I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them. — George Mason, during Virginia’s Convention to Ratify the Constitution, 1788

South Dakota, Don’t Cast an Insane Vote

April 27, 2014   ·   0 Comments

Albert_Einstein_tongueMy letter to the editor in the Rapid City Journal today:

Albert Einstein is credited with saying, “The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again while expecting different results.”

That aptly describes anyone who supports former Gov. Mike Rounds while expecting him to go to Washington and contribute to any change from our nation’s disastrous fiscal and moral course.

Rounds and his RINO minions would have us believe he’s some born-again conservative who is “gonna clean up this town” in Washington, when the reality of his record is quite different.

Rounds is the former governor who vetoed the state’s first attempt to ban abortion over “technicalities,” and spent taxpayer funds on vaccinations for a sexually transmitted disease. He is also the former governor who grew government and left the state with a $127 million structural deficit that even his former Lt. Gov. Dennis Daugaard acknowledges on his website.

Mike Rounds, a conservative who’s going to “show ‘em how it’s done” in Washington? What a sick joke.

Meanwhile, Stace Nelson has a proven record of conservatism, working to reduce spending and government, and standing strong against the establishment status quo flow.

Where will your vote go? More of the same, or proven change in the right direction?

Bob Ellis, Rapid City

By

Can Environmentalists Deceive Conservatives?

April 27, 2014   ·   0 Comments

environmentalismIf only the environmentalists would simply tweak their message to make it more palatable to conservatives, we could once again have bipartisan agreement that the premises of environmentalism are desirable.  That’s the sentiment of a column published Friday at the Huffington Post.  In her piece, “How to Talk to a Conservative About the Environment,” Robyn Purchia seems to believe that it really is just a messaging problem that keeps conservatives from accepting the environmentalist agenda, as if conservatives somehow don’t understand what it’s all about.

She writes:

Not too long ago, environmental reform was a bipartisan, no-brainer issue. President Richard Nixon, a social conservative on many issues, established the Environmental Protection Agency. Our major federal environmental laws, like the Clean Water Act and Clean Air Act, were all passed with bipartisan support, as was later legislation which strengthened them. But things have changed. Data from the Pew Research Center shows that Republican support for the environment has sharply declined.

What happened? What changed so drastically in the 40 years federal environmental laws have been in existence?

Putting aside the unconstitutional, federal power grab in Nixon’s establishment of the EPA, and Ms. Purchia’ faulty claim that conservatives don’t “support” the environment, let’s take at look at the answers to her question.

What has changed so drastically in the past 40 years of federal environmental laws is the ever-increasing power and overreach of unelected, unaccountable, unconstitutional federal bureaucracies into the lives of the American people and American businesses and industries under the bogus guise of “saving the planet.”  What has transpired is hoax after hoax by environmental extremists in positions of power, hoaxes used to push the tyrannical agenda that lies at the bottom of the environmentalist movement.

At its heart, the environmentalist movement is aligned with the Marxist dictates of the United Nations Agenda 21 scheme, which is nothing more than a global plan to tightly control the people of the world, to sharply curtail freedom, to eliminate private property, to commandeer resources and to redistribute the wealth of people and nations so that everyone is an equally miserable serf of the state.  It is a Godless, anti-human movement born in the pit of Hell that has nothing to do with clean air and water and everything to do with brutal power over people’s lives.

Nevertheless, Ms. Purchia states that to make conservatives like environmentalism,

“… the rhetoric must change to show how protecting the environment is both a religious responsibility and economically beneficial.”

I am willing to give Ms. Purchia points for her apparent sincerity, however misguided she may be.  She really does appear to genuinely love-love the Earth and environment.  She is the founder of a nonprofit, environmental group called Eden Keeper, which seeks to instill a religious element into environmental stewardship.  In this, she has stumbled into one of the truths of environmentalism:  it is indeed a religion, but a tyrannical, Godless one, because it places the Earth above people, and the Lord is nowhere to be found in it.

However, Ms. Purchia is either utterly deceived or horribly uninformed when she claims that there are “economic benefits” to environmentalism.  Environmentalism, with its attendant horde of federal, state and local regulations and taxation on all aspects of business, energy, production, building, development and land use, is one of the most expensive, wealth-destroying, freedom-robbing monsters in existence.  There are simply no economic benefits to this Marxist scheme, none.

Under Barack Obama (or whatever his name is) we have seen a grotesque explosion in outrageous power grabs by the EPA, the Bureau of Land Management and other extra-constitutional environmentalist bureaucracies.  One result of this is that more and more people clearly see the inherently evil fruit of the environmentalist movement.  We see it in skyrocketing energy prices and other costs.  We see it in unconscionable federal regulations that are deliberately closing down our power plants and preventing drilling for our own oil and other energy supplies.

The environmentalist movement does not have a messaging problem.  It has a mental problem.  Informed conservatives can see right through to its evil, tyrannical core.  Ms. Purchia is only wasting her time imagining that there can be an effective way to “talk to conservatives about environmentalism,” because conservatives will still recognize the pig under the lipstick.

By

Unhealthy trends in nation beg for conservative leadership

April 26, 2014   ·   0 Comments

graphA new, sweeping demographic snapshot of the United States, “The Next America,” has been produced by the Pew Research Center. 

The data and graphs present a stunning picture of how dramatically the United States has changed and how dramatically it will continue to change. 

The big themes that one walks away with is that America is getting older, less white, less religious, less traditional, and less patriotic. These trends suggest big questions regarding the future of the country and what the implications are regarding our politics and public policy. 

In 1960, 9.2 percent of our population was over 65. By 2010 this percentage was up to 13.2 percent. It’s projected that by 2050 21.4 percent of the American population will be over 65. 

In 1960, 85 percent of America was white. By 2010, this was down to 64 percent. It is projected that by 2050 America’s white population will have become a minority at 47 percent of the population. 

In 2012, the majority of Americans under 45 voted for Barack Obama and the majority 45 and over voted for Mitt Romney. Broken down by race, 59 percent of white Americans voted for Romney while 93 percent of blacks, 71 percent of Hispanics, and 73 percent of Asians voted for Obama.

Relativism prevails today among younger Americans. 

In answer to the question “Is the United States the greatest country in the world?” 32 percent in the 18-29 age bracket say “yes” and 64 percent over the age of 65 say “yes.” 

Whereas only 9 percent of Americans over 65 indicate no religious affiliation, 29 percent of Americans under 29 say they are not affiliated with any religion. 

And young Americans are far more likely to likely to embrace non-traditional values such as same-sex marriage and out-of-wedlock childbirth than older Americans. 

So it should come as no surprise that over time, conjugal marriage is disappearing as a core American institution and that increasing numbers – now over 40 percent – of babies are born today to unwed mothers. 

The facts showing America’s dramatic changes stand clearly before us. 

However, what it means regarding “The Next America,” to take the name of the Pew study, I would say is far less clear. 

If the assumption is made that no major changes occur in prevailing attitudes among racial and ethnic groups, and that attitudes that now prevail among younger Americans will stay with them as they get older, so the status quo clearly favors the Democratic Party and points to a more socialist and liberal America. 

On the other hand, there is something called reality. 

The viability of our entitlement programs – Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid-which, according to Pew will account for half the federal budget by 2022, depends on a young working population to carry the burden of the elderly and the poor. But, as the Pew study also notes, in 1945 we had over 40 working Americans for every retiree. Today this is down to 3 to 1. 

Soon the cash demands of these programs will exceed the revenue our population can produce to sustain them. Either we need to fundamentally change these programs or dramatically raise taxes. 

And, more and more literature is being produced showing that the traditional family is not an historic accident but an essential institution necessary for healthy, prosperous living. 

This all explains the core tensions in the Republican Party today. 

Should the party pander to the current liberal trends of the country to try and win votes in the short term? 

Or should Republicans be sounding the alarm and pointing the way back from what a sober look at America today says is not a healthy situation – socially or fiscally? 

I believe the message of this new portrait of America from Pew points to the pressing need for new courageous conservative leadership. 

By

A Response to Those Who Blame God for Evil

April 25, 2014   ·   0 Comments

“Blaming God for all of the evils in this world is like blaming the sun for all of the darkness!”

During my radio show this week, I was talking about how “blaming God for all of the evils in this world is like blaming the sun for darkness.” In other words, God is blamed for the evils in this world rather than the good He gave, and still gives, through Jesus Christ (John 3:16) and that He continues to give through His mercy on a daily basis (Psalm 103).

There is a story told of a man in a London airport who decided to purchase some English butter cookies. He opened the small tin, took one out, then placed the tin at his feet. After waiting for his flight for some time, a middle-aged woman smiled politely and sat next to him. To his astonishment, without a word of permission she reached down, took a cookie out of the tin and ate it.

He couldn’t believe what the complete stranger had just done!

Suspecting that it may be a local custom, he smiled awkwardly and took a second cookie himself. She then took a third.

Then she took the very last cookie, looked at him, broke it in half and offered it to him. The audacity of the woman! Different words such as impudent, rude, brazen and presumptuous flashed through his mind.

As he was about to express his thoughts, he bent down and saw that his identical tin of cookies was still at his feet. In an instant, he realized that he had been the brazen, rude and impudent person. He had been eating the cookies of a complete stranger! He also realized how her response to his actions had, in truth, been very gracious.

When you look a little deeper at the plight that man has put himself in, you will find that it is man and sin man chooses to commit which are responsible for the evil in this world (James 1:12), not God.

Man not following the rule of God’s government is the very reason evil exists in this world! It always has been and always will be.

There are so many wars within and without that could simply be prevented if man would subject himself to the meek King of Glory, and yet, because he rebels, war continues, and man has the audacity to blame God.

Let’s go through the Ten Commandments to see the reason for the evils in this world!

No. 1 Thou shalt have no other gods before Me! Do you serve other gods?

No. 2 Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image! Do you serve a god that overlooks lying, stealing, adultery, etc.?

No. 3 Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain; for the Lord will not hold him guiltless that taketh His name in vain. Do you practice what you preach?

No. 4 Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. Do you honor God by giving your heart to Him and your hand to man?

No. 5 Honour thy father and thy mother: that thy days may be long upon the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee. Do you hold your parents in high esteem?

No. 6 Thou shalt not kill. Are you angry with your brother without a cause (Matthew 5)?

No. 7 Thou shalt not commit adultery. Have you looked upon a man or a woman to lust after them (Matthew 5)?

No. 8 Thou shalt not steal. Have you stolen something of great or small value?

No. 9 Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor. Have you told a lie before?

No. 10 Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbour’s. Have you lusted after something that does not belong to you (Exodus 20)?

Remember what Noah Webster said:

“All the miseries and evils which men suffer from vice, crime, ambition, injustice, oppression, slavery and war, proceed from their despising or neglecting the precepts contained in the Bible.”

Friends, have you despised or neglected God’s Holy Laws and precepts contained in the Bible? Therein lies the evil that prevails. (Romans 7:14-25)

And before blaming a merciful God for the darkness that man is responsible for, we might want to take a step back and realize that it was God the Father that gave His only begotten Son to die on the cross for man’s violation toward God’s Holy Law (John 3:16), in order to establish The Light!

By

Removing the Blinders From Lady Justice

April 25, 2014   ·   0 Comments

Lady_JusticeJustice is supposed to be blind.  Not blind as in the inability to see.  But blind in the sense that justice is the same for everyone, regardless of personal bias’ or societal standing.

In fact, blindness is demanded so that the innocent can be protected.

That is the purpose of law, you know.  To protect the weak and innocent.  The rich and politically-connected count on Lady Justice peeking out from under her blindfold.  When justice can be influenced by the rich, or pressured by the powerful, then justice is no longer blind.

The scales Lady Justice holds are useless if her decision is based upon who puts the most coins in the scales.  We don’t want justice to be blind.  We want justice to be just.

Just is defined as “treating people in a way that is moral or good.”  All law is based on morality.  To remove morality from law is to make the law lawless.

Justice matters to the Lord.  It used to matter to America.  Because Lady Justice has removed her blindfold the weak and innocent struggle to find justice in our courts.  No group has been preyed upon more by the powerful than little innocent unborn baby boys and girls.

This is not as simple as calling a judge an originalist or a progressive.   There is no legal ideology that can declare murder to be just.   There is, however, an ideology that declares some people more human than others.  Justice is not supposed to have a point of view or politically ideology.  It should be blind.

The United States Supreme Court once declared that a woman had no right to vote.  Another SCOTUS declared a black man to be 3/5ths of a human being.  Those were not moral decisions, they were immoral ones.  Most decisions based on politics are immoral.

That is the way ideology has always worked.  The progressives know that they cannot legalize the murder of a human being so they merely change the meaning of the term human being.   Negroes weren’t humans.  Women weren’t humans.  The Nazi’s declared Jews weren’t human.  Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood, called blacks “human weeds.”   The Roe Court declared unborn babies weren’t human either.

Simple.  Murder isn’t murder if the victim isn’t human.  Even Dr. Seuss knew better than that.

“A Who is a Who know matter how small.”

The Supreme Court of the State of Alabama just threw a bucket of truth into the justice system.  By a vote of 8-1 the Court ruled that an unborn baby has the same rights as his/her born fellow citizens.   To anyone honest enough to admit the truth, this has been obvious for four decades.  Of course a pre-born child is human.  Finally, the highest court in the state of Alabama has decreed it so.  Read about it here.

Lady Justice put her blindfold back on in Alabama and declared that ALL people, born and unborn, are the created with God-endowed rights.  Unalienable.  No one can take them away.  Not a mother.  Not a doctor.  Not a terrorist in a black robe.  All Natural Rights come from God.  No man, and certainly no court, can legally take them away.

That, my friends, is blind justice.  No amount of political lobbying can change the fact that abortion has been struck a damaging blow in America.  A Who is a Who no matter how small.

Oh, I am sure that the decision will be appealed.  I am sure God-haters Kagan, Sotomayor, Ginsburg, and Breyer will bellow about a “woman’s rights.”  But it will be fun to watch the legal gymnastics that they will have to perform to over-ride the Alabama Court’s well-reasoned decision and attempt to grant the “right” of a women to usurp  another human’s unalienable right to life.

The abortion laws in America are schizophrenic.  “Wanted” babies are protected, un-wanted babies are not.  Scott Peterson is on death row for killing his pre-born baby.  If your negligent driving causes the death of a woman’s pre-born baby you will be charged with homicide.  If a father chooses to kill his pre-born child he is a murderer, if his wife chooses to murder it she is guilty of  “choice.”    A dead baby is a dead baby.  Calling it a “fetus” does not change that fact.  Too often our courts have created  “situational-humans.”  The Alabama decision restores dignity and rights to the pre-born.

The concurrent opinion by Chief Justice Roy Moore (remember him?), who once fought the state over the display of the Ten Commandments, says: “As stated by James Wilson, one of the first justices on the United States Supreme Court: ‘Human law must rest its authority ultimately upon the authority of that law which is divine.’”  Moore noted the “first right listed in the Declaration as among our unalienable rights is the right to ‘Life.’

“Blackstone wrote that ‘[l]ife is the immediate gift of God, a right inherent by nature in every individual; and it begins in contemplation of law as soon as an infant is able to stir in the mother’s womb,’” he wrote.

“We … hold that the use of the word ‘child’ in the chemical-endangerment statute includes all children, born and unborn, and furthers Alabama’s policy of protecting life from the earliest stages of development,” the majority opinion said.

The case dealt with a woman, Sarah Janie Hicks, who was charged after her newborn tested positive for drugs. She had pleaded guilty to a count of violating Alabama’s chemical-endangerment statute. Her conviction was affirmed.  You cannot legally poison an unborn baby with drugs.  Even if you call it a fetus.

I saw recently that Hillary Clinton is going to be a Grandma.  I wonder how she would feel about Chelsea killing the baby.  In announcing the good news Chelsea called the child a “baby.”  So did her mother.  I thought it was a fetus?  I guess fetus is the word you use when you want to kill another woman’s grandbaby.

Long live the Supreme court of Alabama.  Justice serves best when justice is blind.  A Who is a Who no matter how small…so says the Supreme Court of Alabama.

Learn more about your Constitution with Coach Dave Daubenmire and the “Institute on the Constitution” and receive your free gift.

By

Has The Revolution Already Begun?

April 25, 2014   ·   0 Comments

Tea Party

Tea Party

The amygdala (pronounced ah-MIG-dah-lah) is that little walnut sized “thingy” resting near the bottom of the human brain that warns us when danger is near.  Its sorta like a burglar alarm for your life.

Ever have those tiny little hairs on the back of your neck stand up?  Ever have goose bumps?  Ever get the feeling that you are being watched by someone, or some thing that does not have your, ahem, best interests in mind?   Ever have the persistent feeling that all is NOT well and imminent danger is lurking in some quarter not yet identified? Well, unless your amygdala is broken, or has simply atrophied, that teeny-tiny little mass of nuclei buried deep in the anterior inferior temporal lobe of the brain. is where ALL the above comes from.

I like to think we humans developed the amygdala about the time we decided to climb down out of the  trees and live in holes in the ground and the sides of mountains and cliffs we later came to call caves.  I’m no anthropologists or biologist, or any other kind of “ologist,”  so I have no clue when the human amygdala became standard equipment.  So, I’m just winging it here.

Still — smart people pay attention to the warnings from their amygdala.  A great number of those who didn’t — aren’t here any more. And a disproportionate number of those who still don’t today, will not be with us much longer.

It is the way of things.

My amygdala has been virtually bouncing off the inside of my skull for well over a week now. I can almost hear it humming much like a plucked bow string of an English longbow.

Something is going on that presents a danger to my person.  IF it is what I THINK it is, then by extension, you, too, are in danger.

Allow me to deliberately digress for a moment, or two:  The Cliven Bundy Affair in Nevada recently.  That whole thing was the dumbest operation yet devised by government brain-trusts in Washington.

-OR-

It was not! 

Who could NOT have foreseen the reaction by Bundy’s family, his neighbors, and freedom loving American across America.

The answer is — the idiots in DC who planned this donnybrook, IF, of course, that is what REALLY happened.

It has been suggested that the raid at Bundy’s ranch was purposely designed to cause the chaos that ensured so as to provide the government planners a truer picture of the response they can expect from the American people when they, the Marxist tyrants in Washington, finally bring the legendary “iron curtain” down around America.

If Washington had ANY doubt that government  dictatorial overreach would be met with the same level of violence from the American people, then all doubt should have been removed from their bureaucratic minds when throngs of American citizen militias, armed to the teeth, began arriving and squaring off with the government’s domestic armed forces.

The tension was so high that a single shot, even fired accidentally, would have set off a firefight locally and a nationwide rebellion.  I don’t think the public yet understands just how close we came to yet another war of revolution in America during those tense days in Nevada.

Look, the American people are, like that humming bow string I mentioned above, strung about as tight as they have ever been.  It won’t take much for then to utter an oath, grab their semi-automatic rifle, all the ammo they can carry,  and head for the swamps and woods and form up into organized resistance.  Many groups of citizens have already “formed-up.”  They are simply awaiting orders from headquarters. (And NO, I don’t know who, what, and where headquarters is.  That is by design, I feel sure.)

At the moment, America resembles that duck sitting placidly on the waters of the old mill trace.  On the surface that duck is quiet, serene, subdued — while beneath the surface, the duck is paddling like hell.

The Mainstream Media is deliberately NOT covering the most important story on the planet today.  Why? Because they are owned and controlled — lock stock, and ink barrel — by the Marxist tyrants of the Obama Regime.   They are the willful ally of the Marxist government in the US and they volunteer their propaganda efforts in support of the communist efforts to destroy America.

“It’s this bias that President Obama has come to depend on to advance his radical agenda. With the help of a very eager and compliant press willing to do their bidding, the White House controls talking points, advances their left wing agenda, and molds public opinion through propaganda disguised as news.” - SOURCE

You would think, the government would allow for a cooling off period before they tried another hostile takeover of private property.  You WOULD think that - and you would be wrong.

Consider the following: Texas officials are raising alarm that the Bureau of Land Management, on the heels of its dust-up with Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy, might be eyeing a massive land grab in northern Texas.
~~~~~~~~~~~
At issue are thousands of acres of land on the Texas side of the Red River, along the border between Texas and Oklahoma. Officials recently have raised concern that the BLM might be looking at claiming 90,000 acres of land as part of the public domain.
~~~~~~~~~~~
BLM said it is merely in the “initial stages of developing options for management of public lands,” as part of a “transparent process with several opportunities for public input.” SOURCE

Does Washington REALLY want to MESS with Texas?  Of all the bone-headed decisions to come out of Washington the last five years THIS one has to rank right up there at the top.

Look.  Texas does not NEED the US to survive.  That state is self-sufficient.  The fact is, they are doing the US a favor by remaining in the union.

And lest we forget, Texans WILL fight, no matter the odds.  If BLM sends an armed force into the Red River area, you can bet they will be met with armed resistance.

Oh, and just a few steps north lies Oklahoma with some 50,000 militia members who love freedom.  And though those “Sooners” happily pick at their southern neighbors,  they will rush to their side immediately should they be needed.

More and more we are seeing the Gadsden flag being displayed, in all its glory, on more and more homes around America. You know, the “Don’t Tread On Me” flag.”

 The Gadsden flag is a historical American flag with a yellow field depicting a rattlesnake coiled and ready to strike. It was created by Christopher Gadsden.  Gadsden was named the Lt. Governor of South Carolina in 1778.

Gadsden was the principal leader of the South Carolina Patriot movement in the American Revolution. Gadsden was an American patriot if ever there was one. He led Sons of Liberty in South Carolina starting in 1765, and was later made a colonel in the Continental Army. In 1775 he was in Philadelphia representing his home state in the Continental Congress.”  - SOURCE

(As South Carolina is my native state, I want to be sure my fellow “Sandlappers” get the credit due them for their efforts at securing freedom for America then and now.) 

You can feel it in the air.  Americans sense a coming fight, an internal struggle to restore the America our Forefathers left in our keeping.   Many are just coming to understand the gravity of the mistake voters made in 2008 and again in 2012.  It has nearly destroyed the country and wreaked havoc around the globe.

But, the federal government, through their mindless, power-hungry antics, may be opening a doorway through which freedom loving Americans will be able to retake that which is rightfully theirs/ours and restore the republic to its constitutional status.

Just remember the duck mentioned above.  We may appear placid and serene, but just beneath the surface we’re working like heck to save our country.

By

Rand Paul’s ‘Nonchalant Attitude’ on Abortion

April 24, 2014   ·   2 Comments

Senator Rand Paul (R-KY)

Senator Rand Paul (R-KY)

By Tony Perkins
Washington Update

Republicans are still months away from kicking off the presidential race — and that’s a good thing for front-runners like Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), who could use the extra time to hone their messaging. In four years, the Kentucky leader has won over plenty of fans for his solid record on a whole range of issues, including life. But today, it isn’t his record that’s concerning people — it’s his rhetoric.

Yesterday, in a sit-down with former Obama insider David Axelrod, Sen. Paul surprised a lot of conservatives with his nonchalant attitude on abortion and his role in ending it. As president, Axelrod wanted to know, how hard would his White House push to overturn Roe v. Wade? The Senator’s answer: not much. With the country so evenly divided on the issue, he thinks an incremental approach is best. “I think the debate is about when life begins,” said the lead sponsor of the Senate’s Life at Conception Act. “Is it okay for an eight-pound baby to be aborted one week before delivery?”

Asked what his personal opinion on life at conception is, Sen. Paul said, “My personal religious belief is that life begins at the very beginning.” But, he explained, America is evenly divided between “all life and no abortion, or all abortion and no life… I think the law will come down in between.” Later, he said, “The country is in the middle, [and] we’re not changing any of the laws until the country is persuaded otherwise.”

Maybe it was inarticulate, or maybe these are the Senator’s real feelings, but that last comment certainly set off alarm bells for social conservatives. Obviously, no president has the power to unilaterally ban abortion, but he does have the power to make the issue a priority — something most Americans assumed Rand Paul would do. Regardless of the GOP’s pick, conservatives expect their nominee to use the Oval Office to advance a culture of life. Changing minds is important, but what better way to accomplish it than using a national platform to talk about its importance?

As to Senator Paul’s suggestion that the country isn’t persuaded on the issue, the latest surveys tell a different story. In fact, Americans’ opinions on abortion have shifted so much that Gallup polling now considers “pro-life” the “new normal.” What’s more, the biggest sea change has been among young voters — the same ones who make up the Senator’s strongest support.

And public opinion isn’t the only thing proving him wrong. In the states, legislatures are shattering records for pro-life bills, passing a whopping 205 measures between 2011 and 2013. If that isn’t indicative of the public’s conviction on the issue, I don’t know what is. Justyesterday, Mississippi Governor Phil Bryant (R) added another one, signing his state’s 20-week abortion ban into law — outlawing the procedure when babies can feel excruciating pain.

After the failures of John McCain and Mitt Romney, social conservatives are looking for someone who will put a priority on their issues, not just use them as throwaway lines in a stump speech.

By

The Four Walls of Godly Jurisdiction

April 24, 2014   ·   0 Comments

Let’s talk for a just a minute about jurisdiction….

The Latin word “Juris” means “law” and “Dicto” means “I speak.”  So, if a person, or an institution has “jurisdiction” over a matter, it means that the person or the institution has the authority to speak, or to say, what the law is regarding the matter.

Now, please, notice that this does not mean that having “jurisdiction” over a matter gives one the authority to make the law, just to speak it – to declare it – and to enforce it.

In the America View of law and government, we recognize that the Law of Nature and of Nature’s God is a fixed, unchanging standard.  And “jurisdiction” – the authority to speak and to enforce the law – is given, by God, to four separate governments.

We can visualize this delegation of God’s authority by thinking of the four walls of a room, each wall representing one of the four governments – the spheres of authority – that God has authorized in His Word.

First, there is self government, in which we, as individuals, are required to control ourselves – to conform our behavior to the strictures of God’s commandments.  For example, the Commandments require that we positively discharge certain duties like worshipping the One true God and honoring our mothers and fathers.  The Commandments also compel us to NOT do certain things, such as steal or bear false witness. The Commandments address us personally and apply to us personally.

The remaining three jurisdictions are institutional in nature.They include the family; ordained by God in the Garden of Eden and charged with providing for the health, education and welfare of its members.  God designed and declared the family to be the primary institution of human society with the widest range of duties and responsibilities.

Next, we have the Church, whose head is Jesus Christ, and which is charged by Christ with the promulgation of His Gospel, the training of all church members in disciple-making, and the distribution of the sacraments.

Lastly, we have the Civil Government, which is charged by God with defending the borders and administering the justice system so that the Lord’s people might live in peace and harmony.

Overarching all these jurisdictions and their authority is God’s jurisdiction and authority, which by nature of His status as Creator of all, is all encompassing and universal.

Since He is the Creator and the Designer of each of the earthly jurisdictions, His authority flows from Him down to and through each earthly jurisdiction.

In this way we can see that while there is, in fact, a separation between the duties of the Church and the State, there is NO separation of God and His law from civil government.  To the contrary, there is an absolute duty on the part of the civil government to understand, promote, and enforce the law of the Creator.

Our founders, in the Declaration of Independence, referred to God as the Supreme Judge of the Universe because His jurisdiction supersedes every act of civil government.

So, if someone tries to tell you that God and His law don’t have anything to do with civil government then you can be sure that this person does not understand American history or American government.  He, or she, should not get your vote or your support.

Learn more about your Constitution with Michael Anthony Peroutka and his Institute on the Constitution and receive your free gift.

By

Unshakable Hope

April 24, 2014   ·   0 Comments

If you go to the stores these days you’re in for sticker shock as the price of everything heads to the ceiling, but there is one item that is going down in price.  In fact, it’s so cheap that quite often it’s simply free for the taking. It is so abundantly available that the supply far outstrips any level of demand. What is that item? It is available every time you open the mailbox, a newspaper, turn on the radio, TV, or read on the internet. What is that item? Discouragement.

I know you’ll believe me when I say that there is plenty of discouragement to go around in our land today. The author F. Scott Fitzgerald once said, “[t]rouble has no necessary connection with discouragement. Discouragement has a germ of its own, as different from trouble as arthritis is different from a stiff joint.”[1] I believe he is right. Discouragement is a choice we make in light of events that occur in our path on this heavenly pilgrimage.

Now we have a solution given to us by our Lord and Savior in His Word. Turn to Luke 23:55. We need to recall that the events of the Holy Week all culminated in the crucifixion of our Lord and Savior. His death on the cross, which purchased our salvation, was discouraging in the extreme for His disciples. When resurrection Sunday dawned, they were dejected and fearful.

After the death of our Lord and Savior, the custom was for family and friends to separate themselves and mourn for seven days. Custom dictated for a body to be placed in a burial cave, left to decompose. Then this initial mourning period was followed by a less intense 30-day period of mourning, called shloshim. However, the entire mourning period was not fully over until the flesh of the deceased had decomposed leaving only the bones, usually about a year later.

The Bible accounts of funerary arrangements which reveal that the Jews took great care in preparing the corpse for interment. Family and friends washed the body of the deceased, rubbed it with spices and fine oil, and wrapped it in cloths. (John 19:39, 40; Acts 9:36-41). Neighbors and others could come to express their grief and console the family. (Mark 5:38, 39). But in the death of Jesus, the Sabbath rest required by the Law of Moses prevented the Jews from carrying out all the funeral arrangements on that day. Since Jesus died about three hours before the start of the Sabbath, Joseph of Arimathea and others buried him hurriedly without having completely prepared his body for burial. (Luke 23:50-56).

For that reason, some of Jesus’friends went to his tomb after the Sabbath, hoping to complete the process. (Mark 16:1; Luke 24:1).“And they found the stone rolled away from the sepulchre. And they entered in, and found not the body of the Lord Jesus. And it came to pass, as they were much perplexed thereabout, behold, two men stood by them in shining garments:  And as they were afraid, and bowed down their faces to the earth, they said unto them, Why seek ye the living among the dead? He is not here, but is risen: remember how he spake unto you when he was yet in Galilee, Saying, The Son of man must be delivered into the hands of sinful men, and be crucified, and the third day rise again.”(Luke 24:2-7).

Jesus’ friends told what they had seen. Peter was intrigued and went to check out their story. Why not the others? Why just Peter? I believe it was due to fear and discouragement.Those fears were rational. Jesus had just been executed and there was no doubt about the fact that the political /religious leaders of that day intended to completely stamp out the movement Jesus had began. The discouragement was also rational. With Jesus dead and gone they concluded everything was lost. Indeed it would have been had He not risen from the dead.

The Resurrection of Jesus Christ changes our discouragement into hope.  Hope is the message which God the Father communicates to us here today by the Resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead. He desires us to be His children so much that He sent His only begotten Son into the world. He desires us to be His children so much that He caused His perfect Son to take upon His body the terrible penalty of the sins of the world.  On that awful Friday, Christ suffered and died for us that we might be saved, that we might be adopted into the family of God. Will you accept Him and make Him Lord of your life?

Learn more about your Constitution with Pastor David Whitney and the “Institute on the Constitution” and receive your free gift.

[1]http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/f/fscottfit401339.html#pUBw0kZEbecCK8rz.99

By

Are You a ‘Settler’ In Your Own Land?

April 24, 2014   ·   0 Comments

Rachel's Tomb, 1930s

Rachel’s Tomb, 1930s

The very fact that Israeli Prime Minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, brought the left leaning foe of the Jewish residents of Judea and Samaria, none other than Tzippi Livni, into his coalition as Justice Minister and now chief negotiator in the “peace” talks with the Arabs who call themselves Palestinians, is in itself a tacit admission that he and some members of his government entertain the thought of giving away yet more parts of the ancestral and biblical Jewish homeland.

Even more astounding is that Ms. Livni, of all people, is now responsible for negotiating “peace” with the cunning and corrupt PLO’s Saeb Erakat. Indeed, the negotiations have always had one purpose and one purpose alone – to tear away yet more of the Jewish heartland in return for a delusional peace.

That is treachery most base; treachery to the living Torah (the first five books of the Bible); treachery to Jewish history; treachery to Zion; and last but not least treachery to the eternal Holy Covenant made between God and the Jewish people. Liberals, leftists and secular folks may not like being told this, but it is a truth that cannot shrivel away.

When did it become an accepted truism that a so-called peace between Israel and the predominately Muslim Arabs, those who call themselves Palestinians, requires that Israel give to them it’s very biblical birthright for a mess of potage? Have the Oslo Accords, the Wye Agreement, the Roadmap, ad nauseum, all now superseded the eternal possession of the Jewish people to their God given homeland? It would seem so, and that is a monstrous tragedy so enormous as to spit in the face of the Almighty and make the very angels in heaven weep.

As one Christian supporter of Israel named Rick from Houston wrote in a comment column regarding Livni: “Who IS this person who dares try to divide the land that the Almighty bequeathed to Abraham and his descendants through Isaac and Jacob? She wants to give your land to the descendants of Ishmael. She is inviting the wrath of the Lord to come upon the entire nation.”

All this political foolishness was designed to appease successive U.S. Presidents. But the present occupant of the White House, President Obama, increasingly displays pro-Muslim policies which are a clear and present danger to the very existence of Eretz Yisrael, the Land of Israel and, may I suggest, to the very future of America itself. And Obama sends his Secretary of State, John Kerry, numerous times to pressure and threaten Israel, thus ushering in a baleful time for the Jewish state.

The so-called Palestinian Authority is now encouraged by Kerry and Obama to harden its demands to insufferable and arrogant levels that require Israel to essentially commit national suicide. Abbas has again and again told the world, and now Obama and Kerry, that the “Palestinian Arabs” will never accept Israel as a Jewish state. Period.

Kerry spewed his own poison by stating, as he stood shoulder to shoulder with the Holocaust denying Mahmoud Abbas, that Israeli “settlements” are illegal. The PA and the PLO hearing this now sense that the time is right to instigate another period of criminal violence and murder against Israelis and so the Jewish death toll mounts.

All these notions of “land for peace” and a “two state solution” erode the millennial and inalienable rights of one people alone to the land between the River Jordan and the Mediterranean Sea – the Jewish people

Indeed, there should instead be demands made upon the artificial Arab entity known as the Kingdom of Jordan (which sits upon four fifths of the geographical territory which was known as the Palestine Mandate) for the return of biblical Gilead – in north west Jordan – which is the ancestral home of the Biblical Jewish tribes of Gad, Manasseh and Reuben. But this would be too courageous for an ever timorous present Israeli government to demand.

Prime Minister Netanyahu’s government and previous governments stretching back to those of Yitzhak Rabin and Shimon Peres, have all betrayed Jewish patrimony in the Land of Israel.

They have tragically conceded to the Arabs the blatant lie that Israel “occupies” Arab territory – specifically territory claimed by a fraudulent Arab people who have come to call themselves Palestinians. This absurdity has given birth to a grievous, self-inflicted wound which afflicts Jews within Israel and the Diaspora. Remember, there has never in all of recorded history existed a sovereign, independent state called Palestine.

Jewish communities, (villages and towns) do not consist of “settlers.” The Jewish population of Judea and Samaria (the so-called West Bank) consists of the descendants of the native and indigenous Jewish people who are now inhabiting and redeeming their own ancient land. This people are not “settlers” in what is already theirs by virtue of millennial physical and spiritual attachment. Indeed, many present day Jewish villages, especially throughout Judea and Samaria, are built on the very sites upon which Biblical Jewish communities once existed. On the Golan, for instance, numerous sites abound where ancient synagogues once existed.

Notice that Judea and Samaria have not been annexed. Jerusalem and the Golan were annexed. The time to restore Judea and Samaria to all of Israel is well overdue. These lands are the very warp and woof, the very fabric and fiber of Jewish history, both during and after biblical times.

Ted Bellman, wrote in the Israpundit blog, that once again an Israeli government and Prime Minister miss a golden opportunity to exert to the entire world the Jewish state’s empirical and unassailable historical rights to the territories knows as Judea and Samaria but which a hostile world prefers to call the “West Bank.” He writes as follows:

“In accepting UNSC Res 242, Israel also accepted “recognized and secure borders” rather than rejecting such resolution and such borders and demanding our right to all of Judea and Samaria. Nothing has changed since then. Even now, as Israel negotiates a final settlement, she doesn’t start by demanding all the land and supporting such demand with strong historical and legal arguments. Instead she doesn’t make such a claim and meekly says she will settle for security and recognition.

“There is only one reason that Netanyahu is not stressing Israel’s legal rights and that is because he is intending to abandon them. He would not have entered these negotiations if he wasn’t so inclined. While he rejected the framework of ’67 lines plus swaps as the basis of negotiations, he is free to accept such a framework during negotiations.”

Here, sadly, more credence is given as to why the prime minister places Tzippi Livni as his chief negotiator with Saeb Erakat, even though she is yearning to abandon Jewish patrimony and sell out the Jewish pioneers in the ancestral heartland.

In 2003, Professor Talia Einhorn wrote about Judea, Samaria and Gaza, or as it is known by its Hebrew acronym, Yesha: meaning Yehuda, Shomron and Azza.

She was commenting on the ‘slip of the tongue” by then Prime Minister Sharon who used the word “occupation” in reference to Israel’s presence in Yesha. In 2003, Yesha still included Gaza. It was abandoned in 2005 for the sake of peace! And what a monumental disaster for the Jewish state that abandonment became. Hamas, the junior branch of the Muslim Brotherhood, now occupies Gaza and its charter calls not only for the destruction of the Jewish state but for the extermination worldwide of all Jews.

Professor Einhorn stated clearly then that Israel, the Jewish state, is not an “occupying force” in Yesha. This is what she said:

”Up until 1948, Judea, Samaria and Gaza were a part of the British Mandate. In the 1948 War of Independence, Egypt illegally grabbed the Gaza Strip and Jordan took Judea and Samaria, the so called ‘West Bank.’

“Egypt did not claim sovereignty in Gaza but Jordan deigned, in 1950, to annex Judea and Samaria. This annexation was not recognized by international law. The Arab nations objected to it, and only Britain and Pakistan recognized it – and Britain did not recognize the annexation of eastern Jerusalem.

“In 1967, after the Six Day War, these territories – which were originally meant for the Jewish Nation’s National Home according to the Mandate Charter – were liberated and returned to Israeli control.”

Professor Einhorn added that, “according to international law, Israel has full right to populate the entire Land of Israel with dense settlement and thus actualize the principles set by the League of Nations in the original Mandate Charter of San Remo in 1920.

“At that time, the mandate to the Land of Israel was granted to the British and an introduction to the mandate charter states clearly that it is based on the international recognition of the historic ties between the Jewish People and the Land of Israel. Clause II of that mandate charges Britain with ‘ensuring the existence of political, administrative, and economic conditions that will guarantee the establishment of the Jewish national home in the Land of Israel.’”

We, of course, know how that turned out. Britain reneged on its promises and undertakings. Britain tore away 80% all of the mandate territory east of the Jordan River in 1922 and gave it away to a Saudi  who became the Emir Abdullah. There is nothing, therefore, in international law that requires the creation of a Palestinian state between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean.

Professor Einhorn pointed out that the UN Partition Resolution of November 29, 1947 merely recommended that a Jewish and Arab state in what was the geographical territory known as Palestine “shall come into existence.”

Though the Jewish leadership reluctantly accepted the partition plan, it was, as we all know, rejected utterly by the Arab states, which invaded Israel thus voiding the UN’s recommendation of any legal basis.

The decision by the Jewish leadership to accept the UN Partition Plan was deeply painful for them. After all, the armistice lines where the invading Arab armies had been stopped left the Jewish state a mere nine to 15 miles wide and with Judea and Samaria (the so-called West Bank) and half of Jerusalem occupied illegally by hostile Jordanian Arab Legion troops.

The assessment was also motivated by the desperate need to give sanctuary to the 800,000 Jewish refugees driven out of their ancient homes throughout the Arab world, and to provide a haven for the remnants of the Jewish survivors of the Holocaust.

Israel was forced to fight yet another war of survival against Arab genocidal aggression in the June, 1967 Six Day War. It liberated Yesha – Judea and Samaria – from Jordanian occupation and it therefore must be understood that this precious territory is empirically the very heart of the Land of Israel by all that is holy. And if that’s a dirty word to some, so be it.

Simply put: The Jewish people do not settle land that already belongs to them. And the Jewish people cannot be called “settlers” in their very own ancestral, Biblical and native homeland.

Now if those facts are understood and hammered home again and again by every Israeli and pro-Israeli throughout the world, think of the power and the glory that will ensue. Finally, the world will hear about unassailable Jewish rights to the Land and not the fraudulent claims of an Arab people who call themselves Palestinians. As Ted Bell wrote about the Zionist leader, Theodore Herzl:

“Herzl rejected Uganda when it was offered because, even though he was secular, he realized that the only place for the Jewish state he envisaged, was in Eretz Yisrael (the Land of Israel) which includes Judea and Samaria, because it is to Eretz Yisrael and Jerusalem that the Jews prayed for two thousand years to return. Nowhere else would suffice.”

But it all becomes meaningless when Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu allows an ambitious leftist politician like Tzipi Livni to remain as Israel’s negotiator.

By

Featured Articles

Albert_Einstein_tongue

South Dakota, Don’t Cast an Insane Vote

Bob Ellis

Albert Einstein is credited with saying, "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again while expecting different results." What do you get when you vote for more of the same?

environmentalism

Can Environmentalists Deceive Conservatives?

Gina Miller

If only the environmentalists would simply tweak their message to make it more palatable to conservatives, we could once again have bipartisan agreement that the premises of environmentalism are desirable. That’s the sentiment of a column published Friday at the Huffington Post.

graph

Unhealthy trends in nation beg for conservative leadership

Star Parker

A new, sweeping demographic snapshot of the United States, “The Next America,” has been produced by the Pew Research Center, and it helps explain the core tensions in the Republican Party today. Should the party pander to the current liberal trends of the country to try and win votes in the short term? Or should Republicans be sounding the alarm and pointing the way back from what a sober look at America today says is not a healthy situation – socially or fiscally?

Rush_Bible_1a

A Response to Those Who Blame God for Evil

Bradlee Dean

During my radio show this week, I was talking about how “blaming God for all of the evils in this world is like blaming the sun for darkness.” In other words, God is blamed for the evils in this world rather than the good He gave, and still gives, through Jesus Christ (John 3:16) and that He continues to give through His mercy on a daily basis (Psalm 103).

Lady_Justice

Removing the Blinders From Lady Justice

Dave Daubenmire

Justice is supposed to be blind. Not blind as in the inability to see. But blind in the sense that justice is the same for everyone, regardless of personal bias' or societal standing. In fact, blindness is demanded so that the innocent can be protected.

Archives




"We don't intend to turn the Republican Party over to the traitors in the battle just ended. We will have no more of those candidates who are pledged to the same goals as our opposition and who seek our support. Turning the party over to the so-called moderates wouldn't make any sense at all." - Ronald Reagan, Nov. 10, 1964