I preached this message this morning in memory of Zac Smith. I hope it will be an encouragement to you.
Text: Matthew 19:16-17a: And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life? And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? There is none good but one, that is, God.
Intro: In Matthew 19, people had brought their children to see Jesus and the disciples tried to keep them away. But Jesus rebuked the disciples and told them to let the children come to Him. Jesus showed His love for the children, by hugging them, holding them, blessing and praying for them. While all this is going on a wealthy young man comes to Jesus and asks what thing he could do to earn eternal life. He didn’t understand that you cannot buy or do any good work to get salvation. It cannot be purchased, and you cannot do anything good enough to deserve it. You have to accept it as a free gift, much like these children that came in their innocence to see Jesus and accepted Him as He was.
But before addressing his question, Jesus addressed the rich man’s salutation. When the young man greeted Jesus he said, “Good Master.” Jesus then replied, “Why do you call me good? There is only one that is good, and that is God.” Now Jesus pointed out two things in His answer. One, if He is good, then He is God, and two, God is definitely good.
For some people that’s a hard proposition to accept. When you look at all the trouble in the world today you can’t help but wonder what is going on. ISIS, terrorism, Christians beheaded, Nepal earthquake, China threatening the stability of the Southeast Asian region, crime, disease, where does it all stop? The atheists, the critics, the skeptics, the unbelievers, those who reject Christ will mockingly say, “Where is your God now?” “Why does He allow evil like ISIS and other terrorist groups to exist?”
When the trials come into our own lives and our homes, when we struggle with sick children, no job or income, when we can’t seem to find an answer for our problems they say, “How can a loving God allow these things to happen?” “You foolish Christians, what meaning of life do you find in your God who allows this to happen to you when you have faithfully worshipped Him?” Sometimes it’s hard for us not to ask the same questions.
I. When Ruth Nayve was diagnosed with cancer, we all prayed for her and begged God to heal her, and to meet their financial obligations which were excessively high. He did. But just as she ended her chemotherapy and was recovering her mother came down with cancer, and then her father had a paralyzing stroke. Just when it seemed like things were looking good for Ruth, they became worse for her family. Who could blame them if they were to wonder when it will all end? When will it be enough?
II. When Pastor Terry Overstreet, whom we prayed for this morning, and I met in college, we were young, and strong, and athletes. I played baseball; he had been offered a scholarship to play football at the University of Maryland. We both loved the New York Yankees! He gave it up to follow God’s call into the ministry. I chased my baseball dream and when I didn’t make it went into the military before finally becoming a missionary. We are both 60 years old. While I’m relatively healthy, he just suffered his second stroke. Almost as if adding insult to injury, his church had just celebrated its 30th anniversary and two days later he was struck down. He is a good pastor and well loved by his church. You can’t help wonder why does God allow these things to happen?
III. My family has been plagued with Multiple Sclerosis. My great grandfather died of it in 1935. My Aunt Marianne came down with it in her 20s, her sister, Carol, got it in her 60s, and my dad came down with it at age 73. All three of them died from the disease and now my cousin’s daughter, Marisha has MS. She’s fighting a brave battle, but there is no cure for the disease and now, only in her 30s, she needs a cane to walk, but is often so weak she needs a wheel chair. When the disease was first diagnosed she called her grandmother, my Aunt Carol, and they cried together over the phone because they both knew what it meant for her future. MS is a genetic disease. It is passed down within a family, but the tendency is to skip generations. That is it will pass from a grandparent and then reappear in a grandchild. Since my two aunts and my dad all had it, and my cousin’s daughter has it, I can’t help but wonder if someday it’s going to afflict either of my two young sons, and I pray for God’s mercy.
IV. Then besides illnesses, tragedies and death, there are other kinds of trials that we often struggle with. When you’ve dedicated your life to a cause or a profession and then you fail to reach your dreams and you’re left with bitter disappointment; when you start a business and it fails and you’ve lost your investment; or you’ve studied as hard as you know how and you still failed a test; when you’ve worked your hardest and done your best and then you get fired from your job unfairly; when you try to do right and people oppose you and slander you; when the person you love leaves you, and friends betray you; you sit there and wonder, Lord, Why? Why have I failed? Why has this happened? Why are people treating me this way? Haven’t I served you? Haven’t I been faithful? What am I going to do now? You look out at your life and you see no direction ahead. You’re going to have to start over but you don’t know how or what to do, and you wonder, What is God doing with me?
In the Aeta village is a woman named Carmen. She’s an intelligent woman. When she was young she was able to leave the village and get an education. She learned to play the piano well and having tasted a more comfortable life her hope was to be a professional musician. But it didn’t happen. Her dreams were smashed and she had to move back home. Discouraged and depressed she turned to alcohol. Now she’s the village drunk. She must wonder, is there no hope? There’s got to be something better than this in life. She said to us once in a drunken stupor, “I just want to die.”
V. In 1873, Horatio G. Spafford sent his wife, Anna, and four daughters on a ship to England. He had intended to go, but a last minute business emergency forced him to stay behind. Spafford would follow when the business was done. On the voyage his family’s ship came into a violent storm and in the middle of the ocean collided with another ship. Anna Spafford was rescued, but their four daughters drowned. Spafford took the next ship across and as they reached the location of the tragedy the captain told him this was the place. Then as Horatio Spafford stood at the rail and looked out at the watery grave that held his children, he wrote the hymn we sang this morning.
When peace like a river attendeth my way; when sorrows like sea billows roll;
Whatever my lot thou hast taught me to say, It is well; it is well with my soul.
Did you ever go to the mountains and sit by a stream or small river and just listen as the water flows over the rocks forming pools and then cascades on its journey down through the hills and canyons? It’s a soothing, relaxing sound that as you listen and enjoy the beauty around you seems to cause an overwhelming peace to come over your spirit. Sometimes that’s the way life is and it is easy to say, “Yes, it is well with my soul.”
But what about when the sea billows roll? What about when the storms of life break your way, you are devastated and there is no relief? When nothing goes right and you can’t see your way out of the trial, and you feel like you want to lash out at God and say, “Why?” It’s not so easy then to say, it is well. When God’s sovereign will goes against your personal will and desires do you still recognize He is God? When the trials beat you down and it seems like there’s no end and no answer, can you still say God is good?
VI. A few weeks ago in our Missions Conference I told you about my cousin, Sharon, how she and her husband, Jim Smith, had worked with Rachel Saint in the jungles of Ecuador. Today I want to tell you more of her story. In 1976, Sharon gave birth to her first child, a son they named Zac. Zac was born two months prematurely and was in an incubator in the hospital struggling to breathe. One day our grandfather went to the hospital with Sharon to see his first great grandson. As he and Sharon stood outside the window looking in at Zac in the neo-natal intensive care ward, Sharon began to cry.
Grandpa put his arm around her shoulder and as they walked down the hall and he told her a story. In 1914 he had enlisted in the Dutch army. He was just twenty years old. But not long after in a physical exam the doctor determined that he had a heart murmur. It was so bad that he was immediately discharged and the doctor told him he probably wouldn’t live passed thirty, only ten more years. By 1976 he had lived another 62 years, had six grandchildren, two great granddaughters and now he had seen his first great grandson. “Don’t worry,” he told Sharon. “God has plans for that boy.”
Indeed God did have plans, but as it turned out they were not the plans that Zac or his family would have hoped for.
VII. (Show video.) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b4Qb1qdXn4o If you haven’t seen this video you need to. It’s four minutes and thirty seconds and well worth your time.
VIII. Five years ago yesterday, May 16, 2010, Zac Smith passed into the arms of Jesus. The cancer had riddled his body until he was hardly more than skin and bones. There was no relief for his pain. How he suffered. In the end he was so weak he couldn’t speak or even open his eyes. His last conscious act was to raise his right index finger just enough to point up, apparently signaling that the angels had come, and then he died.
Zac has a great family; this is a recent picture of his wife, Mandy, and children, Lizzy, Jake and Luke, with my cousins Jim and Sharon. He had a great ministry at his church. The Lord has given them grace and comfort, but after these several years you couldn’t blame them if they still just wonder why? But Zac gave us the answer. No matter what happens God is still God, and God is still good.
Con: No matter what happens, whether you know the reason or not, God’s plans for you are better than any plans you could ever make for yourself. Whether it includes a life of ease and great success, a life of struggle and heartbreak, or anything in between, God’s will is always best.
Zac Smith wanted to raise his family. He wanted to serve God. He was taken before his children reached their teen years. In life he served in a large church doing the multi-media, where he also made this video, and influencing perhaps hundreds of people. In death, through this video, he has influenced and encouraged hundreds of thousands of people. This video, not only on Youtube and Vimeo, but also in churches and elsewhere has been shown all over the United States and all around the world.
There are people who would never have known the comfort God gives if they had not seen this video. People who were in despair have found hope and encouragement in this video. People whom Zac will only know when they get to heaven have come to Christ because of this video. Whether we concur with God’s will for Zac’s life or not, God knew what was best even in Zac’s suffering and the heartbreak of his family. And the eternal rewards are unending.
Listen, no matter what you go through, whether you live in wealth or poverty, whether you live in health or struggle with disease, whether you are successful or struggle through failures and disappointments, whether you live a long life or die young, God has a plan for you and it is the best plan because God is still God, and God is still good. To God be the glory.
Sunday, May 17, 2015
Monday, May 11, 2015
A Godly Mother
Who can find a virtuous woman? for her price is far above rubies. - Proverbs 31:10
Favor is deceitful, and beauty is vain; but a woman that fears the Lord, she shall be praised. - Proverbs 31:30
I thank God, whom I serve from my forefathers with pure conscience, that without ceasing I have remembrance of you in my prayers night and day; Greatly desiring to see you, being mindful of your tears, that I may be filled with joy; When I call to remembrance the sincere faith that is in you, which was first in your grandmother Lois, and your mother Eunice, and I am persuaded that in you also. Wherefore I put you in remembrance that you stir up the gift of God, which is in you by the putting on of my hands. For God has not given us the spirit of fear; but of power, and of love, and of a sound mind. - 2 Timothy 1:3-7
Intro: Abraham Lincoln is considered by many to be one of the two or three greatest presidents of the United States. He was born in the wilderness in Kentucky and never went to school. His mother taught him to read using the Bible as a textbook. From his humble beginnings he became a lawyer, a politician, and finally president of the United States. His speeches were filled with Scripture references, and it was his leadership during the Civil War that saved the Union. His mother instilled in him the foundation that molded his character. On one occasion, having borrowed a nickel from a friend, when he was paid for some work and had the money he didn't wait until the next time he saw the friend, instead he walked several miles to find him and repay the debt. Lincoln once said, "No one is poor who had a godly mother."
Mother's have an advantage of relationship with their children over fathers, siblings, and friends. She has a nine month head start. There is a bond that is created in the womb. After a few weeks the child begins to hear his mother's voice and it is soothing. It is good for mothers to sing during pregnancy. The child gets to know her, her attitudes and feelings. Newborn babies find comfort in their mother's arms before anyone else's.
When Ethan was born Lhey was very weak after a very difficult pregnancy in which she almost lost him twice. Often when Ethan cried I would carry him around the house and sing to him until he quieted down. But if Lhey was feeling up to it, she would take him and he would stop crying almost immediately. Even now if he's sad or crying, if Lhey is out and I try to comfort him, he will say to me, "I want mom."
Let's consider what we can learn from a godly mother.
I. Transparent tenderness (2 Timothy 1:4).
Most of us learn tenderness from our mothers. I know that men can be tender, but most of us try to exude a macho kind of air. We want to be tough and strong, and we often don't show an example of tenderness. That comes from the mother. It is the mothers who teach their children to be demonstrative, caring, and full of compassion. With apparently an absent father, Timothy was raised by his mother and grandmother. He became a man with a tender heart as illustrated by his tears. That came from his mother.
We were at the Battlefield Mall in Springfield, Missouri one time when Ethan was about four years old. They have a play area for small kids with a little house in the middle and a slide, and then four stations around it. One is a hollow log with a caterpillar crawling over it, another is a car, one is a rowboat, and one a spaceship. They are all made out of hard rubber and the floor is covered with a soft padding like they put on jogging tracks, so it's safe for small children to play and climb around.
On this day we were sitting by the spaceship. A lot of children were there running around playing, and Ethan was playing with a group of boys. But there was one boy there who had no arms. He was playing by himself and had managed to climb into the seat of the spaceship. But when he climbed out of the seat he tripped and fell on his head. He wasn't hurt, of course, but as he rolled over on his knees, Ethan saw him and came and knelt down beside him and said, "Are you okay?" The boy said yes, and Ethan spent the rest of the time playing with that boy until his family left.
You can't imagine how proud I was of my son for having such compassion. But I'm sure he got it from his mother.
II. Authentic Spirituality (2 Timothy 1:5).
Paul thinks of Timothy as a man who is not hypocritical in his Christian life. He is a man of character, which he got from his mother and grandmother. Grandmothers also fill a role in baby-sitting or even raising their grandchildren.
When I was seven my dad left my mother with three small boys to take care of by herself. Since Mom had to work, we often spent time at our grandparent's home. One of my best memories of those days was my Grandma Boonstra sitting in a chair crocheting and singing, "At the cross, at the cross, where I first saw the light." That's where I learned that song, and it's always been one of my favorites.
My Grandma Patterson also played a role in raising one of her grandchildren. My Aunt Marianne had polio in her left arm as a young girl, and then came down with Multiple Sclerosis in her twenties. She had a baby boy named Mike. When her husband left her, she struggled to care for Mike by herself, but as her condition worsened, Mike often spent time at Grandma's house. As old as she was, she put her life into Mike and cared for him. Today Mike is married, has two grown children, and a successful business in Loveland, Colorado. He has done well in his life, but it started with his mother and grandmother.
A church, a Christian school, a circle of Christian friends can teach the facts of Scripture and be influential, but it is a mother who can make the facts real by walking the Christian walk daily in front of her children. It is often the mother who is first to speak to her children about salvation. My mother introduced me to the need of accepting Christ as my Savior when I was seven years old. I finally trusted the Lord when I was twelve, but it was my mother who helped me understand the need.
III. Inner Confidence (2 Timothy 1:7).
With all the derelict fathers in our societies children depend more and more on their mothers. Moms often do all the child rearing, discipline and providing. They have to try to be a father as well as mother. You know how much I love baseball, but it was my mom who always tried to encourage me. She tried to help me build up the confidence I needed to play. Now if you know anything about baseball, you may have heard it said that baseball is 90% from the neck up. That is, you have to have an inner confidence to be able to stand in the batter's box and hit the ball.
Paul tells Timothy that the Holy Spirit instills in us an inner confidence that drives away fear. But that same power that drives away the spirit of fear is often inbred in us by a strong, godly mother.
IV. Unselfish Love (2 Timothy 1:7).
This kind of love seeks the highest good for others. It doesn't quit when it is tired or hurting. Mothers get up at all hours of the night to take care of crying babies and sick children. Even when they are sick themselves, their unselfish loves transcends their own problems to care for their families.
This kind of love doesn't flinch when discipline is necessary. This love will laugh while under pressure. It is unselfish, giving, secure moms that somehow manage to deposit healthy, wholesome kids into our lonely, frightened society.
V. Self-Control (2 Timothy 1:7).
Love needs the balance of discipline to be consistent. A child that is not disciplined will come away believing he is unloved. Last week in Baltimore a certain mother saw her sixteen-year-old son protesting in the streets on TV. She went down to the protest, found him, drug him away, and slapped him on the head saying, "I didn't raise you to be a drug addict, a drug pusher, or a thug." She physically removed him from the rioting and took him home. When a TV reporter interviewed the boy later he said that he was glad his mother loved him so much to take him home. That mom showed her love by disciplining her child.
A psychological study at the University of California showed that 1) boys with high-esteem were clearly more loved and appreciated at home than boys with low-esteem; 2) the high-esteem group came from homes where parents had been significantly more strict in their approach to discipline; 3) the parents of the low-esteem group had created insecurity and dependence by their permissiveness; and 4) the homes of the high-esteem group were also characterized by democracy and openness.
Discipline is necessary for the proper raising of children, but it also needs to be controlled. Often a father will get angry and punish a child unfairly, where the mother in tenderness knows just how much is needed, how to discipline in love, and when to stop.
Con: You may have heard people say, "Everything I am is because of my mother." In my case that is true. My dad left when I was only seven and it was my mom who raised me, disciplined me, took me to activities, and worked full time while doing it. Now Dad wasn't completely absent from our lives, but even he recognized how much Mom did. One night he met our neighbor in a bar somewhere in town and as they were talking the neighbor mentioned to him that he sure had some good boys. Dad said, "It's all due to their mother."
Now you also know that I'm not perfect, but everything I am, every good thing in me, apart from the Lord's doing of course, is because of my mother. Today I hope you will join me in honoring our mothers.
Favor is deceitful, and beauty is vain; but a woman that fears the Lord, she shall be praised. - Proverbs 31:30
I thank God, whom I serve from my forefathers with pure conscience, that without ceasing I have remembrance of you in my prayers night and day; Greatly desiring to see you, being mindful of your tears, that I may be filled with joy; When I call to remembrance the sincere faith that is in you, which was first in your grandmother Lois, and your mother Eunice, and I am persuaded that in you also. Wherefore I put you in remembrance that you stir up the gift of God, which is in you by the putting on of my hands. For God has not given us the spirit of fear; but of power, and of love, and of a sound mind. - 2 Timothy 1:3-7
Intro: Abraham Lincoln is considered by many to be one of the two or three greatest presidents of the United States. He was born in the wilderness in Kentucky and never went to school. His mother taught him to read using the Bible as a textbook. From his humble beginnings he became a lawyer, a politician, and finally president of the United States. His speeches were filled with Scripture references, and it was his leadership during the Civil War that saved the Union. His mother instilled in him the foundation that molded his character. On one occasion, having borrowed a nickel from a friend, when he was paid for some work and had the money he didn't wait until the next time he saw the friend, instead he walked several miles to find him and repay the debt. Lincoln once said, "No one is poor who had a godly mother."
Mother's have an advantage of relationship with their children over fathers, siblings, and friends. She has a nine month head start. There is a bond that is created in the womb. After a few weeks the child begins to hear his mother's voice and it is soothing. It is good for mothers to sing during pregnancy. The child gets to know her, her attitudes and feelings. Newborn babies find comfort in their mother's arms before anyone else's.
When Ethan was born Lhey was very weak after a very difficult pregnancy in which she almost lost him twice. Often when Ethan cried I would carry him around the house and sing to him until he quieted down. But if Lhey was feeling up to it, she would take him and he would stop crying almost immediately. Even now if he's sad or crying, if Lhey is out and I try to comfort him, he will say to me, "I want mom."
Let's consider what we can learn from a godly mother.
I. Transparent tenderness (2 Timothy 1:4).
Most of us learn tenderness from our mothers. I know that men can be tender, but most of us try to exude a macho kind of air. We want to be tough and strong, and we often don't show an example of tenderness. That comes from the mother. It is the mothers who teach their children to be demonstrative, caring, and full of compassion. With apparently an absent father, Timothy was raised by his mother and grandmother. He became a man with a tender heart as illustrated by his tears. That came from his mother.
We were at the Battlefield Mall in Springfield, Missouri one time when Ethan was about four years old. They have a play area for small kids with a little house in the middle and a slide, and then four stations around it. One is a hollow log with a caterpillar crawling over it, another is a car, one is a rowboat, and one a spaceship. They are all made out of hard rubber and the floor is covered with a soft padding like they put on jogging tracks, so it's safe for small children to play and climb around.
On this day we were sitting by the spaceship. A lot of children were there running around playing, and Ethan was playing with a group of boys. But there was one boy there who had no arms. He was playing by himself and had managed to climb into the seat of the spaceship. But when he climbed out of the seat he tripped and fell on his head. He wasn't hurt, of course, but as he rolled over on his knees, Ethan saw him and came and knelt down beside him and said, "Are you okay?" The boy said yes, and Ethan spent the rest of the time playing with that boy until his family left.
You can't imagine how proud I was of my son for having such compassion. But I'm sure he got it from his mother.
II. Authentic Spirituality (2 Timothy 1:5).
Paul thinks of Timothy as a man who is not hypocritical in his Christian life. He is a man of character, which he got from his mother and grandmother. Grandmothers also fill a role in baby-sitting or even raising their grandchildren.
When I was seven my dad left my mother with three small boys to take care of by herself. Since Mom had to work, we often spent time at our grandparent's home. One of my best memories of those days was my Grandma Boonstra sitting in a chair crocheting and singing, "At the cross, at the cross, where I first saw the light." That's where I learned that song, and it's always been one of my favorites.
My Grandma Patterson also played a role in raising one of her grandchildren. My Aunt Marianne had polio in her left arm as a young girl, and then came down with Multiple Sclerosis in her twenties. She had a baby boy named Mike. When her husband left her, she struggled to care for Mike by herself, but as her condition worsened, Mike often spent time at Grandma's house. As old as she was, she put her life into Mike and cared for him. Today Mike is married, has two grown children, and a successful business in Loveland, Colorado. He has done well in his life, but it started with his mother and grandmother.
A church, a Christian school, a circle of Christian friends can teach the facts of Scripture and be influential, but it is a mother who can make the facts real by walking the Christian walk daily in front of her children. It is often the mother who is first to speak to her children about salvation. My mother introduced me to the need of accepting Christ as my Savior when I was seven years old. I finally trusted the Lord when I was twelve, but it was my mother who helped me understand the need.
III. Inner Confidence (2 Timothy 1:7).
With all the derelict fathers in our societies children depend more and more on their mothers. Moms often do all the child rearing, discipline and providing. They have to try to be a father as well as mother. You know how much I love baseball, but it was my mom who always tried to encourage me. She tried to help me build up the confidence I needed to play. Now if you know anything about baseball, you may have heard it said that baseball is 90% from the neck up. That is, you have to have an inner confidence to be able to stand in the batter's box and hit the ball.
Paul tells Timothy that the Holy Spirit instills in us an inner confidence that drives away fear. But that same power that drives away the spirit of fear is often inbred in us by a strong, godly mother.
IV. Unselfish Love (2 Timothy 1:7).
This kind of love seeks the highest good for others. It doesn't quit when it is tired or hurting. Mothers get up at all hours of the night to take care of crying babies and sick children. Even when they are sick themselves, their unselfish loves transcends their own problems to care for their families.
This kind of love doesn't flinch when discipline is necessary. This love will laugh while under pressure. It is unselfish, giving, secure moms that somehow manage to deposit healthy, wholesome kids into our lonely, frightened society.
V. Self-Control (2 Timothy 1:7).
Love needs the balance of discipline to be consistent. A child that is not disciplined will come away believing he is unloved. Last week in Baltimore a certain mother saw her sixteen-year-old son protesting in the streets on TV. She went down to the protest, found him, drug him away, and slapped him on the head saying, "I didn't raise you to be a drug addict, a drug pusher, or a thug." She physically removed him from the rioting and took him home. When a TV reporter interviewed the boy later he said that he was glad his mother loved him so much to take him home. That mom showed her love by disciplining her child.
A psychological study at the University of California showed that 1) boys with high-esteem were clearly more loved and appreciated at home than boys with low-esteem; 2) the high-esteem group came from homes where parents had been significantly more strict in their approach to discipline; 3) the parents of the low-esteem group had created insecurity and dependence by their permissiveness; and 4) the homes of the high-esteem group were also characterized by democracy and openness.
Discipline is necessary for the proper raising of children, but it also needs to be controlled. Often a father will get angry and punish a child unfairly, where the mother in tenderness knows just how much is needed, how to discipline in love, and when to stop.
Con: You may have heard people say, "Everything I am is because of my mother." In my case that is true. My dad left when I was only seven and it was my mom who raised me, disciplined me, took me to activities, and worked full time while doing it. Now Dad wasn't completely absent from our lives, but even he recognized how much Mom did. One night he met our neighbor in a bar somewhere in town and as they were talking the neighbor mentioned to him that he sure had some good boys. Dad said, "It's all due to their mother."
Now you also know that I'm not perfect, but everything I am, every good thing in me, apart from the Lord's doing of course, is because of my mother. Today I hope you will join me in honoring our mothers.
Monday, May 4, 2015
The Greatest Fight of the Century?
It was billed as the "Greatest Fight of the Century," or the "Era" at least. A fight five years in the making. Manny "Pacman" Pacquiao had finally got the fight he wanted with Floyd "Money" Mayweather, who had dodged him for years. The hype was tremendous. A 400 million dollar purse to be split 60-40 for the winner, with some 60 million going to the MGM Grand Casino in Las Vegas. The largest pot in history.
The showdown was compared with the great Sugar Ray Leonard-Thomas "Hit Man" Hearns fights of the 80s. Mayweather was putting his perfect undefeated record on the line. Could he survive and join the great Rocky Marciano as the only undefeated champions in history? Could Pacquiao, the national hero of the Philippines, pull off another upset and win a ninth title in a storied career that had seen him win in several weight categories?
The suspense was thick world wide. In the Philippines the one thing the country unites behind totally is Pacquiao. Every time he fights crime rates drop all over the country because nobody is on the streets. They're all watching the fight somewhere. Giant screens were put up in parks in Manila for crowds to watch. In Olongapo the convention center was showing the fight, as well as bars and restaurants all over the city and all over the country. In America so many people had signed on to Pay-Per-View that the system couldn't handle the orders, and the fight was delayed forty-five minutes while the networks were brought up to speed. The ringside announcers kept the hype going talking about the boxers and comparing them to the great fights in history until all was ready.
Finally the moment had come. From the outset it was not only strange, but bewildering. To honor Mayo Uno, a communist Labor Day holiday that is celebrated in Mexico, and has nothing to do with the United States, a Mexican singer was introduced to sing the National Anthem of Mexico. But it wasn't enough that he just sang the song. When he finished he went on a rant in Spanish about "Viva Mexico," or something along those lines. My first thought was, What the heck does Mexico have to do with this? Why would we have the Mexican anthem sung before a fight in which neither boxer is Mexican or speaks Spanish? It became clear a few minutes later when the ring announcer gave the name of the hispanic president of the Nevada State Boxing Commission. No doubt a liberal Democrat supporter of open borders and illegal immigration making a statement in favor of the Mexican invasion of the Southwest.
The only good thing about the performance was that the crowd seemed not to appreciate it either. There was no applause, only a sense of wonderment about what was going on. Next a group of several Filipino men and one woman dressed in traditional barongs sang the Philippine National Anthem, Lupang Hiniram. They sang it proudly and beautifully. Then came the American National Anthem sung by the actor and sometimes singer Jamie Foxx. This is the same Foxx that has declared in open mockery of Christianity that Obama is his savior. His stylizing of the anthem was a joke that fortunately also brought little applause if any.
Then the fighters came in with their entourages. Pacquiao arrived first wearing a T-shirt instead of the customary robe that fighters usually wear. Then Mayweather came in wearing some kind of a jacket instead of the robe, and behind him in his gaggle was somebody dressed up in royal garb wearing a head mask with a crown looking like the comical king in the Wizard of Id. The entry took on the air of an All-Star Wrestling event. It was a joke, which was a portend of what was about to come.
The preliminaries were done and the fight finally got under way. It was a party atmosphere here in the Philippines and the group I was with screamed and laughed every time Pacman threw a punch. But it was clear right away that he wasn't connecting much and Mayweather's height and reach seemed to be to his advantage. He was the only one getting any real hits in during the first round. Round one to Mayweather.
Round two was a little more neutral but by then a pattern had become obvious that would continue throughout the fight. Pacquiao brought the fight to Mayweather. He chased him all over the ring backing him into corners and against the ropes, but Mayweather with continued sideward movement kept out of Pacman's range. Round two was pretty even. In Round three it looked as if Pacquiao was beginning to reel Mayweather in, and in round four they had several toe-toe exchanges. Pacquiao won every one of them.
Mayweather wouldn't let it happen again. He ran from a frustrated Pacman who couldn't draw a bead for a big blow, and counterpunched, hitting Pacquiao time and again, apparently building up points with the judges, but not with the fans. Looking at the faces of the spectators at ring side there was no excitement, just stone-faced stares. When the final bell ended the 12th round, and the lopsided scorecards were announced, Mayweather climbed on the ropes to boast in his victory and instead of cheers received a chorus of "boos." It was just strange.
Mayweather then to his credit in a post fight interview was gracious in his comments about Pacquiao and what a good fighter he is, but when the ring side announcer asked Pacman what he thought, he said, "I thought I won." The announcer was incredulous. "You really thought you won?" he asked, as if it was beyond his belief. But even the announcers pointed out in the eighth and ninth round breaks that Mayweather's corner seemed to be quite concerned that he was losing.
What blew my mind was that at the beginning of the twelfth round one of them said he scored it 8-3 in favor of Mayweather. I was stunned by that. It seemed to me that Pacquiao had won at least the third, fourth, sixth and ninth rounds. The first and fifth had gone to Mayweather and maybe six, seven, and eight, but the other rounds seemed to me to be pretty even. The disparity of the scorecards was really puzzling. One judge had it 118-110, and the other two 116-112. If they were judging it by the number of hits scored as they do in Olympic boxing, then Mayweather won, but this wasn't the Olympics. This was a professional boxing championship, and even if you consider Mayweather the winner, it was a much closer fight than those scorecards indicated.
The real story here is that one man came to fight and the other didn't. What the fans saw was the new way to win a professional fight: run around the ring for twelve rounds to avoid getting hit, and when you do stop to throw some punches, get in a clinch and put a headlock on your opponent. Then showboat before the final bell rings. Mayweather scored more hits, but they were all counter punches and none of them hurt or even marked Pacquiao. Pacman's problem was he couldn't corner Mayweather long enough to get in enough hits. He was the aggressor bringing the fight to Mayweather the entire bout, but the Money man just dodged and weaved and ran for his life. Pacquiao actually thought he had won. If Mayweather had stood in and traded punches with him it's likely he would have won. But that must have been Mayweather's strategy: Don't box so you don't lose.
Disappointment here in the Philippines is indescribable. This evening everybody everywhere was talking about the fight. Even the very popular Senator Miriam "Defensor" Santiago joined in. She tweeted, "Congratulations Mayweather on winning the 3K Fun Run."
The ringside announcers continued to play up the greatest fight of the era in their post fight comments. The people who paid thousands for tickets at ringside certainly got their money's worth tonight they said, almost as if they were trying to convince themselves. Comparisons to Leonard and Marciano and his perfect record were made over and over, but there is no comparison. This was no battle of the Titans ala Foreman-Ali and Frazier-Ali, or even Leonard-Hearns and Leonard-Hagler.
Neither will Mayweather ever compare with Rocky Marciano even if he does win his next fight and retire with a perfect 49-0 record. Marciano only went the distance six times. He KO'd forty-three of his opponents, most of them within the first three rounds. That's what you expect of a champion. You expect him to stand toe-to-toe with his opponent and beat him up. Mayweather ran for his life and took little potshots at Pacquiao doing no damage and not showing any of the courage or skill that makes a boxer great. He was a totally unworthy winner.
A lot of people here are speculating about a rematch, but there won't be one. Mayweather is going to fulfill his contract with Showtime and have one more fight in September, probably against a weak opponent to make sure his undefeated record stays intact. He won't fight Pacquiao again because there is too much of a chance that he would lose.
In the end it was just kind of a weird day. Everything about this fight was strange from the entourages, to the judges, to the running around in the ring. It had been ambitiously and presumptuously promoted as the greatest fight of the era, but it turned out to be the greatest disappointment.
The showdown was compared with the great Sugar Ray Leonard-Thomas "Hit Man" Hearns fights of the 80s. Mayweather was putting his perfect undefeated record on the line. Could he survive and join the great Rocky Marciano as the only undefeated champions in history? Could Pacquiao, the national hero of the Philippines, pull off another upset and win a ninth title in a storied career that had seen him win in several weight categories?
The suspense was thick world wide. In the Philippines the one thing the country unites behind totally is Pacquiao. Every time he fights crime rates drop all over the country because nobody is on the streets. They're all watching the fight somewhere. Giant screens were put up in parks in Manila for crowds to watch. In Olongapo the convention center was showing the fight, as well as bars and restaurants all over the city and all over the country. In America so many people had signed on to Pay-Per-View that the system couldn't handle the orders, and the fight was delayed forty-five minutes while the networks were brought up to speed. The ringside announcers kept the hype going talking about the boxers and comparing them to the great fights in history until all was ready.
Finally the moment had come. From the outset it was not only strange, but bewildering. To honor Mayo Uno, a communist Labor Day holiday that is celebrated in Mexico, and has nothing to do with the United States, a Mexican singer was introduced to sing the National Anthem of Mexico. But it wasn't enough that he just sang the song. When he finished he went on a rant in Spanish about "Viva Mexico," or something along those lines. My first thought was, What the heck does Mexico have to do with this? Why would we have the Mexican anthem sung before a fight in which neither boxer is Mexican or speaks Spanish? It became clear a few minutes later when the ring announcer gave the name of the hispanic president of the Nevada State Boxing Commission. No doubt a liberal Democrat supporter of open borders and illegal immigration making a statement in favor of the Mexican invasion of the Southwest.
The only good thing about the performance was that the crowd seemed not to appreciate it either. There was no applause, only a sense of wonderment about what was going on. Next a group of several Filipino men and one woman dressed in traditional barongs sang the Philippine National Anthem, Lupang Hiniram. They sang it proudly and beautifully. Then came the American National Anthem sung by the actor and sometimes singer Jamie Foxx. This is the same Foxx that has declared in open mockery of Christianity that Obama is his savior. His stylizing of the anthem was a joke that fortunately also brought little applause if any.
Then the fighters came in with their entourages. Pacquiao arrived first wearing a T-shirt instead of the customary robe that fighters usually wear. Then Mayweather came in wearing some kind of a jacket instead of the robe, and behind him in his gaggle was somebody dressed up in royal garb wearing a head mask with a crown looking like the comical king in the Wizard of Id. The entry took on the air of an All-Star Wrestling event. It was a joke, which was a portend of what was about to come.
The preliminaries were done and the fight finally got under way. It was a party atmosphere here in the Philippines and the group I was with screamed and laughed every time Pacman threw a punch. But it was clear right away that he wasn't connecting much and Mayweather's height and reach seemed to be to his advantage. He was the only one getting any real hits in during the first round. Round one to Mayweather.
Round two was a little more neutral but by then a pattern had become obvious that would continue throughout the fight. Pacquiao brought the fight to Mayweather. He chased him all over the ring backing him into corners and against the ropes, but Mayweather with continued sideward movement kept out of Pacman's range. Round two was pretty even. In Round three it looked as if Pacquiao was beginning to reel Mayweather in, and in round four they had several toe-toe exchanges. Pacquiao won every one of them.
Mayweather wouldn't let it happen again. He ran from a frustrated Pacman who couldn't draw a bead for a big blow, and counterpunched, hitting Pacquiao time and again, apparently building up points with the judges, but not with the fans. Looking at the faces of the spectators at ring side there was no excitement, just stone-faced stares. When the final bell ended the 12th round, and the lopsided scorecards were announced, Mayweather climbed on the ropes to boast in his victory and instead of cheers received a chorus of "boos." It was just strange.
Mayweather then to his credit in a post fight interview was gracious in his comments about Pacquiao and what a good fighter he is, but when the ring side announcer asked Pacman what he thought, he said, "I thought I won." The announcer was incredulous. "You really thought you won?" he asked, as if it was beyond his belief. But even the announcers pointed out in the eighth and ninth round breaks that Mayweather's corner seemed to be quite concerned that he was losing.
What blew my mind was that at the beginning of the twelfth round one of them said he scored it 8-3 in favor of Mayweather. I was stunned by that. It seemed to me that Pacquiao had won at least the third, fourth, sixth and ninth rounds. The first and fifth had gone to Mayweather and maybe six, seven, and eight, but the other rounds seemed to me to be pretty even. The disparity of the scorecards was really puzzling. One judge had it 118-110, and the other two 116-112. If they were judging it by the number of hits scored as they do in Olympic boxing, then Mayweather won, but this wasn't the Olympics. This was a professional boxing championship, and even if you consider Mayweather the winner, it was a much closer fight than those scorecards indicated.
The real story here is that one man came to fight and the other didn't. What the fans saw was the new way to win a professional fight: run around the ring for twelve rounds to avoid getting hit, and when you do stop to throw some punches, get in a clinch and put a headlock on your opponent. Then showboat before the final bell rings. Mayweather scored more hits, but they were all counter punches and none of them hurt or even marked Pacquiao. Pacman's problem was he couldn't corner Mayweather long enough to get in enough hits. He was the aggressor bringing the fight to Mayweather the entire bout, but the Money man just dodged and weaved and ran for his life. Pacquiao actually thought he had won. If Mayweather had stood in and traded punches with him it's likely he would have won. But that must have been Mayweather's strategy: Don't box so you don't lose.
Disappointment here in the Philippines is indescribable. This evening everybody everywhere was talking about the fight. Even the very popular Senator Miriam "Defensor" Santiago joined in. She tweeted, "Congratulations Mayweather on winning the 3K Fun Run."
The ringside announcers continued to play up the greatest fight of the era in their post fight comments. The people who paid thousands for tickets at ringside certainly got their money's worth tonight they said, almost as if they were trying to convince themselves. Comparisons to Leonard and Marciano and his perfect record were made over and over, but there is no comparison. This was no battle of the Titans ala Foreman-Ali and Frazier-Ali, or even Leonard-Hearns and Leonard-Hagler.
Neither will Mayweather ever compare with Rocky Marciano even if he does win his next fight and retire with a perfect 49-0 record. Marciano only went the distance six times. He KO'd forty-three of his opponents, most of them within the first three rounds. That's what you expect of a champion. You expect him to stand toe-to-toe with his opponent and beat him up. Mayweather ran for his life and took little potshots at Pacquiao doing no damage and not showing any of the courage or skill that makes a boxer great. He was a totally unworthy winner.
A lot of people here are speculating about a rematch, but there won't be one. Mayweather is going to fulfill his contract with Showtime and have one more fight in September, probably against a weak opponent to make sure his undefeated record stays intact. He won't fight Pacquiao again because there is too much of a chance that he would lose.
In the end it was just kind of a weird day. Everything about this fight was strange from the entourages, to the judges, to the running around in the ring. It had been ambitiously and presumptuously promoted as the greatest fight of the era, but it turned out to be the greatest disappointment.
Wednesday, April 15, 2015
With Malice Toward None
One hundred fifty years ago this morning America, yea, the world, lost one of its greatest statesmen. Shot in the back of the head by a coward the night before while watching a play at Ford's Theater in Washington D.C., Abraham Lincoln breathed his last at 7:22 a.m. Edwin M. Stanton, the Secretary of War, had taken charge of the scene in the Petersen boarding house where Lincoln was taken. "Now he belongs to the ages," he said.
Lincoln's sons, Robert and Tad, had not been allowed in the room, and his wife, Mary Todd Lincoln, sat in a parlor weeping in agony as she descended deeper toward the insanity that would eventually overwhelm her. A young army surgeon, Charles Leale, had been the first in the presidential booth at the theater to attend Lincoln. To the end he sat by Lincoln's side holding his hand to let him know if he regained any amount of consciousness that he had a friend.
Lincoln's assassination was a tragedy of monumental proportions. Binding the wounds of a divided nation would never be accomplished with the "charity for all" that Lincoln had envisioned. His death was also controversial. Loved by millions, he was equally despised by many, and out of that hatred emerged what some have called the "Lincoln Myth," the belief that Lincoln was not the legendary "Honest Abe," and that he trampled on the Constitution and usurped the Tenth Amendment rights of the states. The myth accuses him of tyranny, blames him for starting the Civil War, and denounces him for freeing the slaves as a political move, not because of any belief in the equality of all men. What is most surprising is that there are people still fighting the Civil War, mentally at least, who bitterly malign Lincoln to this day.
Are these accusations true or are they the sour grapes response of sore losers who refuse to accept the verdict of a war that ended a century and a half ago? Is there credibility to the charges or are they the rewriting of history to support a utopian view of America that never existed?
The argument centers around slavery. Lincoln, by his Emancipation Proclamation, became the "Great Emancipator," and the end result of the war was the abolition of slavery, but the anti-Lincoln argument is that the war was never about slavery. It was about state's rights. This may be partially true, but the only "right" the southern states were worried about was the right to own slaves. Every other issue on the table could have been settled through the legislative process, but slavery was the one issue that could not. The South was willing to go to war and destroy the Union over slavery.
The proof is in the secession commissioners that scoured the South in 1860 stirring up legislatures and mobs into a secessionist fury. They had only one message. Lincoln was going to end slavery; we must secede. It was only after the war when the Confederate Vice President, Alexander Stephens, wrote a history of the United States that the argument shifted away from slavery toward being primarily a state's rights issue.
The myth then claims that Lincoln was actually a racist who cared nothing for the slaves. The Emancipation Proclamation was a political move to gain a moral high ground and prevent European nations from supporting the South. Such arguments ignore Lincoln's letter to Joshua Speed in 1855 in which he expresses his hatred of the institution, and his comments in the Lincoln-Douglass debates that negroes also deserved the rights to life, liberty and happiness. Looking at it with clear eyes it would seem that those who defend slavery are hardly in a position to hurl charges of racism.
Next the argument is that Lincoln was going to be a tyrant and illegally end slavery, thus forcing the South to separate. But in those same Lincoln-Douglass debates Lincoln clearly stated that he had no legal power and no intention of ending slavery where it existed. He believed that the intent of the Founders was to let slavery die a slow death on its own by leaving it alone where it existed and not allowing it to expand to the territories. Politically he was against the expansion of slavery, but had no plan to do anything about it where it was established. The southern states ignored his clearly stated intent and embarked on secession because they foolishly feared Lincoln would end slavery.
Lincoln is accused of starting the war because he invaded the sovereign state of Virginia. The problem with this view is that there was a standing Federal army with troops stationed in every state. On April 12, 1861, Confederate rebels fired on the Federal installation at Fort Sumpter in Charleston, South Carolina. The South provoked Lincoln to act in order to save the Union. Lincoln made it clear that he believed it was his solemn duty to preserve the Union. He would not have called for volunteers to join the army to put down the rebellion if the South had not rebelled.
The argument is made that Lincoln was the first major politician to argue that the Constitution was perpetual and that individual states had no right to secede. But this is historical ignorance. Daniel Webster was a giant defending the Union "now and forever." He fought for the Union of all the states as one nation for fifty years. Along side him before he became a secessionist when it was more convenient was John C. Calhoun of South Carolina. The first threat of secession had come from New England in 1807 and Calhoun vehemently argued against it. The argument for a perpetual union was well known long before Lincoln's Cooper Union speech in 1860.
The accusation then is that Lincoln became a tyrant and trampled all over the Constitution by illegally denying the writ of Habeas Corpus, illegally putting thousands in prison, and by invading and waging war against the sovereign states. He is blamed for being the cause of big government overreach and tyranny to this day. The facts tell a different story.
The Constitution, in fact, allows for the suspension of Habeas Corpus "in cases of rebellion or invasion (when) the public safety requires it" (Article I, Section IX). Habeas Corpus has been suspended twice in America's history, the first time by Lincoln and the second by Grant. Lincoln suspended it on April 27, 1861, in Maryland and parts of the midwestern states in response to riots and anti-government actions by local militia. The country was in a civil war and the suspension was well warranted. Several people were arrested, but it was not thousands, or even hundreds. Lincoln acted within the limits of the Constitution. It was the southern states that trampled on it. The results of the war they brought on themselves.
Big government usurpation of Tenth Amendment rights and its overreach in modern times has been attributed to the tyrannical government Lincoln "created" during the war, but this is hardly fair. Lincoln never argued against the rights of the states. He clearly stated he would never interfere with slavery in the states where it existed for the very reason of state sovereignty. His concern was the spread of slavery into the territories. The Emancipation Proclamation was indeed a political move. It declared the slaves free only in the states that were in rebellion and not yet subdued. It did not free slaves in the border states that had remained within the Union. Had it not been for the war, slavery would have been left alone to die its own slow death in the states where it was allowed.
What Lincoln might have done during Reconstruction will never be known. His untimely death ended any hope of his agenda "with malice toward none" ever being accomplished. It was the "Radical Republicans" led by Thaddeus Stephens that set out to punish the states that had been in rebellion that led to ever increasing government control of internal affairs in the states. If Lincoln had lived that likely would not have been the case.
Lincoln should be remembered for being the man that he was, a man of character forged in a wilderness and hardened by experience. He was a man of strength, a "rail-splitter," not only physically, but mentally as well. He learned to read by firelight in his home. His textbook was the Bible, which he quoted often in his public life. "No man is poor who had a godly mother," he wrote. He was a man of integrity. The story of his walking miles to return a borrowed nickel is not a fabrication.
He was a man of compassion and passionate about his causes. "Our progress in degeneracy appears to me to be pretty rapid," he wrote to Speed. "As a nation, we began by declaring that 'all men are created equal.' We now practically read it 'all men are created equal, except negroes.'" He was a militia captain in the Black Hawk War in the 1830s, and knew the rigors of troops in the field. As president he agonized over the casualty lists and begged God for His forbearance. He was raised on the frontier and never became a regular church attender, but he understood Scripture better than many theologians. "Men are not flattered by the knowledge that God is not on their side," he once said.
His inaugural addresses, the 1863 Thanksgiving message and the Gettysburg Address are among the finest works of literature ever penned. His humbleness before God is evident in all of them. His challenge in the Second Inaugural is as convicting as it is tender. He points out that both sides read the same Bible and pray to the same God, but God has His own purposes, and "the judgments of the Lord are true and righteous altogether." He quoted Psalm 19:9.
It is almost fitting that the Second Inaugural was the last formal speech he would ever give. The closing lines parallel the closing of a life that was both humble, yet strong; firm and resolute, yet tender and empathetic; sagacious, yet practically simple. It also seems appropriate that at the theater Lincoln was laughing when the fatal shot was fired. He had also suffered the death of two sons, one while carrying the burden of the war, and for the first time in four years he was relaxed. His personal secretary, John Hay, wrote that as he took his last breath "a look of unspeakable peace came upon his worn features."
The magnitude of the importance of Abraham Lincoln to America is simply this: Without George Washington there would have been no United States of America; without Abraham Lincoln those United States would not have survived.
With malice toward none, with charity for all, with firmness in the right as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in, to bind up the nation's wounds, to care for him who shall have borne the battle and for his widow and his orphan, to do all which may achieve and cherish a just and lasting peace among ourselves and with all nations.
Lincoln's sons, Robert and Tad, had not been allowed in the room, and his wife, Mary Todd Lincoln, sat in a parlor weeping in agony as she descended deeper toward the insanity that would eventually overwhelm her. A young army surgeon, Charles Leale, had been the first in the presidential booth at the theater to attend Lincoln. To the end he sat by Lincoln's side holding his hand to let him know if he regained any amount of consciousness that he had a friend.
Lincoln's assassination was a tragedy of monumental proportions. Binding the wounds of a divided nation would never be accomplished with the "charity for all" that Lincoln had envisioned. His death was also controversial. Loved by millions, he was equally despised by many, and out of that hatred emerged what some have called the "Lincoln Myth," the belief that Lincoln was not the legendary "Honest Abe," and that he trampled on the Constitution and usurped the Tenth Amendment rights of the states. The myth accuses him of tyranny, blames him for starting the Civil War, and denounces him for freeing the slaves as a political move, not because of any belief in the equality of all men. What is most surprising is that there are people still fighting the Civil War, mentally at least, who bitterly malign Lincoln to this day.
Are these accusations true or are they the sour grapes response of sore losers who refuse to accept the verdict of a war that ended a century and a half ago? Is there credibility to the charges or are they the rewriting of history to support a utopian view of America that never existed?
The argument centers around slavery. Lincoln, by his Emancipation Proclamation, became the "Great Emancipator," and the end result of the war was the abolition of slavery, but the anti-Lincoln argument is that the war was never about slavery. It was about state's rights. This may be partially true, but the only "right" the southern states were worried about was the right to own slaves. Every other issue on the table could have been settled through the legislative process, but slavery was the one issue that could not. The South was willing to go to war and destroy the Union over slavery.
The proof is in the secession commissioners that scoured the South in 1860 stirring up legislatures and mobs into a secessionist fury. They had only one message. Lincoln was going to end slavery; we must secede. It was only after the war when the Confederate Vice President, Alexander Stephens, wrote a history of the United States that the argument shifted away from slavery toward being primarily a state's rights issue.
The myth then claims that Lincoln was actually a racist who cared nothing for the slaves. The Emancipation Proclamation was a political move to gain a moral high ground and prevent European nations from supporting the South. Such arguments ignore Lincoln's letter to Joshua Speed in 1855 in which he expresses his hatred of the institution, and his comments in the Lincoln-Douglass debates that negroes also deserved the rights to life, liberty and happiness. Looking at it with clear eyes it would seem that those who defend slavery are hardly in a position to hurl charges of racism.
Next the argument is that Lincoln was going to be a tyrant and illegally end slavery, thus forcing the South to separate. But in those same Lincoln-Douglass debates Lincoln clearly stated that he had no legal power and no intention of ending slavery where it existed. He believed that the intent of the Founders was to let slavery die a slow death on its own by leaving it alone where it existed and not allowing it to expand to the territories. Politically he was against the expansion of slavery, but had no plan to do anything about it where it was established. The southern states ignored his clearly stated intent and embarked on secession because they foolishly feared Lincoln would end slavery.
Lincoln is accused of starting the war because he invaded the sovereign state of Virginia. The problem with this view is that there was a standing Federal army with troops stationed in every state. On April 12, 1861, Confederate rebels fired on the Federal installation at Fort Sumpter in Charleston, South Carolina. The South provoked Lincoln to act in order to save the Union. Lincoln made it clear that he believed it was his solemn duty to preserve the Union. He would not have called for volunteers to join the army to put down the rebellion if the South had not rebelled.
The argument is made that Lincoln was the first major politician to argue that the Constitution was perpetual and that individual states had no right to secede. But this is historical ignorance. Daniel Webster was a giant defending the Union "now and forever." He fought for the Union of all the states as one nation for fifty years. Along side him before he became a secessionist when it was more convenient was John C. Calhoun of South Carolina. The first threat of secession had come from New England in 1807 and Calhoun vehemently argued against it. The argument for a perpetual union was well known long before Lincoln's Cooper Union speech in 1860.
The accusation then is that Lincoln became a tyrant and trampled all over the Constitution by illegally denying the writ of Habeas Corpus, illegally putting thousands in prison, and by invading and waging war against the sovereign states. He is blamed for being the cause of big government overreach and tyranny to this day. The facts tell a different story.
The Constitution, in fact, allows for the suspension of Habeas Corpus "in cases of rebellion or invasion (when) the public safety requires it" (Article I, Section IX). Habeas Corpus has been suspended twice in America's history, the first time by Lincoln and the second by Grant. Lincoln suspended it on April 27, 1861, in Maryland and parts of the midwestern states in response to riots and anti-government actions by local militia. The country was in a civil war and the suspension was well warranted. Several people were arrested, but it was not thousands, or even hundreds. Lincoln acted within the limits of the Constitution. It was the southern states that trampled on it. The results of the war they brought on themselves.
Big government usurpation of Tenth Amendment rights and its overreach in modern times has been attributed to the tyrannical government Lincoln "created" during the war, but this is hardly fair. Lincoln never argued against the rights of the states. He clearly stated he would never interfere with slavery in the states where it existed for the very reason of state sovereignty. His concern was the spread of slavery into the territories. The Emancipation Proclamation was indeed a political move. It declared the slaves free only in the states that were in rebellion and not yet subdued. It did not free slaves in the border states that had remained within the Union. Had it not been for the war, slavery would have been left alone to die its own slow death in the states where it was allowed.
What Lincoln might have done during Reconstruction will never be known. His untimely death ended any hope of his agenda "with malice toward none" ever being accomplished. It was the "Radical Republicans" led by Thaddeus Stephens that set out to punish the states that had been in rebellion that led to ever increasing government control of internal affairs in the states. If Lincoln had lived that likely would not have been the case.
Lincoln should be remembered for being the man that he was, a man of character forged in a wilderness and hardened by experience. He was a man of strength, a "rail-splitter," not only physically, but mentally as well. He learned to read by firelight in his home. His textbook was the Bible, which he quoted often in his public life. "No man is poor who had a godly mother," he wrote. He was a man of integrity. The story of his walking miles to return a borrowed nickel is not a fabrication.
He was a man of compassion and passionate about his causes. "Our progress in degeneracy appears to me to be pretty rapid," he wrote to Speed. "As a nation, we began by declaring that 'all men are created equal.' We now practically read it 'all men are created equal, except negroes.'" He was a militia captain in the Black Hawk War in the 1830s, and knew the rigors of troops in the field. As president he agonized over the casualty lists and begged God for His forbearance. He was raised on the frontier and never became a regular church attender, but he understood Scripture better than many theologians. "Men are not flattered by the knowledge that God is not on their side," he once said.
His inaugural addresses, the 1863 Thanksgiving message and the Gettysburg Address are among the finest works of literature ever penned. His humbleness before God is evident in all of them. His challenge in the Second Inaugural is as convicting as it is tender. He points out that both sides read the same Bible and pray to the same God, but God has His own purposes, and "the judgments of the Lord are true and righteous altogether." He quoted Psalm 19:9.
It is almost fitting that the Second Inaugural was the last formal speech he would ever give. The closing lines parallel the closing of a life that was both humble, yet strong; firm and resolute, yet tender and empathetic; sagacious, yet practically simple. It also seems appropriate that at the theater Lincoln was laughing when the fatal shot was fired. He had also suffered the death of two sons, one while carrying the burden of the war, and for the first time in four years he was relaxed. His personal secretary, John Hay, wrote that as he took his last breath "a look of unspeakable peace came upon his worn features."
The magnitude of the importance of Abraham Lincoln to America is simply this: Without George Washington there would have been no United States of America; without Abraham Lincoln those United States would not have survived.
With malice toward none, with charity for all, with firmness in the right as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in, to bind up the nation's wounds, to care for him who shall have borne the battle and for his widow and his orphan, to do all which may achieve and cherish a just and lasting peace among ourselves and with all nations.
Thursday, April 9, 2015
Liberal Hypocrisy
Dave Kistler is an evangelist and president of World Hope On Line in Hickory, North Carolina, and a friend of mine. He posted the following which I am reposting with permission. This incident pretty much illustrates the bias and hypocrisy of the Liberal, Leftist, Gay community.
Lance Patterson
Have you heard this? A Castle Rock, Colorado man by the name of Bill Jack is making national headlines for his successful attempt to illustrate the grand hypocrisy within the judicial community. His effort? He entered a bakery whose owner is supportive of gay marriage and asked him to bake three "anti-gay marriage" cakes. Each of the three cakes would contain Bible verses that clearly state God's opposition to same-sex marriage, as well as strong verses declaring the gospel. The result was a firm refusal to bake any such items.
At that point, Mr. Jack, a committed Christian, filed a suit with the Colorado Civil Rights Commission claiming discrimination. The CCRC ruled against Bill declaring that the baker was not obligated to bake any cake with “derogatory language and imagery.” So, it's OK for a Christian baker to be forced to bake a cake that violates his/her beliefs, but it's not the same when a gay-friendly baker is asked to bake a cake that is contrary to his/her values? Plus, since when are Bible verses "derogatory language and imagery?"
Of course, Bill Jack believes that it's a bakers prerogative to refuse to bake a cake AT ALL, if he/she wants to! His point was to merely illustrate the incredible hypocrisy that now exists within the judicial system, and the strong anti-Christian sentiment that now exists in America. In Mr. Jacks own words, "Christianity has now been granted second-class status!"
Is it any accident that the strong anti-Christian bigotry so prevalent in America coincides with the presidency of Barack Hussein Obama? I don't think so! No, Barack Obama has purposefully and dramatically altered the religious climate in America! Obviously, the anti-Christian bigotry did not start with him. However, that movement has found a willing accomplice in him! Even today, he made more comments that demean those of us who hold Christianity dear! As he ventured toward strong anti-Christian rhetoric, he abruptly caught himself and declared, "That's a discussion for another time!"
What is not a "discussion for another time" is the ongoing and escalating animosity that is being fostered toward Christians across the globe! No, NOW is the time for a discussion of it, especially in the United States! It is not enough to say, "Well, in another year and a half this president will be gone and the attitude will return to more normal!" NO, we dare not wait another year and a half! In fact, Christians (especially preachers) have been silent for too long!!! No, this conversation must be had NOW!!!
If your state legislature is working toward it's own RFRA (Religious Freedom Restoration Act), then get busy informing your state legislators of your support for that bill--provided it is well-crafted and doesn't, through the back door, condone Islamic Shariah Law. In the days ahead, my own state of North Carolina will take up just such a bill. I have no doubt it will be well-crafted and do what it is intended to do--protect the beliefs of those of us who adhere to the Scriptures and take seriously our sincerely held CHRISTIAN beliefs! If your state has no such legislation proposed, then get busy calling on your legislators to craft a RFRA!
These days are NOT for the faint of heart! These days demand dedicated Christian men and women (especially preachers) with tough hides, tender hearts and thinking heads, who'll assume a position of leadership in the home, church and civil government! It's well past time that we concern ourselves with the scowls of those who do NOT love God, His word, or the gospel enough to earnestly contend for our religious liberty! I say this lovingly, but VERY directly! I am tired of worrying about those who are passionless and purposeless when it comes to the cause of Christ! By the grace of God, they will NOT infect me with their tragic illness of complacency!
We don't sing it often anymore, though we should! But, I love the words to William P. Merrill's grand hymn, "Rise UP, O Men Of God!" It's beyond applicable at this critical time in our national life!
"Rise up, O men of God! Have done with lesser things! Give heart and soul and mind and strength to serve the King of kings!
"Rise up, O men of God! The church for you doth wait! Her strength is unequal to her task, so rise up and make her great!"
Lance Patterson
Have you heard this? A Castle Rock, Colorado man by the name of Bill Jack is making national headlines for his successful attempt to illustrate the grand hypocrisy within the judicial community. His effort? He entered a bakery whose owner is supportive of gay marriage and asked him to bake three "anti-gay marriage" cakes. Each of the three cakes would contain Bible verses that clearly state God's opposition to same-sex marriage, as well as strong verses declaring the gospel. The result was a firm refusal to bake any such items.
At that point, Mr. Jack, a committed Christian, filed a suit with the Colorado Civil Rights Commission claiming discrimination. The CCRC ruled against Bill declaring that the baker was not obligated to bake any cake with “derogatory language and imagery.” So, it's OK for a Christian baker to be forced to bake a cake that violates his/her beliefs, but it's not the same when a gay-friendly baker is asked to bake a cake that is contrary to his/her values? Plus, since when are Bible verses "derogatory language and imagery?"
Of course, Bill Jack believes that it's a bakers prerogative to refuse to bake a cake AT ALL, if he/she wants to! His point was to merely illustrate the incredible hypocrisy that now exists within the judicial system, and the strong anti-Christian sentiment that now exists in America. In Mr. Jacks own words, "Christianity has now been granted second-class status!"
Is it any accident that the strong anti-Christian bigotry so prevalent in America coincides with the presidency of Barack Hussein Obama? I don't think so! No, Barack Obama has purposefully and dramatically altered the religious climate in America! Obviously, the anti-Christian bigotry did not start with him. However, that movement has found a willing accomplice in him! Even today, he made more comments that demean those of us who hold Christianity dear! As he ventured toward strong anti-Christian rhetoric, he abruptly caught himself and declared, "That's a discussion for another time!"
What is not a "discussion for another time" is the ongoing and escalating animosity that is being fostered toward Christians across the globe! No, NOW is the time for a discussion of it, especially in the United States! It is not enough to say, "Well, in another year and a half this president will be gone and the attitude will return to more normal!" NO, we dare not wait another year and a half! In fact, Christians (especially preachers) have been silent for too long!!! No, this conversation must be had NOW!!!
If your state legislature is working toward it's own RFRA (Religious Freedom Restoration Act), then get busy informing your state legislators of your support for that bill--provided it is well-crafted and doesn't, through the back door, condone Islamic Shariah Law. In the days ahead, my own state of North Carolina will take up just such a bill. I have no doubt it will be well-crafted and do what it is intended to do--protect the beliefs of those of us who adhere to the Scriptures and take seriously our sincerely held CHRISTIAN beliefs! If your state has no such legislation proposed, then get busy calling on your legislators to craft a RFRA!
These days are NOT for the faint of heart! These days demand dedicated Christian men and women (especially preachers) with tough hides, tender hearts and thinking heads, who'll assume a position of leadership in the home, church and civil government! It's well past time that we concern ourselves with the scowls of those who do NOT love God, His word, or the gospel enough to earnestly contend for our religious liberty! I say this lovingly, but VERY directly! I am tired of worrying about those who are passionless and purposeless when it comes to the cause of Christ! By the grace of God, they will NOT infect me with their tragic illness of complacency!
We don't sing it often anymore, though we should! But, I love the words to William P. Merrill's grand hymn, "Rise UP, O Men Of God!" It's beyond applicable at this critical time in our national life!
"Rise up, O men of God! Have done with lesser things! Give heart and soul and mind and strength to serve the King of kings!
"Rise up, O men of God! The church for you doth wait! Her strength is unequal to her task, so rise up and make her great!"
Friday, March 13, 2015
A Treasonous GOP Letter?
On Monday, March 9, forty-seven Republican Senators signed an open letter to the leaders of Iran telling them frankly that a nuclear arms deal made with the Obama might not stand. It is a fair warning. The president may have the authority to negotiate foreign treaties, but the Senate has to ratify those treaties before the United States will be bound to them. The Senators are letting Iran know that any treaty that will allow them to develop nuclear weapons at any time in the future will not stand.
Hillary Clinton immediately tweeted that the letter undermines American leadership and no potential candidates for the presidency should be signing on to it. NBC Nightly News took up the torch on the 11th, claiming that the letter violated the Logan Act and that the Senators have committed treason.
Oh, yes, Hillary and NBC have taken the high ground and are standing up for ... what? The rule of law? Really? This open, transparent letter, put out for everyone to see is equal to treason? And it is unprecedented? Well, let's see. What does NBC think of the following?
Was it treason when Ted Kennedy wrote a letter to Soviet Premier Yuri Andropov in 1983 attempting to undermine Ronald Reagan's diplomatic efforts with the Kremlin?
Was it treason when Jimmy Carter wrote a letter to the United Nations in 1990 undermining President G.H.W. Bush's efforts to build a coalition against Saddam Hussein?
Was it treason when Senator John Kerry traveled to Nicaragua in 1985 to meet with the communist ruler, Daniel Ortega, whom the Reagan Administration was opposing?
Was it treason when Nancy Pelosi traveled to Damascus to show support for Syrian President Assad after President G.W. Bush named Syria as part of an axis of evil, and after Bush requested she not go?
Was it treason when Michigan Congressman David Bonior traveled to Baghdad to meet with Saddam Hussein and undermine President Bush right before the invasion of Iraq?
Where were Hillary and NBC when these letters and events happened? Why weren't they crying "treason" over these? Oh, yeah, I forgot. The rule of law only applies to Republicans. Democrats have always considered themselves above the law. That's because they are such bastions of truthfulness, integrity, and transparency!
The Logan Act, which they are now all touting, is a 1799 law that makes it a felony for unauthorized citizens to enter into negotiations with foreign governments on behalf of the United States. But that is not what is happening here. The forty-seven Senators are not negotiating. They are the ones who will be voting on whether or not to approve any treaty Iran signs with Obama. They are just giving a clear warning that any treaty that gives away the store and allows Iran to develop nuclear weapons will not stand.
The letter also stands as a reminder to Obama that the Senate means to follow the rule of law. Obama's immediate reaction was to guarantee that any treaty he enters into with Iran will not allow them to build nuclear weapons. If that cannot be verified there will be no treaty. Of course, we all know how credible Obama's promises are, and there is really no reason to believe this one will be any different.
If NBC were really concerned about treason, they'd be looking at the White House. Of course....
Hillary Clinton immediately tweeted that the letter undermines American leadership and no potential candidates for the presidency should be signing on to it. NBC Nightly News took up the torch on the 11th, claiming that the letter violated the Logan Act and that the Senators have committed treason.
Oh, yes, Hillary and NBC have taken the high ground and are standing up for ... what? The rule of law? Really? This open, transparent letter, put out for everyone to see is equal to treason? And it is unprecedented? Well, let's see. What does NBC think of the following?
Was it treason when Ted Kennedy wrote a letter to Soviet Premier Yuri Andropov in 1983 attempting to undermine Ronald Reagan's diplomatic efforts with the Kremlin?
Was it treason when Jimmy Carter wrote a letter to the United Nations in 1990 undermining President G.H.W. Bush's efforts to build a coalition against Saddam Hussein?
Was it treason when Senator John Kerry traveled to Nicaragua in 1985 to meet with the communist ruler, Daniel Ortega, whom the Reagan Administration was opposing?
Was it treason when Nancy Pelosi traveled to Damascus to show support for Syrian President Assad after President G.W. Bush named Syria as part of an axis of evil, and after Bush requested she not go?
Was it treason when Michigan Congressman David Bonior traveled to Baghdad to meet with Saddam Hussein and undermine President Bush right before the invasion of Iraq?
Where were Hillary and NBC when these letters and events happened? Why weren't they crying "treason" over these? Oh, yeah, I forgot. The rule of law only applies to Republicans. Democrats have always considered themselves above the law. That's because they are such bastions of truthfulness, integrity, and transparency!
The Logan Act, which they are now all touting, is a 1799 law that makes it a felony for unauthorized citizens to enter into negotiations with foreign governments on behalf of the United States. But that is not what is happening here. The forty-seven Senators are not negotiating. They are the ones who will be voting on whether or not to approve any treaty Iran signs with Obama. They are just giving a clear warning that any treaty that gives away the store and allows Iran to develop nuclear weapons will not stand.
The letter also stands as a reminder to Obama that the Senate means to follow the rule of law. Obama's immediate reaction was to guarantee that any treaty he enters into with Iran will not allow them to build nuclear weapons. If that cannot be verified there will be no treaty. Of course, we all know how credible Obama's promises are, and there is really no reason to believe this one will be any different.
If NBC were really concerned about treason, they'd be looking at the White House. Of course....
Wednesday, March 4, 2015
Benjamin Netanyahu's Speech to Congress
Benjamin Netanyahu's speech before a joint session of Congress last night was an example of statesmanship which we have not seen in America since Ronald Reagan. Not only did he identify the problem and the enemy, he boldly stated that Israel would stand alone if it had to. There was no waffling on who the terrorists are, what religion drives them, or who is supporting them. There was no naiveté, no blind reliance on the "goodness" of the murderous, terrorist exporting Islamic Iranian regime to change and give up their nuclear arms ambitions. There was no feckless leadership from behind. This is a man who understands the world, understands Islam, understands Iran, and understands the threat to peace, not only in Israel, but in America and the world.
Netanyahu was firm and deliberate as he laid out the danger of Obama's proposed treaty with Iran. At the same time he was kind and generous in his comments to Obama, his gratitude for things that Obama has done for Israel, such as intelligence sharing, and lesser known aid such as assisting the Israeli Embassy in Cairo when it was under siege. He also mentioned strategic issues known only to him and Obama because of their sensitivity. He thanked the Congress for their generous military assistance including the Iron Dome missile defense system. In his opening remarks he wished a quick recovery for Senator Harry Reid, who was injured while exercising, even though Reid has been no friend of Israel.
What a contrast to the spoiled little brat Obama, his administration, and over fifty Democrat members of Congress, who had a tantrum and refused to attend. Obama said later that he did not have time to even watch the speech on television. Why? What was he so busy doing, planning his next golf outing? And what a pathetic display of childishness by Nancy Pelosi who stood and turned her back on Netanyahu every time there was a standing ovation during his speech.
What a missed opportunity for Obama to show himself statesmanlike by overlooking pettiness and attending. Netanyahu entered the House chamber down the same isle on the Democrat side that the president uses when entering for State of the Union speeches. He entered to a standing ovation and shook hands with many Democrats, including Harry Reid who spoke very warmly to him for several seconds. Obama's presence would have been a show of great magnanimity and would have helped to strengthen U.S. and Israeli relations. His absence proved where his real interests lie. He wants a treaty with Iran regardless of the consequences and he wasn't about to sit in the House chamber and hear the truth about his giving away the store negotiations.
Netanyahu stated his profound obligation to speak about the future of Israel's survival. He referred to the story of Esther in the Old Testament who saved the Jewish people by obtaining their right to defend themselves against their enemies. He said that now Israel, for the first time in a hundred centuries has the ability to defend itself, and would never give up that right. He compared the situation in ancient Persia to the current Iranian situation. The Ayatollah has openly used Twitter to call for the destruction of Israel. He wrote to the leader of Hezbollah in Lebanon, "If all Jews gather in Israel it will save us the trouble of chasing them down all around the world."
He pointed out that Iran's threat is not just to Israel but to the whole world. Iran was hijacked by religious zealots in 1979, who gave the country a new constitution designed to fulfill the Koran's resolution to jihad. He made the contrast between the Iranian and American constitutional philosophies clear. America offers life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, while Iran pledges death, tyranny and the pursuit of jihad. He called out the "goons in Gaza, the lackeys in Lebanon, and the Shia'a in Syria," which are all sponsored by Iran. Today four capitols in the Middle East are controlled by Iran including Beirut, Damascus, Gaza, and of all things, Baghdad. Two years ago sanctions on Iran were eased and we were told to give the new regime in Iran a chance to change. The change has been more persecution of Christians, more murders, and more terror.
Then Netanyahu clearly explained the difference between Iran and ISIS. They are both competing for the same crown, he said. The crown of a militant Islamic Empire. Iran is Shia'a, and ISIS is Sunni, but they both want to control a world-wide caliphate in which there will be no rights for women, no freedom of religion. ISIS commands the world's attention right now but it is not the greater threat. ISIS is using small arms and IEDs. Iran has intercontinental ballistic missiles.
It is often said that in war the enemy of your enemy is your friend. But in this case, Netanyahu explained, "The enemy of your enemy is your enemy." A treaty with Iran that only delays them from getting nuclear weapons is winning a battle in the short term but it is losing the war. The deal being offered to Iran now by the Obama administration will guarantee that Iran will eventually get nuclear weapons. He pointed out that any deal that allows Iran to keep it's vast nuclear facilities with centrifuges spinning will allow them a short breakout time to a weapon of six to twelve months. He gave North Korea as an example of how meaningless a supervised treaty would be. Obama's deal would allow Iran to keep 6,000 centrifuges, but the Supreme Leader of Iran has stated his plan to build 190,000. And intercontinental ballistic missiles are not even a part of the negotiations.
Netanyahu also warned that a nuclear Iran would lead to a nuclear arms race all across the Middle East. It will be a "farewell to arms control." We don't have to gamble on Iran changing for the better. We must not lift restrictions until three things happen. First, Iran must stop aggression against its neighbors in the Middle East. Second, it must stop supporting terrorism around the world, and third, it must stop threatening to annihilate Israel. This led to the longest and loudest ovation of the evening.
Netanyahu finished his speech recognizing the presence of Elie Wiesel, holocaust survivor and Nobel Prize winner, and warning the Congress not to repeat the mistakes of the past. He then pointed to an image of Moses on the wall at the rear of the gallery and quoted Moses: "Be strong and resolute, neither fear or dread them." He closed hoping that Israel and America will always stand together.
It was a speech of magnificent proportion. There was no political correctness or blind belief in the goodness of the Islamic religion. It clearly identified the players and the situation, and stated the threat to not just Israel, but to the Middle East and the world.
The presence and non-presence of key individuals in the House also clearly illustrated the difference between real leadership and proud, little buffoons who play a game with words, but don't understand the stakes and take no action of substance. It showed the difference between a heroic man and a cowardly community organizer. Bibi Netanyahu was a war hero, a member of an elite Israeli special forces unit, wounded twice in battle. Obama smoked pot, wrote phony autobiographies and plays golf. Netanyahu lives in the real world where Islam is the greatest evil and threat to peace since the collapse of the Soviet Union. Obama dithers in a fantasy realm where Islam is the source of all good, the fabric of America, and its prayers the most beautiful sound on earth.
By the way, I'm tired of hearing everybody, conservatives included, talking about radical Islam, which has hijacked a peaceful religion. Islam is not a religion of peace, and there is no radical Islam. There is Islam based on the Koran that teaches hatred and jihad to overcome the infidels, which is followed to the letter by devout Islamic terrorists, and there is moderate Islam that doesn't live by the Koran, but will not condemn those who do. What we see in Islamic terrorism is Islam by the Koran.
Netanyahu knows this. But until we learn this lesson, we are never going to win the war on terror. Netanyahu's speech ought to be played and studied in every political science and history class in the nation, as well as the White House, until we understand that what he has told us is the truth, and we ignore it at our own peril.
Netanyahu was firm and deliberate as he laid out the danger of Obama's proposed treaty with Iran. At the same time he was kind and generous in his comments to Obama, his gratitude for things that Obama has done for Israel, such as intelligence sharing, and lesser known aid such as assisting the Israeli Embassy in Cairo when it was under siege. He also mentioned strategic issues known only to him and Obama because of their sensitivity. He thanked the Congress for their generous military assistance including the Iron Dome missile defense system. In his opening remarks he wished a quick recovery for Senator Harry Reid, who was injured while exercising, even though Reid has been no friend of Israel.
What a contrast to the spoiled little brat Obama, his administration, and over fifty Democrat members of Congress, who had a tantrum and refused to attend. Obama said later that he did not have time to even watch the speech on television. Why? What was he so busy doing, planning his next golf outing? And what a pathetic display of childishness by Nancy Pelosi who stood and turned her back on Netanyahu every time there was a standing ovation during his speech.
What a missed opportunity for Obama to show himself statesmanlike by overlooking pettiness and attending. Netanyahu entered the House chamber down the same isle on the Democrat side that the president uses when entering for State of the Union speeches. He entered to a standing ovation and shook hands with many Democrats, including Harry Reid who spoke very warmly to him for several seconds. Obama's presence would have been a show of great magnanimity and would have helped to strengthen U.S. and Israeli relations. His absence proved where his real interests lie. He wants a treaty with Iran regardless of the consequences and he wasn't about to sit in the House chamber and hear the truth about his giving away the store negotiations.
Netanyahu stated his profound obligation to speak about the future of Israel's survival. He referred to the story of Esther in the Old Testament who saved the Jewish people by obtaining their right to defend themselves against their enemies. He said that now Israel, for the first time in a hundred centuries has the ability to defend itself, and would never give up that right. He compared the situation in ancient Persia to the current Iranian situation. The Ayatollah has openly used Twitter to call for the destruction of Israel. He wrote to the leader of Hezbollah in Lebanon, "If all Jews gather in Israel it will save us the trouble of chasing them down all around the world."
He pointed out that Iran's threat is not just to Israel but to the whole world. Iran was hijacked by religious zealots in 1979, who gave the country a new constitution designed to fulfill the Koran's resolution to jihad. He made the contrast between the Iranian and American constitutional philosophies clear. America offers life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, while Iran pledges death, tyranny and the pursuit of jihad. He called out the "goons in Gaza, the lackeys in Lebanon, and the Shia'a in Syria," which are all sponsored by Iran. Today four capitols in the Middle East are controlled by Iran including Beirut, Damascus, Gaza, and of all things, Baghdad. Two years ago sanctions on Iran were eased and we were told to give the new regime in Iran a chance to change. The change has been more persecution of Christians, more murders, and more terror.
Then Netanyahu clearly explained the difference between Iran and ISIS. They are both competing for the same crown, he said. The crown of a militant Islamic Empire. Iran is Shia'a, and ISIS is Sunni, but they both want to control a world-wide caliphate in which there will be no rights for women, no freedom of religion. ISIS commands the world's attention right now but it is not the greater threat. ISIS is using small arms and IEDs. Iran has intercontinental ballistic missiles.
It is often said that in war the enemy of your enemy is your friend. But in this case, Netanyahu explained, "The enemy of your enemy is your enemy." A treaty with Iran that only delays them from getting nuclear weapons is winning a battle in the short term but it is losing the war. The deal being offered to Iran now by the Obama administration will guarantee that Iran will eventually get nuclear weapons. He pointed out that any deal that allows Iran to keep it's vast nuclear facilities with centrifuges spinning will allow them a short breakout time to a weapon of six to twelve months. He gave North Korea as an example of how meaningless a supervised treaty would be. Obama's deal would allow Iran to keep 6,000 centrifuges, but the Supreme Leader of Iran has stated his plan to build 190,000. And intercontinental ballistic missiles are not even a part of the negotiations.
Netanyahu also warned that a nuclear Iran would lead to a nuclear arms race all across the Middle East. It will be a "farewell to arms control." We don't have to gamble on Iran changing for the better. We must not lift restrictions until three things happen. First, Iran must stop aggression against its neighbors in the Middle East. Second, it must stop supporting terrorism around the world, and third, it must stop threatening to annihilate Israel. This led to the longest and loudest ovation of the evening.
Netanyahu finished his speech recognizing the presence of Elie Wiesel, holocaust survivor and Nobel Prize winner, and warning the Congress not to repeat the mistakes of the past. He then pointed to an image of Moses on the wall at the rear of the gallery and quoted Moses: "Be strong and resolute, neither fear or dread them." He closed hoping that Israel and America will always stand together.
It was a speech of magnificent proportion. There was no political correctness or blind belief in the goodness of the Islamic religion. It clearly identified the players and the situation, and stated the threat to not just Israel, but to the Middle East and the world.
The presence and non-presence of key individuals in the House also clearly illustrated the difference between real leadership and proud, little buffoons who play a game with words, but don't understand the stakes and take no action of substance. It showed the difference between a heroic man and a cowardly community organizer. Bibi Netanyahu was a war hero, a member of an elite Israeli special forces unit, wounded twice in battle. Obama smoked pot, wrote phony autobiographies and plays golf. Netanyahu lives in the real world where Islam is the greatest evil and threat to peace since the collapse of the Soviet Union. Obama dithers in a fantasy realm where Islam is the source of all good, the fabric of America, and its prayers the most beautiful sound on earth.
By the way, I'm tired of hearing everybody, conservatives included, talking about radical Islam, which has hijacked a peaceful religion. Islam is not a religion of peace, and there is no radical Islam. There is Islam based on the Koran that teaches hatred and jihad to overcome the infidels, which is followed to the letter by devout Islamic terrorists, and there is moderate Islam that doesn't live by the Koran, but will not condemn those who do. What we see in Islamic terrorism is Islam by the Koran.
Netanyahu knows this. But until we learn this lesson, we are never going to win the war on terror. Netanyahu's speech ought to be played and studied in every political science and history class in the nation, as well as the White House, until we understand that what he has told us is the truth, and we ignore it at our own peril.
Thursday, February 5, 2015
Ten Facts That Will Blow Right-Wingers Minds
I was shown an article called Ten Facts That Will Blow Right-Winger’s Minds. This is my response to the article. I've edited the ten points and quotes for space. If you want to read the entire article you can find it here. href="http://www.alternet.org/10-facts-will-blow-right-wingers-minds". These ten comments don’t blow my mind simply because they are all disingenuous liberal propaganda. Maybe my answers will blow some liberal minds, but I doubt it. Liberals generally are only interested in their agenda, not the truth.
1. The United States is not a Christian nation, and the Bible is not the cornerstone of our law.
I will admit we are probably in a post-Christian era as much of the country has turned against God, and Christian churches and businesses are coming under increasing pressure from anti-Christian elements in government and public institutions, and organizations like the ACLU, in an attempt to exclude all references to Christianity in public places, especially in public schools. But the statement is disingenuous and not true.
Any quote taken out of the context of the speech, the letter, or the time in which it was given can be manipulated to make any argument you want. That is the case with all of the quotes given here. The argument against our Christian roots usually focuses on a misunderstanding of the doctrine of Separation of Church and State, which many people ignorantly believe is a part of the Constitution. It is not.
The Separation of Church and State doctrine was penned in a letter by Thomas Jefferson to the Baptist church in Danbury, Connecticut, in response to a letter from the Baptists who were concerned that there was an attempt to establish a national religion. Jefferson assured them that the Constitution was written to assure a separation of church and state so that the government could never establish a national church or interfere with church affairs, but which did not prevent churches from influencing the government by means of First Amendment rights.
Jefferson also wrote the following:
“God who gave us life gave us liberty. And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are the Gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with His wrath? Indeed, I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just; that His justice cannot sleep forever....” – Notes on the State of Virginia, Query XVIII, p. 237.
This is most definitely a reference to the Christian God. Jefferson was not a deist as many claim. For one thing, a deist god would not be just or even care what its creation was doing. In fact, funds were designated for the evangelization of Indians to the Christian religion in every annual budget of Jefferson’s administration. Jefferson wrote the following as well:
“I am a real Christian – that is to say, a disciple of the doctrines of Jesus Christ.” – The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, p. 385.
John Adams is quoted concerning the Treaty of Tripoli in 1797 that the United States is not a Christian nation in any sense of the word. Adams’s meaning about the treaty was that we do not have a national Christian Church that controls the government. This had been the situation in Europe under Roman Catholic influence and in England under Anglican Church influence for centuries and the Founders were not going to have it. Adams also wrote a letter to the Massachusetts militia in 1798 in which he said, “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”
Take the time to read David McCullough’s biography of Adams and you will find dozens of quotes from Adams about Christianity and its influence on the Founding Fathers.
Madison is quoted affirming the separation of church and state. Madison’s statement, however, does not disprove our Christian founding. It simply verifies the Separation of Church and State as Jefferson stated it, which in the context of the time meant to keep the government out of religion, not religion out of the government. It was a 1947 Felix Frankfurter Supreme Court ruling that turned the meaning of separation upside down to keep Christianity out of the government.
Madison, known as the “Father of the Constitution,” also wrote, “We have staked the future of all our political institutions upon the capacity of mankind to self-government, upon the capacity of each and all of us to govern ourselves, to control ourselves, to sustain ourselves according to the Ten Commandments of God.”
John Jay, a co-writer of the Federalist Papers with Madison and Alexander Hamilton, delegate to the Continental Congress, and first Chief Justice of the US Supreme Court wrote: Providence has given our people the choice of their rulers, and it is the duty, as well as privilege and interest, of a Christian nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers.”
A long statement by George Washington is given in which he opposes spiritual tyranny by any state church. Washington’s statement is also indicative of the times. He was against a church-state union that would produce a spiritual tyranny such as what the colonists fled England to escape. Washington, who was a vestryman in his church, also said the following:
“It is impossible to rightly govern a nation without God and the Bible.”
The French philosopher, Alexis de Tocqueville, visited America and wrote: “The Americans combine the notions of Christianity and of liberty so intimately in their minds, that it is impossible to make them conceive the one without the other ... Religion in America must be regarded as the foremost of the political institutions of that country.”
Woodrow Wilson declared in 1911: “America was born a Christian nation.”
There are hundreds of quotes from the Founders and Framers of the Constitution about America’s Christian heritage. They are all in the public domain for anyone who is serious enough to investigate the truth about our Founders, but here is one more decisive statement. In 1892, in Holy Trinity v. United States, Justice Brewer wrote in the opinion of the Supreme Court:
“These, and many other matters which might be noticed, add a volume of unofficial declarations to the mass of organic utterances that this is a Christian nation.”
To say we are not a Christian nation is nothing but the dishonest agenda of extremist left-wingers who will selectively choose certain founding statements and deliberately misconstrue, pervert, and misapply the quotations in order to rewrite America’s history. Nobody is perfect, and nobody has never told a lie, but leftists who put out this stuff live by spewing falsehoods. It is their shameless lack of character and integrity that blows my mind.
2. The Pledge of Allegiance was written by a socialist.
So? The Pledge of Allegiance states the Patriot’s love and devotion to his country. You might also remember that the original pledge made no reference to God. The U.S. Congress corrected that in 1956 when it was changed to read, “one nation under God.” Under God was President Eisenhower's idea. When he introduced the proposal in 1954 he said, "In this way we are reaffirming the transcendence of religious faith in America's heritage and future."
3. The first president to propose national health insurance was a Republican.
So? Republicans make mistakes too. The fact is, it’s a Democrat issue today that every Republican in Congress opposes and rightfully so. Far from fixing any supposed problems with the medical insurance industry, obamacare is destroying the entire health care system.
4. Ronald Reagan once signed a bill legalizing abortion. As Casey Stengel said, ‘You could look it up.’
Yes, and you could also look it up in Reagan’s autobiography, An American Life, and find that he was misled into believing the bill only allowed abortion to save the life of the mother, and he thought it was going to reduce the overall numbers of abortion. It didn’t, and he admitted it was one of the biggest mistakes he ever made. That doesn’t take away any credibility from his pro-life stance, as he became one of the greatest defenders of life during his presidency.
5. Reagan raised federal taxes eleven times and only those in the top income brackets benefitted.
Yes, and they were small increases that hardly compared with the tax cuts. It is also misleading to suggest that they only affected the top income brackets. That’s the typical Democrat class warfare argument that doesn’t hold an ounce of water when you consider there are more millionaire Democrats in Congress by far than millionaire Republicans. They also benefited from the tax cuts and never complained about growing their own fortunes.
The other fact is that Reaganomics led to the longest economic expansion in our history up to that time. If you weren’t alive in the 1980s you cannot really appreciate how good we had it in America after the Carter malaise. The criticism that the '80s was the worst economy in fifty years was a Clinton strategy to destroy capitalism and replace it with a high tax socialist economy. That was soundly rejected, as was Hillarycare, by the country in 1994 with the Republican Revolution that led to a longer economic boom than in the '80s. Clinton went along with it and took the credit at the time, even though he brazenly waved his finger and denied it at the Democrat convention in 2012. There are other things to consider as well including the Democrat controlled House that Reagan had to deal with. It is interesting after all, how many times Obama has compared himself with Reagan, while at the same time trashing Reagonomics.
6. Roe v. Wade was a bipartisan ruling made by a predominantly Republican-appointed Supreme Court.
It is a hard thing to understand how supposed conservatives appointed to the Court keep turning liberal. Sandra Day O’Conner is another example as well as John Roberts. Nixon expressed his disappointment in Earl Warren. Unfortunately, the Senate has to confirm the nominees, and when the Democrats had large Senate majorities, Republican presidents were forced to appoint moderates in order to get them confirmed. Staunch conservatives like Judge Harlan, nominated by Nixon, and Robert Bork, by Reagan, were slandered with such vitriol by such Democrat stalwarts of integrity as Ted Kennedy that the nominations had to be pulled.
The bigger issue here is the one thing left out of this argument. Roe v. Wade also stated that if it could ever be proven that life began before birth, the ruling would be overturned. There is now absolute evidence that a child is a live human being from conception, with a heartbeat in only a few weeks, and with the ability to hear, and to feel pain. So the real question is, why has Roe v. Wade not been overturned?
7. The Federal Reserve System was a Republican invention. The grandfather of Nelson Rockefeller was one of its architects.
So? The Rockefellers have been notoriously liberal in politics regardless of party affiliation. It was also a Democrat president, Woodrow Wilson, who favored and signed the bill creating the Federal Reserve, and instituting the personal income tax system and the IRS, which today is the biggest scandal ridden agency in the government. All the more reason to get rid of the Fed and the IRS.
8. The Environmental Protection Agency was, too, created by Richard Nixon, who also was in favor of healthcare.
The EPA was created for a good reason, to clean up the environment. It did a pretty good job at first. Air pollution has been greatly reduced; parks and wilderness areas are kept clean. It was a good thing. The fact that it has morphed into a monstrosity trying to regulate every aspect of everybody’s life and destroy all production of energy isn’t the fault of Nixon. The EPA is run today by extremely leftist liberals.
Oh, and Nixon was for healthcare. He was also forced to resign from office over the cover up of a small break-in that had no national consequences. One of his advisors, Charles Colson, went to prison for having illegally in his possession one FBI file. Obama has presided over cover ups of Fast and Furious and Benghazi and others, and has yet to be held accountable even though these have had not only national, but international consequences. During Clinton’s presidency, Hillary had over 900 FBI files illegally in her possession, but she did no jail time, and now she is stonewalling the Benghazi investigation. Obama, through executive order, has illegally overturned the Constitutional separation of powers over and over. Where’s the accountability? The hypocrisy of defending Democrats for crimes far greater than Republicans have been punished for is appalling. Obama’s administration is undoubtedly the most corrupt administration America has ever seen.
9. Obama has increased government spending less than any president in at least a generation. Several percentage statistics were given to show Obama’s spending growth at only 1.4%, while Bush was over 5% and Reagan over 8%. It calls Obama the most thrifty president in at least a generation.
This is nothing but a flat out lie. The numbers do not in fact add up no matter how they are manipulated, and confusing the issue with percentages rather than real numbers doesn’t change anything. Obama called Bush’s last budget deficit of 450 billion dollars "irresponsible and unpatriotic." He then ran budget deficits of over 1.3 trillion dollars for five straight years. The national debt under Obama has doubled from 9 trillion in 2008 to 18 trillion in only six years. He has added more deficit spending and more debt than all 43 presidents before him combined. Thrifty is not a word that describes BHO. Out of control spend freak is more like it.
10. President Obama was not only born in the United States, his roots run deeper in American history than most people know. It is claimed that eleven of his mother’s ancestors fought in the American Revolution.
Since the last proposition was a complete fabrication, what is there to prevent us from believing this one is too? If his Dunham lineage is so well documented, let’s see it. Obama made a lot of claims in his fantasy autobiographies but this wasn’t even one of them. If there were any modicum of truth in it, I’m sure it would have been plastered all over the place in his defense. The fact that nobody knows it gives it very little credibility.
Even if it is true it says nothing about the place of his birth. Neither is it irrational to question his American citizenship. Obama spent a million dollars in legal fees covering up his past so that it was not available for examination. Why? The birth certificate he finally produced is so full of anomalies its validity is suspect. The sequence of birth numbers is out of order with certificates of other births issued on his birthday. It identifies him as African-American, a term that was not commonly in use until the 1990s. In 1961 he would have been identified as a Negro.
He supposedly became an Indonesian citizen when he lived there under the name of Sotero. That alone would disqualify him for the American presidency. By his own admission in one of his books he traveled to Pakistan in 1981. At the time U.S. citizens were barred by the State Department from going there. How did he make the trip? He could have with a British passport, which is possible if he was born in Kenya. In 1961 Kenya was still a part of the British Commonwealth, not yet independent, and he would have had a British passport if born there.
I lived in Kenya for fourteen years. The Kenyans certainly believed Obama was born there. They claimed him in their newspapers. His grandmother claimed to have witnessed his birth. And his yearbook bio from either Columbia or Harvard claims he was born in Kenya.
The smoking gun, however, is his Social Security number. He has a Connecticut number that belonged to a man who died many years ago. When they rolled out obamacare he had his staff enroll him. Funny thing. They could not get him enrolled because the system wouldn’t recognize his SSN. If he can credibly explain the SSN, I’ll drop the argument, but the evidence points to an illegal, unqualified usurper sitting in the White House.
None of this blows my mind, except as I wrote above, the absolute lack of intellectual integrity on the part of leftist propagandists who shamelessly produce statements like these in an attempt to distort and pervert the truth. As the Fonz would have said, “Sit on it.”
1. The United States is not a Christian nation, and the Bible is not the cornerstone of our law.
I will admit we are probably in a post-Christian era as much of the country has turned against God, and Christian churches and businesses are coming under increasing pressure from anti-Christian elements in government and public institutions, and organizations like the ACLU, in an attempt to exclude all references to Christianity in public places, especially in public schools. But the statement is disingenuous and not true.
Any quote taken out of the context of the speech, the letter, or the time in which it was given can be manipulated to make any argument you want. That is the case with all of the quotes given here. The argument against our Christian roots usually focuses on a misunderstanding of the doctrine of Separation of Church and State, which many people ignorantly believe is a part of the Constitution. It is not.
The Separation of Church and State doctrine was penned in a letter by Thomas Jefferson to the Baptist church in Danbury, Connecticut, in response to a letter from the Baptists who were concerned that there was an attempt to establish a national religion. Jefferson assured them that the Constitution was written to assure a separation of church and state so that the government could never establish a national church or interfere with church affairs, but which did not prevent churches from influencing the government by means of First Amendment rights.
Jefferson also wrote the following:
“God who gave us life gave us liberty. And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are the Gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with His wrath? Indeed, I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just; that His justice cannot sleep forever....” – Notes on the State of Virginia, Query XVIII, p. 237.
This is most definitely a reference to the Christian God. Jefferson was not a deist as many claim. For one thing, a deist god would not be just or even care what its creation was doing. In fact, funds were designated for the evangelization of Indians to the Christian religion in every annual budget of Jefferson’s administration. Jefferson wrote the following as well:
“I am a real Christian – that is to say, a disciple of the doctrines of Jesus Christ.” – The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, p. 385.
John Adams is quoted concerning the Treaty of Tripoli in 1797 that the United States is not a Christian nation in any sense of the word. Adams’s meaning about the treaty was that we do not have a national Christian Church that controls the government. This had been the situation in Europe under Roman Catholic influence and in England under Anglican Church influence for centuries and the Founders were not going to have it. Adams also wrote a letter to the Massachusetts militia in 1798 in which he said, “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”
Take the time to read David McCullough’s biography of Adams and you will find dozens of quotes from Adams about Christianity and its influence on the Founding Fathers.
Madison is quoted affirming the separation of church and state. Madison’s statement, however, does not disprove our Christian founding. It simply verifies the Separation of Church and State as Jefferson stated it, which in the context of the time meant to keep the government out of religion, not religion out of the government. It was a 1947 Felix Frankfurter Supreme Court ruling that turned the meaning of separation upside down to keep Christianity out of the government.
Madison, known as the “Father of the Constitution,” also wrote, “We have staked the future of all our political institutions upon the capacity of mankind to self-government, upon the capacity of each and all of us to govern ourselves, to control ourselves, to sustain ourselves according to the Ten Commandments of God.”
John Jay, a co-writer of the Federalist Papers with Madison and Alexander Hamilton, delegate to the Continental Congress, and first Chief Justice of the US Supreme Court wrote: Providence has given our people the choice of their rulers, and it is the duty, as well as privilege and interest, of a Christian nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers.”
A long statement by George Washington is given in which he opposes spiritual tyranny by any state church. Washington’s statement is also indicative of the times. He was against a church-state union that would produce a spiritual tyranny such as what the colonists fled England to escape. Washington, who was a vestryman in his church, also said the following:
“It is impossible to rightly govern a nation without God and the Bible.”
The French philosopher, Alexis de Tocqueville, visited America and wrote: “The Americans combine the notions of Christianity and of liberty so intimately in their minds, that it is impossible to make them conceive the one without the other ... Religion in America must be regarded as the foremost of the political institutions of that country.”
Woodrow Wilson declared in 1911: “America was born a Christian nation.”
There are hundreds of quotes from the Founders and Framers of the Constitution about America’s Christian heritage. They are all in the public domain for anyone who is serious enough to investigate the truth about our Founders, but here is one more decisive statement. In 1892, in Holy Trinity v. United States, Justice Brewer wrote in the opinion of the Supreme Court:
“These, and many other matters which might be noticed, add a volume of unofficial declarations to the mass of organic utterances that this is a Christian nation.”
To say we are not a Christian nation is nothing but the dishonest agenda of extremist left-wingers who will selectively choose certain founding statements and deliberately misconstrue, pervert, and misapply the quotations in order to rewrite America’s history. Nobody is perfect, and nobody has never told a lie, but leftists who put out this stuff live by spewing falsehoods. It is their shameless lack of character and integrity that blows my mind.
2. The Pledge of Allegiance was written by a socialist.
So? The Pledge of Allegiance states the Patriot’s love and devotion to his country. You might also remember that the original pledge made no reference to God. The U.S. Congress corrected that in 1956 when it was changed to read, “one nation under God.” Under God was President Eisenhower's idea. When he introduced the proposal in 1954 he said, "In this way we are reaffirming the transcendence of religious faith in America's heritage and future."
3. The first president to propose national health insurance was a Republican.
So? Republicans make mistakes too. The fact is, it’s a Democrat issue today that every Republican in Congress opposes and rightfully so. Far from fixing any supposed problems with the medical insurance industry, obamacare is destroying the entire health care system.
4. Ronald Reagan once signed a bill legalizing abortion. As Casey Stengel said, ‘You could look it up.’
Yes, and you could also look it up in Reagan’s autobiography, An American Life, and find that he was misled into believing the bill only allowed abortion to save the life of the mother, and he thought it was going to reduce the overall numbers of abortion. It didn’t, and he admitted it was one of the biggest mistakes he ever made. That doesn’t take away any credibility from his pro-life stance, as he became one of the greatest defenders of life during his presidency.
5. Reagan raised federal taxes eleven times and only those in the top income brackets benefitted.
Yes, and they were small increases that hardly compared with the tax cuts. It is also misleading to suggest that they only affected the top income brackets. That’s the typical Democrat class warfare argument that doesn’t hold an ounce of water when you consider there are more millionaire Democrats in Congress by far than millionaire Republicans. They also benefited from the tax cuts and never complained about growing their own fortunes.
The other fact is that Reaganomics led to the longest economic expansion in our history up to that time. If you weren’t alive in the 1980s you cannot really appreciate how good we had it in America after the Carter malaise. The criticism that the '80s was the worst economy in fifty years was a Clinton strategy to destroy capitalism and replace it with a high tax socialist economy. That was soundly rejected, as was Hillarycare, by the country in 1994 with the Republican Revolution that led to a longer economic boom than in the '80s. Clinton went along with it and took the credit at the time, even though he brazenly waved his finger and denied it at the Democrat convention in 2012. There are other things to consider as well including the Democrat controlled House that Reagan had to deal with. It is interesting after all, how many times Obama has compared himself with Reagan, while at the same time trashing Reagonomics.
6. Roe v. Wade was a bipartisan ruling made by a predominantly Republican-appointed Supreme Court.
It is a hard thing to understand how supposed conservatives appointed to the Court keep turning liberal. Sandra Day O’Conner is another example as well as John Roberts. Nixon expressed his disappointment in Earl Warren. Unfortunately, the Senate has to confirm the nominees, and when the Democrats had large Senate majorities, Republican presidents were forced to appoint moderates in order to get them confirmed. Staunch conservatives like Judge Harlan, nominated by Nixon, and Robert Bork, by Reagan, were slandered with such vitriol by such Democrat stalwarts of integrity as Ted Kennedy that the nominations had to be pulled.
The bigger issue here is the one thing left out of this argument. Roe v. Wade also stated that if it could ever be proven that life began before birth, the ruling would be overturned. There is now absolute evidence that a child is a live human being from conception, with a heartbeat in only a few weeks, and with the ability to hear, and to feel pain. So the real question is, why has Roe v. Wade not been overturned?
7. The Federal Reserve System was a Republican invention. The grandfather of Nelson Rockefeller was one of its architects.
So? The Rockefellers have been notoriously liberal in politics regardless of party affiliation. It was also a Democrat president, Woodrow Wilson, who favored and signed the bill creating the Federal Reserve, and instituting the personal income tax system and the IRS, which today is the biggest scandal ridden agency in the government. All the more reason to get rid of the Fed and the IRS.
8. The Environmental Protection Agency was, too, created by Richard Nixon, who also was in favor of healthcare.
The EPA was created for a good reason, to clean up the environment. It did a pretty good job at first. Air pollution has been greatly reduced; parks and wilderness areas are kept clean. It was a good thing. The fact that it has morphed into a monstrosity trying to regulate every aspect of everybody’s life and destroy all production of energy isn’t the fault of Nixon. The EPA is run today by extremely leftist liberals.
Oh, and Nixon was for healthcare. He was also forced to resign from office over the cover up of a small break-in that had no national consequences. One of his advisors, Charles Colson, went to prison for having illegally in his possession one FBI file. Obama has presided over cover ups of Fast and Furious and Benghazi and others, and has yet to be held accountable even though these have had not only national, but international consequences. During Clinton’s presidency, Hillary had over 900 FBI files illegally in her possession, but she did no jail time, and now she is stonewalling the Benghazi investigation. Obama, through executive order, has illegally overturned the Constitutional separation of powers over and over. Where’s the accountability? The hypocrisy of defending Democrats for crimes far greater than Republicans have been punished for is appalling. Obama’s administration is undoubtedly the most corrupt administration America has ever seen.
9. Obama has increased government spending less than any president in at least a generation. Several percentage statistics were given to show Obama’s spending growth at only 1.4%, while Bush was over 5% and Reagan over 8%. It calls Obama the most thrifty president in at least a generation.
This is nothing but a flat out lie. The numbers do not in fact add up no matter how they are manipulated, and confusing the issue with percentages rather than real numbers doesn’t change anything. Obama called Bush’s last budget deficit of 450 billion dollars "irresponsible and unpatriotic." He then ran budget deficits of over 1.3 trillion dollars for five straight years. The national debt under Obama has doubled from 9 trillion in 2008 to 18 trillion in only six years. He has added more deficit spending and more debt than all 43 presidents before him combined. Thrifty is not a word that describes BHO. Out of control spend freak is more like it.
10. President Obama was not only born in the United States, his roots run deeper in American history than most people know. It is claimed that eleven of his mother’s ancestors fought in the American Revolution.
Since the last proposition was a complete fabrication, what is there to prevent us from believing this one is too? If his Dunham lineage is so well documented, let’s see it. Obama made a lot of claims in his fantasy autobiographies but this wasn’t even one of them. If there were any modicum of truth in it, I’m sure it would have been plastered all over the place in his defense. The fact that nobody knows it gives it very little credibility.
Even if it is true it says nothing about the place of his birth. Neither is it irrational to question his American citizenship. Obama spent a million dollars in legal fees covering up his past so that it was not available for examination. Why? The birth certificate he finally produced is so full of anomalies its validity is suspect. The sequence of birth numbers is out of order with certificates of other births issued on his birthday. It identifies him as African-American, a term that was not commonly in use until the 1990s. In 1961 he would have been identified as a Negro.
He supposedly became an Indonesian citizen when he lived there under the name of Sotero. That alone would disqualify him for the American presidency. By his own admission in one of his books he traveled to Pakistan in 1981. At the time U.S. citizens were barred by the State Department from going there. How did he make the trip? He could have with a British passport, which is possible if he was born in Kenya. In 1961 Kenya was still a part of the British Commonwealth, not yet independent, and he would have had a British passport if born there.
I lived in Kenya for fourteen years. The Kenyans certainly believed Obama was born there. They claimed him in their newspapers. His grandmother claimed to have witnessed his birth. And his yearbook bio from either Columbia or Harvard claims he was born in Kenya.
The smoking gun, however, is his Social Security number. He has a Connecticut number that belonged to a man who died many years ago. When they rolled out obamacare he had his staff enroll him. Funny thing. They could not get him enrolled because the system wouldn’t recognize his SSN. If he can credibly explain the SSN, I’ll drop the argument, but the evidence points to an illegal, unqualified usurper sitting in the White House.
None of this blows my mind, except as I wrote above, the absolute lack of intellectual integrity on the part of leftist propagandists who shamelessly produce statements like these in an attempt to distort and pervert the truth. As the Fonz would have said, “Sit on it.”
Tuesday, January 27, 2015
SOTU 2015
Watching Obama give a speech is a painful experience and the State of the Union address last week was no different. I am so tired of hearing people gush about what a great orator or speaker he is. He is not. He drops his voice like a thud at the end of short, choppy sentences, and when he makes gestures, drops his left hand on the podium, which thumps the microphone in a frustratingly irritating manner.
He bounced up to the podium as he always does like Mr. Cool Guy trying to appear jovial, casual and relaxed. The problem is we are not in a jovial, casual or relaxed time in history. His attitude was Nixonian in its arrogance and defiance. His whole manner was disturbing at best.
If you were hoping to hear anything of real substance you probably came away disappointed. Obama said nothing new. It's the same old speech he's been giving for five years, same failed ideas, same false claims of a great economy, a great foreign policy, and the respect of the world. The speech was a fraud, full of contradictions, mythical statistics, and a perverted sense of what is good.
It's time to turn the page and remake America, he said. What? What has he been doing for the last six years? That's the same message he was preaching in 2008. Or is he saying it's time to turn around the train wreck we've been on for the last six years and get back to where we were? If only that were true.
It was no surprise that he touted the economy. In fairness, every president will take credit for a good economy. Remember how Clinton took credit for the 1994 Republican Revolution reforms that led to the greatest economic boom in our history? (Remember also how liberals blamed Bush for the recession that followed the economic bubble that Clinton created with Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac unsecured loans that burst as he was going out of office?)
Obama claimed that last year we had the fastest job growth since 1999. What he left out is that this recovery is the slowest recovery from a recession in American history. He also conveniently forgot to mention that there are still fewer people working today than when he took office, and the labor participation rate has dropped from 66.4% in 2009 to 62.7% today, the lowest rate since 1978, and that the net gains are in part time jobs, not full time. Ninety-two million Americans are out of work, and the number of people receiving food stamps has gone from 33 million in 2008 to 46 million today, an increase of 29%. He wants to raise the minimum wage because families can't survive on the current minimum level. They won't survive on 15 dollars an hour either if the only work they can get is part time.
Obama shamelessly took credit for the drop in oil prices and touted the success of solar and wind energy. People seem to have forgotten that in 2008 he told us to expect seven dollar a gallon gas. His policies were never designed to lower gasoline prices, but rather to cripple the energy industry. It has taken five years for him to conduct an environmental study on the XL pipeline and he still refuses to approve it, even though 70% of the country is in favor of it. He threatened to veto any bill approving it because he wants a comprehensive bill to cover other forms of energy including trains, bridges and infrastructure. Right. If you believe that I've got swamp land to sell you.
If he was really interested in helping the country he would take what he could get and work for the rest, not hold the pipeline hostage to his failed wind policies (Remember the bankrupt Solyndra?) while he destroys the coal industry. The reality is, oil has come down because of private industry research and development. Almost all of the new oil and gas deposits have been found on private land. Obama has refused to open up government lands for exploration or off shore drilling. The potential oil in ANWR in Alaska is so great it alone would make America energy independent, but it's inaccessible thanks to a government cowed by environmental nut cases.
The reality of the recovery is that it was the two stimulus packages Obama pushed through in 2009 (Remember the ones that he scared the Democrat controlled Congress into passing to prevent the entire economy from collapsing?) that have held up the recovery. The reason we are finally seeing a little light now is that the government infusion of money in failed efforts to stimulate the economy are past, the deficit has come down, and private enterprise is finally able to get back on its feet. Without the stimulus packages the recovery would have been complete four years ago.
Obama also shamelessly touted the deficit, which he has "cut" in half. What he and all his lapdog worshippers ignore is that the 590 billion dollar deficit last year was still 150 billion higher than President Bush's worst budget deficit, which Obama called "irresponsible and unpatriotic." And he's only cut in half the monstrous deficit he created. What is also lost in his view of the deficit is that the national debt is now over 18 trillion dollars, double in six years what it was when Obama took office.
Obama continued to praise obamacare, which, he said, brought health care rates to the lowest level in fifty years. The comment received no Republican applause and shouldn't have received any. The average American under obamacare will pay over $6000 a year for health insurance. Before obamacare the average American was paying under $4800.
Time and again Obama sounded like a Republican (which all liberals do when campaigning). He said the country works great when government doesn't get in their way. It's the free enterprise argument. The problem is, Obama doesn't believe it. His big government policies (Remember "You didn't build it?") have stifled the recovery and the growth of small businesses.
One of the greatest strains on the economy is illegal immigration and the porous border that Obama refuses to secure. But Obama promised to veto any immigration bill that would overturn his executive orders. He said we all need to work together to see that everyone gets a fair shot. We should not be allowed to just share in success, we should also contribute to success. In other words, redistribute the wealth by paying more taxes.
Along with this socialist idea he added universal child care, guaranteed paid sick leave, tax cuts up to $3000 per child, and equal pay for women who do equal work. He ignored the IRS scandal and how to deal with it, and the Equal Pay Act, passed in 1963 and signed by Kennedy, which already guarantees equal pay for women.
He praised military members for their service and challenged businesses to find them work, but failed to mention the reason so many servicemen and women need jobs is because he is systematically gutting the military and sending them home.
Obama said he wasn't going to make this speech a laundry list of wants, but by the time it was over he had demanded quite a few items including free community college education. He wants to pay for it by closing loopholes that give tax breaks to lobbyists and the rich. What loopholes he didn't say, but he wants to reward companies that will bring their businesses back to the U.S. from China. How he wants to reward them wasn't clear either, but the best way to start bringing them home would be to end the stifling taxes and OSHA regulations that drove them away in the first place. He talked a lot about tax reform, but made no mention of reforming the scandal ridden IRS.
Up to this point his address was pretty much what I expected; rehashing the same one-liners and spin drivel we've been hearing for the last six years. But building up to the finish it was the most galling piece of lily-livered hypocritical tripe I've ever heard. He actually defended his cowardly leadership from behind. He called it the smarter strategy of diplomacy and threatened to veto any legislation to toughen sanctions on Iran. He insisted we must give the diplomatic efforts a chance to work.
Let's see. He was unable to get Iran to give up its nuclear ambitions with his softer, gentler diplomacy, so he loosened the sanctions that were about to put Iran under in order to get them to stop work on their centrifuges. Six months was agreed upon in order to come up with a treaty. Then it was extended six months. And then it was extended six months again. In June, no doubt, there will be no agreement and it will be extended again. All the while Iran continues to work toward nuclear power while Obama in Jimmy Carterish blindness claims they have stopped.
He then criticized America's embargo of Cuba and claimed that if after fifty years a policy isn't working it's time to try something else. Well, duh! Something else should have been tightening the sanctions against Cuba, not surrendering the store to the last hold out of the Cold War.
Obama then claimed that American air strikes are turning back ISIL (He continues to use the title for ISIS that recognizes their right to claim Palestine.), and then asked Congress for authority to send troops to fight them. This is the war Obama claims to have ended. A year ago he said ISIS was the JV, and when he authorized air strikes he and Secretary of State Kerry promised there would be "no boots on the ground." Now he's asking to put boots on the ground to restart the war that Bush won and he gave away. He said it's time we stand down from our war setting while he's gearing up to start another war.
He talked about standing up to the bankrupt ideology of violent extremism, and although he did use the word "terrorism" once in the speech, he refused to link it to Islam or to mention Al Qaeda. Last year he boasted of success in Yemen, but this year never mentioned the country even though its leader was being overthrown as Obama spoke. Neither did he say anything about the Al Qaeda terrorist attack in France the week before.
Obama lectured us that we don't lead with bluster, but with firmness and resolve. Well, first of all, Putin has taken the Crimea and moved into Ukraine with a whole lot of bluster, challenging Obama's firmness and resolve and finding it to be wanting. The reality is, you need a little bluster to reassure your allies (Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!), because the lack of bluster exposes your lack of firmness and resolve. Bluster worked pretty good for Reagan. It won the Cold War.
Then he turned to Climate Change. The theory that the earth is warming up has been so debunked that even Al Gore has stopped talking about it, but Obama brought it up again. All scientists believe it, he said. Really? Fourteen of the last fifteen years are the hottest on record, he said. Really? The facts used on those studies were manipulated to a pre-determined outcome, as the leaked e-mails back in 2009 proved, and the only scientists still preaching it are those being paid to. Average temperatures have actually gone down ten years in a row according to other meteorological scientists. But Obama will veto anything that challenges the "progress" he's made in battling the weather. He's not only a narcissist, he's got a God complex.
Obama claims our pillar of leadership is based on our values. Then he gave us a most mixed up explanation that had nothing to do with values. We need to use drones with the proper constraint. Why? If you're going to use them, why not send overwhelming numbers and win the war? He said we must reject Muslim stereotypes. Why? Every major terrorist attack in the world in the last twenty years has been done by Muslim terrorists. You're not going to win the War on Terror if you don't identify your enemy and send him to blazes. He failed to condemn ISIS for killing women, children, Christians, and gays. He again insisted on closing Guantanamo because "that's not who we are."
Well, who the heck are we? He praised as an accomplishment of our values system the overturning of traditional marriage by the courts in favor of gay marriage, even though the majority of Americans are against it. He held up a woman's right to choose for health care (meaning abortion on demand) as another pillar of our values. Then he said the right to vote is sacred and is denied to too many. What was he talking about? Who has been denied the vote? Democrats and their illegal immigrant stooges voted, some as many as three times in North Carolina, Tennessee and Virginia in the 2012 election. Who was denied?
He finished with a rah-rah about America's greatness and in his only biblical reference in the speech decided that we are our brother's keeper. Of course, in liberalese, that means not you and me, but big government nanny state.
In defiance of the recent election in which all of his policies including obamacare were resoundly rejected by the American public, he then said he has two years left to do what he thinks best. Work with me, he said, and I'll work with you. He hasn't worked with the Republicans for the last six years. What makes anybody think he will now? He wants America to unite. Why? He's been the greatest divider the nation has seen since the Civil War. With another dividing reference to Furguson, Missouri, he wants us to let the children know that every life matters. What about the lives of the unborn? Planned Parenthood received over half a billion dollars last year from the government to continue to be the nation's largest abortion provider.
He said we've laid a new foundation of remaking America. Wait a minute. That was his plan in 2008. You mean after six years he's only laid the foundation? The only thing left for his remaking of America is its destruction.
This was the stupidest, most anti-American speech ever given by a president before Congress. It was the most arrogant, self-serving pack of lies ever foisted on America, and he ought to be impeached for it. Obama doesn't care about you. He says he wants to equalize the playing field by redistributing the wealth. Socialism, as Joe the Plumber pointed out. But Obama has increased his personal wealth over a thousand percent from a little over one million dollars in 2008 to over 13 million now. Do you think he's going to give any of his wealth to level the playing field? He's living like a king, spending over a billion dollars in travel expenses galavanting all over the world to play golf while he ignores world wide crises that need his attention.
Wake up America. If the Republicans don't stand up to Obama over the next two years we may not have a country left to stand up for. These are the times that are trying our souls. These are the times that are going to prove whether we can turn our country back to constitutional government and the God of our Forefathers, or whether we deserve the leadership we elected in 2008 and 2012 and the continued fall headlong to destruction.
He bounced up to the podium as he always does like Mr. Cool Guy trying to appear jovial, casual and relaxed. The problem is we are not in a jovial, casual or relaxed time in history. His attitude was Nixonian in its arrogance and defiance. His whole manner was disturbing at best.
If you were hoping to hear anything of real substance you probably came away disappointed. Obama said nothing new. It's the same old speech he's been giving for five years, same failed ideas, same false claims of a great economy, a great foreign policy, and the respect of the world. The speech was a fraud, full of contradictions, mythical statistics, and a perverted sense of what is good.
It's time to turn the page and remake America, he said. What? What has he been doing for the last six years? That's the same message he was preaching in 2008. Or is he saying it's time to turn around the train wreck we've been on for the last six years and get back to where we were? If only that were true.
It was no surprise that he touted the economy. In fairness, every president will take credit for a good economy. Remember how Clinton took credit for the 1994 Republican Revolution reforms that led to the greatest economic boom in our history? (Remember also how liberals blamed Bush for the recession that followed the economic bubble that Clinton created with Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac unsecured loans that burst as he was going out of office?)
Obama claimed that last year we had the fastest job growth since 1999. What he left out is that this recovery is the slowest recovery from a recession in American history. He also conveniently forgot to mention that there are still fewer people working today than when he took office, and the labor participation rate has dropped from 66.4% in 2009 to 62.7% today, the lowest rate since 1978, and that the net gains are in part time jobs, not full time. Ninety-two million Americans are out of work, and the number of people receiving food stamps has gone from 33 million in 2008 to 46 million today, an increase of 29%. He wants to raise the minimum wage because families can't survive on the current minimum level. They won't survive on 15 dollars an hour either if the only work they can get is part time.
Obama shamelessly took credit for the drop in oil prices and touted the success of solar and wind energy. People seem to have forgotten that in 2008 he told us to expect seven dollar a gallon gas. His policies were never designed to lower gasoline prices, but rather to cripple the energy industry. It has taken five years for him to conduct an environmental study on the XL pipeline and he still refuses to approve it, even though 70% of the country is in favor of it. He threatened to veto any bill approving it because he wants a comprehensive bill to cover other forms of energy including trains, bridges and infrastructure. Right. If you believe that I've got swamp land to sell you.
If he was really interested in helping the country he would take what he could get and work for the rest, not hold the pipeline hostage to his failed wind policies (Remember the bankrupt Solyndra?) while he destroys the coal industry. The reality is, oil has come down because of private industry research and development. Almost all of the new oil and gas deposits have been found on private land. Obama has refused to open up government lands for exploration or off shore drilling. The potential oil in ANWR in Alaska is so great it alone would make America energy independent, but it's inaccessible thanks to a government cowed by environmental nut cases.
The reality of the recovery is that it was the two stimulus packages Obama pushed through in 2009 (Remember the ones that he scared the Democrat controlled Congress into passing to prevent the entire economy from collapsing?) that have held up the recovery. The reason we are finally seeing a little light now is that the government infusion of money in failed efforts to stimulate the economy are past, the deficit has come down, and private enterprise is finally able to get back on its feet. Without the stimulus packages the recovery would have been complete four years ago.
Obama also shamelessly touted the deficit, which he has "cut" in half. What he and all his lapdog worshippers ignore is that the 590 billion dollar deficit last year was still 150 billion higher than President Bush's worst budget deficit, which Obama called "irresponsible and unpatriotic." And he's only cut in half the monstrous deficit he created. What is also lost in his view of the deficit is that the national debt is now over 18 trillion dollars, double in six years what it was when Obama took office.
Obama continued to praise obamacare, which, he said, brought health care rates to the lowest level in fifty years. The comment received no Republican applause and shouldn't have received any. The average American under obamacare will pay over $6000 a year for health insurance. Before obamacare the average American was paying under $4800.
Time and again Obama sounded like a Republican (which all liberals do when campaigning). He said the country works great when government doesn't get in their way. It's the free enterprise argument. The problem is, Obama doesn't believe it. His big government policies (Remember "You didn't build it?") have stifled the recovery and the growth of small businesses.
One of the greatest strains on the economy is illegal immigration and the porous border that Obama refuses to secure. But Obama promised to veto any immigration bill that would overturn his executive orders. He said we all need to work together to see that everyone gets a fair shot. We should not be allowed to just share in success, we should also contribute to success. In other words, redistribute the wealth by paying more taxes.
Along with this socialist idea he added universal child care, guaranteed paid sick leave, tax cuts up to $3000 per child, and equal pay for women who do equal work. He ignored the IRS scandal and how to deal with it, and the Equal Pay Act, passed in 1963 and signed by Kennedy, which already guarantees equal pay for women.
He praised military members for their service and challenged businesses to find them work, but failed to mention the reason so many servicemen and women need jobs is because he is systematically gutting the military and sending them home.
Obama said he wasn't going to make this speech a laundry list of wants, but by the time it was over he had demanded quite a few items including free community college education. He wants to pay for it by closing loopholes that give tax breaks to lobbyists and the rich. What loopholes he didn't say, but he wants to reward companies that will bring their businesses back to the U.S. from China. How he wants to reward them wasn't clear either, but the best way to start bringing them home would be to end the stifling taxes and OSHA regulations that drove them away in the first place. He talked a lot about tax reform, but made no mention of reforming the scandal ridden IRS.
Up to this point his address was pretty much what I expected; rehashing the same one-liners and spin drivel we've been hearing for the last six years. But building up to the finish it was the most galling piece of lily-livered hypocritical tripe I've ever heard. He actually defended his cowardly leadership from behind. He called it the smarter strategy of diplomacy and threatened to veto any legislation to toughen sanctions on Iran. He insisted we must give the diplomatic efforts a chance to work.
Let's see. He was unable to get Iran to give up its nuclear ambitions with his softer, gentler diplomacy, so he loosened the sanctions that were about to put Iran under in order to get them to stop work on their centrifuges. Six months was agreed upon in order to come up with a treaty. Then it was extended six months. And then it was extended six months again. In June, no doubt, there will be no agreement and it will be extended again. All the while Iran continues to work toward nuclear power while Obama in Jimmy Carterish blindness claims they have stopped.
He then criticized America's embargo of Cuba and claimed that if after fifty years a policy isn't working it's time to try something else. Well, duh! Something else should have been tightening the sanctions against Cuba, not surrendering the store to the last hold out of the Cold War.
Obama then claimed that American air strikes are turning back ISIL (He continues to use the title for ISIS that recognizes their right to claim Palestine.), and then asked Congress for authority to send troops to fight them. This is the war Obama claims to have ended. A year ago he said ISIS was the JV, and when he authorized air strikes he and Secretary of State Kerry promised there would be "no boots on the ground." Now he's asking to put boots on the ground to restart the war that Bush won and he gave away. He said it's time we stand down from our war setting while he's gearing up to start another war.
He talked about standing up to the bankrupt ideology of violent extremism, and although he did use the word "terrorism" once in the speech, he refused to link it to Islam or to mention Al Qaeda. Last year he boasted of success in Yemen, but this year never mentioned the country even though its leader was being overthrown as Obama spoke. Neither did he say anything about the Al Qaeda terrorist attack in France the week before.
Obama lectured us that we don't lead with bluster, but with firmness and resolve. Well, first of all, Putin has taken the Crimea and moved into Ukraine with a whole lot of bluster, challenging Obama's firmness and resolve and finding it to be wanting. The reality is, you need a little bluster to reassure your allies (Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!), because the lack of bluster exposes your lack of firmness and resolve. Bluster worked pretty good for Reagan. It won the Cold War.
Then he turned to Climate Change. The theory that the earth is warming up has been so debunked that even Al Gore has stopped talking about it, but Obama brought it up again. All scientists believe it, he said. Really? Fourteen of the last fifteen years are the hottest on record, he said. Really? The facts used on those studies were manipulated to a pre-determined outcome, as the leaked e-mails back in 2009 proved, and the only scientists still preaching it are those being paid to. Average temperatures have actually gone down ten years in a row according to other meteorological scientists. But Obama will veto anything that challenges the "progress" he's made in battling the weather. He's not only a narcissist, he's got a God complex.
Obama claims our pillar of leadership is based on our values. Then he gave us a most mixed up explanation that had nothing to do with values. We need to use drones with the proper constraint. Why? If you're going to use them, why not send overwhelming numbers and win the war? He said we must reject Muslim stereotypes. Why? Every major terrorist attack in the world in the last twenty years has been done by Muslim terrorists. You're not going to win the War on Terror if you don't identify your enemy and send him to blazes. He failed to condemn ISIS for killing women, children, Christians, and gays. He again insisted on closing Guantanamo because "that's not who we are."
Well, who the heck are we? He praised as an accomplishment of our values system the overturning of traditional marriage by the courts in favor of gay marriage, even though the majority of Americans are against it. He held up a woman's right to choose for health care (meaning abortion on demand) as another pillar of our values. Then he said the right to vote is sacred and is denied to too many. What was he talking about? Who has been denied the vote? Democrats and their illegal immigrant stooges voted, some as many as three times in North Carolina, Tennessee and Virginia in the 2012 election. Who was denied?
He finished with a rah-rah about America's greatness and in his only biblical reference in the speech decided that we are our brother's keeper. Of course, in liberalese, that means not you and me, but big government nanny state.
In defiance of the recent election in which all of his policies including obamacare were resoundly rejected by the American public, he then said he has two years left to do what he thinks best. Work with me, he said, and I'll work with you. He hasn't worked with the Republicans for the last six years. What makes anybody think he will now? He wants America to unite. Why? He's been the greatest divider the nation has seen since the Civil War. With another dividing reference to Furguson, Missouri, he wants us to let the children know that every life matters. What about the lives of the unborn? Planned Parenthood received over half a billion dollars last year from the government to continue to be the nation's largest abortion provider.
He said we've laid a new foundation of remaking America. Wait a minute. That was his plan in 2008. You mean after six years he's only laid the foundation? The only thing left for his remaking of America is its destruction.
This was the stupidest, most anti-American speech ever given by a president before Congress. It was the most arrogant, self-serving pack of lies ever foisted on America, and he ought to be impeached for it. Obama doesn't care about you. He says he wants to equalize the playing field by redistributing the wealth. Socialism, as Joe the Plumber pointed out. But Obama has increased his personal wealth over a thousand percent from a little over one million dollars in 2008 to over 13 million now. Do you think he's going to give any of his wealth to level the playing field? He's living like a king, spending over a billion dollars in travel expenses galavanting all over the world to play golf while he ignores world wide crises that need his attention.
Wake up America. If the Republicans don't stand up to Obama over the next two years we may not have a country left to stand up for. These are the times that are trying our souls. These are the times that are going to prove whether we can turn our country back to constitutional government and the God of our Forefathers, or whether we deserve the leadership we elected in 2008 and 2012 and the continued fall headlong to destruction.
Monday, January 5, 2015
Happy New Year
Well, I finished the last year writing out a message, so I decided to start the New Year with another one. I hope it will be an encouragement and a blessing to you.
Pressing On Toward the Mark
Text: Philippians 3:14
I press toward the mark for the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus.
Introduction: Throughout life we will come across milestones, specific events that can be life changing or life confirming. For example, when you accepted Christ and were saved, it was a life-changing event. You became a new creation in Christ. When you graduated from high school or college it was a life-confirming event. You had taken a big step forward in your life. Certain birthdays and anniversaries are considered to be milestones and gemstones are used to honor them. Silver marks a 25th anniversary, gold the 50th, and a diamond the 75th. Our church is about to celebrate its 40th anniversary. If you didn’t know, the 40th gemstone is a ruby.
Our theme for this year is Pressing On For Thee at Forty. The ruby seems appropriate as the blood red color reminds us of the blood Jesus shed to secure our salvation and establish the church.
Let us consider what is the mark, and what is the prize? The mark is often represented as heaven and the prize our rewards, but that idea misses the point. The mark is Jesus Christ, and the prize is salvation. So then, what does it mean to press toward Jesus Christ? Romans 8:29 says that we are predestined to be conformed to the image of the Son. If the mark is Christ, then pressing to the mark is becoming more like Christ. We need to ask ourselves as a church, after forty years, are we continually becoming more like Christ? Is your pastor leading you to be more Christ like, and are you becoming more like Christ in your daily walk?
David wrote, “I shall be satisfied when I awake with your likeness” (Psalm 17:15). If it is the destiny of every Christian when we get to heaven to be like Christ, shouldn’t we be trying as much as we can to be like Christ now? So, how do we get there? How do we press toward the mark? What are we pressing for? Let me give you some ideas.
I. Holiness (I Peter 1:16).
Because it is written, Be ye holy; for I am holy.
Peter quotes a command given by God in Leviticus 11:44-45 to be holy. God cannot abide sin in His presence, and if there is sin in your life the first thing you need to do is get your heart right with God. You can never be holy without a clean heart. Clean up your thoughts, words, and actions, the places you go, the people you meet, the things you do. You should make your activities acceptable to God.
You need to repent of specific sin; not just a generic “forgive me for whatever I’ve done wrong.” Search your soul, examine yourself, and confess specific sins, not to me, not to a priest, your relationship is between you and the Lord. Tell the Lord where you have failed and ask His forgiveness. When Isaiah saw God on the throne and the angels calling out, “Holy, holy, holy, is the Lord of hosts,” he cried out, “Woe is me” (Isaiah 6:5).
He confessed that he was a man of unclean lips. What he meant by that I don’t know. Maybe he had a problem with swearing or cussing. Maybe he had a penchant for repeating off-color jokes. Maybe he was arrogant and condescending to people. It doesn’t matter what, he repented and he was cleansed. When we repent of all sin in our lives and get our hearts right with God, then we are pressing on toward holiness.
II. Purity (1 Timothy 5:22).
Lay hands suddenly on no man, neither be partaker of other men’s sins: keep yourself pure.
If there is any area that people everywhere have trouble with it is the idea of moral purity. Unfortunately, Christians have as much trouble with this as non-Christians. If you can find people who have kept nine of the Ten Commandments, the one they’ve likely broken is number seven, immorality.
Sex is all about us. It’s commercialized; it is on TV and movies, in novels, it’s everywhere. The way models and movie stars are fawned over for nothing more than showing off a beautiful body, you would think sex rules the world. And it probably does. The National Education Association wants to teach sex, emphasizing the gay lifestyle as being normal, to five year olds in kindergarten. That’s how wicked our society has become.
Young people will often say, “I can get involved, I know my limits, I’ll stop in time.” But they never do. They don’t know their limits. They don’t understand that when the fire of passion is ignited it’s hard to put out. Middle aged and old folks haven’t figured it out either. “The heart is deceitful above all things and desperately wicked” (Jeremiah 17:9). In a moment of passion you never know what you’ll do.
Paul tells us to put on the Lord Jesus Christ, “and make no provision for the flesh to fulfill the lusts thereof” (Romans 13:14). Don’t go where sin is; don’t put yourself in a place where you will be tempted. You’re not strong enough to stand in your own strength against the “wiles of the devil.” Peter compared Satan with the king of beasts.
We lived in Africa for fourteen years. We’ve seen 500 pound male lions in the wild. A lion roaring nearby will make your hair stand up. You’ve never heard anything so ferocious. Satan as a roaring lion will devour you if you play with sin. The answer is to flee youthful lusts and keep yourself pure.
How? By following after righteousness, faith, charity, and peace (2 Timothy 2:22). Hang around with friends who call on God with pure hearts. Surround yourself with friends who will encourage you to live a pure life.
Young people, old people, all people, don’t throw away your life over moral sins. Proverbs 2:19 says that you will never reach your full potential in life if you give in to immorality.
You get your heart by pressing toward holiness; you keep your heart right by pressing toward purity.
III. Integrity (Proverbs 4:23).
Keep your heart with all diligence, for out of it are the issues of life.
A person of integrity is one who is true, honest, a person of conviction, with strong moral principles. Integrity is undivided in its thoughts. That is, a person of integrity is not double-minded. He knows what is right and what is not, and he doesn’t compromise his convictions. He will always to the right thing.
I’m not a drinker. I’ve never been a drinker. When Proverbs says, “Wine is a mocker, strong drink is raging; and whosoever is deceived thereby is not wise,” I take that to mean not to be deceived by it. So I don’t imbibe. I’ve seen the affects of it on too many people who have thrown their lives away, ruined their families, even died. I had a friend who broke the Navy’s twelve hour “bottle to throttle” rule, went flying when his head was not clear, and crashed into San Diego Bay. I’ve had friends killed by drunk drivers. Some Christians will disagree with me on whether you can take it in moderation or not. That’s fine, I believe they are wrong, but this is my position and I will not compromise on it.
Back in 1986 when I was flying here at Cubi Point, the Navy base put together a package four-day tour to Hong Kong. Operations were slow and nine of us at my squadron took leave and went on the tour. The other guys went just for the nightlife. I wanted to tour the place and go shopping. One night one of the guys invited me to go with them. He said, we understand your religious position. You don’t have to drink, just come sit with us. We’d like to talk to you. I politely declined. For one thing they weren’t just drinking, they were going to topless bars. For another, if I had gone, even if I didn’t drink, my presence with them would justify in their minds that I thought it was okay for them. I wanted no part of it.
When I was in Marine Officer Candidate School in Quantico, Virginia, one weekend my platoon was the duty platoon. We weren’t allowed to go anywhere but into Quantico town, which was on the base, in order to eat. Saturday evening I went with about ten other candidates to eat. They all ordered beers and when the waitress came to me I ordered a large milk. She looked at me funny and laughed and said okay. The guy next to me said you might at least order a coke to make it look like you’re drinking with us. I said that’s exactly why I ordered milk. I don’t want anyone to think I’m drinking with you. When they all ordered another round I told the waitress, “I’ll have the usual.” It got a big laugh from everybody.
Listen, I’ve heard people say they go to bars and drink because it opens up opportunities to share the Gospel with people. Frankly, I doubt that, but the end never justifies the means. “It is never right to do wrong to get a chance to do right” (Bob Jones, Sr.).
As a person of integrity, people should be able to say about you that you are true to your word. You are dependable. You will always do what you promise, and you will always stand by what you believe.
You get your heart right by pressing toward holiness. You keep it right by pressing toward purity. You demonstrate that your heart is right by pressing toward integrity.
IV. Wisdom (Proverbs 1:7).
The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge: but fools despise wisdom and instruction.
Knowledge is simply the accumulation of facts. But there are people without conscience who ignore the truth and manipulate the facts. We see that in public school textbooks that have perverted the truth about such things as the first Thanksgiving. They say the Pilgrims thanked the Indians for helping them through the winter, when in fact they invited the Indians to join them in thanking God. We see it in political correctness that denies the Christian heritage of our Founders, refusing to even allow their writings to be taught in public schools because of a perverted twisting of the concept of “separation of church and state.” We find it in Obama’s public statements about the contributions Muslims have made in the building of America. This is because there is no fear of the Lord in the lives of the people who manipulate the facts.
The fear of the Lord gives us a proper understanding of the facts, but it is wisdom that will help us make the proper application of the facts in our lives. Proverbs 2:2 tells us to listen to wisdom and apply our hearts to understanding. Wisdom will guide you in holiness, purity and integrity.
So, how do you get wisdom? You won’t get it watching TV. Not from politicians. Not from dirty movies, romance novels, or gossip magazines, and certainly not in the life of arrogant, stuck up movie stars who think they own the world because of their fame and money. No, you find wisdom in the Word of God. James 1:5 says that if you lack wisdom ask God for it. He will not scold or rebuke you for asking. He’ll give it to you if you are serious about applying it.
When you press toward wisdom it will help you maintain holiness, purity and integrity in your life.
Conclusion: We are at the start of a New Year, a time for new beginnings. For many it’s a time to put 2014 behind them and start over. For others it’s a time to build on the successes of 2014 and press on. As a church we are approaching our 40th anniversary. It is not a time to rest, but a time to press on and to determine that we will continue for another forty years as God enables us. Individually it is time for us to make a greater effort than ever before to press toward the mark of being like Christ. It doesn’t matter if you are 4, 14, 40, 54, or 74, or anywhere in between or beyond, keep on pressing on “toward the mark for the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus.”
Pressing On Toward the Mark
Text: Philippians 3:14
I press toward the mark for the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus.
Introduction: Throughout life we will come across milestones, specific events that can be life changing or life confirming. For example, when you accepted Christ and were saved, it was a life-changing event. You became a new creation in Christ. When you graduated from high school or college it was a life-confirming event. You had taken a big step forward in your life. Certain birthdays and anniversaries are considered to be milestones and gemstones are used to honor them. Silver marks a 25th anniversary, gold the 50th, and a diamond the 75th. Our church is about to celebrate its 40th anniversary. If you didn’t know, the 40th gemstone is a ruby.
Our theme for this year is Pressing On For Thee at Forty. The ruby seems appropriate as the blood red color reminds us of the blood Jesus shed to secure our salvation and establish the church.
Let us consider what is the mark, and what is the prize? The mark is often represented as heaven and the prize our rewards, but that idea misses the point. The mark is Jesus Christ, and the prize is salvation. So then, what does it mean to press toward Jesus Christ? Romans 8:29 says that we are predestined to be conformed to the image of the Son. If the mark is Christ, then pressing to the mark is becoming more like Christ. We need to ask ourselves as a church, after forty years, are we continually becoming more like Christ? Is your pastor leading you to be more Christ like, and are you becoming more like Christ in your daily walk?
David wrote, “I shall be satisfied when I awake with your likeness” (Psalm 17:15). If it is the destiny of every Christian when we get to heaven to be like Christ, shouldn’t we be trying as much as we can to be like Christ now? So, how do we get there? How do we press toward the mark? What are we pressing for? Let me give you some ideas.
I. Holiness (I Peter 1:16).
Because it is written, Be ye holy; for I am holy.
Peter quotes a command given by God in Leviticus 11:44-45 to be holy. God cannot abide sin in His presence, and if there is sin in your life the first thing you need to do is get your heart right with God. You can never be holy without a clean heart. Clean up your thoughts, words, and actions, the places you go, the people you meet, the things you do. You should make your activities acceptable to God.
You need to repent of specific sin; not just a generic “forgive me for whatever I’ve done wrong.” Search your soul, examine yourself, and confess specific sins, not to me, not to a priest, your relationship is between you and the Lord. Tell the Lord where you have failed and ask His forgiveness. When Isaiah saw God on the throne and the angels calling out, “Holy, holy, holy, is the Lord of hosts,” he cried out, “Woe is me” (Isaiah 6:5).
He confessed that he was a man of unclean lips. What he meant by that I don’t know. Maybe he had a problem with swearing or cussing. Maybe he had a penchant for repeating off-color jokes. Maybe he was arrogant and condescending to people. It doesn’t matter what, he repented and he was cleansed. When we repent of all sin in our lives and get our hearts right with God, then we are pressing on toward holiness.
II. Purity (1 Timothy 5:22).
Lay hands suddenly on no man, neither be partaker of other men’s sins: keep yourself pure.
If there is any area that people everywhere have trouble with it is the idea of moral purity. Unfortunately, Christians have as much trouble with this as non-Christians. If you can find people who have kept nine of the Ten Commandments, the one they’ve likely broken is number seven, immorality.
Sex is all about us. It’s commercialized; it is on TV and movies, in novels, it’s everywhere. The way models and movie stars are fawned over for nothing more than showing off a beautiful body, you would think sex rules the world. And it probably does. The National Education Association wants to teach sex, emphasizing the gay lifestyle as being normal, to five year olds in kindergarten. That’s how wicked our society has become.
Young people will often say, “I can get involved, I know my limits, I’ll stop in time.” But they never do. They don’t know their limits. They don’t understand that when the fire of passion is ignited it’s hard to put out. Middle aged and old folks haven’t figured it out either. “The heart is deceitful above all things and desperately wicked” (Jeremiah 17:9). In a moment of passion you never know what you’ll do.
Paul tells us to put on the Lord Jesus Christ, “and make no provision for the flesh to fulfill the lusts thereof” (Romans 13:14). Don’t go where sin is; don’t put yourself in a place where you will be tempted. You’re not strong enough to stand in your own strength against the “wiles of the devil.” Peter compared Satan with the king of beasts.
We lived in Africa for fourteen years. We’ve seen 500 pound male lions in the wild. A lion roaring nearby will make your hair stand up. You’ve never heard anything so ferocious. Satan as a roaring lion will devour you if you play with sin. The answer is to flee youthful lusts and keep yourself pure.
How? By following after righteousness, faith, charity, and peace (2 Timothy 2:22). Hang around with friends who call on God with pure hearts. Surround yourself with friends who will encourage you to live a pure life.
Young people, old people, all people, don’t throw away your life over moral sins. Proverbs 2:19 says that you will never reach your full potential in life if you give in to immorality.
You get your heart by pressing toward holiness; you keep your heart right by pressing toward purity.
III. Integrity (Proverbs 4:23).
Keep your heart with all diligence, for out of it are the issues of life.
A person of integrity is one who is true, honest, a person of conviction, with strong moral principles. Integrity is undivided in its thoughts. That is, a person of integrity is not double-minded. He knows what is right and what is not, and he doesn’t compromise his convictions. He will always to the right thing.
I’m not a drinker. I’ve never been a drinker. When Proverbs says, “Wine is a mocker, strong drink is raging; and whosoever is deceived thereby is not wise,” I take that to mean not to be deceived by it. So I don’t imbibe. I’ve seen the affects of it on too many people who have thrown their lives away, ruined their families, even died. I had a friend who broke the Navy’s twelve hour “bottle to throttle” rule, went flying when his head was not clear, and crashed into San Diego Bay. I’ve had friends killed by drunk drivers. Some Christians will disagree with me on whether you can take it in moderation or not. That’s fine, I believe they are wrong, but this is my position and I will not compromise on it.
Back in 1986 when I was flying here at Cubi Point, the Navy base put together a package four-day tour to Hong Kong. Operations were slow and nine of us at my squadron took leave and went on the tour. The other guys went just for the nightlife. I wanted to tour the place and go shopping. One night one of the guys invited me to go with them. He said, we understand your religious position. You don’t have to drink, just come sit with us. We’d like to talk to you. I politely declined. For one thing they weren’t just drinking, they were going to topless bars. For another, if I had gone, even if I didn’t drink, my presence with them would justify in their minds that I thought it was okay for them. I wanted no part of it.
When I was in Marine Officer Candidate School in Quantico, Virginia, one weekend my platoon was the duty platoon. We weren’t allowed to go anywhere but into Quantico town, which was on the base, in order to eat. Saturday evening I went with about ten other candidates to eat. They all ordered beers and when the waitress came to me I ordered a large milk. She looked at me funny and laughed and said okay. The guy next to me said you might at least order a coke to make it look like you’re drinking with us. I said that’s exactly why I ordered milk. I don’t want anyone to think I’m drinking with you. When they all ordered another round I told the waitress, “I’ll have the usual.” It got a big laugh from everybody.
Listen, I’ve heard people say they go to bars and drink because it opens up opportunities to share the Gospel with people. Frankly, I doubt that, but the end never justifies the means. “It is never right to do wrong to get a chance to do right” (Bob Jones, Sr.).
As a person of integrity, people should be able to say about you that you are true to your word. You are dependable. You will always do what you promise, and you will always stand by what you believe.
You get your heart right by pressing toward holiness. You keep it right by pressing toward purity. You demonstrate that your heart is right by pressing toward integrity.
IV. Wisdom (Proverbs 1:7).
The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge: but fools despise wisdom and instruction.
Knowledge is simply the accumulation of facts. But there are people without conscience who ignore the truth and manipulate the facts. We see that in public school textbooks that have perverted the truth about such things as the first Thanksgiving. They say the Pilgrims thanked the Indians for helping them through the winter, when in fact they invited the Indians to join them in thanking God. We see it in political correctness that denies the Christian heritage of our Founders, refusing to even allow their writings to be taught in public schools because of a perverted twisting of the concept of “separation of church and state.” We find it in Obama’s public statements about the contributions Muslims have made in the building of America. This is because there is no fear of the Lord in the lives of the people who manipulate the facts.
The fear of the Lord gives us a proper understanding of the facts, but it is wisdom that will help us make the proper application of the facts in our lives. Proverbs 2:2 tells us to listen to wisdom and apply our hearts to understanding. Wisdom will guide you in holiness, purity and integrity.
So, how do you get wisdom? You won’t get it watching TV. Not from politicians. Not from dirty movies, romance novels, or gossip magazines, and certainly not in the life of arrogant, stuck up movie stars who think they own the world because of their fame and money. No, you find wisdom in the Word of God. James 1:5 says that if you lack wisdom ask God for it. He will not scold or rebuke you for asking. He’ll give it to you if you are serious about applying it.
When you press toward wisdom it will help you maintain holiness, purity and integrity in your life.
Conclusion: We are at the start of a New Year, a time for new beginnings. For many it’s a time to put 2014 behind them and start over. For others it’s a time to build on the successes of 2014 and press on. As a church we are approaching our 40th anniversary. It is not a time to rest, but a time to press on and to determine that we will continue for another forty years as God enables us. Individually it is time for us to make a greater effort than ever before to press toward the mark of being like Christ. It doesn’t matter if you are 4, 14, 40, 54, or 74, or anywhere in between or beyond, keep on pressing on “toward the mark for the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)