A Theology of Patriotism
Books, Readings, Movies and Music Celebrating Americanism, Freedom, the Christian Faith, Godly Virtues, and Western Civilization
Introduction: The Great Election of 2016 for the President of the United States is now over and the 45th President will be Donald Trump of New York, a businessman, not a politician. This election will be the subject of studies for the foreseeable future because it was so very different in many ways from all the elections preceding it. Perhaps the strangeness of the election will not be fully known until after the Trump presidency has had a chance to actually do some things that were promised in the campaign.
This election has clearly demonstrated what many of us have known for a long while: this nation is very divided. In my studies as an amateur historian I would say that our nation is more divided than at any time since the 1850’s- 1860’s. The slavery crisis was a complex issue that touched on what it means to be a human being, what the Bible says about slavery, what the Founders thought and wanted, as well as the sheer economics of slavery and the political divide the issue caused including the issue of states’ rights and individual property freedoms. It took the worst war in our history, a war that killed more Americans than any other war, to settle the issue and the lingering issues of race and racism linger still and will likely never go away. But today we are at least just as divided and maybe more so.
The issues that divide us today are just as fundamental as the issue of slavery. Is an unborn baby a human being with rights? Should men be able to marry men and women marry women? What is marriage? What is a family? Can people switch genders and declare themselves a different gender from what they were born with and then force society to recognize them for who and what they are pretending to be? If you have a religious belief that contradicts the liberal sexual mores can you be persecuted and prosecuted by the State and coerced to act against your religion in order to accommodate those with whom you disagree? Do homosexual rights trump religious freedom? Is Islam compatible with any of our western values? What is a nation? Should we not have borders or an official language? Should we purge our history of inconvenient facts because the public’s values have changed?
For the last hundred years or so conservatives and the religious right have slowly surrendered one part of our culture after another despite winning many elections. Our culture is no longer slouching towards Gomorrah, we are going at breakneck speed off the cliff to Gomorrah. And yet we, the religious right and conservatives in general, have just won another election. Sort of. Trump is problematic at best for purebred conservatives.
While political movements, elections, and policies are important, they are just one part of what we must do to reclaim the culture. I would say, boldly even, that the greatest single cause of the decline of our culture is that we have forsaken Christ and His Inspired, Inerrant, Infallible Word. The Church has failed to hold to sound doctrine and failed to pass the faith down to the next generation, and the next, and the next…. We have failed to proclaim the pure gospel and evangelize the lost, failed to claim every part of our culture for the glory of Christ, and failed to lead our world with a consistent and biblical worldview. We have retreated to our Christian ghettos and have been compromised by the world.
Along with the decline in the Church, the next big reason for the fall of our civilization is that we have ceded control of Education to the pagan Left. From the local elementary schools to the school boards, the teachers’ unions, the Teachers’ Colleges and Universities, to the Dept. of Education, our education system is failing and falling short. Our literacy rates are in decline but our athletics are outstanding. The classics are unread, untaught and forsaken but we are computer literate. Americans no longer are even teaching math at university, immigrants are. The Liberal Left and atheists do not and will not, cannot, teach patriotism and moral values anymore. It is now controversial to require students to say the pledge of allegiance, it is not unusual for the Mexican flag to be more prevalent on campus than the American flag and kids cannot sing Christmas carols during Winter Holidays (it used to be called Christmas!)
In short, the American education system is all about keeping children ignorant of the greatness of our country, ignorant of the biblical basis for morals and values, and is more interested in turning out world citizens who cannot think or reason and know not from whence they came, than they are about turning out moral citizens who think critically and cherish their nation’s heritage.
The same can be said for the American entertainment establishment. Gone are the days when sports heroes and movie stars also served in the armed forces and fought in our wars. Today the sports heroes take a knee when the National Anthem is played and the movie stars threaten to move to Canada when their candidate and political party loses an election. One of the biggest Olympic heroes of all time, Bruce Jenner, has made himself a woman. Sort of.
And the News Media, the so-called journalists of our day…are simply disgusting. Useless. Communists. It took an outlaw set of computer hackers, Wikileaks and Anonymous, to break the decisive stories that revealed how crooked the demoncratic party is. They did what the Main Stream Media used to do.
If our government does not address these issues in our education, media, and entertainment systems then all of our political actions and ideals will come to naught.
So what can I do? What can WE do? One tiny thing I am going to do is to promote good books, movies and music that point us in the right direction. If the education system, modern news media and entertainment industry does not promote Americanism, Patriotism, Western Civilization, Virtue and Good Morals, and the Christian Faith, then I WILL. The lists that I will produce are from my personal library and are books/movies/music that I think are important and share a good message that will build up the Church, build up America and Americans, and fight the overwhelming tide of evil that assaults us every day.
I am inviting you to educate and inform yourself through these resources. Certainly we should exchange ideas, discuss the books and the issues. And have fun!
I. History: the Record of Freedom and Oppression, Greatness in Western Civilization
A. General Histories of America: Here are some general histories of America that I have either found to be outstanding or look very promising with good, strong recommendations.
- A History of the American People, by Paul Johnson. HarperCollinsPublishers: New York, 1997 (1088pp.) Johnson is British and the book was originally published in Britain. This is an outstanding, conservative view of the history of America. I would say that if you could read one volume on the history of America, read this book!
- Modern Times: The World from the Twenties to the Eighties, by Paul Johnson. Harper&Row Publishers: New York, 1983 (817pp.) While this is a world history, it deals a lot with America and her impact on the world, so I am including it here as a companion volume to the one above. I have read this big book twice it’s so good! Even though it is now a bit out of date, if you want to read a great, conservative account of most of the twentieth-century, this is the book.
- The Growth of the American Republic, Volume One, sixth edition, by Samuel Eliot Morison, Henry Steele Commager and William E. Leuchtenburg. Oxford University Press: New York, 1969 (921pp.) The original edition of this classic came out in 1930. Volume Two, seventh edition, 1980 (923pp.) I read these two classics back in 2000 over about 5 months- that fast for such a large work indicates how much I enjoyed these books! The authors tell the story of America in a rich, invigorating manner.
- America, The Last Best Hope Volume I:From the Age of Discovery To a World at War by William J. Bennett. Nelson Current: Nashville, TN 2006 (673pp.) The portions of this book I have read are outstanding! Volume II: From a World at War to the Triumph of Freedom 1914-1989 Thomas Nelson: Nashville, 2007 (592pp.) This two volume set may be better in some ways than the previous set listed above because Bennett does deal with some modern trends in American History that are liberal and deconstructive. Bennett takes on controversial subjects like Columbus and sets the Liberals straight! If you can afford the time for a big 2 Volume history of America, go to Dr. Bennett.
- A Patriot’s History of the United States From Columbus’s Great Discovery to the War on Terror, by Larry Schweikart and Michael Allen. Sentinel: New York, 2004 (928pp.) I have read parts of this book and am quite impressed! It seems that it started out as a one volume work but the following volumes have been added. A Patriot’s History of the Modern World From America’s Exceptional Ascent to the Atomic Bomb: 1898-1945, Larry Schweikart and Dave Dougherty. 2012 (490pp.) A Patriot’s History of the Modern World Vol.II From the Cold War to the Age of Entitlement: 1945-2012 by Schweikart and Dougherty. 2013 (671pp.)
- The Americans: The Colonial Experience by Daniel J. Boorstin. Vintage Books: New York, 1958 (434pp.) This is an outstanding three book series that takes a series of connected snapshots to lay out the history of this great nation. This is not your normal, straight chronological history; Boorstin’s writing is unique and scintillating. The Americans: The National Experience. 1965 (517pp.) The Americans: The Democratic Experience. 1973 (717pp.) This inexpensive paperback set would be a great addition to any family’s library. The way Boorstin writes and organizes his book is that you can open it to any chapter at random, read it, and feel good about your country and learn a lot. You do not have to read it all the way through, first to last, although that is certainly the recommended way.
- The Oxford History of the American People, volume I: Prehistory to 1789, Samuel Eliot Morison. Mentor: New York, 1972 (422pp.) Volume II: 1789 Through Reconstruction. (540pp.) Volume III: 1869 to the Death of John F. Kennedy 1963. (521pp.) Morison is one of my all-time favorite authors and this series is outstanding. I also have the one volume, hardback edition which can still be purchased: The Oxford History of the American People, Oxford University Press: New York, 1965 (1151pp.) Morison is an old school conservative who is a delight to read. By conservative I do not mean a partisan, rather, an accurate historian who is passionate about our story and seeks to tell it with grace and dignity.
- B. Discovering the Americas: Stories of Adventure, Courage & Greatness: Every American should get to know Christopher Columbus. He has fallen out of favor these days and is blamed for the near extermination of the Native Americans, Indians, and Aboriginal Peoples. I believe that we should celebrate Columbus and his great accomplishments as he had a great faith in God, a sense of divine calling in his life, and he was the most courageous and talented mariner in our American story. Simply put, if Columbus had not persevered in his quest, which was a religious quest, America would not be here.
The study of Columbus does have a particular relevance to our lives today in that he was seeking a way to deal with the problem of Islam in his day. That’s right, Columbus did NOT just sail west because it was there, he did not set out on his journey simply for fame, glory, and riches. He believed God had called him to this task in order to enrich the Spanish Crown and fund a Crusade to reconquer the Holy Land from the Muslims and open new trading routes since the Muslims had blocked the direct route. Along the way he discovered a New World.
- The Log of Christopher Columbus, translated by Robert H. Fuson. International Marine Publishing Company: Camden, Maine 1987 (252pp.) An excellent prime source that demonstrates his faith in God and personal courage.
- The Four Voyages of Christopher Columbus, Edited and translated by J.M. Cohen. Penguin Books: New York, 1969 (320pp.) This book is an Excellent prime source and contemporary account. This is an inexpensive paperback and should be in every American’s home!
- Columbus and the Quest for Jerusalem, Carol Delaney. Free Press: New York, 2011 (319pp.) An excellent biography that sheds much light on the religious motives of Columbus. If you can’t read Morison’s lengthy biography of Columbus, read this one!
- Admiral of the Ocean Sea, A Life of Christopher Columbus, by Admiral Samuel Eliot Morison. Little, Brown and Company: Boston, 1942 (680pp.) This Pulitzer Prize winner is one of my top biographies. If you could only read one book on Columbus, read this one.
- The Life and Voyages of Christopher Columbus, Two Volumes in One, by Washington Irving. Cosimo Classics: New York, 2011, originally published in 1893, (489pp., 515pp. respectively). Did you catch the author’s name? Yes, that Washington Irving, the famous 19th century author of The Last of the Mohicans, and The Deerslayer. One Great American writing about another. While I have not read this massive 2 volume biography yet, this classic promises greatness. Morison does quote from Irving several times in his books, but there are some inaccuracies in the book that Morison ferrets out.
- The European Discovery of America: The Southern Voyages A.D.1492-1616, by Dr. Samuel Eliot Morison. Oxford University Press: New York, 1974 (758pp.) This outstanding book tells the stories of the brave, the cruel, the greedy, and the amazing men who led other men in the very dangerous journeys of early trans-Atlantic sailing to the Americas. The book focuses on Columbus, Magellan, and Drake but includes others. These men should be revered as heroes by every American, but, sadly, their stories have fallen on hard times to our great loss.
- The European Discovery of America: The Northern Voyages A.D. 500-1600, by Admiral Samuel Eliot Morison. Oxford University Press: New York, 1971 (712 pp.) This Harvard Professor and U.S. Navy Admiral begins his story with ancient myths of islands and lands west of Gibraltar and the English Isles and then covers in detail the great mariners like Leif Ericsson, John Cabot, Jacques Cartier and Sir Walter Raleigh. These great men, and the adventures they pursued, should be common knowledge today, but have, sadly, been long forgotten. In my lifetime the only men that come close to these heroes are the astronauts of the Mercury, Gemini, and Apollo programs which also are now nearly forgotten.
- B. Conquering and Colonizing the Americas
- Of Plymouth Plantation: Bradford’s History of the Plymouth Settlement 1608-1650, by Governor William Bradford. The Vision Forum, Inc.: San Antonio, TX 1998. Originally published 1856 after being lost and in private possession for over two-hundred years. This edition updated into modern English in 1909 by Harold Paget. (353pp.) I have read this book twice and believe that every American should read this book! Condensed, paperback editions are available.
- Love and Hate in Jamestown: John Smith, Pocahontas, and the Heart of a New Nation, by David A. Price. Alfred A. Knopf: New York, 2003 (305pp.) This outstanding book needs to be read in conjunction with Plymouth Plantation listed above. The two books give you both sides of the founding of this great country- a search for wealth and adventure as well as a search for freedom to worship.
- A Land as God Made It: Jamestown and the Birth of America, by James Horn. Basic Books: New York, 2005 (337pp.) Jamestown is so important that a second book is worthy of your reading.
- Captain John Smith: Jamestown and the Birth of the American Dream, Dorothy and Thomas Hoobler. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.: Hoboken, New Jersey, 2006 (274pp.) To understand, love, and appreciate America you must read biographies of the great men and women who founded and built this great country. John Smith was a great man, and here is a worthy biography.
- John Winthrop: America’s Forgotten Founding Father, by Francis J. Bremer. Oxford University Press: New York, 2003 (478pp.) Surely Winthrop deserves the title of a Founding Father, and this biography brings back this forgotten giant of our history.
“For the first time in its history, the United States is trying to wage and win a war without accurately identifying the enemy or its motivations for seeking to destroy us. That oversight defies both common sense and past military experience, and it disarms us in what may be the most decisive theater of this conflict: the battle of ideas.”
The following is an article written by Frank J. Gaffney Jr., president of the Center for Security Policy in Washington and was an article in the April 2010 issue of The American Legion Magazine. Thought you would find it interesting & scary; I did.
For the first time in its history, the United States is trying to wage and win a war without accurately identifying the enemy or its motivations for seeking to destroy us. That oversight defies both common sense and past military experience, and it disarms us in what may be the most decisive theater of this conflict: the battle of ideas.
Such a breakdown may seem incredible to veterans of past military conflicts. Imagine fighting World War II without clarity about Nazism and fascism, or the Cold War without an appreciation of Soviet communism and the threat it posed.
Yet today, the civilian leaders of this country and their senior subordinates – responsible for the U.S. military, the intelligence community, homeland security and federal law enforcement – have systematically failed to fully realize that we once again face a totalitarian ideology bent on our destruction.
That failure is the more worrisome since the current ideological menace is arguably more dangerous than any we have faced in the past, for two reasons. First, its adherents believe their mission of global conquest is divinely inspired. Second, they are here in the United States in significant numbers, not just a threat elsewhere around the world.
What, then, is this ideology? It has been given many names in recent years, including political Islam, radical Islam, fundamentalist Islam, extremist Islam and Islamofascism. There is, however, a more accurate descriptor – the one its adherents use. They call it “Shariah.”
Perhaps the most important thing to understand about Shariah is that it is authoritative Islam, which presents itself as a complete way of life – cultural, political, military, social and religious,
all governed by the same doctrine. In other words, this comprehensive program is not simply the agenda of extremists hunkered down in caves in Afghanistan or Pakistan. Neither can its directives be attributed to deviants hijacking Islam.
Rather, Shariah – which translates from Arabic as “path to God” – is actually binding law. It is taught as such by the most revered sacred texts, traditions, institutions, top academic centers, scholars and leaders of the Islamic faith. Fortunately, hundreds of millions of Muslims around the world do not wish to live under a brutally repressive, woman-demeaning, barbaric and totalitarian program. Such Muslims are potentially our allies, just as those who do adhere to Shariah are our unalterable foes.
The immutability of Shariah-adherent Muslim hostility toward the rest of us derives directly from the central tenet of Shariah: Muslims are explicitly required to seek the triumph of Islam over all other faiths, peoples and governments.
The ultimate objective of Shariah is the establishment of a global Islamic state – Sunni Muslims call it “the caliphate” – governed by Shariah. The means by which this political outcome is to be achieved is called “jihad.”
Since 9/11, many Americans have become unhappily acquainted with the terrifying, violent strain of jihad. Under Shariah, violence – often described by non-Muslims as “terrorism” – is the preferred means of securing the spread and dominion of Islam, as it is the most efficient.
While Shariah deems jihad to be the personal obligation of every faithful Muslim capable of performing it – man or woman, young or old – they can forgo the violent form when it is deemed impracticable. In such circumstances, the struggle can be pursued through means that are, at least temporarily, non-violent. Taken together, the latter constitute what renowned author and expert Robert Spencer calls “stealth jihad.” Adherents to Shariah call it “dawah.”
Examples of stealth jihadism abound in Western societies, notably Europe and increasingly in the United States. They include the demand for symbolic and substantive accommodations in political, economic and legal areas (for example, special treatment or rights for Muslims in the workplace, in public spaces and by government); the opportunity to penetrate and influence operations against government at every level; and the insinuation of the Trojan horse of “Shariah-compliant finance” into the West’s capital markets.
If stealth jihad seems less threatening than terrorism, the objective is exactly the same as that of violent jihad: the subjugation to the Dar al-Islam (House of Islam) of all non-Islamic states that, like the United States, make up the Dar al-harb (House of War). It follows that those who seek ostensibly to impose Shariah through non-violent techniques – notably in the West, the organization known as the Muslim Brotherhood – are our enemies every bit as much as those who overtly strive to defeat us by murderous terrorism.
Many Western elites, including the Obama administration, have been seduced by the seemingly benign quality of the Muslim Brotherhood. In fact, we know from the 2008 prosecution of the Holy Land Foundation – the largest terrorism-financing trial in U.S. history – that the Muslim Brothers’ mission in the United States is “a kind of grand jihad to destroy Western civilization from within … by their own miserable hands.”
Another Brotherhood document, titled “The Rulers,” was seized in a 2004 raid and describes how the organization will try to overthrow the U.S. Constitution in five phases:
• Phase I: Discreet and secret establishment of elite leadership
Phase II: Gradual appearance on the public scene, and exercising and utilizing various public activities
• Phase III: Escalation, prior to conflict and confrontation with the rulers, through the mass media
• Phase IV: Open public confrontation with the government through the exercise of political pressure
• Phase V: Seizing power to establish an Islamic nation, under which all parties and Islamic groups will become united
“The Rulers” makes plain that all the above-mentioned phases “are preliminary steps to reach the (fifth) phase.”
The Muslim Brothers know that by masking their ideological agenda as a religious program, they can use Western civil liberties and tolerance as weapons in their stealthy jihad. For this strategy to succeed, however, they must suppress any discussion or understanding of the true nature of Shariah.
Adherents to Shariah insist that their law prohibits any slander against Islam or Muhammad. Under such a catch-all restriction, virtually any kind of conversation about – or critique of – Islam can be considered impermissible if Muslims find it offensive. Particularly in Europe, the ever-present prospect of violence, like that which followed the September 2005 publication of Danish cartoons poking fun at Muhammad, is generally sufficient to induce self-censorship.
In this country, the application of such prohibitions seems unthinkable, given the guarantees of free speech enshrined in the Constitution’s First Amendment. Unfortunately, the Obama administration last year co-sponsored with Egypt a relevant and deeply problematic resolution in the U.N. Human Rights Council, promoted for years by the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), a group of 57 Muslim-majority nations that stridently embraces Shariah and seeks to legitimate and promote its advance around the world.
The resolution calls on members of the United Nations to prohibit statements that offend Islam. It also calls for criminal penalties to be applied to those who make such statements.
The U.S. implementation of such a resolution would obviously be a matter not just for the executive branch, which supported it, but for Congress and the judiciary as well. It is a safe bet that any formal effort to supplant the First Amendment in this way would meet with great resistance.
To a stunning degree, U.S. leaders have been effectively conforming to Shariah slander laws for some time now. For instance, presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama have both repeatedly described Islam as a “religion of peace,” without acknowledging the requirement for jihad its authorities demand, pursuant to Shariah.
At the Muslim Brotherhood’s insistence, the Department of Homeland Security and the State Department have barred the use of perfectly accurate terms like “Islamic terrorism.” The U.S. government has also embraced the Muslim Brothers’ disinformation by translating jihad as nothing more than “striving in the path of God.”
Under the Bush and Obama administrations, the favored name for the enemy has been “violent extremism” – a formulation that neither offers clarity about the true nature of our foe nor lends itself to a prescription for a successful countervailing strategy. Even when al-Qaeda is identified as the enemy, it is almost always accompanied by an assurance that its operatives and allies have “corrupted” Islam. Ignored, or at least earnestly obscured, are two unhappy realities: such enemies are implementing Shariah’s dictates to the letter of the law, and they have millions of fellow adherents around the world who view Islam’s requirements the same way.
One of the most egregious examples of this practice of unilateral disarmament in the battle of ideas is the January report of the independent review of the Fort Hood massacre, co-chaired by former Army Secretary Togo West and former Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Vernon Clark. Their 86-page unclassified analysis purported to dissect an event allegedly perpetrated by Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan – a medical officer whose business card described him as “Soldier of Allah,” whose briefings justified murder of his comrades in the name of jihad, and who shouted the Islamic martyr’s cry “Allahu Akbar!” (“God is great!”) as he opened fire, killing 13. Incredibly, the words “Islam,” “Islamic terror,” “Shariah,” “jihad,” and “Muslim Brotherhood” were not used even once in the West-Clark report.
Such political correctness, or willful blindness up the chain of command, doubtless caused Hasan’s colleagues to keep silent about his alarming beliefs, lest they be punished for expressing concerns about them. Now, reportedly, six of them have been designated as the scapegoats for what is manifestly an institutional failure.
The painful truth is that however we rationalize this sort of behavior, our Shariah-adherent enemies correctly perceive it as evidence of submission, which is the literal meaning of the word “Islam,” and what Shariah demands of everyone, Muslim and non-Muslim alike.
Indeed, Shariah offers non-believers only three choices: conversion to Islam, submission (known as dhimmitude) or death. Historically, dhimmitude was imposed through successful Muslim conquests. In more recent years, tolerant Western nations have increasingly succumbed to stealthy jihadism, backed by more or less direct threats of violence.
That trend, worrying as it is, may be giving way in this country to a new campaign: jihad of the sword. The past year saw a fourfold increase in the number of actual or attempted terrorist attacks in the United States. Sadly, that statistic will likely be surpassed in the year ahead. Four of the nation’s top intelligence officials have testified before Congress that it is certain new acts of violence will be undertaken in the next three to six months. Worse yet, a blue-ribbon commission has calculated that the probability of the use of weapons of mass destruction somewhere in the world by 2013 is now over 50 percent.
Is this dramatic upsurge in violent jihad directed at the United States unrelated to our behavior? Or does it reflect a growing calculation on the part of our Shariah-adherent enemies that violence against the United States is now, once again, practicable?
Either way, the time has clearly come to make a far more serious effort to defeat both the violent and stealthy forms of jihad being waged against this country. If we are to do so, however, we have to start by telling the truth.
Our enemy is not “violent extremism,” or even al-Qaeda alone. Rather, it is the millions of Muslims who – like the Muslim Brotherhood, al-Qaeda and their allies – adhere to Shariah and who, therefore, believe they must impose it on the rest of us.
We are at war with such individuals and organizations. Not because we want to be. Not because of policies toward Israel or the Middle East or anything else we have pursued in recent years. Rather, we are at war with them because they must wage jihad against us, pursuant to the dictates of Shariah, the same law that has guided many in Islam for some 1,200 years.
What is at stake in this war? Look no further than The American Legion’s Americanism Manual, which defines Americanism as “love of America; loyalty to her institutions as the best yet devised by man to secure life, liberty, individual dignity and happiness; and the willingness to defend our country and Flag against all enemies, foreign and domestic.”
Such values cannot coexist with Shariah, which demands the destruction of democratic nations like the United States, its governing institutions and liberties. Shariah would supplant them with a repressive, transnational, theocratic government abroad and at home.
The extraordinary reality is that none of this – the authoritative and malevolent nature of Shariah, its utter incompatibility with our civilization, and its adherents’ determination to force us to convert, submit or die – is concealed from those willing to learn the truth. To the contrary, the facts are widely available via books, the Internet, DVDs and mosques, both here and overseas. Interestingly, on Dec. 1, 2005, Gen. Peter Pace, then-chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, called on his troops to expose themselves to precisely this sort of information: “I say you need to get out and read what our enemies have said. Remember Hitler. Remember he wrote ‘Mein Kampf.’ He said in writing exactly what his plan was, and we collectively ignored that to our great detriment. Now, our enemies have said publicly on film, on the Internet, their goal is to destroy our way of life. No equivocation on their part.”
As it happens, Maj. Stephen Coughlin, a lawyer and Army Reserves intelligence specialist recruited by the Joint Chiefs to be their expert on the doctrine and jurisprudence of jihad, took Pace’s admonition to heart. He wrote a master’s thesis inspired by the chairman’s quote, titled “To Our Great Detriment: Ignoring What Extremists Say About Jihad.”
Coughlin’s briefings explicitly and repeatedly warned military leaders of the enemy’s “threat doctrine” – drawing from, among Islamic texts, passages the Fort Hood suspect used to justify his massacre. Unfortunately, engaging in such analysis, let alone acting on it, was powerfully discouraged in January 2008 when Coughlin was dismissed from the Joint Staff after he ran afoul of a Muslim Brother then working for Deputy Secretary of Defense Gordon England.
In short, we are today confronted by the cumulative effect of a sustained and collective dereliction of duty, one that is putting our country in extreme peril. Our armed forces – like their counterparts in the intelligence community, Department of Homeland Security and law enforcement – have a professional duty to know the enemy and develop appropriate responses to the threat doctrine. If this dereliction is allowed to persist, it is predictable that more Americans will die, both on foreign battlefields and at home.
The American people also need to become knowledgeable about the threat of Shariah and insist that action be taken at federal, state and local levels to keep our country Shariah-free. This toxic ideology, if left unchecked, can destroy the country and institutions that are, indeed, “the best yet devised by man to secure life, liberty, individual dignity and happiness.”
Frank J. Gaffney Jr. is president of the Center for Security Policy in Washington and host of the nationally syndicated program “Secure Freedom Radio.”
The only flaw in his thinking is that he thinks the enemy is merely those muslims who want Sharia law.
In an age where some schools are even disallowing red and green (i.e., Christmas Colors, non-religious) paper plates and plastic ware at “Winter Holiday Parties”
and Christmas carols are being banned, to have second graders at a school perform a “Holiday Program” that includes a song praising Allah is OUTRAGEOUS!
In Fishers, Indiana, at the Lantern Road Elementary School,
Principal Danielle Thompson defended the program that included things from Christmas, Hanukkah, Ramadan, Las Posadas, and Kwanzaa. While only a few local parents protested the inclusion of a song about Allah, the word got out to the American Family Association and a national campaign developed to stop the song in praise of Allah.
“School officials removed a phrase saying “Allah is God” after the American Family Association launched a protest of the program on its electronic newsletter.The change was made, Thompson said, because no other deities were directly named in the program.”
At Pamela Gellers’ website, Atlasshrugs, some of the words to the program that the children were to sing are included:
“Allah is God, we recall at dawn,
Praying ‘til night during Ramadan
At this joyful time we pray happiness for you,
Allah be with you all your life through.”
But when it came time to perform the “Christian” part of Christmas, children were assigned to say:
“I didn’t know there was a little boy at the manger. What child is this?
I’m not sure if there was a little boy or not.
Then why did you paint one on your nativity window?
I just thought if there was a little boy, I’d like to know exactly what he (sic) say.
Micah Clark, executive director of the Indiana AFA, launched an Internet protest once he heard about the allegations. “What surprised me here is that we’ve had a secular scrubbing of Christmas for so long and the school apparently didn’t see the problem with kids singing to Allah,” he told FOX News Radio. “You won’t even mention Jesus and you’re going to force my child to sing about Allah?
The first problem here is the desire to be “inclusive”. This modern innovation in our society and education system is inherently self loathing and destructive, although it sounds nice. Historically, America has been a “melting pot” that has rightfully welcomed immigrants. However, the goal has always been (until recently) to have E Pluribus Unum, Out of Many- One. The goal is to make Americans not to have a thousand different little cultures perfectly preserved, included, and respected.
We should be inclusive in the sense that, wherever you come from, whatever your past, you are welcome to come to America to start afresh. But starting afresh means you are willing to become Americanized. You learn our religion (Christianity), you learn our language (English) and you learn our culture.
Modern day inclusiveness directly implies that all cultures are equal and are of equal value and truth. It teaches that we cannot judge other cultures as inferior and we must respect everyone’s culture, religion, etc. It teaches that it would be wrong to make immigrants change their ways when they come here. This belief is not only wrong, it is dangerous.
What makes a nation is three things: 1) a geographic border; 2) a language; and, 3) a common worldview (based upon core beliefs, most frequently religion).
Christmas is about as American as you can get. As a Christian, and former Baptist Pastor, I know that Christmas is itself a melting pot of a tiny bit of biblical Christianity, a dash of paganism, a lot of Roman Catholicism, some folk lore from Germany, England and America, and a lot of American entrepreneurial spirit. The early Puritans who founded New England tended to stay away from Christmas as too Popish.
But Christmas is THE BIGGEST HOLIDAY IN AMERICA. Christmas is inherently about Christ, hence the name, and any attempt to put it on an equal footing with Hanukkah, Kwanzaa (a totally made up, non- African holiday) and Ramadan is just plain wrong. Now I can respect Hanukkah and celebrate it because Christianity and Judaism are somewhat intertwined and the Jews are a wonderful people and culture that have contributed immensely to Western Civilization.
But should a public school try to celebrate and link all these different religions in one holiday celebration in the name of Inclusiveness or Diversity? NO!
The SECOND problem with Lantern Road Elementary’s celebration is that they FAVORED Allah over Jesus. Allah was proclaimed as being God, but Jesus was left out of Christmas entirely and the song even cast doubts on the nativity. In the last 50 years there has been a steady war against Christianity in the public schools, but now we are seeing a deliberate attempt to teach islam in the schools, to favor islam and give muslims special rights.
Does Ms. Danielle Thompson even know that in most muslim societies she would be given the lash for how she dresses and for being a woman out in public and daring to teach girls in a school? I don’t think so.
The one quote in the article that stands out as being the most nonsense is this:
But one state Muslim leader said the school’s decision to remove the word Allah was far from inclusive.”It’s unfortunate if that was removed from the program just because of Islamophobic feelings,” said Shariq Siddiqui, executive director of the Muslim Alliance of Indiana. “Schools are a place where we should learn more about each other rather than exclude each other based on stereotypes and misconceptions.”
Please point out how inclusive and ready to learn about other religions the schools in Islamic countries are? Wherever Islam goes, oppression and ignorance follow. Do you really think that if muslims were the overwhelming majority in this school district, and were allowed to practice sharia law, that they would allow Hanukkah or Christmas to be celebrated equally with Ramadan?
The last problem in this story I want to address is this quote:
In the week before the program, the principal said, about 30 people called with concerns — and only four of the complaints came from local families. Thompson said many callers were appeased when they heard the program’s purpose and scope.
Only 4 local families called to complain? This is either a complete lie or, what I fear, it shows complete dhimmitude and apathy. People don’t know and they don’t care to know what Islam is really like. We have grown complacent and sheeplike, afraid to speak out.
I am convinced that we must eventually address the “free exercise and establishment clauses” of the First Amendment in light of Islam. This is dangerous territory for a secular state can then slap restrictions on all religions. But the problem is that Islam is spreading aggressively in the West and in America now as well. They have learned to “game our system”. Their goal is not an equal playing field, it is total dominance.
They have been at war with us, we are not yet at war with them.
Pastor Ken Pagano of New Bethel Assembly of God in Louisville, KY. is all in favor of the celebration of the Second Amendment that his church is sponsoring on June 27th. The “Open Carry Celebration” invites members to bring guns and guests to church for patriotic music and a class on being a responsible gun owner in relationship to the 2nd Amendment.
This will drive the libtards and MSM nuts.
While I am all in favor of the 2nd Amendment, and support the right to carry concealed, even in churches, and am not opposed to having a gun safety class at church, I do hope that this is not in the place of a regular worship service where the Lord is worshiped and the gospel proclaimed. I am not opposed to including some patriotic themes in our worship services on occassion, but the primary purpose of the Church gathering on Sunday morning as the Body of Christ is worship and the proclamation of the Gospel, not celebrating our nation or our constitutional liberties. If this even were to be conducted after the worship service, or on a Saturday, it would be better.
Here is the link:
The obvious objection by many people would be that they believe Christians are to be pacifists, or at least pastors and Churches are to be pacifists. People point to Jesus who willingly allowed himself to be arrested unlawfully, tried in a phony trial and executed unjustly, all the while forbidding his disciples from resisting, even healing the ear that Peter cut off from Malthus.
But the pacifists use a faulty hermeneutic here. Jesus’ whole mission was to die as our substitute on the cross to atone for our sins and save for himself a called out people. That mission required non-resistance. Granted, the church is not to expand the gospel through means of force. Our Kingdom is not of this world and cannot be spread by the sword. This is fundamentally different from Islam which is commanded to be spread by the sword.
But when you look at the Scriptures as a whole you realize that this same Jesus did command Israel in the OT and did authorize war, self-defense and the execution of criminals. The 10 commandment prohibition is against murder, the unjust killing of innocent people.
It is in no way a sin for Christians to arm themselves in order to protect themselves, their families, their churches and communities. It is permissable for Christians to patricipate in the military and in the civil offices such as policemen, jailers, etc.
I personally think it would be a great men’s ministry idea (and for ladies and youths as well) to have a church sponsored gun safety class taught by an NRA trained person. We could have a church sponsored shooting competition or even hunting trips.
And as for carrying concealed while in church, as a former pastor, I carried a pistol frequently. In the story about the Little Rock muslim terrorist who shot the soldier at the Army recruiting center, one of the targets he had checked out was a Baptist church. Be warned, Be prepared.
Equality 7-2521Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 2 so far )
The long awaited and much protested commencement address at Notre Dame University by President Obama this past Saturday is a good example of the contrast between Liberals and Conservatives. Those who were protesting were usually committed Catholics opposed to the President’s being invited to speak because of his radical pro-abortion stance and his stance on stem cell research using human embryos (read: babies). By his voting records in the Illinois State Senate and in the US Senate, by his executive orders as President and by his appointing the radical pro-abortion Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius, President Obama is easily the most pro-abortion President ever.
“I do not suggest that the debate surrounding abortion can or should go away,” the President said in his address at the Notre Dame commencement, after receiving an honorary degree. “Because no matter how much we may want to fudge it — indeed, while we know that the views of most Americans on the subject are complex and even contradictory — the fact is that at some level, the views of the two camps are irreconcilable.”
“Each side will continue to make its case to the public with passion and conviction,” Obama added. “But surely we can do so without reducing those with differing views to caricature.”
President Obama called for a new, more respectful tone in the abortion debate, marked by “open hearts, open minds, fair-minded words” that are merely emotional platitudes.
He did get one thing right, the two positions on abortion are irreconcilable. And that is why this issue makes for a great way to introduce and discuss the differences between Conservatives and Liberals.
DIFFERENCE NUMBER ONE: OUR UNDERSTANDING OF GOD
It would be too simple and just flat out wrong to say that Conservatives believe in God and Liberals don’t. I know a lot of liberals who are Christians. But the difference between Conservatives and Liberals is, at its core, a theological difference. Of course there are conservatives and liberals who are atheists, so again, it is not just being a theist that makes one a conservative.
But how do we define God? Where do we get our understanding of who God is and what He is like? Granted there is much diversity in both camps here, but generally speaking, the Conservative camp is dominated by those who have a biblical, evangelical view of God. To the Conservative, God is Triune- Father, Son and Holy Spirit- and God is not just Love, he is also Sovereign, Holy, Just, Omnipotent and Immanent as well as Transcendent. To the Liberal, God is more of a vague concept but is overwhelmingly described as Loving, Accepting, non-judging. Amongst Liberal Christians, they will accept the Conservative definition of God, but stress the Love of God as the central attribute and tend to de-emphasize his holiness and justice. This is frequently done by stating they believe in the God of the New Testament, de-emphasizing the Old Testament.
As AW Tozer once wrote, (a paraphrase) “What we think about God reveals more of what we are.”
The Liberal God is a loving God who would not really send anyone to hell, unless they were really, reeally bad. Dick Cheney would perhaps merit hell, but surely Castro is among the righteous. The Liberal God is not really serious when he says, “The wages of sin is death” (Rom. 6:23) and Jesus surely didn’t mean what he says about hell in the parable of the Talents in Matt. 25 when he casts the man who hid his talent into the outer darkness.
Generally speaking, Liberalism is guided more by atheism than by a belief in the God of the Bible, even though many Liberals are Christians. Generally speaking, theistic Liberals are guided more by the God is Love side of theology that de-emphasizes the Justice of God. This is one of the explanations for the defense of homosexuality and the promotion of homosexual marriage within mainstream liberalism. (And yes, I know not all homosexuals are liberal, nor do all support the homosexual political agenda, but both the Liberal and Homosexual movement is dominated by those who do). God is Love, he created me as homosexual and God “don’t make junk” therefore He loves me unconditionally and my homosexuality must not be a sin, and marriage between homosexuals would be a good thing.
To stress God is Love, at the expense of his other attributes is a gross error. Yes, God is love. But also yes, God is holy and will punish sinners in a hell that is a place of torment, forever. Yes, God is accepting, but he ONLY accepts those who come to him through faith in Christ alone.
In President Obama’s pro-abortion views God is apparently much more concerned about the economic well being and the convenience of the mother than he is about the tiny unborn baby inside her womb. The overwhelming percentage of abortions are performed because of the financial situation of the single mother and the overwhelming inconvenience of an unwanted pregnancy. The fundamental reason for abortion is that women want sex without consequences. And they think there will be no consequences for abortion, but abortion is almost 100% fatal to the babies. This kind of callous thinking reveals a lot about Obama’s and other liberals’ view of God. God is more concerned with our economic well being, our convenience, than he is about life. This view actually has much more in common with the atheistic materialist worldview than anything Christian. There is no fear of God or his justice when it comes to abortion.
In a bizarre and contradictory way, Liberals also usually tend to favor the elimination of the death penalty for those criminals who have murdered innocent people and have been tried by a jury of their peers and found guilty and deserving of capital punishment. Liberals support the killing of innocent babies in the wombs of mothers for whom having a baby would be a financial burden, but oppose the killing of hardened criminals who killed innocent people and who are a continuing economic burden on the state which houses and feeds them for life. Again, the liberal view of God warps their sense of justice. Even an atheistic materialist who believes in evolution should see that it is a good thing for society to eliminate the murderers as being not fit for the survival of the fittest.
A SECOND WAY THAT LIBERALS AND CONSERVATIVES ARE FUNDAMENTALLY DIFFERENT IS IN THE ISSUE OF HERMENEUTICS OR INTERPRETATION OF THE BIBLE AND THE CONSTITUTION.
I have already touched on this in my discussion of the Liberal Christian view of God vs. the Conservative Christian’s view of God. Essentially, liberals read texts not looking for what the author originally intended, not looking for eternal verities to be affirmed, but they read for what makes them feel good today. There is not one positive, affirming mention of homosexuality in the entire Bible. Yet in my readings of homosexual Christians and those who defend the homosexual lifestyle, they seek to justify their actions with Scripture. I have seen some very convoluted hermeneutical gymnastics employed to prove that as long as the homosexuals are in a committed, loving relationship they are ok with God. Again, they are basing their arguments upon their own desires or felt needs and emotions instead of the objective facts in the Bible.
So too with the Constitution. Liberal Activist Judges do not base their arguments upon the original intent of the framers using the historic-critical methods of interpreting history and literature. They make stuff up to satisfy the emotional felt needs of the here and now.
There is an inherent antipathy amongst liberals towards objective truth, logic, and historical truth. Evidence doesn’t matter, what matters is the here and now. Adjust or jettison as inconvenient any objective truth or historical evidence that hinders you from doing what you think needs doing right now.
Again let us look at the aboriton issue that Obama brought up at Notre Dame over the weekend. Throughout Europe a huge demographic change is underway. White Europeans are a dwindling ethnic group due to 2 generations of abortion and radical birth control resulting in a birth rate that is well below replacement level. In 25 -50 years many of Europe’s countries will me muslim dominated because muslims have had unlimited immigration into Europe and they have many children. White Europeans focused for too long on the economic pleasures that accompanied low birth rates and now they will be reaping what they have sown. The failure to understand and apply the biblical principle of “be fruitful and multiply” has consequences that will be very painful for European society.
In America we are preparing to have a Federal Hate Crimes law that will protect some groups more than others and will fundamentally challenge our Constitutional idea of “equal protection under the law” as well as two first amendment rights- freedom of speech and the free exercise of religion. This is the result of enacting laws based upon emotion instead of a careful reading of the Constitution.
A THIRD DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE CONSERVATIVE AND LIBERAL IS IN ANTHROPOLOGY: Even though there are liberals who are Christians and do believe in a special creation of man by the God of the Bible, Liberalism is dominated by the atheistic materialist worldview of the evolutionist. Liberalism believes that man is an accident of nature, is the center of the universe, and is essentially good. Conservatives on the other hand believe that God created man in His image, that we are fallen sinners and need law and government to coerce us to do what is right and prevent us from doing wrong and that man is subject to God who is the center of the universe. Again, I realize there are many conservatives who think it is all about them and who are evolutionists, etc. But Conservatism is dominated by the biblical view of man.
Liberals believe that man is basically good and that when man misbehaves and commits a crime, there are really two victims: the person who was robbed, killed or whatever, and the criminal is also a victim. Who victimized the criminal? Society. Liberalism tends to not hold people accountable for their decisions. Liberalism likes to shift the blame on to society as a whole or other groups of people as oppressors. This is shown by taking corporal punishment away from the schools, banning spanking by parents, viewing prison as rehabilitation instead of punishment, and using the government to try to fix or control the economy instead of relying on free market principles.
Basically Liberals do not accept the biblical doctrine of original sin. This is linked with evolution as well, for if man was not created in the image of God, but simply evolved from the apes, morals are simply social constructs that can change with time and no one is either really bad or good. The terms lose their significance. There is no ultimate judgment day, justice is a temporary and imperfect thing that is all too often used by the dominant group in society to oppress the poor.
Conservative thought is greatly affected by the idea of original sin. The Founders of America understood the concept well and that is why they wanted a Republic, a rule by Law, instead of a Monarchy, a rule by men. Conservatives understand that men are sinners and will do evil things. They do not need to just be educated or rehabilitated, they need to be punished and made to make restitution. They need to be changed, born again through the Gospel.
If, as liberals are want to do, the laws are changed to meet every new desire, every new felt need, every short term need/desire, and liberal justices on the SCOTUS continue to radically change the Constitution, you in effect have a rule by men instead of a rule by law. The law becomes whatever you want it to be, whatever suits your current desire. Conservatives object to this rule of men, because we see men as sinners.
When liberals look at a murderer they see a disadvantage youth who had a bad background and was oprressed or let down by society. Conservatives tend to say, he murdererd because he is a murderer on the inside.
Consider Obama’s desire to close the Guantanomo Bay prison for the Terrorists and to release them into the general population. Never mind that they were detained on the field of battle as illegal combatants who do not wear uniforms, use civilians as human shields, and have a worldview that believes all Christians, all westerners should be killed.
Consider the liberal tendency to reduce the size of the US military. The premise is that if we talk with our enemies and understand each other there will not be a need for the military let alone nukes. Disarmament will show our enemies that we mean no harm and they will follow our lead and disarm. They cannot mean it when they say they will eliminate Israel or the West. Conservatives on the other hand, understand that some societies are murderous and are intent on destroying us out of sheer hatred and envy. We conservatives know that there is no sense in talking with terrorists, muslims or communists since their worldview calls for worldwide domination and enslavement or conversion of the whole world and lying to the west, the dhimmis, or the Christians is perfectly acceptable. We say, why waste time talking with them. Simply have the greatest military in the world, and the strongest economy. It is better to be feared/respected in the world than loved. Liberals want to be loved.
In conclusion America has been slowly, inexorably, drifting into Liberalism for a hundred or more years. Liberalism is essentially an adolescent view of the world that is based upon a wrong view of God, a wrong view of the Scriptures and our founding documents, and a wrong view of man. There are severe consequences for living the liberal life whether it is an unwanted pregnancy, abortion and guilt, financial ruin through deficit spending and higher taxes or allowing our enemies to walk free and gain the upper hand. Liberalism, when left to its own devices and allowed to become the dominant worldview brings national death, not life.
President Obama and the US Congress are in the process of destroying this country. May God have mercy on us because the Liberals surely will not.
Equality 7-2521Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 1 so far )
One Second After by William Forstchen is the single most terrifying, realistic, dystopian novel I have read in my life. After the Bible, this is the One Book You Must Read This Year. Soon. Now. This book is very carefully researched and is extremely accurate, detailed, and emotionally charged. If you have a weak stomach, be prepared to puke as you read it. But you Must read it. If you cry easily as you read a real tear- jerker then get a box of Kleenex. In fact, by a case of Kleenex, they will come in handy later. You’ll see. I read Pat Frank’s Alas, Babylon, and Nevil Shute’s On the Beach as a kid, along with Bradbury’s Fahrenheit 451 and various other novels with a dystopian bent. See my review of Anthem by Ayn Rand here:
As horrifying as those novels were, One Second After hits so close to home and is so realistic that it literally kept me awake last night, all night, even though I laid the book aside at 2100. This book is making me change some priorities.
The story takes place in the typical small college town of Black Mountain, North Carolina.
A former Infantry Colonel in the Army, Dr. John Matherson, is a history professor at Montreat College and is thrust into city leadership when an EMP bomb goes off over the country wiping out all electric power and electronic devices. America is instantly plunged into the darkness of the 19th century unprepared. Forstchen walks you through the difficulties this small town faces in the first days, weeks, months, and the first year. It is not a pretty scene; it will disturb you like nothing else you have read. There is no happy ending here.
The author sets up the crisis beautifully by giving a splendid background to the town and the professor’s family. It’s his youngest daughter’s birthday, Jennifer, and when he is talking on the phone with his daughter’s godfather, a general from the Pentagon, he hears shouting and panic in the background and the general has to leave hurriedly, the cell phone goes dead, along with everything electric in the house. Their first thought is another power outage, but it affects his daughter’s diabetes blood monitor too and just one of the tragedies of this book of tragedies is set up.
Still thinking it is just a power outage Professor Matherson cooks the hamburgers on the grill in preparation for Jennifer’s party when she makes one of the scariest observations: “Hey Dad, something strange…Listen.” He stood there silent for a minute…”I don’t hear anything.” “That’s it, Dad, There’s no traffic noise from the Interstate.” He turned and faced towards the road…but she was right; there was absolute silence.
The next terrible tremor came when the professor looks up at the evening sky and realizes he sees no jet contrails, not one, and they are on the route to Atlanta so there are always 2-3 jets in the sky, always. Next, he sees the smoke from distant fires in the mountains that were not right. “The chill…it reminded him of 9/11.”
When Jennifer’s grandmother, Jen, drives up in her classic Ford Edsel she announces, “Damndest thing. Power’s out up at the nursing home. And you should see the interstate, cars just sittin all over the place, not moving.” This sets up more tragedies.
The professor and his mother in law decide to drive into town to pick up Matherson’s 16 year old daughter who should have been home by now. As soon as they get to the Interstate, however, the Professor realizes the problem is bigger as he sees all the cars stalled. Notably, he takes this trip without a gun. That will change. On this brief trip to the highway, he sees his daughter walking home with her boyfriend, but then, a beautiful woman in business attire comes to the fence and tries to get him to take her into town since his car is working and her BMW is not (yet another theme- shiny new cars become worthless, old junkers and classics priceless). He turns her down, along with many others asking for help. (Yet another couple of themes introduced that are carried throughout the whole novel.) Yes there is a love story that is developed in the book, two actually, and there is joy and tragedy accompanying them both.
In chapter 3 there is an encounter between John and the convenience store owner and John tells Hamid to stash his remaining cigarettes as an investment. This encounter comes up again and again in the book, but ultimately, in the next to the last chapter we read this, John sees a teenager with a stand set up downtown selling two plump squirrels and a rabbit. the going price was 7 bullets for a squirrel and 20 bullets for the rabbit. “John’s earlier prediction that cigarettes might very well become currency had been wrong. Nearly every last one had been smoked long ago….It was bullets that were now the currency of choice, espcially .22 and shotgun shells.” (p.317). It is interesting that as I write this, the ammunition shelves at all sporting goods stores are bare. Ever since the election of Barack Obama, there has been a run on guns and ammo. That brief episode points forward to the extreme scarcity that will soon exist, the return to a barter economy, and the value of bullets and wild game. Even our addictions, like cigarettes, will pass away as people try to just survive.
It is on Day 2 that John goes in to the town and meets with the police chief, Tom, and Charlie Fuller the Director of Public Safety and the Mayor Kate Lindsey. In that meeting John brings up EMP and gives them a copy of an old paper he had presented with one section on EMP. “EMP. Electromagnetic Pulse. Its the byproduct of a nuclear detonation.” “We’ve been nuked?” Kate asked, obviously startled. “I think so.” (p.63).
On p.71 they start to talk about priorities, security is mentioned, and water. They realize that without refrigeration food will be a problem. But they act too late in many regards, and it has not even been 24 hrs.
Another theme emerges in this meeting with an attempt by the Chief to take over John’s Edsel since it is running and none of the police cars are. John very coldly tells him “That car is mine, my family’s. You declaring martial law?” “I think we’ll have t, ” Kate said quietly. “When you do, come and try and take it, Tom.” “What do you mean try?” “Just that, Just try.” The theme is Martial Law, freedom for the individual vs.the needs of the State in an emergency. This conflict will continue throughout the book.
The Professor leaves the meeting and goes to the college where we are introduced to Washington Parker, a Marine veteran who runs campus security. He is already thinking and organizing the college kids into a security force. He is one of the heroes of the story.
The next scene suddenly shows how serious things are getting and again, sets the tone for the rest of the book. The place is the drugstore where John is going to try to pick up some insulin for his little girl, Jennifer. The drug store is now a mob scene and John has to get violent with a violent man. this sets up three strands of the story: John is a man of action and violence when needed, John is trying to save his little girl’s life, and he gets injured thus setting the stage for his relationship with the woman from the BMW whom he refused to give a ride to the previous night. Makala Turner is a nurse and is one of the heroines of the story. The themes are: looting mobs, violence, medicine and love.
The author takes us through the various survival strategies as the crisis deepens until the climax of the story with a large battle between the town’s militia and a roving Posse of druggies and gangsters who are also resorting to cannibalism. Cannibalism is another theme in Forstchen’s other books (see The Lost Regiment series- one of my all time favorite sci fi series.)
I will not go through all the episodes, but I do want to address several of the topics that come up.
FIRST, there is the stubborn disbelief of the evidence by Dr. Matherson and everyone else. Nobody initially wants to say what the problem is and everyone thinks it will clear up by the next day. This, too, is a theme that is carried through to the end of the book in the last chapter when Col. Matherson has a discussion with the general leading the first relief column to reach Black Mountain, a year later. When disaster strikes, especially a sudden, yet gradual disaster as an EMP blast, where the true ramifications are felt out gradually over a year’s time, people go into denial. FAILURE TO ACT IN THE FIRST 24 HOURS IN A FEW KEY WAYS CAUSED MORE OF A DISASTER. P.37 “There was a thought, but it was too disturbing to contemplate right now. He wanted to believe that it was just a weird combination of coincidences, a power failure that might be regional, and would ground most flights due to air traffic control. Maybe it was some sort of severe solar storm, potent enough to trigger a massive short circuit; a similar event happened up in Canada several years ago.” Lesson #1 ACCEPT REALITY AND ACT IMMEDIATELY ON THE NEW TRUTH. Hesitation by Professor Matheson and others in leadership caused some serious problems.
LESSON #2: ESTABLISH SECURITY OVER THE KEY LOCATIONS AND ASSETS IMMEDIATELY, IN THE FIRST 24 HOURS AT LEAST, FIRST 8 HRS PREFERABLY. Failure to secure the drug stores and grocery stores immediately led to a chaotic looting spree. City government must recognize the severity of the crisis and act accordingly. BUT, police forces are nowhere near big enough to do this job. THIS IS WHERE A MILITIA MUST BE USED. THERE IS NO TIME TO GET THE NATIONAL GUARD MOBILIZED AT THE STATE LEVEL.
LESSON#3: THIS KIND OF A CATASTROPHE CALLS FOR MARTIAL LAW. SECURITY IS THE FIRST PRIORITY.
LESSON #4: SECURE WATER, FOOD, FUEL, MEDICAL SUPPLIES.
LESSON #5: THE NURSING HOMES, HOSPITALS, MEDICINE DEPENDENT PEOPLE, ELDERLY, ILL AND VERY YOUNG WILL DIE OFF RAPIDLY IN THE FIRST WEEK. YOU MUST TRIAGE THE PEOPLE, KNOW WHO IS GOING TO HELP THE COMMUNITY AND BE SURE THEY SURVIVE. THE OTHERS WILL JUST DIE. Late in the book the city leaders realize they will run out of food and all will starve so they give less food to the non-essential people while the essential people, the young college students who have formed the militia for example, get more food because they are doing the hardest work. Harsh, but realistic.
Again, the nursing home scene will make you puke and/or cry. It is graphic, unpleasant, but you have to read it.
LESSON #6: Guns and ammunition will be essential for hunting and for defending against thieves and for defending the city against the roving gangs and “armies” that will form.
LESSON 7: Cleanliness and sanitation will be essential to prevent epidemics. Though the book did not go into this much, but it did a little, the loss of working sewers for a lot of people causes a big problem. Imagine the large Apartment Complexes in your city with 3, 4 or more stories. Water shuts down, sewer shuts down. Where will people go to relieve themselves? What happens when toilet paper runs out in a couple of days? Large Apartment complexes will become stinking hell-holes in 3 days.
LESSON 8: In the novel, because it was a college town, there were some students and professors who knew enough about local plants to begin foraging for food. They harvested dandelions and mushrooms. In an urban environment, can you do that? The woods of North Carolina were all around so hunting squirrels, rabbits, deer, game birds and even bears and wild hogs was readily available…until all the animals were killed off. In the big city there are squirrels, rabbits, pigeons and dove, but not much else.
LESSON 9: The book stresses neighbor helping neighbor, small towns defending themselves against the masses of people traveling on the highways exiting the big cities. Time and again it was stated that people in cities flocked to the countryside thinking that more food was available, when the reality was…they were starving too. In other words, the local geographic unit must bind together quickly, and be prepared to defend itself, fend for itself, and feed itself. Some natural alliances are possible with communities right next together as in the book.
LESSON 10: Leaving home, leaving the big city, seems like a good idea at first, but proves to be a very BAD idea. If you live in a city and have nowhere close to go like a lake house, grandpa’s house, stay put.
LESSON 11: The small towns let in some of the traveling folks who had good job skills needed, nurse Makala for example. Lawyers, accountants and bankers, etc. were useless and not accepted. They died on the road.
LESSON 12: Maintaining our cultural values and form of government in an extremely bad situation. Yes they declare martial law quickly and do have a community feeding program, militia, hospital, etc. But they do keep some private property and freedom. They allow those with a reserve of food to keep it, they just cannot eat at the public feeding until they run out of food at home (and a search will be made). John is allowed to keep his car and a pilot who has an older airplane keeps his plane but runs missions for the town. When it is time to try criminals they are given a brief trial, then executed. Col. Matherson becomes the executioner since he is at first not a part of the city government or Police Force. He gives a couple of good speeches along the way to the townspeople to keep them from descending into barbarism.
LESSON 13: Religion is kept in an important role by the author. Good pastors and Christians are praised, prayer and religious services are observed.
LESSON 14: Our society has a lot of people with mental illnesses who are on medications for same. What happens when their meds run out?
OVERALL LESSON: OUR SOCIETY IS A VERY COMPLEX TECHNOLOGICAL SOCIETY THAT IS EXTREMELY FRAGILE. IF A DISASTER HAPPENS, YOU HAVE TO SURVIVE WITH WHAT YOU HAVE ALREADY IN YOUR POSSESSION AND YOU HAVE TO HAVE THE KNOWLEDGE, SKILLS, HEALTH AND DETERMINATION TO SURVIVE. IN THIS BOOK, 80% DIE OFF IN THE FIRST YEAR.
As a committed Christian I found this book to be faith friendly. Yes, there were some curse words and the Lord’s name was used in vain a few times. The violence is quite brutal and graphic, but not gratuitous; it is an essential part of what the book is trying to teach. Positive values are stressed and sins, such as selfishness are portrayed realistically and with consequences. No one is ideal here, all are shown to be sinners, but many are portrayed as noble, sacrificing their lives in combat and through starvation so that others might live. Justice is portrayed, as is mercy. The Bible portrays warfare very realistically in various places but none so graphically as in 2 Kings 6-7 where a siege is underway in Samaria and the people are starving. It is prudent for Christians, even in the comfort and luxury of our modern day, to prepare for what Forstchen says might happen.
This book serves as a serious wake up call to America and it should be read by every American. Our politicians need to be shaken awake. Action needs to be taken today. But don’t count on it. Another lesson from the book, Help doesn’t come from the Federal Government until the last chapter. Prepare yourself and your family.
Here are some links:
First is Forstchen’s homepage-
An article on EMP:
And here is a scary news story about how our enemies, Iran for one, are already working on this weapon:
Here is a review of the book by Mark Steyn:
Here is an update that reveals that our military has neglected the hardening of their computers and comm gear in recent decades, not taking a limited nuclear war seriously:
Equality 7-2521Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )
Yesterday, May 7, 2009, was the National Day of Prayer, and it was fraught with more controversy than recent Day’s of Prayer. At issue was whether or not President Obama would choose to participate, or even issue a proclamation. In following the stories it looked obvious to me that Obama did not want anything to do with the annual observance (since 1952), but in the end, agreed to issue a proclamation, but not to attend any of the events. This was yet another calculated political maneuver, and I believe, probably another sign that his real religious beliefs likely lie closer to Mecca than he has let on.
It should be noted that Pres. BHO did attend and speak at the National Prayer Breakfast back in Feb. Why attend that observance and not the larger event of the National Day of Prayer? The National Day of Prayer was led by Shirley Dobson, wife of Dr. James Dobson, one of the most influential voices in evangelical conservatism for over thirty years. Dr. Dobson has been hugely critical of Pres. Obama. Clearly then, Obama did not want to associate himself with his political enemies which would upset his base- homosexuals, atheists, etc. See the below article for his speech at the National Prayer Breakfast:
Here is a brief history of the National Prayer Breakfast:
In the above story you will notice some of the speakers at the National Prayer Breakfast have included leaders from Muslim and Hindu States, thus it is a muslim friendly event, whereas the National Day of Prayer seems to include more Christians and Jews although many of th ePresidential proclamations include all religions. This is a significant difference that supports my thesis above that Obama’s spiritual loyalties lay closer to Mecca than Nashville.
That all being said, I must, in all fairness, criticize Pres. George W. Bush along the same lines. Evangelicals welcomed him as one of their own, but, over time, I observed that his personal theology was seriously compromised. His choice to include muslims in various religious funcitons such as the 9/11 memorial service, and his actually going inside a mosque, and his various remarks about islam being a religion of peace and basically assuming that we all worship the same God….sorry, but that kind of insidious compromise disgusts me and shows that you are not an evangelical. That is not to say that I think the man is not a Christian. I saw a lot of signs that he is what he claims to be, a Christian, unlike the current usurper in the White House.
But here are the questions: Should there be a National Day of Prayer in America which is now so multicultural, so secular and so divided? Are we a Christian nation? Does National Day of Prayer compromise our doctrine of ‘separation of church and state’? Does it compromise any truths of Scripture?
Here are some links to the history of the National Day of Prayer:
But, there are some theological difficulties with such events besides the well known legal difficulties. Let me begin my relating a persona story of an event where I was invited to give the public invocation, yet declined due to certain theological difficulties. After 9/11 the company where I was working at the time held a company wide meeting where the CEO, a committed Evangelical Christian, was going to share his thoughts on the tragedy and share a brief testimony (he was going to tell how he came to God). I had previously, on a few occasions led in prayer at some company events so I was asked to pray before the gathering which would likely have about 400 people in attendance.
I declined this opportunity because there had been one restriction placed on me: do not pray in Jesus’ name. Just pray to God, but leave out the name of Jesus. The reason given was that because it was a company wide meeting, not quite mandatory though, and people of other faiths would be present, they wanted it toned down. I politely turned down the request. I could not compromise my convictions in this regard.
I believe I could participate in a prayer event with Catholics, and even Jews, if I was allowed to pray in Jesus’ name. While I believe the God that the Jews worship is the same God who I worship, I do not believe the Jews have a right relationship with that God because the only way to have a right relationship with God is through God’s Son, Jesus Christ.
The larger problem comes with attempting to include muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, etc. These religions do not worship the same God I do, they worship demons. There is no way that I could participate in any kind of a joint religious venture with them.
An even more complex problem arises with Mormons. They also worship a demon, in that the false god they have constructed is in no way related to the God who is, even though they use the Bible. Yet, the Mormon religion in its surface features is closer to Christianity than any of the other world religions. Frankly, I just don’t know what to do with them.
Now enter the National Day of Prayer. Is it pleasing to God for a nation, our America, to set aside a day of prayer when you realize that many who are participating are unbelievers, Jews, Mormons, muslims, Hindus, etc.? Or, are the false prayers of idolaters adding insult to injury? Furthermore, when you understand what some Baptists think about the dangers of a Civil Religion, where people assume they are ‘saved’ because they are Americans and are generally religious, then does something like the National Day of Prayer actually confirm them in their sins?
These are some of the complicating factors involved. Would I want to attend a National Day of Prayer with President Obama leading it? NO!
But is the whole effort a good thing? Or are the atheists right on this one?
Although there is much evidence for staying away from such events, I am going to side with the National Day of Prayer because I believe that some symbolism, even though it may be attended by much hypocrisy, is important and pleasing to God. I believe this principle is embedded in the sacrificial system God established through Moses. The sacrifice on the DAy of Atonement was for all Israel, but actually saved no one. It was a symbolic sacrifice for the nation that did look forward to the sacrifice of Christ on the Cross. There were plenty of Israelites who trusted in God with great faith, and there were no doubt many who had no faith, yet were under the general blessing of the annual sacrifice by the priest on the Day of Atonement.
I believe there is a need for such religious events and symbolism in our country, that such things do seek the blessings of the God who is, even though many, perhaps even most of Americans, are not genuinely saved by the blood of Jesus. I believe that the ‘radical separationsists’ who seek to remove all religious observances and symbols from our national scene are dead wrong and are harming our country.
I believe that America is still a ‘Christian Nation’ in that our religion is more Christian than any other, and our history is clearly mostly Christian, and our laws and culture are broadly Judeo-Christian in origins. Our founding fathers and documents are clearly from a judeo-christian background. Therefore, having a largely Christian national day of prayer is a good thing, as is having the 10 Commandments posted in our schools and courtrooms- despite what our courts have mis-ruled.
President Obama’s being fathered by a muslim man, adopted and raised by another muslim man, attending muslim school in Indonesia, his illegal travels in Pakistan as a young man, and his clear preference for arabs and muslims over Israel indicate to me that his faith is probably some kind of amalgamation between the radical black liberation theology of Jeremiah Wright and standard islam. It will be interesting to see if Obama copies George Bush by going into a mosque and even more interesting to see if he worships as a muslim again.
Maranatha! Come Lord Jesus!
Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 4 so far )
UPDATE FROM ATLAS: check out this story from Pamela over at my favorite site, AtlasShrugs. Thanks to the Dept of Homeland Security the Maryland National Guard actually was distributing an alert about the TEA Parties as being potential terrorists!
The 4-5,000 at the Fort Worth seemed to me to be a lot of families with small kids, older retirees, professional folks and salt of the earth working class folks like yours truly. Really dangerous types!
I must be a Right Wing Radical. This may mean I am going to be targeted by President Obama’s Homeland Security Department while the various muslim radicals in this country go unobserved.
In a report that came out this week, the Department of Homeland Security is greatly concerned about the growth of radical right wing groups, like militias. Apparently these dangerous right wingers are upset over having a Black President, out of control immigration across our borders, and threats to our second amendment right to bear arms.
Well I really don’t care what color our President, or the color of anybody else for that matter. Racists and skinhead types are morons that need to repent. But what a person’s worldview is …that matters to me. Especially if it is the President. Unfortunatly the President has a warped worldview and is a flaming abortion lover, terrorist lover, dictator lover, capitalist hater, US Military hater, and an all around SOCIALIST. I guess that makes me a right wing radical.
I do think our immigration policies have been a bit lax for the past 30 years; we have basically been without a border. I love the Mexican people, the Mexican guys I have worked with for the past 25 years are good hard working men. But, I don’t want to live in Mexico and America is being so inundated with illegal and legal immigrants, we are becoming Mexico. That needs to stop. Yes, by the way, I am a cultural snob, I actually think that American culture is superior to what the rest of the world offers and therefore we need to preserve our culture. That includes the English language. And, please, not one more muslim need apply for entry to the USA.
Further proof that I am a right wing radical is that I am a gun nut. I happen to not only believe in the 2nd Amendment to the US Constitution, but I also happen to have studied what the founders meant by the second amendment. It’s not about duck hunting. It is all about preventing Government from becoming a tyranny. It is about defending oneself and ones family from those who would do you harm (Indians in those days, criminals today). And I do enjoy hunting pigs…with my AK-47 (civilianized, sporterized, semiauto not full auto, fully legal). I regularly attend gun shows. I taught my two sons how to shoot. (One son is a professional security officer now and the other is a paratrooper serving in Baghdad- both fine upstanding citizens and…Right Wing Radicals).
Another proof that I am an official Right Wing Radical is that I am a Veteran of the US Army. The Homeland Security paper identified some veterans as being radicalized. Count me in. Wait a minute, I think I was a right wing radical at the age of 18 when I was sworn in to the US Army on an ROTC scholarship to OU. Come to think of it, I was raised as a Right Wing Radical. I must be a victim of child abuse. When I was 6 years old my grandmother, half Indian, half white, put a shotgun in my hands and sent me out to kill a turkey. The only safety briefing I got was, “Don’t let the javelina get ya!”
Certainly the Homeland Security Dept would label me a Right Wing Radical because of my voting record. I have never voted for a Demoncrat for President, only Republicans and Republicrats (George W. Bush and McCain were Republicrats, Reagan a Republican). I voted for Pat Buchanon back when he was running in the GOP primary. And I have voted for a few Libertarians here and there.
Speaking of Libertarians, I must be a right wing radical because I have read all of Ayn Rand’s novels… and loved them.
The coup de grace, the last straw, the most damning evidence against me as a right wing radical is that I am a Bible thumping, conservative, Reformed, Southern Baptist. That’s right, I believe in the inerrancy of the Bible, Jesus is the only way to salvation, all other world religions lead you to hell on a freight train, and there is a hell that is hotter’n Texas in August. I believe all men, especially me, are natural born sinners and need a radical transformation that can only come from the Holy Spirit. All those miracles Jesus did….are real. And he did rise again from the grave and He is coming back again, sooner rather than later. So, yeah, I am a right wing radical who clings to his guns and religion and doesn’t much want a bunch of foreigners over running our borders.
And, ya know what? Gov. Perry of Texas rocks with that statement on Texas Sovereignty yesterday. We need to enforce the 9th and 10th Amendments of the Bill of Rights.
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
Don’t Tread On Me!
Bryan E. Walker
aka Equality 7-2521
The Bill of Rights, the first 10 Amendments to the US Constitution, is going to unravel soon. Within a decade, probably sooner. On several issues. Free Speech will be tested by the Obama administration with Talk Radio like it has already suffered under the Bush administration and the McCain-Feingold law that attacked Free Political Speech and was upheld by SCOTUS. The 2nd Amendment will be attacked by the Obamasky government soon, using all of the recent mass shootings and the civil war in Mexico as a pretext and the Clinton era Brady Bill as background. The Free Exercise of Religion clause in the first amendment will be attacked from two opposing directions: 1) Gay marriage and hate speech codes that will be used to force churches and religious institutions to accept gays and 2) The huge influx of muslims will force the government to either cave in and accept sharia law, thus allowing child marriages, clitorectomies, honor killings, and polygamy, -OR- the government will have to seriously modify the use of the “free exercise” clause to either exclude MANY islamic practices considered vital to their religion (controlling their women through clitorectomies, regular beatings, honor killings and polygamy) or outlaw islam entirely. It is the impact of islam upon our 1 st amendment that I want to address today.
When the Constitution was being considered, the greatest opposition to it was its lack of a Bill of Rights. Some states just were not going to ratify it without a Bill of Rights. Madison and others then wrote out the a Bill of Rights and, after some were abandoned and others modified, the first 10 amendments were settled on and the Constitution was approved with the understanding that after Congress and the President were seated they would pass the Bill of Rights.
At that time in America some states still had state supported churches and some persecution of dissidents was still carried out. State support for denominations gradually faded after the new nation was formed, and the Bill of Rights was gradually applied to the states by the courts. Through the years some legal cases brought to the SCOTUS expanded the range of the “Free exercise” clause of the first amendment, other cases have restricted or limited that clause. In recent decades it seems like more cases have resulted in more restrictions. The point is that the SCOTUS has a history of restricting the free exercise of religion.
Now to the issue at hand: with the vast influx of muslim immigrants, they are bringing in not just a different religion, but different morals and ways of defining what it means to be a woman, a man, marriage, education and law. In the islamic religion there can be no separation of church and state so they do not accept that part of the 1st amendment that says, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion”. It simply does not apply to them in their eyes. This is why they MUST have Sharia Law wherever they are. This is why the courts in England and other European nations are allowing Sharia. What this does, however, is to set up two different law codes in the same geographic and national area. This then does away with the idea of equal protection under the law for all people and opens up a whole range of problems with the free exercise clause of the first amendment.
Read this story at Atlas Shrugs and you will understand what I mean:
If the courts intervene and take children away from muslim parents because they have made arranged marriages, or even given their 9 year olds to a man who has consumated the marriage, perfectly allowable in sharia law, can you imagine the outrage from the muslim community? What if a muslim mother is prosecuted for forcing her 13 year old daughter to have her clitoris removed without her daughter’s consent and without pain medication? Female genital mutilation is common within many muslim groups, especially from Africa. How will we apply family law to a muslim man who has 4 wives and children by each? Or what about the muslim family of 1 man, 4 wives who need government assistance? But all of these things are under the free exercise clause and are essential for the muslim faith.
What about the muslim schools that teach children to disrespect American law, mores, and tradition and that attempts to turn them into little jihadis? Does the government want to get inside a religious school and tell them what they can and cannot teach besides the 3 R’s?
Now, suppose the government does get involved through many lengthy court cases over the free exercise clause and islam, and after 4 to 8 years of Obama appointed judges get placed in the various courts including the SCOTUS, how will those cases be decided?
Let’s make it worse: if the SCOTUS restricts the 1 st amendment more, or just decides to allow sharia law, what will the same courts decide if it is a fundamentalist Christian church or church school that is teaching that marriage is just for 1 man and 1 woman? We have just offended the muslims, the gays, and the polygamists. Will the libtard courts side with the conservative Christians or say that we need to be more tolerant?
One major problem with libtards and their simplistic, atheistic understanding of religion, is that they think religious people can just have their private religious thoughts, meet together in their houses of worship and that’s the end of it. The libtards don’t understand that religions are fundamentally worldviews that must be acted upon. If you believe, you must also behave. You must not merely talk the talk, you must walk the walk. That is why Christians and Muslims both descry the immorality of Hollywood and America in general. That is why Christians say marriage is between 1 man and 1 woman for life and muslims say marriage is between 1 man and up to 4 women. Gays are excluded. (By the way, we Christians, while telling homosexuals their lifestyle is immoral and denying them the rights of marriage, we do not stone them or burn them alive. Muslims do that.)
The following statement I made when I was a 16 year old in Miss Entwhistle’s American History class: The first amendment should only be applied to the various Judeo-Christian denominations and churches. As soon as you allow Hindus, Buddhists and Muslims into America the 1st amendment stops working. It was written by Christians with a Christian understanding of the world. It cannot work with other worldviews.
We are hurtling towards a full blown Constitutional crisis soon over the Bill of Rights. The 1st Amendment free exercise clause, (and I haven’t even mentioned the Obama effort to REQUIRE doctors and hospitals with religious convictions against abortions to provide them), free speech with Talk Radio, 2nd amendment, and the ignored IX and X amendments which some states are now resurrecting. Add to this the passing of some ex-post-facto laws recently that affect corporations’ taxes and executive salaries, the owning of banks and car companies, and you can really see the constitution is going to be taking a beating for a long time.
What is the solution to the islamic problem? The European solution is to allow 2 separate law codes to exist side by side. That will last until there are more muslims than europeans. You don’t seriously think the muslims, when they take over, will extend the same tolerance level to us as we did to them? Good luck to you gays out there when that happens. You think Christians are intolerant of gays? We just want you to go back into the closets, the muslims will kill you.
The only solution, THE ONLY SOLUTION, is to seriously alter the 1st amendment and ban islam from the shores of America. And that ain’t gonna happen.
WHAT WILL HAPPEN? The muslim friendly Obamasky administration will not prosecute these gross violations of women’s and children’s rights and islam will continue to spread in Amerika. The courts will eventually allow Sharia Law, just as they are beginning to in Europe. Christians will be persecuted for being intolerant and for hate speech. And the atheistic secularists will rule.
Maybe, just maybe, in 25 years when Eurabia starts to eliminate the gays, Amerika will wake up. But more than likely, the West will just be led to their slaughter.
According to a poll conducted by Rasmussen, only 53% of Americans agree that Capitalism is bettern than Socialism. This helps to explain why the past several Presidential elections have been so close. It appears that America/Amerika is pretty evenly divided. Here is the story:
What I find very interesting is the age break down in the poll. Those under the age of 30 were most likely to favor socialism, 37% preferring capitalism, 33% socialism and 30% undecided. People in their 30’s went 49% for capitalism and 26% socialism while people over 40 strongly favored capitalism with only 13% favoring socialism. Those who invest money (and that was not defined in the story) went 5-1 in favor of capitalism. When you break the poll down by political party there are no surprises: Republicans favored capitalism 11-1 while demoncrats favored capitalism by only 39% to 30% for socialism. Those unwilling to identify by political party favored capitalism 48% to 21% for socialism.
The story says Rasmussen did not define capitalism or socialism in the poll.
What does this poll mean?
1) As the Church declines in America, fewer attend church, fewer claim to be Christians, atheism is growing, so too does a biblical view of money, wealth, work and economics decline. To a large extent, the Protestant Reformation coincided with a revolution in economics. The concept of a Protestant Work Ethic is demonstrable in history. There are real reasons why North America, settled by Puritans and other Protestants grew more industrious and prosperous than did South and Central America. The Christian West developed scientifically and economically at a much faster pace than did any other part of the world. The Bible teaches individual property rights, limited government, hard work, frugality and generosity, keystones of our economic success historically. You have to look at Africa, the mid-east, and Asia and ask why they did not develop as quickly as the Christian West when they were older civilizations with plenty of natural resources and people. The one clear difference is Christianity.As Christianity declines the drift will not be towards capitalism and freedom, but toward Statism. People will always have a master, either Christ or the State.
The church needs to teach about money, work, savings, and economics. Unfortuantely, the Church is clearly divided on this issue with the liberal churches teaching marxism and the conservative churches not teaching economics at all and the charismatic church teaching the grotesque health and wealth gospel heresy.
2) When you look at what our public schools and universities are teaching about history and economics, politics and human nature, you realize that our young are being brainwashed with socialist propaganda from their earliest years through college. This has been going on for at least 3 generations and is getting stronger, therefore the younger age group had the least affinity with capitalism. This is a problem I do not hear the Republicans or even Talk RAdio addressing. Of course Rush and Sean, Mark, Laura and Neal will decry the sad state of public education, but nobody seems to have a workable plan for changing it. Conservatives are losing the battle because the Libtards have control of educating our young.
Yes there is a huge growth in private and Christian schools and homeschooling is growing; but these are all a small minority. The public schools and universities are preparing the battlefield for the next generation by converting the masses to socialism/statism. How can this be changed? Conservatives dream of school vouchers, magnet schools and breaking the monopoly of the teachers unions. Dream on. We need to focus on divide and conquer. We need to pick one conservative state and one or two state universities and seek to take over the board of regents, the presidency, and the schools of education, completely change the education philosophy and begin turning out conservative teachers. In that same state we must takeover the State Board of Education and the local school boards of the largest cities in that state. We must bring school vouchers into that one state and the cities of that one state.
Transforming one state like this will take a minimum of twenty years. But once the program begins, we can perhaps spread to another state. The southern states that are committed Red states or in the Great Plains or Mountains would be a good place to start. But start we must.
Along with this long range plan we should seek to bring lawsuits against school districts, superintendents and boards that are failing and that are controlled by the statists and demoncrats. Sue the teacher unions. Hit the statists with lawsuits after lawsuits to bring about change. In a lawsuit you go through the “discovery” phase, where you can bring out all the information about inferior teaching philosophies and bring out the evidence for superior teaching philosophies and present the evidence for both.
Until we fundamentally change the education system across this country we wil continue producing more statists and socialists.
3) The entertainment industry is committed to statism/socialism. Here again we must divide and conquer. Conservatives must invest cash and hire the BEST directors and producers, actors and actresses to make or remake conservative movies. High quality, conservative movies are proven money makers. American History and Capitalism are Rich in material for Great Movies or even TV shows. Already the long delayed movie for Ayn Rand’s classic, Atlas Shrugged, is beginning, due to the election of Obamasky. The book is back on the best seller lists and the movie, if done right, will break all kinds of records.
Can you imagine a series of movies about America’s capitalistic heroes? Eli Whitney, Robert Fulton, Alexander Graham Bell, Thomas Edison, Rockefeller, Andrew Carnegie, Andrew Mellon, Henry Ford. If you tell these stories truthfully, but focus on the positive, you could change a generation of kids.
As long as we focus only on the next election and the next supreme court appointee we will continue drifting, now racing towards statism/socialism.
Here are some links to some related articles:
From today’s news we have an excellent example of statism/socialism being played out in California. The Legislature is seriously considering banning some Big Screen TVs because they use too much electricity. The State will tell retailers they cannot sell the Big Screen TVs, but private individuals will still be able to possess them and purchase them from out of state or online. The following story says that during peak TV time, such as the Super Bowl, about 40% of the power in the state of California goes to power all the TVs that are on to watch the game.
If the legislature can ban this appliance, what else can they ban? Do you have too big of a refrigerator? Too many freezers? Too big of a microwave? Once the beast of the State starts banning products to save on energy it will never stop. This is statism!
And president Obamasky also wants to have a little thermostat control that is in your house that is linked to the government so that the government can monitor your energy usage. See this on youtube:
This is so much like Orwell’s 1984 that it is unbelievable. A US President actually calling for government monitoring of what you do in your own home…in the name of helping the environment of course! This is statism of the worst kind.
PS- here is good article from BAptist Press about this issue:Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )
« Previous Entries