just say no to George W. Bush and the prison industrial complex? Mexico and the border counties of the United States are in the midst of a war imposed on them by political opportunists in our government. Local police and politicians in these areas have little choice but to either accept the payoffs from the drug lords or flee for their lives. We the people have the ability to stop the insanity now. Every American who cares about the future of our children and grandchildren, and about the well-being of our neighbors to the south, ought to be on the phone demanding that their representatives in Washington, D.C., and state capitals around the country end the failed drug prohibition and end the war on drugs now. Further, they ought to be demanding that their children and grandchildren now in prison be freed from the slavery imposed on them by the prison industrial complex. Unless sane people demand change, the United States will continue to keep doing the same old war on drugs thing that has failed for decades, and expect a different outcome this time. Get angry, get involved, and demand an end to the war on drugs before your family is the next to be destroyed by this bloated Government make-work project for police and prison guards.

The Case For A Western President

2008-05-11T17:44:00.004-05:00

From 1861 till 1865, the American South fought a war for independence, not over the issue of slavery, as recent generations have been miss-taught in public schools even in the South, but over the bold efforts by the Northern States to promote a concentration of power in the Federal Government. This concentration of power was and is at odds with the United States Constitution as it was originally conceived and with the spirit of the American Revolution. The freemen of the American South didn’t bleed and die to win independence from mad King George of England, only to surrender their freedom to a Federal Bureaucracy in Washington, D.C. So, when the commercial interests – the bankers, industrialists, and other profiteering pigs feeding at the Federal trough – pushed forward their economic agenda to concentrate even more power in the Federal Government, the American South said enough.

Having voluntarily acceded to the union of American States when the Constitution was ratified, they now chose to voluntarily secede from that union, as was their right under the Constitution. Unlike the Articles of Confederation, which had provided for a perpetual union of sovereign States (which provision was ignored when the individual States seceded from the Confederation to join together under the new Constitution), the United States Constitution contained no provisions for a perpetual union. The Southern States were Sovereign political entities, and they were acting constitutionally and in accordance with both the letter and spirit of the Declaration of Independence when they seceded. Bigger is not always better, and as the Greeks had learned 3,000 years earlier, decentralized government is a far better way to ensure the individual rights and liberties of a free people.

The American South was moving inexorably toward emancipation of its slaves, and would have, over the ensuing decade or two, completed that task, just as other Sovereign Nations that make up Western Civilization have done. The threat of Southern secession should have moved the Federal Government to stop its overreaching. It should have led to peaceful negotiations between the Federal Government and the Sovereign State Governments, and an increase in individual freedom and personal liberty. Instead, the greedy Northern industrialists and bankers were unsatisfied with the profits they were making off slavery in their textile mills and banks. They were eyeing even greater profits from Federal Government contracts. So they kept beating the drum for war. The War for Southern Independence which followed resulted in the deaths of more Americans than have occurred in all other American wars combined, from the American Revolution to the current Iraq War. It also resulted in huge fortunes being accumulated by a cadre of Yankee families, some of whom continue generations later to live on the dividend of those ill-gotten gains.

Meanwhile, the American South was impoverished, its political and personal rights stripped away along with its wealth, its women, both black and white, raped and mistreated ruthlessly, and its children left to starve by the Federal Government. The words of Lincoln’s Second Inaugural Address were mere empty rhetoric. There was malice toward all things Southern, and mercy for none who had dared to stand-up for the rights supposedly guaranteed to them under the Constitution. Not just the Southern Military, but every Southerner – child or adult, slave or free – was made to suffer under the heel of oppressive military occupation. The pillaging, beatings, rapes, and other depredations against the populace continued for a decade or more. Homes, lands, factories, stores, and other properties were confiscated either outright or by nefarious legal means. To the victor went the spoils.

Over the past 44 years, we have elected a number of Southerners to the highest office in the land – the presidency. What has it gained us? Starting with Lyndon Johnson in 1964, we have been treated to one great power grab after another. Johnson, Carter, Bush, Clinton, and Bush have each turned their back on the history and heritage of the American South, even though it was largely responsible for their political victories. Instead of supporting a smaller, less intrusive Federal Government, they have worked tirelessly to expand the Federal Government and intrude ever more into the private lives of Americans. Each has been responsible for stripping away more of the little power retained by the Sovereign States. They have each done great harm by consolidating and centralizing ever more power in the hands of Federal Bureaucrats. In short, the election of Southerners to the office of President of the United States has done enormous harm to the American South, and to all Americans whether the citizens of Northern States realize it or not.

There have been two politicians from Western States who have had enormous effect on the nation, as well – one for ill, and one for good. President Nixon, despite deep character flaws, did manage some good, but the disgrace of impeachment and resignation over the Watergate incident will forever be his legacy. President Reagan, with his optimism and belief in the ability of the American people to order their own lives and affairs, made serious and somewhat successful efforts to reduce both the size of the Federal Government and its intrusion on the rights of citizens and the Sovereign States.

Ronald Reagan was arguably the greatest American President of the 20th Century. However, the small minded and greedy men who followed him into office have done terrible damage to what Reagan accomplished. Lacking both Reagan’s self-control and faith in the American people, they have let their illicit lusts and their greed for power, wealth, and privilege control them. So we are left with a Federal Bureaucracy more bloated and rapacious than at any time in our history. Our Sovereign States are mere puppets, dancing on the strings pulled by unelected administrators in Washington, D.C.

John McCain is a Western State politician. His record as a United States Senator is decidedly mixed. He has shown both great personal heroism and self-control while a prisoner of war in Vietnam and a callous disregard for the United States Constitution in sponsoring so-called campaign finance reforms while a Senator. It remains to be seen whether he will rise above his Senatorial record if elected president. One thing he has going for him – he isn’t a Southern Scalawag, like the sorry lot that began with Lyndon Johnson. Nor is he a Northern State politician bred to wallow in the Federal feeding trough, like Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. Obama has stated plainly his contempt for the Constitution in proclaiming his intent to appoint Federal judges who will dance to his political will. Hillary Clinton has proclaimed her allegiance to big government consistently in her nationalized health care proposals and other plans. The 2008 Presidential Election gives us the choice between known political evil on the Democratic ticket, and a roll of the dice on the Republican ticket. Let’s hope that the dice are lucky for us, and we get another Reagan from the Western States. We cannot afford another Southern Scalawag in the White House.

Barack Hussein Obama - An Almost Blank Slate

2008-05-11T13:19:00.008-05:00

Speculating About an Obama Administration

As Hillary Rodham Clinton wonders whence came this bus that is about to run over her, other Americans, too, are wondering who or what is Barack Hussein Obama? Much about who Senator Obama is seems a blank slate, waiting till after his inauguration as the 44th President of the United States to be filled-in. Indeed, Senator Obama may be a kind of political chameleon, changing his positions and policies, his friendships and affiliations, in accordance with the political landscape in which he finds himself. However, there is enough of a paper trail to make reasonable forecasts of what Americans can expect from an Obama Administration.

National Security
Kiss Israel good-bye. Senator Obama doesn’t appear to see Israel as a bulwark holding back the tide of Islamist terror in the Middle East. He appears to identify more with the Muslim Palestinians, who he seems to liken to the “oppressed” African American communities that he worked to organize in 1980s Chicago. His sympathies appear to lie on the wrong side of the Security Wall that Israel is constructing with much success to reduce terrorist incidents within its borders. The Muslim Palestinians have made enormous progress in eliminating Christians from both Palestine and Lebanon. Expect them to complete the task with a friend in the White House, and expect the nation of Israel to experience a drastic increase in Islamist terror attacks.

Kiss Iraq good-bye. Senator Obama’s anti-war credentials are impeccable. He listens attentively to the drumbeat of demands from the radical left to end the war immediately. The killing fields of Southeast Asia, soaked with blood after the United States Congress stabbed South Vietnam in the back by withholding promised military aid following the Peace Agreement, will be overshadowed by the blood-soaked sands of Iraq when the last American helicopter lifts off from the roof of the United States Embassy in Baghdad. Our loyal allies, who have trusted our promise to stand by them while they build a free and democratic republic in the heart of the Caliphate, will find that American Democrats are no more trustworthy in 2009 than they were in 1969. Afghanistan, Pakistan, and all of the other ‘stans of the Caliphate will succumb in rapid order to the horrors of extremist Islamist rule. The Talibanization of the Caliphate will proceed apace.

Kiss Europe good-bye. The socialist states of Western Europe, already in the midst of a mass cultural suicide brought on by abandonment of Christianity and unmitigated hedonism, are slipping into the hands of the Caliphate. Barack Hussein Obama will not answer the call for help, when the Muslim hordes already occupying the heart of formerly Christian Europe begin to seize power and invoke Sharia law. Russia, mortally wounded by seven decades of Communist dictatorship, will continue its death spiral with the oligarchs and former Communist leaders, such as Vladimir Putin, stealing whatever they can while their countrymen fall prey to the Caliphate and the Russian Mafia. Mass conversions to Islam will occur from London to Moscow and from Stockholm to Athens, as Europeans make their peace with Islam and a new Dark Age descends over Europe.

Domestic Security and Policy
Senator Obama’s present religious affiliation is a matter of calculated political positioning, rather than a matter of conscience and conviction concerning particular doctrines. Watch for him to inch closer and closer to Islam, during an Obama Administration. With a fatal misunderstanding of Islam and the Caliphate, a President Obama will believe that embracing Islam and converting to Islam will give him a position of power in the global Caliphate, and secure America from Islamist attacks. Nothing could be farther from the truth. Domestic security will spring leaks on every front, as Islamist terrorists see the election of Obama as just one more sign of the weakness and inferiority of Western Civilization. Emboldened by an Obama win in November, Islamist terror cells will carry-out attacks in the American heartland, rightfully convinced that a President Obama will focus on accommodation rather than retaliation.

Kiss homosexual rights good-bye. The Islamists in our midst will begin systematic persecution of homosexuals and others they consider deviant and undeserving of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Just as is already occurring in major European cities, homosexuals will find their world severely circumscribed by gangs of Muslim youths who will taunt, attack, and kill with impunity, as they create “no go” areas for local police. Along with the reversal of fortunes for homosexuals will come a reversal of fortunes for gender equality, freedom of expression, and religious freedom. When Obama sits down to talk with the President of Iran, he’ll be told in no uncertain terms how homosexuals are to be dealt with. By the end of a second term for an Obama Administration, America will begin to look more and more like a third world country.

Immigration, border control, and the related issues of national security will become radicalized during an Obama Administration. Open borders mean an ever greater influx of Islamic terrorists and radicalized Muslims. Ironically, it will be an African American president who sets the United States on a path inevitably leading to the restoration of chattel slavery. Islam believes that Christians and other non-Muslims are destined to serve Islamic masters. As Barack Hussein Obama embraces Islam as his new found religion, he will condemn the millions of Christians who take their faith seriously to a life of servitude under the overlords of the Caliphate.

Who He Is
Barack Obama began his career as a community organizer. He learned to listen and to play-back what people told him. He has no firm principles of his own, other than to figure out which way the parade is marching and run ahead to appear to lead it. That is his campaign strategy, and it is serving him well. There is no reason to believe he will let a little thing like the Constitution of The United States of America stand in his way if he is elected president. He has already stated plainly that he will appoint judges who will legislate from the bench according to his vision for America, rather than follow the Constitution. He will no doubt be listening very hard when Iran's president and the leader of Hamas tell him which way the parade is marching. Is it not reasonable to expect that he'll run to get ahead of it so as to appear to be leading the United States into the Caliphate? A President Obama will be ruled by the same principles that have guided him thus far - personal expediency. Just as he used the Reverend Jeremiah Wright as long as Wright was useful, so he will use a facade of Christianity only as long as he finds it useful.

For a nation to last as long as the USA has under the same Constitution is almost unheard of in the history of the world. As Americans abandon the moral principles of individual liberty, limited Federal government, and an allegiance to the foundational Christian values and worldview that have so richly blessed this great land, the future is far from certain. One thing we can be sure of: When a majority puts its trust in a messianic political leader rather than in the true Messiah, Jesus Christ, it is on the path to slavery and ruin rather than freedom and prosperity.

Boomer Beware

2008-04-28T14:49:00.004-05:00

On what basis does the Federal government justify refusing to allow free citizens the right to decide for themselves the degree of pain that they find tolerable, and treating it inexpensively when it becomes excessive? This is really a very simple question: By what right does the Federal government deny pain relief to citizens who are experiencing varying degrees of physical pain? Is it that the Federal government always knows what is best and chooses what is best for individual citizens? Or is it an insidious and evil streak of collective cruelty that possesses politicians and bureaucrats who have the power to grant or deny pain relief to others? Many famous experiments have been performed that demonstrate how willingly, even gleefully, the average college student, put in a position to inflict pain, will torture others when it can be done anonymously and/or without fear of retaliation. This seems to me to be the only rational explanation to the question, “Why are law abiding, tax paying, and generally honest citizens denied access to inexpensive and effective pain medication in the United States of America?” Withholding cheap, effective pain medication from those who need and desire it can only be explained by the desire of Federal bureaucrats and politicians to inflict pain on citizens simply because they can do so without fear of being held accountable for their cruelty.

In countless other nations around the world, cheap, effective pain medication is available over the counter (OTC) from pharmacies, or even from convenience stores, discount stores, and supermarkets. Not in the USA, however. Here someone in pain must gain access to a medical doctor, pay for an expensive office visit; convince the skeptical physician that the pain is both real and so intense as to be intolerable, and only then be dispensed a very small quantity of pain medication. Rather than make use of cheap, readily available, and safe opiate based pain relievers, the giant pharmaceutical companies promote new, less effective, and far more dangerous pain relievers – only recalling them from the market when the evidence of the dangers posed by these new medications becomes so overwhelming that judges and juries start hitting “Big Pharma” with multi-billion dollar lawsuits. All this because the Federal government, in its infinite wisdom and cruelty, has decided that rational adults, even those in their fifth, sixth, seventh decades and beyond, will not be allowed to gauge their own pain and buy cheap opiate based pain medication OTC to relieve their own suffering.

As the Baby Boomers age, the number of individuals suffering needlessly grows by thousands every day. How long will the aging Boomers continue to buy the lies of the Federal government and Big Pharma that deny them the pain relief they so desperately need? If hydrocodone, codeine, and other natural and artificial opiate based medications are made available OTC, will some people become addicted? Of course, but no more will be addicted by OTC pain medication than are now becoming addicted every day to street drugs, alcohol, and tobacco. Millions of Americans are self-medicating with alcohol, because they either cannot afford medical care, or because the doctors they go to for pain relief are being harassed by the Federal government and Big Pharma for prescribing cheap opiate based pain relief medicines.

Thousands of doctors have stopped prescribing the cheap, readily available pain medicines that their patients need to maintain any decent quality of life. Why? – Because Federal Drug Enforcement thugs are threatening them with prosecution as drug dealers if they don’t fall in line. Big Pharma would much rather sell the next $25 per pill pain reliever that come out of their labs, regardless of the uncertainty about product safety, than see aging Americans have access to cheap, safe, OTC opiate based pain medications. Big Pharma and its lobbyists own Congress, as well as the alphabet soup of Federal agencies that do their damnedest to regulate every aspect of our lives. If you are a Federal bureaucrat, and hope to land a cushy, high paying job with Big Pharma when you retire early from your present place at the Federal feeding trough, wouldn’t you do all you could to protect Big Pharma in the meantime?

AARP ought to be taking this issue on with all of the resources it can muster. Why isn’t it doing so? Could it be that AARP is more interested in marketing its endorsed programs than in really looking out for the interests of senior citizens? It is time for seniors and soon to be seniors from every walk of life to start demanding that the cruelty stop now. It is time to demand that senior citizens, as well as all free adults in the USA, have cheap OTC access to hydrocodone and other opiate based pain medication. The answer to the question posed in the first sentence of this post is simple: There is no justification for the Federal government to refuse free citizens the right to decide for themselves when they are in pain, and to have access to cheap, safe pain relief without the expense, inconvenience, and intrusiveness of getting a doctor to prescribe. It is cruel and inhuman treatment to withhold OTC opiate based pain medication from American citizens. And it is doubly cruel to do so with seniors.

Senior citizens, this is a call to arms. Subject your elected representatives to an unceasing barrage of demands that hydrocodone and other natural and artificial opiate based pain medicines be made available OTC now. Demand a stop to the harassment of doctors who prescribe pain medication, and demand that the prosecution of compassionate doctors who are defying the cruel demands of the Federal government and Big Pharma be ended. You know what is at stake. Don’t wait till you, your spouse, or someone else you love is needlessly suffering in agony with pain that could be easily relieved before you raise your voice and your fist demanding change. Don’t let another town hall meeting with your Congressional Representative or Senator go by without a vocal demonstration by seniors organized and demanding an end to the ‘nanny state’ mentality telling us that someone else knows more about our aches and pains than we do. Take control of your own pain management. At your age, you’ve earned the right to make such decisions for yourselves. You don’t need some thirty-something overpaid bureaucrat or Big Pharma executive deciding whether you are hurting enough to be thrown a few crumbs from their table, or experimenting on your bodies with their latest dangerous drugs.

The "ebay Barometer"

2008-04-24T16:21:00.003-05:00

One of the anecdotal evidences that I follow is the sale of precious metal, in the form of coins, on "ebay", the wildly successful online auction service. When silver, gold, and platinum coins are bid up far above reasonable and rational market prices, I take it as an indication that consumers are feeling more than the usual edginess about the economy, and about politics, as well. After all, “It’s the Economy, Stupid,” was the horse that Bill Clinton rode all the way to the Whitehouse. Lately, silver coins, in particular, seem to be selling at prices far more than would seem reasonable by either the spot price for the metal or the numismatic value for the coins. So what is going on here?

One possibility is a growing sense that the global economy is on the brink of collapse. Europe continues to behave as though it is completely oblivious to the catastrophe that is already unfolding among the pseudo democracies that make up the European Union. Germany, France, Italy, Greece, The Netherlands, Belgium, Spain, and the Scandinavian countries have created social entitlement programs (read: welfare) that they have no hope of paying for, even in the short term. Their native populations are shrinking at a pace that is the equivalent of a continental “going out of business” sale. The common currency that they have created, the Euro, is the fiat money of all fiat monies, without so much as the “full faith and credit” of a viable government to sustain it, however strong it may look, for the moment, against the United States Dollar. Russia is so sick that it is highly implausible that any amount of life support can keep it in business for more than a few more years. The population is collapsing from not only a shockingly low birthrate, but also from epidemic diseases that are wiping out native Russians by the millions.

Nature abhors a vacuum. We all remember that rule from middle school science, don’t we? So what is replacing Europe as our ancestors knew it? The transcontinental Caliphate of fundamentalist Islam is about to topple the governments in country after country. The first, second, third, and fourth generation Muslims living in the heart of Europe, as well as the Asian provinces of Russia and in the United Kingdom, are on the threshold of achieving numeric parity with the aging, non-reproducing native populations of these dying nations. Most of the European governments are already in a schizophrenic combination of full denial mode and full appeasement mode. They steadfastly refuse to acknowledge the demographic realities of their collapsing native populations and unsustainable welfare state programs. Likewise, they refuse to acknowledge that their native populations are being numerically overtaken by Muslim immigrants, whether recent or a generation or more removed from their homelands. Simultaneously, they are falling all over themselves to apologize for any perceived slight against Islam, real or imagined. Under the rubric of “anti-hate” laws and regulations, they are rapidly expanding special privileges for Muslims at the expense of what should be non-negotiable human rights and personal liberties for their own native peoples.

While I will opine that the prices being paid on "ebay" and elsewhere for precious metals are unsustainable, and many of the buyers will be kicking themselves as they watch the value of their purchases go south in the months ahead, the jitters behind these prices are understandable. There are several lessons to be drawn for the United States as it watches the “ebay Barometer” continue to reflect perceptions of the global economic future.

First, we simply cannot afford to watch the population of Muslims in America grow from the estimated four million here today to forty million over the next decade or two. We need to stop the immigration, both legal and illegal, and make concerted efforts to eliminate the fertile soil that we have allowed for a radical, unassimilated Muslim presence to grow rapidly in our midst.

Second, we need to fix our own entitlement program problems. The demographic don’t lie. Our combination of Social Security, Medicare, and other Federal entitlement programs are a cancer eating away at our national identity. Do we really want to emulate France, Italy, or Spain when it comes to social engineering and economics? Do we really want to emulate the horrible Canadian healthcare system? In the United States, one can be referred for an MRI and have the test done and a report back to one’s doctor in 48 hours, for routine matters, and almost immediately for emergencies. In Canada, the only way to accomplish the same speed and efficiency is to come to the United States for healthcare. Good luck getting an MRI in less than two years, for non-emergencies, and expect to wait months even if the medical situation is considered an emergency. Do we want a national healthcare system for the United States? – No thank-you; we’ve seen the disastrous results of such programs repeated over and over again in the collapsing countries that bought-in to a giant healthcare entitlement program. We’ll have none of that here, thanks all the same.

Third, we need to recognize that the threat of radical Islam isn’t going away just because Barack Hussein Obama or Hillary Rodham Clinton promise us it will if we elect them to run the country for the next four or eight years. Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi can pontificate all they want to over the War on Terror and tell us that we are just tilting at windmills. Tell that to the 3,000 who died on September 11, 2001. Tell it to the hundreds that have died in the Madrid and London terror attacks. Spain chose to respond to the carnage wrought by Islamic terrorists by surrendering. Okay, fine – when you’ve allowed yourself to become out-numbered because of stupid socialist nanny-state programs and uncontrolled immigration, then perhaps you don’t have much choice. The USA still has a choice, if we make the right decisions in the next few months.

Fourth, we need to stop the nonsense of "hate crime", "hate speech", etc. Singling out one group as worthy of special protection can only be done at the expense of other groups. Crimes are crimes, no matter who the victims are. We have seen these feel-good laws and regulations used very effectively in Canada and Europe to silence dissent and strip away basic human rights. Whenever this occurs, we are all diminished, and our Constitution is compromised.

The Islamic terrorists already in the U.S., and those eager to get in to attack us, believe that we are no different from Europe – weak-willed, decadent, and focused on peripheral issues such as homosexual rights and national healthcare, rather than on survival as a free people. It is up to the real Americans to prove them wrong. Just say no to surrender, or decide now that your children and grandchildren will have to learn, along with the late, great Europe, to bow toward Mecca five times every day. It is probably too late for Europe, but it doesn’t have to be for us. The choice is that clear, and I think that a lot of people are beginning to understand these facts. After all, the “ebay Barometer” is already predicting stormy weather.

Texas - Right on Guns - Wrong on Mormons

2008-04-22T13:33:00.002-05:00

Texas bills itself as like, “a whole other country!” This is true to a remarkable and refreshing degree. Personal liberties are taken seriously. Personal responsibility is taken seriously. Limited government is taken seriously. The original United States Constitution, and the first 10 amendments, the “Bill of Rights”, are taken seriously. But something went terribly wrong in April 2008 when the Texas Child Protective Services agency (CPS) used an apparent hoax call, allegedly from a 33 year old emotionally disturbed woman in Colorado, as a pretext for taking 416 children, many of them infants, from their families.

By now, most of those reading this will have heard of the CPS orchestrated raid on the YFZ Ranch in Eldorado, Texas, and the buses lining up to haul away the women and children. Highly indignant law enforcement and CPS officials spoke movingly about protecting these children from sexual predators, rape, and worse at the hands of their fathers, uncles, grandfathers, etc., etc., etc. We were told about the frightened cell phone call from a 16-year old victim, who was being abused at the hands of her 50-something year old “husband,” and forcibly impregnated against her will. So millions of Americans, as well as America’s enemies around the world, all twittered and shook their heads about those kooky Mormons, and their evil ways, and wasn’t it surprising that those gun-crazed Texans appeared to be doing the right thing and saving those children from their parents, putting them under the protection of the all-wise, all-knowing, always benevolent State. High time, the enemies of freedom and liberty said, for Texas to get in step with the rest of the world, and bow at the altar of statism, and realize that the answer to every problem is “more government.”

In the most intrusive of government interventions, CPS is now doing DNA testing, x-raying, and prodding and poking these poor children to try to create a case out of thin air. There is a presumption that the Mormons are evil, that their religion is wrong, and that merely raising the children in the faith of their fathers is a form of the most horrific child abuse. The testimony by the representative of CPS is most telling:

Angie Voss of CPS testified that, while there were no allegations “of abuse against babies, prepubescent girls or any boy,” her agency, Child Protective Services, contends that the teachings of the FLDS — which Ms. Voss believes is to marry shortly after puberty, have as many children as possible and obey their fathers or their prophet, imprisoned leader Warren Jeffs — amount to abuse. "This is a population of women who appear to have a problem making a decision on their own," Voss said.

Experts agree that it will be virtually impossible to ever determine with any certainty the exact ages of the teen mothers. Experts also agree that the teen pregnancy rate among the Mormons of the YFZ ranch is probably lower than the teen pregnancy rate in the general population in Texas, and indeed in most of the United States. Yet, CPS, the same agency that has repeatedly returned abused children to their abusive families in non-religion based cases, is determined to waste millions of Texas tax dollars and scarce agency resources to keep these 416 children away from their heart-broken mothers and fathers. Can there be any doubt that this is a case of religious persecution by the State of Texas?

We abhor child abuse. We believe that the theology and doctrine of the Mormons, including those of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, is profoundly wrong. These are not, however, reasons for the Texas CPS to use a hoax phone call as a pretext for destroying the lives of 416 children, as well as their mothers and fathers. We believe that Angie Voss’s testimony is accusatory against the theology of the Mormons, not their behavior. Criminal behavior is fair game for the CPS and other governmental entities with police powers, (although we also believe that far too many individual behavioral decisions have been criminalized); personal religious beliefs are not. The CPS and the State of Texas have overreached. Now they should apologize, return the children, and promise to never, ever act so rashly again. And someone needs to be fired in Austin.