22 November 2010
13 November 2010
02 November 2010
Election 2010
Two years ago, America elected a man with no experience in running anything but a campaign and his mouth. It was a momentous occasion to be sure. It was for many Americans a moment of healing. America had elected the first African-American President. It proved that America is not a racist nation. Sure there are still many racists in America, and work still needs to be done with regards to race, but all in all America proved she is colorblind. What happened though, is that all of President Obama's rhetoric was not backed up with results. When he said that he wanted to change America, most people who voted for him thought he meant change for the better. He promised to fix the economy and his policies have made the economy worse. He promised to fix race relations (which his election proved wasn't that bad) and race relations are now worse. He promised to have a transparent, bipartisan administration. It has been neither.
Liberals also have reason to be angry with him. He promised to close the terrorist prison at Guantanamo Bay, it is fully functioning and I might add, rendition programs have been ramped up. He promised to end the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. He has ramped up the war in Afghanistan with very limited success and troops are still in Iraq. Currently, they are in a "support" role. This is an inaccurate description and the only reason it isn't being talked about is the media never tries to destroy a Democratic President on war policy. The President's push for a single-payer health care system has fallen far short of liberal expectations. (even though the American public wanted nothing to do with government health care) His promises of bringing amnesty for illegal aliens and pushing for gay "equality" have fallen short of his promises as well.
I think the reasons for his failures from a liberal perspective are very easy to understand. These liberal agendas are so far outside of what mainstream America wants that it is a tough sell, even for Obama's teleprompters. He did a good job of selling "Hope" and "Change" but Americans do not have hope in his abilities to correct America's economic woes, and his goal of 'fundamentally transforming America' is not what America wanted.
So what do we have two years later? $3 trillion more in debt. New and expanded entitlement programs. 10% unemployment with at least 15% real unemployment. A business community that is scared to death of his economic policies and therefore are sitting on record amounts of capital. Class warfare. And...a new Congress.
President Obama, you had the most lopsided presidential victory in recent history and in two years, your failed policies were responsible for the most lopsided midterm election tidal wave since the 1940s. Republicans now have a 51 seat majority in the House of Representatives. Senate Democrats won only 11 of 37 Senate races. (at the time of this posting, likely to be 12) In short, big government policies got smoked at the ballot box.
However, it wasn't long ago that Republicans had this kind of opportunity...and they screwed it up. Soon to be House Majority Leader Eric Cantor was clear in stating that, "We have to deliver." Yes you do, because the TEA Party is watching you. We are not taking your word for it that you have our best interests at heart. When the White House has a new occupant in two years, we DEFINITELY will be watching. Don't screw this up, or the GOP will be gone, and a new conservative party will rise.
Liberals also have reason to be angry with him. He promised to close the terrorist prison at Guantanamo Bay, it is fully functioning and I might add, rendition programs have been ramped up. He promised to end the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. He has ramped up the war in Afghanistan with very limited success and troops are still in Iraq. Currently, they are in a "support" role. This is an inaccurate description and the only reason it isn't being talked about is the media never tries to destroy a Democratic President on war policy. The President's push for a single-payer health care system has fallen far short of liberal expectations. (even though the American public wanted nothing to do with government health care) His promises of bringing amnesty for illegal aliens and pushing for gay "equality" have fallen short of his promises as well.
I think the reasons for his failures from a liberal perspective are very easy to understand. These liberal agendas are so far outside of what mainstream America wants that it is a tough sell, even for Obama's teleprompters. He did a good job of selling "Hope" and "Change" but Americans do not have hope in his abilities to correct America's economic woes, and his goal of 'fundamentally transforming America' is not what America wanted.
So what do we have two years later? $3 trillion more in debt. New and expanded entitlement programs. 10% unemployment with at least 15% real unemployment. A business community that is scared to death of his economic policies and therefore are sitting on record amounts of capital. Class warfare. And...a new Congress.
President Obama, you had the most lopsided presidential victory in recent history and in two years, your failed policies were responsible for the most lopsided midterm election tidal wave since the 1940s. Republicans now have a 51 seat majority in the House of Representatives. Senate Democrats won only 11 of 37 Senate races. (at the time of this posting, likely to be 12) In short, big government policies got smoked at the ballot box.
However, it wasn't long ago that Republicans had this kind of opportunity...and they screwed it up. Soon to be House Majority Leader Eric Cantor was clear in stating that, "We have to deliver." Yes you do, because the TEA Party is watching you. We are not taking your word for it that you have our best interests at heart. When the White House has a new occupant in two years, we DEFINITELY will be watching. Don't screw this up, or the GOP will be gone, and a new conservative party will rise.
01 November 2010
Give unto Barry?
"Keeping a close watch on him, they sent spies, who pretended to be sincere. They hoped to catch Jesus in something he said, so that they might hand him over to the power and authority of the governor. So the spies questioned him: “Teacher, we know that you speak and teach what is right, and that you do not show partiality but teach the way of God in accordance with the truth. Is it right for us to pay taxes to Caesar or not?” He saw through their duplicity and said to them, “Show me a denarius. Whose image and inscription are on it?” “Caesar’s,” they replied. He said to them, “Then give back to Caesar what is Caesar’s, and to God what is God’s.” They were unable to trap him in what he had said there in public. And astonished by his answer, they became silent." Luke 20:20-28
“Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.’ “Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’ “The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’" Matthew 25:34-40
It is often taught by Statists that Jesus was for paying taxes and his statement, "Give back to Caesar what is Caesar's" is a statement supporting higher taxes. It is nothing of the sort, clearly. Jesus was simply stating that we should do what we are required and pay what we are supposed to pay to the government. He never advocated paying more, and he didn't advocate government intervention in helping the poor. Jesus advocated individual intervention in helping the poor. He said each individual will be judged on how they treat and serve those less fortunate than themselves. When we help the poor, (with a proper attitude I might add) it is considered a righteous act in the sight of the Lord. When we do not, the scripture goes on, we are not considered righteous in the sight of the Lord.
Now there is this notion out there of "Collective Salvation" that I'm not really going to get into in great detail. (If you want to know more about it, listen to Glenn Beck) But this idea drives the Statist. The Statist believes that if, as a people, we give more to the government, the government can do what is right (laughable) and help the needy and then we all are "saved" collectively. This teaching is from Satan. It is designed to lead astray those with "good" hearts who don't really want to change. There is a clear path to salvation, and that is through Jesus. (John 14:6) Any other teaching, merely leads people astray.
Finally, I'll say this. I think that if we as a people (and Churches in particular) did a better job of helping the poor and needy, there wouldn't be a need for government involvement in helping the poor. There would be no government Welfare program because local churches would be providing that service. We wouldn't need Food Stamps, because Churches would be providing that service. The government would automatically be smaller which would mean there are more private sector jobs and opportunities for entrepreneurship, meaning less poor people. Why do we have the Federal Government involved in education? When parents couldn't teach their children back in the 1600's, community schoolhouses developed. When these didn't do their job, local government had to intervene. When this didn't work, regional governments got involved until you get to the point where we are spending trillions of taxpayer dollars on something that should be taken care of by parents. Because we have failed to do what we are supposed to, we have the Federal Government involved in every aspect of our lives instead of the limited role the founders had assigned to it. Why was this necessary? We didn't do our job as a people, and got bailed out by an ever increasing government. When people don't do what they are supposed to, government is usually seen as the solution, instead of the real solution: God. Then instead of worshipping the Creator, we start worshipping the government that we created out of our own laziness and irresponsibility. Americans need to again be responsible, get back to worshipping God and tell the government, "Thanks but no thanks. I created this mess, I can get myself out of it."
“Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.’ “Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’ “The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’" Matthew 25:34-40
It is often taught by Statists that Jesus was for paying taxes and his statement, "Give back to Caesar what is Caesar's" is a statement supporting higher taxes. It is nothing of the sort, clearly. Jesus was simply stating that we should do what we are required and pay what we are supposed to pay to the government. He never advocated paying more, and he didn't advocate government intervention in helping the poor. Jesus advocated individual intervention in helping the poor. He said each individual will be judged on how they treat and serve those less fortunate than themselves. When we help the poor, (with a proper attitude I might add) it is considered a righteous act in the sight of the Lord. When we do not, the scripture goes on, we are not considered righteous in the sight of the Lord.
Now there is this notion out there of "Collective Salvation" that I'm not really going to get into in great detail. (If you want to know more about it, listen to Glenn Beck) But this idea drives the Statist. The Statist believes that if, as a people, we give more to the government, the government can do what is right (laughable) and help the needy and then we all are "saved" collectively. This teaching is from Satan. It is designed to lead astray those with "good" hearts who don't really want to change. There is a clear path to salvation, and that is through Jesus. (John 14:6) Any other teaching, merely leads people astray.
Finally, I'll say this. I think that if we as a people (and Churches in particular) did a better job of helping the poor and needy, there wouldn't be a need for government involvement in helping the poor. There would be no government Welfare program because local churches would be providing that service. We wouldn't need Food Stamps, because Churches would be providing that service. The government would automatically be smaller which would mean there are more private sector jobs and opportunities for entrepreneurship, meaning less poor people. Why do we have the Federal Government involved in education? When parents couldn't teach their children back in the 1600's, community schoolhouses developed. When these didn't do their job, local government had to intervene. When this didn't work, regional governments got involved until you get to the point where we are spending trillions of taxpayer dollars on something that should be taken care of by parents. Because we have failed to do what we are supposed to, we have the Federal Government involved in every aspect of our lives instead of the limited role the founders had assigned to it. Why was this necessary? We didn't do our job as a people, and got bailed out by an ever increasing government. When people don't do what they are supposed to, government is usually seen as the solution, instead of the real solution: God. Then instead of worshipping the Creator, we start worshipping the government that we created out of our own laziness and irresponsibility. Americans need to again be responsible, get back to worshipping God and tell the government, "Thanks but no thanks. I created this mess, I can get myself out of it."
31 October 2010
Back in the Saddle
I've been away from writing for a long time. I'll be getting back soon. I think I'll probably throw in some video blogs as well. I'm considering having days when I release certain things, deadlines, etc. Maybe book review Friday, politics Monday, Religion Wednesday or something like that. Anyhow, have a great day. If anyone has any ideas on how to advertise properly, not just using google's adsense, please leave a comment because I'd like to advertise, but I don't like google's random ads.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)