1. voteOur national debt is approaching 18 trillion and we have over $127 trillion in unfunded liabilities.
  2. Supposedly, with growth at 3.5 percent, our economy is zooming, but much that growth is due to the reduction of oil and gas prices.  That reduction is due to new technology that Obama just finally got around to supporting. Meanwhile, in the name of about Global Warming (never shown to exist) , Obama and the Democrats continue warring against coal.
  3. The news on “immigration reform” is that we can expect President Obama to issue another one of his unconstitutional executive orders.

    House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi called on President Obama to issue a “bold” executive order that would stop the deportation of millions of illegal immigrants, including farm workers, families of people allowed to remain in the country under the administration’s “Dream Act” policy, and many others. (continued here)

    Why do the Democrats want all those illegal immigrants?  Well, now we have question. Could non-citizens decide the November election? With enough “non-citizens,” in the next election that question could go away. 80 percent of non-citizens vote Democrat.

  4. With respect to the Ebola virus our leaders have a schizophrenic policy. When they come from West Africa after treating people with Ebola we don’t quarantine civilian health care workers, but our military personnel? Well, here is our Dear Leader’s scientifically incomprehensible explanation

    Q    Are you concerned, sir, that there might be some confusion between the quarantine rules used by the military and used by health care workers and by some states?

    THE PRESIDENT:  Well, the military is a different situation, obviously, because they are, first of all, not treating patients. Second of all, they are not there voluntarily, it’s part of their mission that’s been assigned to them by their commanders and ultimately by me, the Commander-in-Chief.  So we don’t expect to have similar rules for our military as we do for civilians.  They are already, by definition, if they’re in the military, under more circumscribed conditions.

    When we have volunteers who are taking time out from their families, from their loved ones and so forth, to go over there because they have a very particular expertise to tackle a very difficult job, we want to make sure that when they come back that we are prudent, that we are making sure that they are not at risk themselves or at risk of spreading the disease, but we don’t want to do things that aren’t based on science and best practices.  Because if we do, then we’re just putting another barrier on somebody who’s already doing really important work on our behalf. And that’s not something that I think any of us should want to see happen. (from here)

  5. The Obama administration has the situation in Iraq and Syria under similarly scientific control, Foreign jihadists flocking to Iraq and Syria on ‘unprecedented scale’ – UN.
  6. In spite of (or because of?) Obamacare, our health care costs are rising faster than our wages. And those rising health care costs hit low income workers harder.
  7. And so forth.

In this coming election, we have the need to throw the bums out more than we have had in decades. The people we have in charge right now don’t even bother to concern themselves with the Constitution. Instead of serving us, they think their job is to deliver the goods (our goods) to their campaign donors.

So what should we do? We should vote Republican.

Of course, many will complain there is very little difference between Republicans and Democrats, but that is not entirely true. If we check their voting records, we will find that even RINOs don’t vote exactly like Liberal Democrats. Republican did not vote for Obamacare, for example. Nevertheless, we cannot count on power-hungry RINOs to repeal awful legislation like Obamacare or to cut taxes and spending. Therefore, we must plan ahead.

Why aren’t Republicans and Democrats more concerned about running our country properly? That is our fault. Too many of us don’t participate in either the Republican Party’s or the Democratic Party’s nomination process. Instead, we let special interests fund the candidates they want and get them nominated. And surprise!  Surprise! What the special interests want are crooked politicians.

Therefore, on the day after Election Day, November 5, 2014, we need to do three things.

  1. If the guy we voted for is a RINO, we need to send him a polite note. We need to congratulate him on his victory, and we need to explain just exactly why we voted for him. If he starts do something else, like trying to pass an amnesty bill for illegal immigrants, we must make it clear we will work to get rid of him in the next election.
  2. We need to start participating in the nomination process. Until we start nominating Republicans who are serious about limited government, we are going to get RINOs who are only just a little bit less crazy than Democrats about taxing and spending.
  3. We need to pray. Whatever God’s Will for the future may be, we need to be doing what He would have us do.


Senator Dick Black emailed this yesterday.


The American southern border is collapsing, as hundreds of thousands of Central Americans and Mexicans pour into our country.  No war drove them here; no famine; no plague; no danger.  The influx was unlawfully planned and coordinated by U.S. and Mexican officials.

No one can tell me that thousands of children just decided to walk hundreds of miles to a new country. That doesn’t happen without their parents’ active participation.  The parent’s goal is to set an anchor in place—a dreamer, who can sponsor his family and bring a chain of others in his wake. And the parents don’t do this without an established system of immigrant escorts in place, something that required lots of money and organization.  These aren’t just children coming.  They are a massive wave of welfare recipients of all ages; the children are simply the gentle political face of a hostile foreign invasion.

The trip is almost 2000 miles from Guatemala to El Paso, Texas.  Does anyone seriously believe that unaccompanied children can traverse that distance alone? U.S. Department of Homeland Security solicited bids for “escorts for unaccompanied alien children” in January–long before the invasion began.  They said there “will be”65,000 children. Was that just a wild guess about something that had never occurred before?  Of course not; the penetration of our borders was carefully planned by this administration in deliberate violation of federal criminal statutes.

These new arrivals will go directly onto states’ welfare rolls and into overtaxed public schools. Their burden falls squarely on U.S. taxpayers, already staggering under pressures of unemployment, printing-press money, and the unlimited supply of cheap, unskilled labor.

Democrats caused this problem.  Where are Senator Mark Warner and Senator Tim Kain?  Are they not aware of it?  Do they care about Virginians at all?

Warm Regards,

Richard H. Black
Senator of Virginia, 13th District

Keep in mind that our local politicians can influence our Federal politicians. Usually, because the Federal Government spends so much money, Federal politicians push local politicians around. However, if we stand behind our local leaders, they can carry the day. That will be particularly true if we move forward with an Article V Convention of the States. The people attending that convention would be chosen by state legislatures.

Make no mistake about it. We are being invaded. Our elites will use these children as pawns in the conquest of our country. They will make enough poorly educated immigrants voters to win close elections. If we do not want to see our country involuntarily transformed and our children condemned to tyrannical servitude, we must fight back.


please giveWhat Got This Started?

In OF TWISTED WORDS => FEMINISM scatterwisdom and I got into a conversation about the nature of laws. That conversation began with this interesting observation.

If I may offer you this thought, laws influence public perceptions. So if a law pertains to a moral precept rather than a precept to maintain order, the precept of law becomes the new definition of morality. In other words, those in government who influence new laws are also being given the power to alter or twist morals under the guise of law. (from here)

What exactly is the difference between a law that pertains to a moral precept rather than a precept to maintain order? In response to my observations and query added the following.

What I had in mind referred to laws relative to moral beliefs of marriage, divorce, and,abortion.. When laws change the definition of marriage between a man and a women, or to define ending a fetal life as a lawful abortion, people perceive when a law is passed it must be morally right and the numbers of occurrences rise. Same as each new government spending avenues arise with each new added tax..When drugs become lawful, the same thing will happen..Seems definitions and morals change whenever new laws are passed same as perceptions change in the instance of feminism as you point out in your post.. (from here)

There is, I think, a large measure of truth in ‘s comments.  However, we tend to overlook the fact that all laws enforce moral precepts. When politicians legislate on such moral issues as marriage, divorce, abortion,… they may or may not take their desire to maintain order too far, but our laws against stealing and murder are also based upon moral precepts. Moreover, our leaders want us to share their perception that stealing and murder are wrong (at least when stealing and murder do not have their approval).

So when is it wrong for government to make laws that seek to revise the public’s definition of morality? I believe  has the key. The principle is order. I think government exists to maintain order by protecting our rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Government does not exist, however, to make us virtuous, wise, create jobs, end poverty or otherwise solve all our innumerable problems. If we want to fix the world, we must first seek to fix ourselves and ask our Lord for His help.

So What Is A Poorhouse?

When I think of people using government to force their morality upon the rest of society, I do not think of marriage, divorce, abortion,… Instead, I think about the trillions of dollars our government spends on health, education, and welfare programs. These programs do not exist to maintain order. Health, education, and welfare programs supposedly exist to protect the life, liberty, and the happiness of the poor, but these programs rob some citizens and transfer their property to other citizens. Therefore, we can rightly argue that those who support this robbery use the power of government to force their morality upon their fellow citizens.

How did government get into the business of health, education, and welfare programs? We can go back into ancient history for examples. Consider the phrase “Bread and circuses“. That goes back to the time of the degeneration and collapse of the Roman republic. The poorhouse (poor farms), however, has a far more recent origin.

Poor farms were the origin of the U.S. tradition of county governments (rather than cities, townships, or state or federal governments) providing social services for the needy within their borders; the federal government did not participate in social welfare for over 70 years following the 1854 veto of the Bill for the Benefit of the Indigent Insane by Franklin Pierce. This tradition has continued and is in most cases codified in state law, although the financial costs of such care have been shifted in part to state and federal governments. (from here)

By the time of the Great Depression, most Americans knew what a poorhouse was. Thus, we have this quote.

We are the first nation in the history of the world to go to the poor house in an automobile. — Will Rogers (from here)

How The Poorhouse Grew Into A Great Temptation

Rogers was a deservedly well-known and respected man. So here is another Will Rogers quote (after the Wall Street Crash of 1929).

Sure must be a great consolation to the poor people who lost their stock in the late crash to know that it has fallen in the hands of Mr. Rockefeller, who will take care of it and see it has a good home and never be allowed to wander around unprotected again. There is one rule that works in every calamity. Be it pestilence, war, or famine, the rich get richer and poor get poorer. The poor even help arrange it.  — Will Rogers (from here)

Rogers was a Democrat. So I doubt he understood exactly why Socialism cannot work. Like most of us, I think he thought we can fix our government and make it work by electing the right people. Nevertheless, after decades of trying, we have yet to succeed. If anything, our problems have grown. The rich are getting far richer, and the poor are getting even poorer.

Why do the rich keep getting richer and the poor still poorer? I think our problem is one of temptation. Consider what James had to say about temptation.

James 1:13-18 English Standard Version (ESV)

13 Let no one say when he is tempted, “I am being tempted by God,” for God cannot be tempted with evil, and he himself tempts no one. 14 But each person is tempted when he is lured and enticed by his own desire. 15 Then desire when it has conceived gives birth to sin, and sin when it is fully grown brings forth death.

16 Do not be deceived, my beloved brothers. 17 Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of lights with whom there is no variation or shadow due to change. 18 Of his own will he brought us forth by the word of truth, that we should be a kind of firstfruits of his creatures.

Temptation is something that grows within each of us. If we let temptation grow within us, it destroys us. We can only overcome temptation by turning to God, remembering that He is the source of every good gift and every perfect gift.

When we started setting up government-run poorhouses, we gave to Caesar what belongs to God. We opened ourselves to temptation. Instead of accepting our individual responsibility to help the poor, we opened the door to the public treasury. Then, we gave our leaders the opportunity to tempt us with “other people’s money”. Now all we can do is admit the temptation and flee from it.

If we want to know what is corrupting our government, don’t we have to follow the money? Isn’t money what the politicians care about? Issues such as marriage, divorce, abortion,… These are highly important, but compared to what government spends on health, education, and welfare programs they involve very little money. Isn’t the fixation on health, education, and welfare programs bankrupting our nation?

Unfortunately, most of us still refuse to understand the corrupt nature of government-run health, education, and welfare programs. Even many Conservatives overlook the plain fact that government-run health, education, and welfare programs represent a humongous fixation on social issues, social issues where government has no business. Instead, we focus on marriage, divorce, abortion,… as if these were the only social issues. 




What Exactly Makes Someone a Bigot?

Here is the final post on the Lincoln–Douglas Debates of 1858. In this post we will consider what leads to bigotry.

What leads to bigotry? I think it has to do with an absence of words, an unwillingness to listen to the right words. Although we say the pen is mightier than the sword, we give the power of words too little thought. Yet we fill our minds — feed our souls — with words. Good words — God’s Word — renew our minds and cleanse our hearts. Words that speak the Truth save our souls. When we choose to listen to filth — believe lies — we damn ourselves to Hell. Thus, in the Garden of Eden the fall of man began with a conversation.

Because we often have so little desire to know it, we run from the truth. In a process Satan taught our forebears in the Garden of Eden, we can easily elude the truth. First we doubt what we know. Then we deny we ever knew any such thing. Next we deceive ourselves and others. What will harm us now becomes good, and what is good for us now becomes bad. Finally, in the pride of willful ignorance, justified with lying words, we sin (see DOUBT, DENIAL, DECEPTION, AND DISOBEDIANCE).

Uncle Tom

Want a modern example of our belief in a lie? Consider the most popular definition of “Uncle Tom”. Here is the first definition in the list at the Urban Dictionary.

Uncle Tom
A black man who will do anything to stay in good standing with “the white man” including betray his own people

The fourth definition in the list, however, reminds us of man’s propensity to doubt, deny, deceive, and finally sin. When Harriet Beecher Stowe wrote Uncle Tom’s Cabin, she did not portray Uncle Tom as a boot-licking coward. Instead, she made the notion of a brave and honorable black man believable to her audience. Her Tom lived as a sincere Christian. Her Tom died before he would reveal the whereabouts of escaped slaves to an evil man. Consider this excerpt.

“Well, Tom!” said Legree, walking up, and seizing him grimly by the collar of his coat, and speaking through his teeth, in a paroxysm of determined rage, “do you know I’ve made up my mind to KILL YOU?”

“It’s very likely, Mas’r,” said Tom, calmly.

“I have,” said Legree, with a grim, terrible calmness, “done—just—that—thing, Tom, unless you’ll tell me what you know about these yer gals!”

Tom stood silent.

“D’ye hear?” said Legree, stamping, with a roar like that of an incensed lion. “Speak!”

I han’t got nothing to tell, Mas’r,” said Tom, with a slow, firm, deliberate utterance.

“Do you dare to tell me, ye old black Christian, ye don’t know?” said Legree.

Tom was silent.

“Speak!” thundered Legree, striking him furiously. “Do you know anything?”

“I know, Mas’r; but I can’t tell anything. I can die!

Legree drew in a long breath; and, suppressing his rage, took Tom by the arm, and, approaching his face almost to his, said, in a terrible voice, “Hark ‘e, Tom!—ye think, ’cause I’ve let you off before, I don’t mean what I say; but, this time, I’ve made up my mind, and counted the cost. You’ve always stood it out again’ me: now, I’ll conquer ye, or kill ye!—one or t’ other. I’ll count every drop of blood there is in you, and take ’em, one by one, till ye give up!”

Tom looked up to his master, and answered, “Mas’r, if you was sick, or in trouble, or dying, and I could save ye, I’d give ye my heart’s blood; and, if taking every drop of blood in this poor old body would save your precious soul, I’d give ’em freely, as the Lord gave his for me. O, Mas’r! don’t bring this great sin on your soul! It will hurt you more than ‘t will me! Do the worst you can, my troubles’ll be over soon; but, if ye don’t repent, yours won’t never end!” (from here)

Uncle Tom’s Cabin was a work of fiction. Stowe never pointed to a particular black and said “that’s Tom”. Instead, she said The Life of Josiah Henson, Formerly a Slave, Now an Inhabitant of Canada, as Narrated by Himself inspired her work. One major difference between Henson and Stowe’s Tom is that Tom did not escape slavery. Instead, he died helping others.

With a fictional work Stowe revealed the horror of slavery to millions. She did so by humanizing the Negro in the minds of her readers.

Uncle Tom’s Cabin was the best-selling novel of the 19th century and the second best-selling book of that century, following the Bible. It is credited with helping fuel the abolitionist cause in the 1850s. In the first year after it was published, 300,000 copies of the book were sold in the United States; one million copies were sold in Great Britain. In 1855, three years after it was published, it was called “the most popular novel of our day.” The impact attributed to the book is great, reinforced by a story that when Abraham Lincoln met Stowe at the start of the Civil War, Lincoln declared, “So this is the little lady who started this great war.”(from here)

Did Lincoln give credit to Stowe for starting the Civil War? The veracity of the quote is disputed. Just the same, everyone knows about Uncle Tom’s Cabin. The problem is that too few read it. Because we have never read Uncle Tom’s Cabin, we now believe an “Uncle Tom” is a black man who will do anything to stay in good standing with “the white man”, including betray his own people.

An Excerpt From The Lincoln – Douglas Debates

How did we get so confused about “Uncle Tom”? Why isn’t such a historically important book required reading? Isn’t the answer too obvious? We listen to the wrong people. Instead of resolutely trying to determine the rightness or wrongness of the thing, we believed what we wanted to believe. Hence, we have been led like sheep to the absurd belief that the main character of Uncle Tom’s Cabin was a traitorous weakling.

Freedom requires we face the truth. So it is that in their seventh and last debate, Abraham Lincoln insisted upon talking about a subject his opponent, Senator Stephen Douglas, refused to discuss. Is slavery right or wrong?

On this subject of treating it as a wrong, and limiting its spread, let me say a word. Has any thing ever threatened the existence of this Union save and except this very institution of Slavery? What is it that we hold most dear amongst us? Our own liberty and prosperity. What has ever threatened our liberty and prosperity save and except this institution of Slavery? If this is true, how do you propose to improve the condition of things by enlarging Slavery-by spreading it out and making it bigger? You may have a wen or cancer upon your person and not be able to cut it out lest you bleed to death; but surely it is no way to cure it, to engraft it and spread it over your whole body. That is no proper way of treating what you regard a wrong. You see this peaceful way of dealing with it as a wrong-restricting the spread of it, and not allowing it to go into new countries where it has not already existed. That is the peaceful way, the old-fashioned way, the way in which the fathers themselves set us the example.

On the other hand, I have said there is a sentiment which treats it as not being wrong. That is the Democratic sentiment of this day. I do not mean to say that every man who stands within that range positively asserts that it is right. That class will include all who positively assert that it is right, and all who like Judge Douglas treat it as indifferent and do not say it is either right or wrong. These two classes of men fall within the general class of those who do not look upon it as a wrong. And if there be among you any body who supposes that he, as a Democrat can consider himself “as much opposed to slavery as anybody,” I would like to reason with him. You never treat it as a wrong. What other thing that you consider as a wrong, do you deal with as you deal with that? Perhaps you say it is wrong, but your leader never does, and you quarrel with any body who says it is wrong. Although you pretend to say so yourself you can find no fit place to deal with it as a wrong. You must not say any thing about it in the free States, because it is not here. You must not say any thing about it in the slave States, because it is there. You must not say any thing about it in the pulpit, because that is religion and has nothing to do with it. You must not say any thing about it in politics, because that will disturb the security of “my place.” There is no place to talk about it as being a wrong, although you say yourself it is a wrong.  (from here)

Instead of attacking Douglas, Lincoln pointed to Douglas’ call for willful ignorance. Without even using the word hypocrite, Lincoln made Douglas’ hypocrisy self-evident.

Consider the problem of our own evil. When we sin, don’t we always arrogantly pretend we are doing nothing wrong? So what can we do? You and I cannot stop others from sinning, but we can humbly turn to our Lord and ask for wisdom.

James 1:5 English Standard Version (ESV)

If any of you lacks wisdom, let him ask God, who gives generously to all without reproach, and it will be given him.

What issues of right and wrong would some like us to ignore these days?

  • Is aborting the birth of a baby murder?
  • When government redistributes our nation’s wealth, taking from the “rich” and giving it to the “poor”, is that stealing?
  • Is same-sex “marriage” just an effort legitimize a perverse form of fornication?
  • Is affirmative action a reverse form of racism?
  • Does the idea of a “living” Constitution make any sense?
  • Why do we trust politicians, people nobody trusts, with the education of our children?
  • Is the entertainment produced by Hollywood an appropriate substitute for spending time with our children?

Don’t we want our children to deal sanely with issues of right and wrong? Then how does it make any sense to hand over their education to politicians and Hollywood?

Proverbs 11:2-3 English Standard Version (ESV)

When pride comes, then comes disgrace,
    but with the humble is wisdom.
The integrity of the upright guides them,
    but the crookedness of the treacherous destroys them.

It is not like we do not know that giving our children over to the care of politicians and Hollywood is a preposterous notion. Our problem is we don’t want to know the truth. We each want to make “me” more important than the truth. So when we should turn to God for guidance, we doubt. When we fear what God might require of us, we deny. And when politicians and Hollywood “offer” their services, to teach our children the wisdom of the world for “free”, we accept their deceits as truth. Then, in disobedience we fail make certain of the instruction our children in schools where God is feared and properly reverenced.

When government pressures parents to send their children to secular government-run schools, does that constitute an infringement upon our religious freedom? Are you willing to consider the question? Do you approve of the increasing moral degradation of our society? You don’t? Then encourage parents and help them, especially Christian parents. Insist upon the right of parents to choose who teaches their children.

For a list of the posts in this series, see AN EXAMPLE OF BIGOTRY — PART 1.