Showing posts with label president. Show all posts
Showing posts with label president. Show all posts

Thursday, February 07, 2013

Who’s Your Daddy?

     Wow!

     I’m just here to support the president of the United States. The president of the United States is, you know, our boss. But he’s also, you know, the president and the first lady are kind of like the mom and the dad of the country. And when your dad says something, you listen. And when you don’t, it usually bites you in the ass later on. So, I’m here to support the president.

     Wow! I wonder whether this was meant as a joke. After all, Mr. Rock is a professional jokester who will say or do anything for a laugh.

     Having observed the decline in societal ability to think, however, it seems that he may be serious. For the last hundred years Americans have accepted more and more spoon-fed doctrine from the media, Hollywood, government and so-called education.

     This is actually a very easy sell. The most effective deceptions are those that mimic the truth the most closely.

     Honour thy father and mother; (which is the first commandment with promise;) That it may be well with thee, and thou mayest live long on the earth. (Ephesians 6:2-3)

     From this all authority flows. This is the natural order, ordained by the Lord God from the very beginning. This law, this truth, is written on our hearts and in our consciences. It is taught to us by our generation into this world. It is taught from our conception, gestation, parturition, and rearing. We come into this world by the coming together of our father and mother. We are brought forth into the world entirely dependent upon them for everything. Honoring them is the natural response. In honoring them, we ourselves are blessed. In honoring them we are kept safe by their protection and care and instruction. In honoring them, we are properly fed and clothed and housed. In honoring them, we learn what is good for us. These are undeniable facts, even when the parents are not all that they should be. Even when parents are abusive and evil, many of the blessings that accompany honoring them still manifest themselves.

     So it seems that Mr. Rock is actually right. The President is our boss and the president and his wife are like our dad and mom. It is indeed meet, right, and salutary that we honor them.

     It is sad that very often the full declaration of the Fourth Commandment is not embraced.

     Honour thy father and mother; (which is the first commandment with promise;) That it may be well with thee, and thou mayest live long on the earth.
     And, ye fathers, provoke not your children to wrath: but bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord.
(Ephesians 6:2-4)

     Parents and those in authority are not to forget the one from whom this special honor is entrusted. They are not to act as though this authority were theirs for their own purposes or glory. Parents and those in authority are given this authority from above. They are specially designated servants of their Father, to rule according to His will for the sake of His family.

     When parents and those in authority forget this, their actions do indeed provoke the children to wrath. Where the love of God is not acknowledged as the source of all good, parents and rulers become abusive of their power and those under their rule eventually rebel. Neither the abuse of power nor the rebelling is good. Neither is of God and His gracious will.

     From the beginning all things were created good. Life was peaceful and harmonious. But the devil tried to raise himself above God and thereby cast away from himself the love of God. Lucifer cut himself off from the good and gracious will of God and led a rebellion in a vain attempt to make himself God. The stupidity of such an attempt is astounding, to think that the creature would seek to overthrow the Creator.

     Once the rule of God’s love was lost to Lucifer, he acted according to his self-made image. He acted hatefully and deceitfully, seeking to overthrow and destroy everything that God had created. Adam fell for the temptation, but the Lord came calling him back into the life of grace with the confrontation of his sinful choice and the promise of the Seed of Woman who would crush the hateful head/ruler of the serpent.

     With this promise, stated as a condemnation of the serpent and its head, flowed the further promise of restoration of the family order. Woman was promised that despite her usurpation of her husband’s rule that she would be moved toward him again so that he would rule over her and that together they would be God’s instruments of life through the promised Seed. Adam was promised that the ground from which he was made would resist his efforts so that he would be continually called to turn from his own efforts and choices to trust the Lord and His Word.

     For those who trusted in the Lord and clung to His Word and promise, no other rule was necessary. It was always the refusal to trust the Lord that led people to appoint rulers for themselves to whom they would be subjected. The chosen people of Israel had only the rule of the Word, taught through their parents, until they chose not to trust the Lord and to demand to be subjected to a king like the other nations had chosen for themselves.

     In the Church, however, we see the Lord’s order restored. In the Church there is only the servant/slave of the Word ordained over the families. This slave is called shepherd, or pastor, or elder, or presbyter/over-seer. His rule over the Lord’s household is strictly defined as the pure preaching and administration of the Word and the Sacraments. From this all the families are restored to the life of grace, mercy, and peace in which parents are honored and obeyed and children are brought up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord.

     At Pentecost this was manifested with the outpouring of the Holy Spirit and the conversion of at least 3000 souls. The life in which they shared was a beautiful manifestation of God’s gracious rule amongst His saints. And in every place where the Lord rules through His means of grace, this is the result. It is true today just as it was then.

     Sadly though, it is a rare occurrence today. As with the people of Israel, those professing to be the Church often do not trust the Lord to rule through His means of grace and so they begin to subject themselves to rulers of their own choice. In every case tyranny is the result. The people turn from the Lord and what He has ordained and bind themselves to various forms of tyranny with such devotion that they endure terrible things as if they were necessary. It is as James warns in James 4 and James 5.

     Those who trust in the Lord and walk in His ways do not appoint earthly rulers for themselves. Rather, they subject themselves to the rulers whom the Lord raises up over them. First He gives them parents. Secondly He gives them pastors. He also gives them rulers whom the rebellious have raised up in their rebellion. The saints subject themselves to such rulers for the sake of good order, obeying in all things which do not demand sinful acts on their own part. Wherever the rulers demand what is wrong, the saints peacefully disregard the tyrannical orders and suffer the abuses that result.

     And so Mr. Rock is right, regardless of whether or not he knows why. But does this mean that the president should be supported in disobeying the authority under which he is subjected? When he is placed with an oath to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States of America, is he to be supported when he willfully disobeys the authority under which he is placed?

     The American people have squandered the power given to them to hold such unlawful rulers in check. They have chosen to squander their votes, voting for the lesser of two evils. They have worshiped their false security of the promise of pensions and Social Security checks and voted according to their idolatry. They have voted for a woman’s right to choose death rather than voting to defend life for all. They have voted to support our soldiers, even when the military was being used for wicked and evil agendas. They have voted with selfish and irresponsible motives and so they have elected selfish and irresponsible and even wicked rulers.

     Now they cry out and wonder how this could happen, and worse, many say that they are thankful that the consequences will come after they have departed from this world without genuine care for those who will be left to endure the consequences. What sort of parents and grandparents would speak with such selfish and wicked disregard for their responsibilities? Mr. Rock stood and said that he supports Obama in violating the Constitution. Is this not what the passing generation has done as well? Have they not ignored their responsibilities concerning the younger generations? Those who fear, love, and trust in God above all things do not act in this way. They love their neighbors as themselves. They honor father and mother and they display this honor as loving fathers and mothers. They endure abuse while speaking out for what is right and true and calling for right treatment of their families and neighbors.

     Oh that people understood the holiness of the Lord that is taught to us in the Ten Commandments. Then we would not have wars and rumors of wars but we would fall together on our knees confessing our need for remission of our sins and reconciliation to God and one another. No one who bows the knees and head to God as Father and Redeemer and Savior and Justifier and Sanctifier rises up rebelliously to murder and make war. Rather, the peace of God that surpasses all understanding guards their hearts and minds in Christ Jesus forevermore. Where peace rules honor is displayed toward all.

+ + +

Monday, November 05, 2012

Election Day



Tomorrow Americans will be voting concerning various political issues, including who will be the President for the next four years.

I have met a few people who think that Obama is the right choice.  I am amazed at their reasoning when they try to explain.

I have met many more who think that Romney is the lesser of two evils.

In talking with people I have heard many people say that they would consider voting for a third party candidate, but that such a candidate cannot win.

Huh?

I’ve seen polls that indicate that those claiming to be independent of the two lock-step parties are as much as 40%.

If everyone one who claims to be independent really meant it and voted for say, Gary Johnson, he would be the next president elect.

If everyone who said, “He can’t win” voted for him, guess what?

I don’t agree with Gary on everything, but hearing him speak and reading his positions, he seems to me to take the Constitution very seriously.  He has a good record.  He is every bit as pro-Life as Romney.

You think otherwise?

Read what Romney’s site says:

Values: Marriage, Family, Life.

First notice that this is stated in the third person.  This is written by someone other than Romney.

Next notice that he makes no statement of any actual plan for action.

The boldest statement made is:

“He will protect the right of health care workers to follow their conscience in their work.”

How?

Every statement indicates that he intends to point his finger at someone else and claim no responsibility himself.  Read what his propagandist writes for him.  See if he ever actually commits to anything.  Anything at all.

Gary Johnson at least speaks in the first person or simply states the points that he believes.  Johnson says basically the same regarding protecting life that Romney says.  He says that all life is precious and must be protected.  He furthermore limits a woman’s choice to viability of a fetus.  So if this is pressed regarding what viability actually means, then the fetus would be protected from conception.  This is not his current stand, but he indicates protection for those he counts as viable as necessary.  This is actually more than Romney states as his intended actual action.

But then, what Republican president has actually done anything more than claim to be pro-Life.  What president has actually done anything about it?

On the other hand, pro-Life presidents have pressed for the Patriot Act and the TSA and Homeland Security and other horrific acts.

Johnson says: Civil Liberties:


  • The PATRIOT Act should be repealed, which would restore proper judicial oversight to federal investigations and again require federal investigators to prove probable cause prior to executing a search.
  • Habeas corpus should be respected entirely, requiring the government to either charge incarcerated individuals with a crime or release them.
  • The TSA should take a risk-based approach to airport security. Only high-risk individuals should be subjected to invasive pat-downs and full-body scans.
  • The TSA should not have a monopoly on airport security. Airports and airlines should be encouraged to seek the most effective methods for screening travelers, including private sector screeners. Screeners outside of government can be held fully accountable for their successes and failures.


This is a very good start.  Imagine if we had a president who actually tried to accomplish these things.

At least pro-Life people would not be labeled as terrorists and arrested for speaking out.

What did either of the Bushes do?  What does Romney actually commit himself to do?

Johnson is on the ballot.  Voting for him is easy.  Voting for him is casting a true NO vote to the way the lockstep parties have been leading us.  That may be a long way from what a great option would be, but it would be a step in the right direction.

If anyone thinks that the Patriot Act is a small issue, wait till that person is arrested without Habeas Corpus.  Suddenly very little else will matter.

Sadly, Johnson admits that he does not know much about the NDAA, but since he desires to repeal the Patriot Act, he would surely also want to repeal its big brother.

At any rate, it will surely be interesting to see how many people are truly independents, and how many are merely noise makers.

Monday, March 19, 2012

Is This Newsworthy?

I have been asking people who are very alert to many things happening in the nation and in the world whether they are aware of H.CON.RES.107. I have also repeatedly performed Internet searches to see whether any mainstream media sources are reporting it. So far I have found no mainstream media, including the so-called conservative talk show figures and FOX, who are reporting this. As I said, I have also asked various people who are followers of the news, and not one of these people have been aware of this.

The actual text of the House Bill is not yet available, but here is the official Library of Congress posting of H. CON. RES. 107.

Does this seem newsworthy to you?

Here is an article that explains it more clearly:

Will A Sitting President Finally Be Held Accountable For High Crimes and Misdemeanors?

This House Bill is calling for the impeachment of the President of the United States.

Is anyone even reporting that this is happening? Is anyone reporting on the incident that triggered this House Bill being presented?

Here is the video:



This is the Secretary of Defense saying that the President will invade anyone he chooses to invade or attack, without seeking permission of the Congress.

Is this not newsworthy anymore? Do Americans really count this as OK? Does the media not care that this is the publicly declared position of the current administration?

If Americans were aware of this, would there be an outcry?

Should this not be brought to the attention of the public? Is it not of national interest that impeachment proceedings have begun in the House of Representatives?

Is this not news?

- - -

Thursday, March 01, 2012

The Pretense of the Two Party System

In the following video David Icke does a good job of explaining the reason that the political system seems never to change course. The explanation is essentially complete within the first 5 minutes, so you may want to stop at that point when it turns into a music video. I don’t endorse David Icke, but he does make valid points that are worth hearing.



I’ve made some clips from a segment of this video where the “president” declares who is signing the executive orders.



Who is signing? Whose executive order is this? Who has actually planned and worked this?



This is not limited to the political arena. It is also displayed in the direction observed in the various church bodies. Lay people cry out wondering why they cannot reverse the wayward trends in their church bodies. The same sort of false dichotomy is active in church body politics. The leaders pretend to have opposing agendas, usually a liberal and a conservative agenda juxtaposed to one another. But in reality both sides enact that same things when they are “in power.”

The people cling to their church body because they are afraid to cut the apron strings from Momma, even though Momma has prostituted herself to the point of degrading beyond any recognizable likeness to her former self. And so they are edged little by little to the precipice.

+ + +

Wednesday, November 09, 2011

Old Man Attacked by Obama Administration

An 80 year old man is being attacked by the Obama Administration and the FBI as a violent criminal because of his pro-life stand. His big acts of violence? He stood on a side walk and he accidentally stepped on someone’s shoe.

More information is available at:

Obama Admin: Fine Pro-Lifer $25,000 for Stepping on Shoe

Bias at Justice: A Tale of Two Cases

Federal government out of step with pro-life America.

How this man’s actions can be counted in any way as violent is beyond reason. Certainly he may have been annoying to those seeking to eradicate the babies whom they do not want to consider. Certainly he may have been a nuisance to the Planned Parenthood Limitation staff. But he caused less actual accosting of people than the Justice Department daily causes, or that Congress and the President cause, or that telephone opinion pollsters cause.

He certainly did nothing like the woman did to him with the pepper spray. Yet he is treated as a perpetrator of violence and she is not.

According to the US government, those who cry out for those who have no other advocates are to be punished as violent offenders while those who deny the voiceless a chance to be heard or even to live to see the light of day are counted as innocent.

Just how perverted must the abuses of justice reach before people awaken from their apathy?

+ + +

Monday, February 21, 2011

President's Day and Freedom

On this President's Day, I wonder how many people have seen this article and the CNN video included there.

VETERAN’S GROUP DEMANDS APOLOGY FROM SEC. OF STATE CLINTON

Quite a story! Quite a video, considering that it is a CNN video. Since we do not watch TV, we don't know whether or not it made headline news. Did it?


Thursday, December 17, 2009

Born Alive



Quite a remarkable comparison to the Christmas story:

And it came to pass in those days, that there went out a decree from Caesar Augustus, that all the world should be taxed. (And this taxing was first made when Cyrenius was governor of Syria.) And all went to be taxed, every one into his own city. And Joseph also went up from Galilee, out of the city of Nazareth, into Judaea, unto the city of David, which is called Bethlehem; (because he was of the house and lineage of David:) To be taxed with Mary his espoused wife, being great with child. And so it was, that, while they were there, the days were accomplished that she should be delivered. And she brought forth her firstborn son, and wrapped him in swaddling clothes, and laid him in a manger; because there was no room for them in the inn. (Luke 2:1-7)

Then Herod, when he saw that he was mocked of the wise men, was exceeding wroth, and sent forth, and slew all the children that were in Bethlehem, and in all the coasts thereof, from two years old and under, according to the time which he had diligently enquired of the wise men. (Matthew 2:16)



Monday, February 16, 2009

Presidents’ Day

     Today is a national holiday, a day set aside for holy things, a holy day. Hmm. President’s Day, what is holy about this day?

     That very likely depends upon one’s perspective.

     But what do we celebrate on this day? What does the office of President set before us as a people?

     The prescribed Presidential Oath of Office is recorded in the last paragraph of Section I of Article II of the Constitution of the United States of America:



     Before he enter on the Execution of his Office, he shall take the following Oath or Affirmation:— “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”



     The text for the oath can be also be seen at Presidential Oaths of Office and the text of the Constitution here.

     Our most recently elected and sworn in president stumbled at the misdirection of the administrator of the oath, Chief Justice Roberts. The oath was administered a second time, as is reported here. The chief justice administered the oath from memory, and when the President Elect did not follow completely, without the written words the chief justice’s lead became confused. Therefore, to be certain that no question would be raised later regarding the legitimacy of the ceremony, the oath was re-administered.

     The Constitution prescribes these words as THE oath that must be taken before a president elect can enter on the execution of his office. Even though it may seem a small matter to move the word faithfully to the end rather than the beginning of the phrase, it does actually change the emphasis of the oath and thereby changes the oath prescribed by the Constitution. Certainly it is right that the oath be administered again correctly.

     Is this really so important? Why did this become an issue at all?

     Why did the chief justice not bring a written copy of the oath that he was to administer to the president elect? Was it arrogance? Was it pride?

     In this age of public media in visual and audio format that is broadcast live to all the world, concern over perception of personality often supplants concern over faithfulness. If Faithfulness had been the concern of the chief justice and of the president elect, they both would have brought written copies and used them. At the very least, both men would have made certain that the chief justice used a written copy.

     This brings us back to the original question regarding Presidents’ Day. Faithfulness flows from a proper sense of what is holy. That which is holy has been set apart or sanctified. The office of President has indeed been set apart, both by men and by God. Men wrote the Constitution and established the specific offices prescribed for the governing of the United States. God established that such governance is necessary for good order and has given His blessing to this authority among men. It is absolutely necessary for good order that both those governed and those appointed to govern remain mindful of the holiness of the office. It should be held to the very highest expectations.

     Indeed, Presidents’ Day is a true holiday. Do we still hold to it faithfully? Do we even still know what this means?


Wednesday, May 07, 2008

A Candidate for President

Click to the constitutionparty.com - Forging a Rebirth of Freedom

The Constitution Party had its nomination convention at the end of April and now has its nominee for the upcoming presidential election for the United States of America.
Chuck Baldwin
Chuck Baldwin was nominated for President and his Vice Presidential running mate is Darrell Castle, an attorney and Vietnam War Marine Corps veteran from Memphis, Tennessee.

Chuck has published a column in which he states what he will do if elected as the President of the United States. You can read his column at “If I Were President”.

Also of interest is the Constitution Party’s platform.

I have mentioned this platform in a previous post entitled, Constitution Party Platform. At that time I knew considerably less about the Constitution Party, but I have since learned more about it and I believe that I now have a party with which I agree in most areas. It certainly represents what I know of the Constitution far better than either the Democrat or Republican parties and their candidates do.

I offer this post and the accompanying links for any who would like to investigate Candidate Baldwin’s and the Constitution Party’s positions.