LIGHT AT THE END OF THE TUNNEL

 

Human beings have freedom of religion. Individual conversions from one religion to another do occur, and many conversions freely take place; generally, Christians will be Christians, Mohamed followers will be Muslims, and Israelis will be Jews--spiritually speaking, that is. Therefore, when problems arise between these groups, finding fault with faith seldom yields constructive conflict resolution, but rather, exploring common streams of connection between different faiths might reposition negotiating parties closer to a coveted agreement.

 

Meaning, that these religions will continue to exist as free adherence to them is a human right. As to conflict resolution, religion, therefore, cannot be held as the only or sole purveyor of human action. Other causes for action, or other sources of causes for action, may well exist, which, when unexplored, might diminish the availability of resources designed to end wars and finalize conflicts.

 

A "Jihad" means of course a Muslim religious assault, war or crusade against something. The word "Jihad" evokes Middle-Eastern Arabs in terrorist garb, acting from a religious platform that offers little room for compromise and conflict resolution.

 

I also remember the civil war in Ireland between peoples of the same Christian faith, but of different religious denominations-- the war between the Irish of the South and the British of the North on the land of the Irish is not about religion at all. True, the Irish of the South are Catholic generally, and the Irish of the North, of former British descent, are mainly Protestant in denomination.

 

But, the Irish object to the British having invaded their country more than 300 years ago in order to carve out a territory unto themselves, as "other" in Ireland, while proclaiming their allegiance to a foreign government, the government of England. Differences in government, culture and economic development continued to fuel the hostilities between the two groups, which to this day, yearn for peace to reign on the Irish Isle.

 

This debacle in Ireland, therefore, having its adversarial causes rooted in sensed and felt objective and material injustices, has been camouflaged as a Protestant-Catholic conflict, which it is not. The conflict has its foundation in objective roots of invasion from without and economic deprivation from within. When the conflict is not religious, then causes have sources that are amenable to objective remedies, such as financial and economic, political and cultural. When the conflict is not faith-based, then it is a "man-made" conflagration that has an objective resolution to the satisfaction of all parties concerned.

 

For, as human beings are creatures of faith, when a conflict is crouched in religious overtones, people come to believe that there appears to be no easy avenues of resolution. For, faith invokes rigid adherence to precepts and commandments that operate to engineer opposition to externally imposed different creeds.

 

Thus, the word "Jihad" invoking Taliban and El Qaeda violence as being primarily from Muslim "religionists," tends to also imply that problems associated therewith will not be easily resolved, for they are matters of faith, as problems between Judaism and Islam, embodying the ineffective perspective on the Palestine conflict. Problems between Jews and Palestinians are not expressed as abstract religious concepts but rather as objective pains of daily living requiring available material solutions from the extant stock of Middle East resources.

 

Problems of violence, whether between the Irish and the British on the soil of Ireland, or between Jews and Arabs on the land of Palestine, can be constructively resolved when approached from their root-cause sources rather than from a "religious framework" whose psycho-affective dimensions cannot be uprooted as they are anchored in the fulfillment of the deepest of human needs. Conflicts ensue from real pains suffered that continue into the present, and not from purely abstract, conceptual, or imaginary wrongs, regardless of how far into the past the hostility might have originated. Present victims must have some objective affront continuing into the present to cling to, in order to foment discontent amongst the greater masses of the people, which cannot be solely religiously theological.

 

These conflicts appear to take a "religious cloak" because the grieving parties believe they have no other recourse, due to repeated complaints or petitions that apparently have been ignored. What Europeans, Americans, Jews and Arabs must understand is that, peoples, like the Irish and the Palestinians, who have had a long history of colonial occupation harbor the scars of wounded pride which confronts their spiritual and moral freedom with feelings of shame and guilt for the lack of economic development and the presence of ineffective political structures. The current situation only feeds these feelings of past colonial resentment as economic underdevelopment attests to the heretofore suppressed social impetus for creating wealth and prosperity.

 

These people feel, still, that colonial powers were responsible for these anomalies, which would not have taken root, were they not to have imposed their own imperial prerogatives upon the conquered peoples. The people of Palestine feel that their legitimate and just complaints regarding appropriate redress continue to fall on deaf ears. So do the Irish.

 

For all intents and purposes, since it is well-known, and always proclaimed, that the three major religions of the earth--Christianity, Judaism and Islam-- have the same ancestral spiritual roots, then aggrieved parties do not see themselves as having a "religious problem." How could they? Rightly so, freedom of religion is a human right and a spiritual endowment, and cannot be abrogated.

 

However, "religion" happens to be their last "life preserver." Yet, they blow themselves up in order to kill the enemy; and the enemy himself has his own religious rationalizations that fuel war hostilities. Religion, being an activity of the unassailable human spirit, only provides the last "place of refuge" for desperate measures tailored to attract attention to political, social and economic problems needing constructive and lawful resolution. From their sense of wounded history, they have inculcated their minds with the belief that they have "nothing left to lose"--until their legitimate grievances find listening ears for appropriate relief, especially when we are already there, in the Middle East, fighting two wars, one in Iraq and the other in Afghanistan, the causes of which, according to their own understanding, being related to past patterns of hostilities that had pegged us into the West-East camps, due to different "ethnic underpinnings," reminiscent of colonial history.

 

It is therefore not to our advantage to believe that these problems are rooted in religious strife, which appears to present intractable psycho-social parameters that defy understanding, and thus, tend to also elicit cynicism and resignation, even in our best efforts towards peace. Rather, the proper approach,--as in the case of Ireland, so too, the case of Palestine-- ought to be construed to be rooted in unresolved grievances suffered from a deep sense of internalized pain, now engendering great traumatic guilt, caused by the reality of past aggressive policies dating back to colonial expeditions, the effects of which, they believe, are with them, to this day. Problems that are objective in nature, and which have material solutions for appropriate redress, cannot be easily shoved under the rubric of "religion," or theologically explained away as arising from "faith conflicts."

 

In addition, the aggrieved parties in both Ireland and Palestine, feel that their legitimate grievances that aim at redressing objective injustices suffered, have been primarily ignored or "brushed aside" with abstract platitudes offered to both sides, but without concrete steps to remedy conditions yielding the disastrous and destructive consequences for national pride, economic development, political stability, and cultural tranquility.

 

Peoples in underdeveloped or undeveloped nations, after all, "must live with themselves." Economically developed nations have to understand that the peoples in the countries that are not developed are not immune to self-blame when deserved, but nor are they blind to histories of denied prosperity caused by external aggression that kept their energies engrossed in self-defense and apologetics for being "conquered peoples." Wounded pride and suppressed humanity leave deeper scars than externally caused material deprivation.

 

It would be better to approach these problems from the standpoint of "tort jurisprudence" in order to avoid the greater accusations of criminal injustice, which could be resolved through educationally attuned cultural exchanges for political restructuring towards representative government, and commensurate financial assistance for building economic infrastructure. Then, there would be light at the end of the tunnel for grievance remedy, conflict resolution, and peace negotiation.  For, suffered injustices could be amended by appropriate international actions that aim at re-establishing economic parity between the groups and representative government as political structure, which would restore ethnic pride and cultural self-esteem, the crucial foundations for launching social prosperity in the face of perceived "historical backwardness."

 

Quantity: Retail Price: $18.00 Web Price: $14.40ISBN 10: ISBN 13: 978-1-60899-252-2 Pages: 158 Binding: Paperback Publication Date: 01/01/2010 Street Date: 11/11/2009 Division: Resource Publications Category: Science

I thank you all for your participation in responding to my blog. God bless you. Have a wonderful thanksgiving. God bless the United States of America, the greatest nation the world has ever known! Please join in by helping a fellow blogger. Below is information on my newly published book STAR DEATH! You'll enjoy sci-fi at its greatest level of theory! Thank you.   WIPFANDSTOCK.COM PUBLISHERS    Star DeathBy Leo Emmanuel Lochard -Book Description Star Death is a science-based fiction book depicting "sun death" as revealed by the Prophets and as depicted by the Apostle Peter in the Holy Bible. It also parallels scientific estimations of solar entropy as forecast by major astrophysicists who have pushed Relativity Theory to its applicable limits. This book, based on real scientific theorization, is fresh in perspective and presents the laws of thermodynamics in a way never entertained before. The sun, reacting to inputs from the outer reaches of the Milky Way Galaxy, must therefore "negotiate" the "tugs of entropy"; it stretches its electromagnetic curtain to envelop the whole heliosphere into tumultuous radiation eruptions that extend even to the outer periphery of the solar system. Jupiter, Mercury, and the Earth convulse under tremendous pressures that impinge upon their mass and magnetic fields, respectively, to produce turbulence and perturbations uprooting the relative tranquility of the solar system. On the Earth, there is life, human life. Gravi-metric processes become chaotic and erratic so as to disrupt the daily routine of productive life. With impending "star death" came the imperative necessity to create a permanent, safe, space habitation for the human family. As "sun death" affected the whole human species, countries undertook to cooperate internationally in order to alleviate human suffering in the light of the possible extinction of the family of Man.

It has come to our attention that certain readers who disagree with specific points of view being freely expressed at TPM are engaging in attempted censorship disguised as senseless writings that are designed to clog or block (their own words) opinions and facts, the expression of which,  they cannot prevent, such as the red writings on TPM Cafe in which the writer proposes that his intention is to block or clog TPM Cafe with so-called writings until the post they object to is thrown off the screen. That is not a wise and constructive approach to mutual communication. I would suggest that writers reply to the post in a manner that conveys their opposition to views expressed therein rather than engage in this deceitful and evil method of displacing views they object to. Thank you. God bless you.  Leo Emmanuel Lochard

Promoting a Failed System Leads to Cosmic Disasters

 

Inasmuch as we love our Jewish friends and support our Hebrew allies, there is however a foolish movement in American Christianity to promote patterns of conduct exemplified in the Old Testament as demonstration of that love and support.

     Such a misguided approach has led to convoluted exegesis that fail to recognize the words of God himself concerning the Israelites whom current Christian theologians are driving Christian congregations to emulate. It is as if AIPAC was preaching the sermon rather than a Christian preacher. Many electronic preachers even display the flag of the United States with the flag of current physical Israel right on the stage, while excluding the Christian flag.

    Electronic preachers continue to motivate the flock into adopting attitudes displayed under the Old Covenant where Scriptures tell us, as the Apostle Paul reminds us, that the Old Covenant was a "custodian" in accordance with which God allowed certain things to happen; and that now, men are without excuse. You cannot "name it and claim it" when the property lawfully already belongs to somebody else--otherwise, it's called theft.

    For example, they keep preaching that the wealth of the wicked is laid up for the just and the illustration they use is that when the Egyptians let the Israelites go, the Israelites left Egypt with all the gold and silver and expensive cloth etc. . . But Christian theologians then exercise a form of amnesia in forgetting that Moses had not received the Ten Commandments yet, that the Israelites were steeped in pagan rituals which caused them to violate Jehovah's priestly instructions. What did they do with the gold with which they had exited Egypt? Well, the Holy Bible, in Genesis written by Moses, tells us that the Israelites then under the leadership of Aaron, Moses's brother, built themselves a golden calf to worship while carousing and engaging in debauchery and sinful abominations--they were not worshipping Jehovah who had just freed them.     

    Meanwhile, God is giving the commandments to Moses on Mt. Sinai. As Moses was absent from the encampment while receiving the Law on tablets of stone, when he descended from the mountain, he found the Israelite camp in chaos, anarchy and immoral godlessness. Twenty-three thousand Israelites died in the desert that day as punishment for their sins, transgressions, trespasses and iniquities against almighty God.

    Christian ministers seeking lessons from the Old Testament seldom drive their teachings to their logical, spiritual and moral conclusions as stated in the Holy Bible due to their misguided blind allegiance to supporting the physical Israeli cause in the Middle East, i.e., land acquisitions etc. . .

    We all desire a peaceful Middle East wherein Jews and Arabs live side by side as brotherly neighbors. These descendants of faithful Abraham need the love of Jesus Christ in their hearts, not the enmity of partiality and partisanship that blinds them both to the opportunities of Christian salvation.

    Christian ministers have not managed to know how to ally themselves with the Israelis without diluting the Gospel of Christ whom the Israelis as well as the Arabs still reject. They have forgotten that Moses himself, King David and all the Prophets convicted the Israelites as being a stubborn, stiff-necked and rebellious people whom God had to chastise so many times due to their refusal to abide by God's commandments--they had always wanted a king or form of government that would allow them to behave like all the other nations that surrounded them, that is, to make war, conquer territory, levy taxes, own slaves, etc . . . Please read Samuel's testimony in the Books of Kings. At their initial request for a king, God had rejected their demand, but finally conceded that they had not rejected Samuel the priest, but rather God himself as their king.

    From Saul to David, and a host of kings that succeeded them, the kingdom had always been divided from within, which caused a great chasm within the Israelite people, as the whole kingdom finally disintegrated into the Northern Kingdom and Judah in the South. Since then, the Israelites never achieved a unified kingdom or government, even up until the time the Romans invaded Palestine. Because of their rebellious disobedience of God's commandments, Israelites ended up in captivity to the Egyptians, Babylonians, Medo-Persia, Assyrians, Greeks, and finally, at the time of Christ's coming, Palestine had been under occupation by the Roman Empire.

    In sum, Christian theologians bending backwards to demonstrate their support for the current State of Israel engage in convoluted scriptural exegesis as they attempt to muster a form of appreciation for Old Testament Israelites that not only conflicts with God's indictment of their conduct but also completely disregards today's unspiritual adventures of current Israelis in Middle East geo-political affairs.

    We have been thrown into this conflict between Jews and Arabs, which has cost us very dearly in terms of American lives, resources and expenditures. And only God knows how long we will be in Iraq and Afghanistan. If the problem is a spiritual one, then Christian ministers ought to preach the Gospel of Christ with partiality to none and openness to all. For God shows no partiality. (Romans 2:11.) Current members of physical Israel, in the Middle East, should have been members of our common Christian family a long time ago, as members of the Israel of God. The deceitfulness of the devil has hindered them in spirit, mind, soul, heart and will. But many of them will be saved, before the end of the age comes, as prophesied in the Holy Bible.

    Biblical history reminds us that God had to keep a faithful remnant continuously under his careful blessings, as the majority of Israelites failed to keep God's commandments, thrown to and fro into the godlessness of earthly concerns that contradicted the pattern of ownership God had set in motion for them. They were the "carriers of the tradition" whose truth had climaxed into the coming of Christ as Messiah, hence, Jesus's response to Pilate when Pilate asked him "What is truth?"

    God had desired the Israelites hold him as their heavenly and earthly king, until Messiah would arrive to fulfill the whole law and the Prophets by whose miraculous works the Old Covenant would mature into world-wide prophetic materialization as the New Covenant of love, merci, righteousness, legal prosperity, and lawful liberty. The Israelites were not allowed to have an earthly kingdom in order that their mission on the earth to enlighten all tongues, tribes and nations regarding God's covenanted relationships, in their "chosen position" as God's children, would have no competition, until such a time God would decide that the harvest was ripe for sending Messiah. Mission accomplished and fulfilled in the coming of Jesus Christ. Then, as the Gospel is preached, known, received and believed throughout the world, children of God in Christ, from all tribes, tongues and nations, become the "priesthood of believers" and the "chosen generation."

    It never worked out that way--Israelites had failed to acknowledge their universal mission for God on the earth. The Israelites always succumbed to the quest for earthly power, riches, land, conquest, and warfare, which God punished by engendering conditions for eventual captivity, in the aftermath of which God saved a faithful remnant to accomplish his purposes for humankind.

    The Book of Hebrews, Chapter 11, explains how by their faith, the righteous and the remnant, had gained God's favor; by knowing that their obedience to God's commandments had embodied a greater purpose to redeem, not just the Hebrew people group, but also all of humankind. And throughout the Gospels, openness of the Scriptures to all tribes, tongues and nations, provided the means by which all peoples would become acquainted with God's greater plan of salvation for humanity as well as with God's righteous means and instruments for transforming their lives into creative, constructive moral productivity.

    In Hebrews 8:13, the Apostle Paul proclaimed the Old Covenant obsolete, as it was fading away due to God having fulfilled all promises and all commandments via the birth, life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, as Messiah, for both Jews and Gentiles--now as the Israel of God, embodying God's plan of righteous, prosperous and peaceful living on the earth for all peoples.

    The major theme in the Old Testament is that God had given the Law to the Israelites, through Moses, in order that they, as a people group, might be brought to faithful righteousness, so that God would prepare the way for sending Messiah to redeem and deliver all humankind from sin, death, Satan and hell. Current dwellers in physical Israel have failed to recognize the universal purpose for which God had willfully chosen their forebears. That universal mission has been fulfilled also for their benefit, as in their becoming members of the Israel of God (Galatians 6.) God had always reminded them that their "status of chosen people" had not been due to their good behavior but rather due to the goodness of God who overlooked their human frailties in order to accomplish his greater plan of salvation for humanity as a whole.

    Since at that time all nations were pagan godless tribal societies, God had to begin somewhere; thus God chose one people group among many. For we must remember that Abram was originally from Ur, of the Chaldees, Chaldea, then in the Babylonian Empire--configured now in a region that falls within the international borders of Turkey, Iran and Iraq. All descendants of Abram whose name God changed to Abraham ("father of many nations") were Hebrews; and it is later on, that some acquired the name of Jews and others the name of Arabs, due to differences in location, culture, language and religion, etc . . ., and due to Satan deceiving them both with strife, enmity and warfare. Spiritual wickedness in the heavenly realms or spiritual places is as real as a bacterial infection that debilitates the human organism by sabotaging immuno-metabolic efficiency.

    In times such as these, it is necessary that electronic preachers and Christian theologians understand that they cannot dilute the Gospel in order to cater to their geo-political preferences, lest their sermons of health and wealth be misunderstood as assent to unwarranted Israeli aggression against Arabs in the Middle East. The rule of law has been established for legal prosperity. And lawful prosperity is not "divinely ordained aggression;" nor is prosperity obtained through military conquest of lands and resources that already belong to other peoples. Christian ministers err greatly in not being able to separate their sympathy for physical Jewish causes, from the greater plan of God to save all peoples from strife, warfare, poverty, bloodshed and injustice through the loving redemption of Jesus Christ.

    The Apostle Paul, by God's Holy Spirit, reminds us that we, both Jews and Gentiles, who have been born again, who have converted to Christianity, who recognize Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior, from all tribes, tongues and nations, are the Israel of God (Galatians 6); that we represent spiritual Israel, the embodiment of God's heavenly purposes for humanity; and that uncircumcision of the flesh or circumcision of the flesh counts for nothing, for God had desired "circumcision of the heart," from the beginning, that is, rejection of wickedness, evil, and godless idolatry; in sum, that faithful Christians or spiritual Israel, whether Jew or Gentile in ancestry, are now ambassadors for Christ, and representatives of God, to embody the will of heavenly design for human living on the earth as children of God (John 1:1-14.) That was God's plan for the people group called "Israelites," from the beginning, and is still God's purpose to redeem as many will believe in the saving plan he established by the coming of his son Jesus Christ.

    The physical temple of stone in geographical Jerusalem was destroyed in A.D. 70 by the Roman Empire, and there is no prophecy or commandment to rebuild it thereafter, for we, human beings who have received the Holy Spirit of God in Christ, Messiah Jesus, have become God's real temple, as prophesied from the beginning; hence, the revelation that the ark of the covenant and God's temple were in heaven (Revelation 11:19; 14:17; 21:22.) And the Jerusalem, of which the Apostle John speaks, in Revelation, is from heaven or from above, and not a geographical, physical Jerusalem captured out of contention, warfare, conquest and strife. (Revelation 21.) 

    There is no recognition in the Holy Bible for a physical kingdom of Israel as the purposes of God for instituting a "nation of Israel" or the "Israelite people" had been already fulfilled by sending Messiah to descend from the righteous faithful remnant, among whose members were Abraham, Moses, Isaac, the Prophets, David, the Virgin Mary, Joseph her husband, the Apostles etc . . . through whom God accomplished his purpose and plan, for all of us Jews and Gentiles, more than two thousand years ago, in short, for all of humankind.

    Terms that had expressed God's promises of a new heaven and a new earth where righteousness dwells, in the Old Testament, such as Zion and Beulah land, are newly fulfilled in names such as "the Jerusalem from above," in the New Testament, as conceptual encapsulations of God fulfilling his plans for humanity,--that they shall live in peace, love, prosperity, justice, liberty, equality and righteousness rather than in warfare, enmity, hostility, bloodshed and strife.

    Electronic preachers, Christian theologians and ministers must understand that the Old Covenant has been fulfilled and that physical Zionists of today have no heavenly purpose as far as the Old Testament and the New Testament are concerned, except that a certain number of Judaic Jews,--a number that denotes "completeness" or "fulfillment" in numerology such as "one hundred and forty-four thousand," which is a multiple of twelve,--will come to know Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior (Revelation 7) before or during end-time events that will announce the fulfillment of God's purposes for the Age.

    In short, today's physical Zionists are descendants of Abraham, as we are, but who had failed to understand the universal purposes of God for themselves--as those who had built the golden calf in the desert while God was giving the law to Moses on Mt. Sinai, after God had delivered them out of Egypt. These "modern" descendants of Abraham failed to know God's plan for them as the embodiment of God's universal mission that they would teach the whole world regarding God's merciful grace and righteous salvation through the coming of Messiah who would transform all tongues, tribes and nations into spiritual descendants of faithful Abraham as children of God living together in a new earth where righteousness dwells.

    We do pray that Jews in Israel, Jews around the world, Arabs in the Middle East and around the world, as well as Christians in America and around the world, come to realize the greater universal purposes God had for sending Jesus Christ as the savior of all humanity wherein all descendants of "father of faith," Abraham,--Jews, Christians and Arabs,--can enjoy peaceful and prosperous living in Christ, on the earth where righteousness will indeed dwell.

Promoting a Failed System Leads to Cosmic Disasters

 

Inasmuch as we love our Jewish friends and support our Hebrew allies, there is however a foolish movement in American Christianity to promote patterns of conduct exemplified in the Old Testament as demonstration of that love and support.

     Such a misguided approach has led to convoluted exegesis that fail to recognize the words of God himself concerning the Israelites whom current Christian theologians are driving Christian congregations to emulate. It is as if AIPAC was preaching the sermon rather than a Christian preacher. Many electronic preachers even display the flag of the United States with the flag of current physical Israel right on the stage, while excluding the Christian flag.

    Electronic preachers continue to motivate the flock into adopting attitudes displayed under the Old Covenant where Scriptures tell us, as the Apostle Paul reminds us, that the Old Covenant was a "custodian" in accordance with which God allowed certain things to happen; and that now, men are without excuse. You cannot "name it and claim it" when the property lawfully already belongs to somebody else--otherwise, it's called theft.

    For example, they keep preaching that the wealth of the wicked is laid up for the just and the illustration they use is that when the Egyptians let the Israelites go, the Israelites left Egypt with all the gold and silver and expensive cloth etc. . . But Christian theologians then exercise a form of amnesia in forgetting that Moses had not received the Ten Commandments yet, that the Israelites were steeped in pagan rituals which caused them to violate Jehovah's priestly instructions. What did they do with the gold with which they had exited Egypt? Well, the Holy Bible, in Genesis written by Moses, tells us that the Israelites then under the leadership of Aaron, Moses's brother, built themselves a golden calf to worship while carousing and engaging in debauchery and sinful abominations--they were not worshipping Jehovah who had just freed them.     

    Meanwhile, God is giving the commandments to Moses on Mt. Sinai. As Moses was absent from the encampment while receiving the Law on tablets of stone, when he descended from the mountain, he found the Israelite camp in chaos, anarchy and immoral godlessness. Twenty-three thousand Israelites died in the desert that day as punishment for their sins, transgressions, trespasses and iniquities against almighty God.

    Christian ministers seeking lessons from the Old Testament seldom drive their teachings to their logical, spiritual and moral conclusions as stated in the Holy Bible due to their misguided blind allegiance to supporting the physical Israeli cause in the Middle East, i.e., land acquisitions etc. . .

    We all desire a peaceful Middle East wherein Jews and Arabs live side by side as brotherly neighbors. These descendants of faithful Abraham need the love of Jesus Christ in their hearts, not the enmity of partiality and partisanship that blinds them both to the opportunities of Christian salvation.

    Christian ministers have not managed to know how to ally themselves with the Israelis without diluting the Gospel of Christ whom the Israelis as well as the Arabs still reject. They have forgotten that Moses himself, King David and all the Prophets convicted the Israelites as being a stubborn, stiff-necked and rebellious people whom God had to chastise so many times due to their refusal to abide by God's commandments--they had always wanted a king or form of government that would allow them to behave like all the other nations that surrounded them, that is, to make war, conquer territory, levy taxes, own slaves, etc . . . Please read Samuel's testimony in the Books of Kings. At their initial request for a king, God had rejected their demand, but finally conceded that they had not rejected Samuel the priest, but rather God himself as their king.

    From Saul to David, and a host of kings that succeeded them, the kingdom had always been divided from within, which caused a great chasm within the Israelite people, as the whole kingdom finally disintegrated into the Northern Kingdom and Judah in the South. Since then, the Israelites never achieved a unified kingdom or government, even up until the time the Romans invaded Palestine. Because of their rebellious disobedience of God's commandments, Israelites ended up in captivity to the Egyptians, Babylonians, Medo-Persia, Assyrians, Greeks, and finally, at the time of Christ's coming, Palestine had been under occupation by the Roman Empire.

    In sum, Christian theologians bending backwards to demonstrate their support for the current State of Israel engage in convoluted scriptural exegesis as they attempt to muster a form of appreciation for Old Testament Israelites that not only conflicts with God's indictment of their conduct but also completely disregards today's unspiritual adventures of current Israelis in Middle East geo-political affairs.

    We have been thrown into this conflict between Jews and Arabs, which has cost us very dearly in terms of American lives, resources and expenditures. And only God knows how long we will be in Iraq and Afghanistan. If the problem is a spiritual one, then Christian ministers ought to preach the Gospel of Christ with partiality to none and openness to all. For God shows no partiality. (Romans 2:11.) Current members of physical Israel, in the Middle East, should have been members of our common Christian family a long time ago, as members of the Israel of God. The deceitfulness of the devil has hindered them in spirit, mind, soul, heart and will. But many of them will be saved, before the end of the age comes, as prophesied in the Holy Bible.

    Biblical history reminds us that God had to keep a faithful remnant continuously under his careful blessings, as the majority of Israelites failed to keep God's commandments, thrown to and fro into the godlessness of earthly concerns that contradicted the pattern of ownership God had set in motion for them. They were the "carriers of the tradition" whose truth had climaxed into the coming of Christ as Messiah, hence, Jesus's response to Pilate when Pilate asked him "What is truth?"

    God had desired the Israelites hold him as their heavenly and earthly king, until Messiah would arrive to fulfill the whole law and the Prophets by whose miraculous works the Old Covenant would mature into world-wide prophetic materialization as the New Covenant of love, merci, righteousness, legal prosperity, and lawful liberty. The Israelites were not allowed to have an earthly kingdom in order that their mission on the earth to enlighten all tongues, tribes and nations regarding God's covenanted relationships, in their "chosen position" as God's children, would have no competition, until such a time God would decide that the harvest was ripe for sending Messiah. Mission accomplished and fulfilled in the coming of Jesus Christ. Then, as the Gospel is preached, known, received and believed throughout the world, children of God in Christ, from all tribes, tongues and nations, become the "priesthood of believers" and the "chosen generation."

    It never worked out that way--Israelites had failed to acknowledge their universal mission for God on the earth. The Israelites always succumbed to the quest for earthly power, riches, land, conquest, and warfare, which God punished by engendering conditions for eventual captivity, in the aftermath of which God saved a faithful remnant to accomplish his purposes for humankind.

    The Book of Hebrews, Chapter 11, explains how by their faith, the righteous and the remnant, had gained God's favor; by knowing that their obedience to God's commandments had embodied a greater purpose to redeem, not just the Hebrew people group, but also all of humankind. And throughout the Gospels, openness of the Scriptures to all tribes, tongues and nations, provided the means by which all peoples would become acquainted with God's greater plan of salvation for humanity as well as with God's righteous means and instruments for transforming their lives into creative, constructive moral productivity.

    In Hebrews 8:13, the Apostle Paul proclaimed the Old Covenant obsolete, as it was fading away due to God having fulfilled all promises and all commandments via the birth, life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, as Messiah, for both Jews and Gentiles--now as the Israel of God, embodying God's plan of righteous, prosperous and peaceful living on the earth for all peoples.

    The major theme in the Old Testament is that God had given the Law to the Israelites, through Moses, in order that they, as a people group, might be brought to faithful righteousness, so that God would prepare the way for sending Messiah to redeem and deliver all humankind from sin, death, Satan and hell. Current dwellers in physical Israel have failed to recognize the universal purpose for which God had willfully chosen their forebears. That universal mission has been fulfilled also for their benefit, as in their becoming members of the Israel of God (Galatians 6.) God had always reminded them that their "status of chosen people" had not been due to their good behavior but rather due to the goodness of God who overlooked their human frailties in order to accomplish his greater plan of salvation for humanity as a whole.

    Since at that time all nations were pagan godless tribal societies, God had to begin somewhere; thus God chose one people group among many. For we must remember that Abram was originally from Ur, of the Chaldees, Chaldea, then in the Babylonian Empire--configured now in a region that falls within the international borders of Turkey, Iran and Iraq. All descendants of Abram whose name God changed to Abraham ("father of many nations") were Hebrews; and it is later on, that some acquired the name of Jews and others the name of Arabs, due to differences in location, culture, language and religion, etc . . ., and due to Satan deceiving them both with strife, enmity and warfare. Spiritual wickedness in the heavenly realms or spiritual places is as real as a bacterial infection that debilitates the human organism by sabotaging immuno-metabolic efficiency.

    In times such as these, it is necessary that electronic preachers and Christian theologians understand that they cannot dilute the Gospel in order to cater to their geo-political preferences, lest their sermons of health and wealth be misunderstood as assent to unwarranted Israeli aggression against Arabs in the Middle East. The rule of law has been established for legal prosperity. And lawful prosperity is not "divinely ordained aggression;" nor is prosperity obtained through military conquest of lands and resources that already belong to other peoples. Christian ministers err greatly in not being able to separate their sympathy for physical Jewish causes, from the greater plan of God to save all peoples from strife, warfare, poverty, bloodshed and injustice through the loving redemption of Jesus Christ.

    The Apostle Paul, by God's Holy Spirit, reminds us that we, both Jews and Gentiles, who have been born again, who have converted to Christianity, who recognize Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior, from all tribes, tongues and nations, are the Israel of God (Galatians 6); that we represent spiritual Israel, the embodiment of God's heavenly purposes for humanity; and that uncircumcision of the flesh or circumcision of the flesh counts for nothing, for God had desired "circumcision of the heart," from the beginning, that is, rejection of wickedness, evil, and godless idolatry; in sum, that faithful Christians or spiritual Israel, whether Jew or Gentile in ancestry, are now ambassadors for Christ, and representatives of God, to embody the will of heavenly design for human living on the earth as children of God (John 1:1-14.) That was God's plan for the people group called "Israelites," from the beginning, and is still God's purpose to redeem as many will believe in the saving plan he established by the coming of his son Jesus Christ.

    The physical temple of stone in geographical Jerusalem was destroyed in A.D. 70 by the Roman Empire, and there is no prophecy or commandment to rebuild it thereafter, for we, human beings who have received the Holy Spirit of God in Christ, Messiah Jesus, have become God's real temple, as prophesied from the beginning; hence, the revelation that the ark of the covenant and God's temple were in heaven (Revelation 11:19; 14:17; 21:22.) And the Jerusalem, of which the Apostle John speaks, in Revelation, is from heaven or from above, and not a geographical, physical Jerusalem captured out of contention, warfare, conquest and strife. (Revelation 21.) 

    There is no recognition in the Holy Bible for a physical kingdom of Israel as the purposes of God for instituting a "nation of Israel" or the "Israelite people" had been already fulfilled by sending Messiah to descend from the righteous faithful remnant, among whose members were Abraham, Moses, Isaac, the Prophets, David, the Virgin Mary, Joseph her husband, the Apostles etc . . . through whom God accomplished his purpose and plan, for all of us Jews and Gentiles, more than two thousand years ago, in short, for all of humankind.

    Terms that had expressed God's promises of a new heaven and a new earth where righteousness dwells, in the Old Testament, such as Zion and Beulah land, are newly fulfilled in names such as "the Jerusalem from above," in the New Testament, as conceptual encapsulations of God fulfilling his plans for humanity,--that they shall live in peace, love, prosperity, justice, liberty, equality and righteousness rather than in warfare, enmity, hostility, bloodshed and strife.

    Electronic preachers, Christian theologians and ministers must understand that the Old Covenant has been fulfilled and that physical Zionists of today have no heavenly purpose as far as the Old Testament and the New Testament are concerned, except that a certain number of Judaic Jews,--a number that denotes "completeness" or "fulfillment" in numerology such as "one hundred and forty-four thousand," which is a multiple of twelve,--will come to know Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior (Revelation 7) before or during end-time events that will announce the fulfillment of God's purposes for the Age.

    In short, today's physical Zionists are descendants of Abraham, as we are, but who had failed to understand the universal purposes of God for themselves--as those who had built the golden calf in the desert while God was giving the law to Moses on Mt. Sinai, after God had delivered them out of Egypt. These "modern" descendants of Abraham failed to know God's plan for them as the embodiment of God's universal mission that they would teach the whole world regarding God's merciful grace and righteous salvation through the coming of Messiah who would transform all tongues, tribes and nations into spiritual descendants of faithful Abraham as children of God living together in a new earth where righteousness dwells.

    We do pray that Jews in Israel, Jews around the world, Arabs in the Middle East and around the world, as well as Christians in America and around the world, come to realize the greater universal purposes God had for sending Jesus Christ as the savior of all humanity wherein all descendants of "father of faith," Abraham,--Jews, Christians and Arabs,--can enjoy peaceful and prosperous living in Christ, on the earth where righteousness will indeed dwell.

Obama critics like Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck are not "racist."

Facts all of you desire to ignore is that every president in the United States of America has received criticism during his presidency regarding policies the American people disagreed with.

How come Hillary Clinton did not make it as the presidential nominee of the Democratic Party when she had clearly won the popular vote? You would cringe, rant and rave if you heard the real truth from me. You would no longer call it "psychoanalysis." Why did white liberal democrats want a "black president" first, before a white woman president?

Check this out! Were our white liberal students "white haters" because when they protested against the Vietnam War white-Johnson and white-Nixon were president, respectively? This would be illogical nonsense, wouldn't it?
Ridiculous? Were the Blacks who demonstrated in the streets for their civil rights all "white haters" as well?

One day soon a woman will become president--will every American male who criticizes her policies be accused of being "woman haters?"

One day a Hispanic American will be president who will have policies attracting opposition--will you then accuse every dissenting American of being "anti-Hispanic?"

Then an Asian American will be president etc . . .

You might as well "rewind the tape" and save it for those future times! Unless you come to your senses and recognize that public officials are not kings or nobles here -- that they will get criticized regardless of their gender, ethnicity or race.

O! You will accuse dissenters and critics of being "racist" only if these "minority" presidents are liberal leftist "democrats" like you? You would rather have the silence of the cemetary and the pollyannaish adulation of the graveyard in order that your atonement-candidate of choice succeed at all costs?

I don't see you advocate we should return all the lands we stole from the American Indians since 1492; but rather you engage in such hypocritical exercises as to adopt some of their "primitive" (your words) religious beliefs - like "trees have spirits" -- as if this would right all the wrongs they've suffered! Spin management! Yes, the so-called "new age religion" put together Hindu philosophy (cycle of life, reincarnation etc...)and American Indian religion in order to pretend all historical wrongs have been righted by simply engaging in some "window dressing" and "crowd pleasing" gyrations to which all liberals then subscribe. McDonald hamburgers are still pretty good, aren't they?

Political correctness is spiritual terrorism -only spin management while propped-up spinmeisters are making a lot of money by having liberals toe the line with your deceptions -- Al Gore has made 100 million dollars from "global warming" while millions of Americans are unemployed.

Your accusations are so spurious. Mark my words, one of these days you will complain that the White House should change its name to the "Black House," or to some other name in order to become more politically correct! Yes, it's going to happen because leftist liberals push their aberrant political ideology to ad absurdum conclusions that border on the edge on inanity.

It is not right to dehumanize people like Rush Limbaugh or Glenn Beck, or people who attended the "tea parties," just because they oppose the administration's policies. That's the American way -- free exercise of inalienable political free speech rights!

It is not right to disparage Fox news because it disagrees with administration policies. The news they broadcast is as real as CNN. Fox News then, is real news.

And CNN and other news organizations are no more real news than Fox News just because they agree with Obama's policies. In that sense, CNN, ABC and NBC might as well move their headquarters to the White House. The only reason administration officials praise CNN, is because CNN reporters don't devote time to critical analysis of their policies to the same extent they assaulted previous republican administrations; but rather, CNN, ABC and NBC spew out benign soporifics intended to sustain an unspoken agreement for adulation of the atonement-candidate-of-choice to which they mentally submit while fantasizing all of the American people should "park their brains" and just "pad themselves on the back" for having elected a "minority", or rather, "their minority" to the White House.

In a representative democracy based upon self-government where the people ELECT their public officials, things work differently in reality. Political criticism demonstrates a vibrant representative government where "government of the people, by the people and for the people" remains responsive to the real needs of We, the People!

Read more »

A misunderstanding that prevails in the secular media and amongst leftists at large, regards the origin of the concept of "separation of Church and State" and its intended meaning.

This phrase or concept does NOT appear anywhere in the Constitution of the United States, which is the supreme law of the land.

This concept was birthed by Thomas Jefferson in a letter he wrote to Danbury Baptist Association in the State of Connecticut, dated January 1, 1802, while he was President of the United States. That letter was meticulously worded to protect our religious institutions against government encroachment, on the one hand, and on the other hand, to oppose the British model where there is a Church of England, or, otherwise a "government church," whereby the king or queen is the primary "head" or "minister."

Jefferson may have chosen a peculiar way to institute such a protection by using himself as an example-- as "head of state,"-- but to him, it was the proper thing to do, in the most befitting way, since he, himself, was the President of the United States.

Thus, as he thought, what greater affirmation or validation could the church obtain than to receive support and agreement for freedom of religion and liberty of conscience from the highest office in the land!

Leftist liberals would be hard pressed in their attempts to turn Jefferson's remark on its head by submitting the opposite view--for the fact is, Thomas Jefferson was a friend and helper of the church and not its enemy.

Here is an excerpt from that letter, "I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that THEIR legislature should MAKE NO LAW RESPECTING AN ESTABLISHMENT OF RELIGION, OR PROHIBITING THE FREE EXERCISE THEREOF, THUS BUILDING A WALL OF SEPARATION BETWEEN CHURCH AND STATE."

So, as you see, Jefferson was writing from the standpoint of PROTECTING churches from local, state and federal government intrusion in their affairs of faith and practice, in that government cannot make any law regarding religion at all, for that it is a matter of private conscience and right to freely worship. The "wall" was to keep government out in the sense of, no government interference, but it was not to keep faith out of government.

"The wall of separation"--a "wall" so to speak, erected between religion and government by the Constitution--was to keep government out of church affairs as the pillar of freedom of worship, and not to prevent citizens from knowing and learning, praying and practicing their faith in America. 

Nor was "the wall of separation" intended to abrogate the faith of public servants and to inhibit religious practice by individual public officials working in government. Public officials work in government and serve in government, but they, themselves, in person, are NOT the government. This misunderstanding must be cleared up--public servants, civil servants and government employees are still private citizens with full enjoyment of their Bill of Rights, but working in government as they "protect, defend and preserve the Constitution of the United States."

For how can government service take away rights when government itself has been instituted "to secure these rights?"  Would not these government employees working for the people of the United States be compelled to destroy their very own rights, as well as the rights of their neighbors, as citizen-employees?

To the contrary, Jefferson encouraged religious faith and practice as President, for he had participated in writing the Declaration of Independence wherein he credits our Creator as the sole Author of our inalienable rights. And in addition, the Constitution was ratified "in the year of our Lord," 1787.

Again, an excerpt from the letter to Danbury Baptist Association in Jefferson's own words, "I reciprocate your kind prayers for the protection and blessing of the common Father and creator of man, and tender you for yourselves and your religious association, assurances of my high respect & esteem." He is saying, "I am praying with you for God's protection and blessing."

So, you see, even Jefferson, as President offered prayers in his correspondence with the Danbury Baptist Association.

In addition, see the context here, which is important, for, Jefferson wanted to distinguish religion as practiced in America from religion as practiced in Britain-- whereby the Church of England or the Anglican Church of which the British king or queen is the head of state, was the "official State religion."

Here is where Jefferson expressed his sentiment of caution, "I have refrained from presenting even occasional performances of devotion presented indeed legally WHERE AN EXECUTIVE IS THE LEGAL HEAD OF A NATIONAL CHURCH."

Again, you see, Jefferson stated that even when he practices his faith publicly, it is indeed legal, but not as the "legal head of a national church." He would not attend service at the Church of England when it is well known that the queen or king is the legal head of that national church, even though his attendance there to worship would be legal.

Thus, Jefferson wanted to emphasize that there is NO "United States of America Church" with the President as head-pontificate, as compared to the British system where the king or queen is the head-pontificate, even when he legally opts to engage in "occasional performances of devotion."

And that was the context of the "wall of separation" between church and state.

Therefore, the context of "thus building a wall of separation between church and state," per the original meaning intended by Thomas Jefferson in his letter to Danbury Baptist Association, in Connecticut, was that:

    1)  government must have a "hands off" policy regarding religion; it cannot make any law respecting its establishment or practice;
    

     2)  there is no "official government church" in the United States of America; in England there is the Church of England, but here there can never be "the Church of federal government" in America, with government dictating matters of faith and religious practice
    

     3)  all Americans in every capacity, have the inalienable rights to practice their faith and religion in accordance with the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, regardless of their profession or employment;                                                                                                                                        

    4)  given that government is instituted to protect citizens' inalienable rights, public officials, civil servants and government employees do not lose their civil and religious rights just because they enter a building designated as "public building" or "government building, or just because their employer happens to be "government."

In short, just because you go to public school or are employed by government, you don't leave your rights, at the door; just because you are in a government building, you don't stop being an American.

Otherwise, there would have been an insoluble contradiction--for the Constitution says you have freedom of religion; but when you are employed by government or when you enter a public building, your rights would evaporate? That would not make sense at all. Then, whose rights is government instituted to protect--if not yours, the public employee, also?

Consequently, the main point is that, for example, the governor of a State cannot declare that the State has opened a "government church" with the governor as "head-minister." In the same manner, the federal government cannot proclaim the opening of a "government church of the United States" with the president or the speaker of the house as "ministers." This, is the context Jefferson wanted to convey. And that is the context of Jefferson's letter in coining the phrase, concept or statement: "building a wall of separation between church and state."

Remember, Jefferson's intention was to sustain the security and protections for religious freedom that are already guaranteed for ALL Americans and persons within the jurisdiction of the Constitution and laws of the United States of America, in all places and for all time, and not to destroy the very foundation for the existence of government itself, which is, "to secure these rights."

 

OMINOUS DANGERS WITH "TREATIES"

 

     The President of the United States is constitutionally empowered to "make treaties" with the advice and consent of the Senate. Article II to the Constitution of the United States reads:

      "He shall have power, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, to make treaties, provided two-thirds of the senators present concur;"

  Article VI, Constitution of the United States of America reads (with emphasis):

 "This constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; AND ALL TREATIES made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, SHALL BE THE SUPREME LAW OF THE LAND; and the judges in very state shall be bound thereby any thing in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding."

So, you see, the major problem with treaties is that they have as much weight as the Constitution of the United States, in that treaty provisions, per Article VI to the Constitution of the United States, supersede the specific laws of each and every State in this Union, and State judges must obey treaty provisions regardless of State or local laws to the contrary.

This provision of Article VI appears to conflict with Amendments IX, X and XI. In Amendments IX and X, powers not delegated to the federal government are retained by the people or the States, respectively. And in Amendment XI, even the judicial power of the United States is restricted in scope so as not to extend "to any suit in law or equity . . . commenced or prosecuted against one of the United States . . . by Citizens or Subjects of any Foreign State." This Amendment was intended to prevent federal courts from acting in favor of a particular State against the rights of individual citizens, so that justice may be properly obtained. However, there is the "other side of the coin."

Since Article VI prevents the Supreme Court of the United States from intervening on behalf of a State, even if that State is sued at law or equity in a treaty-related legal action commenced or prosecuted against it by "Citizens or Subjects of any Foreign State," then who shall protect a State of this Union against treaty provisions that violate that State's constitution or the inalienable substantive or due process rights of citizens thereof?

There is a grave danger looming over the heads of individual citizens, with our leftist representatives or senators running to the United Nations to promote "treaties" that both internationally and domestically undermine the constitutional and parental rights of all Americans,--such as the so-called "rights of the child,"--because the policies therein could never pass constitutional muster were they to be proposed in State legislatures or Congress.

In that so-called "U.N. legislation," they intend to change the age at which a child is considered a minor, to so-called "empower" children for legal actions in courts of law, as well as changing the very foundation of American self-government whereby parental authority in directing children's spiritual, moral, vocational and professional education cannot be abrogated.

In short, in the United Nations, leftist fanatics are attempting to transfer adult rights to immature and innocent children who do not even have the capacity to understand or apply these legal obfuscations, except that their devolution will have been controlled by self-interested adults obsessed with taking control of those children's lives, hence, their camouflaged advocacy to make children "enemies" of their parents. U.N. personnel and their respective treaty representatives in member countries would therefore have more rights over American children than the American parents of those American children.

American children do not belong to NGOs or "non-governmental organizations," nor to elected politicians who can be "booted out of office," nor to delegates from United Nations member countries.

 In addition, there are problems occurring in other parts of the world which Americans have already resolved here, by the rule of law, such as "child labor," "child slavery," "child sexual abuse," etc . . . And if these instances require United Nations action in other countries where these odious problems still exist, then the U.N. has to work with those respective nations in order to undertake local policies that address resolution of those crimes against children. But the U.N. or parasitic NGOs cannot "lump" all children all over the world into one "grab bag," in order to extend their tentacles in power grabs from which they will certainly profit. American parental rights are inalienable and must be faithfully preserved.

In all these instances, it is necessary to remain vigilant so as to protect American sovereignty, and by that, secure protection for the inalienable rights of all American parents which are already guarantied by the Constitution of the United States and its Bill of Rights.

THE "MIDDLE" DECEPTION

 

                                       T    h    e        M    a    j    o    r    i    t    y _____

            Extreme Left                                                               Extreme Right

         (Fringe groups)                                                                (Fringe groups)

        (Outer-edge individuals)                                              (Outer-edge individuals)

          ANARCHISTS                                                                   FASCISTS

         (Lawlessness)                                                                 (Legalistic Terror)

 

There has been a great misunderstanding in our culture due to the mass media always striving to reduce every thing to its simplest expression because of estimated public illiteracy. For example, even though most reporters have college degrees, they are advised to write at a "sixth grade education level." And lately, from the media itself, it has been promulgated that the level of literacy is even lower in American society, and that they should be writing at a "fourth grade education level."

 This media estimation is an insult to our intelligence. For, regardless of education level, people always possess the "undeveloped" intelligence that allows them to reach for a higher level of performance. And this I know from personal experience. For, I knew a man who had a son who was in a motorcycle accident that tore his knee cap, after which he became disabled. That son, a fine young man, explained to me all the adjustments he had to make, however, with great surprises about the person he had been all along.

  He told me that he returned to school to obtain a degree in electronics and discovered to his utter amazement that his intelligence was in a "dormant state," because he never applied himself completely--that in high school, he "just cruised;" and that he never really "applied himself" to "reach for the stars" or to "stretch himself" in order to be "the best that he could be." In short, he was excelling in his studies of electronics, within a journey of self-discovery as well.

              "To shoot for the lowest rung of the social ladder," is a tragedy of tremendous regrettable proportions.  The media and public schools bureaucrats and teachers should not insinuate to students that there is no right or wrong answer in social studies classes and other courses.  Students have the right to try--after which they discover whether they fail or succeed. If students leave with the attitude that there is no difference between failure and success, then a great wrong is being perpetrated against them and their well-being.

             In mathematics or sciences, there is a correct or incorrect answer; therefore, so too in the social sciences--for example, America is a free, representative republic, and not an oligarchic tyranny. Thus, there are right and wrong answers, correct and incorrect solutions. Otherwise, students, young people are being programmed for failure--to simply seek to "belong" to the "common lot of the average" in accomplishment, achievement and personal development.

              It is not true that the majority always seeks the "middle," "the average" or "the mean," or the "lowest common denominator." 

              But rather, the majority is "the whole widest greatest middle" AWAY FROM BOTH EXTREMES, as shown in the diagram above.

              There are extremes from both the left and the right. An example of extremes to the left may have been Charles Manson; an example of extremes to the right, perhaps, may have been Ted Kazinsky, the so-called "Unabomber" (a term created by the media).

               The misunderstanding or rather the "deceptive middle" emerged, I believe, due to the great difficulty that had arisen in developing consistent policies regarding racial discrimination born of past historical slavery of Afro-Americans, and past colonial occupation of "non-white" ethnic groups. Since the perpetrators of slavery and colonialism appeared to have belonged to the Caucasian groups of the Earth, from the 1920s onwards, the concepts of "majority" and "minority" began to be associated with "race," rather than political or economic interests.

            For example, in Congress, when the Democrats are the "majority party" as a group regardless of race or ethnicity of members, the Republicans as a group, are the minority party regardless of race or ethnicity of party members.

            Unfortunately, whereas in Congress the meanings attached to "majority" and "minority" are due to political affiliation, in the society at large, the meanings associated with "majority" and "minority" have been distorted to only refer to "white" and "non-white," or as the mass media, public schools and university bureaucrats say, "people of color," as if "white Caucasians" have no "color" themselves.

In Federalist Papers or Publius, No.51, James Madison addresses majority-minority problems in terms of political, economic and social interests:

 

"Ambition must be made to counteract ambition. The interest of the man must be

connected with the constitutional rights of the place........................

 

"Different interests necessarily exist in different classes of citizens. If a majority

be united by a common interest, the rights of the minority will be insecure. There

are but two methods of providing against this evil: the one by creating a will in

the community independent of the majority--that is, of the society itself; the

other, by comprehending in the society so many separate descriptions of citizens

as will render an unjust combination of a majority of the whole very improbable,

if not impracticable. The first method prevails in all governments possessing an

hereditary or self-appointed authority. This, at best, is but a precarious security;

because a power independent of the society may as well espouse the unjust views

of the major as the rightful interests of the minor party, and may possibly be

turned against both parties. The second method will be exemplified in the federal

republic of the United States. Whilst all authority in it be derived from and

dependent on the society, the society itself will be broken into so many parts,

interests, and classes of citizens, that the rights of individuals, or of the minority,

will be in little danger from interested combinations of the majority. In a free

government the security for civil rights must be the same as that for religious

rights. It consists in the one case in the multiplicity of interests, and in the other in

the multiplicity of sects."  

 

(The Federalist Papers, Hamilton, Madison, Jay by Clinton Rossiter, 1961,    

  Mentor Book) (emphasis, added above)

 

Individuals enjoying freedom of religion and freedom of association being the foundation of lawful, constructive liberty, given the multiplicity of interests and diversity of groups, no "majority combination" would emerge, Founders believed, to infringe upon the rights or interests of "minority groups"--but read, political, economic, cultural or other social minority category; not racial or ethnic.

Individuals have the inalienable right to associate in ways that are compatible with other individuals freely willing to associate on the basis of their respective interests, but no individual or group can be physically forced or legally forced to associate with another individual or another group. It is all on a free will, voluntary basis.

America's Founders envisioned a society filled with individuals and groups of diverse interests, all enjoying the equal protection of laws based upon consent, whereby the rule of the majority would animate the public interest, the majority being the greatest number of diverse people coming to a lawful, reasonable and constructive agreement on a certain resolution, regardless of ethnicity or racial affiliation--for example, as the will of the voting majority encompassing all individuals of all interests, as all individuals would have equal access to all available legal opportunities to prosper, while enjoying the inalienable rights to avail themselves of these opportunities.

With the inalienable right of equal access to all available legal opportunities to comprehensively prosper in society, no individual would seek to rebel against his own destiny, since he had the free will to fashion its outcome. It is therefore wrong to speak of a so-called "right to fail," but rather one should speak of the "right to try." For failure or success comes after trying to achieve.

For example, when we vote in presidential elections, the elected person receives votes from all ethnic groups in America, therefore, being elected by the will of the majority of Americans. And this has nothing to do with the statistical "mean," "middle" or "average." Each individual vote is counted and is as important as every other individual vote. Each individual vote has a qualitative excellence that is not diminished by any other individual vote--but that, as they are added together, the majority of voters with the most votes for a candidate win the election. But that majority is constituted of all individual voters whose candidate won the election, regardless of race or ethnicity.

In the same vein, as we consider individual development and social success, all individuals have the same inalienable rights to lawfully attempt to excel without undue impediment from government, from any group or other individual, the complex of which conducive to open channels of achievement parading individual merit as the determinant of outcomes rather than hereditary succession or genetically-derived causation.

Therefore, it is not the so-called "average" or "middle" or "mean" that individuals should target in their personal development, prosperity and maturity, but rather they should apply themselves to the fullest extent of their capacity to succeed in this great nation where every one can "dream big," to then witness and live the accomplishment of their dreams in real, achievable, enjoyable prosperity, in terms of both social and material benefits.

In other words, it is ok to be Bill Gates as it is ok to be Bill Cosby; it is ok to be Donald Trump as it is ok to be Lee Trevino.

 

My Lord, My God Almighty!

The truth engenders these kinds of responses - ad hominem attacks without addressing the issues at all!

A child is born from a male sperm cell uniting with a female egg - this is fact, this is reality, this is science, this is logic, this is truth. Man-woman marriage or union is the only logical, scientific, moral, spiritual relationship in the whole universe. All other "relations" are counterfeit, false and immoral.

Homosexual and lesbian so-called "relations" are not self-sufficient but dead-ended - they cannot have children. 

And so they must either contrive some illogical and immoral "reason" for seeking to enthrall "someone else's" children into their web of lies for a so-called "adoption," or connive to engage artificial insemination services with a man's sperm in the equation.

Then, why willfully engage in homosexual sodomy and lesbianism at all?  Reality-check!

The homosexual rejects the woman - but covets her child.  The lesbian rejects the man but covets his sperm cell. So you see, there is no such thing as "two mommies" or "two daddies."  These lies have been perpetrated for too long and it is time that mature adults wake up to face the truth for the good of all concerned!

Morality is based upon scientific sense and Judeo-Christian values, from the Psalms of David to the teachings of the Apostle Paul, are imbued with the most spiritual, objective, scientific, logical, moral Good for Humanity.

Anal sex or sodomy, and lesbianism lead to dead-ends, for the practitioners and other human beings. Evils from those behaviors are beyond words.

I pray all of you wake up and come to your good sense so that you can benefit from all the good God has for you in Christ Jesus!

Human beings are created either male or female - and there is nothing in between except in the fictional imagination. Look between your legs and you know the truth that sets you free - you will witness either a vagina or a penis, but not both. 

May God open your inner eyes for your own benefit and the good of your neighbors! 

America is much too much a great nation for it to go down the drain like all the petty empires that have bludgeoned the course of human history - where homosexual sodomy, and lesbianism had held sway over the current of society, like ancient Rome and ancient Greece, hence destroying all civility, ordered living and lawful jurisprudence.

 

THE DESPERATE LEFT - TRUTHS FOR MATURE ADULTS

   It is to our amazement that the leftist liberal democrats in this nation continue to assault traditional values and America's Judeo-Christian foundation in order to attempt to achieve their long coveted agenda. They try to infuse every aspect of American living with a "gay flavor," from medical care to public education, as if promoting the homosexual agenda was a necessary ingredient of all societal activities and programs.

    Since when, that, catering to homosexual affiliation was necessary for "success" in America?  Hard work, earned merit, lawful achievement, and the right to prosper from one's own efforts and qualities, among other factors, contribute to the achievement of success.  But leftist demagogues proceeded to equate homosexuals and lesbians with "people of color" or "minorities," as if being born Black was the equivalent of choosing to engage in anal sex.  The liberal leftist democrats are on a bent to enlist radical homosexuals as "allies" due to their own perceived "disadvantaged status." 

    There is no such thing as a "disadvantaged" or "disenfranchised" homosexual requiring special legal protection apart from all other Americans.  It is a choice, like drinking liquor or injecting cocaine into one's veins.  The vagina is made for the penis, not the anus.  The anus is created for the excretion of human waste.

    The choice to engage in anal sex is not a ticket to social privileges or special status.  We need more public servants like Senator Jesse Helms who understood the dangers of catering to the homosexual lobby's abominable advocacy. "People of color" should rise in righteous indignation to protest this pretense of equivalency that only aims at reducing all people to the same lowest level or to the same depth of depravity at which homosexuals and lesbians are operating.

    Reverend Martin Luther King Jr. was a respectable minister of Christian faith, who adhered to God-ordained commandments, anchored in the Judeo-Christian tradition, and could never have been found to equate the civil rights aspirations of Black Americans with the demagogical diatribes of homosexual advocates who are wallowing in the filthiness of anal sex.

    There is no equivalency between being born Black and deliberately choosing the homosexual lifestyle.  Sodomy is a choice, not a birth-based characteristic.  Sodomy is willful rebellion against Nature, God and society--it has no genetic basis.

    The natural, and also God-ordained genetic determinants of man-woman relationships are that the man has a penis and the woman has a vagina--two penises are a useless abomination leading to a dead-end; likewise, two vaginas are a fruitless abomination leading to a dead-end.

    Homosexuality means the death of every thing - religion, the nuclear family, and civilized society, and therefore, the destruction of all beneficent sentiments towards God, Family and Country. 

    The godless media networks fail to uncover the hidden costs of practicing anal sex, including short lifespan, physical violence, disease, illness, dishonor, lack of self-respect and self-esteem. 

    Homosexuals came out of the closet, so that they do not commit suicide in the closet.

They literally cannot live with themselves, knowing fully well they are committing a grievous sin against God and perpetrating an eternal wrong against all the living.

    They are engaged in "perpetual advocacy"--targeting even children in kindergarten--in their attempts to enlist "approval" or "validation" from the general public while aggressively attempting to transmogrify government into fascistic "keepers of sheep" who promise altering our systems of laws to accommodate that abominable advocacy.

    We would entreat homosexuals and lesbians to seek help from concerned organizations and individuals who would assist them in understanding the gravity of their abnormal behaviors and the destructiveness of their advocacy for the sake of their own wellbeing and health, and for the sake of America's children whose general welfare they could never fathom as homosexual "relations" always lead to dead-ends.

 

DEFYING ENTROPY

 

The Laws of Thermodynamics:  Energy is never created nor destroyed but always transformed.  Entropy: A thermodynamic measure of the amount of energy unavailable for useful work in a system undergoing change; a measure of the degree of disorder in a substance or a system: entropy always increases and available energy diminishes in a closed system, as the universe; a process of degeneration marked variously by increasing degrees of uncertainty, disorder, fragmentation, chaos, etc., specifically, such a process regarded as the inevitable, terminal stage in the life of a (social) system or structure.

 

A nation is not an inanimate physical system or process - it is an assembly of living human beings who are spiritual-moral in nature, a greater family of individual families and individuals.  Our destiny is not "terminal entropy."  America's Founders saw to it that we have ownership of secure, constitutional, lawful and constructive processes for Continuum Prosperity.

 

The founding of the United States of America was a spiritual act that took into account all available scientific knowledge at the time.  It was not an easy transformation from one political system to another, i.e., from the British Empire to a representative republic.  America's Founders were conscious of their actions as they wrestled with the moral dimensions of their separation from Great Britain.  They understood that a tall, great building, for example, cannot stand without a comparable, solid foundation underneath it.  They understood the laws of Conservation and Entropy in systems undergoing change.

 

The Universe and Nature are structured within the framework of Continuum Space-Time.  The Solar System is comprised of nine Planets and a Sun, held together by gravitational solar Energy, the field forces of which, allow the Earth to revolve around the Sun and rotate upon itself.  As revealed in the Holy Bible, God created the heavens and the Earth and established them in Continuum Space-Time.  Read the words of Thomas Jefferson in the Declaration of Independence: the whole Declaration is the epitome of applied sciences and the archetypal creation of the Organizing Principle par excellence, towards the edification of a constructive social system of individual Liberty and the Rule of Law for the purposes of Continuum self-government and religious, political, economic and cultural Prosperity.

 

(THE CONSCIOUSNESS OF CONTINUUM - THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD)

 

"When in the Course of human Events, it becomes necessary for one People to dissolve the Political Bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the Powers of the Earth, the separate and equal Station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent Respect to the Opinions of Mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the Separation.

 

(APPLIED SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE - CONSERVATION OF SUPREME AND TRANSCENDENT PRINCIPLES)

 

"We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness - that to secure these Rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed,

 

(CHANGE, ENTROPY AND CONSERVATION)

 

"that whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these Ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its Foundation on such Principles, and organizing its Powers in such Form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

 

(ENTROPY - NECESSITY OF CHANGE - NEW CONSERVATION: THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD)

 

"But when a long Train of Abuses and Usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object, evinces a Design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their Right, it is their Duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future Security.  Such has been the patient Sufferance of these Colonies, and such is now the Necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government.  The History of the present King of Great Britain is a History of repeated Injuries and Usurpations, all having in direct Object the Establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States.  To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid World."

 

(CONSERVATION OF SUPREME AND TRANSCENDENT PRINCIPLES)

 

"And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm Reliance on the Protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor."

 

Evolutionism contends, given time, chance and the inherent properties of Matter, that life and organization, order and productivity will happen all by accident - that order spontaneously arises from chaos, anarchy and disorder, given enough time and random chance.  The Laws of Thermodynamics say a resounding NO!  America's Founders said a resounding NO in accordance with the Judeo-Christian tradition and the scientific principles they knew, which guided their creation of this nation.   To the contrary, without spiritual consciousness of moral living, in time, things degrade, degenerate, and disintegrate; as Entropy sets in - they do not improve or get better.  And it takes human consciousness to restore Continuum organization to events and processes of Life.  Just cook a meal and expect the dishes to wash themselves and the kitchen to clean itself WITHOUT YOU in the equation - it will NOT happen!  Life cannot arise or emerge from dead, inanimate processes - it takes continuous, conscious spiritual intelligence of a Creator to infuse it with design and organization. 

 

It is human conscious will from our Creator that imposes Order and Organization upon Matter and Energy - for example, the coal, the oil, the natural gas would remain underground all by themselves, were it not for human ingenuity and creative productivity.  Animals do not have free will; they answer to genetic determinism.  But even insects created by God, like the bees, impose a form of "order" upon the inanimate nectars of the field, by their genetic programming to produce honey.  God gifted us, Humans, with the conscious use of the Organizing Principle and with a portion of His own mental capacities so that, as His created human family, we might take a creative part in the Continuum of things on Earth that are reflections of spiritual realities already extant in the heavenly realm.  In Psalms 8, the Holy Bible declares that we are created "a little less than God," or "a little less than the heavenly beings."  God is eternal; we are mortal.  And thus God said "Let there be light."  And there was light and God saw that it was good.  Likewise, Man said "Let there be electricity."  God allows us to duplicate Nature and the Universe in forms that are useful to us - lightning can kill; but a light bulb gives light.

 

As Samuel Adams so aptly emphasized, the American Constitution will work only with a religious and moral people.  America's Founders defy Entropy by their persistence, and their insistence on spiritual principles and moral precepts that bore absolute significance for their establishment of a free nation that would endure for centuries into the future.  Read the Preamble to the Constitution of the United States of America.  Founders studied previous kingdoms and empires like Greece and the Roman Empire, not ignoring the tyranny, corruption and vicissitudes that crippled their development into free republics, hence all the precautions, checks and balances, and periodic elections that oversee government operations - for the peaceful and orderly transition of power after each election, ONCE AND FOR ALL.

 

"We, the People of the United States, in order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common Defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

 

"IN ORDER TO FORM A MORE PERFECT UNION!" "TO OURSELVES AND OUR POSTERITY!"  Founders intended that Entropy be defied and constructive change continue to sustain Conservation of the Good that we achieve from generation to generation, within the framework of constitutionally-based laws and amendments to the Constitution of the United States, as local self-government takes precedence over centralized bureaucratic federal micro-management.  For powers not delegated by the Constitution to the federal Government are reserved to the States, respectively, or to the People.  The foundation is constructive individual liberty, and not government supremacy. 

 

This means that within the Constitution itself are structured inherent processes for constructive, edifying, or up-building CHANGE within Continuum Space-Time, in promotion of good principles, morals, practices and operations, that when implemented, consciously thwart the degenerative effects of Entropy.  But standards must be observed.  With the Bill of Rights, legislative enactments and the amendatory process, and the resulting Constitution and laws, the system can undergo CHANGE, while simultaneously protecting, preserving and defending the Constitution, and at the same time avoiding the traps of tyranny, disorder, chaos and anarchy.  Within the framework of American principles of jurisprudence and political philosophy, is active, an array of self-corrective mechanisms.  When judiciously applied in faithfulness to the Judeo-Christian foundations of spiritual logic and time-tested legal processes that preserve the dignity and lawful liberty of the individual, they ensure organized individual and social activity for constructive self-government.   With utmost reverence for its truth, we can again echo the immortal pronouncement of President Abraham Lincoln at Gettysburg, "That this nation, UNDER GOD, shall have a new birth of freedom, and that Government of the people, by the people and for the people SHALL NOT PERISH FROM THE EARTH. 

 

As you can see, Spirit matters.  A skyscraper cannot stand without a solid comparably-great, strong foundation, the roots of which, securely reaching into the depths of the Earth underneath it.  Again, Americans continue to defy Entropy - this republic shall not follow the so-called "rise and fall pattern" common to all petty empires that mar the landscape of human history.  From our Founding, God our Creator has been our strength, our shield, our Deliverer, our Rock and our Salvation - as a nation and a republic under God, with liberty and justice for all.  These events and processes are not by accident.  As we have just witnessed above, they were deliberately begun by America's Founders with the expected faithfulness of each generation to the wellspring of its living foundation.

 

Yes, Matter is Entropic.  But our Creator made us "more than just matter."  We have a spirit and a soul created in the image and likeness of God.  Organization does not sprout spontaneously in Nature - it takes pre-programmed, Creator-imprinting, for processes to continue as created.  But our Society is not Nature - we live by laws enacted upon our given consent.  God endowed us with inalienable rights, the blessings of which, have been secured since our Founding, even since "before the foundation of the world."  Let us not lose sight of our innate spiritual constitution and our intrinsic moral character as we embody those ideals that make for living prosperously in this blessed land.  These are not make-believe fantasies on a movie screen but a reality, based not just on Law, but on a conscientious apprehension of the Good which impels us from within our hearts.  Therein are treasures untold and prophecies foreknown.

 

Obama, as President, brought a "new kind of pride" to the Afro-American community.  Sotomayor, as Supreme Court Justice will also bring a "new kind of pride" to the Hispanic community.  We hope "this new kind of pride" takes root to grow and develop into a new outlook in life, as these groups endeavor to assimilate into American life away from illicit and unlawful drug-trafficking and gang activities, which in the past, they had been associated with, mostly in the media and Hollywood movies. 

These unspoken gains reveal a new reality in minority relations as the rule of law gains precedence over destructive substitutes for long-suppressed ethnic pride and individual self-esteem due to past historical grievances such as colonialism and slavery.  These new benefits for both sides, should hopefully accrue as members develop greater interest in educational pursuits and community service, with a new appreciation for the work ethic and the development of a healthy self-respect based on personal achievement and earned merit. 

Another unspoken benefit which commonly motivates both sides for constructive engagement occurs when majority members refrain from past habits of abandoning certain neighborhoods to these groups, who, when left to their own destructive designs, usually entangle themselves in the deleterious effects of underdevelopment and urban blight due to underlying gang and illicit drug activities which remained underground in the presence of lawful economic activity.  Lawful economic activity and constructive residential engagement provide moral and legal restraints that effectively delegitimize irrelevant accusations of injustice and disenfranchised criminal isolation.  Do not forget the ghettos and barios that exploded in the late 1960's and 1970's.  They were formerly abandoned as "intractable."

Residential and commercial, social and special-events engagement between all groups is good for America, both in the present and for long term consequences.  It is a fact that the lack of historical experience in implementing the Organizing Principle for orderly and constructive proceedings has plagued aggregates of these groups for decades.  The new turn of events should enlighten majority members in sustaining the civilizing effect which their presence provides - it is to the upbuilding of American society that groups have an enlightened interest in impacting each other beneficially, for the good of all concerned.

We would encourage majority members to assist in neighborhood development, not just in terms of financing, but also by their presence which is commonly interpreted as good will, willingness to communicate and desire to live together in a nation esteemed for its ethnic diversity.  And it is generally observed that where majority members do not run from certain neighborhoods and remain commercially and residentially active, this civilizing effect has greatly improved respect for law and order, the work ethic, common civility and community development.  For, ground abandoned anywhere in America, in the absence of civilized living, is lost ground that in the long run will accumulate into enclaves of "no man's land," bound for eventual explosion in the future.  An ounce of prevention  is worth a pound of cure!

These are the more obvious gains from current historical development, as seeds to be cultivated into trees of abundance for the beneficial welfare and constructive upbuilding of our nation, openly observed from the unspoken understanding that animates dialogue in the electronic media and the printed page, based upon real events now forming in this God-begun, God-blessed republic, the United States of America, from which the flames of liberty and the rule of law continue to enlighten the world.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CLOSET DICTATORS

Leftist Democrats often behave like petty dictators caricatured in comic books.  Democrats cannot stand lawful dissent or genuine legal opposition to their policies.  They are so out of touch with the lot of Americans at the ground level that they imagine conspiracies from the upper echelon of the Republican Party - by accusing Republicans of having orchestrated such groundswell, massive, grassroots opposition to President Obama's "health-Scarce" and "E-Con-manic" policies.  From Washington DC's Obama "Chicago machine-style" politics, every thing appears to be a "con job" in the mass media and on the Internet.  For when there is no provable consent from the American people for alleged legislative agendas, Democrats in Washington DC are only assuming they have legitimacy for implementing them, while pretending they can ignore the will of the American people. 

 

Leftist, socialist-leaning Democrats fantasize unanimous agreement while courting and dispensing socialist thought "with an American flavor" against which they expected there would be no opposition.  That is naïve and cynical.  Democrats are showing contempt for democratic structures and constitutional due process of law as enshrined and guaranteed in the First Amendment.  They fancy they had it "in the bag" with their grandstanding "wordsmith" tactics by which they would "sweep the world off its feet" with feats of oratory.  Remember Goebels in the Third Reich!  How about George Orwell's "1984!"   Feats of mass media oratory, alone, are not sufficient to win governing consent from the American people.  In Obama's camp, all "foot soldiers" or rather "mass media soldiers" are still on campaigning alert that espouses a defensive mode in all directions, even though, they already won the election in 2008. 

 

We remember the socialist left during the Vietnam War - actress Jane Fonda even rode a tank with North Vietnamese soldiers by her side - all in the name of "war protestor." 

 

Democrats harbor many illusions of ill-gotten power.  Democrats fancy there is some Goebellian secret to manipulating the masses into a frenzied mob or into silent sheep that will only rubber stamp Obama's wishes.  It looks like as if when Obama and his cohorts cannot stir the masses into a heap of "baba sheep," they start demonizing the Republicans as well as disrespecting the integrity of democratic institutions and First Amendment inalienable rights of the People to protest, demonstrate against and petition Government for redress of grievances.  "Tea parties," demonstrations, peaceful protest, and peaceable assembly are as American as apple pie and baseball.

 

Many of us have always considered the possibility that Democrats are "closet dictators" who lash out in rage when they cannot lawfully "get their way."  They have a tendency to rattle the words of representative government while at the same time practicing contempt towards people who live the spirit and letter of truly free government by their actions.  That attitude is very cynical and worse, unrealistic, all at the same time.   Democrats live in a world of fantasy if they expect Obama to be the "first magician" in the White House; for, the fact of the matter is, Obama is no different from any other President in the United States of America whose ideas of governance are not necessarily accepted by all Americans.  Confidence to govern is consent-based and cannot be imposed from above. 

 

There are no "baba sheep" or frenzied mobs here to give them such "total confidence."  "Confidence" is utilized in parliamentary systems whereby the government or current administration is dissolved and new elections are called.  But in our system of representative government, the President is elected for a fixed term of four years.   Here, politicians have to earn "confidence" from our lawfully given consent.  "Confidence" appears to psychologically matter to Obama and his staff in a manner not amenable to immediate vote getting - at least not until 2012 when Obama may seek a second term.  It is as if they expected Obama to become the first "knight on a white horse" wooing and cajoling masses of people into kow-towing acceptance of every thought spewed forth out of Washington DC.  The next presidential election is not until 2012.  Now, then, it is Obama's and the Democrats' leftist legislative agenda that they covet "confidence" for.  Rightly so, Americans are provably demonstrating they do not consent to it.

 

In short, our inalienable rights to peaceable dissent, protest, demonstration, opposition and assembly are already constitutionally guarantied and secure.  We have no kings or nobles here - all politicians are subject to lawful dissent, legal opposition as well as to the much-dreaded opportunity to be "booted out of office," comes the next election.  And this outcome, Democrats fear the most, hence, their illicit approach to maintaining "the people's confidence" in their attempts to shove socialist thought down their throats.  It appears that Americans are voting early - they do not consent to Obama's agenda, and this is not a conspiracy.  It's open dissent, in the good old American Way!

 

Wake-up, Democrats!  This is the United States of America.  We have the God-given inalienable constitutional right to not only disagree with and oppose Obama's socialist meanderings but also your attempts to implement them in this nation without the lawful consent of the American people.  There!  And that's the gist of it!