MILLENNIALS and OTHERS IN MODERN AMERICA…


I have long wondered what the millennials and liberals truly believe and stand for.  I think I have, with the help of others, discovered what makes them tick or what doesn’t tick at all for them.  America was formed as the Free Constitutional Republic and for almost 240 years the prevailing sentiment in America was America.  Rather, it was a sense of patriotism and our core values were rooted in religion or the Bible and a strong sense of family.  That has changed dramatically, at least among certain sectors of our society. 

The generations of my parent and grandparents and mine were largely committed to the American ideal and embraced a deep sense of loyalty and devotion to America and all she stood for.  The millennials of today do not espouse those views and seem to care a lot less about patriotism, religion, or the core family unit.  That is troubling for this American and I see some very dangerous political realities springing forth as a result.

Wall Street/NBC News began a survey about 21 years ago when they began asking Americans which values were the most important to them.  The majority two decades ago responded, “principles of hard work, patriotism, commitment to religion and the goal of having children” were at the top of the list.  Those were considered critical components of our American society and makeup. 

When the same question was asked of today’s millennials the response revealed a shift.  Although somewhat surprising, ‘hard work’ remained at the top of the list, there were some significant shifts in values.  Patriotism, commitment to religion and family and children dropped dramatically.  Patriotism being ‘very important’ dropped 9%.  Religion decreased by a disturbing 12% and children and family fell the most decreasing by 16%.  That is powerfully expressive of where we are as a society.

When people 55 and older are asked that question Patriotism weighs in at 80% compared to 42% of those 18-38.  That embodies both the millennials and the older members of Gen-Z.  Interesting, but to the dismay of the liberal left, most were satisfied with the economy.  I’m sure that will inspire a new push to cripple our economy by the Left to make the pathway to victory more difficult for Trump.  The survey indicated that Democrats have changed their views far more than Republicans and are less patriotic, embracing of religion and family.

I am a Vietnam veteran and served in war and in honor of our country I am troubled when people do not value our heritage.  I am troubled by the incessant push to revise, rewrite, and purge our history of those facts and figures that the liberal left finds objectionable.  History is history and if we sanitize it, we fail to learn from the mistakes or gain the benefit from the successes or the overcoming of those mistakes.  History should be a schoolmaster, not a taskmaster and not fluid.  What happened, happened and nothing we can do will change that.  We learn, move forward, and make any necessary adaptations to become better.

I have worked all my life and paid taxes.  I have never felt that anyone owed me anything that I did not earn and when employed always attempted to give a good day’s work for a day’s pay.  My parents taught me the value of a dollar and the requirement of being personally responsible and accountable in life.  They inspired and instilled in me a sense of pride in accomplishing and providing for my own rather than being dependent on anyone else other than God. 

For some time, I’ve attended gatherings where the national anthem would be played and watched as some, mostly those of the younger generation, showed no respect.  I acknowledge that some my age failed to respond and continued doing whatever they were doing with no recognition of the flag.  My sentiment toward the flag is rooted in my love for this country and my respect for all those who have served and died for her.  That will never change!

I am not surprised at the change in values with two-generations or more of liberal progressive brainwashing that has been transpiring in public education, especially at institutions of higher learning.  The hippies and anti-establishment crowd of the ’60s are now the professors along with their disciples in most of our universities.  We are now paying and will pay a very high price for our actions over the past few decades. 

Let’s fight for Faith, Family, and Freedom and keep America Free and the Representative Government our Founders gave us.  Vote for America in 2020 and vote against the push for progressivism, liberalism, and socialism.  America is too valuable to allow to be destroyed!

God bless you and God bless America!

WHEN REASON FAILS, LIBERTY IS LOST…


I am fully cognizant that individuals interpret the same thing differently.  In life, we do not all agree on everything.  Politically, morally, economically, socially, and spiritually we have different perspectives and beliefs.  The differing opinions could and should be used to facilitate discussion and debate seeking common ground and genuine solutions to real problems. 

Tragically, in today’s world, deliberative reasoning seems to be destined for the trash heap of life.  I fear that our Republic has reached such a partisan and ideological divide that reasoning together has become a Utopian Fantasy. 

I have tried to have a civil discussion on differences with some followers of the Democratic ideology and agenda.  I attempted to hear their arguments but when I presented factual data, that came from various sources, not just conservative think-tanks, they went into the attack mode.  I was called a bigot, racist, misogynist, suffering from some phobia, Xenophon, hater of the poor, and other derogatory labels.  When I tried to brush aside those attacks and ask for the definitive basis of their beliefs and views, the attacks became even more violent and the vitriol more intense.

Our Republic, the United States of America, a representative system of government, requires open discourse and common ground to survive and thrive.  It is the earmark of tyrannies and oligarchies to squelch free speech and suppress any views other than the authorized government view.  We are not a Grecian Style Majority Rule Democracy but a Representative Republic.  This design affords us a buffer to protect us against knee-jerk spur of the moment reactions.  It is vital to the preservation of our Liberties and Freedoms.

When the view that the government can and should provide everything for everyone prevails, Liberty is Lost.  No government will provide without demanding a level of control.  The more the government provides the more it demands control. 

If the government provides free healthcare, it will ultimately become the decision-maker in what, when, how, and how much care is given and to whom that care is given.  That sounds like a Pandora’s box to me and opens a door that is a direct threat to Freedom and Liberty.  What has our government done, in its history that makes us trust them to control healthcare?  Let reason prevail, please.

When the view that the government is obligated to provide housing, food, clothing, transportation, and education prevails, Liberty is Lost.  Where is the money coming from to pay for those ‘freebies’?  The envious idea that ‘taxing the rich’ is the solution to everything fails when reason is applied. 

The obvious result of over-taxation of the rich is that the rich will use their resources to hide their money, cease investing and creating jobs, etc.  The result is that the government gets less revenue and has to expand their taxation to the next level and the next level until they have taxed everyone and everything.  With the history of our government’s ineptitude and waste, who would believe they have the wisdom to successfully manage those programs and the money required to operate them?  Let reason prevail, please.

In history, some not too distant examples are visible of the inherent dangers of allowing our Constitutional Freedoms, Liberties, and Rights to be stripped from us.  When speech is suppressed and opinions that differ from the authorized government dictum are reclassified as ‘hate speech’ not simply ‘opinion,’ Liberty is Lost.  When the inalienable and constitutional right to ‘keep and bear arms’ is rescinded or infringed the incredible danger of tyranny and despotism enjoys an exponential rise.  We only have to refer to the last century and Nazi Germany to see that danger. 

Our founders, almost to a man, feared a hostile and rogue government morphing into tyranny, oligarchy, or dictatorship.  They believed that it was imperative that the people be allowed to have the means to protect themselves from predators of all kinds including their own government.  The 2nd Amendment had nothing to do with guns but with the people’s right of ‘self-defense.’  It does not specify style or type of arms but that it was “the right of the people” to keep and bear them.  When anyone is rendered defenseless, they become open targets and prey for predators and Liberty is Lost. 

When the borders of a nation or erased and there is open ingress and egress to and from that nation into any other region of the world, that nation no longer exists as a sovereign nation.  If we adopt the idea, as is advanced by some on the Left, that we are merely citizens of the world and borders are immoral, Liberty is in grave danger of being lost.  If we have no means of knowing who is a legal citizen and who is not, how will we know who can legitimately decide the political fate of the community, the state or the nation? 

It is my prayer that ‘reason’ will be restored and that all sides of every issue will rediscover the ability and willingness to have an open, rational, and honest discussions.  We will not all agree on everything, our founders did not.  The framers of the American Constitution did not all agree.  The Bill of Rights is an amazing accomplishment of those men with sharp disagreement finding common ground and reaching a viable and workable solution to those disagreements.  Today’s political climate in America is devoid of that quality, and when reason fails, liberty is lost.

God gave us the ability to think, rationalize, and reason, let’s not squander that gift.  God made us different not so that we would war with each other and seek to annihilate any differing opinion but because none of us has the capacity to house all the wisdom needed for a functioning society to successfully survive and thrive. 

He could have made us mere puppets and pulled our strings, but He did not. He created us in His image and likeness but gave us the ability to reason and make choices.  We all have preferences, desires, and are motivated by different stimuli.  We are each unique but as a society, our individual uniqueness must be blended with all other uniquenesses.  Without reason, we will become sectarian, divided, alienated, and adversaries and Liberty will be lost.  Let reason prevail, please.

I realize that this is more a personal rant than a tool of persuasion for many, but I hope it resonates with you and you introspectively examine your willingness to engage in productive reasoning.  Liberty is a prize too valuable to lose and Freedom, to be preserved requires the ability to hear all sides of the matter and find common ground.  God help us to become people who truly recognize and respect that “All men are created equal and have certain inalienable rights.”  May we become a people who desire that everyone is treated fairly and equally under the law and see true liberty and justice for all.

I do not see that in the modern Democrat Party and because I desire Freedom, Liberty, and the preservation of the Republic I reject the candidates ascribing to the Progressive, Socialist, Globalist, Leftist view.  I am voting for and fighting for Faith, Family, and Freedom in the only way I know.

God bless you and God bless America!

OKAY, PREACHERS CAN BE STUPID TOO…


How’s that for placing a target on my back?  I guess I didn’t learn the lesson of how to win friends and influence people.  I am a preacher but that will count for little with those who find what I am saying objectionable.  They will argue that I am confused or simply wrong, and that’s okay with me.  I believe that I am on solid ground morally, ethically, constitutionally, and biblically in my position. 

This is still America, the land that is supposed to embrace Freedom of Speech which includes Freedom of Religion and Thought.  Our Founders did not all agree on everything, but they believed in those inalienable rights and in open and honest discussion of all matters.  Tragically, many today no longer believe in that principle.

But back to my title and why I would make that assertion.  I am referring to the speaker at the DNC who claimed that the Bible and the Constitution are both Socialist Documents.  Seriously?  Yes, that’s what he said.  The he of which I speak is the Right Reverend William Barber, the president of the North Carolina Chapter of the NAACP. 

It was nothing more than a political stump speech.  He offered the typically used Liberal Talking Points and ignored the abandonment of the Left regarding economic liberty.  He ignored their attempts to make the United States another Venezuelan cesspool economically.  But, then, he is a Leftists and he must amend the Bible and the Constitution to fit his ideology. 

He argued, wrongly, his view.  He said, “When we embrace moral language, we must ask does our policy care for the least of these?  Does it lift those who are most marginalized and dejected in our society?  Does it establish justice?  That is the moral question.”  (No argument from me thus far, but he continued.) 

He said, “If someone calls it socialism, then we must compel them to acknowledge, that the Bible, then, must promote socialism.”  (Whoa Nellie, now he is bordering on very dangerous and erroneous ground.)  He continued, “Because Jesus offered free healthcare to everyone and he never charged a leper a co-pay.”  (Talk about stretching the Bible to say what you want it to say.)

He continued his diatribe saying, “You want to have…it is time for us to say, if you want to have a moral debate, bring it on baby.  The Bible says a nation will be judged by how it treats the poor and the sick and women and immigrants.”  (Wow!  Where could he be going with this?  He is partially correct but the elastic in his doctrine is stretching.)  He continued, “The Bible says that God makes it rain on the just and unjust alike.  If you want to call caring for folks’ socialism, then the Constitution is a socialist document because it calls us to promote the general welfare and establish justice.” 

Yes, Reverend it does but not in the way you describe.  It is not in embracing socialism but in allowing people the opportunity to pursue happiness and work.  The Bible also says that a person who does not provide for his own is worse than an infidel. It also says that if any person would not work that person should not be given food to eat.  I guess those are to be ignored but then this is where we seem to be in the minds of those embracing liberalism, socialism, and the entitlement mentality. 

This is heretical balderdash, in my view, and must not go unanswered.  This is not new and will continue long past the current era of political wrangling, but it is dangerous.  We are called to help those in need, but that is on a personal and individual basis.  You cannot use the Bible to prove that Jesus taught that the government was to take care of the poor, but the people and the church were to do so. 

The Bible’s directives regarding charity do not include a mandate that we send our money to the government to dispense as it sees fit.  There is no mandate to fill the coffers of the government so bureaucrats can live high on the hog off what was designed for the poor. The Clinton’s Foundation comes to mind here. 

In the Bible ‘tax collectors’ were equated to harlots and viewed as thieves, not social justice warriors to be lauded with praise.  That might give a small inkling of how the government of man was viewed in the Bible.  But, those on the left following the toxicity of liberalism and socialism will never acknowledge that.

The Reverend Barber may be a wonderful man and a great preacher, but he seems to know little about Christian theology or the Bible.  He knows even less about the Constitution.  It is assuredly not a collectivist document as he seems to believe.  The Bill of Rights is a direct challenge to his view.  A view that is eerily familiar in the New York Times 1619 Project. 

The Bible warns against covetousness and the Reverend and his cohorts seem to be steeped in that condition wanting the government to be afforded coercive power to steal from the people to redistribute to those of their choosing.  I call him a wolf in sheep’s clothing.

If the State where to seek to provide everything, absorbing everything into itself, it would ultimately become nothing more than a bureaucracy incapable of guaranteeing the very thing it purports to supply.  Everybody truly needs love and personal concern.  However, we do not need, and the Constitution does not offer a State which regulates and controls everything. 

The idea of the bible is that charity and charities are the work of individuals and Churches, not governments.  People need more than ‘bread’ and when the government provides it demands control.  We should be very wary of that reality.

I pray that we will all become concerned about the poor and the truly needy and take personal steps to alleviate all the suffering we can.  However, I also pray that we will maintain our understanding that the federal government is not our source and supply. 

I pray that we will recognize personal accountability and personal responsibility.  I pray that we will never allow the liberal leftist to transform America into a third-world Socialist cesspool economically and a tyrannical entity governmentally.  God help us to remain the Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave.  May we never give up our inalienable right to Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.

God bless you and God bless America!

DEFENDING OUR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS…


I don’t know about you, but I consider defending our Constitutional Rights and Freedoms a prime objective.  Any politician who is willing to bypass the Constitution and strip us of our inalienable rights is not a friend of mine.  Any politician that attempts to sell the ‘snake oil’ solution of giving up liberty in hopes that the government can issue an edict that will keep us safe, is not my friend or a friend of the Constitution. 

Every politician who is elected of national office is required to take an oath to both protect and defend the Constitution of the United States of America.  They are not afforded the luxury or privilege to cherry-pick which part of that document they protect or defend.  They are required by the Constitution and by moral decency to honor all of it whether they like what it says or not.  That is how we have survived for over 240 years and how we will continue if we do. 

Some have accused me of being a Trump Cultists and a Trump apologist and insist that I never criticize anything he does.  That is blatantly false and today I am going to question an action that this administration, like administrations before him, is pursuing. The push by the federal government for tech companies to give the government ‘backdoor access’ to encrypted applications is, in my view, questionable.  I am concerned about the violation or potential violation of our constitutional right of protection from ‘unreasonable search and seizure.’ 

Some will argue, but if it keeps us safe from one terrorist attack then it is worth it.  That is the same argument for ‘gun control’ but rejected when it comes to abortion or the border.  It is somewhat cherry-picking and the words of Benjamin Franklin echo in my mind.  He said, “Those who would give up essential liberty, to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.”  I know the word deserve is a bit harsh, but the truth is that if we give up liberty hoping for safety, we will end up with neither.  The country and the constitution will suffer as a result.

Encryption is the process used to encode data to prevent unwanted third parties from accessing a user’s personal profiles.  The algorithms for encryption are many and varied, but their intended purpose is to protect you and me for the nefarious intrusion into our privacy and personal information.  Smartphone and computers utilize encryption to permanent lock our data in case of theft or if an unauthorized individual attempt to access our devices. 

Of course, those are not always successful, and hackers also use algorithms to break the codes and steal our personal data.  Viruses such as the infamous Ryuk ransomware has been used by hackers to successfully encrypt the files and steal information from hundreds of businesses around the world. 

I can appreciate the government wanting to protect us from Terrorist and I want to them to be able to do just that.  However, if they ignore the privacy of law-abiding citizens and violate our constitutional rights, is that the right approach?  Terrorist organizations use apps like Telegram which features end to end encryption to communicate between each other and disseminate their radical propaganda.  That is dangerous and must be addressed.  Hackers and drug dealers also use that application for their diabolical purposes to communicate and safeguard their information.  If it is documented that there is criminal activity then a warrant from the courts could and should be used, but not blanket access by the government.

The 2015 terrorist attack in San Bernardino, California is an example of the dilemma and difficulty posed for the government and citizens.  The Islamist Syed Rizwan Farook and his wife Tashfeen Malik took 14 lives and injured 22 more in their attack.  During the investigation the FBI recovered Farook’s work phone, the iPhone 5C, but were unable unlock the device.  They requested Apple to create software that would allow them to access the iPhone of Farook.  Apple refused to do so, and a third party helped the FBI unlock the iPhone, but the information retrieved was limited. 

Apple’s refusal escalated the discussion of where the line is to be drawn between National Security and Consumer Privacy.  That is a very important line and one that is not always easily distinguishable.  I am very much interested in protecting against terrorist and very determined to maintain our Constitutional Rights.  That is the kind of issue that could keep me awake at night.  Being torn is an understatement. 

Edward Snowden leaked information about the expansive and extensive government surveillance.  I am not trying to defend him, but the revelation was troubling and the extent to which ‘big brother’ is watching is concerning.  With the immense arsenal of the federal government to spy on citizens the encryption issue may sound almost moot but is it? 

The loss of privacy by law-abiding American citizens should always be a concern.  Let me offer a possible scenario and you decide how far you think the government should be able to go in their quest for information.  If the government can deem that it has the right to all personal information and private communications for national security purposes what is next?  Could that not also argue that they have the right to control and determine what technological devices and technology we are allowed to utilize?  Could they not seek to be allowed to audit all your personal files on your home computer, tablet, or any other encrypted device at any moment for any reason.  All in the name of national security?

The conundrum is that we, as private citizens, want to be safe and protected but we also want to maintain our constitutional right to privacy.  Our current legal system is based on the premise and idea that any person is innocent until proven guilty.  I fear that allowing unfettered access by the federal government to backdoor encryption will violate our personal privacy to the point that we will find ourselves not only unsafe but under the thumb of the tyrannical elitists in government who want total control.  I do not want America to become another China or any other despotic country where people no longer have true freedom.

Yes, I am perplexed and troubled.  However, I continue to stand for the Constitution and our inalienable rights and freedoms.  I also stand staunchly for discovering any criminal and terrorist and prosecuting them to the full extent of the law.  It is a perplexing situation and one that is not easily answered but with the push of the Left toward Total Control and Socialism, I fear for the personal freedom of all citizens. 

God bless you and God bless America is my prayer.  Lord, please keep us free while keeping us safe!

ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION AND THE FOUNDING FATHERS…


I have encountered people of in various political sectors who want to argue that the Founding Fathers wanted Open Borders.  That is factually inaccurate! I will attempt to detail why I believe that.  It is also a dangerous view that they are advancing! But those arguing for Open Borders, often in the name of compassion, seem to miss the obvious in the writings of the Founders and the wording of the Constitution.  They also seem to miss the dangers allowing unimpeded illegal penetration into the United States of America poses. 

I have had those who are devotedly Libertarian, extremely Liberal, and some Republicans who are, in most things, quite conservative and desirous of following the Constitution advance the view of Open Borders being right.  Some even argue that all laws prohibiting illegals from entering the Sovereign Republic of the United States were written by Eugenics and Evil Men. I find that view flabbergasting and am amazed at the woeful misinterpretations being presented in today’s politic. 

Former President, Barack Hussein Obama, declared that any restriction of immigration in order to protect our national security was “offensive and contrary to American values.”  I’m not sure what American values he was referring to, but I believe that view is diametrically opposed to the view of our Founders and the Framers of our Constitution.  I believe it is an invitation to the destruction of the Republic and endangers Americans.  The endangering of Americans cannot be ignored in the light of the many crimes committed by the illegals, some who have been deported multiple times residing in Sanctuary Cities and States. 

The Founders repeatedly expressed their concerns about indiscriminate mass immigration.  They made it incredibly clear that the purpose of allowing foreigners into our fledgling nation was not to recruit millions of new voters or secure permanent ruling majorities for their political parties.  It was and should still be to “preserve, protect, and enhance the republic.”  The Republic that they put their lives on the line to establish and sought to preserve for posterity into perpetuity.

In 1790, just a few short years after the Revolutionary War, the House of Representatives debated naturalization.  James Madison argued, “It is no doubt very desirable that we should hold out as many inducements as possible for the worthy part of mankind to come and settle among us and throw their fortunes into a common lot with ours.  But why is this desirable?”  It is imperative that we note Madison said, ‘the worthy part’ and ‘throw their fortunes into a common lot’.  That does not sound like terrorist, gangs, drug dealers, and those who could not provide for themselves. 

Why do we want immigration?  It is not for ‘diversity.’  That is the argument I hear often by politicians and liberals.  They argue that “diversity is our greatest asset.”  Seriously, if that is our greatest asset, we are paupers.  Madison continued stating that it was, “Not merely to swell the catalogue of people.  No, sir, it is to increase the wealth and strength of the community; and those who acquire the rights of citizenship, without adding to the strength or wealth of the community are not the people we are in want of.”  Tell me again that the Founding Fathers wanted Open Borders with the ability indiscriminately come and go as you please.  That dog won’t hunt, and that bird won’t fly.

Their idea was that immigrants should ‘assimilate’ and any immigrant that would not ‘incorporate’ him or herself into our society should be excluded.  George Washington wrote John Adams and expressed a similar view that immigrants should be absorbed into American life so that, “by an intermixture with our people, they, or their descendants, get assimilated to our customs, measures, laws: in a word soon become one people.”  

Alexander Hamilton wrote in 1802 something that is relevant today and should resonate with everyone who wants to keep America as America.  He said, “The safety of a republic depends essentially on the energy of a common national sentiment; on a uniformity of principles and habits; on the exemption of the citizens from foreign bias and prejudice; and on that love of country which will almost invariably be found to be closely connected with birth, education, and family.”

Hamilton further argued and warned that “the United States have already felt the evils of incorporating a large number of foreigners into their national mass; by promoting in different classes different predilections in favor of particular foreign nations, and antipathies against others, it has served very much to divide the community and to distract our councils.  It has been often likely to compromise the interests of our own country in favor of another.”  Does that sound like an advocate for Open Borders?

Hamilton further correctly predicted, that “the permanent effect of such a policy will be, that in times of great public danger there will be always a numerous body of men, of whom there may be just grounds to distrust; the suspicion alone will weaken the strength of the nation, but their force may be actually employed in assisting an invader.”  Does that sound like an Open Border Advocate?

He also contended that the survival of the American republic depends upon “the preservation of a national spirit and a national character.”  He insisted that “to admit foreigners indiscriminately to the rights of citizens the moment they put foot in our country would be nothing less than to admit the Grecian horse into the citadel of our liberty and sovereignty.” 

I insist that to allow unrestricted open borders is unwise, unsafe, and un-American.  A country that does not value its own citizens and sovereignty first will not, no can not endure as a country long.  Our Liberty and Freedom demands, as our Founders understood, that we have secure borders and a very carefully evaluated and guarded immigration system.  Illegal Immigration must never be part of any allowable mix.

I pray you will join me in fighting for the preservation of the American Republic and while we welcome legal immigrants who will assimilate and bring value to the Republic, we reject the notion that Open Borders is either a Christian or American value.  It is neither!

God bless you and God bless America. 

LUNACY IS LUNACY…


I would like to think that politicians like Joaquin Castro of San Antonio, Texas and the liberal leftists of the Democratic Party are simply politicking about ‘gun control.’  I would like to think they are not as ill-informed and lacking facts as they appear.  I would like to think they have more respect for the intelligence of the American people, than they seem to have.  I would like to think they do not believe what they spew forth in their rhetoric, ideological agendas, and diatribe.  But I don’t!  I believe that many of them believe what they are saying and believe they are the righteous saviors of the planet.

Some time back, Governor Greg Abbott of Texas was a participant in a town hall moderated by two people with a floor reporter and two of the three were of obvious liberal bias.  Most of the questions were staged in an attempt to trip up the Governor or get him to concede to the liberal demands that people of color are being horribly treated at the hands of whites and that we must pass ‘red flag’ or other ‘gun control measures.’  He handled the situation quite well.  At the end, they had the Democrat response and it was Representative Castro.  That was infuriating. 

The infuriating part was not that they allowed a Democrat response, I expect and welcome that.  It was what and how Representative Castro approached his response.  He insisted that we have weapons on the streets that were specifically designed for military purposes.  That is sheer ignorance and factually inaccurate, and I would hope he knows it, but I suspect he does not.  He insisted that Texans would fight the Governor and Trump because Texans wanted progressive change and were tired of the results of conservatism.  That too, I believe is factually inaccurate.  His rant was nothing less than an “I hate all Republicans diatribe.”  He appealed to all Texans to resist!

The Main Stream Media, Peripheral Media, the Liberal Leftist and the misguided on the Right pontificate the evil of guns and we need sanity to prevail.  We dare not allow ‘knee-jerk’ responses to tragedies, they never produce lasting or viable results.  We need Constitutional and reasoned sanity to prevail! 

In the wake of the mass shootings in El Paso and Dayton, Ohio, Senator Lindsey Graham offered a truth that infuriates the Left.  He said in an interview with the Washington Examiner, “in the case of the AR-15, there is a hurricane, a natural disaster, no power, no cops, no anything.”  He said regarding ownership, “People wanting to do harm are not going to come to a home with an AR-15.  If you step on the porch with an AR-15, they will probably head down the street.”  I think he is right, and I know they will leave if they come to my house. 

One of the survivors of the El Paso massacre, a black man, Christopher Grant told CNN’s Chris Cuomo that he was surprised that his mother didn’t have her gun with her.  He said, much to Cuomo’s angst: “I ran towards my mother to try to shield her.  And I’m like ‘mom.’  Cause my mom is a gun-wielding grandma.  She carries a snub-nose Smith and Wesson, 38 special with a built-in scope on it – everywhere she goes!”  I too am surprised that even though Walmart is a gun-free zone that there were not armed citizens stepping up to stop the shooter in his tracks or at least attempt to.  Most shooters seek out ‘gun-free zones’ to do their evil.  What law prevents that?

I cannot fathom how the Liberal Leftists of today, largely in the Democrat Party fail to grasp the reality that gun laws, gun restrictions, and gun bans only impact the ‘law-abiding.’  The criminal, as is indicated in the name, does not respect or regard the law.  They break it, that is what makes them a criminal.  Hey Democrats, ‘Here’s Your Sign!’

I have no respect for any politician or news person who does not take the time or exhibit the ethical character to honestly and truthfully investigate the facts before presenting their rhetoric.  If they honestly studied the Second Amendment, they would quickly discover that it was never about ‘guns’ but ‘people’ and ‘rights.’ 

We have had guns throughout our history as a nation and mass shootings were rare until the 1960’s.  What changed?  Not gun ownership but people.  It has more to do with a change of thinking, ideological positioning, entitlement, and utopianism than guns.  It is a matter of the heart.  Yes, I’m putting on my preacher and Christian hat now and insist that no law will ever curb the violence but will likely cause its escalation.  We either deal with the real problem or we face a growing problem and worse nightmare.

In a recent PJ media column by Dennis Prager, he explains: “Given the same ubiquity of guns, wouldn’t the most productive question be what, if anything has changed since the 1960’s and ’70’s? Of course, it would. And a great deal has changed. America is much more ethnically diverse, much less religious. Boys have far fewer male role models in their lives. Fewer men marry, and normal boy behavior is largely held in contempt by their feminist teachers, principals, and therapists. Do any or all of those factors matter more than the availability of guns?”

Mr. Prager hit the nail squarely on the head with his concluding remarks in that interview.  He said: “Finally, since the 1960’s, we have been living in a culture of grievance. Whereas in the past people generally understood that life is hard and/or they have to work on themselves to improve their lives, for half a century, the left has drummed into Americans’ minds the belief that their difficulties are caused by American society — in particular, its sexism, racism, and patriarchy. And the more aggrieved people are the more dulled their consciences.”

America, if we are willing to allow emotion drive us to ‘knee-jerk’ solutions we will not only not solve the problem we will make it worse!  If we allow the Leftists who consider our Inalienable Rights Anathema to their Agenda to reclaim power it may rightly be said, “We deserve what we get.”  No, I do not believe that the millions of us or even the millions who are deceived ‘deserve’ the destruction but there is a price to be paid and every choice has a consequence.  I choose Freedom!  I choose the Right to pursue Life, Liberty, and Happiness!  I choose to stand for Faith, Family, and Freedom!

God bless you and God bless America!

MAKE NO MISTAKE – The Democrats Want Your Guns…


I have no illusions that the leftists are willing to take any semblance of a moderate approach to ‘gun control’.  They are full-bore ‘gun ban’ and ‘gun confiscation’ and that is not going to change!  They may misguidedly believe that their approach is in the best interest of the public, but it is misguided at best and diabolical at worst.  There may be some of them that truly want to protect people but there are others who want total control and know they cannot achieve their objective as long as Americans are allowed to ‘keep and bear arms.’  Those are the ones that Jefferson was referring to in his warnings and statements about watering the ‘tree of liberty.’

I have warned for some time that just focusing on the constitutional right to ‘keep and bear arms’ is missing the bigger picture.  Of course, I will fight for the constitution and our constitutionally protected inalienable right of ‘self-defense’.  Of course, I will seek to always follow the law and the constitution.  However, there are other factors at work under the surface and behind the scenes that are incredibly dangerous. 

There is a grave danger that state governments will seek to by-pass the federal constitution and come for your guns.  Don’t dismiss that as impossible and never say never.  You may say never, about your willingness or unwillingness to give up your guns and avow as did, Charleston Heston, “Pry them from my cold dead hands.”  However, there is a movement afoot that seeks to use both state governments and economic means to ‘ban our guns’ and control ‘gun manufacturers’. 

The ideas they are presenting are rooted in the false theory that if we have ‘gun laws’ that ban or restrict various types of firearms we will provide safety for the public.  That is to assume that the criminals, those lacking in mental ability, terrorist, or the demonic will also obey the laws.  That is so far-fetched that no rational human should anticipate such an occurrence.  But, alas, there seem to be millions who believe the Leftists drivel, diatribe, and rhetoric.

With the shootings over the past couple of years, we have witnessed a dozen or more states passing ‘Red Flag Laws’ that have done and will do little to reduce this problem.  The laws and warnings that we already have, if implemented and followed would do as much as these new laws will do.  Sadly, many of the shooters have used legally purchased weapons and passed extensive background checks.  I did not say all but many. 

I am deeply concerned that the President and the GOP are vacillating on ‘Gun Control’ and ‘Red Flag Laws’.  This is just another of the myriad of attempts to diminish our 2nd Amendment Rights.  Sadly, as I stated before, some of them are in earnest longing for a solution to make people safer.  I can appreciate that however, they are wrong!

Mass shootings are horrific!  There is nothing about them that is good, they are horrific and evil!  I want people to be safe and feel safe in public, at work, in the market place, and at church.  I want people to have a sense of safety and security in their homes.  I want that as much or more than the leftists pushing ‘gun control.’  However, I know that there are no laws that can be passed or executive fiats that can be signed that will achieve that goal. 

The problem is not the weapon of destruction but the destroyer using the weapon.  It is and will remain a heart and mind issue.  It may be driven by ideology, religion, depression, or any other factor but the cause is not the gun it is the gunner.  If guns were not available, they would use something else including vehicles.  Where does it end?

Imagine the unreliability and danger when a ‘Red Flag Law’ allows anyone to report another as being potentially dangerous and the authorities then seek to confiscate their firearms.  Jealousy, anger, bitterness, envy, and hate could render millions of Americans without the legitimate and lawful ability to protect themselves and to ‘keep and bear arms.’ 

Facebook’s reporting policy should be a glaring example of how nefarious and inept that kind of policy would be.  Also, a wife or husband who is angry could do incredible harm to their spouse in a fallacious report.  Before you say, “Nobody would do that” let me remind you that I’ve been in the ministry for over 50 years and YES IT HAPPENS!  I support reporting someone who exhibits warning signs of being dangerous to the authorities, but I do not support failing to follow ‘due process’ in the confiscation of their arms.

The “Red Flag Laws “which are currently being advanced follow an incredibly dangerous pathway.  They provided for the confiscation eliminating the ‘due process’ part of the constitutional protection.  Blaming of the NRA for the mass shootings is like blaming automobile clubs for car wrecks.  The truth is that if enough people get behind ‘gun control’ it won’t matter what the NRA or any other pro-gun groups do.  The Left likes to cite reported polling numbers as though they were the final decree on our rights and whatever the majority wants the majority should get.  We are not a majority rule democracy but a representative constitutional republic.

If our 2nd Amendment Rights fall by the wayside, what is next?  Our 1st Amendment Right including Freedom of Speech and Religion is also currently under assault.  Our 4th Amendment Right protecting us against unreasonable search and seizure is at stake.  We are being assaulted by politicians and political activists who have no respect for and refuse to honor or recognize the Constitution.  The politicians took an oath that we need to hold them accountable to follow.  If they refuse and continue their assault on that document, they need to be ousted as quickly as humanly possible.

God help us to see the dangers and reject the emotional appeal to surrender liberties hoping to gain safety and security.  History and common sense reveal that will not be the result.  I stand fast and firm for America and Americans.  I will never give up the fight to protect Faith, Family, and Freedom.

God bless you and God bless America!

WHAT PART DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND?


What I’m talking about is the attempted ‘nullification’ of the Constitution and our Constitutional and Inalienable Right to “keep and bear arms.”  What part of the words “the right of the people” escapes the grasp of those willing to neuter the Constitution and nullify our rights? 

The 2nd Amendment is not about any particular style or type of firearm but the Right of the People to keep them and Protect themselves.  It seems relatively simple to me, but then, I take the words of the Constitution and the Amendments to mean something.  I believe that the Framers and Founders knew what they were saying, carefully weighed their words, and crafted the language with specific intent.  Yes, I’m an Original Intent person!

The words of the 2nd Amendment specifically states: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”  Nothing is mentioned about the type or style of Arms but that the people have the right to keep and bear them.  It also says, specifically that this right SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED!  Shall not!  What part of that do you not understand?

The wording of this Amendment was suggested by Samuel Adams and John Hancock for the specific purpose of making it perfectly clear that the federal government could never infringe upon those rights.  It was to avoid the confusion as to what the federal government could and could not do in this matter and was designed to guarantee that law-abiding citizens would never be restricted from owning, keeping, and bearing their own arms! 

I have become convinced that Adams and others gave future generations too much credit regarding respecting the Constitution.  The idea has emerged that citizens do not have the right to both keep and bear arms.  The idea has been advanced by those wanting to strip us of this right, that gun ownership is a privilege, not a right.  That is a slap in the face to our founders, the framers, and the document itself. 

Our Founders understood and believed that Rights come from God, not the government.  They believed so strongly that the right of ‘self-defense’ was an Inalienable Right that they carefully constructed the wording of the Amendment.  Today, it seems, that many on the Right and on the Left, have the idea that it is within the purview and right of the federal government to ‘curtail’ gun ownership.  It is also being advanced that the federal government has the right to determine what type, style, and caliber arms we can own. 

That is both incoherent and contextually inaccurate regarding the 2nd Amendment.  The words of the Amendment seem to matter little in today’s politically charged America.  If we lose the Constitution to private or party interpretation, we lose the Republic.   Chris Cuomo of CNN tweeted that “there is no individual right” in the 2nd Amendment.  He is wrong and now deceased Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia rightly referred to the “individual right” in the Heller v. District of Columbia decision. 

Winston Churchill offered a thought that gives understanding as to why and how people like Cuomo would think as they do.  He was not speaking specifically to this kind of Constitutional ignorance, but it could be rightly applied.  Churchill said that, for human beings, “five years is a lot.  Twenty Years is the horizon for most people.  Fifty years is antiquity.”  This is why I am staunchly on the side of Original Intent and believe that if we view the Constitution in any other light, we lose its meaning, purpose, and power. 

We managed to span 146 years from the ratification of the Constitution and the Amendments before we were burdened with America’s first sweeping federal gun law.  In 1934, the National Firearms Act (NFA), was rammed down America’s throat by well-meaning legislators.  I say well-meaning because I hope they were not simply being nefarious and intent on stripping us of our Constitutional Right to “keep and bear arms.”

Today, we have the idea being bandied about by people on both sides that we must ‘do something’ therefore some type of ‘gun ban’ is necessary.  That notion of the federal government has the right or ability to ‘ban guns’ is anathema to our American sensibilities, the Constitution, and the 2nd Amendment.  It should be resoundingly rejected without out further debate, but it isn’t and won’t be.  Prior to the NFA in 1934 everyone understood and respected the reality that the 2nd Amendment prohibited that kind of action and gave no right to government to impede, infringe upon, or ban gun ownership. 

The Thompson Sub-machine Gun and all automatic weapons were banned because it was deemed that there was no justifiable need that was commensurate with the risk involved in the public owning them.  I will be blasted for this thought, but I believe that was a wrong decision based on my view and understanding of the Constitution.  If we take the position that there has to be a legitimate need that justifies a risk, then we will quickly morph into a view that ‘no firearm’ is justified.  It is a very slippery slope. 

Since we already have NFA and all automatic weapons are banned we do not need further gun bans, restrictions, or laws to prohibit ownership of firearms.  Simply because a rifle or firearm is cosmetically amorphous and identified incorrectly identified as military-style assault rifles do not justify the ban.  We have no need for new gun laws and no new gun law will prevent further mass shootings or murders. 

NFA made it almost impossible for the average law-abiding citizens to own any automatic weapon.  The cost is prohibitive and the tax exorbitant on them.  I consider it quite egregious for the federal government to pass any laws or offer any edicts that ban firearms.  Even after NFA for over 50 years it was understood that law-abiding Americans could own a machine gun providing it was properly registered and purchased.  In 1986 that changed with the ‘banning’ of automatic weapons in the Hughes Amendment to the National Firearms Owner’s Protection Act (FOPA). 

Ronald Reagan is reported to have considered vetoing that bill but was convinced by the NRA to no do so.  They believed the Supreme Court would throw the law out as unconstitutional. He failure to veto was a bad decision ,constitutionally.  We are fighting for our Constitutional Rights and Liberties and regardless of how you feel about firearms, we the people have the Constitutional Right to “keep and bear Arms.”  A right that, per our founders was not to be infringed. 

God bless you and God bless America!

UNITERS or DIVIDERS?


Can anyone in politics today be called a Uniter?  Is everyone in politics today a Divider?  I am painfully serious and that is deeply troubling to me.  I love America!  I love people and desperately want America to excel, be restored to a Limited Government where We the People are truly governed by consent, not coercion.  Can we attain that lofty perch?  In this, I refuse to be less than optimistic even in the face of the incredible division and seeming impasse ideologically in today’s modern political world.  Am I dreaming and clinging to a ‘pie in the sky’ wish?  Possibly but if I don’t shoot for the moon will never hit higher than the street light. 

I talk to Democrats frequently and after they give me their standard rhetoric, diatribe, and rants about the evil orange man, Donald J. Trump I get to ask questions.  Sometimes, my questions send them into a rage and the tirade that ensues makes discussion impossible.  But there are times when they actually hear my question, give it some thought, and respond.  It is those times that give me hope.

I am 100% convinced that unless and until we actually listen to each other and discuss matters with some semblance of rationality and honesty we will never achieve my desired objective for America.  I am equally convinced that if we do, we can achieve far more than any of us might think possible.  Both sides, view the other side as irreconcilably deluded and frequently ‘the enemy.’  If that is our position and attitude, then resolution and restoration is an Impossible Dream and a Utopian Fantasy. 

We have endured over three years of a 24/7 barrage of attacks, attempts to overturn the 2016 election and the intentional dividing of the nation.  Those of us who did not support Hillary Clinton and voted for Donald J. Trump have been branded ‘deplorable’.  We have been called every name under the sun, mostly unfairly.  We have a nation of approximately 330 million people.  This nation is the size of the continent of Europe.  Can anyone unite this nation?

If the Democrats and those following their current brand of liberalism regain power can they govern?  The same cabal that has maligned, marginalized, and physically assaulted 63 million people calling us racist, bigots, idiots, homophobes, white supremacist, fascist, and other names would be tasked with that responsibility. 

How would they treat those of us who opposed and oppose their brand and style of governance?  Would they attempt to ignore us and hope we fade into the shadows and disappear?  That won’t happen, we will not!  Would those in power succumb to their rabid base and demand that everyone is forced into compliance with their toxic agenda?  Would that not foment serious confrontations and have the incredible potential for violence? 

Over the past decade or so, about 154 million fundamentalists, evangelical, or Catholic Christians have been maligned, mocked, pilloried and vilified for our beliefs.  Our religious liberties have been under assault and in danger of governmental usurpation and regulation.  What can that segment of society expect when the Left pressed to force acceptance of unconditional abortion, infanticide, and seek to suspend our Christian liberties and force us to comply with their positions and conditions?

I have zero doubt that if the Left regains control of the Government that includes the White House, the House, the Senate, and the Courts the litigation, administrative edicts, and intimidation will escalate.  Their base demands it and the political prostitutes always gravitate to abuse of power attempting to maintain control and dominance. 

Have you taken the time to truly reflect on the reality that in a nation of 330 million there will always be evil?  There will always be the demonic, the deranged, the devious, and evil people who will commit mass murders and other atrocities.  That is not going away with legislation. 

The passage of ‘open-ended’ red flag laws is a move in the wrong direction.  I know it sounds like a sensible and compassionate thing to do.  I know it is politically expedient and will gain votes in certain sectors, but it is the wrong move.  Why?  Because the same people who abuse social media will abuse the reporting of potential dangers and violations.  Those in law enforcement and politics who have a larger end-game will abuse the new laws and we will be no safer but will lose more of our individual liberties and rights. 

The move is on today to strip citizens of their constitutional and inalienable right of ‘self-defense’ embodied in the 2nd Amendment and in the 1st Amendment.  The 2nd Amendment was not about guns but about people and our right of defense.  That must be guarded and protected against the nefarious power-crazed political prostitutes of today. 

Can the Democrats following the toxicity of liberal thought and globalism expect to govern and deal with upwards of 70% of Americans who own and want to keep their firearms?  The Leftists are proposing an increase in entitlement programs that would increase the need for revenue from tax-payers by over 200%.  Is that a good plan?  They insist they will not touch Social Security or Medicare so the only other pathway for them is tax, tax, tax, tax, and tax some more! 

The IRS has issued an analysis displaying the reality that the average income tax would have to increase by at least 80% on the top 10% to cover their proposals.  Some would say, “Fantastic, the rich will pay their fair share!”  But it doesn’t stop there.  The next 40% of taxpayers would see an increased rate of 65% and the bottom 50% would incur a 40% tax rate.  Is that still fantastic in your mind? 

That would cause a revolution of non-filers and make multiplied thousands of otherwise law-abiding citizens criminals because they’d hide their money trying to survive.  Add to that equation the 11-30 million illegals now, here and the additional ones that would come with open borders and you have an open invitation to anarchy and the total destruction of our Republic. 

The Left is good at sowing confusion, misinformation and as Uncle Joe Biden said, “We choose our Truth over Facts.”  I think he said, “truth over facts” but facts support truth rather than being something other than the truth.  If we allow those following the toxicity of liberalism as embodied in today’s Democratic Party to reclaim the controls of government, we will have effectively destroyed the Republic.  It is your choice.  I’ve made mine, and I choose Liberty and the Republic, Faith, Family, and Freedom not the chains being proposed by the Left and the Democrats. 

God bless you and God bless America!

ONWARD TO THE PAST, AMERICA…


That should be the motto of the Democrats running for office in 2020 because it is their mantra and what they are proposing.  I am stunned that millions of Americans, many whom I think are reasonably intelligent but terribly misguided are buying into their proposals.  I was born at night, but it wasn’t last night, and I am convinced that my 2nd Grade Grandchildren would know their policies are not good business.  If not them, then my 6th Grader would assuredly know the difference between progression and regression.  Yet, millions of those following the toxicity of liberalism seem to be devoid of the cognitive acuity to deduce that reality.

Among the proposals of the Democratic hopefuls is the brazen plan of Joe Biden who has pledged and voted to eliminate all of President Trump’s tax cuts.  Wow!  How many people applaud that?  Only those not paying any taxes now and living on the government dole, I suspect.  Joe did not take the position of his fellow Democrats who promise to eliminate some of the cuts he said, ALL OF THEM!  He then said, “…you think I’m joking, but I’m not.  If you know anything about me and taxes.” 

Hey, Joe, yes, I know about you and the Democrats regarding taxes.  You never met a tax increase you didn’t like.  You promise to use the taxes to pay for entitlements and scream about the cost of the cuts.  The truth of the matter is, tax cuts add more revenue rather than reducing it.  You know it, economist know it, and hopefully, the American people will come to realize it.

You did promise to take us back to the Obama policies and economic conditions.  I would hope no rational American would support that proposal.  You want to take us back to a condition of stagnation and want us to believe what your former boss claimed that the new normal was low growth.  You want us to believe that jobs that left under Obama would never return.  Those same jobs that have come back in manufacturing and other areas under Trump.  Thanks, but no thanks!  I like where we are and where we are heading and do not want to go back into financial darkness.

When you examine the facts and even consider the fact that liberal outlets such as the Washington Post have debunked Biden’s claims of how the taxes affected people, you must wonder what he is smoking.  The Conservative-leaning Americans for Tax reform has reported that a single parent taking care of one child with an annual income of $41,000 received a tax cut of more than $1,300.  Households in Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Michigan received tax cuts of about $1,400 on average. 

Biden suggested that there were loopholes in the tax code amounting to approximately $1.6 trillion.  He could not specify where they were and exactly who receives them but his magic math and tax, tax, tax, will allow him to spend, spend, spend, and it will all be easily done and free for everyone!  Yeah, and I have some pristine oceanfront property in the middle of the Arizona desert I’d love to sell cheaply too. 

The Washington Post reported that the average American family earning between $50,000 and $75,000 annually received a tax cut of about $1,000.  How can anyone with half a brain not see the fallacy and failure of the Democrat Economic Plans? 

When you add to the mix the Democrat’s proposals regarding Open Borders, Gun Control, Medicare For All, Free This and Free That, you see the dilemma the non-thinking voting public is in.  Open Borders is dangerous for Americans and damages the job market for many people.  It increases the fiscal burden and thereby overloads our healthcare system, educational system, and law enforcement.  It is a non-American idea that the Left insists is humanitarian and compassionate. 

Elizabeth Warren has gone further into the looney bin with her ‘Gun Control’ proposals.  She wants a new ‘federal assault weapons ban’ that people willing to break the law will ignore.  She proposed increasing the tax on firearms (30%) and on ammunition (50%) that won’t deter any crime of violence but will make us law-abiding Americans give the government more money to defend ourselves.  A ban on ‘high capacity ammunition magazines’ that won’t do one thing to deter criminals from killing people and prevent the law-abiding from defending themselves against those criminals with high capacity magazines.  She wants to extend the waiting periods for obtaining a firearm.  That will have zero effect on criminals. 

Her plan extends the right and purview to Congress to determine and stipulate what “high capacity” is.  Congress, she said, “Would decide what the reasonable limits are on the lethality of weapons.”  What?  Any weapon is lethal if it hits someone in the right or wrong place.  She also wants to target Gun Manufacturers, which is nothing short of a push for Gun Confiscation and the Total Elimination of Firearms.  They also want a “federal licensing system” but oppose voter identification.  Amazing isn’t it? 

The Democrats appear willing to violate the Constitution, strip us of our Constitutional and Inalienable Rights but not protect us against Leftists Voter Fraud.  In any of the mass shootings, someone explain how any of her proposals or the proposals by the Democrats have prevented any of them?  In my mind, they are pushing and searching for ways to impede our liberties recognized by the Constitution.  I have to ask, “How many innocent people will be victimized by adherence to the law when criminals ignore it?”  Hey, Democrats, no Hey, Americans, when will we wake up and say, NO MORE!  No more to the Leftists attempt to violate our Constitutional Rights and strip us of our Liberties!  NO MORE!  That’s why I’m voting No on the Democrats in 2020.

God bless you and God bless America!