Syte Reitz

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

Browsing Posts tagged Black Swans

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

 

 

Don’t Count Chickens When Deluged with Hatching Black Swans!

and

A Note To Republican Delegates

swans-733723605Counting chickens: This phrase comes from the saying “Don’t count your chickens before they’re hatched!” which means do not conclude that you have something before you actually have it in hand.

Black swans: This is a political science concept based on the fact that most swans are white, and black swans were thought not to exist at all.  In actual fact, black swans do exist, but are very, very rare.  The political phrase refers to Black Swan events as very rare events that are completely unexpected, yet they transform history as we know it and make history completely unpredictable.

Don’t Count Chickens!

So today, in the very unpredictable political climate that seems to change direction radically by the day during this 2016 Slide1Presidential election, we should not be concluding or forecasting anything at all until all the rare, unpredictable events have finished arriving.  We should not count chickens when we are in the midst of a cygnet (baby swan) hatching explosion!

So what should we do? Nothing?

What should we do faced with one political shocker after another? Nothing?
No, we can soak in events, analyze them logically, and see if they fit into a pattern or frame of reference that we can make sense of.
You probably say- good luck doing that, analyzing or understanding anything in the present political climate!
By definition, black swan events cannot be anticipated, or prepared for.
.
Yes. Good luck doing the impossible!
That is, unless you remember to include the interconnection of Church and State, a politically incorrect and taboo topic which we have been exploring on this website in recent years.  A concept that actually provides the key to understanding – and to steering or taming– the seemingly out-of-control events we are witnessing today.

Slide1Surprising and Stunning Events

Events shaping this presidential election political season have certainly surprised and stunned us all from the very start.

Who expected 17 Republican candidates? Who expected Donald Trump’s candidacy? Who expected socialist Bernie’s challenge of Hillary to amount to more than a hill of beans? Who expected Trump’s phenomenal success and his following? And who expected Cruz to drop out of the race as and when he did?

Here we might add the observation that Cruz’s exit speech on May 2nd at the conclusion of the Indiana Primary sounded more like a rallying speech, and opened the possibility, at least in my mind, that the “suspension” of Cruz’s campaign was not so much the waving of a white flag as a shift to a different, clandestine game plan. There is, after  all, more than one clandestine war going on behind the scenes, not controlled by and not on the radar of those of us who devote only 15 minutes every 4 years to entering a voting booth.  (More on the clandestine wars later.)

Black Swan Political Theory

The collection of unexpected, unprecedented events we have witnessed in the primary season so far this year indicate an outcome that could never have previously been imagined, and is presently hard to imagine. It is a classic example of a Black Swan political event.

Slide3And not only are we witnessing a Black Swan event in this election, but we have scores of Black Swan events occurring one after another.  They are stunning political professionals and pundits, and violating all laws of political probability!

What Can We Learn from Black Swan Theory Today?

So let us sit back and make some stabs at analyzing what is going on, what the future might hold, and whether we are powerless pawns in the unfolding of history, or whether we have at our disposal some secret weapons that could steer events.  (Via one of my favorite topics, the Interconnection between Church and State!)

When things seem dismal and all seems lost (incidentally, this is precisely the moment in time that most of us fall to our knees in prayer), some pretty remarkable things begin to happen.  We begin to include faith and God in our politics, and the Goliaths begin to fall.  It’s described in the Bible (David and Goliath), and it’s happened in recent history – including the recent collapse of the Soviet Union.  When people start praying and putting ethics first, that’s when we get to see the  successful and productive Interconnection of Church and State.

Religion is powerful, and the Interconnection of Church and State is powerful. There is a reason why despots, and why many in our present government and culture (also despots!), try so hard to eliminate God from public life.  With God included, despots have no chance, and the people win.

Church and State

So Where Are We Right Now?
Trump versus Hillary?

.

If you believe much of the media,  it’s going to be Trump versus Hillary, isn’t it?

Not quite so simple.
It very well may be Trump versus Hillary, but there are many reasons why it might not be.

.

The Secret War Most of Us Missed in 2012

Slide2In 2012, it really looked like it would be Mitt Romney versus Obama. But those who followed this closely could see there was a clandestine war for delegates going on and Mitt Romney only made it by the skin of his (very polished) teeth.

Mitt Romney and Ron Paul had BOTH satisfied the conditions for entering the convention (plurality in 5 States) in 2012, and since delegates were only thought to be bound on the first vote, Ron Paul supporters were working on getting delegates to exercise their freedom of conscience. Delegates could prevent Romney’s nomination in the first vote of the Tampa 2012 Convention by abstaining, and thus they could trigger a brokered convention.  This would give Ron Paul a chance to compete for the nomination, and would allow the introduction of additional candidates.

Slide126-e1346270884172Yes, in 2012, we were headed for a brokered convention – but it turns out that Mitt Romney had had enough clandestine foresight to seed the Republican Rules Committee with delegates who were loyal to himself ahead of the convention — delegates who then changed Rule 40(b) on the eve of the Convention in such a way as to exclude Ron Paul, and to allow only Mitt Romney into the Convention.  A brokered convention was avoided, and Mitt Romney got the nomination.

But Ron Paul came very close to winning a clandestine war against Mitt Romney, something that most Americans did not know then, and do not know to this day.

And we might add that this was not a gentleman’s war, but a dirty battle, during which Over 400 Republican delegates filed a Federal lawsuit against the Republican National Committee and Reince Priebus the Chairman, alleging that violence and intimidation were used against delegates in an effort to control how they voted.  These delegates refused to be bound and insisted on their right to vote their conscience in 2012. Today, it has been clarified that delegates do indeed, have the right to vote their conscience in all votes at the Convention. As it turns out, binding is not binding!

Note also, that it’s the progressives in the Republican Party (yes, there are some!) who are being accused of violence and intimidation– NOT the conservatives!

Are We in the Midst of More Clandestine Battles?

So, where are we today?
Today, we are on the brink of another brokered convention.
The same cultural war is raging, we have the same division in the nation and in both parties, and the same clandestine political struggles are occurring behind the scenes.
Not to mention criminal investigations that may impact the presidential race.

This time, the struggles have intensified, the media has publicized them, and more Americans know about the situation.
So make no mistake, there are plenty of clandestine battles going on, and there is no guarantee yet that it’s Trump versus Hillary.

Threats to HillarySlide2

Because our primary focus here is on the Republican nomination, we raise only briefly the possibility that Hillary Clinton may be charged with criminal charges and may soon be disqualified from candidacy for President.  Charges against Hillary Clinton include tampering with and destruction of documents, and espionage.  The results of FBI email investigations and Bengazi investigation results (five House committees, two Senate committees and a bipartisan Select Committee on Benghazi) could lead to FBI indictment and serious federal charges against Hillary Clinton.  Needless to say, such charges would remove Hillary from any race for Presidency.  Unless, of course, Obama has the gall to issue a pardon.

In the event that Hillary is disqualified from the race on legal grounds, more black swans will arrive- are we to consider a socialist, possibly communist Presidential candidate in the United States?  Will there be attempts to introduce Joe Biden?  Someone else?

Threats to Donald

Back to Republicans – Donald Trump has just won 1237 estimated delegates, due to Cruz’s suspension of his campaign.  But that number is just that- ESTIMATED.
Nobody can know the true number until the first vote occurs at the Republican Convention in Cleveland in July.

Slide1For a while it seemed like NO candidate would clear the Rule 40(b) bar that Mitt Romney changed in 2012, which now requires a candidate to clear a majority (51%) in 8 States to enter the convention – a very difficult thing to do, and something that Donald Trump was in doubt of accomplishing before Ted Cruz’s unexpected suspension of his campaign.
Plans were even under way in the Republican Party to change Rule 40(b) on the eve of the Convention, so that Republicans would not have ZERO candidates meeting the requirements to enter the Convention.  The proposed change would have admitted all  candidates who “won” at least one delegate in the primaries (that would be about half of the original 17 candidates) to enter the convention for the first vote.

So now, with Cruz’s suspension it’s looking like Trump has cleared Rule 40(b), and the 1237 estimate, and will be the only candidate estimated to qualify for nomination.

Slide1

Since the outset, 2/3 of Republicans voted for “Social Conservatives” (i.e. Judeo-Christian morality), while the more liberal Trump was only able to summon up 1/3 of the vote. Bankrupting your opposition may not be the best way to represent the will of the people!

However, Trump’s victories so far have been in the primary arena, an arena that is primarily money-driven, and not driven by the ideology of Republican voters. It is an arena which is tainted by the Democrat-driven legislation which allows non-Republicans to vote in Republican primaries in 24 States.  It is NOT an arena that represents  Republican voters, Republican ideology, or the Republican Platform.

It is not an accident that the Rules of the Republican Party provide delegates at the Convention a veto power over the Primaries. Delegates are active Republicans in 50 States and territories, are not from Washington, and they represent American citizens who are Republican better than the primaries now do. The delegates just may not reproduce the results of the Primaries.Slide2

What happens if the delegates actually represent the affiliation of American Republicans, who seem to lean conservative by 2/3, instead of representing the Primaries, in which Donald Trump collected his victories after bankrupting his 16 more conservative opponents?

Complicating the Already Complicated Mess

To make matters even less certain than usual, it has become clear this year that delegates are not bound by primary results, and can “change” their votes.  They are even free to vote their conscience in the first vote of the convention, and do not have to feel “bound” by the primary/caucus results. This information has just surfaced in this primary election season.  So Donald Trump is in serious danger of not getting his estimated 1237 votes in the first ballot of the convention, despite feeling that he has 1237 estimated votes based on Primary results!
Slide1

In spite of Democrat and media efforts to portray this as a massive violation of democracy, it has become clear that delegates who ignore primary results would actually be restoring democracy, and would actually be protecting the right of the Republican Party to nominate it’s own conservative candidate– rather than handing that privilege to their opponent, the Democrat Party, who has surreptitiously succeeded in passing “binding” legislation in 24 States in recent decades.

These recent Democrat efforts to steer the Republican nomination have been trumped (no, not by Trump) by the Rules of the National Republican Party, a careful reading of which makes it clear that the rights of Republicans to nominate their own Republican candidate have been preserved, despite Democrat attempts to hijack their process.Slide1

Rogue Delegates or Patriots?

So this year, Republican delegates have finally been made aware of the fact that they hold the legitimate and legal power to restore the conservative face of the Republican Party to match it’s conservative platform.  They do not have to bend to legislation passed by Democrats in 24 States, who were trying to subvert the functioning of their opponent Republican party.
The Rules of the Republican Party have specifically exempted their delegates from such interference by State legislation.

So guess what?
Thousands of Republican delegates will be deciding this July  where to place their allegiance- to the Republican Party Platform, or to primary results (which were massively tainted by the participation of non-Republican progressives, even by progressives bussed in from neighboring States– in the 2016 New Hampshire primary— to hijack the Republican nomination).

Worth repeating: For the first time, delegates are highly likely to go rogue, on a massive scale.  And they’re not Republican “establishment” cronies.  They’re more likely very conservative patriots.

More Layers of Chaos

Here Come the SwansNeedless to say, if the delegates Donald Trump thinks he has won (because of legislation in 24 States that “binds” delegate votes), if those 1237 delegates instead follow their own conscience, because they just learned that they are exempt from this legislation which was pushed through by Democrats in 24 States, more chaos will result.

The delegates might either abstain, depriving Donald Trump of 51% and forcing a second vote, in which additional candidates can be proposed, or delegates might vote for someone other than Trump (depending on who is on the ballot, which depends on what rules have been changed by Rules Committee the week before!!!).
As you can plainly see, massive numbers of Black Swans may be arriving to stun us, and there is little way of predicting which way it will go.

Particularly for us normal people who don’t have any of the pertinent clandestine details, and who are limited by the very limited and biased information offered to us by the press.

The Underground WarSlide1

The players battling for control in this underground war which may or may not succeed in ousting Donald are not necessarily  RINO “establishment” delegates who want Mitt Romney to be President (although there will be some of those, too).
This is a multi-faceted war with an outcome impossible to steer, except by prayer and adherence to Judeo-Christian ethical principles.  (That’s the only way we can tame or steer Black Swans.)

The players will include:

  • Trump & his associates
  • Conservative Republicans who have been felt betrayed by the actions of increasingly progressive Republican leaders since the 2014 elections
  • RINO “establishment” members who want to maintain the status quo, even if it means handing the election to Hillary. Incidentally, Donald Tump’s lumping of all Donald opposition under a common umbrella of “establishment” is vey misleading.   In actual fact, Donald is lumping two warring factions together – conservatives and RINOS – who are war with each other, and who each have very different reasons for opposing Donald Trump.
  • Evangelical and Catholic citizens who are fighting to maintain Judeo-Christian values (religious liberty, pro-life and traditional marriage) in the Republican Platform
  • Ted Cruz, who could be continuing an unpublicized yet legitimate behind the scenes effort to win delegates ideologically, as he did in Colorado and in North Dakota.
  • The “Never Trump” group, which may overlap with some of the other groups mentioned.
  • Tea Party Members who emphasize conservative economy over conservative ethical “social” values
  • Libertarians, who often line up with Republicans in areas where their interests overlap. This year, some are even discussing Libertarian success as a third party, feeling they have a better than usual chance because so many voters want simply “not Hillary” and “not Trump” this year.
  • Progressive infiltrators of the Republican Party who have been trying to steer left for quite some time.
  • Mitt Romney, who has been rumored to be thinking of an Independent candidacy.  Mitt Romney?  No longer a Republican?  Now an Independent?
  • Will there be two Independent candidates? A Libertarian and Mitt Romney?
  • Or even a third Independent candidate? Bernie Sanders, who has been encouraged by Donald Trump to run as an Independent.
  • …  there may be other factions that have not occurred to me, naive and out of the loop in politics as I am.
  • And, most important, there is a invisible player, God.  And God has a wicked sense of humor.
    I am watching political developments with great anticipation, as America continues to pray.

FeaturedImage-battlefield-heroesThe battlefields will include:

  • Media- press, social, advertising
  • Wooing delegates behind the scenes- both honest ideological wooing and potential dishonest manipulation and bribery.
  • Alteration of the Rules of the Republican Party by the Rules Committee at the eve of the Convention.
  • Alteration of the Platform of the Republican Party in the Platform Committee at the eve of the Convention
  • … numerous other mechanisms that this politically naive citizen struggles to imagine
  • And, most important, the hearts, souls, prayers and churches of America, where good people continue to pray for a restoration of Judeo-Christian morality to American government.

 

Possible Outcomes

The Outcome WILL Be a Black Swan

Davids can slay Goliaths

Davids can slay Goliaths

The outcome of this Presidential election season is likely to be a Black Swan not possible to predict at this point in time. We should not place too much confidence in the outcome being Donald or Hillary.

A Good Outcome Is Quite Possible

We should remember that Black Swans, although unpredictable, can be good – like the collapse of the Soviet Union without war in 1991.

We could, if we play our cards right (actually, if we talk to God right), end up with a restoration of Judeo-Christian values and an Abraham Lincoln or Ronald Reagan emerging as our next President. That person could even be Donald Trump, provided his “conversion” to conservatism is legit.  And the conversion would have to be in all areas, particularly the ethical ones.

Violence May Be Involved

The outcome of this Presidential election season could include violence at conventions – both Republican and Democrat.Slide1
Donald Trump has forecast, even before he became the lone candidate following Ted Cruz’s withdrawal, and before Trump had the Mitt Romney-2012 rule-required majority in 8 States (which only a lone candidate could possibly acquire), Trump (very unprofessionally and very undemocratically) has forecast riots if he is not elected the Republican nominee on the first Convention vote.  Is Donald Trump considering encouraging the use of  Alinsky tactics, previously employed primarily by progressives?

There are reports of violence instigated by paid professional protesters at some recent Trump campaign events- protesters sent by Clinton and Soros. Several protesters admitted answering a Craig’s list ad paying $16.00 an hour for protesters.

There are even reports of Democrat on Democrat violence – between Bernie and Hillary supporters.   At the Nevada Democrat State Convention, Senator Boxer claimed that Bernie supporters made her fear for her life.

Even conservatives, albeit far right conservatives, have now made the mistake of hinting at the use of violence.  Glen Beck was just suspended from his show for comments hinting at the assassination of a President Trump in the event that he is elected and becomes dictatorial, following the Presidential present precedent.

Slide1Why All This Violence?

People most often turn to violence when they feel cornered.

The left has been fighting an uphill battle against Judeo-Christian morality and has been using violent and crooked Alinsky tactics now for years.

But now more and more “Independents” are turning to violence as a solution to our increasing problems.
This may explain the wide support now seen for Donald Trump’s aggressive rhetoric- people seem to think that it takes a bully (Trump) to subdue a bully (Obama).

But that attitude is very short-sighted, and I am personally hoping that Trump’s rhetoric is theatrical, not literal.
It is hard to say whether Donald Trump is a patriot or just another bully.
Introducing bully #2 into the White House could be very dangerous, and could boomerang in our faces, as do most violations of Judeo-Christian ethics.
Slide1

We really do need to figure out exactly what page Mr. Trump is on.  Is he a legitimate convert to conservatism and the solution to America’s problems, is he a naive liberal who thinks he can win the Presidency by adopting a couple of conservative positions and hijacking the Republican Party, or is he actually a liberal plant, an infiltrator,  who is about to blow the Republican Party apart?
This blogger truly has NO idea. (Hence the increased need for prayer and for more GOOD Black Swans.)

Violence Not Too Surprising From Alinskyite Progressives- But Will Trump Encourage Joining In?

The practice of  Alinsky tactics  by Democrats is not too surprising, considering Obama and Hillary were students (and teachers!) of Alinsky tactics. These aggressive tactics were well illustrated during the circus staged by Democrat union protesters in Madison Wisconsin, to fight Governor Scott Walker’s financial reforms in 2011. I witnessed and experienced those “non-violent” tactics myself, at the hands of Madison, Wisconsin progressives.

But the possibility of violence and Alinsky tactics among Republicans is truly disturbing. So far, it’s only talk, and actual disruptions have been limited to progressive and paid “activists.”

Slide1To Win A Battle, We Must Be Prepared to Engage in It

A positive outcome of this Presidential election, with a victory for Judeo-Christian values, is still possible.   But such an outcome  will definitely require courageous action and fervent prayer on the part of conservatives.
The outcome will not be favorable if we do not engage in the battle and stick to our guns.
Goliath would never have been slain if David had not stepped up to the challenge.
The Soviet Union would never have collapsed if Ronald Reagan, Polish Solidarity and Pope John Paul II had run away from the problem or cowered.

We will be facing some Alinksyites and some primitive mobs.
But with God in our corner, we will not be facing them alone.

2016 – a Pivotal Election

This election represents a very major battle with the potential to reclaim the soul and the morality of America.
It may be the pivotal battle that determines whether America is Great again, or whether America falls into decline and ethical collapse.  A nation that kills it’s children at the rate of 1 million per year cannot thrive- either morally, or economically.Slide1

And making America Great Again is not a reference to Trump- on whom the jury is still out.

America will not be made great solely through economic strategy.
America will be made great by returning to the Judeo-Christian values on which America was established.

Whether America returns to those founding values, and whether that return is headed by a converted St. Donald (analogy to St. Paul the Evangelist) or by a different ethical conservative leader, remains to be seen.

In 1571, Christian Europe was under threat of Muslim domination, and prayer of the Rosary to Our Lord, through the intercession of his Mother of Good Counsel, led to a very surprising (Black Swan) victory  for Christian forces against terrific odds.

Christian Europe was saved from annihilation.
.xx
The inscription on the image of Our Lady of Good Counsel reads “Mater Bonii Consilii, Ora Pro Nobis Jesum Fillium Tuum,” or “Mother of Good Counsel, Pray for Us to Jesus your Son.”
You don’t have to be Catholic to pray the Rosary, a meditative prayer on the Life of Our Lord.
Praying the Rosary today is as pertinent and as effective as it was in 1571.

One Way to Win

One possible mechanism for a positive outcome could include delegates using their freedom to pressure Donald Trump into supporting the present Republican Platform.
Donald Trump is just beginning to back up his claim of conversion to conservatism with action- with the announcement of his Supreme Court picks.
Let’s hope he continues by supporting other important ethical issues, like pro-life, religious freedom and traditional marriage.

Can We Dispense With the Moral Issues?

Some think that we can dispense with the “social” or “moral” issues and focus on the economic.
Rush Limbaugh has actually suggested that the Republican platform is optional or dispensable.  This implies that the mission statement describing what the Republican Party represents and has represented for decades, and which assures voters of exactly what they are voting for, need not be followed.  It’s dispensable, said Rush Limbaugh.  Nobody follows the platform any more.  Really?  How did Mitt Romney fare in the 2012 election when he failed to follow the platform?  How did that work out for Mitt and for the entire Republican Party?  Has Rush Limbaugh now abandoned conservative values?

When a conservative icon like Rush Limbaugh begins to waffle on conservative principles we can be sure that events have become truly baffling.  They are only baffling, however, when someone gets scared by all the black swans that have been arriving.  Rush needs a reminder on the role of Black Swans in history and their steerability via  some serious prayer and some serious adherence to Judeo-Christian ethical principles, no matter what!

Slide1Can’t We Just Compromise?

Some suggest that a middle of the road outcome, in which Donald Trump, with the appointment of a relatively liberal Vice President, possibly even a Democrat, would “solve” the political tug-of-war that has existed for decades now between the right and the left.

This national ideological split, characterized by tug-of-war elections which are won by the slimmest of margins, has produced almost random election outcomes in recent years.

The formation of a “hybrid” merger, a middle-of-the-road party through a mechanism involving Donald Trump could serve the purpose of eliminating the established political system and the current players who have much invested in continuation of the system.  The resulting elimination of lobbyists, entrenched politicians and self-interested parties, often using political correctness to force their agendas, would be replaced by a more rational system, more accountable to the electorate.

Although this possibility is theoretically attractive and is aimed at producing policies that benefit all Americans, it does not address the resolution of some major problems, for which compromise does not seem possible.

A wagon pulled in two directions simultaneously by two different horses gets nowhere.

Where Compromise May Not Be PossibleSlide1

There are many areas in which it is not possible to compromise, in which one side must win:

  • It is not possible to take both roads when you reach a fork.
  • 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.

Choices Must and Will be Made

choicesChoices must be made, and laws must be enforced.
This election is likely to determine whether the United States steers right or steers left.
We’ve been waffling too long and getting nowhere.
Actually, no.  We have been very rapidly drifting left- not by the will of the people, but by manipulation by the Presidency and by the Supreme Court.  And Congress is NOT doing their job of checking those out-of-control branches of government.

There is no way to predict or to influence the outcome of this very complex situation except through sticking to our ethics, praying, and watching the Black Swans as they arrive.

Personally, I think it’s high time somebody corrected the damage done by the Obama administration, which is ramping up affronts to morality and to religious freedom by the day.
There is a major spiritual battle going on, and we need to engage in it.

Citizens must support the most ethically conservative candidates and must vote.
Delegates must follow their consciences and make sure that the candidate elected, whether it is Donald Trump or not, sticks to the Judeo-Christian ethics outlined in the present Republican Platform.

May God Bless and Help America!

 

 

See also:

-which explains why the brokered convention has been totally misrepresented by media and by campaigns, and why the brokered convention could be the Black Swan that saves America, as it has done in the past- with the election of Abraham Lincoln and of Ronald Reagan.

-an explanation of why delegates having the power to reverse primary results may not be a ditching of democracy at all, but the reverse- a protection, or check and balance built into the system against infiltration of primaries by the opposition or by monied interests.  Also why “rogue” delegates may not represent the Republican “establishment” at all, but may represent the reclaiming of the soul of the Republican Party.

– which reflects the conservative leanings of most of America.

Aside: Wisconsin Primary results reflect the conservative will of America, which could dominate the Presidential election if Conventions are allowed to play their intended role of checking the money-driven Primary results, in which 16 (mostly conservative) Republican candidates were out-maneuvered financially by Donald Trump, but still represent the will of two thirds of America.

-which describes why Wisconsin is a great model for the whole United States, our war between right and left, and why Wisconsin offers successful solutions for all of America.

  • Election Infiltration and Here Comes Paul Revere!

    -which discusses the conflict between Primaries and Convention, between State legislation and RNC Rules, and the recent legal developments that give Republican delegates complete freedom to “trump” Primary results – and why they might not be traitors, but patriots if they do so.

-which discusses the politically awkward questions that are being evaded, yet which are steering this Republican primary season.

 

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.

 

Elections 2016 (and 2014)

or

Taming the Black Swan

or

Selling Out vs Sticking to Principles

 

Back to Politics

Despite the fact that this blog was originally established for the purpose of discussing and defending traditional ethics and morality in our modern culture, we keep digressing into politics.

Who's in Charge?This may be fitting, since what is politics, after all, if not the interaction of human beings on an organized group level; an interaction that certainly ought to be subject to the same rules of morality and decency that apply to individual human interactions?

And since what goes around comes around applies to our personal lives, guess what?  What goes around comes around applies to politics as well.Church and State  (The expression means that bad things you do come back to bite you later, and the good things you do come back to reward you later.)

Readers Demand Political Philosophy

Readers seem to know this, and as elections approach, they keep returning to those old articles here which discuss political philosophy, which explore the crucial interconnection between morality and the State (i.e., interconnection between Church and State).

Such discussions are not commonly available in the public arena in the present political atmosphere, which is so often controlled by fear of political bullies like the Freedom From Religion Foundation and their ilk, who attempt to eradicate all mention of right and wrong from the public forum. These bullies who attack religion are effectively advocating the absence of all morality from government, from law, and from public life.

So after a hiatus following the ethically dubious 2012 Presidential election in which Barack Obama purchased votes by bribery with Obama-phones and other lollipops, and in which conservatives tossed the vote by staying home in disgust, this blogger returns again to discussion of politics, of coming elections, and of election strategies for Elections 2016.

Why the Hiatus?

Slide1The results of the 2012 Presidential election made clear several important facts, which required some time to resolve:

  • The people had spoken, and the Obama administration now had four more years to deliver on its campaign promises.  The United States is, after all, a democracy.  The fair loser steps aside gracefully and lets the wheels of democracy turn.
  • Those people who were foolish enough to vote for Obama needed to experience more Obama consequences, to experience a rise in personal misery index, before they could be persuaded to vote for someone more responsible who does not promise lollipops and who does not lie.  And 2013/14 certainly provided ample rise in personal misery index generated by government; now even Democrats are calling Obama incompetent and are distancing themselves from him before the 2014 elections.  Meanwhile, we conservatives take an imposed rest and simply watch the inevitable  and painful implosion. We don’t enjoy it any more than parents enjoy watching their teens making painful mistakes.
    What goes around comes around. But it takes time.  We all hurt, we all suffer, but nothing can be done to circumvent some suffering in this life.
  • The Republican establishment, which was foolish enough to cheat in order to change Republican convention rules so they could nominate their favorite Compromise Candidate, Mitt Romney, needed to figure out that there is a limit to the degree of compromise their conservative supporters will tolerate before they rebel.  There was great surprise and shock in November 2012, when 4 million registered Republicans failed to come to the polls, handing the election to Barack Obama.

Jumping into PoliticsSo now two years have passed, and we have experienced some of the consequences of the 2012 election.  We have experienced more of Obama’s administration, ObamaCare failures, VA scandals, IRS scandals, implosion of Iraq, border crises, and numerous other debacles.  Establishment Republicans have experienced 4 million registered Republicans staying home from the polls, and losing the election.
During all of which, Nero fiddled as Rome burned.
Political puzzle pieces have been falling into place.
We need to redefine how we approach politics. 

So now it’s time to end the hiatus and time to address the future.
Back into politics!

Confusion Reigns

First observation on returning to politics in 2014: confusion reigns.

Democrats are suffering from the deluge of scandals befalling President Obama as the fruits of his erroneous policies and his lies mature. Today, 58% of Americans, including 30% of Democrats, say that the Obama administration is incompetent at managing the government.  Now, even New York Times correspondents are saying that the Obama administration’s ebola response is another example of Obama not running a competent governmentLiberals have begun to acknowledge Obama’s incompetence.  

Republicans are suffering from highly disfunctional infighting, seemingly incapable of choosing between continuing moral compromise with the opposition, and their fear of unpopularity if they choose responsible conservative policy.

000
Slide2

Support is at an all-time low for both parties, and nobody seems to know how to attract the independent voters from the middle.
Only 24% of American voters identify as Republicans, 31% as Democrats, and a whopping 43% identify as Independents.

This bears repeating: a whopping 43% of Americans identify as Independents!
There are way more independents than Democrats.
There are way more independents than Republicans.

THE LEADING POLITICAL FACTION IN THE UNITED STATES TODAY IS INDEPENDENT.

What does it mean to be Independent?
Being Independent means that nobody tells these voters what to think; they think for themselves, and they owe allegiance to neither party.
If Independents could only agree on a candidate, there would be a landslide election and an Independent victory!

Potential Strategies

How can the two major parties recruit from the 43% of  uncommitted electorate in the middle?
With more lollipops and promises?
With an offer of responsible tough government appealing to those who have suffered enough in this economy?
Will a third party succeed in stealing the election?
Is the time ripe, with broadening disgust with both major parties, for the introduction of a third party?
Slide1

Birth of the Republican Party

Looking at history, the founding of the present Republican party occurred under similar conditions, and resulted in the election of Abraham Lincoln to the Presidency.

640px-Abraham_Lincoln_November_1863The Whigs seemed incapable of coping with national crisis over slavery, so the Republican Party was established (in Wisconsin!) with the primary goal of opposing slavery. (Yes, contrary to what today’s progressives want you to think, the Republican Party was the first to oppose slavery!) The Whigs lost power, and Abraham Lincoln, a Republican, was elected.

So there is historical precedent for the birth of a third party; provided the nation is sufficiently disgusted with the two existing parties.

Are we sufficiently disgusted with the two existing parties today?

Can a third party rise to the occasion in present divided times and succeed in election 2016?

Or would a third party simply divide the conservative vote and hand victory to Democrats?

The Republican Split Today

The Buckley Rule

Slide1Some conservatives advocate nominating a moderate candidate with whom one does not agree (compromising one’s values), as Republicans did in nominating Mitt Romney in 2012, in order to capture the votes of moderate independents, rather than nominating a strong responsible conservative who would capture the conservative independent vote and who is more likely to salvage our nation, as Scott Walker recently salvaged a damaged Wisconsin.

This philosophy, nominating the most conservative person who “can win,” has been called the Buckley Rule, after Bill Buckley, who advocated this approach in 1967.

The problem with this principle is that it assumes that we know who can or cannot win, an quite frankly, we don’t know.  Mitt Romney’s failure to be elected was a prime example of this.  An additional problem with this philosophy is that when conservatives continually sell out and compromise, it allows government to drift permanently towards the left, abandoning important conservative values and allowing the passage of laws which make it impossible to recover conservative ground.

Apparently 4 million Republicans rebelled against the Buckley Rule in November on 2012, and more are likely to follow in 2014 and 2016.

The Limbaugh RuleSlide1

Many who rebel against business as usual in the Republican Party (i.e. rebel against continual and unending compromise) advocate instead voting for the most conservative candidate in the primary and risking losing the moderate vote. This has recently been called the Limbaugh Rule –“in an election year when voters are fed up with liberalism, vote for the most conservative Republican in the primary.”

This is a variation of the Tea Party philosophy, and a variation of my philosophy, which is ALWAYS, not just in an election year when voters are fed up with liberalism, vote for the most conservative candidate in the primary who will uphold traditional Judeo-Christian values, pro-life topping the list, followed by fiscal responsibility.

This approach encourages voting for Tea Party candidates at Republican primaries, hoping to steer the Republican Party establishment in a more conservative direction. This approach appeals to more voters as they become fed up with liberalism and its consequences, and may work in 2016, provided the Republican Establishment does not use it’s power to force through the Buckley Rule (which the “Establishment” apparently favors) over the heads of increasingly conservative American voters. This is what the Republican Establishment did in 2012 to nominate Mitt Romney, by hook or by crook. And it got them exactly nowhere.

The Limbaugh rule says stick to your principles, especially in 2014/2016, when voters are fed up with liberalism.

Third Party Option

tea_party_logoThe Republican split today appears to be so serious that many serious conservatives are considering abandoning the Republican party altogether.

Some are considering the creation of a third party. In this case, there is the danger that this would split the conservative vote, handing victory to the Democrats.

Depending on how stubborn the Republican Establishment (John Boehner, Reince Priebus and other RINOS, Republicans in Name Only) prove to be in the time between now and November 2016, this might sadly become an attractive option for more and more Americans.

OLiberty-Amendments-230

Amendment of the Constitution via Article V

Finally some, like Mark Levin, are so fed up with American politics on both sides of the aisle that they are considering extreme measures like amending the Constitution through Article V of the US Constitution, so that U.S. citizens could override their Senate and their Congress, which have ceased representing them (details at The Liberty Amendments).

This approach would involve returning to much more fundamental founding values and very limited federal government.

The Conservative Dilemma

With four factions advocating four different approaches, the solution to this conservative dilemma is not obvious.
The above four approaches are mutually exclusive, and getting conservatives to agree on one approach would pose quite the obstacle.

  • Those favoring the Buckley Rule would nominate someone like Mitt Romney or Chris Christie again.
  • Those favoring the Limbaugh Rule would nominate someone like Scott Walker or Ben Carson.
  • Those favoring the Third Party Option would replace the Republican Party by a group like the Tea Party.
  • Article V supporters, if successful, would provide an opportunity for radical change and decentralization of government, returning much power to the states and reducing the power of the federal government.

Slide2The first option (Buckley Rule) has already been tried and failed in Election 2012.

Many conservatives favor the second option (Limbaugh Rule) right now. Stick to your principles an nominate the most conservative candidate in the primaries.

But as discontent with Washington continues to grow, it becomes more and more likely that some Americans may abandon business as usual and may opt for the more startling last two options- third party or even overriding Washington DC via Article V.

One thing is certain- the 4 million disgusted registered Republicans who stayed home in November of 2012 are not likely to change their minds and get back on board with John Boehner and the Buckley Rule.

It is much more likely that an additional 4 million will join the first 4 million in boycotting the Republican establishment’s cowardly and ever-compromising path towards defeat.  Yet staying home OR voting for a third party can hand the election to Democrats, even if they do not have majority support.

So What’s a Conservative to Do in 2014/2016 ?

There will be much discussion, much angst, andSlide3

much disagreement among conservatives over which of the above four approaches should be followed in 2016.
There will be even more anxiety over whether the guaranteed lack of unity will defeat us, handing victory to progressives.

But an examination of history, an examination of the forces that determine the fate of nations and of elections, reveals that perhaps we need not worry.
There is a simple and practical approach that may reassure those so very worried about the future.
Hint: it involves simply sticking to your principles and not selling out.
-The approach the Almighty might suggest if anybody bothered to ask Him.

The Determinants of History

What determines history?
What determines the fate of a nation or the fate of an election?

It may surprise some to hear that the determinants of history, the elements that identify or determine the nature of events or that fix their outcome, are not usually voters, nor are they politicians.Slide1

Many historians acknowledge that much of history is determined not by careful planning and strategy, but by fluke events called Black Swans.

Black Swan theory is taught at universities, and Black Swan theory was discussed by the New York Times in connection with the  9/11 Commission, which sought “to provide a ‘full and complete accounting’ of the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001 and recommendations as to how to prevent such attacks in the future.”

Black Swan theory is not a joke; it’s a sobering and probable reality.

So when we talk about the 2016 election, it is wise to consider whether a Black Swan event will be the determinant of the election, and to ask whether it is possible for us or for our politicians to influence that Black Swan event.

 

What IS a Black Swan?

How do we define a Black Swan?

JJPThe Cambridge Japanese Journal of Political Science refers to these unpredictable big events that shape human history, or Black Swans (emphasis mine):

The nonlinear dynamical process of self-organized criticality provides a new ‘theory of history’ that explains a number of unresolved anomalies: Why are the really big events in human history usually unpredictable? Why is it impossible to anticipate sudden political, economic, and social changes? Why do distributions of historical data almost always contain a few extreme events that seem to have had a different cause from all the rest? Why do so many of our ‘lessons of history’ fail to predict important future events? As people, organizations, and nations become increasingly sensitive to each other’s behavior, trivial occurrences sometimes propagate into sudden changes. Such events are unpredictable because in the self-organized criticality environment that characterizes human history, the magnitude of a cause often is unrelated to the magnitude of its effect.

Nassim Taleb is a Black Swan specialist.  He is a scientist, essayist, businessman, mathematical trader and scientist-philosopher who studies the epistemology of randomness and the multidisciplinary problems of uncertainty and knowledge, particularly in the large-impact hard-to-predict rare events called “Black Swans”.

Taleb seeks to create a “platform for a new scientific-minded public intellectual dealing with social and historical events — in replacement to the ‘fooled by randomness’ historian and the babbling journalistic public intellectual.”

Slide1

(Nassim Saleb feels morally bound as a professional philosopher and historian to acknowledge that history is driven by Black Swan events.)

In his book Learning to Expect the Unexpected, Taleb defines the Black Swan like this:

A black swan is an outlier, an event that lies beyond the realm of normal expectations. Most people expect all swans to be white because that’s what their experience tells them; a black swan is by definition a surprise. Nevertheless, people tend to concoct explanations for them after the fact, which makes them appear more predictable, and less random, than they are. Our minds are designed to retain, for efficient storage, past information that fits into a compressed narrative. This distortion, called the hindsight bias, prevents us from adequately learning from the past.

“Much of what happens in history”, he notes, “comes from ‘Black Swan dynamics’, very large, sudden, and totally unpredictable ‘outliers’, while much of what we usually talk about is almost pure noise. Our track record in predicting those events is dismal; yet by some mechanism called the hindsight bias we think that we understand them. We have a bad habit of finding ‘laws’ in history (by fitting stories to events and detecting false patterns); we are drivers looking through the rear view mirror while convinced we are looking ahead.”

So when it comes to elections, whether they be 2014, 2016, or any other election, it would be wise to remind ourselves that Black Swans are often determinants of the outcome.

That’s why nobody can predict election results.

By definition, a Black Swan is an unexpected and surprising historical event that plays a giant role in altering the course of history, yet could not have been predicted, and is not pre-planned by politicians or governments.

Role of the Black Swan in History

remembering-9-11-attacksHistorians and economists both acknowledge the role of Black Swans in human history.

There are many examples of Black Swan events in history, recent and ancient.
Remember the definition: nobody saw it coming, nobody could have seen it coming, it could not be planned for.

Some examples of Black Swan events:

Biblical examples of Black Swan events:holy-cross-justice-icon-of-the-resurrection

Aside: The Bible is a valuable source of political instruction for those who realize the wisdom contained in it.

The above examples of Black Swan events occurred against all odds, were so unlikely that they could not previously be imagined, and they changed the course of human history dramatically.

Black Swans- Good or Bad?

Black Swans can be either good or bad.
To qualify as a Black Swan, an event simply has to lie beyond the realm of normal expectations.
The Christianization of Europe was good.
The terror attacks of 9/11 were bad.
Both were Black Swan events.

Black Swan events can occur not only in politics and in global events, but in our personal lives as well.  One unexpected event frequently steers the subsequent course of a person’s entire lifetime.

Taming the Black Swan

Once one accepts the existence and powerful role of Black Swan events in human history, the next logical question becomes- can we possibly prepare for these events and/or influence these events?
Slide1

By human reason, no.
By definition we cannot expect and prepare for the unexpected.

However, in a nation like ours, in which 80% of citizens believe in God, 80% of citizens pray daily and believe that God answers their prayers, in a nation whose government has been founded on the inalienable rights given to man by God, in a nation structured after Christian morality, it is not unreasonable to bring into this discussion the interaction between God and History, and the interconnection between Church and State.
And this changes the picture dramatically.

In fact, when we acknowledge the interconnection between God and the world, Black Swan events become more easily understood as the intervention of God and of Satan in human affairs.

This view does not refuse to discuss the battle between of Good and Evil battle in our world.  In times of history like the present one, while ISIS mercilessly terrorizes Europe without intervention,  events becomes less mystifying when viewed in their proper light.

Back to Who Is In Charge?

Does this mean that we are helpless pawns at the mercy of warring supernatural forces of Good and Evil, much like the ancient Greeks who believed they were subject to the capricious whims of their warring and jealous gods?Slide1

No!
Unlike the ancient Greeks, we have the ability to steer supernatural events indirectly through our personal choices of good and evil and through our prayers.  We have a direct line to God via saintly lives and prayer, through which we can access the most powerful forces in the universe.  This is the power God has given to human beings. A power, incidentally, resented tremendously by Satan.

Unfortunately, some of us also choose to have a direct line to Satan. The Enemy is unleashed and empowered whenever we shun God’s directives and defy God, particularly when we try to be little gods ourselves.

And so, through moral choices and through prayer, we humans do have great influence on the war between Good and Evil.
Why do you think that Pope Francis’s reaction to the crisis in Syria was to call for global Adoration?
The holy man kwows how to fight spiritual warfare.

Satan always baits us with promises and with lies, but ultimately he delivers misery to all human beings, particularly to those who fell for his ploys.  But God limits Satan’s power, and teaches us how to chain the Evil one, by following the guidelines left to us first by the Ten Commandments, and then by Jesus Christ.

And so the mysterious struggles of Good and Evil are played out in our world, while many of us are unaware that victory is really within our grasp and that we have much more power over world events than we realize.

The Solution

or

Taming the Black SwanAmerica Prays

The solution is simple;

  • Stay close to God through prayer
  • Trust God with patience
  • Play by God’s rules, even in the face of impossible odds (God does the rest)

Simple formula for Elections

The formula for victory is simple- vote for the wisest and most moral candidate, whether you are voting in elections or in primaries, and forget about arguments on capturing independents in the middle by making moral compromises.

Follow the Limbaugh rule, not only when voters are fed up with liberalism, but ALL the time.
It worked for Abe Lincoln, it worked  for Ronald Reagan, and it worked for Saint John Paul II in the dissolution of the Soviet Union.Slide1

Most of America (Independents) needs to reclaim a political party and make it our own.
Both existing parties have failed us abysmally.
Democrats have completely sold out Christian values by promoting abortion and redefining marriage.

In 2014, Independents should go to the polls and vote for Republicans, because they oppose abortion (killing over a million citizens each year), and represent fiscal responsibility as well.
Perhaps the Republican party might be willing to shift to the right.

ballotpedia2-630x286Do your homework; use a neutral source like BALLOTPEDIA.

In 2016, if the Republican establishment resists a shift to conservative values and if the field is littered with numerous conservative candidates who split the vote up as they did in 2012, conservatives should not fear a brokered convention in which many conservatives are pared down to a few with numerous rounds of ballots.
We should not let the Republican establishment force the Buckley Rule, as they did in 2012, forcing the nomination of Mitt Romney against the majority of their party, who supported conservatives.

A message to the Republican establishment: don’t sell out your base and your ethics in some misguided attempt to capture some Independent votes from the middle.
Most Independents want a shift towards conservatism, reality and responsible behavior.Slide1

In 2016, if the Republican establishment tries to force liberalism and the “Buckley rule” as they have in the past, we move to a third, more moral and more conservative party.

Independents think, they admire justice, and they rally behind upstanding candidates.
Independents come in riding on black swans.

Reporting History

Most historians separate history and philosophy/theology into distinct and separate compartments, and only rarely do they acknowledge that human beliefs exert a powerful influence on human behavior and on human history.

It is even more rare for an historian to acknowledge that those humans actions which stem from religious belief (such as prayer or such as heroic action) can actually be effective in dealing with a global or political problem.
The political correctness of today does not permit the inclusion of God, moral choices, or prayer in any analysis.

But those who take their heads out of the sand and realize that this nation was founded on Christian principles and that this is still a nation of God-fearing and freedom-loving people in both parties, will realize that this nation’s history has been and will continue to be be steered by ethics, by prayer, and by God.
Unless the minority, the radical progressives who want to eradicate any mention of God from our lives and from our history, are allowed to intimidate the rest of us into inaction and into silence.God Bless America

The reading of history cannot be partial and biased to exclude the fact that this nations was shaped by Christians, still consists of Christians, and that it’s history has been guided and protected by a very good God.
The role of the supernatural must be acknowledged, if Truth is to be known.
The secularization of human history neglects to consider man’s strongest motivations, denies his noble struggle between the Truth and the Father of Lies, and dismisses his most powerful ally – the Almighty.

Col 2:8 See to it that no one captivate you with an empty, seductive philosophy according to human tradition, according to the elemental powers of the world and not according to Christ.

Interconnection Between Church and State

The interconnection suggested here between Church and State is not the top-down dictation of moral values by Executive Order that is being attempted by President Obama, dictating what newly invented progressive morality the citizens of the United States must follow.  Nor is it a government-imposed State Religion imposed from above.

The interconnection is a democratic one.

When it comes to refining the relationship between government and religion, or between Church and State, the key is for ethical values to flow from the bottom up, not from the top down.

Nobody wants a specific government-imposed religion. But people clearly do want a code of morality and ethics on which most reasonable citizens can agree.

Instead of eliminating morality altogether from public life, and instead of government (King Obama) dictating his own brand of morality, citizens need to vote their personal religious moral beliefs into law.
The Constitution provides the mechanism by which this fundamentally Christian nation, still identifying itself as 80% Christian, can choose representatives in government who reflect their ethical beliefs.

An Optimistic Future

When the interconnection between Church and State is implemented, not from the top down, but  from the grass roots up,
when we all pray and go to the polls and vote for what is right and what is moral, our nation will heal and will get back on the right track.

David will slay Goliath, and Red Sea will part.

That power is in our hands.
We can marshal powerful forces into play that could never be predicted or imagined on a human level alone.

We can steer the Black Swans- provided we don’t throw away the reins.

 

Related Posts:

The Missing Link – Redefining How We Approach Politics

Pope Francis Takes On Obama

Political Puzzle Pieces Falling into Place

Enjoying the Progress? Join the Prayer

Global Adoration- Say What?

 

 

 

All Posts