Feel good versus do good

The left convinces people to vote for them by catering to your feelings.  It sounds good to take from the rich and give to the needy.  It feels good to give stuff to people.  It feels good save the animals by telling people not to eat meat.  People feel like their doing something good. 

They also useguilt.  They guilt you into accepting their way of thinking.  They guilt you into believing global warming.  They guilt you into voting to raise your own taxes, "You have so much, and the poor have so little."  They guilt you into approving their tax hikes on the people who create jobs: "They are greedy rich people."  They guilt you into supporting their regulations on those who create jobs: "They are polluting your air without these regulations."

What is American Exceptionalism?

O

Obama recently said: " I believe in American exceptionalism just as I suspect that the Brits believe in British exceptionalism and the Greeks believe in Greek exceptionalism."

This statement pretty much proves to me that he was not educated by the same history books as average Americans like you and me.  He has no idea what American exceptionalism is.

So, what is American exceptionalism?  It's quite simple actually. Here is the definition:

American Exceptionalism: It's freedom and liberty. That's it. It's freedom and liberty.

The majority of history was full of bondage and slavery. For most of history 90% of the people of any nation lived in poverty with no chance of improving their lives. For 90% of history only the 10% who lived in the aristocracy had a chance at a good education and a well paying job. So the majority of people throughout history have lived under tyranny and despots.

Then along came America where every person was granted the freedom and liberty he or she was born with. The U.S. was the first place in the world where the government did not take away freedom and liberty, and therefore every person had an equal opportunity to succeed in life.

American exceptionalism is the opportunity provided to every person who lives in America because of freedom and liberty. American exceptionalism is not what Obama says: " I believe in American exceptionalism just as I suspect that the Brits believe in British exceptionalism and the Greeks believe in Greek exceptionalism."

American Exceptionalism is not that we are better people. It is not that we are superior people. It is not that we are smarter people. It is not that God loves us and hates everybody else. It is not that God prefers us. It is not that God doesn't prefer anybody else.

It is nothing more than the equal opportunity afforded to all who live among the American borders because our government does not and cannot (and this was ultimately guaranteed by the signing of the U.S. Constitution om 1787) make any efforts to take away our God given rights to freedom and liberty.

The backwoods man: The confidentiality thing

To go along with what I wrote yesterday, I believe that men who are "backwoods" (i.e., not liberals yet) believe that a discussion between a man and a man should remain confidential (i.e., kept secret; not told to the wife).  And the vise verse is true true.

I mean think about it.  A man is having trouble with his marriage, so he confided in another man.  He realizes the other man has the same issue with his wife.  Both men feel better.  They also feel secure knowing their discussion, whatever it was, will forever stay confidential.

The liberal man, on the other hand, may feel this way.  However, the truly conformed liberal will have no need to seek such confidence, as all problems should be out in the open.  Discussions, like on Soap operas, should be on the spot and in public.  There are not secrets.  Problems are solved on the spot.

Personally, this is conducive to conflict.  Most men, I believe, want to keep the peace, and keep their marriages.  Liberals, however, believe if you are not happy you should just leave your wife.  Thus, they don't care about the sanctity of marriage.

If you don't want a baby, you should just kill it, according to the liberal.  So if you are stressed about having a baby, you should end the problem right there by aborting it.  A "backwoods" family would struggle with the secret, and deal with it long term.  This, in essence, IMO, brings out better character in the end.

But, this is what I think.  If you choose to raise your kids another way, so be it.  But liberals don't believe you should have the option.  So they classify more traditional folks -- the backwoods folks -- as backwoods (or not normal, or not liberalized yet).  They want you to conform to the new way of living; to their way.  If you haven't, it's their job to label you (i.e. as backwoods), and conform you.

Backwoods man:  To judge or not to judge

I don't judge people.  I don't because I know life is hard.  You have some people who choose to raise their kids under god, and those who choose to raise their kids not under god. Personally I think my way of raising kids under God is proven to work, although not perfect.  Yet I would not judge a family for choosing to raise their children under no God.

Truly, though, I think the evidence is on my side. In fact, I know it is.  Most of the things we consider unfashionable today, such as abortion, random sex partners, etc., were considered normal in ancient Greece.   Men prepared for war were encouraged, at night, to sneak out and rape women.  They were encouraged to do this, and not to be caught.  Those who succeeded were heralded.  Those who were caught were punished.

A problem with this was that sexual disease and crime ran rampant in ancient Greece. For this reason, the Jews decided to encourage morals and virtues through their monotheistic God.  They encouraged their boys to respect women, and to encourage them to have their children.  In this way, there was still crime and still disease, but it was a far lesser problem than in ancient Greece and other similar societies.

Men and women, thousands of years ago, realized that something was needed to keep kids on the straight and narrow, that simple parenting was not enough.  That is why they encouraged God and, when Christians came around, the Bible.  The Bible, thus, teaches morality, virtues, principles, good behavior, respect, consciousness, etc. The Bible created a voice in the back of a child's head that says: "Stop! Behave yourself."

If you think you can raise your kids better than Christians can, then so be it.  I know for a fact that I have not mastered the skill of parenting, even using a technique mastered thousands of years ago.  If you think you have a better way, so be it.  I will not judge you.  Although, I must say, every study I have ever seen on the subject has supported my view, that Christianity is far more conducive to raising productive members of society than any other religion (including the religion of atheism).

I am in no way here trying to judge, nor criticize, nor condemn, nor offend people with opposing view: I'm just saying this because it's true.

The Church cannnot change just for you

Many people don't want to be a part of the Catholic Church because it won't modernize.  Every Pope that's ever existed has never given up on any of the same old, conservative Catholic principles.  Popes, unlike some republicans, do not cave to pressure. 

Surely the Church could stand to make some changes, such as I believe the Church should allow women into the papacy. But I also think the Church could do this and not give on principle. 

I do not, however, think the Church itself should change just to keep younger people going to Church.  When younger people age and realize they want to be a part of the Church, the Church will be there, unscaved and unhurt.  When poeple get hurt, the Church never does.  Surely there will be a scandal from time to time, but the Church is what it is. 

Note, that I am all for women in the papacy, but I don't want the Church to cave on principle.  So listen to this passage from a feminist protestor who stood outside the Vatican as the new Pope was introduced:

Yes. I mean, that's my dream as a child, is to see a woman out there on the altar. Um, when it comes to women's issues, when it comes to the sex-abuse crisis, um, when it comes to LGTB issues, reproductive health care, the church really needs to be transparent and open and welcome women's voices into those issues.

She also said:

 I do not practice now. I'm ecumenical, and I'm not alone. Many people I know who were raised Catholic no longer attend Mass and many aren't raising their children Catholic, either, when it's because of the sex scandal, the church's views on women, perhaps it's openness to other ideas like homosexuality. I bet there are a lot of people who might return to the church if it changed. After tonight's celebrations are over, the big question will be whether Pope Francis will be (dramatic pause) that change.

She doesn't just want the Church to ad women, she wants the church to ad women and change principle.  I'm not for that at all.  She wants the Church to change ist's views on LGTB, which, by the way, stands for Lesbian, gay, transgender, bisexual.  Other woments issues are reproductive health care, sex abuse, and women's voices. 

She believes the Church is way behind on those things. The church has gotta modernize, otherwise this woman doesn't want anything to do with it -- and that's what she ought to do! If the church is not to her liking, go somewhere else. It's not her job to go in there and make the church fit herself.

She has different political beliefs as the Church, and so she believes the Church should change just to cater to her beliefs.  The church should not have to change because of the political beliefs of some of its members.  If it did that, it would be twisted, inconsistent, and would soon become irrelivent (which may be what some people want.)

But the church is gonna have to do something to get them back. That's not how it works. Not with religion. Not with religion. That's not how this works. That's not how Christianity works.  That's not how Catholism works.  These things cannot change just to cater to a certain audience.  Jesus does not change.  Jesus will never change.  What Jesus stands for will never change.  If you don't accept Jesus, if you don't accpet what he is, then you cannot come into the Church. 

To quote Cardina Dolen, the new archbishob of New York:

Doctrine can't change. So to use the word "doctrinal changes" for a Catholic is almost an oxymoron. There are things that a pope can change that would not be doctrine, but more matters of church discipline. Priestly celibacy is not a doctrine of the church; it's a discipline of the church. Do I expect him to change it? No. Could he change? Yes. Possible, yes. Probable, no. But there's that distinction. Ordination of women, that's a doctrinal thing. That's not discipline.

They don't change the doctrine. That's the key. It's not up to debate. There is no consensus here. The church believes things. If you don't, then don't go. This is what orthodoxy is. And orthodoxy is certainty, certitude.

Yet if you decide to enter, the Church is always here for you.  Jesus will always be here for you, if you so choose to accept him into your life.  But he's not going to change for you, you have to change for the Church. 

Republicans must not give up on principle

I really haven't been doing much writing about politics lately, yet I've still been paying attention to what's been going on.  And one of the things that frustrates me lately is that when democrats lose elections they don't go around saying they need to change what they believe in in order to win the next election.

When democrats lose elections they don't say they are going to start being pro life.  They don't say they are going to give up on giving amnesty to illegal aliens.  They don't say they are going to give into the myth that tax increases generate revenue.  They don't do that.  The do the opposite.  They support their candidate. 

I have been hearing republicans doing the exact opposite.  I've heard republicans say that they are going to have to cater to the Mexican vote by supporting amnesty.  I've heard republicans say they are going to have to cater to women more by giving up on pro life. 

Yet doing those things would  be giving up on principle.  And the whole point of being a conservative is we are running on the principles we stand for.  You don't believe in life and then run on a ticket that doesn't believe in life.  That would be what the democrats do.  Republicans run on principle and principles do not change. 

So my advice to republicans and conservatives is to continue doing what you have always done.  Do not give in on your principles just because you lost an election, and a close election by the way.  We came this close to winning back the White House. Giving up on pronciple is not the way to move forward. 

We all make sacrifices, but "they" don't see it

There was a guy on the Today show this morning who said, "You know what's wrong with this country?  It's that no one wants to give up anything.  No one wants to make sacrifices to help other people."

Really?  No one.  If I said something like that around my wife she would have been all over it with a comment like, "First of all I think that statement is false just on the grounds it's a generalization."  Just that right there makes the comment idiotic.  And here was a guy on the today show.

It was a four person discussion and no one called him on it, which indicated to me they didn't find anything wrong with it.  I think that person lives in his little bubble, and fails to realize that most people in this country are trying to make a living with what little they have.  They don't have anything left to give.

I'm a perfect example of that.  I have a high school education.  I have six years of college education and three degrees, and a job as a respiratory therapist.  I live within my means in order to support my four kids.  After braces, school, sports, babysitters, and taxes and bills there's little money left for entertainment and giving.

And, quite frankly, my life is quite stressful.  Life is stressful in the middle class.  As any parent knows, it's nice to get away from your kids from time to time.  It's also important to get away with the entire family, which costs money.  I'm sorry, but my money is going to go to a vacation over a charity.

Why do I choose a vacation?  Two reasons:

1. To create memories for my kids.  
2. To travel to spend time with my parents, who aren't mortal

I feel fortunate to even have the opportunity to travel to Florida to visit my parents, with my kids. I work hard just to be able to afford to do this.  And this year even our annual vacation won't be done due to lack of funds.

I can think of many charities I'd love to give to.  I'd like to give to the republican national committe to defeat Nobama.  I'd love to give to National Jewish to support asthma.  I'd love to give to various lung organizations.  Yet that won't be done.

I had a member of the Knights of Columbus ask me to purchase a polo shirt for $22 the other day to support the charity.  It wasn't easy to say to the guy, "I'm sorry, but I'm strapped for cash right now."

"I understand," he said.

Of course he understands, he's in the profession of charity.  So I have no money to give, and I imagine most Americans are in the same boat as me.  The only thing I have to give are my words of wisdom and my time.  So does that make me selfish?  Does that make me "unwilling" to "sacrifice" for other people.

My entire life is a sacrifice.  Most Americans work hard like I do, and their entire lives are sacrifices too.  That does not mean we aren't willing to help our nation.  If you guys quit taking our money through taxes and forcing us to spend it on what you want, perhaps we'd have some discretionary money to "sacrifice" for good causes of our choosing.

Perhaps then we wouldn't look so selfish.  Yet because we are "wise" with our money and our choices, that guy on the Today show thinks we're "not willing to make sacrifices."  Shame on his ignorance.

The maturation of morals and virtues

I always contend that it's important for our kids to learn the truth in school, and that includes when it comes to truths that we don't necessarily agree with.  One of the best examples all time when it comes to avoiding the truth is when it comes to morals, virtues and religion.

This goes for both the right and the left.  It's quite apparent that many on the left try adamantly to get Jesus out of schools.  They don't want anything that has to do with Christianity to be mentioned, including God, Jesus and even Christmas.  Hence the term "Holidays" is used.  This is true even Holiday is in reference to a "Holy-day."

I won't delve into that because we read about it adnauseum, hear about it adnauseum, in the news, mainly news from the right.  Yet what we don't hear about is the truth about the moral and virtue shift.  A perfect example here is that in Ancient Egypt and Ancient Greece, where the weather was fairly warmer, it was normal to walk around naked and have people not even do a double take.  

Yet it was also considered normal to be gay, for a man to have a boy lover, for a man to seek prostitution, to have out of wedlock children, and to abort an unwanted boy or girl.  In fact, a man was more likely to be seen in public with his boy child rather than with his wife.  

Pederasty was an accepted and universal institution in the Greek world.  This doesn't imply Greek men were homosexual (it doesn't prove they weren't either), because a majority of men were married, had normal sex relations with their wives, with slave girls, and with courtesans at times.  Yet the woman stayed home and took care of the kids, and were ready when her husband was ready to have sex.  Her job was to take care of the home, cook, make kids and take care of them.  (1)

Because a woman stayed at home, a man was more likely to be seen in public with his adolescent boy lover than his wife.  Yet he would take care of his boy, and he'd mentor him and make sure he grew up to be a productive member of society.  

Henry Sigerist, who wrote "A History of Medicine," contends that the sexual frustrations of adolescent boys did not exist in antiquity.  As soon as a boy was ready he was allowed to have sex. In fact, in Sparta boys were encouraged to go out and rape a girl, but if he got caught he was whipped.  This was standard and accepted practice. (1, 2)

War was common in the ancient world, and to a soldier far from home it was normal to seek satisfaction by a prostitute.  This was also common in Ancient Egypt, and if a child was born it was okay because extra hands were always needed.  Yet in Ancient Egypt 8 out of 10 babies were not born alive, and therefore nature was the most common form of contraception.  Plus many kids died before they reached the age of two due to diseases they were highly susceptible to.

Homer mentions relations between men, although this was most common during periods of war.  Alexander the Great is written about by some historians as a man who had relations with boys or other men, yet this, once again, does not mean he was a homosexual.  It was simply accepted the practice during his time.  

In Egypt it was common for young girls to be married off at the age of 12 or 13, as soon as they reached puberty.  Their husbands were 15 or 16.  Marriage to brothers and sisters was not uncommon, and to have many wives and many children was not abnormal either.  Ramses II had 170 children.  (2)

Lesbian acts were also common in Greece mainly because the women were confined to the house, and their husbands were often off abroad for long periods of time, or simply off at work or in the markets or participating in sports all day long.  

Sigerist explains this way of living:  

"when we study ancient cultures our task is not to judge but to understand them.  To that end we must avoid measuring them with the moral yardstick of our own time, realizing that our own morals have no absolute value but are the result of certain historical developments in which we happen to be involved at the moment.  This is particularly necessary when we study the sex life of other civilizations.  Customs vary; the style of living changes.  to the superficial observer it may look as if the Greeks had been highly promiscuous, having intercourse with whoever happened to be around -- wife, slave girl, courtesan, boy, man -- but this was not at all the case.  Affections were at least as deep as they are today.  No Don Juan creates an art, literature, and philosophy as the Greeks have.  Human relations were broader and deeper, and there was less hypocrisy in matters of sex than in our present world." (2, page 222)

Somewhere along the line our moralistic views changed.  Perhaps men like Moses, who lived withing the Egyptian world, saw how difficult life was for children living amid these circumstances. It was men like him, thousands of years ago, who saw the value in creating a stable environment for children to mature in.  

Perhaps it's for this reason that homosexuality and prostitution were frowned upon, as well as extramarital affairs, sex with young boys and girls, multiple marriages, etc.  Perhaps I'm safe in making this speculation because the Bible in itself is a book of virtues, values, morals, family unity, discipline, individualism, capitalism, etc.  

So when people today talk about making homosexuality, abortion, sodomy, and the like normal parts of our life, or acceptable, they are in a sense trying to take the morals of mankind full circle, back to the way they were during ancient Greek and Egyptian times.  

I doubt that most of these people know this.  I doubt they think of the consequences of this change that they are calling for.  However, it's hard to argue with them when as Americans, as people who live in a free world, we preach the importance of freedom, personal choice, and accountability. 

People should have the right to live the way they choose, whether that be by their environmental choice or natural calling.  If such a choice has a consequence on their children, family life, or on society as a whole, it is their choice not the choice of government.  Such may be the case, or argument, by those who call for gay marriage or the right to abortion (choice).  

Yet it is the risks of such a promiscuous living, or choices, that have many in our society, mainly the religious among us (either Christians, Muslims or other).  It is the religious majority who wish to place restraints on society, and who yearn to encourage governments to make abortion, homosexuality, and other such activities abnormal.

Such values and virtues were recognized by the founding fathers.  Jefferson and Madison wrote letters at length discussing the importance of the government inculcating religion among the people. And hence is why we have religious words all over Washington, on our coins, and why Presidents said prayers and encouraged prayers in schools.  

The founding fathers new that the government could not afford a military or a police, and so they needed to do something to encourage people to be good.  The recognized this by studying ancient societies. 

So even those who did not believe in God decided that God was important.  People who believe in God also believe in the Devil and Hell.  People will try to be good to get to Heaven and to avoid the fires of Hell.  

Those who wish to change what the founding fathers created for America wish to go back to life as it was in Ancient Greece or Egypt or even Mesopotamia.  Yet now that we have studied our history, and wrote the truth about that history instead of telling children the history we want them to know about, we can understand both sides a little better. We must continue to strive for a happy medium.  

What do you think?

References:

1. Sigerist, Henry E, "A History of Medicine," volume I; Primitive and Archaic Medicine, second printing, 1955, New York, Oxford University Press, pages 240-241
2. Sigerist, Henry E, "A History of Medicine," volume II: Early Greek, Hindu, and Persian Medicine, second printing, 1955, pages 219-221

No society can exist without a virtuous people

No society can exist without a virtuous people.  The founding fathers new this by their study of history, and they debated this topic long and hard.  They wanted to make sure that virtue was inculcated into the minds of every American, starting from the very young.

Thomas Paine in his book "Common Sense" wrote that the only way a republic can survive is if the people are "industrious, frugal, and honest."  He also wrote that if the people don't become virtuous, and instead yearn for "luxury, indolence, amusement and pleasure" the nation will become corrupt and it will collapse.

In fact, the founders saw arrogance and indolence in the British system that caused the King to tax the American Colonists without due representation.  This was one of the reasons to justify the separation from the Mother Nation.  

Yet the founders also knew virtue was not a right, as I wrote about here.  It was not something you were born with.  It was not something that would always be there from generation to generation.  It had to be taught.  It had to be earned.  It had to be learned.  It had to be nurtured.  It had to be inculcated into every generation starting with the young, and there would have to be constant reminders about it.  It must be retaught and retaught throughout one's life.

It had to be obtained during the course of life as Thomas Jefferson noted when he said, "Virtue is not hereditary."

They also knew that any person, with a good guide, can become a virtuous person.  For this reason they believed it was important to have a good educational system that taught about God.  They believed that if a person grew to fear the Devil they would automatically be a virtuous people.  

Likewise, if people were to attend religious services every week they would be reminded of the importance of virtue.  Virtue would likewise be nurtured by readings of the Bible, and this is why most of our Presidents have referenced the Bible in their speeches.  

They wanted moms and dads to talk about virtue, and teachers, and leaders in the community and pastors and priests in churches in each community.  Virtue must be taught from generation to generation and must  --must -- remain a powerful part of the community.  

In his Farewell address, George Washington said, "Let it be simply be asked, where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths which are the instruments of investigation in courts of justice?  And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion.  Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education... reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle."

People must be taught to be honest, and just, and fair in their speech and their work and in paying their dues to society. This was needed for the republic to succeed -- and it's still needed.

References:

• Skousen, Kleon -- National Center for Constitutional Studies, "The 5,000 Year Leap: The Miracle That Chanages The World," 1981, 337 pages

Absolute truth

One of the things we have gotten away from in this country is telling people about absolute truths because we are afraid of offending people.  We've gotten away from this in church, courts, school, politics and, you guessed it, the medical field.  The result has lead to many of the problems we face today.

There are two things we are told never to discuss with strangers, and these are religion and politics.  The reason is because we don't want to offend them.  Yet in church, in court, in school, and in politics we should be exploring the truth and teaching about absolute truths.

Yet out of fear of offending someone, we don't do this anymore.  Today we are more interested in keeping the peace that telling the truth.  The reason for this is because the truth can hurt.  And by golly in today's world of political correctness, we are more interested in keeping the peace than teaching truths.

To make matters worse, since we have quit talking about absolute truths, we have become lazy intellectually.  Instead of continuously looking for answers, we settle for what we already know.  And I think there are no better examples of this than right here in the medical field.

For years evidence has been coming out -- and reported right here at the RT Cave -- that the hypoxic drive is real but the hypoxic drive theory is not real.  Evidence supports the idea of giving patients the oxygen they need, and yet doctors continue to underoxygenate COPD patients out of fear they will cause the patent's carbon dioxide to rise and their drive to breathe to diminished.

Yet in all my years as an RT, I have only seen this happen once.  I've seen CO2 rise slightly, yet that's it.  I have only seen a COPD patient have a syncopal episode following oxygen therapy once.  And he was put on a ventilator and his breathing supported, and he lived on another two years. 

Yet because we RTs are enablers, in that we are more concerned to keep the peace than to risk offending a doctor and stating the truth, this theory continues to be worshiped by many physicians.  Because we are afraid to tell the absolute truth, patients are needlessly suffering.  Because we are afraid to tell the truth, the science world has become lazy in their research because doctors are not pushing for the absolute truth.

Instead, doctors in this country continue to teach and practice based on theories that are older than dirt.  Patients suffer, respiratory therapists and nurses are overworked and burned out (resulting in apathy), and the entire medical field suffers as a result.  And we RTs and RNs know about the problem and solutions, yet we don't tell the truth because we are afraid of offending physicians.

Another perfect example is in my field of medicine.  Doctors order breating treatments that I have to do on every patient who wheezes or is short of breath, yet my medicine only treats asthma.  The result is we RTs become burned out and apathetic.  We are so burned out we don't have time to write protocols and educate ourselves.  We become lazy. We become enablers to stupid doctor orders. 

In RT schools and doctor schools we need to start investigating truths and teaching them.  We need to stop worrying about offending doctors who've been around for 50 years and are leaders of the medical cliche.  In economic schools we need to study history and learn from what works and what does not work. I am confident that if we studied this, we'd soon learn that federal governments would be better off living by the same economic and budget standards of the common household.

That taxes are needed yet too much tax and spending will bankrupt not just a household but a government.  That to teach about frugality and virtues is essential to maintaining a just and noble society that will prosper.  That not teaching these, as we've done the past 40 years, will only result in the destruction of the fabric that forms societies.  I've written about this on my blog before.

There is a force of evil over the world right now, and it's being lead by progressives and radical Islam.  T
hey are the one's who have been on the offense the past 100 years because the rest of society has become lazy and hasn't been looking for them.  While we have a blind eye turned to them, progressives have destroyed the moral fabric of America right from within. It has been destruction by insiduous means.

While we had a blind eye to them terrorists have been planning our destruction and even destroyed the Twin Towers in New York.  Yet we continue to have a blind eye to them and they continue to work together for the destruction of the West in order to either create a New World Order of a global Caliphate. 

Democracies are probably going to be formed in the Middle East.  If true democracies are formed that are lead by just and noble people, the world will benefit.  If these democracies give power and protect the freedom of the people, great.  Yet I think too many people assume this is what will happen. 

Yet all along progressives and radical Islam have been planning on taking over these democracies and creating either a socialist country or a radical Islamic country.  If progressive get their hands on the countries they will form communism and take away freedoms.  If radical Islam gets ahold of those countries, they will surround Israel and slaughter the Jews in a second holocaust.  The holocaust caused by Hitler will pale in comparison.

They will not stop there.  WWIII will result.  Either you are with them or you will be killed.  And this will all happen becasue we turned a blind eye to them.  We didn't want to speak up in churhes and schools about the absolute truths because we were afraid of offending. 

Yet speaking these truths may hurt the person you're telling it to.  You wll insult their intelligence.  You may even risk losing respect, and even your job.  Yet this is what's needed in the medical field. 

I don't know if you guys know about this, but when Moses escaped Israel, only 20 percent of the Israelites left with him out of fear of the absolute truths that lay out their.  They weren't sure they wanted to make the sacrifice, take the risk of going where no one has gone before.  They were afraid to face the absolute truth. So for this reason only 20 percent of Israelites stood by Mt. Sinai when Moses introduced them to the Ten Commandments.

Yet that's all it took was a small 20 percent to stand up and tell the truth.  All it takes is for a small group to peaceably assemble and say that the medical field is broke and we need to fix it, that we need to find the absolute truths and teach.  We need to put a kingdom of light over the darkness caused by the power of deception.

We need to get leaders in the Muslim, Jewish, Christian, Conservative and liberal communities to stand up and speak out, and to develop followers who seek to learn the absolute truth.  We can all come together and become the most powerful majority on the face of the earth.  It only takes a small number. It only takes 20-25 percent.

Ronald Reagan once said that "Freedom will prosper when religion is vibrant and the rule of law under God is followed."  No government has lasted  as long as the U.S. government.  If we go back to the core values that formed this nation, we will never fail.  We must have hope.

Facebook
Twitter

Here's why I'm a conservative

Men and women are born with the natural right to choose.  They have a right to try, a right to reep the rewards of their efforts, and a right to fail.  It'a called personal responsibility and accountability.  Yet while it's often necessary, we also have a natural tendency to HATE being told what to do.

The parent-child relationship is a perfect example.  Parents don't want their kids to make the same mistakes they did, so they often create their own personal guidelines and rules for raising their kids.  Some of these rules and guidelines have been passed on from generation to generation and have even become unwritten guidelines and rules for parenting, such as to create a sort of paradigm to make getting through life easier.

Examples of this are common sense rules such as the following:

• Be careful picking up a wet kid, they are slippery
• Support a baby's head
• Keep choking hazzards away from a baby
• Always know where your kids are
• Let your child know who the boss is
• Don't let the TV become the babysitter

One rule my parents had was, "Don't sit too close to the TV!"  Yet I rarely listened to this rule, and I did sit close to the TV.  Then my parents would say, "Don't sit too close to the TV or you'll go blind."  I never went blind. 

Ironically, now we sit in front of computer screens all day and you never hear about anyone going blind for that reason.  That rule was unfounded and untrue.  Yet it was a rule we had to follow.

So you see, some rules are good, yet too many rules simply cause trouble. Not only are they hard to enforce, they are irritating to the people who have to follow them.  Rules should be scarce and strictly enforced so there is a huge incentive to follow them, and that incentive is the right to maintain your natural rights. 

When my boss tells me to do something I have no choice but to do it, even if I think it's rediculous.  I hate doing breathing treatments on people who don't need them, yet doctors ORDER me to do them anyway. 

Yet one of the reasons doctors order them is not because they want to, but because the governmenet won't reimburse for a patient's admission unless treatments are ordered.  So the government telling doctors what they have to do iritates me, causes me to do useless therapies, and ultimately burns me out.

And this brings me back to my point, which is that it would be far better if poeple would simply leave other people alone.  Don't tell me what to do.  Don't tell me how to do my job, especially if you have no clue what I do.

So you can see I hate being told what to do.  I hate it when people in an office 5,000 miles away take my money and spend it on things I don't want my money spent on.  Heck, I hate it when my own wife tells me to zip my pants before I even have a chance to finish dressing on my own. 

The founding fathers had this in mind when they created the U.S. Constitution.  They made it so that no government official could legally take away any natural right from any American citizen.  The states could, and so could local governments, and so could moms and dads, yet the Federal government could not.

The fouinders wanted to make sure the government did not tell people what to do -- with anything.  The reason they did this was because they hated it when the British king took away their money to pay for wars they weren't interested in.  They essentially had taxation without representation, which is the subtraction of a natural right.

So essentially they made it so the Federal government only had the power to make laws regarding a few essential elements, such as maintaining an army, and maintaining a good economic environment.  It did not have the power to take my money and tell me how I had to spend it.

That's why I'm a conservative.  I don't want to be told what to do.  I have no problem helping people out, yet I don't want my hard earned money going to help people spend 40 years sitting on their couches and buying them $100 sneakers and $40 worth of Budweiser each week. 

The elderly need to be taken care of, and I have no problem with this being a government job, yet the Federal government should not be involved in it -- it's unconstitutional.  It's telling us what to do, and it's not in the Constitution that the Fed has to take care of the elderly. 

I hate the Federal government telling us we have to put money into a social security program that is not now how FDR originally intended it to be, and also is probably going to go bankrupt by 2024 along with Medicare because we simply cannot afford it. 

Encouraging people to prepare for retirement is a good thing, and the states surely could pass laws making people choose to put a certain amount of their money in retirement accounts so they can retire and have money available for health care until they die.  Yet the Federal government has no Constitutional right to tell us we have to put our money in.

Problems need to be solved by local people.  If I see a homeless person, then I will help him out.  And if I help him out I know 100% of my money will be used by that person because I saw the transaction.  Yet if the Fed has taken my money to give to that guy, probably 10% of that money will make it to the homeless guy and he'll never get out of poverty because 20 bureaucrats absorbed the other 90%.

So what's better:  Me helping that poor guy out, or Uncle Sam?  I hate being told what to do.  I hate being told to put on a clean shirt and to shave if I don't want to.  I might be better off looking and smelling good, but I shouldn't have to.  It's a natural right to choose. 

It's a natural right to get irritated by an irresponsible government making rules that I -- and perhaps you -- dont' want to follow.  And when you make them it's nearly impossible to get rid of them.  The founders new this, and it's why they made the Fed limited in scope.

I am a conservative because I don't like to be told what to do.  I want Uncle Sam off my back and off yours.  I want America to go back to the simple days when a U.S. President didn't use Federal money and power to bail out a failing bank, or business or economy.  Depressions were shorter when people didn't tinker with them.  Just ask FDR about that one.  His Great Depression lasted longer than any other because he couldn't keep his paws off.

I want to go back to the pre-Woodrow Wilson days when the U.S. Constitution was respected and the words and wisdom of the founding fathers was taught in U.S. Schools.  There's a reason the Constitution was written how it was, as a solid document to stand the test of time so natural rights could never be strippled from Americans. 

I am a Conservative because I want to be free.  I want a right to choose how to spend my money.  I want to be able to afford to help the poor.  I want to have more options how to prepare for retirement, and how togive the money I earn -- including my retirement and social security money -- to my children if I so choose instead of it being absorbed by the government.

I want a common sense approach to government.  That's why I'm a conservative.  I want to have the right to be lazy and stupid and wrong, even if that means I have to suffer the consequences of my mistakes.  Because in the world the founders created, I can also reap the rewards of my hard work without being punished so other people who don't work can eat chips all day.

When an expert in Washington decides what's best for me and makes a rule I have to follow, they are also assuming they are right.  By making decisions for me they are also making me reliant on them, and this makes me lazy -- like the 25 year old who still lives with mom and dad.  If you don't pay your own way, where's the incentive to ever do anything with your life.

This is why I often let my kids make their own decisions.  Sure I don't want to see them fail, so I might help them along.  Yet once they cross that bridge I take it away so they have no option but to keep going forward.  Progressives in Washington do the opposite:  they keep bridges up all over the place so people are encouraged to rely on mom and dad -- or Uncle Sam.

The reason I let my kids help themselves is because I don't want to discourage them from, perhaps, becoming the next great thing, from seeing another paradigm like Thomas Edison, Henry Ford and so many other great Americans did. 

When we forcibly take from those who succeed to give to those who do not succeed we discourage innoation. That is perhaps the number one reason China's economy will soon pass us as the most powerful economy in the world.  America has lost its edge.

Why hasn't an American inventor invented a powerful batter to run a car?
Why hasn't an American inented an environmentally friendly heating system?

The answer is because there is no incentive the way there was in the 19th century, the 1920s or the 1980s.  Americans have become dependent on Uncle Sam.  We have become enablers.  And I hate it, and therefore I'm a conservative.

I  just want to relax and enoy myself.  And if you do to you'll join the conservative cause.

Values and Priorities

There are many people who read the Bible, and every one of those folks might have a unique way of interpreting different parts of the Bible. This actually occurred recently between myself and one of my patients. We actually both had unique interpretations about the Tower of Babel.

However, in the end, we both decided that every Christian, every person who believes in God, or studies the Bible however religious, should get two things out of it.

1. Virtues: We must all be virtuous above all else

2. Priorities: We must have our priorities in order

Jesus said that the most important commandment is to believe in God, and the second most commandment is that you should love your neighbor, and treat your neighbor as you would yourself..

If we can skim it down, if you put God first, then you are putting virtues first. If you are putting your neighbors second, then you are thus putting God first, and thus virtues first. If you are a virtuous person, then you will not only love your neighbor, you will be loved by your neighbor.

So it comes down to -- bottom line -- values and priorities.

Rights verses privileges

Rights are things that you are born with. You do not get rights from the government. You get rights from birth. The only impact the government can have on rights is that the government can take rights away from you.

Every human is born with the same rights. We are all born with the right to speak, the right to defend ourselves, the right to arm ourselves, the right to a fair trial among our peers, a right to practice religion, etc. These are things we are born with.

This is what makes the U.S. Constitution unique, and one of the reasons it's the longest lasting Constitution, is because the founding fathers understood that rights things we are born with. The Constitution was written as such that it would prevent the government from taking any action to take away these rights.

When the government gives you something, it's not a right, it's a privilege. For example, you have the privilege of driving a car, and handicap people have the privilege of ramps and larger bathrooms and such.

When you hear a politician say he is fighting for handicap rights, you have proof of his ignorance. What he really meant to say was that he is for handicap privileges.

You often hear about Gay rights and racial rights and so forth. The same principle applies here. Every human being has the same rights, and it doesn't matter what creed, color, race or sexual orientation. We are all equal and we should all be treated with equal respect.

Again, the U.S. Constitution understood this, and it portends to protect us from each other. The founders understood that my rights stop where your rights begin. In this sense, the U.S. constitution protects us from each other, not from ourselves.

Thus, the government does not have a right to tell you what you can eat, or what you have to buy (healthcare), or where you can live. You are born with a right to live as you wish, and the U.S. Constitution must protect this right. That is, so long as you're not infringing on someone else's right to live as he wishes.

You have a right to scream as loud as you want. Yet this right stops at when your neighbor decides he wants to have piece and quiet. You have a right to drive at any speed you want in your car, yet this right stops when your driving puts other people at risk.

So common sense applies. Put simply:

• Rights: Things you are born with
• Privilege: Things given to you by the government

The next time someone says something like, "I'm fighting for the rights of union workers." You will know that union workers have the same rights as you and me. If anything, he's fighting for the privileges of union workers.

In this way, politicians twist words in order to make things sound better than they actually are. Rights are rights, and privileges are often treated by some to be rights when they are, well, just privileges.

Zacharia described state of U.S. in 518 B.C.

When the founding fathers were working to create this nation they did a ton of research in order to learn from the past and not to repeat the mistakes of the past. For this reason it is essential that in order to maintain this great nation we must continue to learn about the past so that we do not repeat the mistakes that were made.

Yet what we are experiencing right now in the United States is nearly identical to the time period of 518-520 B.C. as described in The Book of Zechariah in the Holy Bible. Zezharia is not a well known prophet, and therefore you don't hear that name very often. There are many children born with the name Jeremiah because the prophet Jeremiah gets many chapters in the Bible. Yet Zechariah gets only few.

Yet the point he makes is a good one.

He was a prophet during a time when the Assyrians had taken over Israel, which at that time extended from the Dead Sea to the Sea of Gibraltar. The area by the Dead Sea was mushy and mostly deserted and not worth much, but the rest of the land, the land in the West, was very fertile and worth a lot. So the Assyrians had good reason to take over this land.

The Assyrians worshipped false gods. They made the Israelites slaves. They worshipped the sun and the moon. The economy and morale was in ruin. Since the economy was in ruin, King Darius of Persia was able to easily come in and wipe out the rulers of Israel and take over the nation.

Zecharia was one of the few who noticed what was going on, and why the land of Judah (Israel) was in such dissaray. In fact, he described the destruction of the once prosperous Israel as the result of lack of morals and values. Hence, the people of Judah had goten their priorities in the wrong order.

The Book of Zechariah notes that, "The Lord Almighty told Zecharia to say to the people, "I the Lord, was angry with yoru ancestors, but now I say to you, 'Return to me, and I will return to you."

What he was saying was that the economy of Judah was ruined because the people started worshiping their stuff more than they worshiped him. In that way, this story is similar to the story of the Tower of Babel. There the Land of God became in ruin because the people started worshiping false gods and worshipping their stuff more so than God. They put their stuff before other people. They put their stuff before work. They put their stuff before their children.

So they divorced. So they lost communication with their kids, and their kids made bad decisions. So the economy collapsed. And so the country of Islam was taken over by those who tried for years to destroy Israel.

Yet God, through Zecharia, was telling the people of Israel that if they want their coutry back, they will have to get their priorities striaght. They will have to put God first, their wives second, their children third, other people and other things. They must put God first, family second, their country third, and then their stuff.

The idea that Zecharia describes is mentioned later in the Bible too, because the writers wanted to prevent the people of Israel from repeating the errors that lead to the decline of Israel. Matthew (5)mentions it adn so does Paul to the Corintheans (1).

Yet a similar thing is occuring right now in the U.S. I wrote about it here in my State of the Union 2011. We have put our stuff before our God. We put our stuff before our family. We put our stuff before our country. And the result is we are losing our country. The economy is sputtering out of control. Other nations yearn to destroy us.

To top it off, radical Islam is perhaps making a gallant effort to form a caliphate in the Middle East, and perhaps a world caliphate with the intent on destroying all who don't believe in Allah, and forcing all others to live under the law of Islam (I wrote about this here).

"Then the angel said, 'almighty Lord, you have been angry with Jerusalem and the cities of Judah for seventy years now. How much longer will it be before you show them mercy."

Values were increased. Morals were returned to the people. They learned to get their priorities in place. Then...

"So I have come back to Jerusalem to show mercy to the city. my Temple (values) will be restored, and the city will be rebuilt... The Lord has promised that he himself will be a wall of fire around the city to protect it and that he will live there in all his glory."

Of the enemies of Israel, the Lord said through Zechariah: "The Lord himself will fight against you and you will be plundered by the people who were once yoru servants."

With virtures and priorities, a nation cannot be defeated. And since the virtues of the Israelites were far greater than the Assyrians, the Israelites would win back their nation. In much this same way the American Revolution took place.

If any place on earth has reason to thank God for its existence it is America. Americans should be thanking God every day. We did this for the first 160 years of our existence, and since then progressives in this nation have worked hard to get rid of God in our Country. They have taken God out of schools. They have taken God out of our public buildings. They have created a welfare state that has destroyed the morale of the people and made many feel helpless and trapped.

It is true that Jeruselum fell because of lack of values, and Jeruselum rose again because its values returned. There is a parelel between what The Book of Zecharia describes here and what is going on in the U.S. today.

Zechariah writes:

The Lord gave this message to Zechariah: "Long ago I gave these commands to my people: 'You must see that justice is done, and must show kindness and mercy to one another. do not oppress widows, orphans, foreigners who live among you, or anyone else in need. And do not plan ways of harming one another.'"

Today we have abortions that are legal, and this has devalued life. This has helped draw our priorities out of order. Many people, especially those in poverty, have learned to place their posessions before the child.

Many who are not in poverty have decided to only have two children because they want more time for fun, more time to work so they can make more money so they can get more stuff, more cars, a bigger house and more and more stuff. They want more time to play with their stuff

What gets lost in all of this, is we spend so much time trying to get stuff, and playing with our stuff, that we forget to pray. We forget about God. We forget to spend time with the people in our lives we should be spending time with, adn then things get all messed up.

But my people stubbornly refused to listen. They closed their minds and made their hearts as hard as rock. Becaue they would not listen to the teaching which I sent through the prophets who lived long ago, I became very angry. Becaue they did not listen when I spoke, I did not answer when they prayed. Like a storm I swept them away to live in foreign countries. This good land was left a desolate place, with no one living in it."

He has a message for those nations outside Israel who are evil and slanderous and worship false gods and have their priorities in the wrong order, such is not unlike progressives, socialists, and Islam of today: "These are the things you should do: Speak the truth to one another. In the courts give real justice-- the kind that brings peace. Do not plan ways of harming one another. Do not give false testimony under oath. I hate lying, injustice, and violence."

Progressives and radical Islam has to hide their ultimate goals of yearning for the new world order and global caliphate respectively. Both yearn to take from the rich and give to the poor, and take away the incentive to work hard. They both want a global welfare state. They both want to incite chaos and violence as a means of achieving their goals Examples include the war on poverty that failed, and the war on drugs that's failing, or Islamic terrorism.

He adds, ""Once again old men and women, so old men and women, so old that they use canes when they walk, will be sitting in the city squares. And the streets will again be full of boys and girls playing. This may seem impossible to those of the nation who are now left, but it's not impossible to me. I will rescue my people from the lands where they have been taken...

"Have courage! You are now hearing the same words the prophets." You must never quit trying. You msut believe. You who see what is wrong must not stop trying to change it. You must have courage.

America will be restored, just like Israel way back in 518-520 B.C. It's another tale from the past reapeated becasue men keep reverting back to materialism, false gods, wrong priorities, and lack of virtues.

And, as George Bush said when he helped to create a democracy in Iraq, democracy spreads. Once the rest of Islam sees what it's like to live in freedom, they too will want it. And that, I believe, is part of the reason for the riots in the streets in the Middle East today. Although their quest may result in those who belive in the Caliphate taking control if we aren't careful.

Yet The Book of Zacharia describes how freedom will spread: "In those days ten foreigners will come to one Jew and say, 'We want to share in your destiny, because we have heard that God is with you.'"

The true state of the union

Union means we are united against the greater causes. We are a melting pot and all in it together. It does not, however, mean that we all have to agree. It also does not mean we all have to get along.

The truth is, there was as much partisan divide way back when John Adams and Thomas Jefferson were hashing it out for the office of the President of the United States as there is today. So I don't agree there is more "partisanship" today than ever before. People who say that haven't read their history books, or have read history books that are slanted.

There are, however, problems in this nation, and that is the reason for the partisan divide. You have one half of politicians who believe the solution is more government and more government, and you have the other half who wants to return to the solutions the founding fathers used in creating this great nation.

One of the greatest problems in this country is not whether or not Joe Smith or Bob Apple get health care or are allowed to retire at 62. That might be a fight, yet it's not the most important. A greater issue is the one you see when you watch a fight between two ladies in a subway cab and there are little kids standing by and no one gets up to help.

A greater issue is when a customer gets into a fist fight with a worker at a Wendys and people stand by and watch. People think to tape this stuff, yet won't set the camera down and help. They place it on You Tube as though they are proud of it. Yet they should be ashamed of themselves for not doing something. It's a priority issue is what it is. People who tape this stuff with pride is the problem. People who watch it are the problem too.

This, I think, is a greater issue with this country. This is a "symptom" of a greater apathy in the nation. It's a sign that we have lost interest in other people. We make fun of them instead of help them. And that, I think, is a problem.

I watched an episode of a popular children's show recently with my children -- a show my children watch every day just about -- and on this episode is a boy who is on regularly who sneezes and sniffles his way through life. Instead of having empathy the children in the show make fun of him. They hate this boy. They don't want him in their lives. This lack of values is part of the problem

When I read the history of the Frea family I read about how great grandma and grandpa and some of their relatives came to the Shoreline area on horse and buggy in the fall hoping to get to the homestead where a little cabin was being built by an uncle. Yet 10 miles from the cabin a major winter storm hits, and they stop at some random cabin. The people living there welcomed my grandparents with open arms. They even let them stay the entire winter.

That's the kind of hospitality that is missing in today's society. An agreement was made on a handshake. My great grandma and grandpa helped around the farm, and in the spring all the men got together and finished working on the Frea family homestead. If that had not happened, perhaps your humble writer here wouldn't exist.

This was a kind of union, a small one, but a union. A greater union was signed between the colonies that ultimately became the United States of America. We work together for a common goal. We don't all agree, yet we work together to try to work out our differences because the Nation is more important than our own problems.

We are a union. It doesn't matter if you are black or white, straight or gay, male or female, republican or democrat, liberal or conservative, Muslim or Christian, rich or poor, a small business person or a CEO at a large corporation, the top 1 percent in income or the bottom 1 percent, a restaurant owner who wants to make everyone fat or the owner of a health club. We are not enemies.

Yet there are those among us who want to make us enemies. There are those who try to pit the rich against the poor, or the common man against the restaurant owners and entrepreneurs. There are those who want to pit blacks against whites and Christians against non-Christians, the fit against the unfit.

They tell the rich that the poor are lazy and the rich are greedy, even while this may not be true in most cases. It is time we stop injecting poison into ourselves. We must instead start injecting the spirit of America and the unity that created this nation, including the Frea family.

You watch these fights at Wendys and in the Subway, you see that the rate that police have been killed in this nation has increased 40% just in the past month, and you can't help but think if this is a reflection on the true state of the union.

You can watch it on You Tube, and there are some who will say we should shut down You Tube. But You Tube is not the problem. We need more You Tubes not less. You Tube is a reflection of YOU, hence the name: YOU tube. It's a reflection of what YOU are.

You can hear about it by listening to people like Rush Limbaugh or Kieth Oberman. There are those who say we should shut them up for throwing so much vitriol. Yet we should not shut them up. We need more of these folks. It's free thinkers like this who came up with the ideas to create this great union.

There are some who say the problem is the partisan divide. Yet as I wrote above, a partisan divide is nothing new. There are some who say we need to unite and stop tossing vitriol. Yet vitriol tossing is not the problem. We need more vitriol tossing. We need partisan divide. It's what made this nation and what will keep us united, believe it or not.

The problem can be watched on a TV show, yet TV is not the problem. WE are the problem. It's us. It's not TV, it's not computers, it's not the subway, it's not the partisan divide, it's not vitriol, it's not TV or radio commentators. It's you. It's me.

Some say the music industry is the problem. Some say the Internet is the problem, and that it needs to be regulated. Yet the Internet is not the problem. The problem is you and me. The problem is what we put on the Internet. The problem is what we use the Internet for.

You could use the Internet for something useful. I'll let you define what is useful, but I will say that sitting around being entertained by someone getting the crap being beaten out him is not useful. It's up to you to find good. Don't blame the technology.

The problem is that we keep trying to solve the problem by getting rid of the things that are not the problem. What we fail to do, what our leaders fail at, is looking at themselves; is looking at YOU.

Here is the true problem: it's priorities. We, you, me... we have lost track of our priorities. We have placed stuff and materialism where we should place God, family and country. You know from my post on priorities that when you get your priorities mixed up everything is mixed up and works wrong.

When you put stuff before your family your family won't work right. When you put your self before your family your family won't work. When you put yourself before your family, you are wrecking the union that is your family. When you put yourself and your stuff before the country, you are wrecking the union that is the nation.

Do you see what I'm saying here. Your car is not the problem. Your house is not the problem. Your STUFF is not the problem. The problem is that more and more of you are putting your STUFF before your God and your family and your country.

Washington is a representative of us, and it resembles us. Washington is part of the problem. Washington has promised us a retirement and pensions and free health care and and all this STUFF, and we have let this happened. In fact, we have yearned for it. Many of us salivate over this stuff.

And when we are asked to make sacrifices, to give back some of our stuff, we get upset. Yet if you are faced with a decision that you have to either give up your pension, your retirement, your gold plated male box or your country, what will you decide? Will you riot if your STUFF is taken away. Or will you unite.

The problem is that too many of us have our priorities and values mixed up. Personally, I value my God and my family and my country far more than I value any one thing. Our great grandparents did not have all this stuff, and they did just fine. The stuff is great if we can afford it, and many of us can. Yet all that STUFF does not define us as a nation.

Some of us are so focused on getting stuff that we have lost our priorities and values. It's the values, the priorities, that we need to get back. It's priorities and values that brought us together as a nation and as a family. It's what made us a great big melting pot.

The truth is, every one of us struggles with retirement and health and money. Some of us make those issues the problem. Those issues are not the problem. We are the problem. Those of us who have placed those things as top priority are the problem.

To fix this problem, to unite the nation the way we were united on 9-11-2001, we must decide what we need as opposed to what we want. On 9-11 we did this. We didn't worry about color or race or rich or poor or liberal or conservative or republican or democrat. We came together as a nation.

That's what we need to do. Priorities and values is the problem. To fix it we must come together and work together and solve the true problems with this nation. We must prioritize things in the right order -- God, Wife, children, family, other people, other things -- and work from there.

Here's the difference between wrong and ignorant

I never think people are ignorant for holding a political view. You can be a socialist and still be smart. You can be a far right wing libertarian and still be smart. You can be a terrorist thug and still be smart. You might be wrong, and I might disagree with your view of the world, but you are definitely not always ignorant.

Yet some people are ignorant (a fact) and wrong (my opinion). While I would never call a person ignorant to their face, I would call them wrong. And while I would never call a person ignorant to their face, I am willing to do so on my blog (although I'll keep the person anonymous).

There was an editorial in our Daily Newspaper with the following headline, "Is it the constitution, or politics," and the author criticized Jay Riemersma's column where he basically provided his advice to the new Congress in Michigan to hold true to the U.S. Constitution.

He notes the following: "I wonder why you and the GOP oppose the Health Care Reform Law? This legislation was borrowed from your party. The meat and potatoes are from ex-GOP Senator Bob Dole's plan from 1994 and ex-GOP Governor from Massachusettes Mitt Romney. How can you and your party justify creating a plan and when President Obama would like to implement it you then oppose it?"

Look, I can easily explain this. In fact, this person sort of hit the key right on the head when he wrote "ex-GOP." Bob Dole was a republican, but he was no conservative. In fact, Bob Dole is a moderate republican, which when translated comes out to be "LIBERAL!"

The 2010 election was about getting liberals out of Washington, be it either from the republican party or democratic party. Both Bob Dole is a liberaland republican. Senators like him moved the party to the left.

You have to remember republican and democrat are the parties, they can be controlled by different factions. Bob Doles faction was moderate (liberal) republican. Bob Reimersma's faction is concervative like most Americans are conservative. He represents the common folks in America.

Jay Reimersma is a Conservative, or a traditional American, or a Constitutionalist. He believes in the same principles as the founding fathers of limiting the scope of government by the Constitution's limits on the governments ability to make laws.

Basically, all Reimersma is saying is he wants to make sure Congress shall make no law that violates the U.S. Constitution. Hence, the Constitution only gives Congress the right to make laws in six areas (taxes, defense, state disagreements, etc) and are allowed to make no laws in any area except in these six.

To make laws in other areas is to take away our God Given freedoms and violates state and individual rights. Rowe-V-Wade was a violation of the Constitution in that abortion is not mentioned in the Constitution, and therefore abortion should be left to the states to decide.

Healthcare is not mentioned in the Constitution, and therefore this should be left to the states to decide. It's not Unconstitutional to have healthcare in the U.S., it's simply unconstitutional for the Federal Government to mandate it on all Americans.

This type of Federalism allows states to experiment, and that's what Mitt Romney did when he signed into law Massachusettes healthcare law. It's fine for a state to decide to create a healthcare program. The Fed cannot.

The editorialist also said that Obama has been far from perfect regarding the economy, yet he inherited Bush lost 779,000 jobs in his final months, and the recession was already underway. What he failed to mention was that the economy was booming until liberal democrats took over Congress in 2006.

He then wrote that Obama added 151,000 jobs in October. So, he criticezes Reimersma's claim that "we don't believe these policies represent progress at all." The editorialist claims, "That is a curious statement because I was led to believe that when a person takes a negative and turns that into a positive that was considered progress."

The truth is, when you create jobs through the government, you're going to have months when the job numbers go down. Yet when those jobs expire (and most of them do), jobs will be lost. It is in this way Keynesian economics (tax hikes and spending increases) that Obama uses create months of false employment hikes that create false optimism.

The same thing happened when FDR was president. Yet in order to know all of this you have to become educated. You have to read or something.

So while I hate to say it, this particular editorialist was ignorant and I just made him less ignorant, if he so chooses to heed this new wisdom. I'm not implying I know everything, yet I think I am correct in understanding that all republicans are not one and the same: some are liberals, and some are conservative, and some are libertarian, etc.

The devil and progressive try to manipulate

Everyone knows that the devil is manipulating. Yet few people in the past 100 years have realized the manipulating ways of the progressives. In this way, Satan has created chaos right here in America by insidious means.

There are three methods he uses to manipulate:

1. Deception
2. Reasoning
3. Life and Death

By deception, he makes something bad look good. An example of this is sexting. People are convinced this is an innocent and fun act. Yet in the end it has been proven to break up marriages. This in essence creates chaos in one's life.

Progressivism is another good example. They make redistribution of wealth look like a good thing for the benefit of society, yet in reality it's the same as socialism and only results in creating class warfare, envy, and economic chaos.

Progressivism is anti-Bible and anti-God. In fact, it was Stalin himself who said that socialism (progressivism) cannot exist together with religion, because the Bible preaches capitalism and individualism. Progressivism is the antithesis of individualism. Hence, the Devil love progressivism.

Progressives also deceive the people in many ways. They cannot come out and say they are socialists, because then the people wouldn't support them.

Reasoning is an attempt to convince one that what is wrong is just and right. This is another means progressives use as well. They know that if you tax the rich this will not generate more wealth, and they know that if you cut taxes this will create more taxpayers and thus more wealth. But they tell us that cutting taxes will result in less revenue. In this way they try to convince us that something that is not is.

Adam and Eve were convinced by Satan that eating something God said was bad would actually be a good thing, or at least it won't make things any worse than they are now. If it looks good, it must be good.

There are a lot of poor people in the U.S., so progressives convinced us it was a good idea to tax the rich in order to give this money to the poor. They called it the war on poverty. Yet instead of making less poor this resulted in more poor.

We were convinced something that looked wrong was right, and now we suffer the consequences, and the progressives benefit because once we have a government program we can't get rid of it because politicians are afraid they will lose votes if they do.

We are convinced by progressives and the devil that giving to the poor will help them out. When in reality it decreases social morale, decreases your lot in life, decreases individualism, decreases freedom, and traps people on the government dole. It makes people lazy. This is what progressives want, and what most people do not want.

Yet this type of chaos is what the devil wants: to suck the life out of people. The worse off people are the more likely they are to shun God and seek out him. The worse off people are the more likely they are to call to progressives to create a government program to help them. They are always right there with the solution.

Thus, another method the Devil uses to manipulate is to get you to hate life. That IS his ultimate goal. He makes you depressed. He wants you to think life sucks. He wants you to feel bad. He wants to make you want to take your own life and perhaps the life of others in the process.

Like Satan, progressives want you to feel depressed and hopeless so you come crawling to them for the answers. Like the devil, progressives justify bad things by saying it's okay, "Their's nothing to fear but fear itself." It's not so bad. Unemployment at 10% is the new normal.

The solution to this is the following:

1. Find God. The Bible shows you what is right, and going to church each week assures you get on and stay on the right path.
2. Capitalism. History shows this has always bettered society, and is the closest a state can get to a perfect society. God preaches capitalism.
3. Education. We must teach the Bible and history.

Is a perfect world possible? The Bible says no

The ultimate goal of progressives and socialists is to create a perfect, euphoric society where everyone has the same opportunity and everyone makes the same money, and there are not bad guys. The problem with this ideal world, however great it would be, is that it is not possible.

Think of it this way, if it were possible to create a perfect world, wouldn't God have done so long ago. The truth to the matter is, he warned Adam and Eve not to eat from the Tree of Wisdom, and they were tricked by the Serpent.

He later killed all the evil people in the world by a flood, and several years later people reverted back to their old ways of worshiping pagan gods such as Baal. The Bible has example after example how God gets rid of evil people, only for evil people to still exist.

If this proves nothing else is that God really did create man in his image. The Bible does say God created man in his image, and since man is not perfect, then therefore we can conclude that God is not perfect. And since God Himself is not perfect, then therefore we can conclude that it is not possible to create a perfect world.

This in and of itself thwarts the theory of progressives that a perfect world is possible. It also provides us a good example of why a socialist such as Joseph Stalin once said that it is not possible to have a perfect society in a world where religions are allowed to exist. And this is why he chose to destroy all the churches and punish people who worshiped God. The same thing occurred in Hitler's Germany.

The Bible teaches individualism. It teaches that if the individual works hard and is virtuous, he will be able to reap the rewards of his hard work. He will also have to face the consequences of his failures. In this system, one who learns from his mistakes is most likely to succeed, and to be modest at the same time.

God provides all men and women with the same freedoms when we are born, and the only thing that can take away these freedoms is a government. Thus, the more laws, the less freedoms. The higher the taxes, the less freedom to choose how we spend our money. The more regulations the less freedom of choice.

So since God and the Bible preach individualism and capitalism, then this is another good reason for progressives and socialists to attempt to get the Bible our of classrooms and out of courtrooms and other government buildings. A more secular society is one that would be more likely to accept a more progressive government.

Unlike God and conservatives, progressives like to create a crisis in order to capitalize off it. They raise taxes and increase government programs under the name of social justice. They exaggerate a crisis (i.e. global warming, the pig flu crisis) so the people call to the government to do something. They use this to advance their agenda. He never lets a good crisis go to waste.

They work to create a perfect and socialist world, yet they don't tell us this. Instead they have to hide their true ambitions just like the devil deceives in order to get his way. He does not learn from the lessons of the past, and the world does not become perfect. In fact, the exact opposite occurs. He creates chaos. That's the goal of the devil, after all.

They say their goal is to make the economy better, yet their Keynesian economics only make unemployment worse, and when fewer people are working there is less money in the market to increase economic activity. Yet a good progressive must never admit he is sabotagingt the market.

Unlike Conservatives, progressives are not motivated by virtues, and they do not act with prudence. Instead he is idealogical.

Progressives, therefore, believe freedoms and human rights are not something we are born with, but are only provided to us BY a Constitution. He therefore attempts to control the individual by subverting his spirit and punishing his natural impulses He believes that it is okay for the government to steal what one earns, but it is not okay for a child to steal from another. Thus, the progressive would ignore the Biblical quotation, "Thou shalt not steal."

Progressives may believe in God, yet they do not believe God has a place in government. They did not learn from history, therefore, that God attempted to create a perfect world and failed. Or if one does not believe in God, that man has made many attempts to perfect society through social justice and failed every time. And yet they continue again and again and again and rightly fail every time.

By following the Bible and what failed and what succeeded by past governments, the founding fathers created the U.S. Constitution. They made it so that government officials could make no law that would take away our God given freedoms. Progressives chose to ignore the Constitution to force their views on Americans, and they also chose to ignore the Bible in their attempt to create their ideal world.

The progressive knows he is right and tries to force his views on the people. Conservatives know they know nothing, and allow individuals the freedom to decide for themselves what is right.

In this way, progressives are constantly trying to manipulate the people into thinking that the Bible and Conservatives are wrong in believing that a free market system is the best system, and the closest we will ever be to a perfect world.

He believes experts in government agencies have the answers to all the problems. He assumes he is correct always. He is always trying to add more government programs and gain more control over individual rights and to regulate the free market.

And when something he does is proven to be detrimental to the public, when there are unintended consequences to their actions, they blame the free market, and therefore capitalism, conservatism, and ultimately the Bible itself.

God eventually came to the realization that no matter what he does some people will continue to worship false gods, and others will continue to simply be outright evil. And the way He found to keep the evil people in check was to help His people create an exceptional nation in the United States of America.

The closest this world has ever gotten to perfection is capitalism, which in itself is flawed because in a perfect capitalist society some people must fail so that newer and better industries can prevail.

Vote for the republic

We can all be the best we can be if we believe in ourselves, and we have virtues. That is the lesson taught to people as far back as the time of Moses. Whether you believe in the old testament or not, we can all still learn lessons from old wisdom.

In Exodus, Moses said to God: "Suppose I go to the Israelites and say to them, ‘The God of your fathers has sent me to you,’ and they ask me, ‘What is his name?’ Then what shall I tell them?”

God said to Moses, “I am who I am. This is what you are to say to the Israelites: ‘I am has sent me to you.’”

What is I am? I am is God. I am is also Good. I am is in all of us. We should all ask ourselves this question: I am ___________. Then we must say this to ourselves, "Yes I can!" That is the wisdom learned from the story of Moses and the Burning Bush. We learn that we can.

The Bible preaches individuality. That is the lesson from Moses that we should take. That is if we answer the question noted above with the best answers.

Here are some options: I am...

1. Creative
2. Happy
3. Capable
4. Faithful
5. Cheerful
6. Free
7. Problem solver
8. An individual thinker
9. An inventor
10. An innovator
11. Able

God told moses that he is all of these, and that he can teach all his people to be all of these. The Bible teaches that we can all be creative, happy, capable, faithful, cheerful, free, a problem solver, an individual thinker, an inventor, an innovator and able if we think to ourselves, "Yes I can!"

Capitalism teaches the yes I can attitude. Capitalism teaches people to think for themselves and to be creative and happy and capable and faithful and cheerful and free and to solve problems and think and invent and innovate and be able. Capitalism was created by the republic created by the U.S. Constitution.

If we answer the question with: "I am not...creative, happy, capable, faithful, cheerful, free, a free thinker, an individual thinker, an inventor, an innovator, and able, then you will not make the best of yourself in this life. You will not get off the couch. You will rely on others to solve problems for you. You will become lazy. You will never get out of poverty. You will rely on your parents (or the government) your entire life. Progress will not be made.

If we get away from the philosophy encouraged by the writers of the Bible, who realized this 2,000 plus years ago, then we will encourage a nation of people with a negative attitude. We will create a world of people who think: "I can't"

God made it so we were born with certain freedoms, and these freedoms can only be taken away by government. God made it so (or nature if you don't believe in God), or created an environment in Britain, where the Colonists had an opportunity to create a nation where every man would be capable of answering the above question: "I am.... Yes I can...!"

In fact, story has it that when Benjamin Franklin walked away from the Second Continental Congress after signing the U.S. Constitution, a woman walked up to him and said, "Mr. Franklin, what have you given us?"

Franklin answered, "A republic, if you can keep it."

The problem with an "I can't" attitude are as follows:

1. Decreased incentive to work
2. Decreased incentive to get off the couch
3. Decreased morale ( a problem with RTs)
4. Increased obesity
5. Increased unemployment (see FDR and Obama)
6. Decrease jobs
7. Decrease wages
8. Increased people on government dole
9. Decreased innovation
10. Decreased inventions
11. Dependence
12. Decreased freedom

The benefits of an "I can" attitude are:

1. Increased incentive to work
2. Increased incentive to get off the couch
3. Decreased obesity
4. Decreased unemployment
5. Increased jobs
6. Increased wages
7. Decreased need for government dole
8. Self reliance
9. Individualism
10. Increased innovation (see the 1920s and 1980s)
11. Increased inventions
12. Increased freedom

Obama said he wants to fundamentally transform America. He said it when he was running as a candidate, and he said it as he was campaigning for liberal Congressmen and Senators. He did. He changed America. Now it's up to voters to fundamentally change America back to a republic.

In the past century we have fundamentally transformed our country from a nation of hard working individual thinking people who are capable, able free, individual... to a nation of people who think they are not capable, free...

We have fundamentally transformed America from a nation of people that said, "I am..." to a nation of people who say, "I can't..."

Since we say, "I cant," the State has to come in and save you. You are stupid. You are incapable of solving your own problems. So we will not only help you when you fall down, we will be your cane to prevent you from falling.

This has created a nanny state; a major debt; a major hole for our children to dig out of.

We must vote today. We must vote for people who will defend and protect our republic; who will defend and protect the Constitution He gave us. We must vote for people who will fundamentally transform America back into a republic of people who say, "Yes I can!" as opposed to, "No I can't!"

Rise people. Get off your seats. Open up your book. Turn on your computers. Read. Read about the Founding fathers. Read about the U.S. Constitution. Read what it was like before Mr. Franklin signed the Constitution that gave us a republic if we could keep it.

And go out and VOTE! VOTE for anyone, regardless of party, who will stand up to the principles that we as Americans have held since we first started sailing the great seas to a land we call America, the home of the free.

Vote! Vote not for people who think you are stupid and think they should make laws that take away your God (or natural) rights, and tell you how to live your life, and encourage you to rely on others to live, and to be lazy.

Vote for people who will defend the republic, and who know you are as smart as you are, capable of making your own decisions. Vote for people who know you are creative, happy, capable, faithful, cheerful, willing, free, a thinker, an innovator, a problem solver, and fully able to fend for yourself and make good decisions.

Vote so we can get the government out of the way so we can develop our I can attitude.

The great thing about America what made us the greatest nation of ALL time, was the fact that individuals were allowed and encouraged to be free and to think and to invent and to keep the rewards from their results. And when they did this, the result made us even better. We did not punish people for achieving.

Vote for every single person who will defend the republic; the U.S. Constitution. You are smart. We are all smart.

I am who I am. That is who we all are. We must not forget it.

Pragmatic

Joy Hakim in her historical series "A History of Us," has some pretty good descriptions of the past, particularly as she describes Americans as Pragmatic. The best example she gives is in book eight of the seires, "An Age of Extremes: 1880 to 1917, is where she describes Ben Franklin as the pragmatist.

Pragmatism means being practical minded. Or, as she words it:

Pragmatic people don't worry much about theories. They just see what works and stick with that. We Americans are known as pragmatic people. We inherited that trait from a Founding Father. Can you guess who?

Well, it was Ben Franklin. He was a pragmatist. Ben looked at the world and used his practical mind to try to make it a better place. The first half of his life he worked hard at his business -- printing -- and became successful and wealthy. Then he retired, at 42, and devoted the rest of his life to science and invention and his country. He made himself useful.

She continued to describe the 19th century as being full of pragmatic people. Some people were like franklin, practical people who were also altruistic. While others were more selfish. Yet they took what was available to them, wisdom and stuff, and they made something of it using common sense.

And in either sense, America was all the better for it. We had many inventions come of this. We had railroads, factories, assembly lines, cars replacing horse and buggy, paved roads, faster production, oil tycoons, larger newspapers.

It all started with practical Thomas Jefferson and George Washington along with Ben Franklin. These were Americans who we could look back upon with pride.

As Hakiim writes, "Those leaders had been practical and responsible, pragmatic and idealistic. Their example meant that every time someone got greedy and mean-spirited, a voice from the past spoke out. It was a national conscience. It said things like: Early to bed and early to rise, makes a man healthy wealthy and wise." Or, "A penny saved is a penny earned." Or, There never was a good knife made of bad steel."

In the past decade we have seen our leaders make decisions for this country that are not practical. They have made decisions that are not based on what has succeeded in the past, but on what has failed. And as a result we have lost confidence in our country. Poll after poll shows this.

This is why we are at a crossroads in this nation. We need to vote for practical people to run our nation, people who will look at the wisdom of our practical Founding Fathers like Ben Franklin to make the right decisions for our future.

Unhappy people are destroying the planet.

Sometimes I think the people over in Copenhagen, and the business leaders and politicians who buy into what they are trying to sell to us, are nothing but miserable, unhappy people who will be unhappy no matter what they do.

These people believe the world is going to come to an end in ten years if we don't change the way we life, drive different cars, tax ourselves and get rid of the capitalism that has given nearly every person on this planet a chance to better their lives.

These people are miserable, and they will not be happy unless they spread their misery on every one in the world. Those that are miserable and running this country want to tear it down so that other countries can get a chance to rule the world. They want to get rid of the U.S. Constitution because other people might have ideas and philosophies to force on us that our Constitution otherwise protects us from.

Thus, we must not limit ourselves to what is legal under the Constitution. We must have a World Legislation making laws that we must follow. We must have laws telling us how to raise our kids, and that we must never spank. Hence, they know what's best for you and me. You'll have unhappy people in England telling you how to raise your kids, and unhappy people in Copenhagen telling your boss he had to buy a billion dollar piece of equipment that allows his factory to emit 10% fewer CO2 emissions or he will have to close his doors and un-employ the 200 people he has working for him.

And you will have World Courts with the jurisdiction to enforce these laws to make sure that you didn't "accidentally" pat your unruly child in the butt. Oh, and did you buy a fur coat? Did you buy a rifle? Sorry, can't do that. Prison for you.

These unhappy people create fake pandemics based on fake science, and they create hoax theories based on fake science so that we are so scared to do the things we like that we live in a box. They want us to be poor. They want to destroy our economy. They want to destroy the way we live. And we are letting them.

This is why it's important to have free thinkers like you and me. That's why it's important we have individual sovereignty, state sovereignty and country sovereignty. And if you don't know what sovereignty is, perhaps you ought to pick up a book and read it.

You can always tell who these folks are, because they are never happy. You can't debate them, because they don't want to know your happy side of the story. They don't want to hear that your dad is happily retired in Florida. He'll want to tax your dad so he pays his due because his happiness is destroying the planet.

Sorry! What's really destroying the planet is not capitalism, democracy, greed, wealth, gas, or CO2 emissions. If there's anything going to destroy what we have on this planet it will be unhappy, miserable people.