I KNOW NOTHING, NOTHING!

Whenever I turn on the broadcast news, it is not long before I realize I am wasting my time.  What is the latest drivel or “fake news” filling up air time? Donald Trump and the Russians stole the election.  What’s the evidence? Since when do gossipers require evidence?

So is the drivel/fake news/gossip important? Yes. The Bible has much to say about the power of our words. Here is an example.

Proverbs 18:21 New King James Version (NKJV)

21 Death and life are in the power of the tongue,
And those who love it will eat its fruit.

What does that mean? Here is a translation that puts it more plainly.

Proverbs 18:21 Good News Translation (GNT)

21 What you say can preserve life or destroy it; so you must accept the consequences of your words.

The news media is partisan, and their talking heads are glib; they can also be most intimidating.  Therefore, so long as major Democratic Party politicians are willing to say the most outrageous things, the news media will happily report their accusations — as presented. They will also quite happily assume the guilt of any Republican politician who does not go along to get along.  All that seems to matter is the seriousness of the charge. The glib can talk all around the absence of evidence.

Meanwhile, because we have allowed glib gossipers to distract us, we risk neglecting real problems.  Instead of protecting ourselves from the far more likely mechanizations of our fellow citizens, we now worry endlessly about how the Russians supposedly tampered with our election system.

Not too long ago I posted EVIDENCE OF VOTER FRAUD. One commenter, a bright fellow who calls himself marmoewp, focused on the poor quality of a few statistical studies I cited.  Since the author of those studies did not have much confidence that those studies proved voter fraud, I did not waste much time defending them. Instead, I pointed to the obvious. Nobody is looking for fraud. So those pathetic studies are the best evidence we have.

If policemen made a point of looking the other way, how often do you think the police would arrest anyone? Think about it. The police would still arrest people, just not the powerful. Such policemen would arrest the victims of crime for complaining about the lack of law enforcement.

So what is the real threat? What does the evidence indicate? What question should we be asking?

Will the Democratic Party do anything for votes?

In this nation, we run our election system at the state and local level.  So let’s look here in Virginia. Before the last election, our governor, Terry McAuliffe did everything he could to put hundreds of thousands of felons back on the voter rolls (see Va. Supreme Court strikes down McAuliffe’s order on felon voting rights). He did not care whether what he was doing was unconstitutional or violated the spirit of the law.  Therefore, when the court got in his way, McAuliffe got out his autopen (Virginia’s McAuliffe to announce restoration of voting rights to 13,000 felons).

Apparently, whereas Barack Obama only has a pen and a phone, McAuliffe has an autopen and an iphone.

McAuliffe is a busy man. What is McAuliffe’s latest affront to justice? He is engaged in various coverups. Here are a few.

Stop and think about how silly we have gotten.  When we register to vote, look at how we handle the question of US citizenship.

In most places in the U.S., the question is handled solely on the honor system. When people register to vote, they check a box attesting that they are U.S. citizens. Election administrators verify identity by looking at driver’s license or Social Security numbers, for example, but under federal guidelines, they may not ask for proof of citizenship, such as a birth certificate or passport. (from here)

When illegal aliens have to violate our laws to get into our country, what makes us think an honor system will keep them from voting?

Let’s expand upon that first little video. Let’s consider the problem Sargent Schultz had to deal with. The longer he avoided reporting the shenanigans of Hogan’s Heroes, the more difficult it became for him to break his silence. Was Schultz on the the right side to start with? No, but it was not any special virtue that kept him from reporting on Hogan. His laziness, his greed, and finally his cowardice silenced him. What appeared to be funny was not so funny after all.

HOW HISTORY REPEATS ITSELF

Lincoln swearing-in at the partially finished U.S. Capitol. (from here)
Lincoln swearing-in at the partially finished U.S. Capitol. (from here)

It is late, a long day.  So I reviewed the comments on WHAT IS THE POINT OF LIMITED AND SECULAR GOVERNMENT? with both astonishment and dismay. What should I say? I have got to go and get some sleep. Should I say anything? I decided that I would have to. Why? Why have I and others tried to make an issue limited and secular, constitutional government?

On Friday, January 20, 2017, Donald Trump will become our president.

President-elect Donald Trump told “Fox & Friends” co-host Ainsley Earhardt that he doesn’t mind Democratic members of Congress boycotting his inauguration, saying “I hope they give me their tickets.”

At least 60 Democratic members of the House of Representatives have opted to miss Friday’s ceremonies, most notably Georgia Rep. John Lewis, who said last week that he did not consider Trump a “legitimate” president.

“I think he just grandstanded, John Lewis, and then he got caught in a very bad lie, so let’s see what happens,” said Trump, referencing Lewis’ initial claim that Trump’s would be the first inauguration he’s missed – despite having previously boycotted George W. Bush’s 2001 inauguration. (continued here)

What the Democrat’s boycott reminded me of was the start of the American Civil War.  How did that begin?

In the November 1860 election, Lincoln again faced Douglas, who represented the Northern faction of a heavily divided Democratic Party, as well as Breckinridge and Bell. The announcement of Lincoln’s victory signaled the secession of the Southern states, which since the beginning of the year had been publicly threatening secession if the Republicans gained the White House.

By the time of Lincoln’s inauguration on March 4, 1861, seven states had seceded, and the Confederate States of America had been formally established, with Jefferson Davis as its elected president. One month later, the American Civil War began when Confederate forces under General P.G.T. Beauregard opened fire on Union-held Fort Sumter in South Carolina. In 1863, as the tide turned against the Confederacy, Lincoln emancipated the slaves and in 1864 won reelection. In April 1865, he was assassinated by Confederate sympathizer John Wilkes Booth at Ford’s Theatre in Washington, D.C. The attack came only five days after the American Civil War effectively ended with the surrender of Confederate General Robert E. Lee at Appomattox. (from here)

The Democrat’s boycott of the inauguration obviously is not as serious as states seceding from the Union, but it is a clear sign we risk loosing our nation’s capacity to peacefully transfer power from one party to another. Just as the Democrats once demanded slavery, they now demand unquestioned obedience to …… to what? When it comes down to it, big government is a nebulous thing. What is it that the Democrats don’t want to control?  What is the property they refuse to give up? Who are their precious slaves now?

Where does the root of the Democratic Party’s power rest? It rest upon their ability to buy votes with other people’s money, what we call redistributing the wealth. Thus far I have been unable to convince some commenters, two in particular, that redistributing the wealth is toxic to a constitutional republic. Just calling it stealing does not seem to work. So this weekend I will write a post that uses a starkly  different approach.

Again, I thank those who commented. Interesting, to say the least.

HOW DID WE GET FROM HERE TO THERE?

puzzledComment threads can wind and twist. So regardless of the topic, there is no telling where they may go.  Hence my comments on Bible Hub by insanitybytes22 eventually produced this comment.

  •   David said:                                                        January 1, 2017 at 8:52 pm

    So there might be research dollars to all districts. Is this suprising or a sign of something nefarious? Who cares? What matters is who does the research, that is, how good are the scientists at the facilities. Are they doing good science? Politicians do not determine who gets an NSF or NIH or NASA grant (yes, NASA awards grants to university researchers). So, much of your concerns about politicians and research grants are unfounded and uninformed.

    Yes, the position that you have taken is an extreme one. The fact that there are private schools or that private industry conducts research is not particularly relevant to the question of whether or not the position of zero federal dollars for education or for biomedical research is an extreme one. This is not just a matter of my “private goals.” We’re talking about the hopes and goals of millions.

    Yes, there are private schools. Can everyone afford to send their children to them, especially when we are talking about universities? Historically, how did the introduction of public schools at every level change the percentage of Americans who were able to get X number of years of education? What percentage of the population recieved a college education in the days when most of the colleges were private or when there was no federal support in the form of grants and loans? How has expanding educational opportunities benefited individual Americans and the country as a whole? I understand that you don’t wish to be enslaved, but maybe a little enslavement is not such a bad idea when you consider the benefits.

    And here’s a dirty little secret. Private colleges and universities receive huge amounts of federal support, both direct and indirect. For example, scientists at private university compete for the same research dollars as those at public universities. Federal dollars enable colleges and universities to offer a lower tuition rate to poorer students. In practice, there are no private universities.

    Yes, private industry does research. But private companies are severely constrained by the need to turn a profit. In addition, the discoveries of scientist working in private industry are private or proprietary. This is not good for science. And where and how do you suppose the scientist in private industry get their initial training as scientists? Guess. Further, there is no way that the private sector can match the amount of money that is provided by federal sources for research. No chance.

    Bottom line, in any many areas, the federal government really can do much more than the private sector. But then again, I don’t want to be enslaving you.

    Not trying to bludgeon anyone with my father’s dead body. Just trying to remind you that there real human beings who genuinely benefit when we are not wedded to purity. (And he’d be happy to be disturbed just to have a chance to chat with you.)

What are and I debating that causes us to fling so much sarcasm back and forth? Several years ago I wrote WHAT IS JUST ENOUGH GOVERNMENT? The topic of that old post, I think, is the subject of our debate.

It seems that David would like to believe that I am some kind of selfish, ignorant hog who doesn’t want to pay his fair share of taxes. However, as Milton Friedman points out in the video in WHAT IS JUST ENOUGH GOVERNMENT?, there is a good reason politicians and civil servants waste our money. They are spending somebody else’s money on someone else.

When politicians tax us and spend our money, they deprive us of the opportunity to use resources that belong to us — that we earned — for our own designs. Human nature, being what it is, drives them to remake the world into what they think it ought to be. Hence, politicians seize every opportunity to spend all they can, including other people’s money, to suit themselves and their designs. Thus, even those monies that politicians ostensibly acquired for one purpose, to build roads, for example, can find their way into unrelated social engineering schemes, health, education, and welfare programs.

Of course, those scheming politicians will have lots of help. They can always count upon needy and politically active government union workers who want all they can get of that big pile of other people’ money to fund their programs.

The mere existence of the public education system exemplifies the magnitude of the lust for power and money. If the public funding of education were just about the children, then we would just give the parents of poor children education vouchers. Then those parents could send their children to a decent school of their own choice. Instead, because our rulers insist upon having control, we have government-run schools, expensive schools that at best instill knowledge without wisdom. At worst, public schools instill beliefs in children contrary to those of their parents, clearly a violation of the freedom of religion and parental rights.

Anyway, as I tried to point out to , I don’t think this debate should be about me or about ‘s father. I also don’t think this debate should be about the poor, the needy, the children, the aged, the endless hopes of dreamers and so forth.  What is important is what is good for our country.  As that old post explains, WHAT IS JUST ENOUGH GOVERNMENT?, we all need a good government. Because everyone suffers horribly under a bad government, good government is just too important to jeopardize by using it to redistribute the wealth.

When we put a huge pile of money in front of our leaders and ourselves — when we try to use the Federal treasury as a piggy bank to fund our personal dreams — we don’t realize our dreams. We just fight and claw over a big pile of money, and who gets that money? Ironically, it is those who need it least. As points out, for example.

And here’s a dirty little secret. Private colleges and universities receive huge amounts of federal support, both direct and indirect. For example, scientists at private university compete for the same research dollars as those at public universities. Federal dollars enable colleges and universities to offer a lower tuition rate to poorer students. In practice, there are no private universities.

Our great private colleges, the Ivy League universities, had their beginnings as seminaries. Over the years those schools have become some of the most secularized institutions in the world. Why? Well, they do get lots and lots of government funding. Would government funding of our education system have anything to do with their increasing disinterest in Jesus’ Great Commission? Doesn’t power corrupt?

Doesn’t greed corrupt? Look at that last election. Did our leaders strive to unite us, or did they pit us against each other any way they could?  When the votes were counted, did they — did we — show we want what is best for our people, or did we just prove how much we want and want and want…..

When we vote, it is our own motives that matter most, not the candidate’s or the other party’s. “Why am I voting for this candidate? Is it about my pocketbook or my country? What is my interest in that big, huge pile of taxpayer monies?”

 

2016 POST ELECTION STRATEGY AND TACTICS – PART 4

New York City Statue of Liberty (from here)
New York City Statue of Liberty (from here)

What posts have gone before?

  • PART 1: We spoke of my personal goal for good government. Is it the same goal you might have? Perhaps.
  • PART 2: We considered the primary obstacle to good government.
  • PART 3: We reviewed the defensive components of a strategy for good government.

PART 4 reviews the offensive components of a strategy for good government. Whereas PART 3 focused primarily upon the individual citizen’s refusal to take part in harmful activities, PART 4 focuses on joint action.  Because our government has the form of a representative democracy, we must work together to keep it under control.

The Components Of A Strategy For Good Government: The Offensive Components

As we lay out the offensive components of a strategy for good government, please keep this in mind. In a free society, the individual citizen makes choices for him or her self. In a free society, government officials have limited power.  Government officials can only do what the law permits them to do. Citizens, however, can do anything that the law does not restrict them from doing. In a free society, the law restricts us from infringing upon the rights of others.  In a free society, government enforces laws which discourage us from infringing upon each others rights. In addition, government arbitrates our differences so that we can exercise our rights with minimal disruption to each others lives.

On the other hand, in a totalitarian society, the reverse is true. Government officials are only restrained by the edicts of those officials above them, and citizens can only do what the government permits them to do. In a totalitarian society, the law — to the extent it exists — is only for show. Hence, to have a free society, our laws must actually limit the power of government officials.

Exercise Control Of The Executive Branch

In the last election, the Republican Party won the presidency.  So President-Elect Donald Trump is now in the process of nominating his cabinet. Fortunately, many of people Trump wants to appoint are Constitutional Conservatives.  Most of the others at least appear competent.  Hence, we must pressure the senators representing our state to approve Trump’s nominations (especially the Conservatives).

Restore the Constitution

What is the primary means rogue government officials have used to escape constitution restraints? They nominate and appoint judges who are willing to say the Constitution says what they want it to say.  Trump has promised to appoint judges who are Constitutional Conservatives. We must work to hold him to that promise, and we must work on our senators to approve the appointment of genuine Constitutional Conservatives.

One Person, One Vote

The Democratic Party is notorious for subverting the election process. Instead of clean and honest elections, what Democrats want is a system that makes it as EASY as possible to vote.  An honest election is clearly more important than making it easy to vote.  If someone is not willing to register to vote, come to the polls, present a photo ID, and then vote, why should the rest of us care if they vote? They obviously don’t care.

To reform the system, Conservatives should pressure Republicans to use their majorities in both the House and Senate and their control of the presidency to at least fix the obvious. Ensure every state and locality:

  • Cleans up its voter rolls. Only American citizens should be allowed to vote, and no one should be voting in more than one locality.
  • Puts into place a system that ensures only properly registered voters can vote.
  • Verifies each registered voter only votes once.

We need to keep the obvious in mind. If the vote is not honest, what good does it do to make certain that minorities can vote?

Does it make any sense to just assume that an election will be honest? Don’t Democrats want us believe the Russians would steal an election for Trump? Then why would Democrats want us to believe that Democrats, Republicans or a third-party would not steal one for themselves?

Send Illegal Aliens Back To Their Own Country

The presence of millions of illegal aliens in this country clearly shows just how willing Democrats are to cheat and steal an election. Because they expect the folks from the war-torn areas in the Middle East to vote for them, Democrats are eager to bring these people into our country. They are even willing to ignore the fact that some of these people are terrorists.

Some, of course, will say that those folks from those war-torn areas in the Middle East are just refugees, that it does not make any sense to compare them to illegal aliens. That ignores the fact that Democrats would love to classify all the illegal aliens entering this nation as refugees of some sort. They want them to vote, even if they vote illegally. If our politicians respected the law and were willing to do their jobs, we would not have millions of illegal aliens in this country. It does not serve the national interest, but it does serves their personal interests.

If we want to preserve our language, culture, and system of government, we have to get immigration back under control. Instead of putting them on welfare, we must insist that the people who immigrate to our country love America and want to become Americans.

Rebuild Our Communities

After the American Revolution, the thirteen colonies needed a national government to perform functions the United Kingdom had provided for, primarily national defense and the regulation of interstate commerce.  Hence, the framers wrote our Constitution, a document that gave the Federal Government a few specific powers. These are enumerated in Article 1, Section 8.

When the thirteen colonies adopted our Constitution, America had a few large cities, but most of the population lived in small communities.  They saw government primarily as a local activity, and they saw state government as a referee between local governments. Non-profit associations (especially churches) and local local government assisted parents in the education of children and took responsibility for charity. Because of their good works, non-profit associations and local governments provided the means for everyone to find their niche in society. Because of churches and local governments, the majority of people felt they had a place where they belonged, where they could contribute back to the community that sheltered them something of value.

Consider this proverb.

Proverbs 22:6 New King James Version (NKJV)

Train up a child in the way he should go,
And when he is old he will not depart from it.

For a different perspective, here is another translation.

Proverbs 22:6 Good News Translation (GNT)

Teach children how they should live, and they will remember it all their life.

That proverb is not just talking about educating a child in the Bible. It is about helping someone find their calling.

What has God called each of us to do in this life? Government has no way to resolve that question for us.  What government officials do is keep us from hurting each other. People with such powers may be good at bossing us around, but being bossed around will not help us find our calling. To find our way — to find out what God has called us to do — we need the help of our family, friends, and neighbors; not politicians. We need the help of the people in our churches and our local communities.

Unfortunately, instead of exercising self-restraint, state officials and Federal politicians have contrived to set up a welfare state. For the sake of money and power, they they have weaken our churches and disrupted local communities with innumerable health, education, and welfare programs. If you don’t know your neighbors well, that’s one reason why.

To Be Continued

What will Part 4 be about? What Specifically Can We Do?