MAN UP!

Many believe the future of the Republican Party is riding on one issue and one issue alone. The issue is “Obamacare.” The question is ---- will the Republican leadership totally repeal Obamacare? Many believe that if the Republican leadership blows this, then kiss your political future goodbye ---not to mention our freedoms as well.
You have the issue in your hands, the Republican numbers to implement repeal, and public support just waiting for your leadership. The question is, do you have the will and the guts to stand up to the following: the back biting Washington D.C. establishment, the Lenin loving liberal media, the choir of “moderate” RINO compromisers in your own party.
Or will you trot out the list of excuses: "Oh, we might get the votes to pass the repeal but Obama will veto the bill,” or, “we didn't have bi-partisan support,” or “the public likes some parts of socialized medicine.” What! The Republicans now own the bloody pulpit; now show us the guts the Democrats displayed in shoving Obamacare down our throats.
The voting public spoke loud and clear; they didn't elect Republicans so they could preen, kiss up, and compromise with the "progressive" Lenin lovers in the other aisle.
Do what's right. Socialized medicine is evil. Keep your campaign promises. Be honorable men and women. Pass the repeal, put the ball in Obama's court, make him veto the will of the people and then override his veto. That will take care of him in 2012.
Vetoes can be overridden, it's been done in the past and it can be done again. It can be accomplished because it has been done under more difficult odds than you Republican leaders are facing today. And, against some of the same people you see in the other party across the aisle.
As an example, in 1977, both houses of the California legislature and the governor were very liberal, very anti-death penalty Democrats. The governor, Jerry Brown, was even an activist against the death penalty when his father Pat Brown was governor. As governor, he publicly stated he would veto a death penalty bill if passed. [Just like Obama says he will veto any repeal of Obamacare.]
Nobody thought it could be done, the press, the political pundits, academia, even the general public who wanted the death penalty, was skeptical. How was it even possible that it could succeed, certainly not in liberal minded California; especially since the Assembly liberal leadership held a 50 Democrat to 30 Republican advantage and the Senate advantage was 24 Democrats to 16 Republicans.
Senator George Deukmejean introduced the death penalty bill SB 155. It received mild attention by the media. I co-authored the bill and formed a political action committee named the Law and Order Campaign Committee {LOCC}. Its purpose was to drum up public support for tougher laws and for the death penalty legislation. LOCC went directly to the public with direct mail to build support for SB155. The results were excellent. What funds were received were quickly rolled over into new mail---time and time again this was repeated until tens of thousands of voters were reached and asked to sign a single petition and return it immediately to LOCC headquarters where their signatures would be personally shown to the legislators.
Twenty seven immense bags of mail containing close to 200,000 petitions were dramatically carried onto the floor of the Senate and Assembly. With every subsequent mailing, direction was given on which specific legislators were to be contacted, either by phone or by personal contact. Pressure was directed at specific legislator’s offices, especially their district offices. The volume of calls jammed the districts phone lines causing great anguish to staffs in both their districts and at the Capitol.
The death penalty bill began to attract wide public attention, even the press took notice --- so when we called for a press conference, the media showed up in massive numbers. They had to. Our direct mail had been so effective they had to report it.
To finish the story, the legislation passed both houses, Governor Brown vetoed the bill and we overrode his veto by the necessary two thirds vote.
Liberal California had the death penalty once more.
If the Republicans in Congress fail to repeal Obamacare they will be committing political suicide while creating a third party in the process. Man up! What's to compromise? Compromising with socialism is like compromising with cancer, even a little bit of it will eventually kill --aren't we sick enough already? The future of America is in your Republican hands ---man up!

EARMARKS ---FEATHER STEALING?

In opening my remarks to college students, I always began the discussion with a friendly cheerful smile, a thank you for inviting me, and then I would say, " I'm well aware you already know that I am called a conservative and some of you consider yourselves to be liberally inclined. However, let's not rush to judgment.
"First, let us both check our epistemological presuppositions and see if we have anything in common, a set of ideological assumptions with which we both can agree. "Let me first ask all of you a simple question that I ask myself before I vote on any issue. Do any of you believe that anyone has a moral right to feather their nest at someone else's expense?"
At that point the class would quizzically look at each other, because some, if not most of the young class had never heard the expression. Smiling, I would explain, "in case some of you don't know what the expression 'feathering your own nest' means, it's a folksy old saying that our forefathers often used. Unfortunately, the last couple of generations seems to have forgotten it. To put it in the vernacular, it means to have a bad case of the wants for something that doesn't belong to you. It means to covet. Webster's dictionary defines coveting: 'is to want ardently something that another person rightfully has--- to long for with envy ---greediness.' In other words, to hanker for and to connive to possess that which doesn't really belong to you. Plucking goodies, 'feathers,' out of someone's nest and putting them in your own nest. Now, how many of you students believe you have a moral right to put another persons 'feathers' in your nest? Come on now--- let's see a show of hands."
Believe it or not, not one hand would be raised.
"Terrific," I would happily exclaim, "Neither do I. None of us really have a right to improve our lot at someone else's expense. In fact, the moral thing to do would be for each of us to help our fellow citizens keep their feathers from another citizen's covetous desires in hopes that they would do the same for us.
"Now, let me ask you another question. How many of you believe you can morally delegate to a third party the right for them to feather your nest at someone else's expense? In other words, you can employ, encourage a friend, or elect someone to take feathers from someone and give them to you? Let's see a show of hands." Again, no hands were raised.
"Terrific," I would happily exclaim. "If you thought it morally wrong to feather your nest at some one else's expense, you certainly couldn't delegate the task to another. Once more we all agree. Well now...would it be OK if you took from somebody who owned a big nest of feathers and gave their feathers to some poor soul who has a skinny nest with a few feathers? Is that moral either? I think not---same principle, you wouldn't do it for yourself then how could you justify doing it for someone else?
"Now, just one more question. How many of you believe might makes right…. that sheer numbers are always right….that if you are in the majority you can feather your nest or anyone else's if the majority jolly well desires?"
Believe it or not, when I called for a show of hands, most would still agree with me that might doesn't constitute right. I would then ask them one more question, “How many of you support governmental earmarks?”
Most of the students raised their hands.
"What's this?" I asked. “Isn't an earmark the same as someone getting money at someone else's expense? Isn't someone feathering their financial nest at some tax payers expense?” The students would usually justify their response, "Well, the majority of the legislature voted for it."
“Oh,” I would answer, “might makes right? Sheer political numbers justify the stealing of someone's feathers to satisfy the desires or the benefit of another? Think about it," I'd ask the class ---“you can't contradict yourself --now can you?”
By this time, the class would be in turmoil and I'd be having the time of my life. Hopefully, some of the students would be thinking for themselves and re-assessing their own fundamental assumptions.
Earmarks are nothing more than covetous actions of legislators stealing from one to benefit themselves and others, in the process breaking two Commandments out of ten. That's big time feather stealing don't cha think?

Political Farm Systems

There are many varying opinions why too many elected Republicans have been so wishy-washy, ineffective and colorless. The reasons, damnations and justifications for their inaction are legion, almost every conservative blogger has an idea and --- so does yours truly---only mine is relatively simple. Since 1961, I've had a direct day by day, eye to eye, in your face, slap on the back contact with hundreds of legislators of both parties -- not to mention interviewing literally gobs of candidates seeking office as the Senate Republican Caucus chairman and founder and chairman of two major PAC's.

I've come to the sad conclusion too many present Republican office holders are second best, nice, affable, personable guys and gals, but hardly warriors fit for battle. If called upon to grade their productivity in fighting liberal activists from A to F, I would have to say most would be graded class C minus which doesn't get the job done. There are rare A's, a few more B's, the preponderance C to C minus with a few D's and some F's. The hard facts are the Republican Party doesn't get the best talent, just a tiny few of the most enterprising and industrious Republican citizens are running for elected office. Republican men and women with strong convictions, possessing the intellect and the stamina to cope successfully with the competitive world of free enterprise, haven't gravitated to the blood and guts world of politics.

Our most qualified and brightest young come out of college with degrees in business, medicine, engineering etc. Their desires are to enter the competitive world and become professionals in their chosen field of endeavor. They opt to participate in the free enterprise system where one can rise to the top of their profession, take pride in their work and receive the direct rewards of their efforts. Those who do successfully enter the business world, usually marry, have families, hire employees and have others who depend upon their talent. Becoming professionals in the highly competitive world of free enterprise takes many years to achieve. Once successful, it rarely dawns on them to leave this profitable and rewarding environment to run for political office.

The Republicans who have sought office are a usually a pleasant, affable bunch who can wow the local Republican Woman's Club but are usually candidates who have rarely climbed high in the professional world; nor are known for their sparkling political intellect, or, have a grasp of political abstracts. Most are pragmatists who have little deep seated philosophical inclinations---much less grasping and understanding the deep motivation and hard core ideology of their left wing counterparts.

It takes an ideologue to know another.

How can I quickly identify these who are class C men who are seeking office? I ask them why they believe they are qualified to be elected and most respond by profoundly saying, "I believe I have the talent to get along with both parties."

That "profound" gasp of ignorance tells me they don't have the dimmest idea of how contemporary politics works at the state and federal level and if elected, they will be smoozed into being a baby RINO by the next election cycle. Once in office, they are easily influenced and maneuvered by the mainstream media, and polls, not to mention smoozed by liberal Democrats and intimidated by the confrontational conservatives in their own party.

When this class C Republican happens to be elected, he usually finds himself in a job far better than anything he has ever known ---prestige ---income --- security --- mind boggling attention and unheard of accolades from every lobbyist who needs his vote. The baby RINO becomes enamored with himself, convinced of his newly acclaimed wisdom and soon becomes fearful of return to civilian life. What ever he believes will get him re-elected is what he justifies ---- and becomes.

These class C Republicans look upon being elected as the end in itself. Being in office is the final goal, the top of the mountain. They don't see gaining the office as just the first step in a long tough fight, a protracted conflict against a dedicated socialist opposition who has built this bureaucratic monstrosity for a purpose. They look upon the liberal Democrat as another one of their colleagues, friends, rather than a foe who has no intention of giving one inch or repealing one bill or cutting one dollar. Class C Republicans do nothing but take up space or worse. As a personal example, one of the class C members of the California senate voted for a bill that helped the liberal left reapportion the state to guarantee Democrat control. His vote bought him a fat Republican seat to seek reelection. I asked him why he sold out his party. His response was candid and surprisingly honest, though morally corrupt. "Bill, you know how to make a living on the outside, this job is all I know,"

There are a few A grades in the Republican ranks, not as yet enough to gain political control of party leadership. These few were smart enough to see the disastrous political direction that our nation was headed and took leave from their chosen professions to right our ship of state. Senators Tom Coburn M.D. of Oklahoma and successful business man Jim DeMint of South Carolina are two such outstanding examples. We are in dire need of more successful Republican entrepreneurs who will set aside their professional life and seek public office. Time is short --- we don't have forever.

Let's now look at the other side, the hard core socialist progressives who come from the largest populated states. They own and control the leadership of the Democrat Party and have progressively increased their grip ever since the Lyndon Johnson presidential years. These hard core activist's are different political animals from the Democrats we used to know during the days of Harry Truman. The hard left look upon being elected as a means to a specific end, which is the total socialization of our government and the end of the free enterprise system.

Their political young, their brightest, seek jobs in the bureaucracy with long range goals of climbing up the political ladder. Their college degrees are usually in education, political science, sociology, environmental studies, etc. They know full well that governmental employment will be easily forthcoming upon graduation. Every year local, state and federal bureaucracies have grown progressively larger. The most dedicated of these new political aspirants join political clubs, become active in their unions, do volunteer work in Democrat political races and when opportunity presents itself, they seek local office in school board elections, city councils, and other local elective offices in order to build a base for future political activity. Some of the most committed young activists are then noted by their left-wing leaders and are offered jobs in leftist organizations and foundations; some are elevated to staff positions of liberal Democrat officeholders. In so doing, they become a highly trained part of the Democrat socialist farm system.

Every sports fan knows that successful baseball franchises have farm clubs, where they develop their raw talent for the major leagues. If they have no farm system there will be little success in winning championships in the majors.

Are there farm systems in politics? Yes there are--- there's just one and it's not the Republican Party. Does anyone think that the pragmatic class C Republicans have a clue to what's really going on or know squat about how to effectively do anything about it? Republicans need their class A in leadership positions and need a farm system of their own.

The Republican's best talent have to set aside their chosen professions for a while and like the Tea Party, dedicate their time, money and talent to right our ship of state. The time is now.

Got a Leader for you

by Senator H.L. Richardson [ret.]
Seems as if Americans today are constantly complaining about the lack of leadership---someone to lead us out of the political and moral mess in which we now find ourselves. No doubt about it, there's a batch of political figures clamoring and posturing for the job, but as yet -- no one stands out above the rest.

May I make a suggestion? Why not use the criteria our forefathers used to pick their top leader. In fact, one like that may still be available.
Well now you ask ---who might that be?

Let's start by asking our American founders who did they pick---and pick they did! Let's start by asking John Jay, George Washington, Sam and John Adams, James Madison and Patrick Henry. Who led them in thought and action?

John Jay, the first Chief Justice of the Supreme Court wrote “Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers, and it is the duty as well as the privilege and interest of our Christian nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers. Our laws and our institutions must necessarily be based on and embody the Redeemer of Mankind…it is impossible that it should be otherwise and in this sense and to this extent our civilization and our institutions are emphatically Christian.”

James Madison, the father of our constitution wrote; "It is impossible for the man of pious reflection not to perceive in it [the Constitution] a finger of that Almighty Hand which has been so frequently and signally extended to our relief in the critical stages of the revolution.”

John Adams, our second president said, "You have the rights antecedent to all earthly governments; rights that cannot be repealed or restrained by human laws; rights derived from the Great Legislator of the Universe.”

George Washington stated “It is impossible to rightly govern the world without God and the Bible.” and “it is the duty of all nations to acknowledge the Providence [divine guidance] of Almighty God.”

When signing the Declaration of Independence Sam Adams proudly stated, “We have this day restored the Sovereign to whom men alone ought to be obedient. He reigns in heaven… from the rising to the setting sun, His kingdom come.”

Chief Justice John Jay called Him the Redeemer. Madison referred to the "Almighty Hand," John Adams called Him the “Great Legislator" and George Washington acknowledged "His Providential Hand" in governing and Sam Adams mentioned "the Sovereign" to whom we should all be obedient.

The most dynamic and outspoken American patriot was Patrick Henry, who said, “It cannot be emphasized too strongly or too often that this great nation was founded not by religionists but by Christians, not on religions but on the Gospel of Jesus Christ.”

There you have it ---Jesus Christ was their supreme leader, their guiding hand, the great legislator, the providential Hand that they all followed in their personal, business and political life. The vast majority of our constitutional forefathers believed in the Triune God, The Father. They believed in the Holy Spirit who guides the believers. They believed and followed the words of Jesus, found exclusively in Holy Scripture. It was Christ who led our founding fathers and the Bible was their manual of action.

And by the way, He's still alive and still available and the Bible is readily available.

Some skeptics usually pipe up and say, “OK, that was then but that was hundred’s of years ago. Few live political leaders think so today.”

Not so. It’s been only in the last few generations that such radical changes have come about, slowly at the beginning of the Twentieth Century then picking up speed in the last forty years. Jesus Christ has become a swear word to a growing number of heathens instead of calling Him the Leader of our nation.

Up until the middle of the Twentieth Century, every American president from Washington to Harry Truman referred to America as a Christian nation, and only a remote few ever doubted or complained about it.

The above quotes aren’t just randomly selected from the late 1700's. They represent the thinking of the vast majority of those who established the Constitution and men who governed our nation for the next 146 years. They were a God fearing people. In revolutionary days 98% of the people called themselves Christians. Today, 86 % still do.

Let me give you a few more examples of quotes from Christian leaders that followed the founding fathers. Forty years after the Declaration of Independence, Noah Webster, the great educator, stated, “The religion which has introduced civil liberty, is the religion of Christ and his apostles, which enjoins humility, piety, and benevolence; which acknowledges in every person a brother, or a sister, and a citizen of equal rights. This is genuine Christianity, and to this we owe our free constitution of government.” Webster said, “The moral principles and precepts contained in the scriptures ought to form the basis of all our civil constitutions and laws….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.”

President John Quincy Adams stated “The highest glory of the American Revolution was this: It connected in one undisolvable bond, the principles of civil government with those of Christianity.”

Andrew Jackson, our 7th President and founder of the Democratic party said “The Bible is the rock on which our Republic rests.”

Ulysses S. Grant, our 18TH President said, “Hold fast to the Bible as the anchor to your liberty: write the precepts in your hearts and practice them in your lives.”

Abraham Lincoln stated, “I am nothing but truth is everything; I know that I am right because I know that liberty is right, for Christ teaches it, and Christ is God.”

In the 1890's, President William McKinley, not known to be reticent in speaking his mind, boldly voiced this opinion, “Nail the flag just below the cross! That is high enough – Christ and country, nothing can come between or prevail against them.”

At the turn of the Twentieth Century, our 26th President saw the pagan tempest on the horizon. Theodore Roosevelt stated “There are those who believe that a new modernity demands a new morality. What they fail to consider is the harsh reality that there is no such thing as a new morality. There is only one morality. There is only true Christian ethics over against which stands the whole of paganism. If we are to fulfill our great destiny as a people, then we must return to the old morality, the sole morality.” Roosevelt also said, “If a man is not familiar with the Bible, he has suffered a loss which he had better make all possible haste to correct.”

How about President Woodrow Wilson, who warned, “A nation which does not remember what it was yesterday, does not know what it is today, or where it is trying to go. We are trying to do a futile thing if we do not know where we came from or what we have been about…” He also said, “I firmly believe in Divine Providence. Without a belief in Providence I think I should go crazy. Without God the world would be a maze without a clue.” Isn't that a wee bit like American politics today, "a maze without a clue?"

President Calvin Coolidge remarked, "It seems…perfectly plain…that the right to equality…has for its foundation reverence for God. If we could imagine that swept away…Our American government could not long survive."

If modern times is the criteria, then how about another who presided over this country during the middle of the Twentieth Century. President Truman said, “The fundamental basis of this nation’s laws was given to Moses on the Mount…If we don’t have a proper fundamental background, we will end up with a totalitarian government which does not believe in the rights of anybody except the state."
Harry Truman was the last president to publicly refer to America as a Christian nation.

Although our 35th President John F Kennedy didn't call our nation "a Christian nation,” he certainly didn't hide his Catholic beliefs when he said, “The rights of man come not from the generosity of the state, but from the hand of God.”

Neither did our 40th President, Ronald Reagan hide his, for he said, “Without God there is a coarsening of society: without God democracy will not and cannot long endure… "If we ever forget that we're one nation under God, then we will be one nation gone under."

Historical evidence clearly points to the fact that we were a Christian people who, like thirty-three consecutive presidents, followed the leadership of Christ, but--- it is debatable that we still are, even though following presidents who didn't hide their Christian beliefs. We were once a “historically developed community of people” with a “common language.” We had a distinctive culture, we were a common community of people who shared the same ethics, and believed in the same principles. It can be argued that the only common constant we now have is the limitations of territory, bound by two oceans and two porous borders.

Theodore Roosevelt said it so well that it bears repeating, “There are those who believe that a new modernity demands a new morality. What they fail to consider is the harsh reality that there is no such thing as a new morality. There is only one morality. There is only true Christian ethics over against which stands the whole of paganism. If we are to fulfill our great destiny as a people, then we must return to the old morality, the sole morality.”

Christian ethics vs. the whole of paganism. This is our present -national malady, the eternal struggle between two irreconcilable differences, which only one will emerge triumphant. One believes Jesus is God and our leader or one really doesn't.

A statement of C.S. Lewis, one of the great intellectuals of the Twentieth Century, said it best when he spoke of Jesus. “I am trying here to prevent anyone from saying the really foolish thing that people often say about Him: “I’m ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don’t accept His claim to be God.” This one thing we must not say. A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would be a lunatic---on the level of a man who says he is a poached egg—or else he would be the Devil in Hell. You can shut Him up for a fool, you can spit at Him and kill Him as a demon, or you can fall at His feet and call Him Lord and God. But let us not come with any patronizing nonsense about Him being a great teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to.”

Are we wise enough to desire the leadership that built this great nation and return to following Jesus, the Son of God? Or, do we stumble down the political atheistic road that has been set before us? Time will soon tell ---and so will eternity.

WHAT WOULD SIR WINSTON DO?

Winston Churchill, commenting on the sinful nature of man once contritely said “we are all worms….but then humorously added, “I must admit , I do think I am a glow worm.”

And glow he did.
In 1940, Sir Winston became a beacon light in the world, a hero to lovers of freedom, a man worthy of emulation. He had many marvelous traits; two of which were a wonderful sense of humor and a dogged tenacity that refused to accept defeat. His statement of “Never, never, never give in.” should be the motto of present day freedom loving Americans; especially since our liberty is under intensive internal assault.
Sir Winston Churchill’s wry comment and sage advice should be followed by all firearm owners when he said, “ Success is going from failure to failure without loss of enthusiasm.” We firearm owners have lost some of our Second Amendment rights and are close to loosing an important part of our First Amendment rights. But what we have lost, we will win back.
“ Success is going from failure to failure without loss of enthusiasm.” Some wry comment from the man who will be remembered as one of the most successful, if not the greatest political leader of the twentieth century. During England’s darkest hour, his wit and willingness to fight lifted the spirits of the British people and his bull dog determination gave them hope. His “never give in” attitude was a key ingredient in the British willingness to fight when the immediate future looked absolutely hopeless.
Let's quickly review the horrendous circumstances that England faced in May of 1940. Paris was about to fall, France was totally occupied, the battered British troops were being evacuated at Dunkirk; it was questionable if they could all be successfully brought home. Without much resistance, practically unimpeded, Hitler’s panzer forces were blitzkrieging across the European continent. The small, practically defenseless island of England was next.
Neville Chamberlain, a well meaning but naive pacifist was their Prime Minister. His administration had been a disaster and a new leader was desperately needed. Against the Kings wishes and by the smallest majority, parliament turned hesitatingly and apprehensively, to the feisty, outspoken Winston Churchill.
Many were predicting his term as Prime Minister would be a short one. One Member of Parliament wrote, “The establishment --- so dubious of the choice and so prepared to find its doubts justified. “
Sir Winston even faced within his own small cabinet a movement to consider discussions with Italy’s diplomats, asking them if they would mediate between England and Germany for terms of peace. The powerful Lord Halifax, who had been Winston’s chief rival for the Prime Minister post, was vigorously promoting the idea of a negotiated peace. Churchill thought that such a move would be a disaster. Unfortunately, many members of parliament were beginning to agree with Halifax.
One of the most extraordinary scenes and decisive moment in the second world war, was a cabinet meeting held by Sir Winston, just eighteen short days after he became Prime Minister. Tired and worn down by a long day of bad news, Churchill addressed his cabinet. Up to that time, Halifax hadn’t given any ground and was still advocating compromise with Hitler. Sir Winston told them, “nations that went down fighting, rose again. But, those who surrendered were tamely finished." He then said, “I have thought very carefully, these last days whether it was part of my duty to consider entering into negotiations with “that man.” But, it was idle to think that, if we tried to make peace now, should get better terms than if we fought it out. The Germans would demand our fleet----that would be called disarmament----our navel bases, and much else. We should become a slave state, though a British government which would be Hitler’s puppet. And I am convinced,” he dramatically concluded, “that every man of you would rise up and tear me down from my place, if I were for one moment to contemplate parley or surrender. If this long island of ours is to end at last, let it end only when each one of us lie choking in his own blood upon the ground.”
Much to Sir Winston’s surprise, the entire cabinet gathered around him, slapping him on the back and shaking his hand. So ended the misguided plans of Lord Halifax and so began the demise of the German paperhanger.
That, fellow gunners, was Winston's leadership. No polls, no consensus vote, no equivocation, no compromise with evil.
Every American, to this day, was a direct beneficiary of that one man’s courage. Can you imagine what would have happened if Halifax had been successful? There would have been nothing to stand in the Nazi’s way of conquering all of Europe. Russia and Africa would have fallen as well. Could you imagine what trouble the United States would have faced fighting the Axis powers alone? We should all shudder at the thought of how long the war would have taken. Add to that, the Germans were not far behind us in the discovery of the Atomic bomb. Where would they have been in the development of nuclear fission if there had been no air bases in England for planes to bomb the German homeland? What if they, the Nazis, would have been first? What city would have gone up in a mushroom cloud? New York? Washington? Los Angeles? Think about it, then contemplate the awesome significance of Churchill’s life, the very existence of this one courageous man.
We Americans need heroes - moral upright men, beacons of light. We need them in American politics now. We need no appeasers, or compromisers of principle. The prophetic poem by Alexander Pope should be etched in our minds. “Vice is an evil of such frightful mean, To be hated needs but to be seen. But seen to oft, familiar with its face, You first abhor, then pity, then embrace.”
Today…..We are seeing evil much too oft. In this age where the olden times are the 1970’s and World War Two is antiquity, we should touch the hearts of our fellow Americans and remind them our cultural roots go back a few years farther than Elvis.
We should never forget, we are the accumulation, the offspring of two thousand years of human progress, born in Bethlehem, awakening in the fifteen hundreds and stretching it’s muscles in the 16th century in England and flowering in 1776 in America. Our heritage and our culture is not the accumulation of the last few decades, but a composite of the blood, sacrifice and tears of centuries of freedom loving, God fearing patriots.
William Bennett, in his great book “Our Sacred Honor,” commented on George Washington’s farewell address. “Our first president reminds us that our national strength and stability rests on the pillars of private morality, most especially religion. The word that he uses to describe the role of religion and morality in America is not “optional” or “desirable, or helpful. It is indispensable. “ For 177 years, every president from George Washington to Harry Truman unashamedly referred to America as a Christian, God fearing nation.
We were…..What happened?
Today, when our political leadership expresses morals and values, it is as if such standards are conjured out of thin air, made up as they go along, conveniently invented to fit any new situation, as if there was no author of our human behavior, no creator …no recognition of the indispensable part Providence has played in our nations history.
In the beginning of the so called enlightened twentieth century, President Theodore Roosevelt stated” there are those who believe that a new modernity demands a new morality. What they fail to consider is the harsh reality that there is no such thing as a new morality. There is only one morality. There is only true Christian ethics over against which stands the whole of paganism. If we are to fulfill our great destiny as a people, then we must return to the old morality, the sole morality.”
He then went on to get tough.
“All those blatant sham reformers, in the name of new morality, preach the old, old vice and self indulgence which rotted out first, the moral fiber and then even the external greatness of Greece and Rome.” Can you imagine these words being spoken by a contemporary national politician? Republican or Democrat? Heavily influenced by their Judeo –Christian training, our ancestors recognized human capabilities…. and frailties. Hamilton, Hancock Madison, Jay, Jefferson, Franklin and other wise men, created a republican government of law, binding us down with the chains of a constitution. To protect us from our own ill.
Thomas Jefferson also gave us sage advice. “Be honest, tell the truth. Nothing is so mistaken as the supposition that a person is to extricate himself from a difficulty by intrigue, by chicanery, by dissimulation, by trimming, by an untruth, by an injustice. This increases the difficulty tenfold, and those who pursue these methods, get themselves so involved at length that they can turn no way but their infamy becomes more exposed.”
We are on the threshold of loosing the country our forefathers gave us. We must win it back --- By willingness to confront evil, by confrontation and with the blessings of the Almighty.