tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-57620345122254553752023-06-20T06:31:51.043-07:00Richie L's rantHost of Christian Talk That Rocks, online radio talk show, Richie L., Blogging about today's issues from a Christian perspective. http://christiantalkthatrocks.netRichie L.http://www.blogger.com/profile/01455477592182220790noreply@blogger.comBlogger20125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5762034512225455375.post-36219702762623492882014-08-25T11:55:00.001-07:002014-08-25T11:55:19.221-07:00Our Detached, Narcissistic, Pathological Golfer-in-Chief<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
Narcissistic personality disorder:<br />
<br />
Definition:<br />
by Mayo Clinic Staff<br />
<i>Narcissistic personality disorder is a mental disorder in which people have an inflated sense of their own importance and a deep need for admiration. Those with narcissistic personality disorder believe that they're superior to others and have little regard for other people's feelings. But behind this mask of ultra-confidence lies a fragile self-esteem, vulnerable to the slightest criticism.</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
<i>Narcissistic personality disorder is one of several types of personality disorders. Personality disorders are conditions in which people have traits that cause them to feel and behave in socially distressing ways, limiting their ability to function in relationships and in other areas of their life, such as work or school.</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
<i>Narcissistic personality disorder treatment is centered around psychotherapy.</i><br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/narcissistic-personality-disorder/basics/definition/con-20025568">http://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/narcissistic-personality-disorder/basics/definition/con-20025568</a><br />
<br />
Detached Personality<br />
Filed in Neurosis, Psychoanalysis by Michael Schreiner<br />
<br />
<i>The neurotic character traits present in a person who is emotionally detached. What can we surmise about his early childhood experiences? In my work with clients several salient features emerge. He will almost certainly have grown up in a restrictive environment where absolute control was important to the caregiver. He will have been alternately showered with praise (sometimes more than he deserved given the circumstances) and punished for his shortcomings (also more than the situation warranted). In other words, his relationship towards his primary caregiver will have been characterized by emotions that alternated between the poles of security and emotional abandonment. Threats of abandonment or being disowned are quite common. There were probably not clearly defined rules, meaning that the caretaker was in a position to find fault with almost any behavior, seemingly at random. A behavior that on one day elicited no response whatsoever would on a subsequent day be grounds for punishment and verbal or physical abuse.</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
<i>The child learns, among other things, that his emotions are dangerous since he cannot predict when his feelings of comfort, security, and love will be shattered and replaced by ones of fear, despair, and worthlessness. One solution available to a child in such a situation is to distance himself from his emotions. If we look at the child’s conflict at the deepest level, I believe the central component is the gap between his caregiver’s profession of love towards him and the child’s secret, usually unspoken belief that his caregiver does not love him. And so the child solves this conflict with the only means available to him. He refuses to engage in the harmful cycle of emotional abuse, and in the process stops feeling any of his emotions deeply.</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
<i>Upon this foundation the neurotic detached personality structure is built. He experiences everything in his life from a distance. His idealized self-image will probably be one of the rational philosopher who has little need for what he sees as trifling emotions. He will value his freedom and independence and use all manner of arguments to prove their necessity in anyone’s life. He will scorn others for their inability to control their emotions while secretly admiring them for their ability to feel deeply. When the emotional thermostat begins to turn up in romantic or friendly relationships he will distance himself, often to the frustration and confusion of his partners.</i><br />
<br />
<a href="http://evolutioncounseling.com/detached-personality/">http://evolutioncounseling.com/detached-personality/</a><br />
<br />
Pathological Disorders:<br />
<br />
<i>Signs Someone May Be a Pathological Liar</i><br />
<i>by Karen Frazier</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
<i>Pathological lying, which is also known as compulsive, chronic, or habitual lying, is not a psychological disorder; it has no documented list of symptoms. However, pathological liars may share the following common traits.</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
<i>Individual Also Suffers from Mental Illness or Personality Disorders</i><br />
<i>According to Psychology Today, while compulsive lying is not itself a diagnosable mental illness, it often correlates with a number of personality and mental disorders. Pathologically lying is a common symptom in a number of mental health issues, such as borderline personality disorder and narcissistic personality disorder.</i><br />
<br />
<a href="http://addiction.lovetoknow.com/wiki/Pathological_Lying_Symptoms">http://addiction.lovetoknow.com/wiki/Pathological_Lying_Symptoms</a><br />
<br />
President Obama is displaying virtually all of these attributes more so now and just as he has in recent years. The world is burning down around him and as Nero distracted himself with minstrels and other pleasures while Rome burned, this President golfs, fund raises, plays pool, hob-knobs with celebrities or vacations every few weeks. He doesn't want to be bothered with the cold realities of a world that does not fit neatly into his Ivy League, social order theorems. This professor is escaping the brutal reality that his entire thesis of how the world should work under the Utopian ideals of socialism and progressive philosophies, isn't working. The man can't bring himself to admit or believe his theories of governance are wrong. This is a place that most dictators eventually come to: Alexander the Great, Bonaparte, Santa Anna, Hitler, to name a few. The dangerous part though is that by the time reality eventually sets in, they have destroyed their countries and countrymen as well as the lives of many others.<br />
<br />
This is why Obama is in an extremely dangerous place and is leaving us in one as well. He has abdicated responsibility for our borders, in a complete and total act of negligence of his Constitutional mandate and oath as defender of our republic, and he is timid on attacking our enemies abroad. He reacts too late to an issue after it has festered to a point where he can no longer deny its havoc. Consequently, Obama is perpetually 'a day late and a dollar short' on so many major issues that he has to always play catch up. That is not leadership. That is a little boy chasing after mama's apron string.<br />
<br />
As with all dictators, his court of advisers is composed of mostly yes men and women who follow the same, Marxist, originated gospel that he does. Therefore, with nobody to truly challenge his perceptions, he simply reacts to situations and falls back on rhetoric and platitudes as if somehow those were tools that will remake the world to his understanding in some sort of metaphysical way because he has spoken that world into existence. However, when the lacking magic of those words does not reshape the world and simply fall flat or are labeled as lies, then he retreats to his familiar fall back of blaming others for that failure to make manifest what he thinks ought to be. This man would make a stellar TV 'prosperity preacher'!<br />
<br />
When cornered with no other options, President Obama takes matters into hands to prove he's right and goes so far as to violate the Constitution and other laws to get his way. He can't bring himself to admit he's been so wrong on so many things. So, he will simply tweak them or shove them around to fit his delusional paradigm. In essence, we have a man in the White House further detaching himself from the reality of how the world really is. The most powerful man in the world arguably, has embraced a form of deception. Even his once stalwart apologists in the national media, themselves masters of the 'half truth', are having to now question this man's logic, alternate reality, and his appearing lack of engagement and empathy.<br />
<br />
I don't think I have ever seen the Main "Stink" Media this nervous and perplexed in quite a while. This media made politician they helped create has turned into Frankenstein. Now, they have no clue what do with him as he has left the laboratory. They have begun to turn on their exotic named monster, but he is too strong and agile even for them. Ignoring the slaughter and plight of Christians and Yazidis in Iraq for example, they could support the narrative of non-involvement and the "we're done in Iraq" sentiment. But, when one of their own in the form of the beheading of journalist Jim Foley lands on their computer screens in all of its horror and Radical Islamic glory, it suddenly becomes a different world! It was the only thing that could knock the wall to wall coverage of a dead, young, troubled black man partially off the 24 hour cable news TV screen.<br />
<br />
A psychologically crippled professor, crippled as a child by the nightmare dreams of his absent father, is not what the nation needs in time of crisis and war. We need a fighter - a warrior - a stern faced Commander-in-Chief who can lead the nation, our allies and who has the courage to engage in Total War rather than the half-ass wars we have been executing from the time of Vietnam and in its long cast shadow ever since. (I am in no way disparaging the brave service of our men and women in uniform. I am simply stating that they have been mishandled by their leaders for so many years.)<br />
<br />
The only antidote to the Islamic State are bullets and bombs administered by the steel nerved airmen and boot and helmet wearing physicians from our military and that of our allies until the last ISIS thug has surrendered or is dead. However, this is a concept that President Obama and many of his predecessors has failed to comprehend. We did not contain the Nazis. Rather, we pound them mercilessly into the dirt. We had generals like Patton who told his troops that they would "grease the axles of our tanks with the guts of those Nazi bastards." Can you imagine the PC crowd uproar if one of our generals dared utter the same thing, replacing Nazi with Radical Muslim Thugs?<br />
<br />
To heap insult on insult, we have a Congress that should be the force to stand up to Obama, the megalomaniac bully. Yet, they are always paralyzed by the specter of the next election. Subsequently, they can't make waves as they might not be popular enough for the electorate to keep them hired for another term. The constant bane of this house of fools is, "wait till after the next election." But, just as a child who's always told "maybe next Christmas," we are constantly being denied that which we have begged for, yet are told repeatedly to wait. Look what that waiting has now gotten us from our trusted representatives, especially the Republican leadership. They will not sacrifice their own political jobs for the betterment of the country if needs be. So, by default, the man-child Obama gets his way and urinates on our Constitution and other laws. Of course, the Democrats won't utter anything against their anointed leader either because right or wrong, at least he's their guy. Party loyalty over the benefit of the nation, comes first.<br />
<br />
My fellow patriots, I wish I could write some eloquent chorus of high spirited words to you, full of star-spangled glories, comforting stories of old, capped off with a let's go show 'em hurrah. What I will offer you, that is those of you of faith, is to hit your knees like never before and pray to the Lord of Hosts that he might yet inspire, awaken and by His mighty hand protect us. Or, if judgment upon this nation in the form of wave upon wave of terrorist attacks be His allowance, that He at least will protect and provide sustenance for His own. Also, I would add to stock up on bullets and beans fellow patriots, as you may be on your own in the coming challenging days ahead. May God yet show some mercy on our poorly led nation.<br />
<br />
Of course, if we do survive to 2016, work those battleground cities and vote only for those with a proven track record for Liberty and loyalty to our Constitution!<br />
<div>
<br /></div>
</div>
Richie L.http://www.blogger.com/profile/01455477592182220790noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5762034512225455375.post-37027664711257613352014-07-02T11:11:00.004-07:002014-07-02T11:12:52.561-07:00THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE - A "SPIRITUAL DOCUMENT TOO?<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14pt;">Is the Declaration of
Independence also a "spiritual" or “religious” document per se? I
would submit that by taking a close look at the first 2 paragraphs and the
last, judging by the references contained therein, the answer is YES! I have
highlighted in italics the evidence:</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 14.0pt;">____________________________________________________________<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 14.0pt;">IN CONGRESS, JULY 4,
1776<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 14.0pt;">The unanimous
Declaration of the thirteen united States of America<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 14.0pt;">When in the Course of
human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political
bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of
the earth, the separate and equal station to which the<i> Laws of Nature and of
Nature's God </i>entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind
requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the
separation.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 14.0pt;">We hold these truths
to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by
their <i>Creator</i> with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are
Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights,
Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the
consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes
destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish
it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles
and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to
effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that
Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient
causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed
to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing
the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and
usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce
them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw
off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. —
Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the
necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government.
The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated
injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an
absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a
candid world.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 14.0pt;">(The last paragraph)<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 14.0pt;">We, therefore, the
Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress,
Assembled, appealing to the <i>Supreme Judge of the world </i>for the rectitude
of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of
these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these united Colonies are,
and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States, that they are Absolved
from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between
them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and
that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude
Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and
Things which Independent States may of right do. — And for the support of this
Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of <i>Divine Providence</i>,
we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 14.0pt;">____________________________________________________________<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 14.0pt;">Certainly The
Declaration is a legal document as well and the lawyerly, laundry list of tyrannical
abuses is evidence of that. And, equally as certain, Mr. Jefferson lifted a significant
part of the Declaration of Independence straight from George Mason’s “Virginia Declaration
of Rights.” However, it's important to note that the spiritual argument for separation
is made FIRST in the document, emphasized by allusions to God. Why?<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 14.0pt;">Kings asserted for centuries that they
ruled by "Divine Right" and the Church in Europe largely supported
this premise. In fact, Scripture does indicate that God sets up and tears down
rulers: Daniel 2:20-22, Psalms 75:7, etc. Consequently, royal rulers of the day
felt that their edicts had somewhat of a divine authority behind them. In many
cases, these royal elites hid behind the Bible to justify their actions no
matter how selfish or unjust. Knowing this, the founders also had to make a
spiritual argument themselves for rebellion against King George and the Parliament
of Great Britain not just a legal one. Pushing back against Britain’s elitism
they asserted an equality of all men as crafted by God! -<i>We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal,
</i>"There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there
is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus." –Galatians 3:28 (KJV)<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 14.0pt;">Scripture indicates
that there are "natural" laws that God has established for how the
universe works and how God's divine authority and judgment flows, if you will.
Consider the words of John Locke (1632-1704) who was a Christian philosopher
who had a great influence in America. He said:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 14.0pt;">[T]he Law of Nature
stands as an eternal rule to all men, legislators as well as others. The rules
that they make for other men's actions must . . . be conformable to the Law of
Nature, i.e., to the will of God.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 14.0pt;">[L]aws human must be
made according to the general laws of Nature, and without contradiction to any
positive law of Scripture, otherwise they are ill made.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 14.0pt;">Locke, Two Treatises
on Government, Bk II sec 135. (quoting Hooker's Ecclesiastical Polity, 1.iii, §
9 ) <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 14.0pt;">In a way, the
Founders were arguing that once rulers engage in persistent tyranny, they
forfeit their claim of "Divine Right" by also violating the
"Divine Rights" of their subjects and violating God's dominion as
well. By the Founders insinuating a religious/Biblical argument for separation,
this also let the other royal leaders and Churches of Europe and elsewhere know
that this was not simply a rebellion of dissatisfied subjects. Rather, this was
a casting off of repression by a people who had long suffered injustices at the
hands of one who claimed a heaven ordained sovereignty over them. They
announced to the world that their rebellion against Mother England was in fact,
righteous! - …<i>appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the
rectitude of our intentions…</i><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 14.0pt;">Granted, while not
all of the Founding Fathers who signed this document were orthodox Christians
in the strict definition of that phrase, I believe however, the larger share
were as professed by their own writings and actions. At the very least, they
ALL seemed to have a firm grasp of the Judeo-Christian ethos and a functional
understanding of both Biblical principles and law as reflected in the
sentiments of Scripture.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 14.0pt;">Ultimately, the radical
assertion here is that our rights do not descend from a king, a government or
any man for that matter. Instead, they come from on high, from God Himself. -… <i>endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights</i>… That means that no
man may at mere whim deprive any citizen of those rights. Man CAN’T take away
what God has given. The Bible asserts that "Ultimate Liberty" was
purchased in blood by God in the flesh, Himself. (Galatians 5:1)<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 14.0pt;">I would urge all of
my fellow patriots during this 4th of July holiday to reflect on the source of
our rights and liberties regardless of your professed faith or lack thereof. To
recognize that our precious freedoms are not granted by flawed governments of
man and so called rulers or elites, but that our rights and liberties are OURS,
inherent the moment we take our first, miracle, infused breath.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 14.0pt;">Happy 4th of July!<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 14.0pt;">Richie L.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
</div>
Richie L.http://www.blogger.com/profile/01455477592182220790noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5762034512225455375.post-40340993603524456832014-02-20T07:37:00.001-08:002014-02-20T07:37:33.340-08:00Putting Government Monitors In Newsrooms?<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
This story hit on the morning of the 19th of Feb. This should send chills up the spine of anyone involved in media, progressive or conservative. And, after the chill subsides, searing hot anger should travel its way up the nerve bundles to the brain...<br />
<br />
<i><b>Why is the Obama Administration Putting Government Monitors in Newsrooms?</b></i><br />
<i><br /></i>
<i>By Matthew Clark / aclj.org</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
Full story here:<i> <a href="http://aclj.org/free-speech-2/why-is-obama-administration-putting-government-monitors-in-newsrooms">http://aclj.org/free-speech-2/why-is-obama-administration-putting-government-monitors-in-newsrooms</a></i><br />
<i><br /></i>
<i>The Obama Administration’s Federal Communication Commission (FCC) is poised to place government monitors in newsrooms across the country in an absurdly draconian attempt to intimidate and control the media.</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
<i>Before you dismiss this assertion as utterly preposterous (we all know how that turned out when the Tea Party complained that it was being targeted by the IRS), this bombshell of an accusation comes from an actual FCC Commissioner.</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
<i>FCC Commissioner Ajit Pai reveals a brand new Obama Administration program that he fears could be used in “pressuring media organizations into covering certain stories.”</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
<i>As Commissioner Pai explains in the Wall Street Journal:</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
<i>Last May the FCC proposed an initiative to thrust the federal government into newsrooms across the country. With its "Multi-Market Study of Critical Information Needs," or CIN, the agency plans to send researchers to grill reporters, editors and station owners about how they decide which stories to run. A field test in Columbia, S.C., is scheduled to begin this spring.</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
<i>The purpose of the CIN, according to the FCC, is to ferret out information from television and radio broadcasters about "the process by which stories are selected" and how often stations cover "critical information needs," along with "perceived station bias" and "perceived responsiveness to underserved populations."</i><br />
<br />
<i>In fact, the FCC is now expanding the bounds of regulatory powers to include newspapers, which it has absolutely no authority over, in its new government monitoring program.</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
<i>The FCC has apparently already selected eight categories of “critical information” “that it believes local newscasters should cover.”</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
<i>That’s right, the Obama Administration has developed a formula of what it believes the free press should cover, and it is going to send government monitors into newsrooms across America to stand over the shoulders of the press as they make editorial decisions.</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
<i>This poses a monumental danger to constitutionally protected free speech and freedom of the press.</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
<i>Every major repressive regime of the modern era has begun with an attempt to control and intimidate the press.</i><br />
<br />
(read more at <a href="http://aclj.org/">http://aclj.org</a>)<br />
<br />
This is insidious. But, not surprising given the audacity of this administration to rule like a dictatorial regime. The implications of this are potentially broad.<br />
<br />
I have several years of broadcast experience in TV and radio, especially radio. Most radio "News Stations," i. e. news/talk format stations, broadcast the usual rotation of local and national talkers of the Conservative vain, in most cases. I believe this is a backdoor way of imposing the fairness doctrine. It's also an attempt to curtail or stifle administration and Obama critics at the source. This proposal even extends to news papers which are not under the jurisdiction of the FCC! Nevertheless, the Administration feels the need to peak over the shoulders of editors, reporters. commentators, news writers, etc. Why? Perhaps, to better control their narrative and maintain the spin and propaganda.<br />
<br />
However, the original mission of the FCC was not to monitor or regulate content, except that which is overtly profane. Their original mission was more technical in nature such as making sure stations didn't trample each others signals and telephone companies didn't illegally hijack each others cable systems, etc. Since then, the FCC has expanded its powers into many areas of minutia regarding broadcasting and electronics. Now this?<br />
<br />
It's up to Congress to pull back on the FCC's leash since they are the ones who gave birth to this yard dog ( 47 U.S.C. § 151 and 47 U.S.C. § 154) regardless of any executive orders Obama may choose to give. If this scheme comes to fruition, everyone needs to write their Congressman and Senator. Every media outlet affected by this needs to file legal suits. The FCC is quickly on its way to becoming a rogue agency.<br />
<br />
The Administration is on the verge of being rogue as well. Some may argue with merit that it already is.<br />
<br />
Quote: "Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man's character, give him power." -Abraham Lincoln<br />
<br />
Richie L.<br />
<div>
<br /></div>
</div>
Richie L.http://www.blogger.com/profile/01455477592182220790noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5762034512225455375.post-86881841549744610312014-02-13T12:26:00.002-08:002014-02-13T13:26:29.061-08:00Happy Birthday Mr. Lincoln<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
Abe Lincoln's birthday was yesterday. Many celebrated the 16th President of the United States with quotes and accolades. Interestingly enough, his legacy still stirs controversy for some. No doubt, he was probably the most complex figure our Civil War produced. I saw social network comments and posts filled with praises. I have also seen many filled with disdain. I read one Facebook post in particular which referred to him as a dirt bag and traitor. Another posted things I won't repeat. I find it fascinating and yet disturbing that after 150 years and several generations later, our nation is still somewhat divided in opinion over the man.<br />
<br />
It's perhaps more troubling that our nation is once again divided politically, though for mostly different reasons. However, the "States Rights" issue is still very present and a rather prominent part of political dialogue even today. While I think virtually all would agree that the South was dead wrong on slavery, ironically many across the nation would quickly state they did have some fair points on the States Rights vs. a strong central government issue. A greater irony is that the party who nominated Lincoln, the Republicans, on the surface had no problem with a more powerful Federal government if it helped abolish slavery. On the other hand, most Democrats were skeptical of a bigger more centralized government. Now, those sentiments have reversed with modern Republicans mostly wanting a more limited Federal government and the Dems wanting it more expansive.<br />
<br />
As a student of the American Civil War, I find that in many ways it was a war of ironies. Lincoln initially was for limiting the expansion of slavery, but not its immediate abolition though he privately detested it. He also held that blacks were inferior to whites and there was no way they could live together in harmony. Conversely, Robert E. Lee, for example, wanted to free the slaves he inherited from his father-in-law, but suspecting Lee would do just that, he made Lee swear to keep them on as slaves after his death. Robert E. Lee also said that he “…could foresee no greater calamity for our nation than the dissolution of the Union." Nevertheless, and perhaps reluctantly, he went on to defend both secession and the continuance of slavery. Towards the end of the war, General Lee even encouraged the Confederate Congress to draft blacks into the Confederate Army insisting they were as good of soldiers as whites. He told the Congress in Richmond that "You must decide if they will fight for you or against you." In fact, early in the war after the battle of Antietam, in 1862, General Lee personally presented commendation to a Louisiana regiment, largely made up of Creoles and freed blacks, for saving his army during its retreat!<br />
<br />
Many Northern officers and soldiers owned slaves especially in states like Kentucky, Maryland and Delaware. In reality, Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation, only applied to the states in rebellion, not the states still loyal to the Union which the fore mentioned were. Many Southerners decried that act by Lincoln. Yet, in Feb. of 1864, the Confederate state of Arkansas outlawed slavery on its own! There were Confederate Soldiers who deserted by the droves who complained, "Rich man's war, poor man's fight." as they felt they were simply pawns being used by Southern aristocrats to shield their property. They also resented that slave owners were largely exempt from the Confederate military draft. Likewise, after the Emancipation Proclamation was issued, several Union Regiments of the Army of the Potomac, nearly to a man, walked out of the camp at Falmouth, Virginia, never to return. One Union Regiment, the 128th Illinois, had 700 men desert who declared, "We'd rather lay down in the woods til’ moss grows on our backs than lift a finger fighting to free one single ni**er."<br />
<br />
For a time during his presidency, Lincoln struggled with issues of equality and freedom for blacks. After meeting and talking extensively with freed men like Frederick Douglas, Lincoln's rather racist views towards Blacks began to soften. So, it's clear that the times in which Abraham Lincoln was President were themselves full of turmoil and confusion. I'm sure that the hand of divine providence picked the right man for the hour in that lanky rail splitter from Kentucky. Civil War Historian, Bruce Catton said, "...something that went beyond words had been at work in the land. The Almighty had His own purposes." It was certainly a more horrible time than the most tragic, ancient Greek playwright could ever have dreamed up. Yet, somehow we survived it.<br />
<br />
However, before you smother Ol’ Abe in stories of his ‘aw shucks’ kindness and honesty, or before you label him the neurotic "Great Divider," I would encourage all to do their own research and candidly look at the life and times of the man. You may just discover some things you never knew.<br />
<br />
When we fail to learn accurately form history, we are destined to repeat it. Happy Birthday Mr. Lincoln.<br />
<br />
"Now he belongs to the ages." –Edwin M, Stanton<br />
<div>
<br /></div>
</div>
Richie L.http://www.blogger.com/profile/01455477592182220790noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5762034512225455375.post-85746133400717555062013-12-19T01:52:00.000-08:002013-12-19T01:57:10.082-08:00A&E Suspension of Duck Dynasty Star Phil Robertson<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
My Thoughts on A&E Suspending Phil Robertson...<br />
<br />
Aside from the silliness of A&E putting Phil Robertson in time out like he's a mis-behaving 5 year old, I find this whole thing rather curious. Phil recently released his book "Happy, Happy, Happy" and he didn't hold back on a lot of controversial topics including matters the Bible addresses as sin. A&E network chiefs had no qualms then. Perhaps they assumed Southern Rednecks don’t read books and D. C. to New York elites won’t touch anything with ‘camo’ on it. But, when Pa-Paw Phil answers a question from a GQ reporter bluntly and in accordance to his Biblical beliefs, even quoting verses from the New Testament, suddenly A&E gets weak in the knees. This is glaring inconsistency on their part. Certainly they have a right as a business to do what they feel is best for their brand, Nevertheless, they knew full and well who and what the Robertson clan was all about when they signed them up.<br />
<br />
In Phil's book, he made it clear that they told A&E execs that prayer, Bible and Christian points of view were going to be part of the show. A&E agreed to those terms and even ceded much creative control to the family regarding the series. Now this???<br />
<br />
So, I have to conclude that A&E is all good with God and the Bible when it suits their agenda and business needs. But, when it doesn't, put a Lady GaGa meat dress on the Christians and open the lion cages. Typical, elitist, media hypocrisy in a wretched guise they fraudulently label as 'tolerance.'<br />
<br />
Love him or hate him, at least Phil was consistent; A&E wasn't. However, after looking at A&E's Facebook page, they are the ones who are getting bit the hardest.<br />
<br />
Richie L.</div>
Richie L.http://www.blogger.com/profile/01455477592182220790noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5762034512225455375.post-38581536348867520452013-11-11T14:42:00.001-08:002013-11-11T14:42:30.358-08:00The U. S. Military Veteran<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
Who is the US military veteran? He or she is a rather unique individual. Some were called up, drafted, some volunteered. Many, if they are honest did not want to go to war or take on a military career, but they knew they had too. It was their duty and they were willing to do it. Most all hated war. But, they loved their country.<br />
<br />
They endured weeks of basic training, undoing all of the comforts, and privileges of a free society. They endured constant yelling and insults from drill sergeants, meals eaten in 5 minutes or less, awkward uniforms, sounds, roars and smells, aches in places they never knew could ache and the deepest pain of all, homesickness. But, they became lean mean fighting machines. They found themselves in perhaps, the greatest army the world has ever known.<br />
<br />
Fresh out of Basic, often they were packed off to serve and fight in places with strange exotic names; places they never heard of like Iwo Jima, Anzio, Seoul, Da Nang, Kuwait, Fallujah, Kandahar. They would endure soaking rains, bitter cold, scorching desert heat, grit, poor sanitation. They would encounter numerous constant enemies, enemies such as flies, mosquitoes, gnats and diarrhea. They would eat meals, usually cold, from cans, plastic containers, with a side dish of stale crackers, all washed down with lukewarm water from a canteen that had probably seen better days.<br />
<br />
For a few months to a few years, their lives were 10 percent sheer terror and 90 percent tedious boredom. They might receive one letter for every ten they wrote back home. Their letters were laced with pride in their unit, contempt for many of their officers, self doubt, jokes and longing for home and loved ones. They obeyed orders that seemed senseless and accepted battle plans that often seemed futile and tragically, sometimes were. They witnessed horrors too terrible to ever utter; things that human souls were never designed by their Creator to witness. They became cursed to re-live those nightmares over and over in the many years later in those sleepless, thousand hour nights when the demons of war come to ply their worst torment and cause the vet to question why it wasn't them who died instead of their comrade. It's an eternal question that only the God of Eternity can answer. Some lose a limb, some lose sanity. Most combat vets lost something.<br />
<br />
They complete their duty and return back to so called normal life with its unique brand of stresses, demands, responsibilities, the kids, the spouse, the in-laws, taxes and the mortgage. They are rarely thanked, rarely recognized for what they did and life goes on. You'll probably pass one of these unique creatures on the street and never know it. They don't wear ribbons or special name tags to inform you. You might even work with one or live next door to one. They fought or served for your freedoms, for your security, your way of life. The only give away may be the fact they are always the one on the block flying the American flag for every little holiday. Yes, that guy or gal that causes the neighborhood association captain to wince.<br />
<br />
So, if it's not too much trouble, take a little time out this Veteran's Day to thank a U. S. Service Vet if you have the privilege of knowing one. Shake their hand, buy them a meal, or hire one. But, at the very least, look them straight in the eye and say, "Thank you for your service to our country." You'd be surprised how many have yet to hear those words spoken sincerely. God bless our Vets. Happy Veteran's Day.<br />
<div>
<br /></div>
</div>
Richie L.http://www.blogger.com/profile/01455477592182220790noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5762034512225455375.post-21833863273059320192012-09-29T01:38:00.000-07:002012-12-17T23:42:26.472-08:00The Terrorists Are Winning.<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Osama Bin Laden is dead. Most of the higher ups of Al Qaida are dead or in 'Gitmo.' The war on terror is all but over and we've won...right?</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Our US Consulate compound in Benghazi Libya was torched, hit with RPG's and mortars and 4 Americans are dead. Now it's finally being called a terror attack which anybody with an IQ above a Russet Potato already knew. Obviously, the war on "Terror" i. e. Islamic extreme-ism is far from over. Our government blamed a film initially. the radicals in the Middle East blamed a film and many of our own media blamed a film. We even arrested the guy alleged to have made the film who was really arrested for parole violation... nudge, nudge, wink, wink. Oh, and let's not forget the vociferous apologies from our Heads of State and the President for the hurt feelings caused by the film. Because, we all know that in the "Age of Oprah and Dr. Drew," the highest form of crime against humanity is to hurt somebody's feelings.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The UN is now considering making it a crime to offend a person or group via "blasphemy against religion" laws!</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
So, we blame some fool here and not the evil terrorists. What a cop out.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I think most anyone with a sliver of decency in their soul who has seen the film trailer in question, would call it tripe. By the way, I noticed that it actually poked a little fun at Christians and perhaps Glenn Beck, in the first few scenes. Interestingly enough, that has been conveniently left out of most all dialogue about this video...hmmmmm. Regardless, the film maker had every Constitutional right to make it and post it online.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
People post insults about other's faiths online daily. Big deal. When it comes to the rudeness and crassness of many folks on the internet, you'd better have your big boy and big girl undies' on. It can be rough and tumble as people who would never say certain things to another face-to-face, feel no trepidation at making insulting, asinine and nasty comments while skulking behind a smart phone or computer screen.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
But, here is where I'm very troubled as one who loves liberty. You see, terrorism is a "head game" played on the living, not those who are it's mortal victims. These terrorists have stabbed at the heart of our liberty; our 1st Amendment, Bill of Rights and more. And, they know it!</div>
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
For example:</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
When we allow the TSA at airports to feel us up and look at our private places on our bodies for the sake of safety, the terrorists are winning.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
When our military court plays a back and forth game with Ft. Hood terrorist Nadal Hasan over his beard, the terrorists are winning</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
When we arrest a man for making a bad, tasteless comedy, the terrorists are winning.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
When our ambassador to the UN says the unrest in the Muslim World is because of a movie, the terrorists are winning.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
When the black flag of Islam flies over our embassy in Cairo, after everyone else that was there skee-dadled, the terrorists are winning</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
When we boldly pin the deaths of American embassy personnel on a movie, the terrorists are winning.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
When our President feels compelled to ask Youtube to review their policies on postings, apologize for a film and give a lecture about the First Amendment to a bunch of people at the UN who hate our Constitution anyway, the terrorists are winning.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
When Muslims in this country as a community fail to speak out against the violence in the Mid-East, the terrorists are winning. For the record, most Muslims I have known are kindly, humble folks.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
When American radio and TV stations crack down on anybody saying anything critical of the Islamic faith, perhaps for fear of being violently attacked, picketed or sued, the terrorists are winning.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
When it's acceptable to trash any other faith <i>except</i> the Muslim faith, the terrorists are winning.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
These Islamic radicals are not simply attacking our sky scrapers, military personnel or embassies, they're attacking our freedoms. This is by design. They don't like our freedoms and liberties. They don't want our type of democratic republic. They want socialistic, theocratic government in the skin of a democracy. Look what they have already established in Egypt and Iran and elsewhere.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
In simple terms, we are coughing up liberties out of <i>fear.</i> Apparently, these are liberties we are <i>not</i> willing to take lumps over or die for. I'm sure glad our Founders didn't feel that way. But, here we are, afraid to tell people half way around the world to grow up and join the 21st Century and hold <i>them</i> accountable for THEIR actions. Can we really value liberties we aren't willing to stand and defend...with our lives if needs be? It seems not.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
And for now, the terrorists are winning.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
</div>
Richie L.http://www.blogger.com/profile/01455477592182220790noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5762034512225455375.post-58499413049864793182012-05-17T09:43:00.000-07:002012-05-17T09:46:50.606-07:00Disenfranchised Republicans Plus, Libertarians Plus, Tea Party Equals, Third Party?<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
I think it's safe to say that nearly ALL Tea Party folks are not thrilled with Obama. And, from things I see posted on Twitter, Facebook, Tea Party Nation, etc. many, if not most conservatives and Tea Partiers, aren't real thrilled with Romney either. I ask this question. How much longer will Conservatives, Tea Partiers, Patriots, disgruntled Republicans and yes, even Libertarians, continue to hitch your trailer of hopes to the Republican Party? How many more times must you be disappointed? How many more broken promises? How many more Republican leaders who talk a good talk but, can't walk a good walk? How much more lip service do we get regarding our Constitution? Perhaps it's time, no, past time, that we walked away from them for good. They and the Dems have proven election after election that they are just flip sides of the same rusty coin. It's Big Government and Big Government Lite. Walk, no, RUN away.<br />
<br />
<br />
I know, it's a scary thought. It's kind of like the time you first moved away from home. Or, maybe, the first time you stood up to a bully. Or, maybe when you drew a line in the sand with an abuser or addict and said, "no more." How much more abuse will you take from this so called two party system that has grown completely dysfunctional? Are you sick and tired of being sick and tired of a tyrannical, out of control, overreaching, overspending, rights abusing, addicted to tax money government in DC that rivals the abuses of King George and Parliament? We know what it took to resolve those issues in 1776.<br />
<br />
Our Founders gave us two ways to overthrow oppressive, tyrannical government; the ballot box and the bullet box (2nd amendment is not just for personal protection and hunting). I am NOT suggesting it's time to utilize that right in that manner. We have not yet exhausted the ballot box, though it may feel like we have at this point. That way still works but it's time to shake up the game so to speak...unless of course you're content to just gripe and moan on and on and bathe in frustration or marinate in the false hopes of the idealism of "maybe one day...".<br />
<br />
We repeat history because we don't learn from it. History is our rear view mirror and it is largely the record of man's mistakes and foolishness. But, every so often, it contains a shining page of real triumph. However, here's the irony about the Republicans. Do you know the story of the birth of the Republican party? Do you really know who the first Republicans were? It's a fascinating tale that came from an era eerily similar to our current one. It was a deeply, divided country with politicians who couldn't agree on much. Alas, history does repeat itself because we become poor students of it!<br />
<br />
Without getting too deep for these pages and your attention span, here is the nut shell version:<br />
<br />
The The United States Republican Party is the second oldest currently existing political party in the United States after its great rival, the Democratic Party. It emerged in 1854 to combat the Kansas Nebraska Act which threatened to extend slavery into the territories, and to promote more vigorous modernization of the economy. It had almost no presence in the South, but in the North it enlisted most former Whigs and former Free Soil Democrats to form majorities, by 1858, in nearly every Northern state.<br />
<br />
With the election of Abraham Lincoln in 1860, and its success in guiding the Union to victory and abolishing slavery, it came to dominate the national scene until 1932. (Courtesy Wikipedia)<br />
<br />
You see, in essence, the Republican Party started as a Third Party formed from abolitionist and dis-enchanted members of two other bigger, political parties. This happened in a political landscape dominated largely by Democrats and Whigs. Now remember, this was accomplished in the horse-and-buggy era and, during a time without social media, the Internet, TV or Radio! Imagine if they had those tools! But, WE DO! They even managed to nominate and help elect arguably one of the greatest, presidents America ever produced, Abe Lincoln! Were they smarter in the early-mid-eighteen hundreds than we are today? Were they better funded? Were they more organized, galvanized, better networked, have more favorable press coverage and marketers? NO! Look what they accomplished in just six or seven years and how they helped change a nation. Yes, it took a bloody Civil War too and let's pray to God above that we NEVER repeat that portion of history again!<br />
<br />
The point is, it can be done. With all due respect to the Conservative Talking Heads and Mouths out there in media who, in one breath preach excellence and individual achievement is do-able by you, yet, in the next breath, tell you that a Third Party is just an impossible dream. They exhort you to keep pinning your hopes on the Republican field. Don't buy their hypocrisy and blarney. Establishing a large powerful, third party can happen. It can certainly be done because it HAS BEEN DONE and by people who didn't have nearly the opportunities, resources and tools at their disposal that we do!<br />
<br />
Where is it chiseled in stone that we can only have a two party system? Now who would benefit the most from that propaganda? Repubs and Dems? Of course, because they want to guard their political monopolies. Follow the money trail and the big lobbying groups!<br />
<br />
Let me clearly state that I am not suggesting that the Tea Party itself become a major third party. Rather, it's that we help birth, organize and coalesce behind one that adheres to our larger values & principles. We CAN do this. We MUST do this lest we be accused truthfully of only being "Summer Patriots." who shrink when the task gets tough.<br />
<br />
The definition of insanity is to keep doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. How much longer will many if not most of you, continue to court and put up with a sold out party that just can't deliver? Like a co-dependent, quit trying to fix it! Get away from it and start fresh. Our Founders quit arguing with and trying to fix the British government. They eventually broke away from it and said, enough! This Tea Partier says, "ENOUGH!" Let's dump the sold out Republican Party that forgot its roots, overboard as our namesakes did with the tea in Boston Harbor. Let's put true leaders and patriots who love and obey the Constitution in Congress and everywhere else in DC, state houses, governorships, county, city governments. etc. And, let's turn the Repubs and Dems over to the Dog Catchers.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Richie L.<br />
<br /></div>Richie L.http://www.blogger.com/profile/01455477592182220790noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5762034512225455375.post-28909853103459567472011-08-21T23:18:00.000-07:002011-08-21T23:41:55.078-07:00Third Great AwakeningThere is a drought taking place here in central Texas that is on the verge of topping all records for heat and no rain. Some long range forecasters are saying we may have 10 to 14 more months of little to no rain (as of this writing). If that is true, the devastation to farms and ranches will be felt for years to come. Already, most of this year's cotton crop is a loss. That is one of the reasons you may be paying moire for clothes. Beef is right behind as most of the ranchers have sold off their cattle at a loss because they can't afford the additional costs of maintaining their herds. There goes beef prices too. Clearly, our drought here in central Texas is having an effect on the rest of the nation, and to some extent, the world as cotton prices soar over shortages.
<br />
<br />I believe this drought is symbolic of a spiritual drought that has gripped the West and America for sometime. It too has had far reaching effects spiritually. A few years ago, while working at a terrestrial Christian Radio station, I met a gentleman who was from Africa. He felt that God had called him a year or so earlier, to go to the US as a missionary. He was used to missionaries going to his homeland from America, not the other way around. He shared with me that he felt the Lord impress upon him that The US was now in need of teachers of the Gospel to come here and reach our lost! He noted that after he was here a while he began to realize that there were a lot of churches filled with very religious people but, not many who had a deep, mature relationship with Christ. He also told me that he felt specifically drawn to Austin. He claimed that he sensed the Lord was trying to do something very special here. I agreed and shared that I had felt that for several years and that I have seen signs of a great awakening washing over America and especially an outpouring of God's spirit in the Central Texas vicinity.
<br />
<br />This "drought" of God's word and Spirit across our land is evident. The assault on Christian Liberties has been ramped up in recent years and the rhetoric against Christians, even from politicians and the main stream media, is alarming. You have reports from the Department of Home Land Security practically calling conservative Christians terrorists. When Christians refuse to accept homosexuality as "OK" and call it a sin, you are immediately labeled a homophobe. Or , if a Christian dares speak up on behalf of unborn babies, you are accused of thwarting women's rights. I believe that even the Tea Party has come under so much fire because many of these same folks have come to realize that its ranks are filled with many Christians. With prayer almost illegal in public schools and the errant arguments and erroneous interpretations of the separation clause of the 1st Amendment, which is preventing Christians from gathering and worshiping on public grounds, is it any wonder that it is open season on followers of Christ? Granted, the persecution of Christians in this country as compared to what happens in many other parts of the world, is light; for now. But, could a day be on the horizon where open persecution of true Christians in this country will become more rampant and dangerous? If we're not careful, I think so.
<br />
<br />If there were ever a time to hit our knees and humble ourselves under the mighty hand of God, it is certainly now. It is also time, not just for the "professional" ministers of the Gospel to boldly proclaim God's love and truth, it is also time for ALL true followers of the Jesus of the Bible to speak up loud and clear. It's not necessary to be obnoxious about it. Simply telling the truth in love ,yet firmly and without hesitation, is the key. Christians have got to trust the Lord and let the Chips fall where they may and let not just our words speak, but also our lives. Scripture makes clear that we are "living epistles" 2 Cor. 3:3. Our lives have to be a consistent witness to the truth of God's love and salvation through Christ.
<br />
<br />I feel deep down in my bones, the Lord is giving our nation a wake-up call via our horrible economy and the natural disasters that it is now or never. Our nation has reached the crossroads of its soul. What happens over the next year or to will determine our fate, for better or for worse. We will never be the same America we once were just a generation ago. However, if we can get back to the principles that once made this nation great, we may stand a chance. If we renounce the idolatry of money, greed and self, before God, we have a chance at experiencing an outpouring of His grace and His Spirit in a "clear water" flow.
<br />
<br />Our political heroes won't fix us, professional preachers won't fix us, nor will science and technology. No, we must collectively do it ourselves by turning to the fiery face of the living God and repenting. Then, bearing the fruits of repentance, readjusting our priorities as the Church of America and loving and taking care of our fellow brothers and sisters in Christ in such a way that it puts all others to shame. When the non-believing world witnesses this, they too will confess that these people really do know the Lord. We will collectively Awaken to the breadth, the height, the depth and length of God's love. He may yet again shed His grace and shine His favor on us. He has allowed us to wound ourselves. All the foundations are shaking. It is the Lord himself doing this in our nation. If we will "Awaken" to His clarion call to return and to deepen our intimacy with Him, His wave of love and forgiveness will sweep over our nation. He will pour down his Spirit like a cool spring rain and soothe our souls and heal our parched and disaster stricken land. Arise, oh sleeper and awaken to the truth about the living God, His word and His salvation. Pray that He will not abandon us. Rather, that He will turn to us once again.
<br />Richie L.http://www.blogger.com/profile/01455477592182220790noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5762034512225455375.post-52441255369422016512011-07-03T08:43:00.000-07:002012-02-02T01:33:41.371-08:00Declaration of Christ DependenceBy the evening of July 2, 1776, the stark reality of what a few dozen men had just voted on was beginning to sink in. The old Philadelphia State House was quiet. According to witnesses, some of the men gazed out of the windows, some prayed, a few wept and others sat in silence. These men had just committed treason and sedition against their own government. Since they were representatives, it carried the weight of long imprisonment or death. They pledged their lives, their fortunes and their "sacred honor" to this rebellion.They were all in: they bet the whole pot so to speak and entrusted their decision and its out come to "Divine Providence" i. e. God.<br /><br />Regardless of the opinion anyone may have of the Founding Fathers, you have to give them credit for being gutsy and displaying incredible courage. It also speaks to how fed up they were with the tyranny that they had been enduring for so long. They knew they had come to a point where it could not continue and the only remedy was to part company with their mother country's government. Very few in history ever succeeded in revolting from a superpower, so the odds were long they could even win. They were forming a new nation, "conceived in Liberty" that was claiming Divine Rights of the individual against a king who hid behind Divine Right of his own authority to get away with committing tyrannical acts. It is important to note that the Declaration of Independence mentions or alludes to God no less than 4 times (endowed by our Creator, nature and nature's God, Supreme Judge of the world, Divine Providence) making the document and its argument not just a legal one, but a spiritual one too.<br /><br />On July 3, John Adams sent a letter to his wife Abigail and told her that Americans should remember this act with solemness and in essence turn towards God each time this holiday is celebrated. Of course now, we celebrate the 4th of July which is the actual date of the final draft and when John Hancock put his name to it along with the secretary as witness. It was also sent to the printer that day with the date of July 4 left on. It would be August 2 when most everyone else would sign it.<br /><br />Nevertheless, our Founders meant for us to regard this holiday as not simply a time for revelry, but a time to give thanks to God for his blessings of liberty and freedom. Scripture declares that we have liberty in Christ Jesus and the gift of grace and salvation purchased by His blood. It was said at the time that many British authorities were frustrated by a motto of sorts that many of the patriotic colonists would quote: "No king but Jesus!"<br /><br />The 4th of July was intended to be a spiritual holiday from the very start. Without the liberty from King Jesus, their would be no true liberty for anyone. He is its source. If we ever forget these truths as a nation, we're doomed to the absence of liberty which is slavery. Tyrants will again be our master. if we are not very careful. Liberty is seldom won or lost in a single day. It creeps by increments. The only way back form this slow creep of fading liberty is through Christ. I grow more convinced of this daily. He is our ultimate Declaration of Independence!<br /><br />Richie L.Richie L.http://www.blogger.com/profile/01455477592182220790noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5762034512225455375.post-28104705357577685372011-04-30T00:05:00.000-07:002011-04-30T00:20:50.783-07:00Mere Revival or AwakeningSomething is in the air. Something is stirring. Demonic activity is increasing and this, I'm hearing, as experienced from all of my Christian sources including myself. I know many believers who are battling spiritual attacks from all sides and quarters. Something has the demons stirred. Actually, I take this as a positive sign that Heavenly forces are gearing up. The Holy Spirit is about to move in a fresh, strong way like we in this country haven't experienced. I believe a 'pure' revival or really more of an 'awakening' is taking place. It has been brewing for some time and little by little, it is gaining momentum!<br /><br />Revival can be refreshing and even life altering. It can last for a season. I've been to tent meetings and anointed services that were refreshing like a cool rain on a hot, summer day. I have witnessed 'pep rallies for Jesus' if you will. These all have their purpose. Some come to faith and experience healings during these events and seasons. However, what I'm feeling in my heart and spirit is something more powerful and on a much broader scale.<br /><br />Historically, there have been many, great revivals and awakenings in this country. A few decades before the American Revolution, there was one of the greatest. There were many in the early 1800's taking place on the frontier in Kentucky, Missouri and Tennessee. Several camp meetings would go on at once with crowds divided into large sections and numerous preachers all preaching at once. Witnesses to these meetings would later describe standing ranks of believers being felled by the Holy Spirit like canon balls being fired at ranks of soldiers, knocking them down in massive rows.<br /><br /><br />Of course there was the Azuza Street Revival in Los Angles in the early 1900's where many spoke in tongues and miraculous healings and wonders took place, and launching a few denominations such as the Assemblies of God. Several decades later in the late 60's and early 70's, there was a similar revival that hit up and down the California coast from San Francisco to San Diego with an epicenter in Orange County. Hippies were becoming Jesus Freaks. The handful of brave pastors and evangelists that would dare reach out to these mop top, barefoot, dirty kids were practically ostracised from their respective denominations and fellowships. These guys were underground then such as, Jack Hayford, Chuck Smith, Josh McDowell, John MacArthur along with music artists like Larry Norman, Barry McGuire, Keith Green, Petra, etc. Now these folks are all household names in Christendom! Music played a key roll along with radical ministry.<br /><br />As a program director of a Christian Music station in the Round Rock?Austin TX area about five years back, I noticed something curious one day on the Christian Music charts. There was an inordinate amount of bands and artist from Texas and the heartland states on the charts. It was strange. Suddenly, it hit me that in the Old Testament, God always had the children of Israel put the musicians out in front of the army. Praise always goes before the Lord. I noticed that nearly all of these artists either lived in cities along or near Interstate 35. This Highway is referred to as 'The main street of America' as it bisects the country from north to south. It wasn't long after this, 2 new Christian stations opened up in Austin and a revival of sorts was underway in Kansas City. This was another one of those 'hmmm' moments!<br /><br />Could the Lord be opening up a fountain head of revival in these cities along the I 35 corridor? Yes. I believe He is!. But, not just ye old revival, but a 'pure water' revival not tainted by the hands of man or religiosity. Rather, I'm seeing an awakening. I'm noticing tell tale signs of a deep moving among Christians who are tired of Church as usual and are fed up with dead, religious programs, religiosity, denominational territorial attitudes, outmoded dogmas and watering down of orthodoxy. I see a hunger for the truth, spiritual maturity and love expressed in deeds of giving and service to others in need and not just pumping up the 'religious system.'<br /><br /><br />I am running into more believers who are either joining or launching very radical ministries to reach out to the hard to reach. They seem to posses a drive and a resilience that reminds me of the early Apostles. I'm also running into more Christians who are acutely aware that there is something very wrong with our nation and that our religious and political freedoms are rapidly vanishing. It's as if blinders are coming off the eyes to see the corruption in both the organized church and our political institutions as well as becoming aware of their own malaise and apathy. In short, Christians are starting to slowly wake up! There seems to be a Holy Frustration with the status quo and a sense that something has got to change and soon.<br /><br />I believe the money problems we are experiencing in this nation bears the touch of the hand of God. Money is the last great idol to fall in America and in the church. Far too many ministries are built and make their decisions based on money. There is nothing wrong with money. We need it like water, air, or food. But, if a man worships food, he becomes a glutton, one of the seven deadly sins. Likewise, when we grow too dependent upon money and wealth, we become greedy. This is idolatry because we grow to depend upon mammon rather than God. 'On Christ the sold rock I stand' not the green paper with the face of 'Benjiman'!<br /><br />Perhaps we have been in the dream castle of religious Disneyland for too long and like spiritual Cinderellas, the Lord is kissing us awake. The serpent is now taking off his Mickey Mouse mask and we are seeing him and evil on full display around the world. Christendom is feeling the sting of persecution like a mini-tribulation. We are groping around in this foretold Age of Apostasy like lost children in this sick amusement park looking for our parent. Now, the non-believers are seeing this and asking the tough questions. about the Bible, God, hell and heaven. Even they sense something is up.<br /><br />Yes, AWAKE oh, sleeper. The days are short and numbered and the harvest is ripe and nearly rotting. Our money, our governments, our institutions are failing before our eyes. But, the Lord is still on the throne. He is mustering his army of Saints for great, spiritual battle; to love the un-lovable, clean the dirty, feed the hungry, nurse the sick, comfort the afflicted, afflict the comfortable, and boldly proclaim His Good News of Salvation to the lost. If you are reading this, I would encourage you to repent, re-dedicate, and reload your spiritual weapons. The captain of our faith is shouting to WAKE UP and MOVE OUT!!<br /><br />RichieRichie L.http://www.blogger.com/profile/01455477592182220790noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5762034512225455375.post-37211792056238741402011-03-30T21:28:00.000-07:002011-03-30T21:36:42.255-07:00Letter to Congressional Representative<div align="left">It has come to the attention of myself and many of your constituents that you represent, that President Barak Obama has gone to war without fullfilling his Constitutionaly mandated duty of allowing Congress to declare war or approve, or at the very least, pass resolution in favor of such an action. </div><br /><div align="left"> Congress' powers to declare war and related military concerns are enumerated in the U. S. Constitution per Article 1, Section Eight: as follows:</div><br /><div align="left">" The Congress shall have power To... declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water; To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years; To provide and maintain a Navy; To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces; To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions; To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;</div><br /><div align="left">Founding Father James Madison reported that in the Federal Convention of 1787, the phrase "make war" was changed to "declare war" in order to leave to the Executive the power to repel sudden attacks but not to commence war without the explicit approval of Congress. One of the earliest Supreme Court cases on this subject (Talbot v. Seeman, 1801) states Congress alone, the court unanimously ruled, had the "whole powers of war," whether that meant authorizing "general hostilities" or "partial war." Much later, Justice Thurgood Marshall referred to this ruling and noted that "nothing in the 172 years since those words were written alters that fundamental constitutional postulate (Holtzman v. Schlesinger, 1973)."</div><br /><div align="left">Congress repealed the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution in January 1971 and as President Richard Nixon continued to wage war in Vietnam, Congress passed the War Powers Resolution (Pub.L. 93-148) over the veto of Nixon in an attempt to rein in some of the president's claimed powers. Today, Congress recognizes no claimed power of the president to wage war outside of the War Powers Resolution. </div><br /><div align="left">I could go into deeper analysis, study and proof texts than what the limited space of a letter could politely contain. So, I will simply state that this President, despite his claim of Constitutional scholarship and in disregard of his sworn oath to uphold, has violated our Constitution and snubed you as well as the other members of Congress, by this latest military engagement regarding Libya. The merits of the action, nor political ideology, nor the Presidents popularity, should have any bearing on a decision to formally impeach or at least censure the President for his unlawful action. The Executive Office does not reside above the highest law of the land. </div><br /><div align="left"></div><br /><div align="left">I woulld also like to remind you, not in a scolding tone, but rather as a plea to your good conscience, that you also took a sworn oath to uphold, protect and defend our Constitution from all enemies, foreign or domestic. It doesn't matter where those enemies reside, whether in a mountain cave along the Pakistan border or in the Executive Mansion. Anyone who asserts himself against or assaults our Constitution should be held to account. </div><br /><div align="left">If you choose to remain silent or inactive on this, then the precedent will be set for further disregard of our Constititution by future elected officials to the larger danger of our Republic and our sacred liberties. </div><br /><div align="left">I thank you in advance for your attention to this grave matter and please feel free to correspond with me at anytime. Thank you for your valuable time and service! God Bless & protect America. </div><br /><div align="left"> Regards,</div><br /><div align="left"></div><br /><div align="left">Richie L.</div>Richie L.http://www.blogger.com/profile/01455477592182220790noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5762034512225455375.post-6102886427380445132011-02-16T21:06:00.000-08:002011-02-17T00:21:45.395-08:00All Aboard!I love trains. As a kid I loved to watch the trains go by the little day care house run by Mrs. Contreras in San Antonio, TX when I was a small child. The tracks were literally just a few feet from her back yard, chain link fence. When I went to school in Virginia, the campus sat alongside a spur of the then Southern Railroad line. I would watch the freight trains rumble by during lunch and waive to the engineers. It always gave me a thrill when they'd waive back. I would fantasize about driving or even "hobo-ing" a train and letting it take me wherever it was destined. On a visit to an Aunt and Uncle's in Southern California one summer, I rode on a passenger train from San Clemente to San Diego. It was a blast. No surprise, that I was hooked on electric trains and model railroading as a kid and teenager. Even my house in Austin where I live today, is less than 1000 feet from the Union Pacific rail line! So hopefully, you'll understand my reaching for the analogy of a train as I use it in regards to our national debt crisis, economic crisis, and the moral crisis hitting our nation.<br /><br />As a student of both history and the Bible, I'm struck at how many themes or "lessons" repeat themselves. How many times did God punish the Israelites for their disobedience, over and over again. And, here we are a few millennia later and we are about to enter what the Old Testament prophecies refer to as the "time of Jacob's trouble." It's important to note that the Lord referred to Israel as "Jacob" whenever they were really messing up. The House of Israel is still in rebellion today and won't really wake up nationally or as a people until "they gaze upon him whom they pierced," Yeshua (Jesus).<br /><br />If the Lord was this rugged with a people who claimed to be His and whom He called "chosen," how much less firm will He be with a people as blessed as we Americans who also proclaim nationally, "IN GOD WE TRUST?" We are so bold that in our Declaration of Independence, we claim our rights come from Him and we make reference to Him in that wonderful document no less than four times! Again, will He not hold us to similar account? I sometimes shudder at the thought.<br /><br />We proclaim in song, "God shed His grace on thee..." and indeed, He has, without question. What other nation in history, but perhaps Israel, has witnessed supernatural intervention, providence and fate on our behalf at dramatic moments? What other nation in world history has prospered and created technologies as we have? Any student of American History must conclude this, or at least, conclude that America has the dumbest luck. Again, will He not hold us to a high standard of accountability? I believe that answer to be, yes!<br /><br />Can a just and loving God hold back his indignation forever from a society that has murdered some 51 million children in the womb? Is the rampant perversion and homosexuality upon us really a form of judgement? What about the increases in child abuse and child porn? Is our bizarre weather and hard droughts of recent years part of a larger curse? Is some of the wrath of other nations against us, in some aspects, judgement too? Are we not reaping what we have sown as a society, with regards to our greed and materialism, by experiencing a floundering economy and astronomical debt? Again, I must admit the answer to be, yes!<br /><br />If this is the case, and I suspect many of you would agree with the above analysis,, the next question that has to be begged is, is it too late? Can we still turn back to the Lord and have Him heal our land? If we turn to Him with broken spirits and contrite hearts, will He despise us? The God and Savior that I have come to know seems rather quick to forgive, is slow to anger, is astoundingly patient and long suffering. He proclaims that His mercies are everlasting! Wouldn't a Lord like this be quick to welcome a prodigal nation like ours back to His care? Again, I exclaim, <em>yes!</em><br /><br />However, I feel the unction to caution, not for much longer. We as Christians must hit our knees harder than ever. We must pray for the Lord not only to tighten up our loose ends as his elect, but to guide our seemingly clueless, political, leaders and wake them up from deadly slumber along with the rest of our nation. The train is still sitting at the station, yet it is blowing its mournful whistle. It will soon start to slowly pull out and away. If we abandon God nationally, sooner or later, He will abandon us nationally. We have kicked him out of the public square, our schools and to some extent our lives by our chasing after material things and money.<br /><br />Look, I'm a huge capitalist pig, but we are talking priorities here. The Apostle Paul was a capitalist too. He was a tent maker and sold his tents in the market, not to start a Fortune 500 company (though he had at times some people who worked with him,) but rather to take care of himself, his ministry team and those fellow believers around him in need. He made it clear to the Ephesus Christians that when he was with them he "coveted no man's gold or silver..." He went on to say how hard he worked night and day to take care of himself and those with him. He set an example for the Ephesian Church that in like manner, they should do the same and save up a little for cases of urgent need. In other words, they weren't simply working for a living, but also for a "giving." There can be a fine line between a desire to better one's estate and raw greed. Often, it requires great spiritual maturity and honest examination of the heart to discern between the two. We can never trust in riches, only in the Lord.<br /><br />Perhaps, the Lord is trying to teach us a lesson here. Perhaps, he has brought us to the Grace Station and is showing us that last train to Jordan. The engine is heating up and it won't be long till those drive wheels start turning. The conductor is shouting at the top of his lungs that final call. Will we as a nation heed the call? Or, will we wait instead for that train with the fine, luxury, passenger cars filled with tempting things and distractions, that is bound straight down the line to destruction? Will we ask Him to help us untangle this economic mess we've created and defuse the time bomb of our debt? Or, will we look for that engine of secular humanism, pulling the freight car loaded with the idol of money? I think money is the last idol to fall in our society, and in our churches, for that matter.<br /><br />No, I don't feel the Lord has turned his back on us just yet. However, I think he is about to. I'm reminded of that line toward the end of the Don McLean song, "American Pie"; 'And the three men I admire the most, the Father, Son and the Holy Ghost, they caught the last train for the coast...' And, God is standing there on the platform with His suitcase packed giving us one last, longing, backward gaze at the Big American Girl that stole His heart, but has since broken it with her harlotry's.<br /><br />The conductor is now shouting, <em>"all aboard?"</em> It's now or never.Richie L.http://www.blogger.com/profile/01455477592182220790noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5762034512225455375.post-50100059214294003832010-12-07T08:25:00.000-08:002012-12-17T22:26:00.325-08:00The Other Christmas Story<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<br />
<div style="font-family: Arial, 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; margin-bottom: 0.5em;">
Everyone is familiar with the story of Christmas as expressed in song, Nativity scenes, pageants and those lovable TV Specials we all can't wait to watch. The most common image is of Mary, Joseph, shepherds and assorted livestock, the 3 wise guys (actually there may have been several more Magi) the guiding star, angels singing (theoretically, though the Bible doesn't say that) and last but. certainly not least, the most famous Jewish kid in the world, the Baby Jesus.</div>
<div style="font-family: Arial, 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; margin-bottom: 0.5em;">
But, there is one set of folks you'll never see in any one's manger scene nor hear any yule tide refrains about; the ones who bore the wrath of the then Roman allowed Monarch of Judea/Palestine. I'm referring to the monster named King Herod I and the actions he took against the innocent that first Christmas.</div>
<div style="font-family: Arial, 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; margin-bottom: 0.5em;">
As your Bible makes clear, the Magi and their entourage were looking for this new born King of Kings. He was the one their star charts and their study of Hebrew/Chaldean manuscripts indicated would be born at that time and place. It was natural for these out-of-towners to assume that the Nation of Judea would also be anticipating and awaiting and perhaps, celebrating. Though scripture doesn't say much about what these foreigners were thinking as they entered the Capital City, I suspect they were puzzled by the clueless-attitudes they observed among the majority of the people and their leaders as to what their own prophets and forefathers had predicted and yearned for. Sound familiar? These wandering astronomers and theologians were so excited, they traveled two thousand miles or more to catch a glimpse of this child king and honor him with their wealth.</div>
<div style="font-family: Arial, 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; margin-bottom: 0.5em;">
Very little enthusiasm existed in Judea either among it's citizens, religious leaders, or corrupt political heads. According to Matthew Chapter 2, These wise "Kings" of the east were asking King Herod I where was this "King of the Jews?" Those ancient sages were excited, but Herod was troubled Scripture says. So was everyone else in town and according to the Bible he summoned the Chief priests, scribes etc. to figure out where the Scriptures said the Christ was to be born. Once he was told Bethlehem, he "secretly" summoned the wise guys (so much for your transparency in government) and charged them to diligently search for the child. If they found this Christ Child, they were to let him know so he could go himself to worship the child. Of course, as the story progresses, you see that Herod had ulterior motives. How often political leaders use the zeal of the faithful as a ruse to promote quite a different agenda!</div>
<div style="font-family: Arial, 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; margin-bottom: 0.5em;">
As the story goes, after the Magi found, honored with gifts and worshiped the Baby Jesus, they were warned by God not to go back to Jerusalem or tell old Herod anything. God also told them to travel a different way home. God knew exactly what was in King Herod's heart. Herod was jealous of Jesus, was afraid of losing his throne and power base. He wanted to "off" this kid. Joseph was also warned by God in a dream and was told that King Herod wanted to find the Christ Child and destroy Him. So according to Scripture the little family slipped out of town and fled to Egypt. The valuable treasures that the Wise Men had given them would sustain them for several years while hiding in Egypt. Isn't it astounding how God provided for this poor carpenter and his young wife?!</div>
<div style="font-family: Arial, 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; margin-bottom: 0.5em;">
Now, here is where the story turns ugly. Once Herod realized he had been "tricked" by the Wise Men, Scripture indicates he was enraged. He summoned his soldiers to go and kill every male child aged 2 and under who lived in Bethlehem and the entire region. This too was also prophesied in Scripture. Matthew 2:18 recounts: "A voice was heard in Ramah, wailing and loud lamentation. Rachel weeping for her children, she refused to be consoled, because they were no more."</div>
<div style="font-family: Arial, 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; margin-bottom: 0.5em;">
Dozens, perhaps hundreds of toddlers and pregnant mothers were butchered because an old King was jealous for power, wealth, status and personal glory. He was not going to submit any of this to any Christ even though Scripture made clear this baby Jesus was the Savior. He was, in reality, warring against God. Pure insanity was on full display!</div>
<div style="font-family: Arial, 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; margin-bottom: 0.5em;">
In a Bible study/home church I attended a number of years ago, a young lady in our group was having trouble with this part of the Christmas story. Why would a loving God allow all of those innocent children to be murdered, she asked? I blurted out something to the effect that He still does. Ever heard of abortion? Yet that still didn't answer the heart of the question. The leader that night expounded upon it this way. In God's wisdom and mind, which none of us on this side of eternity can fully fathom, He apparently allowed, innocent blood to be shed to save the helpless Jesus and family and to buy freedom for them. Joseph, Mary and child escaped into Egypt eventually. Herod was probably convinced he had killed his rival for the throne and thus ended his search and efforts to destroy the Christ Child. After all, isn't that why Christ died for us? Are we not helpless to save ourselves? Are we not sentenced to death for our sins? Are we not facing the rage of this world and it's usurper "king," Lucifer?</div>
<div style="font-family: Arial, 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; margin-bottom: 0.5em;">
Now, you may or may not accept the rationale of that Bible study leader. It seems plausible to me. Honestly, I don't 100% know why God allowed all of those children to be slaughtered. I know He is sovereign, but he allows man fee will.</div>
<div style="font-family: Arial, 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; margin-bottom: 0.5em;">
Nevertheless, I believe there is a stark object lesson here that speaks to anyone who possesses a tender heart.</div>
<div style="font-family: Arial, 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; margin-bottom: 0.5em;">
This too is a part of the Christmas story. No, I have never seen figurines of King Herod I, his soldiers, bloody toddlers and gouged open mothers as part of Nativity scenes sold in department stores or otherwise. I probably never will. It doesn't fit well with the Yuletide decor or the soothing Johnny Mathis Christmas Music wafting out of the store sound system. I suspect if somebody had the "juevos" to put something like that along side the manger scenes and call it "The Other Christmas Story" it would be met with more protests and horror than the ACLU or Atheist activists give regular manger scenes on Courthouse and Statehouse properties!</div>
<div style="font-family: Arial, 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; margin-bottom: 0.5em;">
The fact is, a REAL Baby Jesus was born into an ugly, gritty, evil, world teaming with the naive and wicked. Most of the world then was not happy that Christ was born and most of it is still not. Just look at the dubbed "War on Christmas" that is still waged by all of the modern day "Herods" and their lawyers. Sadly, not much has changed overall with mankind, in over 2000 years.</div>
<div style="font-family: Arial, 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; margin-bottom: 0.5em;">
A just God will eventually take His revenge on those who destroy the innocent, you can count on that like next December 25. He allows man to choose life or death; salvation or destruction.</div>
<div style="font-family: Arial, 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; margin-bottom: 0.5em;">
We each have our own Christmas Story of sorts. Will we choose to honor, worship and trust this now grown up and resurrected Jesus, this God in the flesh? Or, will we be a Herod, rejecting His authority and living in rage or indifference towards God and hurting the innocent in the process? The choice is yours. Will you live like it's Christmas all year in giving to and serving others? Or, will you live a selfish life of destruction, hurting others or living in apathy? Which character in the Christmas Story will you choose to be? Like my old story telling Choctaw friend, Tim Tingle used to say in Choctaw- "Cha tah ha piah ho kay." Translated, "Now the Story...is yours."</div>
</div>
Richie L.http://www.blogger.com/profile/01455477592182220790noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5762034512225455375.post-4681165928815163382010-11-08T21:28:00.000-08:002012-11-21T03:05:21.254-08:00The Attitude of Gratitude<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
On a fairly mild, autumn day in October, 1621, the surviving half of a Christian congregation we call "Pilgrims" (though they rarely referred to themselves as such for that was their state, not their name) displayed a tremendous amount of thankfulness to the Lord for his provision. Most of us in some way or another attempt to replicate this event the fourth Thursday of every November. Sure, we have the turkey, dressing, gravy, mashed and or sweet potatoes, corn and or cornbread, cranberry sauce, pumpkin pie, green bean casserole and all served with a generous side of parade coverage and football on TV. We will also pull up that same grid iron determination to bear with our family's dysfunctions, and perhaps, relatives we are thankful we only have to deal with once or twice a year. This is the typical Thanksgiving tradition as experienced by most Americans to a more or less degree. Oh yes, and we try to stir up within ourselves some form of gratefulness to God for all of it. Not exactly a Norman Rockwell scene or "The Walton's," yet about average.<br />
<br />
It's easy to think of the first Thanksgiving participants as stoic, funny dressed, stern faced, Puritans sharing their corn, deer and pumpkin pie with a bunch of friendly yet naive Indians, then engaging in a dry, pious exercise of thanking "Ye <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_0">Olde</span> Man Upstairs." right there on Plymouth Rock. Then there was something about the Mayflower, a cool Indian named Squanto, a swashbuckler named Miles Standish and that about sums up most <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_1">American's</span> and even many Christian's understanding of those folks and their little feast. While the afore mentioned, cartoon image is what most of us walked away with from school, movies, and television commercials for crescent rolls, the kernels of truth are scant and warped at best concerning this caricature of those tried souls.<br />
<br />
There is not enough space on this blog for me to even begin to attempt to dissect all of the things factually wrong with our myths about those people of Faith and that historic event. However, I will try to put in real world perspective as to what those first group of Reformer/Congregationalist Christians to this continent had endured just months earlier. And, how ironic and unlikely it would be for most people to even dredge up any sincere giving of thanks to God while not letting him have it with their anger, complaints and deep depression.<br />
<br />
The previous winter was so unusually brutal, even the local native tribes, who were generally used to and usually prepared for such, barely hung on. These European sojourners in this hostile land were not very well prepared physically nor skilled to deal with such climes. They did the best they could. Yet with food scarce, and shelters barely adequate, they were fighting a losing battle. <br />
<br />
One after the other of the just 100 or so settlers began to die off due to exhaustion, exposure, undernourishment and disease, the latter of which can spread rapidly in cramped quarters. Many of them were still weakened from the three month voyage at sea. Nearly each day, for several weeks, one of their number perished. Also, the Mayflower and its crew were still anchored in the harbor and even many of the sailors were becoming ill and dropping dead. The crew couldn't share much of their provisions with these pilgrims as they barely had enough for themselves and were simply waiting for the weather to turn so they could get out fast. At one point, there were only about a half-dozen men and boys who were well enough to engage in the daily chores of simply taking care of the rest of their fellow Plymouth settlers. <br />
<br />
The nightmare continued as husbands lost wives, wives lost husbands, and some of the children literally became orphans. Graves were dug when the ground was soft enough to do so. Sometimes the corpses were simply left outside. Often, loved ones would stand guard to keep the wolves from devouring the dead. Cannibalism became a real temptation too. It was in these darkest hours as these "pilgrims" veered between despair and madness that they began to dig deep into their Christian faith. They went deeper than they had gone before or even knew they could. Some prepared themselves for death and relentlessly, it came. Yet, others were fated simply to watch death take their loved ones, powerless to stop it. They even mustered compassion for a young, dying sailor who had cursed and mocked them just weeks before. By the mid-March thaw, they had lost 47 of their original members and many were just barely clinging to life and faith. Miraculously, almost none of the children had died. Still, there were only three complete families left intact at Plymouth Colony by Spring.<br />
<br />
A second miracle happened at this same time as well. His name was Squanto. He was a local native who had been captured a few years earlier by seamen and traders who eventually took him to England. There, the young Indian learned the language and customs of the English. In a fabulous story too long to relate here, the young brave made it back to find his own tribe had all died off from disease. Now he ventured into the shanty village of these desperate colonists. Speaking perfect English, Squanto taught these literal "babes in the woods" how to plant corn, gather eels from the shore and acted as an ambassador between them and the local <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_2">Wampanoags</span> under Chief Massasoit. Was this all just fantastic coincidence or Divine<br />
Providence and answer to dark hour prayers? I am convinced it was the latter.<br />
<br />
That spring and summer, the weather produced perfect growing conditions and the Plymouth Colonists had a bumper crop of corn and many other vegetables and fruits that they planted. Game was also plentiful and they learned to harvest a variety of seafood. Their continued reliance and strengthened faith in the Lord was paying off in spades...and they knew it. But let's be honest here, these were human beings who, while rather young and some just children, must have longed for the love, touch and assurances of parents and spouses. There must have been many hearts still riddled with the holes of loss. Nor can we discount the trials and awkwardness of now blended and adopted families as they sought some semblance of normalcy.<br />
<br />
The last of the Fall harvest was still coming in as the leadership of the Colony, namely Gov. Bradford, William Brewster, Captain Standish etc., decided to set aside a day in October to feast and give thanks to the Lord for such a successful harvest, the completion of homes, store houses and the amazing friendship of Squanto and the <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_3">Wampanoag</span> Indians. <br />
<br />
Now lets think about this a minute. Squanto was a man of faith, but not Massasoit and his bunch. These Indians witnessed what the colonists endured, mainly one of the worst winters the Indians had, themselves, ever seen. Plus, they watched the relationship between Squanto and these English settlers flourish. Next, they witnessed God's power multiply crops into bounty for the "Pilgrims." Finally, they observed the faith of the colonists grow in their Great God. And to top it all, these odd looking Englishmen wanted to throw a feast of Thanksgiving while staring at nearly fifty graves?<br />
<br />
Make no mistake, these Indians were not stupid nor naive savages. On the contrary, they were well versed at the art of spying, gathering intelligence, stealth and observation. They must have watched this whole saga play out with intense curiosity and fascination. And now, they were being invited to feast with these strange Englishmen in honor of their God...to give thanks?? Massasoit must have responded in his own language with something like "Are you kidding me? You better believe I gotta see and be a part of this thing. These people lost half their community and they aren't packing and leaving or turning on each other? They got more graves than houses and they are THANKING their God? I have to know what's going on here. I have to see this and learn about this faith!"<br />
<br />
In fact, Massasoit and company showed up a day early and unannounced with ninety some braves and their families in tow. The Plymouth colonists almost gave into despair, but eventually, some of the braves showed up with many deer, several dressed wild turkeys and other game as well as berries, pumpkins and baskets of corn...some of which they parched in earthen pots much to the "Pilgrim's" delight. In fact, according to diary accounts of the event, including a moving prayer by William Brewster, the Indians and their chief hung around for three days! They must have been touched by the love of Christ they saw flowing.<br />
<br />
I admire and envy the faith of those old Protestant, Reformed Congregationalists. Not just their sense of family and community amongst themselves (the likes of which are sorely lacking in our churches these days) do I admire, but an astounding faith that allowed them to posses an attitude of gratitude in the face of so much death and heartache. Honestly, how many of us would have just thrown in the towel or perhaps drunk ourselves into a stupor or worse. There was no Prozac or grief counseling centers back then-no Oprah or Dr. Phil shows or self help books were available. All they had was the Holy Spirit, the Bible and each others love. They had come to realize that their life in this New World was unmanageable and they needed God's power, which was greater than themselves. While life for those colonists was never a bowl of cranberries, that community of Christians discovered they could have a life of not only political and religious freedom in the New World, but spiritual freedom as long as in all circumstances, they maintained an "Attitude of Gratitude."</div>
Richie L.http://www.blogger.com/profile/01455477592182220790noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5762034512225455375.post-5099881727685342812010-05-26T11:11:00.000-07:002014-02-17T11:44:49.817-08:00Response<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
The following is a response I recently sent somebody who e-mailed me after reading my face book profile and questioning my views on the Founding Fathers<br />
<br />
<br />
<em>On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 5:22 PM, I **** **** Town <i gmail.com="" town="">wrote:<br />Hi, your <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_0">Facebook</span> page says you believe the same as the founding fathers. So you don't want women or non-white men to own property or vote? </i></em><br />
<br />
If you truly <span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_1">believe</span> that about the Founders, I'll give you some slack and fault your educators. Put down the talking points and please <em>READ</em> for yourself what the Founding Fathers wrote and said. It is easy to fall into the trap of "<span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_2">presentism</span>" when critiquing the past. By the way, not all of the founding fathers <span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_3">believed</span> that either. Most did <em>NOT</em> own slaves nor supported slavery. Many felt Native Americans were getting a raw deal too. I will grant you that at the time, most men felt that women shouldn't vote. However, after the Revolutionary War, and with Great <span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_4">Britain</span> out of the way, many property rights were <span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_5">conferred</span> to women and on certain <span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_6">occasions</span>, wives of legislators were allowed to vote as proxy for their husbands who were too ill to attend legislative sessions. Also, many free blacks living in the Northern Colonies and even some in the South owned property and could vote. African-American <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_7">Crispus</span> Attucks was the first person killed in the Boston Massacre in 1770. It was a Black Militiaman (Prince <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_8">Estabrook</span>) who was the first to fall wounded on Lexington Green April, 19, 1775 in the first Battle of the American Revolution. I would challenge you to learn about Bishop Richard Allen of Philadelphia who is considered by many historians to be a Black Founding Father.<br />
<br />
<br />
The Founding Fathers (who believed our liberties and freedoms came from God) <em>GAVE</em> us an amazing Declaration of Independence which declared <em>ALL </em>men (people) are created equal. This was an astounding statement at the time given that so few ANYWHERE on the planet <span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_9">believed</span> this. It is <em>BECAUSE</em> of the groundwork of this statement by the founders that women were ultimately given the right to vote, and that slavery was abolished in this nation and that property rights were extended to all law abiding persons! The Founders also gave us The Constitution, and the form of government that we have; a Democratic Republic, with its three branches of government. It was the legislative branch which passed a <span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_10">Constitutional</span> Amendment to abolish slavery. It was the Legislative and the Supreme Court which proclaimed women the right to vote after years of struggle by women in the <span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_11">suffrage</span> movement. Though it took many years, the system established BY OUR FOUNDERS worked.<br />
<br />
It was to those words written by our Founding Fathers, that many <span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_12">oppressed</span> in this country and around the world have pointed to in the assertion of their rights and liberties! In fact, it was Benjamin Franklin who exclaimed this <span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_13">separation</span> from Great <span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_14">Britain</span> was <span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_15">necessary</span> since every attempt by many of the colonies to end slavery had been thwarted or reversed by the British Crown! Not to mention, the property rights of all Americans had been in many cases, trampled. Both Ben Franklin and Benjamin Rush founded an anti-<span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_16">slavery</span> society in 1774. John Jay was president of a similar group in New York. Constitution signer William Livingston and later Governor of N. J. encouraged them in their efforts including allowances of full property rights and liberties. Rufus King (signer of the Constitution) authored a bill signed into law by then President George Washington, banning slavery in the "Ohio" frontier territories.<br />
<br />
<br />
It was the Founding Fathers who started the Freedom Train down its glorious and sometimes bloody tracks. Yet, that freedom train still rolls. Had those few dozen or so brave men not met on that stormy eve of July 2, 1776 to plot sedition against their government (a crime punishable by death at the time) by declaring themselves free, and ultimately all of us free, you and I might not be having this conversation. We may still be saluting a King or some other Tyrant. Jesus Christ never directly spoke out against slavery either. Nor did he campaign for women's right to vote. Should I quit following Him??? I'll let the Founders respond to your question:<br />
<br />
<br />
"Proclaim Liberty throughout the land and to all the inhabitants thereof."-Leviticus 25:10 The above verse is inscribed on the Liberty Bell.<br />
"Why keep alive the question of slavery? It is admitted by all to be a great evil."-Charles <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_17">Caroll</span> (signer of The Declaration of Independence)<br />
"We recognize no sovereign but God, no King but Jesus."-John Adams &; John Hancock, April 18, 1775<br />
"That men should pray and fight for their own freedom and yet keep others in slavery is certainly acting a very inconsistent as well as unjust and perhaps, impious part."-John Jay, President of Continental Congress.<br />
"I can only say that there is not a man living who wishes more sincerely than I do to see a plan adopted for the abolition of it [slavery]."-George Washington<br />
"My opinion against it has always been known. Never in my life did I own a slave."-John Adams</div>
Richie L.http://www.blogger.com/profile/01455477592182220790noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5762034512225455375.post-6728842181920355322010-03-22T10:22:00.000-07:002015-09-29T19:48:10.028-07:00Charity Does Not Belong to Government<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
In the Preamble to the U. S. Constitution, the term <em>welfare </em>as used by our founding fathers, in the vernacular of that day, meant the "well being" or "soundness" of our nation i. e. "..to promote the general welfare..." It did not mean charity in the form of a monthly check from the Federal Government.<br />
<br />
<br />
Regarding the protion of the pre-amble to the U. S. Constitution--"promote the general Welfare..." For the authors of the Constitution, it was limited ONLY to the acts necessary to maintain the citizens' rights to life, liberty, and property under Natural Law, not distribution of charities. The 10th Amendment limits the scope of activities allowed by both the "General Welfare" and "Necessary and Proper" Clauses. Unfortunately, Courts and some presidents have expanded the federal government's authority to subjects not enumerated under the Constitution through individual Judges' loose interpretations of the "spirit" of the Constitution. However, when comparing the rulings with the official records from the original, Constitutional Convention, it becomes plain that any ruling expanding the role of the Federal Government beyond its intended scope is in direct conflict with our Founders' vision. The Founders repeatedly voted down language that would have allowed presidents or Congress to determine the scope of their own responsibilities because it defeats the purpose of enumerated powers and checks and balances in the first place!<br />
<br />
Thomas Jefferson wrote much on the limits intentionally imposed on federal power. Quotes, for example::<br />
<br />
"The policy of the American government is to leave their citizens free, neither restraining nor aiding them in their pursuits." -Thomas Jefferson<br />
<br />
“Congress has not unlimited powers to provide for the general welfare, but only those specifically enumerated.” – Thomas Jefferson, 1798<br />
<br />
Thomas Jefferson insisted the Tenth Amendment was “the foundation of the Constitution” and added, “to take a single step beyond the boundaries thus specially drawn … is to take possession of a boundless field of power, no longer susceptible of any definition.”<br />
<br />
“With respect to the words general welfare, I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators.”<br />
– James Madison, Letter to James Robertson April 20, 1831<br />
<br />
“The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined . . . to be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce.” – James Madison, Federalist 45<br />
<br />
“If Congress can employ money indefinitely to the general welfare, and are the sole and supreme judges of the general welfare, they may take the care of religion into their own hands; they may appoint teachers in every State, county and parish and pay them out of their public treasury; they may take into their own hands the education of children, establishing in like manner schools throughout the Union; they may assume the provision of the poor; they may undertake the regulation of all roads other than post-roads; in short, every thing, from the highest object of state legislation down to the most minute object of police, would be thrown under the power of Congress…. Were the power of Congress to be established in the latitude contended for, it would subvert the very foundations, and transmute the very nature of the limited Government established by the people of America.”<br />
— James Madison, remarks on the House floor, debates on Cod Fishery bill, (February 1792)<br />
<div>
<br /></div>
Madison; “I cannot undertake to lay my finger on the article in the federal constitution which granted a right of the congress of expending on objects of benevolence the money of their constituents.” - Annals of Congress house of representatives 3rd Congress, first session, page170 (1794)<br />
<br />
James Madison, objected to loose interpretations of the General Welfare Clause, arguing that it was inconsistent with a concept of government of limited powers and that it rendered the list of enumerated powers redundant. He argued that the General Welfare clause did NOT grant Congress additional powers other than those enumerated. So, in the Founders' view, the words themselves served no practical purpose other than to avoid repeating the enumerated powers.<br />
<br />
“This specification of particulars [the 18 enumerated powers of Article I, Section 8] evidently excludes all pretension to a general legislative authority, because an affirmative grant of special powers would be absurd as well as useless if a general authority was intended.” – Alexander Hamilton, Federalist 83<br />
<br />
“No legislative act … contrary to the Constitution can be valid. To deny this would be to affirm that the deputy is greater than his principal; that the servant is above his master; that the representatives of the people are superior to the people themselves; that men acting by virtue of powers may do not only what their powers do not authorize, but what they forbid.” – Alexander Hamilton, Federalist 78<br />
<br />
In short, Hamilton tells us that since the powers of Congress are enumerated and limit Congress to those powers, any assumed authority outside those specified that don’t have a direct relation to those explicit powers must be contrary to the Constitution and therefore — unconstitutional.<br />
<br />
"I am for doing good to the poor, but I differ in opinion of the means. I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it. In my youth I traveled much, and I observed in different countries, that the more public provisions were made for the poor, the less they provided for themselves, and of course became poorer. And, on the contrary, the less was done for them, the more they did for themselves, and became richer." -Ben Franklin<br />
<div>
<br /></div>
It is also not an enumerated power. It states the purpose for the Union and US Constitution in the preamble as well as the purpose of raising taxes, but the phrase itself does not create any power itself. If ‘general welfare’ was carte blanche authority, it would render the limits of the Federal government to the enumerated powers meaningless. Article 1, Section 8 is not a list of suggestions of power, it is a list of delegated authority. If a power is not listed, congress is not authorized to write a law requiring an unlisted power and would need to seek amendment to the US Constitution.<br />
<br />
I don't know if The Federalist Papers are still required reading in school. It's the Founders' own words that answers this and many other modern definitions people like to erroneously poor into that phrase.<br />
<div>
<br /></div>
<br />
Charity is NOT the primary job nor first job of government. Again, the preamble tells us that the first job is Defense of our nation's sovereignty, "...provide for the common defense..." The primary job of our President is as Commander & Chief, not social activist and chief executive of government charity. By the same token, Congress in this regard, has the duty to declare wars, help negotiate or ratify treaties, deal with foreign trade issues, etc. and insure funding for our military, and regulate interstate <span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_0">commerce</span>. THESE are it's prime, enumerated duties and powers as outlined in the Constitution.<br />
<br />
By the same token, one of the primary jobs of the Church, from the beginning, was to care for the sick and poor. This is why so many churches over the last two centuries or so, established hundreds and hundreds of hospitals, orphanages, shelters and soup kitchens across this nation. <span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_1">Increasingly</span>, over the past few decades, the government has seen fit to take upon itself the primary job of the Church. Why? Because, many leading the government have despised the Lord and his Church and <span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_2">believe</span> government can do a better job. And, to be honest, many churches have dropped the ball in this realm, favoring bigger buildings, dead religious programs and materialism over the mandates of Christ and the Apostles. Thus, the Church bears some of the blame in this <span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_3">disastrous</span> trend. As well, the government knows there is great political influence in being seen as benign and helpful rather than the dangerous threat to Liberty that our founders viewed it as. Government uses this perception of itself by many of our citizenry to expand its powers and grow itself larger. I find it deliciously ironic that those who scream the loudest for the <span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_4">separation</span> of Church & State now want the State to be the chief provider of charity! If the State hi-jacks the duties of charity from the Church/faith based organizations, isn't this a violation of the heart of the <span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_5">Separation</span> Clause of the 1st Amendment? I say, YES!<br />
<br />
According to that clause, Congress is not supposed to establish a religion. Yet, they have taken over the primary functions of religion via legislation. By default they have made themselves a church and your tithe to this government charity is more taxes. Now Caesar is asking not simply for what is his his, but also God's! In pure <span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_6">Communism</span>, the State <em>is </em>the religion. Most <span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_7">Communists</span> and Socialists <span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_8">believe</span> that the State can do a better job than the Church at these programs of charity. However, one essential ingredient is missing; the love of God. This is why it never works and why so many <span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_9">former</span> <span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_10">Communist</span> nations and dictatorships are now clamoring for help from religious organizations. This is a lesson we have not learned yet in this nation. Brace yourself because the Lord is about to teach this to those who would play God. Our Federal government has set itself up as a religion, of sorts, with an attending faithful who think government can solve and help all. The Lord will have no Gods before Him.<br />
<br />
With higher taxes and high unemployment, it will be more difficult for Christians to support charities, ministries and their brother or sister in the pew who is struggling. Yet, we must still give to those in need despite the heavy burdens Caesar now lays upon us. If we dedicate our giving and finances to the Lord, He will give us discernment on who to share our daily bread with. He will also fulfill his promises to provide for us, no matter what!<br />
<br />
The Church in the New Testament was largely a self contained economic system. The early Christians not only worked for a living, but for a <em>giving! </em>The Apostle Paul told the Ephesians he coveted no man's gold or silver, but how he worked night and day at his tent making job, not only to provide for his needs and his ministry team, but to help those in the Ephesus Church who were in desperate need. He said he did this as an example for the Ephesian Church. He desired that they would do as he did and he led by example. This is still a good example for us today.<br />
<br />
When the government charity system fails, and it will because God and his love are not <span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_12">in</span> it, the Church of Jesus Christ will be standing tall by contrast. But, only if we get back to the Early Church model of giving and caring for one another as Christ Commanded us. We will put the broke, government programs of <span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_13">health care</span> and welfare to shame. Just as with most of our founding fathers, Americans will once again put their trust in the <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_14">Divine</span> and distrust the schemes of Liberty eroding governments.<br />
<br />
"We recognize no sovereign but God, and no king but <em>Jesus!</em> -John Adams and John Hancock (April 18, 1775) *a requote of Oliver Cromwell<br />
<br />
Richie L.</div>
Richie L.http://www.blogger.com/profile/01455477592182220790noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5762034512225455375.post-13743342749376792482010-03-02T08:18:00.000-08:002010-03-02T13:29:19.902-08:00Christians in Politics<div align="justify">It is a <span id="SPELLING_ERROR_0" class="blsp-spelling-corrected">question</span> that has come up again and again in many fellowships of Christians. How far do we dare tread into the murky waters of politics and <span id="SPELLING_ERROR_1" class="blsp-spelling-corrected">government</span>? Aren't we members of a Heavenly Kingdom? Aren't we, as the Apostle Paul urged, as soldiers in God's army to avoid "civilian affairs?" Isn't Christ returning one day to establish or, more accurately, claim his earthly throne? <span id="SPELLING_ERROR_2" class="blsp-spelling-corrected">Consequently</span>, wouldn't that make the governments of man obsolete and mute? The simple answers to these questions is, yes. However, the full <span id="SPELLING_ERROR_3" class="blsp-spelling-corrected">orb ed</span> answer is a little more complex. I will not attempt in the confines of a simple blog to delve into the the complexities or minutia of this <span id="SPELLING_ERROR_4" class="blsp-spelling-corrected">issue</span>. Volumes have been written on this very question and subject. Instead, I'll attempt to hit on a few <span id="SPELLING_ERROR_5" class="blsp-spelling-corrected">pertinent</span> and practical points for those who feel they must no longer sit on the sidelines and remain inactive or silent. Or, you may be a Christian who is unsure about even being involved in the political process at all.</div><br /><div align="justify">Let's begin with a good working definition of the word politics. In our modern, American vernacular, we tend to think of it as the business of dealing with the issues of governance, policy, rule making, etc. and those who become appointed or elected to govern us, along with their particular social and governmental philosophies. In recent years, Conservative talk show hosts have codified categories of politicians and their supporters into to distinct camps of "Liberal" and "Conservative." More recently, other talking heads, <span id="SPELLING_ERROR_6" class="blsp-spelling-corrected">commentators</span> and authors have defined these groups in the terms of "Progressives" and "Traditionalists" or even "Constitutionalists." Then we have the two party breakdown of Democrat generally means Liberal or Progressive and Republican usually means Conservative or Traditionalist, though there are sometimes exceptions to these rules too. Then, there are those pesky Independents who choose to have no real affiliationwith the two major parties. Some are rather Conservative or "Right" leaning. Others are Libertarians who probably have more in common <span id="SPELLING_ERROR_7" class="blsp-spelling-corrected">philosophically</span> with Conservatives and Constitutionalists, yet, who are as close to anarchists as they can safely get. Still, other Independents may lean "Left" or Liberal but, are disenfranchised with their particular party. Many of these diverse independents make up the TEA Party movement. TEA is an <span id="SPELLING_ERROR_8" class="blsp-spelling-corrected">an acronym</span> for Taxed Enough Already. In general terms, Democrats/Liberals/Progressives tend to want bigger government, tend to look to government to solve many problems and <span id="SPELLING_ERROR_9" class="blsp-spelling-corrected">believe</span> that <span id="SPELLING_ERROR_10" class="blsp-spelling-corrected">certain</span> <span id="SPELLING_ERROR_11" class="blsp-spelling-error">socio</span>-economic ills should be solved <span id="SPELLING_ERROR_12" class="blsp-spelling-corrected">primarily</span> by the efforts of government. Republicans/Libertarians/Conservatives/Traditionalists/Constitutionalists, on the other hand, <span id="SPELLING_ERROR_13" class="blsp-spelling-corrected">generally</span> want less government at all levels and <span id="SPELLING_ERROR_14" class="blsp-spelling-corrected">believe</span> that private enterprise, capitalism and faith based organizations should be primarily involved in the solutions to <span id="SPELLING_ERROR_15" class="blsp-spelling-error">socio</span>-economic ills. These are the primary groups and their agendas now clamoring for control and influence in our <span id="SPELLING_ERROR_16" class="blsp-spelling-corrected">Nation</span>. Some would argue that the divide between most of these two main camps is turning into a gulf with the potential to divide us along the lines of secular humanism vs. <span id="SPELLING_ERROR_17" class="blsp-spelling-error">Judeo</span>-Christian ethos. Alas, it is very difficult and perhaps impossible to <span id="SPELLING_ERROR_18" class="blsp-spelling-corrected">separate</span> a <span id="SPELLING_ERROR_19" class="blsp-spelling-corrected">belief</span> system from politics because one tends to influence the other!</div><br /><div align="justify">Given that these are the main players on the political game board in America, Christians must realize the <span id="SPELLING_ERROR_20" class="blsp-spelling-corrected">immense</span> influence and power these groups of folks have on our everyday lives to the point of affecting, potentially, how and where we are allowed to express our faith, conduct our ministries and even our enterprises. Yet, here in America, we enjoy a certain personal power that many in the rest of the world don't and, <em>that</em>, is the power to vote. The majority of the people who govern us can only do so with our permission. This is the genius of our <span id="SPELLING_ERROR_21" class="blsp-spelling-corrected">Constitutional</span> Republic. That permission slip is the ballot. When we vote for an individual running for public office, we are <span id="SPELLING_ERROR_22" class="blsp-spelling-corrected">basically</span> granting that person permission above the other choices of persons, to govern over us. If more people give one person that permission over the others asking for it, then that person with the most "permission slips" wins the election. Politicians in this democratic republic of ours are really asking for that permission when they ask for our vote. They do not demand it. </div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify"> </div><div align="justify">Since our system of a Constitutional Republic requires the citizens to vote for those who will be "Caesar," then when we vote, are we not rendering to Caesar what is Caesar's in a sense? Jesus said that we are to render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's i. e. pay your taxes. But, Caesar also wanted worship which Christians, by the very nature of our faith, could not do. So, clearly there is a line as to how far we go in our service to Caesar and we should resist Caesar when he asks for that which is not his to take nor ours to give. By the same token, we as Christians should be involved in performing our duties as <em>good citizens</em>, which scripture exhorts us to <em>be</em>, and vote. That, by default, makes us a part of the political process <span id="SPELLING_ERROR_23" class="blsp-spelling-corrected">whether</span> we like it our not. As we render our vote for one Caesar over another we at least send a message to all the other Caesars sitting in office that we are a portion of the community that they must, to some extent, deal with. It at least gives us a chance to have a place at the table for our voices and concerns to be heard. </div><br /><div align="justify">It has been said that all that is <span id="SPELLING_ERROR_24" class="blsp-spelling-corrected">necessary</span> for evil to triumph is for good men to sit back and do nothing. If we as Christians sit back and do nothing with regards to the political process in this country, then we have lost our standing to justly complain about the ills and hazards of our society and its governmental policies that may undermine morality, justice and virtue. As Americans, we have all been given stewardship of our Democratic Republic. We are charged by Scripture to be good stewards of things which we are given. We are also admonished in the Bible that to whom much is given, much is required. Therefore, since we have been blessed with such tremendous liberties, which by the way, our founders proclaimed came from God and not men, shouldn't we all the more be diligent in our efforts to maintain and preserve these liberties? Don't we have a moral obligation not only to ourselves but, to to our children and grand-children to pass on to them this precious, heirloom of freedom? If your answer to this is yes, then my friend, you must involve yourself, at least to some extent, in the gritty game of American <span id="SPELLING_ERROR_25" class="blsp-spelling-corrected">politics</span>. Understand this, the preservation of liberty is a constant and sometimes hazardous job. It is not for the faint-of-heart.</div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify"> </div><div align="justify">While I recognize that our nation will NOT be saved by <span id="SPELLING_ERROR_26" class="blsp-spelling-corrected">political</span> entities, and that God is not spelled GOP, I would contend that in our Republic, Christians must stand at the ready to engage in their civic duties, be informed and involved until Christ returns. You can consider this training for the day "we reign with Him."</div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify"> </div><div align="justify">Richie L.</div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify"></div>Richie L.http://www.blogger.com/profile/01455477592182220790noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5762034512225455375.post-67395350538375434282010-02-19T05:25:00.000-08:002010-03-04T16:17:28.063-08:00Hey JoeIt's the morning after the plane flown by Joe Stack was "kamekazied" into the Echelon building housing the IRS here in Austin. In this tragic murder/suicide the one blessing is only one person was killed, not counting the pilot. The similarities to the morning of 9/11 were eerie. Just as on that morning, I looked up at a very blue sky on a beautiful day wondering when the next plane would drop out of the atmosphere to bring more death and destruction with it. My immediate thought was, 'oh no, here we go again.'<br /><br />However, this proved to be different. This was an American terrorist of sorts. This was a middle aged, white guy with a beef against the U. S. Government and the IRS, specifically. Not to mention his anger against Catholics, George W. Bush, the Austin high-tech industry, Wall street and big corporations as well as corrupt political officials. I think many of us could agree with some of his issues, but at the end of his diatribe he bashes Capitalism and quotes from the Communist Manifesto; not exactly right-wing rhetoric. This man clearly was full of frutration and driven mad by it to the point of becoming a killer. In his mind, Joe Stack needed to add "his pound of flesh" to the body count in what he perceived was a war that had become personal.<br />Knowing the media as well as I do, I knew it wouldn't be long before they were looking for the back story to this heinous crime. All it took was a few scant hours after all of this nightmare unfolded that Chris Mathews of MSNBC's Hardball and a spokesperson from the Southern Poverty Law Center were spinning this as a Right-Wing extremist gone a-wry. They both claim to have read his diatribe, but somehow missed his bashing of Capitalism, bashing of former President George W. Bush, and quoting the Communist Manifesto. Nevertheless they coupled Joe Stack with Tim McVeigh and the militia movement, though in reality Tim McVey was not in a militia but was AWOL from the U. S. Army, the anti-income tax movement, though in his own words Mr. Stack attended conferences on how to play BY the IRS's rules, pay your taxes and get the maximum deductions like the big boys, and the TEA party movement etc. I will be nothing short of surprised if the DHS does not do a similar spin especialy if they see that the manuer coming from mainstream media sticks to the wall. The reality is, by his own words, and I've never known a dying man to mince his words, was that Joe Stark was LEFT leaning. But, let's not confuse hacks like Chris Mathews and others with the facts.<br /><br />I'm not trying to turn this into the game of Left vs. Right. However, the truth is the truth. I've had some journalistic training and what is heading our way, like a bursting sewer main, is a smear campaign and yellow journalism on anyone who dares to dissent against those in government, question the existence and role of certain institutions, speak out against ever soaring tax burdens and run away, deficit spending which is endangering our republic as badly as Al-Quaeda. In the coming days, media elites will circle the wagons, omit or white wash the truth about this nut and do the best they can to couple Joe Stack with Joe "the Plumber," us hate mongers in talk tradio, and the TEA party movement. Yes, those 'tea baggers' who are so vicious and scarry to people like Rachel Maddow who apearantly is frightened by old, retired Korean and WWII vets, little old ladies, soccer moms and their vicious, little, loaded diaper, pacifier wielding, blood thirsty babies in strollers. In short, these media types would rather spend energies on an orchestrated, ad-hominem attack on the folks raising legitimate issues of concern rather than addressing the issues themselves.<br /><br />Scripture says that "evil men love darkness more than light." As a moth is drawn to a light bulb on a sultry, summer night, many main stream journalsits and commentators are drawn to half truths and spin, which in truth, are still lies. Lies abode in darkness. These people can't take criticism of their Savior which is government. Cosequently, they worship at the altar of the preists of their idolitry which are politicians friendly to their god. Anyone who challenges their god and his servants will be mocked and crucified.<br /><br />The poor soul who lost his life at the hands of the mad man Joe Stack will have the mad men and women of the media establishment stand on his remains and rail against that which they choose not to understand and, ultimately, at their own peril. That is the second tragedy unfolding of what happened in my hometown of Austin, Texas. Joe Stack was not a right-wing extremeist. Joe Stack is THEIR Timothy McVeigh.Richie L.http://www.blogger.com/profile/01455477592182220790noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5762034512225455375.post-70531696446123218752010-02-11T13:19:00.000-08:002010-02-11T22:15:24.624-08:00Dear FacebookDear Facebook,<br /><br />I haven't been on your site for long, but it has been fun. It was nice to meet up with old friends and family I haven't seen in a while and some I've never seen. You have provided a wonderful way for all of us to stay connected in an interactive setting. So, thanks!<br /><br />Now I know you guys are sore at Google for wanting to step on your internet turf a little and I'm sure you want to go "Mafia Wars" on them and tell them to get their cyber-hineys back on their own "Farmville." But, you know, the internet is a big, big place and I think there is room for all of us to play nice whether in the social networking world, search engine universe or whatever our particular thing is on the net. I'm sure you guys have sat around sipping S-Bucks and strategizing on how you can push back at the Google clan and let them know who's boss. I got it. I understand. And, maybe part of that strategery was to make Facebook a little more spicier for us "Facers" so we wouldn't jump ship and onto Google's new party boat. Maybe you had the best intentions. However....<br /><br />Fear is often a dangerous motivator and in your zeal to spiff up the joint, you actually made it tackier than Elvis and Lady GaGa decorating a basement for a Bah-mitzvah. Now I'm all for creative innovations, but the "new look" and layout of Facebook seems rather jumbled and overwhelming; not to mention all of the errors from things suddenly not working or freezing up. As an example, as a consumate "Twitterer," I love the simplicity of the layout there. Not too many whistles and bells and I can choose which functions and apps I want, to some extent. They make sense and Twitter is in constant touch with their users on feedback and suggestions and even critiques of the overall site. I know both sites work well together, so maybe, take a cue from them. I beleive they call that good 'customer service.' Granted, most of us don't pay for all of this Facebook fun and frivolity, yet if it weren't for us, Facebook wouldn't have the clout of huge numbers to help sell ads and links.<br /><br />I have heard rumblings and grumblings from many a "Facer" who is considering ditching Facebook all together. That would be too bad. It would ultimately play into the hands of all the other social networking sites and, dare I say, Google? Yes, this could all blow back in your face(book). This situation is analigous to a wife who thinks that the new secretary at the office where hubby works, may turn her man's head too often. So, feeling insecure, the wife gets a make-over and ends up looking like a cheap hooker or a clown and actually turns the hubby off; the very thing she feared! In reallity, the husband loved his wife just the way she was. Facebook, we users are the husband and you are the wife. We loved you just how you were.<br /><br />That tired, Billy Joel song comes to mind right now, "Just The Way You Are." We still love you Facebook. Take off that silly wig and the fire engine, red lipstick. Look in the mirror and love what you see and what you have done to change social networking. The Beatles said it well; "Get back, get back, get back to where you once belonged." Please Facebook, get it back to something a little less error prone, confusing, and more like it was. Otherwise, the song by One Republic, "Too Late to Apologize," could becomes your theme. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Thanks.<br /><br />From my smiling face to yours,<br />Richie L.Richie L.http://www.blogger.com/profile/01455477592182220790noreply@blogger.com1