Save the Date - November 8

Don't know what to do on November 8? I have some thoughts and recommendations.

If you've seen my blog in the past you might have noticed I have not been particularly complimentary of the major party nominees for the office of US President. I still think both parties could have done better with their nominees. However, there are some really significant reasons to support (gulp) Donald Trump this year.

Yes, that's right, I'm going to turn out with all my deplorable friends on November 8 and vote for Donald Trump. Here's why...

No Serious Third-Party Choices

I probably would not throw away my vote on a candidate that had no possibility of winning, especially if my second choice candidate needed my vote, as Mr. Trump does (well maybe not in Texas, but you get my point.) In my opinion Libertarian Gary Johnson is just not up to the job, and even if he were he does not share my worldview. His agenda seems to be mainly focused on marijuana, if you can call that "focus". The Green Party candidate seems like a nice smart lady but her politics are way too far left of the foul line.

Experience

Whaaat...experience? Hillary Clinton has far more experience in government than Donald Trump, I will grant you that. Mr. Trump's experience with government is mostly related to being the subject of government regulators and bureaucrats. However the value of his long experience as an entrepreneur favorably compares with that of President Obama's experience as a "community organizer" and first-term mostly-absent Senator when he entered the White House.

Mrs. Clinton's experience proves only that she has an agenda that is not pro-America but rather pro-Clinton. Any major party candidate will bring a team of experienced advisers and consultants from the ranks of their party, along with the established departments of government and military leaders to help them hit the ground running. What really affects the ultimate course of the country is not experience but the president's worldview and agenda.

Agenda

Both candidates come with an agenda. Mrs. Clinton comes with a progressive agenda, which means she wants to undo practically everything that the greatest generation of America stood for, a strong America that could hold back the tide of evil despotic regimes and set a moral standard for the world to envy and emulate. Mrs. Clinton's history indicates she will chart a course similar to the Obama agenda, trading America's sovereignty and strength for globalism and compromise with organizations like the U.N. or the World Court. On the home front she will press even further toward anti-Christian and anti-family values, led by her friends and mentors on the progressive left. Her agenda on the economic side includes the typical FDR-era government make-work programs.

As far as I can tell, Mr. Trump's agenda (beyond the obvious quest for power and a place in the history books) is to restore America's preeminent place in the world, which has been unilaterally surrendered by the Obama administration. I believe he sincerely wants to help get Americans back to work in the private sector, even if some of his proposals are a bit off-the-wall. I believe he would take a practical approach to deregulation and tax reforms that could help our economy grow.

Temperament

Most people would give Mrs. Clinton the upper hand for being more composed and thoughtful than Mr. Trump. Thus, in spite of her high untrustworthy ratings, she is considered the "safer choice". I can't deny that there is some risk in a Trump presidency, but let me offer this perspective.  Mr. Trump has the proven ability to lead large organizations and make decisions that affect thousands of people's lives and livelihoods. He has also proven his ability to raise responsible hard-working children against all odds for someone in his income bracket. In spite of this Mr. Trump is universally hated by most of the media elites in America and around the world. If elected he would have a tremendous challenge getting anything controversial done without severe criticism and calls for impeachment or resignation from the left, and possibly even members of his own party. This makes it highly unlikely that he could do much damage to the integrity of the presidency.

Mrs. Clinton on the other hand has carte blanche from the media all around the world. She also has the "woman card" that she will use if needed (e.g. "the first female president" and so forth.) She also has a federal court system that was stacked by her husband and President Obama to support her. One or two Supreme Court appointments will make her practically immune to any legal attacks or publicity campaigns, which could quickly be silenced by her executive powers. As she has proven repeatedly, she is willing to put her own interests above those of the country, and like her husband is she capable of successfully thwarting any attempts to uncover the incriminating truth.

The Supreme Choice

By far the largest and most important factor to consider is the precarious state of the Supreme Court. The constitution literally hangs in the balances of this election. Hillary Clinton appointees will consistently rule against private gun ownership and self-defense rights, against first amendment rights of religion and speech (except for Muslims of course), and against any other rights that stand in her way. Clinton appointees will consistently rule in favor of the progressive left agenda. This will affect the moral fabric of our nation so profoundly that I believe we may never recover. Maybe we have already passed the point of no return, but if voting has any ability to change the course of history, my vote will be cast in favor of a stronger United States and against socialism and one-world government.

Deplorable Politics

I found the recent comments of the Democratic presidential nominee, lumping millions of people into a "basket of deplorables", to be extremely troubling. Her explanation and "apology" was even more troubling.

Certainly racism and xenophobia are deplorable attitudes, but Clinton's comments went beyond that to call millions of people themselves deplorable. That is the closest thing to hate speech I have ever heard from a presidential candidate. And this was not just a slip of the tongue or momentary lapse in judgement - she had obviously used that term repeatedly and was comfortable including it in a public forum, albeit one that was friendly to her agenda.

The terms "sexist", "homophobic" and "Islamophobic" are even more troubling, especially in the context of her highly-publicized speech, because they are highly subjective terms depending on the perception of the audience. I suspect many of those agreeing with her sentiment would consider those with traditional views of marriage and concerns about the rise of Islamic radicalism to be in that "basket".

Mrs. Clinton tried to minimize the political damage by suggesting that it was a mistake to say "half of Trump supporters are in that basket". The number is irrelevant; what is troubling is the idea that anyone could be lumped into this category of "deplorables", as if they could just be carted away and society would be better off without them.

How long does it take to turn a "basket of deplorables" 

into a "boxcar of deplorables"?

The elitist attitude that certain groups of people are "deplorable", combined with a consensus that certain difficulties are caused by these "deplorables" soon results in attacks, social stigmas, and sometimes acts of genocide. Thank God this has not happened in America, but the direction of politics in this country is certainly pointing down this dark path, arguably on both sides of the aisle.

Can this country be healed of its deep divisions? I'm pretty certain the answer will not be found in politics, though politics can certainly make it worse. No, the answer can only come from God, through the love that only the presence of Christ can impart in our hearts toward one another.

We should each ask the question, am I infected with hatred toward others based on their political views? Can I forgive my brother, even as I need forgiveness daily myself? God have mercy on us and revive our spirits to call on the Name of Jesus for deliverance!

The Misconception of Mrs. Clinton

I would like to comment on a misconception regarding Hillary Clinton. The recently concluded FBI investigation found evidence that she and her colleagues "were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information." Mrs. Clinton said that this was a mistake in judgment she made for the sake of convenience while running the State Department.

The misconception is that Mrs. Clinton is careless and naive concerning her handling of government secrets. Nothing could be further from the truth. "Reckless disregard for the security of the nation" might be a more accurate description of her conduct. Both she and her husband are extremely intelligent and careful people regarding legal matters, and she took extraordinary measures to keep her communications outside of government purview. Remember that she had months of stalling before turning over the servers that had "somehow been wiped" and had "hard drive failures", so basically the FBI was dealing with only the information she allowed them to see.

The Clintons are Masters of Misdirection. In this case, the misdirection was the embarrassing but not quite incriminating revelation that she compromised top-secret government communications by using personal email servers. That was an enticing bone to throw to the investigators, but it also threw them off the trail of the more important case involving the use of her position in government to solicit donations from foreign sources that would create dangerous conflicts of interest as a top-level cabinet officer and possible future president of the U.S.

Before the more important investigation could occur, the press and the public will lose interest, partly because it is a more complicated story, partly because the real cover-up has been much more effective in this case, and partly because the public and the media will simply become "fatigued" by the constant investigations.

These are the active ingredients in the slick legal coating that covers the Clinton family. Just as the salacious Lewinsky scandal misdirected the media from the story of abuse of executive power to focus on the naughty details of Bill Clinton's personal life, even so the email scandal has been used to change the narrative from corrupt and dangerous liaisons with foreign officials to a so-called careless handling of government emails.

Please understand that if elected, these donations will affect Mrs. Clinton's decisions regarding energy policy and our handling of terrorism and national defense, among a host of other important national issues. And with one pending Supreme Court appointment and possibly two others arising during the next presidential term, along with her husband's earlier federal court appointments, the Clinton family will have complete legal cover for their future actions in the White House.

This next election is NOT about whether we should have the "first female president in American history", or even about electing someone with a better presidential resume. This is about protecting the integrity of our federal government and the future of the republic for which it stands. Our children deserve to inherit a functional democracy as our founders intended, not one that is rigged and corrupted by a family of professional lawyers who know how to dance around the edges of the law.

How Corporate Leftists Are Defeating Democracy in America

Activist corporate chiefs like Marc Benioff of Salesforce.com are using the economic power of their corporations to overrule the will of voters across America. This is a new and very dangerous trend that must be understood and resisted.

Case in point, a recent law in Georgia (HB 757) was passed by the Georgia legislature and was well on its way to becoming law, when Mr. Benioff threatened to pull his business out of the state if the governor did not veto the bill. Money talks, and the bill was vetoed. This bill would have protected religious institutions from being forced to perform ceremonies that violate their sincerely held beliefs. I read the bill closely and can say without hesitation that this bill did not discriminate against any person on the basis of their sexual orientation, nor did it allow such discrimination. The bill simply prevented the state or local governments from penalizing religious organizations for refusing to provide services that are in violation of their beliefs and teachings.

So, can you understand that pastors in America will be forced to perform gay weddings against their conscience or face penalty of law? Of course the intent of these activists is not to have these services performed by those who object, but rather to shut down the religious organizations and people of faith who stand in their way.

Is this really America the land of the free? Well it had better be the home of the brave now, because those freedoms are being taken away, not by a majority of voters, but by leftist CEOs from San Francisco, New York and Boston. Is this DEMOCRACY? It reeks of plutocracy and hypocrisy from those who profess to be advocates for democratic policies.

If you want to understand more, please read this Wall Street Journal article (http://www.wsj.com/articles/salesforces-marc-benioff-has-kicked-off-new-era-of-corporate-social-activism-1462201172) (10-5-2020 NOTE: This article now requires subscription to WSJ. But in the last four years and especially in 2020, seemingly all corporate boards are being stacked with leftist activists like Benioff, under the banner of "ESG - Environmental, Social, Governance". Just check corporate news for any large multi-national corporation in the last 6 months).

My dear friends, corruption is not only coming down from Washington, but seeping into state governments from the most powerful corporations in America. Votes are important, but understanding where the influences are really coming from should help you decide how to more effectively resist these anti-democratic forces. Corporate boards are elected by shareholders, and if you are a shareholder you can speak up about this inappropriate use of company resources.

I leave you with this question: Who should control lawmakers in your state on matters of conscience, the voters of your state, or a San Francisco billionaire and his cronies?


Reference:
Religious Freedom Restoration Act
State Religious Freedom Restoration Acts
Free Exercise Protection Act of Georgia

The Spectrum of Politics

This year in politics has proven my long-held theory that the political universe is not linear from left to right, but curved. In this bizarro world of politics, Bernard Sanders and Donald J. Trump live in the same neighborhood. Bernie's neighbors to the left and Donald's neighbors to the right actually live in the same house together, a crack-house whose residents feed on fear and anger caused by the desperation and delusion of a world without God.

In the spectrum of politics, where deep red and deep indigo plunge into political darkness, demagogues of the past fanned the flames of fear and anger to rise to power while the masses that followed them drank their witches brew of delusion and zeal. Look into this darkness and you will see where the generals of Saddam Hussein's left-wing Baathist party collaborated with the most right-wing zealots of Islam, a meth lab known as Camp Bucca where the evil army we now know as "ISIS" was born.

Demagogues who rise to power have a nasty habit of making themselves demigods. I say this not to suggest that our current political wannabes are of such ilk, but to state plainly that America and the western world have chosen that path by rejecting God. The path away from God leads not to freedom but to a world of hatred and tyranny, led by the prince of darkness. I can understand why those in darkness run to this destructive light, but what baffles me is how the children of God can be led in the same direction.

Jesus said his kingdom is not of this world, and the world of politics is beneath the pursuit of eternal things, but decisions we make in politics have an irreparable effect on young people growing up in the world we leave them. Let us not leave them a world of political extremism where lives are cut short by angry mobs and unnecessary wars. Let us turn back to love and the God who enables love through his unconditional offer of grace.

I am writing a new commandment to you,

which is true in Him and in you,

because the darkness is passing away and the true Light is already shining. 

The one who says he is in the Light and yet hates his brother

is in the darkness until now. 

The one who loves his brother abides in the Light

and there is no cause for stumbling in him.

But the one who hates his brother

is in the darkness and walks in the darkness,

and does not know where he is going

because the darkness has blinded his eyes.

I John 2:8-11

Leading from Behind - Jonah and the King

I recommend this link for your browser home page - http://dailystudybible.com/todaybib.php. It changes every day to lead you through the Bible. Today I was reading Jonah and noticed something typical of weak leadership. See if you catch it:

Then the people of Nineveh believed in God; and they called a fast and put on sackcloth from the greatest to the least of them. When the word reached the king of Nineveh, he arose from his throne, laid aside his robe from him, covered himself with sackcloth and sat on the ashes. He issued a proclamation and it said, “In Nineveh by the decree of the king and his nobles: Do not let man, beast, herd, or flock taste a thing. Do not let them eat or drink water. But both man and beast must be covered with sackcloth; and let men call on God earnestly that each may turn from his wicked way and from the violence which is in his hands. Who knows, God may turn and relent and withdraw His burning anger so that we will not perish.” Jonah 3:5-9

First, the greatest miracle in the book of Jonah is not the big fish, it's the immediate repentance of the wicked city of Nineveh! But did you notice - everyone in Nineveh repented, then the king got wind of it and decided to decree that everyone had to repent. That's called "leading from behind". But at least the king "got with the program" and didn't attempt to thwart God's purposes. That's more than I can say for our leadership today. The only thing the king added was that animals had to repent too. Isn't that typical of lawmakers...LOL.

Well maybe I'm being too hard on the king of that wicked city; he did call them to turn away from wickedness and violence. Oh wait, what about our current leaders? As Jesus said: The men of Nineveh will stand up at the judgment with this generation and condemn it, for they repented at the preaching of Jonah; and now something greater than Jonah is here. (Luke 11:32) OUCH!

The Balooning Deficit - What's Up With That?

Why the budget deficits?  Find out for yourself here:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/politics/30-years-spending-priorities-federal-budget-2012/

The Washington Post provides a nice little interactive tool that helps you see where the money has been coming and going for the last 30 years.  For example:

You can see from the charts where the real problems lie.  First, revenues have declined $600 billion from $2.7 trillion in 2007 to $2.1 trillion the last few years.

Second, spending has gone from $3 trillion in 2007 to about $4 trillion each year since.

So breaking it down further, you will see the exponential growth of the entitlement programs, particularly health care-related expenditures.  You will also see the massive doubling of "income security" which is another word for unemployment benefits.  Oddly, that started in the 2010, most likely due to extending unemployment benefits from one year to two years.

On the revenue side, what happened in 2009?  Individual and corporate income taxes declined by $400 billion.  I believe that was due to an abrubt halt in routine investment gains that had been realized in prior years.  You can't really blame unemployment because payroll taxes hardly budged during that time.  Not only did capital gains evaporate and corporate incomes greatly decline, but you now have a carry-over effect with unrealized capital losses limiting tax revenues.

I guess the most disturbing thing to me is that the 2012 budget calls for a $500 billion increase in tax revenues.  If that doesn't happen we could be staring at a $1.6 trillion budget gap in 2012.  And it could get even worse, with a likelihood of much greater expenditures on interest on the national debt.

$1.6 trillion dollar deficit in a single year - whoa.  That is more than the entire federal budget when the first President Bush left office.  Yet I think the average taxpayer's income is probably not much higher than it was then.  (Mine certainly isn't.)

What can be done about this?  We could probably cut $200 billion from expenditures by getting employment back to pre-recession levels.  That might also add $100-200 billion in revenues.  But primarily the problem is the explosive growth of health care spending.  That absolutely must be stopped, and Obama Care is not going to do it.  Consumers absolutely must become aware of their health costs at the point where they make decisions that affect their health.

I recommend reading a book "The Coming Jobs War" by Jim Clifton.  That's a really good book that explains better than I can do in this blog.