Syte Reitz

The hand that rocks the cradle rules the world…….

Browsing Posts in Cultural Wars

Dear President Trump,

*** 

A Reluctant Trumper

This message comes from somebody who could best have been described before as a very, very reluctant Trumper.
I only voted for you because you supported the Republican platform, which (miraculously) still seems to support Judeo-Christian values, and still opposes abortion.
I worried about whether your devotion to conservative values was genuine.
But in the last 7 months I have become an ardent admirer, enthusiastic supporter, and daily prayer warrior on your behalf.
 *** 

America Is Split

America is deeply split, split on the definition of morality.
Before you, elections skirted any allusion to the ethical conflict brewing  in America .
You  have defined it, called it out, and are sparing no effort to secure moral victory for America.
 *** 

I’m Impressed

I’m impressed by the things people expect to be impressed about— your economic successes, your determination to keep America safe from radial Islamic terrorism, your determination to restore respect for the Constitution of the United States and for law and order.
That in itself should be enough to keep a President popular and successful.
But what has blown my mind and inspired great respect for you is your moral courage.
 *** 

Moral Courage

***  
  • You stuck up for unborn babies, risking losing the election, in your debate with Hillary.
  • You managed to appoint the constitutionalist Justice Gorsuch, against historical opposition from the left.
  • You have acknowledged God, and asked for prayers more than any President in my memory, including President Reagan.
  • Melania had the courage to pray the Our Father publicly when introducing you. (I suspect Melania has a lot to do with  your moral courage.)
  • You openly acknowledge the fundamental essence of Judeo Christian ethics in the Constitution of our nation, yet you are able to welcome, respect and work with nations and with citizens who do not share our fundamental values.
  • Your speeches at Warsaw and at Riyadh spelled these values out clearly, and your actions are consistent with the ideals you described in those speeches. Those speeches were classic, and worthy of recording with the speeches of our other great Presidents and world leaders.  I hope my grandchildren will study those speeches in school one day.
  • Your success in forming a coalition of Arab nations against ISIS, while affirming Judeo-Christian values, is a testament to those ideals.  Jesus Christ  was able to show kindness to those who rejected His teachings.  That is the major difference between Christianity and radical Islamic terrorism. An ability to love and respect someone who does not agree with you.
  • You have remarkable courage.
  • Your inauguration speech, your statements calling out both the intolerant right and the violent, ironically fascist Antifa after Charlottesville, and your willingness to stick to campaign promises, show tremendous courage, particularly considering the opposition you have encountered in established Washington politics.
  • You were prepared to take on the political establishment, and what’s more, you still show no sign of giving up when the Resistance grew larger than anyone can imagine.
  • You have also shown the willingness to change your opinion on an occasional campaign promise— I am no fan of war in Afghanistan, but I defer to you and to the generals, and see that you are sticking to most other promises, so it’s a mark of character to be able to acknowledge that you may have been mistaken in your position on one thing.  America should look out primarily for her own citizens, but there are times that isolationism can be denial of the evil that needs to be confronted.

I’m Grateful

I am grateful to you.
You have had the guts to take on a challenge of Biblical proportions.
 *** 
When praying for you I enlist the help of many Biblical figures — of David who slew Goliath, of Moses, who led the Jewish nation out of Egypt, of St. Paul, who underwent a conversion that can only be described as Biblical, and of Mary, Christ’s Mother, who must see that the battle you are taking on is one that will be personally very punishing on you.
 *** 
I place you in God’s hands, and pray for you every day.
I pray for your protection, for the protection of your family, and for the Holy Spirit to continue to give you the wisdom and courage to do what you need to do.
 *** 

A Few Words to My Fellow Citizens, On Both Right and Left.

A few words to my fellow citizens, on both right and left.
It’s impossible to say exactly how many Americans are on the right and on the left.
*** 
Since (even before Antifa and before the election) the left has been so punitive towards any expression of conservative thought, conservatives have quit participating in polls.  Polls, both before and after the election have become useless in telling us what America thinks and feels. Much of America supports the conservative actions of our President, but is smart enough not to volunteer this opinion to anonymous thugs who telephone our homes prying into our politics.
*** 
Based on the results of the last election, trying to correct the results of polls for the silence of conservatives,  acknowledging that some tactics on the left have even gone too far for Nancy Pelosi, I estimate that the right and left are split not 50/50 as previous polls and elections have implied, but closer to 67/33, implying the existence of a silent majority.
*** 

To the Left

To the left, we remind you that you had 8 years of a President pushing your agenda.  Now it’s our turn.  Lucky for you, we have a President who seems capable of disagreeing with you without sending the IRS, NSA, FBI, Antifa and every other form of persecution after you.
*** 
Under this President, you will be safe in your disagreement, and will just have to suffer compromise.  Your biggest problem will be being subjected to hearing views that differ from your own.
*** 

To the Right

To the right, we point out an obligation, and it’s a big one.
*** 
One man cannot fight half, or a third of the entire country.
Or the bulk of the media.
Or the Washington entrenched establishment, where many politicians on both sides of the aisle seem to have chosen to personally profit from lobbyist funding, rather than to support wishes of the people they represent.
Or the Deep State.
*** 
It is the obligation of every person with conservative values to roll up their sleeves and support this President.
We need to pray for him, to argue with the media online, to call and pressure our representatives in Washington, to speak up in support of conservatism and of Judeo-Christian values in our social circles, and to invest some time in protecting the values we want our children to grow up with.
*** 
In every generation Americans have had to fight for what they believe in, and we do not live in some magical world where we are immune from responsibility, hard work, or risk taking to defend what we believe in.
 *** 

 To President Trump

*** 

To President Trump, I can only hope that you continue to have the courage to stick to your guns in the face of an opposition that you truly never could have anticipated, knowing that God has your back.
Many Americans are praying and have your back.
 *** 
Please stick to your campaign promises, don’t give in and compromise (the left certainly never has!) and remember the the people who elected you still back you, and will continue to back you with prayers and with votes, as long as you stick to what will Make America Great Again — the restoration of Judeo-Christian values, law and order, and the Constitution of the United States.
 *** 
Mr. President, PLEASE keep up the tweets, they are the only direct unaltered connection people like me have with our President.  They allow us to see who is sane- our President, or the media.
 
 *** 
And regarding any possible confusion generated by some of the vaguer tweets  you have sent, most of your supporters realize that you have to throw a few red herrings out there in this time of war, and you cerainly cannot telegraph your certain plans to your enemies.  Your supporters have to read between the lines, and to have some faith in you. During the last 7 months, this previously nervous supporter of yours has not been disappointed by you.  So tweet on, truthful, modern President!
 *** 
Be assured that you have many supporters, that the polls continue to be wrong, just as they were before the election, because your supporters have learned to keep their plans close to the vest, too, just like you do.
It is downright foolish to proclaim your plans to the enemy in advance.
I am sure you will see the fruits of your actions in the results of elections to come.
 *** 
May God bless you and your family, and may God bless America.

***
Syte Reitz

We Promise to keep you in our prayers!

Psalm 53 (54)

A plea for help
I have God for my help. The Lord upholds my life.
O God, save me by your name;
    by your power, uphold my cause.
O God, hear my prayer;
    listen to the words of my mouth.
For proud men have risen against me,
    ruthless men seek my life.
    They have no regard for God.
But I have God for my help.
    The Lord upholds my life.
I will sacrifice to you with willing heart
    and praise your name for it is good:
for you have rescued me from all my distress
    and my eyes have seen the downfall of my foes.
Glory to the Father and to the Son,
    and to the Holy Spirit:
as it was in the beginning, is now,
    and will be for ever. Amen.
I have God for my help. The Lord upholds my life.

Hymn

Lord God and Maker of all things,
Creation is upheld by you.
While all must change and know decay,
You are unchanging, always new.
You are man’s solace and his shield,
His Rock secure on which to build.
You are the spirit’s tranquil home,
In you alone is hope fulfilled.
To God the Father and the Son
And Holy Spirit render praise:
Blest Trinity, from age to age
The strength of all our living days.
-Stanbrook Abbey Hymnal

He Can’t Do It All By Himself…

Or

The Battle Is On: Choose It, or Lose It

The Fast Pace

As media scramble to report on the rapidly developing conflict between the previous Obama Administration, which clings to and tries to amplify whatever residual power it can manage, and the new Trump Administration, which has taken on the job entrusted to them by voters, of restoring American values, and which job is complicated severely by various covert progressive agents of the “deep state” left behind in government by Obama, some of us struggle to keep up, and find ourselves somewhat exasperated trying to stay on top of the story.

The Bigger Picture

But underneath the daily glut of confusing details and lies manufactured by Organizing for Action and liberal media, the story is actually quite simple.
You just have to remember that we are in the midst of a cultural war-

-war tactics are being used.
-war tactics are never what they seem.
-clandestine strategies are essential to winning a war.

So we won’t be seeing President Trump broadcasting his intentions to the enemy, who has access to all the same media outlets we citizens have access to.

President Trump will be holding all his best strategies close to the vest, and will even be releasing some red herrings that send us all scratching our heads.

And his opposition will be doing not only the same, but doing their special Alinsky version of the same—which includes breaking every rule in the book, and spreading a staggering number of lies.

Choosing Sides

In a war, those who don’t make choices get caught in the crossfire.

We ordinary citizens have to choose sides, realize that we don’t have the clearance to know exactly what is going on behind the scenes, and discern that a certain amount of blind trust and loyalty is not only in order, but is essential to winning the war.
We have to gauge what each side stands for, and where we stand.

This conservative’s first priority is backing the side that adopts Judeo-Christian morality.
President Trump has done enough during his first month in office to demonstrate that he truly holds these values, enough to earn the trust of, and to deserve the support of Christians and conservatives. We have to recognize the lies that being spread about him, and the red herrings being released about him for what they are, and we must rally to his support.

** Sung to the tune “You Can’t Always Get What You Want…”

And the Left has done enough during the past month to demonstrate that they are not at all committed to the Constitution of the United States, not committed to Judeo-Christian morality, and certainly not committed to the truth. This is reflected not only in their actions of the past month, but also in the publicly stated platform of the Democrat Party.

The Left Attacks

The enraged seditious progressive left has now launched an all-out attack on President Trump, using every agent available to them, including most of the press, Barack Obama’s Organizing For Action resistance campaign, and George Soros’ money.

Attacks include felonies committed by organized rioters like those seen at Berkeley, lies spread by unethical left-wing media such as the (zero-evidence) Russia collusion accusations against President Trump, active resistance in Washington against Presidential cabinet appointments, and even character destruction campaigns against Presidential appointees. These attacks are being carried out in a very visibly organized fashion, in all probability led by Obama’s new Organizing For Action, which seems to draw on permanent appointees in government who are prepared to violate their oaths of office and to act seditiously against the Constitution and the President of the United States. Some have called this web of clandestine activists the“Deep State.”

The “Deep State”

A comical illustration of the “deep state” concept can be found in the British comedy series entitled Yes, Minister, in which the permanent government staff runs circles around and controls the newly elected British Cabinet Minister, who was elected to make changes which the permanent government staff do not approve, and who cluelessly struggles to implement his promises to his voters. The problem is that in real life outside of television comedy, a group of civil servants who thwart the actions of a President is not funny. They not only commit felonies and treason, but also endanger the entire nation by neutralizing its Commander-in-Chief.

And in 2017, all appearances indicate that Barack Obama has indeed planted progressive permanent staff in government, and has organized “resistance” movement called Organizing for Action, which directs well-planned and well-funded “resistance” activities against the Trump Administration.

We now seem to have two governments – the Trump Administration, and the treasonous Obama resistance administration or Deep State, which has offices in Washington, D.C., and colludes clandestinely with government employees in steering it’s destructive agenda.

Regime change and culture change often spawn such seditious opposition. President Lincoln faced similar problems, and upon taking office fired about 1,100 of the 1,500 members of his Executive staff. Problem with 2017 is that it’s not so easy to fire embedded government employees, and President Trump is stuck with passive aggressive and not-so-passive aggressive resistance at every turn. Attempts are being made to clean house, but the house is actually a filthy swamp.

Even Bernie Belongs to the Deep State

Bernie Sanders, who appeared, at least during the 2016 Presidential Primaries, to be above and outside of the Hillary political machine, is now joining the concerted effort to attack the President and the newly elected agenda.
It looks like Bernie Sanders might even be taking orders from the Deep State.
Bernie has been posting articles maligning President Trump on Medium, a modern app aimed at millennial voters which boasts articles for “readers on the go,” and which spins everything quite progressively.

Bernie recently posted an article on Medium playing the poor Senator who (alas!) knows not what to do, since his President is such a liar! Apparently, in the deep state world led by Organizing For Action, even US Senators are recruited to do the drudge work of maligning President Trump, long after the election. In his article, Bernie laments the inaccuracies in crowd estimates Trump tweeted and portrays them as unbearable lies. This is the same Bernie who has had no problem with Benghazi lies, ObamaCare lies, and Hilary’s email felonies. Now, Bernie is prepared to participate in a traitorous campaign of sabotage and destruction against the President whom America elected, under the deceptive guise of Obama’s “resistance.”

Even Republicans Can Belong to the Deep State

This would be an appropriate place to note that “Deep State” government, although primarily composed of progressives, is not limited to progressives. Deep State can include Republicans as well, complicating the picture further. The Republican Party has been infiltrated over the years by some progressives, and there are stumbling blocks to President Obama’s conservative agenda within his own Republican Party.

This past week, Republicans are struggling over ObamaCare repeal. Established GOP leaders are pushing Paul Ryan’s American Health Care Act, while conservative Freedom Caucus leaders are opposing and calling the proposal “ObamaCare Light” and “RyanCare,” because it does not gut Medicaid expansion, some ObamaCare taxes, Obamacare subsidies, and the individual and employer mandates.
Trump, while appearing to support the proposed legislation, may, with his usual close-to-the-vest style of management, simply be letting the establishment group discover for themselves the folly of losing the support of conservative Republican colleagues, as they refuse to execute the complete repeal that voters expect. Some worry that President Trump has sold out conservative values, and is getting on board with “ObamaCare Light.”
This is an example of complications that can be very nerve wracking, and can shake our confidence in President Trump.

Daily headlines include items like McCain Intensifies Trump Tantrum and Paul Ryan Warns: If We Don’t Pass My Bill, ‘System Going to Collapse.’
With “Republicans” like this, who needs progressives?
We seen to be in a political upside down Alice in Wonderland world where it’s not easy to figure out what is up and what is down.  Ironically, Barack Obama started out his Presidency in 2009 with a clandestine, curiously prophetic Alice in Wonderland Party.  

At times like this, we have to remind ourselves that so far, President Trump had not sold us out, and there is not one instance yet of his betraying conservative values.
We have to wait and see what his game plan is, and how it turns out.

The Line Between Disagreement and Treason

But back to the progressives, who are violating laws with their “resistance.”

What the left is practicing now is not “resistance,” but felony and treason.
When disagreement, or passive and legal resistance escalates into the breaking of laws and into subterfuge against the Presidency, an obvious line has been crossed.

Alinsky Tactics: the Manipulation of a Population

The radical left has been using Alinsky tactics routinely since the 1960’s to work toward their goals.

  • Alinsky tactics describe how a minority can hijack power in a democracy using unethical manipulative tactics.
  • Alinsky tactics = how to manipulate a population against its will.
  • Alinksy tactics were defined in a book by Alinsky, which was dedicated to Lucifer (Satan), the Father of Lies.
  • Hillary Clinton studied under Alinsky, and Barack Obama taught Alinsky tactics many, many years ago.
  • Alinsky tactics violate the Constitution, and they violate Judeo-Christian morality.
  • Barack Obama’s “community organizing” was never real community organizing, but was the art of manipulating a community to help a radical get what they want against majority rule.
  • Barack Obama’s new Organizing for Action is a front for “community organizing” or Alinsky tactics on a national level, i.e. underhanded felonious effort to seize control of the US government by minority radicals.
  • When Americans did not give the progressive minority in America what they wanted in Election 2016, now alternative treasonous Alinsky subterfuge will be used.

Civil War

And so we are in a civil war.

Not a well-defined one as we were in 1861, with honesty and uniforms defining the opposition. But in a clandestine war of subterfuge, where all the opposition fighters, not unlike ISIS terrorists, are embedded and hidden in the population and in the government. And whenever the legitimate government takes any step to camouflage their own battle plan, they are attacked by Alinskyites who demand complete (one-sided) transparency from them. Yet the Deep State opposition offers no transparency whatsoever in return, and even engages in felonious treason by leaking highly classified information about the President and his staff. Even liberal CBS news has acknowledged that “stunning amounts of classified information are being leaked against the Trump administration.

Learn to Recognize the Most Common Tactic of the Left

And so, one of the most common Alinsky tactics used by the left is challenging their opponent with a violation of the opponent’s own professed values (which the left does not share).  If they can’t find a real violation, they invent a violation.  If they have zero evidence, they just make an even more outrageous and shocking accusation.  Then, when their opponent protests “but you have ZERO evidence,” they say, “but the accusation is so shocking, that it is worth checking out, despite the fact that there is zero evidence.  We must make sure that such a heinous thing could not be happening.“

And, presto!, they have entangled their opponent in a snare of furious time, money, and resource-consuming activity, which slows down their opponent, and impedes the opponent’s progress toward the opponent’s own agenda.

This tactic can be summarized as ATTACK, LIE, and REPEAT, or simply as CLASSIC ALINSKY ATTACK.

CLASSIC ALINSKY ATTACK by Obama’s Resistance, February 2017

To translate this into 2017 politics, if the American public just rejected your (Obama’s) rapidly introduced progressive agenda and elected new government officials (the Trump administration) who are tasked with the restoration of common sense American values like respecting the Constitution, religious freedom, protection of life, and fiscal responsibility, and your (Obama’s) opponents have taken office with the obvious intention to SWIFTLY erase your dubious accomplishments of the previous 8 years, you invent a very shocking, very false, completely unsubstantiated claim, like “The Trump Administration has been colluding with Russia since before the election, and therefore they must be purged and stopped.”  Then you press on and repeat the accusations over and over, overwhelming all other news with your fake slanderous story, until people half believe that the accusations could be real.

Trump Tactics

Enter President Trump, an experienced and successful man of the world, who has encountered more than one such scoundrel in his time in the business world, also a serious battleground.

And what does such a man to do?

Does he spend precious time defending himself from such ludicrous and unsubstantiated accusations and derail the work he was elected to do?

No, he goes on the offensive and throws challenges back at his attacker.
President Trump pointed out an equally shocking accusation against his opponent, the Director of the Shadow Resistance in the Shadow White House, Organizer-in-Chief of Organizing for Action, Barack Obama.
Being a conservative who does not use Alinsky tactics, the accusation used by President Trump was a true one.
And for truth, evidence can be found– in the New York Times, the Washington Post, McClatchy and the Guardian:

On Jan. 20, the New York Times’ front-page story was titled, “Wiretapped Data Used In Inquiry of Trump Aides.” That story went on to reveal, “The FBI is leading the investigations, aided by the National Security Agency, the CIA and the Treasury Department’s Financial Crimes Unit. The investigators have accelerated their efforts in recent weeks but have found no conclusive evidence of wrongdoing, the officials said. One official said intelligence reports based on some of the wiretapped communications had been provided to the White House.”

President Trump brilliantly linked his accusation to the false baseless one that was aimed at him- and thus he charged investigators to pair all potential investigation of false Trump-Russian collusion to a simultaneous investigation of Obama’s well suspected, unauthorized and illegal surveillance of Trump and his allies.

Much has been made of Trump’s accusation, with the inevitable progressive parsing of what the meaning of the word ‘wiretapping’ is.  But it’s clear to any normal person with common sense that the Trump campaign was spied on by the Obama administration.   

Any investigation that follows will not only clear the false accusations against President Trump, but will now implicate the previous administration and the present Deep State administrator Barack Obama, by exposing their ongoing abuse of power.
President Trump has turned the resistance booby trap into a boomerang.

Unusual Battle

So this present Cultural Civil War that is being led by President Trump is an unusual battle. It’s by necessity clandestine, involves numerous enemies and the Deep State, and is beginning to involve a whole new set of cyber and media weapons.

The main players would be foolish to advertise their battle tactics.
Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, George Soros and their partners certainly do not proclaim any of their plans or intentions.
President Trump would be foolish to proclaim all his intentions.
And so it follows that we cannot demand to know them.

Our Role in This War

Our main role is to pray, to screen both participants for the ethics of the methods they use, to choose a side, and to join the battle.

Join the Battle?
How?

Prayer is crucial, and has already played a major role in the events leading up to our present situation.
It is through the prayers of the American people, and through the intervention of God that so many unpredictable and seemingly impossible (“Black Swan”) events have occurred in the past few years.

An outsider has been elected to the Presidency, despite all efforts of the progressive Deep State to defeat him.
This outsider managed to bridge the gap and obtain votes that most candidates could not have won.
He seems to know how to accomplish things with speed and with decisiveness, while remaining fair to those who disagree with him.
The left is really gearing up to go after him.

It’s time for us to quit sitting on the fence, to acknowledge the “conversion of St. Donald,” to put our prayers AND our energetic support behind our Commander in Chief, and to play our parts in this epic battle.

How Can We Help?

There are many ways we can help:

  • We can pray. A LOT.
  • We can refuse to believe the daily new media lies about Trump & his administration- we can have some confidence in President Trump.
  • We can identify Fake News and disregard it. Fake news is easy to identify– it does not give a specific and credible source. If it’s vague, it’s fake. If it comes from people who have made a practice of lying in the past, it’s fake.
  • We can defend the restoration of conservatism to America publicly- to family & friends, on social media, in online discussion, and in casual conversation.
  • We can neutralize the perpetrators of fake news by cancelling subscriptions to fake news media
  • We can send president Trump & conservative leaders messages of support & assurances of prayer.
  • We can be sure to vote for candidates who support the Constitution & Judeo- Christian morality, in ALL elections, including very local ones.

We cannot expect one man to fight this battle alone, to reverse years of regression single-handedly, and to fight off clandestine attacks by a now vicious sore-loser left.

If we want the restoration of Constitutional and Judeo-Christian values to America, we have to roll up our sleeves & help this courageous man whom we have elected.

The Extent of the Damage

Our nation seemed to have succumbed to progressive domination prior to Election 2016. The odds of reversing the direction taken by the Obama administration were low. Yet somehow, through a series of very statistically unlikely events, the duplicity of Obama’s radical progressive administration was exposed, and American citizens rallied to pray and to vote for change during the last few years.

The 8 year stream of scandals and revelations about the Obama administration, from the NSA & IRS scandals, and Benghazi shockers to the ObamaCare lies and failures, to the most recent WikiLeaks (Vault 7) CIA revelations, this unlikely stream of exposures has given us evidence of the extent to which the Obama administration tried to spy on and control not only the population of the United States, but even used a clandestine CIA agenda to control other governments, such as that of France.

The Choices We Make

We now have a unique opportunity to reverse this damage and domination by a minority of radical progressives, and to restore the values that built America – Constitutional and Judeo-Christian values.

We have to choose sides, we have to choose liberty, and if we don’t choose it and fight for it, we will lose it.
Our predecessors have had to fight wars to keep and to restore America’s freedom through many disasters and attacks.
This is now our generation’s war, and we must rise to the occasion and fight it.

 

Refugees, Borders, and Globalization

or

Taking Care of Americans and Taking Care of the World

or

Balancing Two Truths

Political Conflict

Much of recent political conflict in the United States, as well as in numerous other countries, revolves around the question of refugees, borders and globalization.

Liberals advocate, in the name of compassion, open borders, massive unvetted refugee admission, and a global economy and mentality. They paint conservatives as hard-hearted and selfish when the wisdom of this liberal agenda is questioned.

Conservatives advocate a different form of compassion — compassion for our own citizens, who have to foot the bill for global charitable gestures, and who have to suffer the risks of infiltration by terrorists (who are, by definition, people who try to take what they want by violent means). Conservatives also advocate compassion for those immigrants who have patiently followed immigration laws and procedures and continue to stand in line to enter the US, but are bumped aside by people who simply walk across the border to stay. Conservatives accuse liberals of being unrealistic, and of trying to make the US hand out more than we can handle.

Who’s At Fault and Who’s Right?

Rather than condemning one group or the other, liberals or conservatives, let us start with the premise that most Americans are reasonable, that neither half of America is evil, and that each group has a piece of the truth.

One truth says that we should care about and assist those in need, our country was built on immigration, and we must offer a helping hand.

The other truth is that we cannot take care of poor outsiders and strangers at the expense of neglecting our own poor, and we certainly cannot increase the population of the US to accommodate all the population of the world who would like to live here.

Framed in these terms, the question becomes not who is evil or wrong, but a much more rational and practical question of balancing two truths, of determining the degree to which we can help others, without damaging ourselves. It becomes a question of Taking Care of Americans and Taking Care of the World, and finding a fair balance somewhere between the two.

Solving Our Own Problems

This need to balance our own nation’s stability before helping other nations is analogous to airline flight emergency instructions, which tell us to secure our own air supply mask before attempting to assist others. It is also analogous to a lifeguard’s need to develop their own strong swimming skills and lifesaving techniques before trying to assist drowning swimmers, lest two individuals drown instead of one. Any trained lifeguard or water safety instructor will tell you that if a novice approaches a panicked drowning swimmer the wrong way, even if the well-intentioned rescuer is a strong swimmer, the panicked drowning person will climb on top of the rescuer, pushing them BOTH under water and making the rescue impossible. Specific training and cautious techniques must be used to save both people.

When approached from this friendlier and more unifying perspective, the problem of how much to help the world, versus how much to help our own nation, becomes easier to consider. It is transformed from a hate-labeling tug-of-war between political factions to a cooperative effort to find a workable compromise.

How Much Will It Cost?

Let’s start with some facts, which help to define the problem.

The Gross Global Annual World Product is $108 trillion, or $16,100 per person per year. So most of the world is pretty poor.

The American Gross National Product is $18 trillion, or $56,000 per person per year.
(Note, these are not salaries, but also include everything the government does for us, like building roads.)

So we Americans have 3.5 times more than the average individual in the rest of the world.
This is crucial information in considering the role we as Americans want to play in helping the rest of the world.

If we Americans want to share what we have to help the rest of the world, we have to decide how much we can bring ourselves to part with.

How Much Should We Share?

The saints among us who want to share all we have, must realize that to equalize the world, all inhabitants of the world would have to go down to the $16,000 per person per year. This just happens to coincide with our government-determined poverty level in the US. In other words, in order to help the world very significantly, we would have to part with most of what we have, and become impoverished ourselves. There is NOT a huge amount of wealth in the world, and those who want to bring the world up to our American standards not only must realize that this is impossible, but they also must realize that to equalize, we must go down to the world’s poverty level, and we might have to sacrifice more than we first realized. And the rest of the world, including China, would have to do this as well.

Many generous-hearted people who do not want to live a life of poverty themselves look for other sources of income to tap, for elevating the lifestyle of others. They somehow believe that there is some untapped wealth in the world that will make it possible for everybody to live well. They look to the Bill Gateses of the world and the corporate giants of the world to pay for the charity they wish to initiate.

Taxing the Rich

Let’s try to do the pretty simple arithmetic on that. If we take the 8 richest men in the world who were recently in the news (Bill Gates et. al.), who own the same amount between the 8 of them as the poorest half of the world’s population all put together, the total net worth of these 8 men is $427 billion. If we distributed this to the poorest half of the world’s population (the poorest 3.6 billion people), we would only be able to give each person $119, only one time. Everyone working for the 8 men would then lose their jobs, and the next year, we would have no 8 men to take money from to distribute again. And the $119 would not make a huge difference to those whose annual share of the world’s wealth has been defined as an average of $16,000.

Yes, the world has so many poor and so few rich men that this technique would not help much.
Some people get so caught up in their envy of the rich that they want to punish the rich even if that would not benefit themselves in the least.  Analogous to the child who rips off their sister’s doll’s head because they cannot have the doll themselves.

ENVY

If we tried to tax the entire US, every single one of us, down to poverty level, if we allowed the entire US to earn only $16,000 per person, and the government took the rest, the taxes collected would only allow us to give each person in the world $1,700, bringing their $16,000 to $17,700 ONCE, after which the US would be too poor to give them anything again.

Corporate Giants

Repossessing corporate holdings would have similar results. Most corporate holdings are stocks and they represent the savings of America’s retirees and those preparing for retirement. If we take that money, we, the taxpayer, will have to support those people in their old age, when they have no retirement nest egg left. So taking corporate money or dividends is, at best, a very temporary measure. What you gain now, you will have to shell back out later, to the same people you took it from.

Back to Who Is Right?

These and other similar calculations show us that the concerns of conservatives are not as evil or selfish as progressive leaders or the press would have us think, but are the valid concerns of responsible people, who do not want to steal from one to give to another, while weakening everyone to the point where nobody can help anybody at all.

And, correspondingly, the concerns of liberals are not evil power plays attempting to steal votes from the poor with false promises, but are the compassionate concern of a good population that has not been informed by their leadership of how little money there actually IS in our national coffers and in the world.

This might be a good place to insert an observation — that the ancient religious practice of tithing, of everyone giving 10% of what they have to their Churches to redistribute to those in need, would do a much better job of equalizing the fate of unfortunate people than any governmental system of taxation could ever do. An additional benefit would be that distribution would be local, and more easily supervised.

And yes, Churches and other charitable institutions have had their share of unscrupulous people who mismanage and even misappropriate those funds, but can any honest person say that our government has ever done a better job of it? Or have they just feathered their own nests and the nests of their friends with our tax money, which was supposedly earmarked to provide essential services to Americans and to other nations in need?

At War With Each Other

So when we embark on the political exercises of regulating the admission of refugees, the regulation of borders, and America’s participation in globalization policy, when we discuss Taking Care of Americans and Taking Care of the World with what resources we have, let’s remember not to vilify each other, let’s remember that each side has important lessons to teach the other side, and let’s not war with each other, destroying our own stability and making it impossible to help anybody else.

Back To How Much Can We Afford?

Let’s also remember that some campaign promises and government issued benefits, including free health care (average $10,000 per person per year), free college ($10,000 state & $34,000 private per person per year), old age and unemployment benefits, food stamps, free cell phones, and rent subsidies, that these benefits cannot be handed out to more than the tune of $56,000 per person per year, or the US will go bankrupt. The $56,000 per person per year Gross National Product that we can afford to spend includes our salary, all our government benefits, all services including roads and police protection, maintaining the military, paying for schools, libraries, and community centers, and helping refugees and others in need. And we have not even considered the repayment of the $20 trillion national debt ($62,500 per person) America has yet to repay.

To make the pie any larger, to get any larger slices, requires growing the economy and creating prosperity, so we could have more pie to share.
And it requires putting the unemployed back to work, baking more pies.

President Trump’s economic plans and incentives during his first month in office alone have already grown the value of the stock market by $3 trillion, which certainly increases the size of our national pie.
And the Trump administration is working very hard to create jobs to put people back to work.

So one way to help the poor, both in our own country, and in other countries, is to give President Trump a fair chance.
The more liberal half of America could help the poor simply by refusing to support the recent organized resistance movement against President Trump and his administration, thus giving conservatives the same fair chance liberals just had for eight years.

The Bottom Line

But the most important question for those who have compassion for others is how much am I willing to share?

Shouldn’t I reach into my own pockets when it comes to discussing charity, and shouldn’t I be a bit kinder and more understanding of those who are in charge of keeping this nation fed, defended, employed, and on an even keel?

The bottom line is that there is no magical source of income to tap, our poor are overwhelming in number, and we all have to reach into our own pockets to help as much as we can. One good start would be to tithe and to volunteer at the local Church/charity of our choice. And today, Ash Wednesday, would be a good time to start.

Understanding the Epic Divide

The Divide

The very obvious epic divide between right and left in our nation, along with any discussion of unification or bridging of that divide, necessitates defining and understanding the world views projected by the right and by the left, and then searching for common ground.

This article seeks not to malign or denigrate any group.
In fact, we begin here with the presupposition that good Americans on both sides truly want what is best for our country, and are passionate about pursuing that good.

The problem comes in defining what is desirable and what is good.

The key to overcoming the divide is reason and understanding.
Also, the best way to defeat your enemy is to make him your friend.

Surprising Issue Surfaces- a Possible Clue?

One of the major issues that reflect this divide is the hot-button issue of abortion, which, for the first time in this election, took center stage at the Presidential debates. Quite frankly, in this writer’s opinion, the very grisly partial birth abortion may have been the straw that broke Hillary Clinton’s back in the 2016 Presidential Election. Trump deftly showcased to America Hillary’s cold and rigid position on the killing of a partially born human child. Although certainly not the only issue at stake, abortion is certainly a highly charged and very emotional issue on both sides.

Abortion has, after decades of being relegated to an unimportant “social” issue, bubbled up to the top of the conservative’s priority list, and continues to be a big priority for both sides – not only for Progressives like Hillary, who have been vocal all along on the essential nature of abortion to their platform, but also for the future Trump Administration.

In a mind-blowing first, one of the first actions of the 115th Congress last week was to release a report on the sanctity and dignity of human life, and on the revelations of wrongdoing by Planned Parenthood, particularly in their sale of fetal body parts. To add to the surprise, the report came from a very unexpected source — from the Select Investigative Panel of the Energy and Commerce Committee – from which one would more likely expect reports on fracking or trade, NOT on the sanctity of life or on Planned Parenthood. See the remarkable commentary by John Stonestreet at Breakpoint. Clearly, the Trump administration is prioritizing the issue of abortion from a remarkably different perspective than that favored by Obama and Hillary.

Swept Under the Rug for Decades

The festering, neglected and unspoken problems of the epic divide, including the controversy over abortion, have been brewing now for decades. These issues have been skillfully skirted by politicians and have been side-stepped by American voters, in a well-intentioned effort at tolerance, an effort aimed at absorbing all views into our American melting pot of freedom and protected human rights. The most important issues, which are the moral issues, were long labeled “social” issues, and were swept under the rug, with varying success, until the 2016 Presidential debates.

And therein lies a possible clue to our big divide—reasonable people rarely go ballistic over mundane issues. However, morality, and it’s definition, IS something that both sides of America can get passionate about.

Despite everyone’s desire to tolerate and to include all Americans in our melting pot, problems surface as our population diversifies, as our morality shifts, and as we pass more and more new laws. The problem boils down to the fact that not all human philosophies, beliefs, or religions are compatible, and in our American melting pot these incompatibilities surface, causing inevitable conflict time and again. The definition of what is good and what is evil is not uniform in all societies, and needs to be defined by the entire nation, if evil is to be contained.

Defining Good and Evil

When regulating and protecting human interactions by law, determining what is right or wrong, or defining a person’s “rights” becomes complicated. The “rights” of one person can infringe on the “rights” of another person, and as a society we are forced to choose which “rights” trump which “rights.”

Abortion is one primary place where “rights” of citizens can clash. In abortion, however hard as it might be to imagine that the rights of a child and those of the mother could possibly not be aligned, progressives do insist that the well-being of a mother could be damaged by the existence of a child, and they advocate favoring “rights” for the mother over “rights” for the child.

Another example where the “rights” of citizens can clash is in the treatment of those who have broken the law. The rights of people to be protected from crime must be balanced with the rights of an incarcerated person to be treated decently. Also, the definition of decent treatment, which has to be paid for by the tax payer, is an area of potential disagreement. For example, taxpayers who cannot afford college for their own children could resent paying for college educations for prisoners.

Which brings up the question of defining “rights” altogether. Is a free college tuition a “right?” Does our nation have the budget to provide that? Does going into debt to pay for such “essentials” not steal from future citizens who will have to pay the bills we incur? If free contraception becomes a “right”under ObamaCare, why is free Tylenol not a “right?” Does free food or free housing then become a “right?”

Obviously, rights, and the definition of good and evil become very complicated.
And government gets the job of passing laws to balance those rights fairly, and to enforce the laws that were passed.

Defining Rights

Defining rights to intangible things is easier than tangible things.
We can say a person has a right life – to not being killed.
To liberty – to not being locked up.

To the pursuit of happiness – to choose their path in life.

But defining the right to tangible things is much more dangerous ground, because somebody has to actually pay for the thing that we declared everyone has a “right” to.

Finally, the amount of material things we can have varies tremendously, and depends on what is available. During a war, people ration and semi-starve, and may do it willingly. During a natural disaster, same thing. And people with an unrealistic grasp of economy cannot go around passing laws about what everyone has a “right” to have, if there is simply not enough to go around.

Pie offers a good simplistic example.
One can say that everyone deserves a slice of pie.
But if there is not enough pie, what happens then?

We have to redefine how much pie each person “deserves,” or has a right to.
In this life, there is not always enough of everything to go around, and if you throw away the right of ownership of property, and allow anyone who feels deprived, or feels envy, to demand what belongs to others, you have chaos.

Let the Rich Pay!!

The left frequently advocates shaking down the rich for funds, like the recent story put out by the World Economic Forum about the 8 richest men in the world who own as much as the poorest half of the world (that would be 3.6 billion of us).  A shocking statistic, for sure, but, sadly, this incompetent (or intentionally misleading) reporting would provide NO SOLUTION to the world economic situation, even if we were to repossess all their wealth, send all 8 to Siberia, and divide up all their wealth among the 3.6 billion poorest.

Why? Because, IF the claim is true and is not FAKE NEWS, then the total net worth of the 8 men, $427 billion, divided by the poorest half, 3.6 billion, equals a grand total of $119 per person.  After which the billionaires would be gone, and we would have nobody to fleece next year.

And the jobs they create would be gone, too.
Not mentioned is also the fact that most of these 8 people are Progressives, so why all the hate for conservatives?!?!
AND, the fact the the median American household income, $55,775, would cover 469 poor people if we took this approach.

Nobody mentions that the number of poor in the world is so great, and the number of super-rich is so small, that the rich do not have enough to pay for what progressives want.  To pay for what progressives want, the whole world would have to produce more money, and we would have to fleece not only Bill Gates, the #1 richest guy, but you and me and the Americans receiving unemployment checks as well.

Bottom line, we have to be careful about what we define as a “right,” and if we do, we have to indicate who is responsible for providing that right, particularly if that right involves a material thing.

Balancing People’s Rights

The simplest solution to this balancing act – to the balancing of rights of one citizen against the rights of another citizen, and declaring what is or is not a right—has been provided in the past by religion.
Religion outlined what rights a person had, what infringed on those rights, and what remedies were appropriate when those rights were violated.
The Declaration of Independence of the United States refers to God-given rights which the colonies felt were being violated by the English monarchy, and which colonialists wanted to guarantee for every future American citizen. Those God-given rights included life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

When it comes to defining good and evil, most people in this country used to acknowledge the Ten Commandments, which are actually the foundation and basis of most European and American law.
The moral beliefs of citizens, primarily those of Christian and Jewish citizens, since they were the most numerous, these moral beliefs stemming from their millennia of religious background, were incorporated into the Constitution of the United States and were voted into law via democratic process.

Religion Versus Self as the Boss

But religion has suffered decline in the United States since the 1950’s.
The Ten Commandments went out the window, one after another.

Despite the fact that 90% of Americans still say they believe in God, and 80% say they pray and they feel that their prayers are answered, many Americans have shifted in their definitions of what is right and wrong. They have shifted from looking to religion for guidance on these issues, to looking inwardly to their own thoughts to define what is right and what is wrong. The word for this is relativism. What is right for you may not me right for me, and I have a “right” to decide what is right for me.

One of the problems with looking to ourselves to define what is right or wrong is that most people are not experts in logic, and are very gullible to the first argument they come across that argues a seemingly convenient particular point. They do not realize that a convincing argument can be made for ANY position and for ALL positions, and that some people spend their lives becoming experts in debate, in law, in ethics, and in morality. Yet, despite all this training, the tendency of the human mind is to choose first what we want, then to find the logical construct that justifies what we want. Very few people truly seek truth and fairness, even when that represents a loss of what they wanted for themselves. Simply stated, our minds play tricks on us, and we seek the argument that gives us what we want, fair or not.

Another problem with looking to ourselves to define what is right or wrong is that it is not wise to assume that I myself am more intelligent, capable and informed than the best minds of history, and, if one concedes that there might be a God, that I myself am more intelligent, capable and informed than God Himself. So the very progressives who respect and deify many medical, legal, engineering and scientific experts, and who would not dream of building a house, curing their symptoms, or even making important life decisions without consulting an “expert,” presume to know how to evaluate the rights of all human beings, and to declare what is right and wrong, based on their own instincts and feelings, without training of any kind.

The Essence of the Divide

It makes a great deal of sense to point out that the most fundamental difference between the right and the left, the item that contributes most seriously to the epic national divide, is the disagreement on whether religion, the belief in a bigger super-power, or ourselves are boss.

And before the Freedom From Religion – Religion is Medieval – Only Stupid Weak People Need Religion mantra kicks in here, please consider the fact that IF the more religious half (or 80%) of America happens to be right, and there IS a God, and He HAS interacted with humanity and given us some guidelines (such as the Ten Commandments), the idea of following the guidelines of an infinitely vaster intelligence than ours, and of an infinitely kinder heart than ours, might just be a good idea.

An additional point on the Ten Commandments—even in the absence of an all-good and all-intelligent God, there is something to be said for the cumulative wisdom of ages of human beings and societies who have survived by those tried and tested rules for millennia to this day. It would take quite the ego to dismiss the cumulative wisdom of history and presume that I myself have the genius to dismiss and to better the wisdom of humanity with all its faults to date.

So Here Comes the Conservative Spin?

This is NOT an attempt to judge those who are not religious, because those who look inward for the definition of moral values might certainly be very sincere. We are trying not to judge, but to point out the shift in values in the United States that has occurred since around 1950.
And yes, this author IS conservative and religious, but is also trying to work towards communication via reason and with good will.
If nothing else, my writing will help progressives understand the thought processes that operate in the mind of one conservative, and realize that conservatives do not deserve the hateful pigeon-holing they have been subjected to following Election 2016.

People on both sides should find this analysis interesting.
There are religious people on both sides of these issues.
Some of the most ardent progressives claim to be religious – Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Al Sharpton, and others.
So read on, and consider what is being proposed.

Difference Chart

Let’s document some of the differences in beliefs that have surfaced in much of our nation in recent decades:
(Please indulge the introduction of the Ten Commandments to make this point.)

  1. I am the LORD your God: you shall not have strange Gods before me.

God is no longer the overriding value superseding all others today.
Many try to ban all mention of God from public life.
The highest value, the top “god” today, is probably MONEY (in Ten Commandments language, the golden calf).

  1. You shall not take the name of the LORD your God in vain.

Cursing God is now fine. In fact, much of Hollywood glorifies blasphemy, and even the expression “Jesus Christ” is often used as a curse word.
(I personally apologize to God every time I hear someone use the phrase disrespectfully, and I bow my head every time it is used appropriately.)

  1. Remember to keep holy the LORD’S Day.

Sunday or the Sabbath is no longer holy, nor is Christmas, Easter, etc. For many, shopping has become a higher priority than attendance at Church

  1. Honor your father and your mother.

Government has started to take over the role of father and mother, for example, with Common Core teaching values to children that are in direct conflict with most Christian religions. Government is trying to legislate how our children are to be raised. Many children have no respect for their parents, and even strike them.

  1. You shall not kill.

Over 1 million babies are aborted (killed) in the United States each year, and we came very close to electing a woman who supports partial birth abortion, the killing of a full-term baby half-way during birth. Abortion may be a much bigger deal than you think. We are working on legalizing euthanasia, and we are routinely pardoning, tolerating, and releasing numerous violent criminals, particularly if they represent votes.

  1. You shall not commit adultery.

Marriage has suffered much, and many citizens no longer value chastity before marriage. Adultery, and any form of sexual transgression is considered to be fine, as long as both adults are willing. Recently, prostitution by underage children has been decriminalized in California. This cripples the efforts of law enforcement to convict pimps who manage child prostitution, because then the children cannot testify against the pimps.

  1. You shall not steal.

Property crime is no longer prosecuted in San Francisco. Stealing is often excused and even justified. Government taxation is headed toward stealing as well – demanding larger and larger taxation “rights” on the income of citizens. The right to ownership of property is very much in question.
Some don’t realize that there was a time in the United States when there was no taxation at all.

  1. You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.

Lying is no longer considered shameful, but is celebrated by funny and popular TV shows like Seinfeld. Fake News is widespread and seriously maligns many people. Politicians are re-elected by American voters, even following the exposure of numerous lies and manipulations. Truth, which used to be highly valued and venerated, is now discarded and almost despised. See What is Truth? Does Truth Matter? for an interesting analysis of why Truth might be important, after all.

  1. You shall not covet your neighbor’s wife.

Your neighbor’s wife is not off limits, provided you both agree to the liaison. Everybody tries to dress and look “hot,” and there is no attempt whatsoever in fashion to avoid being sexually provocative.

10. You shall not covet your neighbor’s goods.

Today, covet away!
Most people don’t even know what the word “covet” means.
Hating those who have more than you and automatically labeling them as evil is common. Glorying in the idea of punishing the rich is very popular, and dismisses realities, such as the fact that the combined total assets of all the rich are not enough to impact the quality of life of the masses, and that the rich actually provide many jobs for the poor. Enjoying the idea of punishing the rich even if it does not help you is a serious form of envy.

What Do the Ten Commandments Have to Do With Anything?

Both the Ten Commandments and the Constitution of the United States, which was written by Christians, reflect a Judeo-Christian worldview. For years, the Ten Commandments have been displayed in courtrooms across the United States.

In recent decades we have been passing laws which drift away from that view, and we have been decriminalizing various activities that were previously considered illegal.
These changes have been driven by seeming compassion, and by the drifting away from religious values that has occurred in the United States. The unfortunate result of the drift is that our system of laws now represents a mass of internal contradictions, which require a highly trained lawyer to manipulate, and justice is not always served. The courts can even become a game of manipulation, deception and farce.

At this point we also have people who resent the still obvious Judeo-Christian roots of our Constitution and of our system of laws. The Freedom From Religion Foundation is a testimony to that. Yet the Freedom From Religion Foundation, despite claiming to reject religion, simply promotes religion of a different kind.  Every Christmas the Freedom From Religion Foundation places a plaque at the Wisconsin State Capitol which celebrates the Winter Solstice – a pagan religious celebration. Pagan beliefs are being substituted for Christian beliefs, in the name of eliminating religion.

Some might say that religion should be done away with, but those are unaware that religion is actually a belief system or worldview, and ALL of us have belief systems, whether we have given them a name or not. Even the most progressive atheists evolve a system of beliefs that become as passionate as any religious group, including abortion rights, global warming, and other progressive doctrines that are imposed by ridicule and by force.

Alternative Value Systems

If we were to abandon Judeo-Christian principles and rewrite the Constitution, something that some progressive leaders and Justices are already advocating, it would be hard to create a value system that is internally consistent and does not contain contradictions– contradictions which lead to chaos.

Adopting other common philosophies, such as Atheism, or Islam, would inflame the sensibilities of numerous Americans who still hold fundamental Judeo-Christian beliefs. And it is not trivial to come up with a new system of beliefs with no internal contradictions and with a consistent logical message.

Atheism is not compatible with the Judeo-Christian worldview. In the Judeo-Christian world, God has placed limits on all people, including leaders and powerful people. A king cannot take the property or the wife of another. The leader is accountable to God for his/her actions, and is expected to observe the rules of justice. The Christian worldview values human life above all, and the taking of innocent human life is not permitted, even if the goals are desirable. Even kings must justify the taking of human life according to specific criteria.
Atheism, in contrast to Christianity, places no limits on the power of leaders or of individuals. Atheism frees leaders to impose their will on the nation without justification. Under atheism, the ends justify the means. If the government feels it can accomplish some good by sacrificing me and my family, it is free to do so. My Lithuanian grandparents were sent to Siberia by the atheist/communist Soviet Union, upon its occupation of Lithuania, and they had done absolutely nothing wrong. They were declared to be “capitalists” because they owned a 1-acre farm, one cow and a sewing machine, their possessions were taken away from them, and they were sent to Siberia.

Sharia Law is also incompatible with the Judeo-Christian world view, and with the Constitution of the United States. Sharia law does not acknowledge inviolable human rights for family members, and permits severe corporal punishment, including punishment to the point of death, by the heads of families.

Under Sharia law, there are no limits on the power of heads of families, religious leaders, and heads of state.

The New Morality

A new (experimental) morality has been creeping into our nation, one law at a time, and supplanting the Judeo-Christian values we used to have, without internal consistency. It has not been well planned, is not systematic, or even internally consistent on any new modern moral plane.

For example, the killing of a fetus/baby is permitted even after partial birth, but the killing of a pregnant woman counts as TWO killings by law. Can the murder of a human being, and the jail term of a killer, truly be dependent on what that woman was thinking? Was she walking home or to Planned Parenthood for an abortion? Can the number of crimes committed by a killer be determined by the thoughts that were going through the murdered woman’s mind? Can a murderer go to jail for the same action for which the abortionist is extolled?

Consider another example, sex with underage children, which is, understandably, a crime. Yet teachers are required to illustrate condom use to young children in classrooms, and the very children who are taught to be “Healthy, Happy and Hot” in their classrooms, become felons when one of the young couple turns 18 and becomes guilty of statutory rape of their younger girlfriend or boyfriend. Our sexual standards impose many confusing inconsistencies on young people today.

Numerous such inconsistencies exist in our new and jumbled morality, and many conservative Americans object to the newly introduced (experimental) morality, and have concluded that the experiment has failed.

Science Takes a Back Seat to the New Experimental Morality

As the failings and drawbacks of the new experimental morality surface, those who want that new morality very badly simply ignore truth and science, they sweep the damage done to other people under the rug, and they make sure that facts and science take a back seat to their progressive agenda.

The progressive leadership of our country has misquoted and swept science under the rug habitually, as problems with the new morality surface.

Government-sponsored sex education does not educate children about the data on sexually transmitted diseases (STDs), misleads children into thinking that a condom will take care of everything, and fails to tell children that in 2011 the United States Center for Disease Control pointed out on their website that abstinence is the best form of prevention for STDs (this important fact has since even been removed from the CDC website).

Hiding the Truth

President Obama, a big sponsor of the new morality, withheld release of the results of a government-sponsored survey on abstinence, the results of which did not support Obama’s progressive agenda. The United States Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) performed a study (National Survey of Adolescents and Their Parents) which showed that 70% of parents and 60% of teens favor abstinence before marriage. The study was ready for publication on Feb 26, 2009, but the Obama administration delayed its release for 1-½ years, until August 23, 2010.

The study results were theb released very quietly, and were later buried deeper on the HHS website, in such a way that searching obvious phrases such as “abstinence” did not call up the study, and a knowledge of the study title or project number was needed to access the study. Finally, a warning is posted for those who have succeeded in tracking down the study: This is a historical document. Use for research and reference purposes only.

Yes, the government feels it must clarify that the document is historical, lest it be used to formulate current policy. By no means can we acknowledge that most of America disagrees with the progressive government’s promiscuous agenda for our children.

Where can we see the National Survey of Adolescents and Their Parents?

Back to the Divide

The two alternatives, Judeo-Christian morality, and self-invented modern morality, are in complete contradiction.

  • We cannot simultaneously allow abortion and declare abortion to be murder.
  • We cannot encourage sexual experimentation in children, then jail them as soon as they turn 18.
  • We cannot pass laws that punish Christian Churches for not placing adopted children with homosexual couples, and allow Christian Churches protection of their religious freedom and beliefs at the same time. (If Christian Churches believe that a healthy life for a child necessitates both a mother and a father, it is not the role of government to force Churches to place adoptive children in homosexual homes. If government wants such placement, government should run adoptive agencies. If homosexuals want such placement, homosexuals should run adoptive agencies. But the idea of government forcing Christian Churches how to direct their charities is a violation not only of religious freedom, but also of “separation of Church and State,” which goes both ways.)
  • We cannot give unlimited benefits to various groups of citizens, without considering whether we have the money to hand out, who is paying the bills, or whether the bills are NOT being paid.

(Most people do not have the time to do their own analysis, and media fails to do the analysis for us, but this author HAS done the analysis— spreading 100% of the wealth of the United States today would not solve our financial problems or poverty, and we would then still be faced with zero wealthy people to tax next year. Most of us are not aware of how few really wealthy people and how many poor people there are,)

  • We cannot brag that 98% of all published scientists support global warming, when the government makes sure that global warming opponents get no research funds, and therefore cannot publish.

We cannot cater simultaneously to all groups, when their beliefs on what is right and what is wrong are in direct conflict.
We cannot hand out more pie than there is.

Decision Making When Paths are Incompatible

We have to acknowledge that we can’t always have what we want, NOBODY can always have what they want, and sometimes my getting what I want can step on the toes of somebody else not getting what they want.

Decision mechanisms when people cannot all get what they want include:

  • Free-for-all fight, and the most powerful win (Anarchy, King of the Mountain, or Chaos)
  • An Authority Dictates (Dictatorship)
  • Democracy (We all vote)

My preference? Democracy.
Even when my (conservative) side was losing the battle, during the last 8 years of Obama administration, I respected the system and tolerated a government which violated my world view and my view of what is right and what is wrong.
I thought sadly that if I live in a country that rejects my values, I must put up with it, or move elsewhere. Or pray that my fellow citizens see the light, begin to see things my way, and vote to restore my worldview.
I became a blogger, and have spent the last decade trying to persuade people with reason of the validity of my beliefs.

Now the tide of public opinion has turned, and the conservatives must be given a chance at government.
And yes, I have heard that many say the popular vote has NOT given conservatives a majority mandate.

Yes, We All Know that Progressives Think the Election Was Stolen

Most are familiar with the issue of the popular vote versus the electoral votes.

Hillary Clinton got more popular votes, but Donald Trump won the election because he earned more electoral votes. The electoral votes allotted to each State do not correspond directly to the number of voters in that state, so in close elections it is possible for a candidate to win the popular vote, but not the electoral vote, nor the Presidency.

An important point needs to be made about the electoral system.
The founders of this country were actually wise in choosing the electoral college instead of the popular vote as the method for selection of the President.
They did not want the choice of President always to be decided by the largest, most populous State, with little regard for the smaller ones.

The structure of the Electoral College can be traced to the Centurial Assembly system of the Roman Republic, and is similar to that used by classical institutions. The Founding Fathers were well schooled in ancient history and its lessons. See the US Election Atlas for more details on the evolution of the Electoral College plan.
The concept can be simplified by example.
If the colonies wanted more rural, less populated States to join the union (and to provide food for the nation from their farms), they had to offer those States a guarantee that their rights would not be trampled and they would not be dominated by the States which were more populous and which had larger cities.
The same principle applies today—should the population of one State be able to dictate the fate of the the entire United States?
Hillary Clinton won California by such a large margin in 2016 ( 4.6 million votes) that her entire advantage came from just that one State. Should Californian values be permitted to steer the values of the entire United States?

No, even if Hillary did get 2-3 million more popular votes, the election was NOT stolen.
The electoral college system protects all of America from being dominated by one State – in the case of 2016, California.

Reasons Why Trump May Actually HAVE WON the Popular Vote

An added point about the popular vote:
Conservatives are just as unhappy about the closeness of the election as progressives are.
While progressives point out that Hillary won the popular vote by 2-3 million votes, conservatives point out that if we corrected the popular vote totals for frequently demonstrated massive voter fraud and for illegal immigrants with illegal voting cards, Hillary would have had at least 3 million fewer votes.

According to PEW Research, 24 million (one of every eight) voter registrations in the United States are no longer valid or are significantly inaccurate, more than 1.8 million deceased individuals are listed as voters, and 2.75 million people have registrations in more than one state. That’s almost 30 million votes that are very susceptible to potential fraud.

These figures, combined with the frequently documented voter fraud exercised by “community organizers” and practitioners of “Alinsky tactics” of the left, call into serious question the exact numbers of the 2016 popular vote.

Alinsky Tactics and the Left

It is well documented that Hillary Clinton was a student of Alinsky, and that Barack Obama taught Alinsky tactics in the past. And Alinskyk tactics are Satanist Saul Alinsky’s 13 rules for political warfare, which are described in a book that Alinsky dedicated to Lucifer (Satan).   Needless to say, Alinsky tactics violate all rules of fair Christian behavior, and they describe how a minority can fight, lie, manipulate, and finagle their way against the despised majority, which limits themselves to Judeo-Christian rules of behavior.

Hillary’s recent collection of scandals– Benghazi lies, security breeches to escape accountability for email communications, the Clinton Foundation traitorous pay-for-play allegations, which are being proven just 2 months after the election, as well as the unethical tactics used against Bernie Sanders—this documented track record of “Alinsky” (in Judeo-Christian language “immoral”) behavior on the part of the progressives in the Democrat Party, certainly make election fraud allegations towards the Democrat Party credible.

Although nobody claims that conservatives are free of any misdeeds, it is still more likely that people who support Judeo-Christian morality might have a lower incidence of illegal deceptive tactics than those who actively teach, advocate and employ Alinsky tactics and “community organizing.” Just this week, news surfaced of progressives plotting to disrupt President-Elect Donald Trump’s inauguration by deploying butyric acid at the National Press Club during what they call the “Deploraball” event scheduled for January 19th. These progressives were meeting at the Washington D.C. pizza place that was mentioned in the Hillary-Podesta emails.  Today, the news  holds more on shocking progressive tactics — progressives held a training camp on disrupting the inauguration and how to handle being arrested, and hundreds of the LGBT community held a dance party in the street outside Vice President-Elect Mike Pence’s home.  CNN has even gone so far as to point out that if Donald Trump were to be killed during the Inauguration, an Obama appointee would become President.  The right has never planned and executed such interference and disruption of progressive events, discussed the killing of a progressive opponent, or targeted progressives in their homes.  

Why Can’t We Just Compromise?

Many of the most contentious issues today do not lend themselves to compromise.
Abortion, gay marriage, and sex education (chastity versus promiscuity) are examples of things that cannot go both ways.
A choice has to be made.

 

  • It is not possible to take both roads when you reach a fork, as Yogi Berra can attest.
  • We cannot aim for individual freedom and for governmental control of personal life and personal thought at the same time.
  • We cannot outlaw and allow abortion simultaneously.
  • We cannot both allow and forbid guns.
  • We cannot preserve traditional marriage and allow homosexual marriage at the same time.
  • We cannot respect religious freedom and require all doctors to perform abortions concurrently.
  • We cannot enforce immigration law and simultaneously have open borders.
  • We cannot build up military defense and reduce military defense at the same time.
  • We cannot base our Constitution and Bill of Rights on God-given rights, yet forbid the public mention of God and of religion.
  • We cannot respect Judeo-Christian values and delete Judeo-Christian values from our laws concurrently.
  • We cannot have a Supreme Court which decrees national law and policy without regard to the beliefs of the American population- most of the above mentioned issues have involved decrees by Supreme Court and by Executive Action which are in disagreement with the beliefs of most Americans.
  • We cannot have a Democratic Republic in which elected Representatives of the people do not represent the wishes of the people and in which politically appointed Supreme Court Justices overrule the will and the religious beliefs of the people.

This is why some advocate leaving these most difficult issues to the States, so that, for example, a progressive State such as California could allow progressive policies, and both liberals and conservatives could live in States which offered the policies that are most important to them.

The idea that the Federal government should not control issues that Americans struggle to agree on is one that Trump has been proposing. On these issues, local control would be local.

Think, dear progressive co-Americans—wouldn’t it be great if we could make room in America for both sides of the ethical and political spectrum?

In Trump’s language, that would be HUGE!

What is the Left So Afraid to Lose?

What are the main issues that the left to panic when considering a conservative or a Trump Presidency?

  • Abortion?
  • Gay Marriage?
  • Welfare?

The Worst Case Scenario and the Most Likely Outcome

Abortion: There is little danger of abortion becoming unavailable in the United States.

I must honestly admit that I would like it if we were forbidden by law to kill inconvenient unborn infants the same as we are not permitted by law to kill inconvenient elders or spouses or children who have already been born.
But I also realize that we live in a democracy, and so long as so many Americans support abortion, abortion is not likely to go away.

The worst case scenario for progressives is that they may have to pay for their abortion themselves, instead of making me pay for it, which is against my ethics (It’s only fair– I have to pay for my own thyroid surgery and my own childbirth!).
They may have to shift to less permissive sexual behavior and more self control—something all of us should strive for constantly.
They may have to travel to a neighboring State for their abortion.

These might not be progressive first choices, but progressives must also realize that it is not the conservative first choice to pay for other people’s children to be aborted, particularly when a disproportionate number of those victims are minority babies.
It is also not the conservative first choice to live in a country where our children cannot be doctors, pharmacists or lawyers, because our Federal laws demand everyone in those professions to participate in abortion-related activities which are against our moral beliefs.

Whose right is more important—the right of a woman to enjoy unlimited sex, including premarital sex and promiscuous sex, or the right of a tiny human being not to be killed by his/her mother?

The job of the government is not to give progressives ALL their wishes, but to balance the rights of all citizens against each other in an ethical way.

We can’t always get what we want – progessives, OR conservatives.
And Christian doctrine always requires that the needs of the weakest be considered first – and who is smaller and weaker than an unborn child?

We appeal to progressives to realize that abortion is advocated only by people who have already been born. The unborn have no voice, other than the voice of conservatives.

Gay Marriage: There is little danger of homosexuality returning to the criminal status it previously held in this country decades ago.

The worst case scenario is that homosexual couples may be limited to civil unions, which do not threaten those of us who believe that marriage is central to the health and security of children and of our future society.
Progressives must realize that their wish for homosexual marriage has some unintended consequences on the rest of us. The moment we allowed homosexual marriage, Catholic adoption agencies had to close their doors, because the federal government requires them by law to do something their faith forbids: to place adoptive children with homosexual couples.
Whose rights are more important—gays to call their union “marriage,” or orphans to get free adoption services that the Catholic Church provides?
See Gay Marriage and Homosexuality for more ways in which the redefinition of marriage hurts the rights of Christian Americans.

Progressives need to realize that their wish to have homosexual unions be called “marriage” impacts the rights of conservative citizens not to have progressive doctrine forced on their Church charitable adoption programs, on public school sex education programs, and on bakeries which prefer not to bake cakes featuring images of homosexual unions.

Welfare: There is no danger of Social Security or Medicare being cancelled by conservatives.

The ObamaCare that is being repealed is a fiasco and failure, and WILL be replaced.

The worst case scenario is that some welfare programs will be streamlined to eliminate fraud and favoritism, and that more efforts will be made to offer jobs to those who are now dependent on welfare.

Two Last Words to the Left- Anarchy and Compassion

Word One about anarchy –

Of those who want to ignore the results of the 2016 election and attempt to delegitimize President-Elect Trump, we ask – what does Anarchy accomplish?

In what ways does the use of Alinsky Tactics such as riots, property damage and butyric acid terrorism accomplish anything?
What is your desired result?

Do progressives think that the Inauguration will be cancelled?
Do they think that Hillary will be given the Presidency?
By what mechanism could that be done?
Even if that was done, is Hillary’s moral history anything to pin our hopes on?

If the progressive goal is to weaken President Trump, so that he would make less progress on the progressive action items we’ve mentioned above, do progressives not realize that a weakened President and administration will not only be weak on abortion, but also in every other area, including our economy and our safety from terrorism? Do you really want to sink the ship you are sitting in?

Word Two about compassion –

Progessives are very admirable in their stated compassion.
But consider the opposite of compassion – heartlessness.

Do progressives not realize that some of their priorities are only compassionate towards one set of people, and only compassionate on the surface?
That some of their priorities become very heartless when the needs and rights of another group of citizens is considered?
Compassion towards a pregnant woman can also be heartless cruelty towards her partially born baby?

All Americans, progressive and conservative want to be compassionate.
We pick different issues on which our compassion focuses, depending our life experience.
We can’t always get what we want, and we can’t be compassionate to all at the same time.
The wishes of citizens and prisoners are opposed to each other and need to be balanced.
The wishes of Christians and Atheists are opposed to each other and need to be balanced.
The wishes of men and women are different, and need to be balanced.
The needs of parents and of children, as well as of teachers, need to be balanced.
Isn’t it time to start realizing that we all intend good, we are all compassionate, and we all have different perspectives that need to have a chance to be tried and to be heard?

Isn’t It Time? 

The Constitution of the United States has set up a framework for this balancing exercise to take place, and has served us reasonably well for centuries.
It is time for progressives to accept a temporary correction and to allow conservatives to have a hand in the game.

Let us all root for each other, pray for each other and, above all, pray for the new President of the United State, Donald Trump.

For the anti-Trumpers, you can always pray for your enemies- prayer helps everyone concerned.

One of the best attributes of conservatives is that they do not have to resort to butyric acid, but can pray.

It’s now time to give conservatives a chance.

 

 

 

Praise Be to God! or Thank God for Black Swans!

Praise Be to God!

slide1.
First and Foremost

First and foremost, praise and thanksgiving be to God, who is all Good!

.
Our confidence in Him, and in the American majority who pray to Him and who seek truth, decency and fairness, and the God Who answers them, has been borne out.
.
Our confidence in the Constitution of the United States, which was founded on Judeo-Christian morality, is also borne out.

.
The United States is still a democracy, under God, and the system, despite abuses, still works.

Imagineagine

Imagine how even more impressive the results would have been if all voter fraud had been absent!

Thanks

We thank God that now the slaughter of abortion will not continue to be encouraged and funded by our tax dollars, nor will that slaughter of our unborn future citizens be condoned by the highest court in our land.slide1

We thank God that religious freedom for Christians, which has already been curtailed under President Obama, will not be further curtailed, but will be restored.

What’s Next?

And now we roll up our sleeves to pray for our new President and for our nation.
We pray that Donald Trump, after spending the last year talking with rural America and campaigning with his evangelical Catholic Vice-President, will undergo a conversion mirroring that of St. Paul the Evangelist.
And if he doesn’t, we emboldened religious citizens of America, and the decent men and women with whom Donald Trump has surrounded himself, will do our best to keep him on track.

We also pray that our opposition eventually realizes that this election result is a blessing, even for them.
We pray that they do not fear the monstrous false image of conservatives that their media has created for them, and we pray that our charitable behavior towards all will dispel that false image.

Slide1

 

 

 

 

 

 

A Woman Speaks Up –on Trump

Public Sins and Abuses

Last weekend’s very public dredging up of both Presidential candidates’ decades-old sins and abuses against women demands some discussion before the November 8th election.

campaign-2016-debate

And there are some things, in the present political climate, that only a woman can say.

Also, in the present climate, with the NSA cataloging each of our phone conversations and keyboard strokes, not only only a woman can speak, but only a woman with nothing to lose, or a woman who is willing to lose everything can speak out.

(Something to which I can personally attest- my blog sustains regular DoS attacks, and I have been harassed by my progressive Madisonian neighbors and “community leaders” via telephone and email.)

And So a Woman Speaks

And so I continue to speak.

This election situation can be analyzed simply and logically, provided we are willing to lay the truth bare and to say what needs to be said.

We have before us two candidates.
Both have vividly shocking and progressive backgrounds.
We should not be surprised.

Really, No Surprise

healthy-happy-and-hot2-300x225

SEX BOOKLET HANDED OUT BY GIRL SCOUTS AT THE UNITED NATIONS

In a nation that encourages promiscuity in both sexes from childhood, teaches a promiscuous version of sex ed in grammar school and through the girl scouts, and labels all proponents of traditional Judeo-Christian morality as medieval relics, there should be no surprise that we have the Presidential candidates that we now have, who epitomize these sexually irresponsible values.

And the product of all this promiscuity is a disconnect between the unbridled sexual abandon which is encouraged by the culture and the resultant disregard for the value of human life, both that of unborn infants, and that of objectified women. This disconnect, this inconsistency, has led to the situation we are confronted with today.

So we have two vividly shocking and progressive candidates, who will be digging up mud and slinging it at each other in accelerated fashion during the coming month.

The Fundamental Difference

But there is still a fundamental difference between the two candidates.

One openly promises to further de-Christianize the United States, the Constitution, to expand the abortion of unborn children, to ridicule and marginalize religious Americans and to cut Catholic and Evangelical values out of the public forum in the United States. She advocates the elimination of religious freedom, use of the Presidency to dictate Church teaching in our country, and most recently (according to Russ Feingold) has expressed the intention to violate the Constitution by banning all guns by Executive Order. This would, incidentally, disarm all opposition to her radical agenda.

reforming-christianity

The other candidate seemed primarily motivated by the financial and security dangers that we face as a nation today. But that candidate has also cut a deal with the Republican Party, agreeing to support of the Republican Party Platform. This Party Platform supports the Constitution of the United States, supports religious freedom, opposes facilitation of abortion with federal funds, opposes the redefinition of marriage, and effectively supports the preservation of the Judeo-Christian principles that are embodied in our Constitution.

This candidate has taken further steps to indicate the sincerity of his support for the Republican Platform (which is now the only major platform supporting the Constitution of the United States). He has chosen a very capable and respected conservative as a Vice President. He has promised to appoint Supreme Court Judges like Anton Scalia, who will support the Constitution. He has even given us a list of candidates to illustrate his sincerity. He has vowed to protect Christianity in the United States, and has met with serious religious leaders after getting the Republican nomination, demonstrating his continued dedication to Judeo-Christian values. He has met with the Prime Minister of Israel, has acknowledged the dangers of Radical Islamic terrorism, and acknowledges the disconnect between the illogical concept of open borders and White House fences, Clinton compound walls, Paul Ryan walls, and all of America’s locked front doors.

As a Woman and as a Catholic

catholic-womanI, as a woman and as a Catholic, have refrained from endorsing Donald Trump, primarily because I worry about the sincerity of his “conversion” to conservative values. After all, we have just lived through 8 years experiencing what promises from progressives mean. A progressive is, by definition, someone who believes that the ends justify the means. That’s a polite way of saying that a progressive is a liar and can never be trusted.

Now, in the light of Donald Trump’s sexual transgressions, I again worry about his suitability for the very honorable office of President. I appreciate the chivalry of people like Paul Ryan, who are presumably trying to protect us ladies from boorish male behavior.

But these are times of war. Even though women definitely have the precious gift of nurturing gentleness which is essential to the rearing of decent future citizens, and which it is very right for our men to protect and to cherish, women can also rise to the occasion and tolerate and bear much when the occasion calls for it.

In fairness, it also must be mentioned that the moral transgressions leveled against Hillary are even more disturbing that those leveled at Donald Trump.  The enabling of rape and threatening of rape victims is morally worse than using lewd language or groping the opposite sex.

Things to Consider

Let’s remember several things.

OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA

MISSIONARIES OF CHARITY

  • Donald Trump has not been discussing groping women dressed like Mother Teresa’s Missionaries of Charity. This, of course, opens the entire very politically incorrect discussion of “is there a degree of suggestive dress that can send signals of invitation to the opposite sex?”
  • Some women in Donald Trump’s world can be as sexually crass and opportunistic as some men can be.  There is no question that some women are as bad as some men when it comes to bartering with their sexuality for advancement in Hollywood — and in politics.
  • The left sends very mixed signals about women- women can demand equality in most areas– to be in the front lines against ISIS — Sandra Fluke can demand federal funding of her promiscuity– yet women are so delicate that someone must protect them from lewd language used privately by Donald Trump? Are we females so helpless and stupid that we cannot handle unwanted male attention without government intervention?
  • hands-tied
  • *These are the double standards that men are forbidden to mention. Logic and common sense have been criminalized by radical feminism. Men, including Donald Trump, are effectively muzzled and handicapped by a double standard, when it comes to getting tough politically on a woman as they would do on a man. Something, by the way, on which progressives rely.
  • There is a big difference between someone who, in their human weakness violates a Christian and legal principle, yet acknowledges their error, promises to correct it, and supports decency in a moral platform, and a person who discards Christian and Constitutional principles right up front and has no intention of being held accountable to them.

I am not defending Trump’s behavior, but trying to evaluate it and to compare it to that of Clinton.
I am also pointing out that much of the reported behavior has not been proven, that Trump’s accusers could be progressive liars and could even be funded by Soros. We must remember that all are innocent until proven guilty.

The Bottom Line

Finally, even if all accusations against Trump and Hillary were true, groping women like an oversexed juvenile is not in the same league of sinfulness or lawlessness as aborting babies, enabling rape, stealing from Haiti, attacking Christianity, and violating the Constitution of the United States.

One candidate supports the eradication of Judeo-Christian values as we know them.

The other candidate supports the Constitution, and the protection of Christianity in the United States.

Despite the demonstrated personal sins of both candidates, the values they promote publicly represent radically different visions for America.
The urgency of participating in the election, and the choice between candidates, is morally very clear, although it will take some courage.  Standing up for morality usually does demand courage and tough unpopular choices.

Voting on November 8th

It is my reluctant conclusion that on November 8th we will have to vote for Trump.

It will be at very least a vote against the destruction of America by professed progressives.
And there is the small chance that the conversion of Donald is genuine, and we could get a very good President.
I will not pretend that going into that booth on November 8th will not hurt.

This Woman Has Spoken

And so, this woman has spoken.

There are many like me who are laying low, usually keeping it close to the vest, but who will definitely show up on election day, after first storming heaven with prayers.
We must also support all the other conservative candidates on the ballot, on whose shoulders the future of America rests.

This election season has already supplied us with unprecedented numbers of Black Swan surprises.  We wait to see how many more game-changing events can fit into the next four weeks.
We need to remember that battles are won, and Black Swans are tamed by prayer!

May God bless and protect America!

Go to Ballotpedia’s Sample Ballot Tool today, and get ready for November 8th!

ballotpedia2-630x286

 

A Big, Big Deal

Slide1We have no guarantee that the Donald has undergone conversion, but it is comforting to learn that Donald Trump has OK’d the Republican Party Platform, which was just reviewed by the Platform committee, a Republican Platform which remains as conservative as ever on all the most important moral issues- abortion, traditional marriage, and religious freedom.

This is a BIG development, a BIG Black Swan, and something worth watching as the election progresses.
Donald seems to have acknowledged that the Republican Party is not his to hijack, and that the conservative values represented by Republicans in recent decades DO matter to the American people.  If the Donald wants the backing of the America, he needs to listen to the people.

Concomitantly, polls are showing a surge of support for Trump, in comparison with Hillary.Slide1

Not a slam-dunk for morality and the future of America yet, but definitely a hopeful and positive development.

And who seemed to be the primary news source noticing?
MSNBC!
Their article is entitled:

Trump Campaign Supports GOP Platform That Moved Further Right

Presumably MSNBC took note because they were distressed by the notion that Donald Trump just might support the conservative social moral values that built this nation, rather than furthering the progressive agenda advocated by the Obama administration.

Me?
For me, this is cause for celebration.
Black Swans continue to arrive this election season, and I continue to pray, and watch in wonderment.

 

 

Election 2016 – the Elephant in the Room

Here Come the Elephants!

Slide1Why is it that people often skirt the obvious?
Do they not see it?
Do they not wish to acknowledge it?
When people refuse to discuss the most obvious dominating and overwhelming issue at hand, we say there’s an elephant in the room.

Regarding Election 2016, there is more than one elephant in the room, and the elephants will soon run away with the election, so we may as well acknowledge them and start discussing them.

Pundits agree that this 2016 election is already different, historic, perplexing and unpredictable.  What they now need to acknowledge and to discuss are the dominant issues steering this election, or the elephants in the room.

From Swans to ElephantsSlide1

We have previously discussed unexpected transformative historical events which steer the subsequent course of history, called Black Swans.  Black Swans are unpredictable determinants of history which may or may not be possible to control.  Black Swan theory is a serious political science theory documented in the political literature and quoted by the 9/11 Commission.

In the present 2016 election, we have seen the arrival of a bevy of Black Swans – led by the transformative and unexpected success of Donald Trump’s presidential campaign (note: Black Swan events are simply unexpected, not necessarily either bad or good).

But now we switch to the elephant analogy, because numerous Black Swans have arrived, and media and pundits seem to be in denial, refusing to discuss them. Media was slow to acknowledge the Trump phenomenon, and they have yet to acknowledge several other important determinants in this election- hence the undiscussed dominating forces become the Elephants.

Slide1What are these Elephants?

So what are all these elephants?

  1. Donald Trump’s phenomenal success and the reasons for it.
  2. The reason why we had 17 (!) Republican candidates.
  3. The “Big Rule Switch” that occurred surreptitiously at the 2012 Republican Convention in Tampa, and is now controlling and complicating this 2016 election.
  4. Discussion of whether Primaries and Caucuses are a transient and meaningless experiment.
  5. Analyzing what the Super Tuesday Primary numbers really show us.
  6. Determining what new elements are influencing the outcome of this 2016 election in place of Primaries and Caucuses.

So let’s look at these Elephants one-by-one.

Elephant #1
The Reason for Donald Trump’s Phenomenal Success

The reason for Donald Trump’s phenomenal success is not anger of the American people, as pundits often postulate in exasperation, failing to find a better explanation.

The real reason for Donald Trump’s phenomenal success is the fact that the American people realize that sometimes it takes a bully to subdue a bully.  But that’s not a politically correct suggestion, so nobody mentions it.

It was very amusing to watch the progressive CNN commentators looking quite panicked on Super Tuesday while discussing Donald’s proposed autocratic tactics and contrasting them with Ted Cruz’s promotion and adherence to Constitutional guidelines.  Who would have thought that progressives could ever welcome the idea of Ted Cruz, even if by contrast to Donald Trump?!Slide1

In view of the Democrat party’s escalating Alinsky tactics in recent decades, our confidence in the ability of a controlled Christian gentleman diplomat like, say, Ben Carson, to win the culture war can be shaken.

Americans love the way Donald Trump takes no nonsense from the left and fights back. His counterpunches almost seem appropriate when dealing with practiced Alinskyites like Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.

Donald Trump not only hits back, but hits back harder– as he did going after Bill Clinton’s sexual history when Hillary accused Trump of sexism. In Donald Trump’s own words, both Clintons “had a very bad weekend”  after Donald was through with them on that issue.

“Can he/she beat Hillary?” is a common litmus test for Republican candidates in this 2016 election, and Donald Trump passes that litmus test.

That is not to say that Donald’s techniques are the best ones in the long run, particularly on the world stage, but we can all appreciate how satisfying it is to see a bully creamed.

Aside: we do need to ask ourselves whether we want to replace one bully with another, and whether a David could slay a Goliath more easily than a second Goliath could do the job, particularly with the assistance of a nation at prayer. We should remember that there is a contrast between the behavior of a Christian and that of a Progressive.

Elephant #2
Why Did We Have 17 Republican Candidates?

.

gop17

.

Why 17 Candidates?

.Because there were 17 extremely talented, qualified, and patriotic men and women who were so dismayed at the destructive Progressive agenda of the Obama Administration that they were willing to run for office, to volunteer to captain a sinking ship.

Just as Americans flocked to the polls in 2014 and are flocking to the polls now in 2016 to reverse the progressive dictates of the present Obama administration, so too candidates are flocking to run for President as if to throw themselves sacrificially on the progressive hand grenade.

Note that the vast majority of these candidates are very conservative, and if one counts primary votes for conservatives versus liberals rather than counting votes for individuals, Donald Trump’s supporters are far outnumbered by Americans supporting conservative candidates.

Note also that the Rules of the Republican Party allow for such eventualities, and provide for a brokered convention when one candidate is not able to collect the support of the Party majority.  The brokered convention then does the job of eliminating candidates through a series of votes until one candidate finally achieves a majority.

Elephant #3
The “Big Rule Switch” in Rule 40(b)

Another important Elephant that never seems to be discussed by media is the “Big Rule Switch” that occurred surreptitiously at the 2012 Republican Convention in Tampa, and is now controlling and complicating this 2016 election.

This is important: so pay attention!

The Republican Party has always regarded Primaries in an advisory capacity, particularly since some states have allowed anyone, not just Republicans to vote in a Republican primary.  In recent decades, there have been numerous illegitimate attempts by progressives to hijack the Republican Party via rule changes.

The most recent attempt involved Mitt Romney’s supporters in 2012 succeeding in introducing changes into the Rules of the Republican Party to exclude Ron Paul from participation in the Republican Convention and leaving Mitt Romney as the Presumptive Nominee.

Slide1

Under the previous rules a candidate needed a plurality (most votes) in 5 State Primaries to go to the Convention.  Two men cleared this hurdle in 2012 – Mitt Romney and Ron Paul.

Mitt Romney supporters managed in 2012 to get the bar to be set higher- suddenly, on the eve of the Republican Convention in Tampa in 2012, the rules were changed so that a candidate needed to get a majority (51% of votes) in 8 State Primaries to go on to the Convention.  This “Big Rule Switch” in Rule 40(b) excluded Ron Paul from consideration, and handed the nomination to Mitt Romney.

Today, this same “Big Rule Switch” that helped liberal Mitt Romney to get nominated is getting in the way of liberal Donald Trump.  Despite his obvious popularty and clear ability to get the plurality in 5 States, he has not been able to get the majority in 8 States (or in ANY State).  It is looking like NO CANDIDATE will clear the new “Big Rule Switch” bar, and presumably all remaining candidates will go to the convention. Then, after the first vote, it will be possible to add additional names into the running, including those who suspended their campaigns like Scott Walker, and those who never declared candidacy, like Sarah Palin.

The “Big Rule Switch” May Lead Us Into a Brokered Convention

So Mitt Romney’s supporters in 2012 created a rule change which might force us into a “brokered convention” in 2016.  This can actually be a good thing– when Republicans cannot agree on a nominee, having a run-off at the election where candidates compete again and additional candidates can be proposed is a good idea.  This eliminates the danger of nominating a candidate who is backed by less than half the Party – as seems to be the case right now with Donald Trump.

Slide1

Despite his obvious popularity, Donald Trump has not received a majority, over 50% in ANY state so far, and certainly not in 8 States, so he cannot be considered the Presumptive Nominee by any measure under the “Big Rule Switch” of 2012.

Confirming at the convention that a majority of Republicans are on board with nominating Donald would be a prudent precaution.  Abraham Lincoln and Ronald Reagan were products of a brokered convention, so this is not something to fear.

Elephant #4
Could Primaries and Caucuses Be a Transient and Meaningless Experiment?

Should the  approximately 2500 Republican Delegates who are elected to represent their States at the Republican Convention be bound to vote according to Primary and Caucus results obtained six months prior to the Convention?

According to Curly Haugland, National Committeeman from the North Dakota Republican State Committee, and member of the RNC Rules Committee, for the past 90 years RNC rules have prohibited the binding of Republican delegates.  RNC rules continue to protect the right of each delegate to The Republican National Convention to vote their personal choice on issues coming before the convention, and for the candidate of their choice to receive the party’s nomination.  Senators and Congress members have this right to use judgement, and so do Republican Party delegates.Slide1

In recent times, progressives who would like to hijack the Republican Party and the media which supports them have been pressuring Republicans to rely more and more on Primary results, rather than allowing the Convention to be the final determining factor in nomination as it has been in the past.  Some States have even passed laws requiring delegates to be bound by Primary results.  But the Rules of the Republican Party clearly indicate that no State can supersede the Rules of the Republican Party or the freedom of their delegates.

The media pressure and spin has been so great in recent decades that many Americans do not even realize that Primary votes are only advisory in nature, are not binding, that Democrats and Independents participate in Republican Primaries, and that Republican delegates also carry the responsibility to keep candidates accountable to the principles outlined in the Republican Party Platform.

Relying on Primary results might sound democratic, but  giving undue weight to the Primaries actually permits outsiders to hijack the Party more easily and allows in candidates (like Mitt Romney) who do not support the entire Republican Party platform.

Relying heavily on Primary results for nomination also gives more power to money interests, by preserving the results obtained during the Primary season, and taking away the right of elected delegates to use their judgement at the Conventions, as our Senators and Congressmen do when they vote in Washington D.C.

The idea of “binding” delegates to the results of the Primaries also prevents delegates from considering events that occur between the Primaries to the Convention in the nomination process.  What if a Republican candidate was subject to prosecution by the FBI as Democrat Hillary Clinton may be, would delegates still feel bound to vote for that candidate at the Convention?

The idea of holding Primaries and Caucuses to advise Republican delegates of their Party member’s interests was a good idea in the past.  But in this progressive world which legislates allowing Democrats to vote in Republican Primaries, and in which political hijackings occur frequently, the idea of binding has become preposterous, and even the concept of holding Primaries and Caucuses should be reevaluated.

Elephant #5
Super Tuesday Numbers – What Do They Mean?

This 2016 Super Tuesday’s Numbers show three remarkable things:

Other conclusions can be drawn from the Super Tuesday numbers as well-

1/3 Trump versus 2/3 Social Conservatives
(AKA Serious Christians)

Slide1Since Donald Trump has been averaging 35% of the Republican vote in most States, the other four candidates share the other 65%.

So what?
So here is another Elephant in the room which is never pointed out – that the other four candidates, Cruz, Rubio, Kasich and Carson, are all “social conservatives” (like me).

What does this mean?
Being “social conservatives” means that they uphold certain moral values – opposing abortion, preserving traditional marriage, and defending religious liberty in the United States. These are, incidentally, fundamental Christian values, or “moral” values.
This means that 65% of voters in Republican Primaries, and that includes some Independents and Democrats, vote “social conservative,” and include morality in their conservatism, not just fiscal conservatism.

It is not surprising that Republican voters and most Republican candidates support “social conservative values” since the Republican Party Platform supports “social conservative” values.

This observation should make for some interesting sorting of votes and delegates at the Republican Convention, and Donald Trump could struggle to reach his desired 51% for nomination. As candidates drop out, social conservative voters will probably go to another social conservative, and not to Donald Trump.

So if you tabulate the Super Tuesday numbers as Trump (“economy rules!”) versus Social Conservatives (“morality rules!”), we could be in for a very interesting convention.  We really could end up electing a poorly known morally upstanding person like Abraham Lincoln or Ronald Reagan– not only from the original 17 candidates, but from other sources as well.  Some have even suggested that Sarah Palin is not out of the question.

 

Last But Not Least- Elephant #6
If This Election Breaks With the Past, What Are the New Rules and the New Determinants for this Election?

The previous 5 issues affecting this 2016 Election indicate that we are breaking new ground here.
We can speculate on who may try what, and what the outcome will ultimately be.
But as mentioned initially, Black Swans are never predictable, and rarely controllable, except through prayer.

Both sides, Republican Progressives and Republican Conservatives, as well as those Democrats who are trying to hijack the Republican Party (from whose ranks Donald Trump has not been entirely out ruled!) may try many of the above approaches to steer things their own way-

 

What Should We Do?

What should we do?Church and State
Me?
I plan to sit back, watch, pray, participate in some conservative activism, and vote.
You should too.
See my election guide from 2014- the same rules still apply- vote for the most moral candidate, pro-life topping the list, and pray.

I truly believe that we are watching the moral reawakening of America, which is guided by an interaction between Church and State – from the bottom up, not religion imposed from above.  I am very excited about Christians having the chance to reclaim our Judeo-Christian roots and our Constitution, and believe that we are now watching this process, emboldened by our delightful Mr. Trump.  The morality that will result will be a synthesis of what we all believe and what we agree on. Like the Constitution, it will be encompassed democratically, grass roots up, in our laws.

What Should We Expect?

CONVERSION OF ST. DONALD?

CONVERSION OF ST. DONALD?

Should we expect more surprises along the way?
Absolutely.

Who knows, with the surprising nature of Black Swans, Donald Trump could even be our St. Paul!
(Although I am not holding my breath.)

God Bless America, and God Bless Our Candidates!
Any one of the Republican contenders will be an improvement over the Progressive Agenda of the last eight years.

My favorite?
Dr. Ben Carson.
Yes, I know he just announced that he “sees no political path forward” after Super Tuesday’s results.

But re-entry through a brokered convention would not be a political path forward.
Could the good doctor be avoiding the political, high-spending, favor-exchanging world of the Primaries, and be planning to step into the Convention directly and apolitically, where the market of ideas is tested by delegates who uphold the Republican Party Platform?

Time will tell.
That would be one elegant and unexpected possible result.
When you interconnect Church and State, many new options become possible for the American people, with God in their corner.

The Biggest Issue of All

God is a best example of the elephants in the room of American politics- a very large, important and crucial issue that everyone is acutely aware of, but nobody wants to talk about.
The Freedom of Religion Foundation has tried to ensure that.
But we won’t count God as an Elephant; too disrespectful.
However, if you count God in, you will have a smoother ride.
In politics, and everywhere else.

 

Priorities?

No comments

Priorities

XXX
It is moving to see a President shed tears over loss of Life, as President Obama did during the announcement of his Executive Action on gun control two days ago.

.
But it is baffling to consider that the death of 26 innocent people at Newtown can move President Barack Obama to tears, while the death of over 57 MILLION innocent unborn babies does not appear to move him in the least.

.

Slide1

xxx

Just HOW Pro-Abortion is President Obama?

President Obama is the most radically pro-abortion President we have ever seen.

Ironically, this is a man who, as the black child of single mother,  would himself have faced a more than 54% probability of abortion, if abortion had been legal at the time of his birth.yournotkeepingitareyou_2012-02-13-brief-cartoon

  • President Obama is so pro-abortion that he voted three times against Born Alive Infant Protection Acts that would require medical care for a baby who survives an abortion.
    President Obama supports the killing of a baby born accidentally in a botched full 9-month term partial-birth abortion.
  • President Obama is so pro-abortion that he has voiced support for the abortion of his own grandchildren.
  • President Obama is so pro-abortion that through ObamaCare, he has forced mandates on religious employers, forcing the employers to provide abortifacient drugs to their employees, against their own religious beliefs.  He has pursued this prioritization of abortion in health care after initially promising his pro-life Democrat colleagues (Stupak and his 11) that ObamaCare would not include abortion.
  • President Obama even has a  “Science Czar,” John Holdren, who has advocated forced abortion and forced sterilization  in the United States to control population.

So we now have a President who has forced abortion onto America, against the wishes of 2/3 of the American population, by deception and through lies.

Do we plan to do something about this as voters in 2016?

Can the aggressive abortion agenda and the culture of deception in our government be changed?
Can we do something about this as voters in 2016?
-Stay tuned, for upcoming articles on the 2016 election, on candidates, and on America’s future options.

See also previous articles on related topics:

The Importance of Babies…

  • The Baby – an article on the importance of the baby, written on my son’s birthday, 3 years ago today. Happy Birthday, Chris!
  • Dear Baby – a letter written our first grandbaby before she was born
  • Abortion – a Much Bigger Deal Than You Think – an article for those who think abortion is not a big deal.
  • The Contrast – an article contrasting Madison’s Pro-Life community with Madison’s Pro-Choicers, and featuring the behavior of Annie Laurie Gaylor, Dan Barker, and the Freedom From Religion crowd at a Catholic Pro-Life event.
  • Black Death in America – on the importance of showing concern for all black deaths.

Obama: "For Independence Day, you will lose your independence"

Obama Administration Forcing Abortion…

xxx
Obama Administration Subverting Religious Freedom…"Baracchio" turning into a donkey as "Timothy Cricket" looks on, appalled.  In the popular children's tale of Pinocchio, Pinocchio fell in with a bad crowd of pleasure-seeking boys.  This resulted in their turning into donkeys who would be enslaved by a coachman.  Pinocchio's conscience, represented by Jiminy Cricket (played here by Archbishop Timothy Dolan) saves Pinocchio from his bad judgement, and the tale ends happily.

 Elections 2016:

 

Slide1

Slide1Click Here: Abortion Killed 19 Times as Many Blacks as Murder

Click Here: 11% of US Black Population Has Been Killed By Abortion since 1990

Click Here: 25% of US Black Population Has Been Killed by Abortion Since 1973

Black Death GraphSee Also: Promiscuity Education?
And: There’s An Elephant in the Room

Teardrop

All Posts