Worldview Matters Thursday, Nov 17 2011

King Solomon said: As a man thinks, so is he. Far from being a trite cliché or unproven proverb, it is fundamental to political wisdom. Knowing how a candidate thinks is the essential factor needed in making a sound voting decision, because how a man thinks determines what he does.

A résumé or family tree may reflect an individual’s work history or to whom one is related, but not one’s work ethic, character, knowledge, ability, or foundational principles — aka worldview.

If candidates do not clearly state their philosophical perspective so the electorate knows their position on moral issues and fiscal policy, an election amounts to nothing more than a popularity contest.

Once in office, an elected official is not supernaturally endowed with insight into what makes good policy. His worldview, though, engraved in his soul, remains steadfast and guides his decision as information is gathered and analyzed.

Our representative form of government affords citizens the liberty of focusing on their daily responsibilities and interests while trusting their elected officials to vote on legislation as closely aligned to their own principles and values as possible, rather than having to constantly involve themselves with the mundane workings of government. However, if the electorate does not know the worldview of candidates before electing them to office, they can never be certain how their representative will decide on any issue, and therefore, must divide their attention between their personal interests and pending legislation — and who has the time (or energy) for that?!

There is much consternation today about the inability of the two major political parties to work together on policies beneficial to our state and union. This is not due to some sophomoric “us vs. them” mentality resulting in unwillingness to compromise, but from incompatible worldviews that can never mix.

The worldview of an official, not his résumé nor his family tree, dictates his position on every issue presented. If the electorate fails to discover the worldview of the person elected into office, they bear the responsibility for whatever incomprehensible and unwanted legislation is passed.

If the worldview of an elected official is not exposed during an election, or is ignored, culpability rests on the heads of the electorate for whatever proposed incomprehensible or unwanted legislation passes.

Leave a Response »

 

Congressman Jeff Landry Declines WH Invitation Monday, Jun 20 2011

Congressman Jeff Landry got and is still getting, heat from local media for his decision to decline an invitation from the White House which was extended to all House Republicans to meet with the President.

The accusation that Landry’s decision put him in the position of not representing the people of Louisiana’s 3rd Congressional District is way off mark.

Landry made a decision that was right for his district as well as the rest of the country. He was sent to D.C. to be their voice, and he is speaking loudly. He was not sent there to beg for money like a pauper in a Charles Dickens novel, but to stand firm, draw a line in the sand, and boldly say: No! We will go no further.

The collective power of Congress can be mighty in resisting the fundamental change of our nation which is presently taking place. However, it must be willing to discern the actions of those in power, and to project the outcome of mindlessly following political protocol, as Landry bravely did, or it will find itself compromised to the point of irrelevance, and members inappropriately playing golf with progressive leaders who are unconcerned about the lives of young American warriors engaged in battle, increasing unemployment, rising gas and food prices, out of control debt, and a tanking economy — except in an election year, of course.

As a result of Landry’s actions, all Republican Representatives should take courage and stand confidently against the current regime and its destructive policies. The objective is not who can bring home the most “loot” from the largess — it is to decrease government intrusion in our lives, and end government sanctioned theft and redistribution of our hard earned income.

Keep up the good work, Congressman!

3 Responses »

 

Sunday, Aug 22 2010

Leave a Response »

 

To Trust God or Government? That Is The Question! Sunday, Aug 15 2010

Some say: Trust God and government. I say: Trust God or government. One is Creator and Giver of life; the other is not. One is Omnipotent and Omniscient; the other is not. One is King of kings and Lord of lords; the other is not.

Private property, a decidedly Judeo-Christian doctrine, is what frees people to distribute what they earn on whatever they choose — a concept foreign to humanistic thought.

For example, prior to LBJ’s War on Poverty, the American black family was intact with a working father and stay-at-home mother, was moving up economically, and out-of-wedlock pregnancies were at the national average. However, the Progressive Democrat programs of public housing, food stamps, child welfare, Medicaid, etcetera, specifically and intentionally targeted the black family to destroy it. As a result, low-income black fathers became tragically unnecessary and a financial impediment to their families. Uncle Sam replaced them, and American society has suffered for it.

Since introducing the Great Society 40 years ago, marriage has become a mere option, illegitimate pregnancy has skyrocketed, crime is on the increase, academic scores are near bottom internationally, inflation is out of control, and our national debt is staggering.

God has not abdicated His responsibilities as Father, Protector, and Provider by destroying the American nucleus family, has He? Or has government imposed itself as husband, daddy, and benefactor to its self-induced fatherless family? The Judeo-Christian God promises limitless financial reward for obedience to His mandates in conjunction with diligent, hard work. In order to receive the government’s promise of provision, one must limit one’s earnings beneath the government’s restriction on income, which indentures the recipient to the government and unrelenting need.

God’s way to abundant prosperity is generational. Government’s delusional means to success is re-distributional. God liberates people by saying: Give me 10 percent of all you earn, and I will give you more in return — and He does. On the other hand, the government stifles initiative through legislation that says: I will take a percentage of all you earn, and the more you earn the more I will take, and what I take I will give to those who have not earned it — and so it does.

Trusting God, and making wise financial choices, allows parents to pass on wealth to their children, while trusting government (which notoriously makes poor financial decisions), forces those parents to pass on permanent poverty to theirs.

Thomas Jefferson warns, “The Republic will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not.”

God promises us, “Bring the full 10 percent into the storehouse . . . test Me in this way . . . see if I will not open the floodgates of heaven and pour out a blessing for you without measure. I will rebuke the devourer for you . . . . Then all the nations will consider you fortunate, for you will be a delightful land.” (Malachi 3:10-12 HCSB)

Therefore, I chose to trust God alone.

Leave a Response »

 

Success and Material Possessions Correlate Wednesday, May 19 2010

Until recently, people equated success by the quality and amount of material possessions they obtained. Now, under the guise of simplifying one’s life, pressure is mounting to discard one’s things, and cast off many modern comforts.

I know a family who succumbed to the lie that greed was the root of their material wealth, and believed they had too much because they were hoarding. Therefore, they sold their beautiful home and many of their lovely possessions in an effort to ‘simplify’. They felt guilty for their prosperity.

Guilt manipulators condemn success, and assault prosperity in a concerted effort to coerce their victims into thinking: less is more — attempting to make everyone equal. If one realizes any level of affluence, and acquires abundant possessions, they make him feel criminal because he has more than others.

Keynesian social engineers tout the innocent unproductive populace as the backbone of society — although they are never satisfied with what they have, and continually crave for more. Furthermore, they feel entitled to a share of the producer’s income, and the government provides it for them in housing, food, healthcare, and schools. Vilified as insatiably greedy is he who buys his own home, eats his own food, gets his own healthcare, and chooses which schools he attends. The wealthy are repeatedly accused of achieving success illegitimately — they obviously cheat the system to make their money — a la Gordon Gekko in the original movie: Wall Street. (Not to be confused with the gecko that rakes in millions of dollars for an American insurance company, and makes it look so easy even a caveman can do it.)

Successful people work hard, have expertise in their respective fields, provide excellent service, and risk failure. There rests the beauty of a free capitalistic society — effort, skill, good service, and fearlessness result in financial reward proportionately.

People strive for a better lifestyle for themselves and their family. Remove that incentive, and those who produce will stop producing and all of society will suffer for it. It is the pursuit of private property which propels mankind forward — even for the French. Many people living in centrally planned societies look at the affluence we enjoy, and yearn to have the same opportunities available to them in their own countries. But alas, many suffer under despot leaders — who, of course, deny themselves no luxury — yet oppress their subjects through so-called ‘social justice’.

Liberty is good, and prosperity is the natural by-product of a free society. Edmond Burke, the great English statesman of the 18th century, correctly observed: free men are not equal, and equal men are not free. Let us not become fatalities of those who want to strip us of our liberty and thereby impoverish us as a nation. Birthed as the beacon of freedom, America must stand firm in her heritage, and resist the guilt manipulators who condemn her, and want to control her citizens by ‘simplifying’ their lives.

Leave a Response »

 

Obama like Jesus? Monday, Apr 12 2010

Some people confuse racism — preference given or denied due to one’s race, with Socialism — the political ideology of: “from each according to his ability, to each according to his need“. Therefore, they believe when someone says the agenda and actions of President Obama are socialistic, that the person who opposes him does so only because Obama is partly black. They will not deny he is a socialist, but will deflect the accusation with cries of racism, and justify his actions by comparing him to Jesus, who, in their minds, was a Socialist in His own right. Both positions, however, are incorrect.

I recommend David Chilton’s book, “Productive Christians in the Age of Guilt Manipulators” for deeper study, but will briefly address these two gross misnomers.

Jesus’ life and teachings promote truth, private property, and individual liberty with responsibility, which are foundational to the proper working of the free market. Regarding healthcare, Jesus never demanded His followers who were doctors (Luke, for example) to practice medicine at their own financial demise. He took nothing from anyone else to give sight, hearing, restored limbs, or the breath of life to those He touched. People received from Him freely, and He gave from His own resources — no one else’s.

Jesus did not continuously feed the poor, either. He never gave preference to someone because he was rich or poor — he treated all equally. On the three occasions when He fed the multitudes, they first listened to Him speak before receiving anything, and when He fed them (out of concern for their strength to travel home), He did so without collecting everyone’s food and redistributing it for all to share equally.

We must remember, too, that Jesus in no way worked for or represented the government. He did not command the government to go and do His work — He commanded His disciples. It is the job of the government to guarantee equal opportunity, not equal property. It is the responsibility of the church to help the poor — but he who refuses to work, shall not eat.

A worker is worth his wages, but not all work is equal, therefore, neither are wages.

Jesus lived a perfect life which included obeying the eighth commandment, “Do not steal”. If Obama wants to imitate Him, he can begin by keeping his hands out of the people’s pockets.

Leave a Response »

 

Cartoon Depicts Angry Tea Partiers Thursday, Apr 1 2010

Upon returning home from work, I opened our local newspaper to the Opinion section as I usually do, to read the various opinions, glance over the Letters to the Editor, and see what the Political Cartoon entails. Today’s cartoon had caricatures of Rep. Boehner, Senator McConnell, Governor Palin, Rush Limbaugh, and Glenn Beck carrying emptied gas containers with a fire raging in the background, surrounded by angry Tea Partiers chanting death threats to all liberals. I’m sure you get the drift.

This is quintessential statist denial. They refuse to see that their actions are completely contrary to the will of average American citizens, and no one has incited us other than the policies they rammed down our collective throat. Boehner, McConnell, Bachman, Ryan, Palin, Limbaugh, Hannity, Beck, Levin, Mancow, Bortz, and a host of others merely publicly express our feelings as a whole, not lead us into rampant mayhem.
The MSM complains they do not have the same advantages that conservative talk does . . . what? Wait a minute! Are they proposing that the big three networks, ABC, NBC, and CBS, along with designated news channels such as CNN, HNN, and MSNBC, as well as major print media including the NYT, LA Times, Houston Chronicle, all Belo Media, Newsweek, US News and World Report, and others is not enough to have an advantage? And, of course, there are the leftist radio stations such as NPR and Air America . . . oh, wait a minute — Air America folded due to lack of listeners. . oops!

Is it possible that people do not want to listen to the condescending sniveling of pompous elitists? Could it be that the masses want to hear what is really going on in Washington, the country, and the world, and not just be lulled into a delusional stupor like the mindless minority who listen to the MSM? Are there not plenty of opportunities to hear the left? Perhaps people are fed-up with the liberal bias, and have turned to other sources for their information.

The MSM, again proven by today’s cartoon, consists of a bunch of spoiled brats who do not want any competition, much less lose to it.

Leave a Response »

 

Dems Got Their Healthcare Tuesday, Mar 23 2010

So the Dems got their healthcare bill passed, and stirred the ire and hatred of the masses against them. Pelosi and Reed will not survive the November elections — Reed defeated, and Pelosi replaced.

The people who they say they are for the poor and down-trodden, make them the people who will suffer the most from this egregious legislation.

Where do they think the government gets its money to do all the kind and benevolent things for all those hurting people? If they penalize the producers in the economy, why should, or would, they keep producing? Therefore, if they stop producing, or produce less, how does the government’s take increase? If they lessen government’s take, then they have less to distribute to the moochers. If everyone becomes a moocher — which is what happens in a universal healthcare system — how is there enough, if any, money to offer the services needed?

The entire system fails, but these progressive idiots who are incapable of logical thought continue on in their march toward self-destruction, and drag the country down with them. Forget about what history has shown us! Ignore what medical care is like in other countries! “We will defy the laws of economics,” they say, “because we are in charge, and we know better than God”, (because, of course, there is no God; they are god!)

Foolish, foolish people!

They don’t see that we are only two generations away from implementing Social Security, and it’s a complete disaster. We are only one generation from Johnson’s “War on Poverty”, and the welfare system is the biggest drain on our tax dollars to date, and we still have the poor with us — yet another failure. But these goons cannot see that the healthcare debacle they have imposed on the American citizenry, against their will, is completely unsustainable and will crush us economically. Perhaps that’s exactly what they want. Fools!

Leave a Response »

 

A Republic, Not A Democracy Friday, Mar 5 2010

Since the people of these United States have become engaged in the opposition of the blatant attempted takeover by the federal government, I have heard many declare “we are a Democracy!“ This could not be farther from the truth. We are a Republic; always have been, and I pray always will be.

In my reading, I have come across a statement made by the US War Department, which I believe every American citizen should read and understand. It is as follows:

“Democracy: A government of the masses. Authority derived through mass meeting or any other form of ‘direct’ expression. Results in mobocracy [mob rule]. Attitude toward property is communistic — negating property rights. Attitude toward law is that the will of the majority shall regulate, whether it be based upon deliberation or governed passion, prejudice, and impulse, without restraint or regard to consequences. Results in demagogism [trying to stir up the people by appeals to emotion, prejudice, etc., in order to establish a new leader], license, agitation, discontent, anarchy.”

“Republic: Authority is derived through the election by the people of public officials best fitted to represent them. Attitude toward property is respect for laws and individual rights, and a sensible economic procedure. Attitude toward law is the administration of justice in accord with fixed principles and established evidences, with a strict regard to consequences. A greater number of citizens and extent of territory may be brought within its compass. Avoids the dangerous extreme of either tyranny or mobocracy. Results in statesmanship, liberty, reason, justice, contentment, and progress . . . . Our Constitutional fathers, familiar with the strength and weakness of both autocracy and democracy, with fixed principles definitely in mind, defined a representative republican form of government. They ‘made a very marked distinction between a republic and a democracy and said repeatedly and emphatically that they had founded a republic’ ” (U.S. War Department, Training Manual No. 2000-25, November 30, 1928).

One Response »

 

They Do Not All Turn Out Like Tim Tebow Saturday, Feb 6 2010

One more day until the Super Bowl — and Tim Tebow’s pro-life ad. Focus on the Family’s advertisement celebrating the “choice” of a mother not to abort her unborn child which airs during the Super Bowl, is attracting heavy fire from the pro-abort contingency. Personalities such as Joy Behar of The View, and comedian Jimmy Kimmel try to persuade us with the asinine logic of, “they do not all turn out like Tim Tebow!”

Behar fears an unborn child may become a rapist-pedophile; therefore, the mother should have an abortion. Kimmel expresses his concern, though in a mocking manner, that the unborn child could turn out to be a worthless lazy bum. Whew, I am glad to know that! After 37 years of indiscriminant abortions — at any stage in a woman’s pregnancy — the world is obviously a safer place. Crime is on the decrease, prison populations have plummeted, and everyone born after 1973 are disciplined productive citizens — like Tim Tebow.

Kimmel and Behar’s arguments coincide with the banality of the pro-choice movement. It is not about choice, it is about abortion. In keeping with pro-choice dogma, given the choice to bear a child, or abort him or her, both of these eugenicists proclaim the only choice is abortion.

How pathetic and blind these people are. Statistically speaking, criminals, and lazy bums, are by far a small minority interspersed throughout our society. Therefore, from a strictly statistical perspective, of the over 50 million Americans aborted since 1973, more would turn out like Tim Tebow than the rapist-pedophile lazy bum from which Kimmel and Behar proclaim abortion has saved us.

I pray more pregnant women faced with the choice to complete the pregnancy or to abort, would give that child a chance and choose life.

Leave a Response »