God’s Power

I’m always a bit confused when I hear someone say something like, "I believe in God, but I don’t believe in the miracles of the Bible, and I don’t think He could have created the world. It just happened." It makes my head spin.

If that’s what you believe, then what kind of a god is it that you believe in? Is it a god that has limitations on its power, or is its power limited to the laws of nature? That’s a pretty small god.

By definition, God is "supernatural." That means He is not limited by nature. He’s above and beyond nature. In fact, He created nature itself and all the so-called immutable laws of the universe.

I thought that Pastor Mark Jeske hit it right on the head in his Grace Moments of Friday, June 13, 2008.

You can receive Grace Moments each day by going to https://www.timeofgrace.org/emailgrace.asp. Grace Moments are always brief and they are free. In 15 to 20 seconds each day, you will be inspired, uplifted, and renewed. If you don’t like them (you will, of course), you can cancel at any time.

Misdirected Finger

Should one laugh or cry? It’s highly unlikely that United States Senator Dick Durbin is an idiot. He has a college education and he was elected to the US Senate. Yet, when he exhibits absolutely no understanding of the way the free market works, one is left with limited choices regarding the august Senator. He’s one (or more) of the following:

1. A cynical politician who knows better.

2. An economic Marxist.

3. An economic illiterate.

Whatever he (and all the liberals in the Senate who called the oil executives to the Hill for political posturing) is, there’s one thing he is for sure—a certifiable hypocrite.

Let’s make this short and sweet. When there is a shortage of beans, the price of beans goes up. When there is an oversupply of beans, they become worth very little. The same thing is true of oil. When you have plenty of oil the price goes down. When there is a shortage, the price goes up.

There is only one group that has caused high gas prices—politicians who blocked oil exploration, production, and refining. Politicians like Dick Durbin, Ted Kennedy, Hilary Clinton, Barak Obama, Harry Reid, et. al. These "leaders" are the ONLY reason we have exorbitantly high gas prices.

They blocked off shore drilling (even at 60 miles out). They blocked drilling on a miniscule 10 square miles in Alaska. They blocked exploration in Montana, Utah and other states. They blocked the construction of new refineries.

Their finger pointing is misdirected. They need to look in the mirror, because they are the problem.

If you like gas prices at $4.00 or more per gallon, then keep electing these folks, because there is no end in sight. In fact, on May 27, 2008 the price of a gallon of gas in London was the equivalent of $10 per gallon US.

It’s time to throw the rascals out!

Who Stole My Church?

If you go to church regularly (and I hope you do), I recommend that you read the book—Who Stole My Church? by Gordon MacDonald (Thomas Nelson, Inc.). As someone who goes to church, you may have noticed a number of non-theological changes in your church service, i.e. contemporary music, bands, and a generally less formal atmosphere.

Today, the Christian religion is going through major changes in its approach to worship. The idea is to make the church worship service more welcoming to the current generation. Maybe you welcome these changes. Or perhaps you dislike them. Regardless of your reaction, this book is worth reading.

And it is also very clever. Gordon MacDonald has written more than ten books, but this one certainly takes an unusual approach to a topic. Instead of being your typical nonfiction book, MacDonald has written a fictional account of a church located in New England. The only real characters in the book are himself and his wife, Gail.

The general idea of the story is that a few years back, the faithful, loyal, and committed members of a small church outside of Boston called Pastor MacDonald to shepherd their church. They felt their church had plateaued, not doing the best job of reaching out into the community, and needed a new outlook and some new energy. Well, they got what they wanted and perhaps more than they wanted, but I’ll not ruin the story by going farther.

I do promise you that you will "recognize" people in your church (maybe even yourself) as you read this enlightening and entertaining book. MacDonald doesn’t promise solutions in this book, but he does provide an entertaining read that allows the reader to look at the changes going on in Christian worship from a different perspective. I don’t think you will be disappointed.

         What’s Your Line in the Sand?

The McCain game plan is now clear—take conservatives for granted and head left. The McCain folks are convinced that conservatives have no other place to go and that the thought of an Obama White House is so bad that no matter what McCain says or does, you and I will hold our nose and vote for him.

Is he right? Maybe.

Frankly, I hope not. There has to be a line which McCain cannot cross and still count on conservatives to support him.

We already know his track record—wrong on taxes, wrong on "global warming," wrong on amnesty, wrong on McCain-Feingold, wrong on ANWR, wrong on the Gang of 14, etc. There’s no logical reason to believe that Senator "Compromise" is going to fight for conservative judges, a secure border, lower taxes, oil exploration, nuclear power, or smaller government. No reason whatsoever.

Richard Nixon was elected by a landslide in 1968 over Hubert Humphrey. It was a disaster. We got wage and price controls, and diplomatic recognition of Red China. Humphrey would not have accomplished any of that, but compliant Republicans went along with liberal Democrats to push through all of Nixon’s bills.

President Obama may not be able to push through amnesty for illegal aliens, but you can plan on it with President McCain. Congressional Republicans will fight Obama tooth and nail on tax increases, but they will roll over for President McCain. Republicans will fight President Obama on signing "global warming" legislation that cripples our economy, but they will play patsy to President McCain. And the GOP will fight to the death against the socialized medicine proposals of President Obama, but cave in for President McCain.

Once again it comes down to the war in Iraq. But can a President Obama really precipitously pull out of Iraq? It’s not likely. The pull out message is directed solely to the far left Moveon.org crowd. Obama has to keep them on board through election day. After election day the anti-war crowd is expendable. Once Obama is in the White House he’ll have to take a more responsible course. Besides, there is nothing a President likes more than being in power during wartime.

So once again, is there any line that McCain can’t cross and still get your vote?

As I said in an earlier blog, I want to vote for John McCain, but I need a reason. My line in the sand is his choice for a running mate. If the running mate is another John McCain, he has crossed my line. If he or she is a young, certifiable, conservative, I’ll hold my nose and vote for Senator McCain.

What’s your line in the sand? Or is John McCain right? Can he do anything he wants and you will still vote for him?

I believe it was Joseph Stalin who said, "One death is a tragedy, a million deaths is a statistic." It’s beginning to be that way when it comes to government spending. If I lose a thousand dollars it’s a lot of money, but the government spending another billion dollars is just an incomprehensible statistic. I’m no cynic, but it seems to me that the government is totally out of control. Just what is it that happens to normal men and women who come to Washington, DC as Senators and Representatives? It appears that they become intoxicated on the power that comes to them through government spending.

All of which brings me to ask the question: Who does the housing bail out really help? Some would say that the answer is obvious—the ones who received the money. But is that really true?

Forget about the fairness of those who acted responsibly having to pay for those who acted irresponsibly. That’s not even that important in the scope of things. I think far more damage is done to those who are bailed out by the government.

Let me ask you this question: Do you help your children when you bail them out of problems that happen because they made bad decisions? When you do, does it really help them? Or, if you let them suffer the consequences of their mistake, does it have a positive effect on them?

Sometimes pain is good for us. We don’t like it. We’re embarrassed by it. It’s a struggle to overcome. But generally we’re better off as a result of it. I once had a friend who was a POW for nearly six years tell me aside from the lost time, his experience as a POW was a worthwhile learning experience. No, he wouldn’t do it over again (who would choose to be a POW or have any of the problems we face as humans—financial, health, relationship), but after the fact we are often willing to admit that they were good for us.

So back to my question: Who was really helped by the housing bail out? I don’t think we helped those who were bailed out at all. Will they now become more responsible because they were bailed out? Or will they forever assume that someone will bail them out when they encounter problems and difficulties as a result of bad decisions? I’d bet on the latter, not the former.

It’s not that I don’t care about these folks. I do. Believe me, I’ve made terrible decisions that have cost me dearly, but I must admit that they were also valuable learning experiences. Maybe I’m just someone who learns by making mistakes, and maybe you can’t relate. My experience is that problems are rarely as bad as we assume them to be. We may be embarrassed. We may be humiliated. We may have to crawl on our knees. We may have to overcome hardships, but we will, in the end, be better for it.

I don’t like it more than anyone else when I have to suffer for my stupid mistakes, but if someone were to bail me out, would I learn anything?

The only folks I can see the bail out helping is the politicians who seek to manipulate and control their fellow citizens to their political advantage. The more dependent the average Joe and Jill become upon government, the less freedom they will have and the more power the politicians will have.

Are we raising an entire generation of Americans who think that government should care for them from cradle to grave and protect them from every stupid decision they make? Look around the globe. There already are many governments like that. We call them dictatorships. They are located in Cuba and China, Venezuela, North Korea, and Iran.

                 I Want to Vote for McCain

I want to vote for John McCain. I really do. Several times I have gotten close to deciding that I can overlook his track record on taxes (voted against the Bush tax cuts twice), on big government (McCain-Feinstein), on blocking the appointment of conservative judges (Gang of 14), on the "Global Warming" hoax (McCain-Lieberman), and on amnesty (McCain-Kennedy). I think, "I’ll just hold my nose and vote for Senator McCain." And then he becomes John McCain again.

First, he attacks the North Carolina Republican Party for running an ad he disagrees with. (What is he running for, president or dictator?) Then he reiterates his stand for "comprehensive immigration reform," i.e. amnesty for illegal aliens.

This election year reminds me of the lyrics from that old song by Ervin Drake/Steve Lawrence, "A room without windows, a room without doors." Basically we have a choice between two liberal candidates—Barack Obama (liberal strong) and John McCain (liberal light). Or perhaps it reminds me of the inverse of the title of Phyllis Schlafly’s book – An Echo, Not a Choice.

Obviously Senator McCain feels more at home with Democrats like Kennedy, Lieberman, and Feinstein than he does with Goldwater, Reagan, or any other conservative. For some men, their word is as good as their bond, but with John McCain, who knows? Yes, I salute him for his service as a POW, but that in and of itself doesn’t qualify him to be President of the United States.

John, I (and millions of other conservative Americans) want to vote for you, but we need a reason. Why should we cast our vote for you? Will you really nominate conservative judges even though you said that Sam Alieto was too conservative ("wears his conservatism on his sleeve")? Will you really reduce the size of government even though McCain-Feingold dramatically expanded the size and scope of the Federal Election Commission? Will you really "secure the border" even though you co-sponsored the McCain-Kennedy amnesty bill? Will you really push hard for making the Bush tax cuts permanent even though you voted against them twice? Will you really work for energy independence even though you voted against drilling in Anwar?

Who are you, John McCain?

I’m holding out hope (but not much) that you will pick a young, clearly conservative running mate. That could push millions of conservative votes into your column (including mine).

Short of that, is the war in Iraq and Afghanistan enough to justify the election of another Richard Nixon, Gerald Ford, or Tom Dewey? Will President McCain really do less long-term damage than President Obama? Ugh! What a choice.

The Message of Jesus

All over the news and the Internet we find clips of the Reverend Jeremiah Wright cursing the United States, stating that the US Marines are just like the Roman soldiers who crucified Jesus, and saying that when terrorists attacked the twin trade towers, "the chickens came home to roost." He went on to say a lot of other weird, hatful, and racist things. He’s not defensible. And it’s hard to understand why Barack Obama stayed at his church for more than 20 years, contributing lots of money.

Politics aside, I am disturbed by the fact that a preacher like Wright damages the Christian message just as much as Jim and Tammy Faye Bakker and the other "fallen" Christian leaders.

The message of Jesus wasn’t revenge. It wasn’t hatred. It was love. In fact, Jesus said in Matthew 5:43-45, "You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.' But I tell you: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be sons of your Father in heaven."

The result of Jesus’ love was forgiveness. In fact, as he was dying on the cross, Jesus said, "Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing" (Luke 23:34). It was because of the Father’s love for you and me that he sent his Son, Jesus, to earth. He shed his power and his glory to become a simple, humble man. We are not lovable, but Jesus still loved us.

He then lived the perfect life that you and I can’t live and in his innocence gave his life on the cross for your sins and mine. As it says in 1 John 3:16, "This is how we know what love is: Jesus Christ laid down his life for us. And we ought to lay down our lives for our brothers."

Thankfully the story didn’t end there. Jesus rose triumphantly from the grave in a victory that he shares with us if we only trust in him.

That is the Christian message. It is worth saying again. It is a message of love, not hate; of forgiveness, not vengeance.

Politicians and misguided preachers come and go, but the good news of Jesus gives you and I hope that never fails.

All Biblical references are excerpted from Compton's Interactive Bible NIV. Copyright (c) 1994, 1995, 1996 SoftKey Multimedia Inc. All Rights Reserved

  John McCain & The Washington Post

I hardly knew whether to laugh or cry when I picked up the Sunday, April 20, 2008 edition of The Washington Post. There on the front page, presented as the feature story of the day, was the beginning of a "hit" piece on John McCain. The issue was John’s famous, always self-serving temper.

Could this be the same Washington Post that endorsed John McCain in the heat of the Republican primary race? When the Post and the NY Times endorsed McCain, I said to myself, "So what?" They certainly won’t endorse him in the general election." I’d like to say "I told you so," but it wouldn’t be a solo, it would be a chorus.

I wanted to write a blog about John McCain, the "Me Too!" Republican or John McCain, the "Johnny one note conservative," but if it wasn’t so sad that the ‘stupid party’ allowed Independents and Democrats to select their nominee, I’d laugh out loud.

How serious is McCain’s anger? Probably not as important as Obama’s questionable patriotism or Clinton’s lack of veracity, or their unified commitment to socialism that will surely lead to a depression. As one who has been at the receiving end of Senator McCain’s anger, I must chuckle.

No, I’m not too upset with McCain’s anger. That would be hypocritical of me since I have angry outbursts of my own (for which I am embarrassed and apologetic). But I am concerned by the Senator’s "one note conservative" track record.

Let’s see how the self-proclaimed "Reagan conservative" stands on the most important issues of the day:

    * Tax cuts: Although he voted against the Bush tax cuts twice, he 
       now pledges allegiance to lower taxes.

    * Immigration: He is an "open borders" advocate through 
       and through.

    * Global Warming: Although the scientific community is divided on 
       the cause of any global warming (some even contend the planet 
       may be cooling), McCain has a "me too" position on this issue. 
       Forget about a thorough scientific investigation, "Dam the 
       torpedoes, full speed ahead!"

    * Conservative judges: The McCain folks tell us not to worry, John 
       has always voted for conservative judges. Well, I hate to be a 
       skeptic, but there is a big difference between voting for 
       conservative judges and nominating conservative judges. John 
       Fund of The Wall Street Journal says he was at a meeting where 
       McCain said he would not nominate a judge like Justice Sam Alito 
       because "he wears his conservatism on his sleeve." If you don’t 
       feel a little less confident about President McCain nominating 
       conservative judges, I’d be surprised." Just ask yourself this 
       question: "Who is more conservative, President George H.W. Bush 
       or Senator John McCain?" Bush ’41 gave us Clarence Thomas, a 
       Justice committed to the US Constitution, but he also gave us 
       Justice David Souter, one of the worst members of Court. Now, 
       how’s your confidence that John McCain will appoint 
       conservative judges?

All of the above now brings us to "Johnny one note conservative," John McCain.

    * The War on Terrorism. This is it. Obama and Clinton will pull out, 
       demeaning the sacrifices of our valiant fighting men and women. 
       McCain will stand and fight.

Is this "one note" enough? Maybe.

It must be weighed against his "Democrat-like" positions on domestic issues. It must be considered against the devastation that Obama and Clinton will wreck on our land.

It may be enough.

It may be enough to ignore the fact that we will be turning the Republican Party over to the "Rockefeller wing" of the party and that the domestic agenda will be "socialism lite."

If John McCain wants to win he needs to send a very clear signal to the conservatives who make up the rank and file of the Republican Party by selecting a clear conservative as his running mate. Otherwise the GOP and the McCain presidency will lack the necessary grassroots energy and enthusiasm needed to propel it into the White House.

It will be interesting for sure.

                       Pebbles in Your Mouth?

Recently, the US Supreme Court held oral arguments in regard to the so-called "millionaires" provision that limits personal expenditures of a candidate running for Congress to $350,000. In regard to the goal of achieving a "level playing field" in the campaign process, Justice Antonio Scalia sarcastically asked, "What are we to do next if one candidate is more articulate than another, require him to speak with pebbles in his mouth?" What a breath of fresh air.

I am so weary of governmental efforts to "level the playing field." I have lousy hand-eye coordination that kept me from being a competitive Little League player when I was twelve. Does that mean the Little League or the government should have put a patch over one eye of the other players? I was also too short to dunk a basketball. I guess they should have given me a special lower basket.

If there is one thing I hope I taught my children, it’s that life is not fair—at least not on this side of heaven. God has given us all different talents and abilities. We are exactly who He wanted us to be. It is in overcoming some of our limitations that we gain character.

I would love to hit the little white ball straight down the fairway, putt accurately, and shoot in the 70s. It has never happened and it never will happen.

I’d also love to kick government out of the "fairness" business. Whenever government intervenes, it usually rights one wrong (real or imagined) and creates others. The marketplace, as imperfect as it may be, is always better than government when it comes to fairness. Always!

And when it comes to elections, we’d all be better off shutting down the FEC with all its rules and regulations, and simply requiring full and complete disclosure of all contributions and expenditures on a 48 hour basis over the internet. In spite of what the politicians would lead you to believe, we really are smarter than they think we are. Today’s FEC is a creation that dramatically un-levels the playing field. The incumbents have all the advantages and that is exactly what the creators of the FEC had in mind. Congressmen and Senators get free franking privileges to their constituents, they get a multitude of free flights back to their districts and states, they get free publicity on the local television stations and local newspapers every time they come to town, and they use your tax dollars to build bridges, dams and highways, to enhance their status as bringing home the "pork" to your state or district.

You and I would be better served if all challengers were able to outspend the incumbents, and they would have a chance to do so were it not for the onerous FEC limitations. The playing field has not been leveled, it runs steeply up-hill for challengers thanks to those who created the Federal Election Commission with all its rules, regulations, and limitations. While elections may not always have been fair prior to the FEC, there’s no doubt it’s much less fair today thanks to government meddling.

Lawrence Reed said it best, "Free men are not equal and equal men are not free." Amen.

                      The Real Education Tragedy

There is a real education crisis in America, but because of the players involved, no one wants to face the hard facts. One of those hard facts is that our public schools in the poor areas of our nation are just plain lousy. The drop-out rate is horrendous and the quality of the education those who stay in school receive is sub par (and that’s being generous).

Those who do graduate from high school pay a huge price. When you don’t get a good, solid education, how in the world can you compete in a tough college environment? How can you compete in the workplace? It’s a rotten deal and these children deserve better.

So what’s the problem? Who or what is keeping these schools from being top-flight educational institutions at both the primary and secondary levels?

Well, it’s not money. Take the District of Columbia, for example. The District spends more per pupil than nearly every other state in the nation, but the schools are notoriously lousy. They are lousy in terms of facilities and lousy in terms of education. There is simply no excuse for lousy facilities or getting a lousy education when there is that much money being spent per student.

It’s not the students either. They’re not dumb. Yes, they could use more encouragement and support from their parents, but lots of students could use that.

The real problem is the politicians who are being held captive by the National Education Association, one of the most far-left unions in the United States. Most of the politicians, right and left, know that they could facilitate a better education for the poorest members of our society by embracing school vouchers.

The jury is not out. School vouchers work. It’s happening today in Wisconsin and in other isolated locations across the country. Thanks to school vouchers, thousands of students who live in the poorest areas of Wisconsin are going to great schools thanks to the school voucher system in place. Many of these schools are like St. Marcus, which not only provides a top-flight education, but also the kind of moral and ethical guidance that will help their students become solid members of society. It took a left-right coalition of truly caring political leaders to secure school vouchers in Wisconsin. Together they created a better system for the underprivileged students in their state.

So why isn’t this successful system spreading like wildfire across the nation? There is one reason, and only one reason—the opposition of the most powerful union in America—the National Education Association.

This union wields massive power and control over the policies of the Democratic Party, making the politicians kneel at their altar. While Ted Kennedy, Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama lament the plight of poor Americans, especially black Americans, the truth is that they are the ones primarily responsible for holding back poor Americans. They are restraining them from realizing the American dream because they are captives of the NEA.

Almost no one would disagree that the key to getting out of poverty is education. The fact is that quality education for a large portion of our society is within our grasp—almost. If only those who pride themselves as being champions of the poor would put their politics aside and bring quality education to the inner cities and poor rural areas through school vouchers.

This is a tragedy that need not happen. We have the solution at hand. All that is needed now is political courage.