Giving away something for nothing doesn't work?

I'm shocked...SHOCKED that "Cash for Clunkers" is going broke after 4 days. Who knew that giving away money for nothing would attract so many takers? Keep in mind that the entity doing this is the government; they CANNOT CREATE REVENUE! They can only redistribute it or curtail spending. Unlike the private sector, they have no mechanism for creating revenue.

The program — aimed at giving at boost to the U.S. auto industry — was supposed to expire at the end of October. But in the one week since it took effect, it appears to have run dry of the $1 billion allocated to it, aides said Thursday.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0709/25638.html


Any predictions on what will happen with government run health care?

Faith-based economics

http://hotair.com/archives/2009/07/27/new-dem-strategy-on-obamacare-ignore-the-evidence-and-just-trust-us/

When you're congressman comes home

Ask him/her a simple question: Did you read it? Congress' recent tendency to vote before reading legislation gives new meaning to the word "irresponsible."





h/t Matt Lewis

Yes, there's still racism in America

Much ado is being made over the arrest of African-American Harvard professor, Henry Gates and President Obama's subsequent comment that the police acted "stupidly." After reading and listening to the "back and forth" on this issue for a few days, I have a few observations:

Yes, racism still exists in America. It always will. As long as people prejudge based on differences, racism of all stripes will exist. The question is whether or not racism was a part of this occasion, the arrest of a black Harvard professor by a white Cambridge cop. I'd say the evidence suggests that racism has definitely reared its ugly head in this case.

Gates, a tenured professor at a prestigious American university, was attempting to "jimmy" the door to his own home, along with his driver. Apparently, he had forgotten his keys. The police were summoned and Sgt. James Crowley, a white Cambridge police officer answered the call.

Crowley, noticing the "suspects" were already in the home, asked them to exit the house and identify themselves. Gates, according to reports, became irate, feeling that he was being "profiled" and beligerently refused. He was at this point arrested.

Now, let's examine where the racism is present. For the sake of argument, let's work with the long-standing liberal definition of racism, that it constitutes prejudicial treatment or oppression by a majority in power toward a minority.

Gates and Obama apparently want us to hop in the "way-back machine" and pretend Cambridge is stuck in 1964. But that's not the case here. Crowley responded to the scene alone and handled the situation by the book. He was presented with a possible home burglary and asked the suspects to come outside to identify themselves. What else was he supposed to do? Take Gates word that he was the homeowner? Go inside by himself to investigate? No in both cases.

Instead of being grateful that someone in his neighborhood noticed his house being disturbed and that the police responded so quickly, Gates immediately and and beligerently assumed a racist motive. That's what precipitated his arrest. And before we start down the sympathetic "plight of the black man fighting for respect in America" road, let's look at who Gates is:

He's a tenured professor at arguably the most prestigious university in the country. He and his DRIVER were trying to gain entrance into his upscale home in Cambridge, Massachusetts. Recounting his hearing of Obama's comments, Gates had this to say:

"I was having dinner with a friend on the upper East Side in a little private Italian restaurant, and all of a sudden I thought my BlackBerry was going to explode,'' Gates said. A friend called saying "Barack Obama just mentioned you in his news conference.''
"I said, 'Oh my goodness, what did he say?'... 'He said the Cambridge police were stupid and that you were friends'...'I went, My God.' And then the emails...it was like a slot machine. I got 500 emails last night. ''

Not exactly Medgar Evers now is it? And it gets better. Apparently Sgt. Crowley is no ordinary Cambridge cop. He teaches a class, with a black officer, on racial profiling for the Lowell Police Department.

“He’s a very professional police officer and he’s a good role model,” Fleming (Lowell PA director) said. “Former police commissioner Ronny Watson, who is a person of color, hand-picked Sgt. Crowley. ... I presume because he would be the most qualified and most professional. He’s a very good instructor. He gets very high reviews by the students.”

So let's review. An African-American professor accuses a white beat cop of racism. Our African-American president, admitting he did not know all the facts, claimed that the police acted "stupidly" in the situation. There is no doubt in my mind that racism has played a major role in this situation. Both Gates and Obama clearly have used their status and positions of power to unnecessarily scapegoat and criticize a beat cop from a different racial background. Both men prejudged Sgt. Crowley's actions based on the color of his skin.

Yes, racism is still alive and well in America.

New game to play during Obama press conferences

http://campaignspot.nationalreview.com/post/?q=MDYzZGIxNGI5MjA1MjI3ZDMyNjJkYjExMzk4MDliZGM=

Pendulum Swings Part II: The Swing to the Left

The Church is not immune from its human frailties, one of which is reactionary behavior in response to a problem. Yesterday, we discussed some of the divisive issues behind those who are mired in a such a conservative position, they refuse to even consider change and label those who engage in healthy change based on their presuppositions. Today, let's take a look at the other extreme: those who have grown dissatisfied with the status quo and have taken up an opposite extreme as their opposition.

Simple reason should readily tell us that merely taking up opposition to one position does not lead to the truth, yet our human nature often leads us into this state which I have labeled "rebels without a clue." We see it in generation after generation of youth. Dissatisfied or disillusioned with their parents' way of life, they take up camp on the opposite shore, reactively opposing the established positions. Of course they don't examine whether or not these new positions are any more or less desirable than those of their parents. Whatever doesn't look like the old must be better. This is fallacious on its face.

The church has engaged in this practice for centuries now. While the objections to a variety of scriptural inconsistencies over the years have been valid, the solutions have often emulated those of the reactive child. In the process, we've often "thrown the baby out with the bathwater."

In contrast, look at the model of change proposed by Jesus. Faced with the Pharisees' bastardization of Mosaic Law, Jesus proposed not a reactive flight from their ways, but a "radical reunion" based on the core truths expressed in God's law. The Pharisees constantly tried to trap Jesus with legal conundrums. Jesus never rejected the Law; He reminded His audience of their departure from the spirit behind its existence. This can best be seen when Jesus was asked which law was most important. Rather than reactively opposing the Pharisees, Jesus went back to the core of the truth handed down by the Father: "Love the Lord your God, and love your neighbor as yourself. On these two principles rest all the other commandments." (Luke 10:27) Moreover, Jesus went out of His way to let His audience know that He was not proposing reactive change in Matthew 5:18:

For truly, I say to you,until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished.

In our search for His truth, we must be careful not just to get "stuck" in traditions, stubbornly refusing change. But we must also not simply bounce like pinballs, reacting to inaccuracies, both real and perceived. We must study the scripture and focus on the core message of the gospel. Then we can evaluate our practices in a mature, Christlike fashion. This will bring us closer to Him and to one another.

Pendulum Swings

During my recent "vacation," I had the occasion to read two books which illustrate the extremes which promote dissonance within the Body of Christ in our contemporary culture. David Miller's Piloting the Straits attempts to address "change" occurring within the churches of Christ and how conscientious Christians, in his estimation, must fight those changes. Though published in 1996, the issues Miller confronts are still highly conflictual today. The other book was unChristian by David Kinnaman. Kinnaman, from the Barna group, Christendom's answer to the Gallup organization, looks at market research data to examine why younger generations are leaving Christianity and not coming back. This book, published in 2007, causes the reader to come to grips with some hard realities regarding how Christians are perceived by outsiders.

One of the major pieces of feedback cited in Kinnaman's book is the perception that Christians "devour their own." That perception is borne out by the data shown in his book, but also is evident in Miller's approach to change in the church. The essence of Miller's argument is to contend that deviation from church of Christ "orthodoxy" is heresy and that such agents of change are motivated by ungodly desires and should be combated and resisted. In the course of making his arguments, Miller claims a highly logical ground. Indeed, Miller's work is full of references, scriptural citations, direct quotations, and syllogistic reasoning. Unfortunately, the great majority of Miller's arguments are fallacious as they begin with two false assumptions that provide the foundation of his resistance to change:

1. Miller assumes that "necessary inference" is on par with scriptural commands and direct examples. This is patently false. Inferences, by their very nature, are human interpretations, and thus subject to debate and disagreement. That Miller would elevate his own inferences to be on the same level with direct commands and examples from Jesus is the height of arrogance.

2. Miller assumes that those who share his opinions are motivated by pure and holy means, while those who differ with him are motivated by selfish and ungodly desires. In fact, Miller devotes an entire section of his book to detailing these evil desires. That Miller professes to be able to judge the hearts of people is again highly arrogant on his part. And once again, these false assumptions are the basis for his syllogisms in the rest of his book.

Especially disturbing is Miller's insistence that promoting change is tantamount to promoting division. This false equivalence enables Miller to proclaim that his faction is preserving the unity of the true church, while the agents of change are bringing division. Hence, there is no need to examine the nature of the proposed changes. We must merely reject change out of hand as being divisive.

This attitude, unfortunately, is all too prevalent within the Church. It has brought fractures to the Body and greatly hampers our ability to serve the world that so desperately needs our unified efforts.

In succeeding posts, I'll examine the other side of the pendulum swing and how it also brings division as well as attempt to look at some of the particular issues still combating the church.

More audacity from Obama...minus the hope and change

"There's a reason Thurgood Marshall took up the cause of Linda Brown. There's a reason the Little Rock Nine defied a governor and a mob," Obama said. "It's because there is no stronger weapon against inequality and no better path to opportunity than an education that can unlock a child's God-given potential."

Unlocking that potential, though, means both acknowledging the challenges facing black youth and then finding a solution to problems that are the legacy of decades of institutionalized discrimination.

"We have to say to our children, `Yes, if you're African-American, the odds of growing up amid crime and gangs are higher. Yes, if you live in a poor neighborhood, you will face challenges that somebody in a wealthy suburb does not have to face," Obama said, returning to his tough-love message familiar from his two-year presidential campaign.

"But that's not a reason to get bad grades, that's not a reason to cut class, that's not a reason to give up on your education and drop out of school," he said. "No one has written your destiny for you. Your destiny is in your hands."

Unfortunately, our new president's modus operandi has been all too clear: put forth platititudes that sound good in the itching ears of the target audience, only to belie them by actions. Obama is absolutely correct about the importance of education in combatting poverty. His actions, however, have not borne out in practice what he professes to believe. Witness the DC voucher program.

Here, Obama single-handedly destroyed a successful program that was actually helping those languishing in poverty. Now lest I be accused of being just another white, conservative, Obama basher, I'll let Juan Williams, who actually wept for joy on air the night Obama was elected illustrate what's wrong with Obama's education policy:

This is an outrage to me. … This is so important that you give young people a chance to have an education in America and especially in a failing public school system like you have in the District of Columbia. This voucher system is a direct threat to the unions. And so I think everybody on Capitol Hill, that’s getting money from the NEA or AFT, they should be called on the table. They should ask them, ‘where do you send your kids to school? And are you willing to say these kids getting the vouchers…and doing better than the rest of the kids, that these kids aren’t deserving of an opportunity to succeed in America?’ You just want to scream. Why Duncan and Obama aren’t in the forefront of education reform is an outrage and an insult to the very base that voted for them.

Williams is rightfully indignant. Obama has betrayed the very base that put him into office. Instead of supporting a program that offered genuine hope and change, Obama sold out his constituents to the teachers' unions. And where does Obama send his kids? If you think it's the DC public schools, think again. But then again, it's alright for Obama and the limousine liberals to live one life and expect a different one for his constituents.

Obama is making policy that will guarantee segregation. The rich will continue to have access to quality private education while the poor will be stuck with no options. And yes, this policy will overwhelmingly continue to affect African-American children. How is this enabling folks to claim their destiny? Where is the hope in this policy? How is this change from the failed practices of the past?

President Obama has audacity to be sure. I don't believe I could get up in front of people who placed their trust in me and lie directly to their faces the way he has done. For shame.

Walking by faith

I will walk by faith
Even when I cannot see
because this broken road
Prepares Your will for me

These words by Jeremy Camp, echoing Paul's statement in II Corinthians 5:7 have become very dear to me over the past year. Permit me to digress from my usual commentary and simply share my experiences over the past year. They have profoundly shaped my spiritual outlook. I have been waiting to write this post for some time now. It is only now that God has provided a "bookmark" of sorts that I can relate my journey of walking by faith.

This has been without a doubt the most difficult year of my life. Last summer, I learned that due to financial troubles, there was a good chance the school which I was leading would close after the next school year. That would mean I, along with my dear friends and colleagues, would lose our jobs, and that our mission to which we were wholly devoted would come to an end. In September, my mother was diagnosed with colon cancer. Over the next two months, I would have to watch her succumb to this dreadful disease. In the aftermath of her death and her funeral, I became quite disillusioned with many in my family. They simply were not who I thought them to be. Damage was done, much of which may be irreparable. In January of this year, the final decision of our board to close the school was handed down. For the next six months, I was to preside over the "death" of this family of God. More hurtful was my disappointment in many men of faith, in whom I had trusted. They seemed unconcerned about the human fallout from their decisions. In the meantime, I searched for God's guidance with my next job. Where should I go? What should I do? What was His will? These questions plagued me as I sent out resumes and went on interviews. Three times I was flown in as a finalist for a position. Each time, it appeared that God's will was going to be revealed. Three times, I learned someone else was selected and it was time to begin searching anew.

During all of this, Satan nagged at me, planting negative thoughts in my mind. I felt forsaken; but the Holy Spirit reminded me of Jesus' words on the cross: "Eloi, eloi, lama sabachthani." I felt confused, unsure of my next steps; but the Spirit reminded me of Abraham, Noah, Moses, and countless others who did not know the "end game" but walked in faith nonetheless. With each doubt that Satan put into my head, the Holy Spirit countered with encouragement from His Word. These sources of encouragement did not come from scripture alone. Often they were delivered by some "angel" in my life. Perhaps they were unaware of the encouragement they were offering, but it was there nonetheless.

The bottom line: In my moment of great doubt, confusion, and pain, God was working His plan all along. Even though I could not see His handiwork clearly, even though I was blind to the eventual outcome, He was walking ahead of me, making my paths clear.

I have learned a great lesson, maybe THE great lesson: I am a blind man in this world. I need the omniscient power of my Lord to guide me. That is a troublesome lesson for many of us, especially me, to learn. I treasure my "sight." I am an academic, a philosopher by nature and vocation. I have always desired and have devoted my life to "seeing more clearly." Indeed, God has revealed much to me in the course of my studies. Still, there is so much more I don't know, and even more I never will. That is why I must submit myself to him. As much as I would like to blaze my own trail in this life, I haven't sufficient sight to do so.

I mentioned in the opening that I've been waiting to write this piece. I vowed to do so out of faith in Him. For some time now, though I didn't know what His will would look like, I knew it would be done anyway. I chose to walk by faith, even when I could not see.

I say this not with pride or hubris, but with all humility. The only thing He required of me was the will to continue. As Kipling put it:

If you can force your heart and nerve and sinew
To serve your turn long after they are gone,
And so hold on when there is nothing in you
Except the Will which says to them: "Hold on"

That's what walking by faith is. It's the determination to hold on to God when all you have to go by is His promise. I praise Him for giving me that strength; and I praise Him for his steadfast love and faithfulness.

Thanks for letting me share my experience with you. We serve a great and wonderful God who desires to give us rich rewards if we'll only trust in Him.

I'll be on the road for awhile

I don't know how regularly I'll be able to post. I'll update any new posts on my Facebook.

It is for freedom that we have been set free

These are the words of the apostle Paul in Galatians, chapter 5:

1It is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm, then, and do not let yourselves be burdened again by a yoke of slavery.
2Mark my words! I, Paul, tell you that if you let yourselves be circumcised, Christ will be of no value to you at all. 3Again I declare to every man who lets himself be circumcised that he is obligated to obey the whole law. 4You who are trying to be justified by law have been alienated from Christ; you have fallen away from grace. 5But by faith we eagerly await through the Spirit the righteousness for which we hope. 6For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision has any value. The only thing that counts is faith expressing itself through love.
7You were running a good race. Who cut in on you and kept you from obeying the truth? 8That kind of persuasion does not come from the one who calls you. 9"A little yeast works through the whole batch of dough." 10I am confident in the Lord that you will take no other view. The one who is throwing you into confusion will pay the penalty, whoever he may be. 11Brothers, if I am still preaching circumcision, why am I still being persecuted? In that case the offense of the cross has been abolished. 12As for those agitators, I wish they would go the whole way and emasculate themselves!
13You, my brothers, were called to be free. But do not use your freedom to indulge the sinful nature; rather, serve one another in love. 14The entire law is summed up in a single command: "Love your neighbor as yourself 15If you keep on biting and devouring each other, watch out or you will be destroyed by each other.

This thought is important to us, not just as Christians, but as Americans. If we strip away the cultural anachronism of circumcision here, there is much that is instructive to 21st century America.

It is a paradoxical human truth that we struggle do deal with freedom, and all too often, we voluntarily surrender it for the comfort of slavery. That is what Paul is talking about here.

Look at America. Before Washington could even finish taking the oath of office, many Americans were ready to make him king, even though they had just sacrificed to throw off the burden of monarchical oppression. Had not FDR died, how many terms would Americans have allowed him to serve? Look at us today. We are quick to run to the government to solve our problems, surrendering our liberty in the process. Rather than exercising our liberty and dealing with the consequences, we are ready to surrender it in search of a "magic fix."

This tendency goes hand in hand with our selfishness. It can be argued that we have arrived at this current mess due in large part to our own self-indulgences. Paul gives strict warning against this. Freedom brings liberty, but not license. We Americans have struggled with this. Over the years, we have treated our freedom much like a teenager left alone in the house for the first time. We have indulged ourselves on debt and debauchery, not denying ourselves anything. We can readily see the results. It has carried us down the road to destruction as a nation. And instead of accepting our responsibility for our selfishness, we have pointed the finger at others and have run to our "daddy," the government, to fix it all. This approach will not sustain our liberty. It will only ensure our continued dependence.

What Paul preaches is true. It is only when we exercise our liberty in the service of others; in the pursuit of mutual edification, that this freedom can be productive. That is the role for the Christian, and that is the role for America.

Happy Independence Day!

This piece by Bruce Walker says it all:

But when speaking of what they wrote in 1776 -- signing their own death warrants, in some respects -- they might ask us this: "We did not mean to confuse you. That is why the words we chose were so clear. You are free creatures of God. Government is your creature, your chattel, your tool -- nothing more. We studied history long before we wrote our brief statement of liberty. You own government or rather the spirit of free men owns government. You fret about ‘stuff.' Why? We are all dead now, as we knew we would be. But we chose to die free, following our consciences - that is the only real choice in life. What confused you?" The principle of liberty is easy. All it requires is courage and honor.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/07/remembering_what_the_declarati_1.html

Nice gesture, Helen, but it's too little, too late

“Nixon didn’t try to do that,” Thomas said. “They couldn’t control (the media). They didn’t try.

“What the hell do they think we are, puppets?” Thomas said. “They’re supposed to stay out of our business. They are our public servants. We pay them.”

Thomas said she was especially concerned about the arrangement between the Obama Administration and a writer from the liberal Huffington Post Web site. The writer was invited by the White House to President Obama’s press conference last week on the understanding that he would ask Obama a question about Iran from among questions that had been sent to him by people in Iran.

“When you call the reporter the night before you know damn well what they are going to ask to control you,” Thomas said.

“I’m not saying there has never been managed news before, but this is carried to fare-thee-well--for the town halls, for the press conferences,” she said. “It’s blatant. They don’t give a damn if you know it or not. They ought to be hanging their heads in shame.”

When Helen Thomas starts assailing a Democrat administration, something's not quite right. Too bad the grande dame of the Washington press corps waited this long to recognize what many of us noticed during the primaries: Obama has used the press to do his bidding. He used them to take down Hillary, and then co-opted them during the campaign to demonize McCain/Palin. All the while, the considerable investigative powers of the mainstream media remained silent about Obama's more than questionable associations, his background as a "community organizer (i.e. socialist), and his lack of bona fides as an executive. Now Thomas and company are shocked to find Obama is manipulating the press with unheard of audacity? Sorry, Helen, the rest of us poor schmucks out here saw him for what he was a long time ago.

Birds of a feather flock together

"Look, a rule of thumb here. Whenever you find yourself on the side of Hugo Chavez, Daniel Ortega, and the Castro twins, you may want to reexamine your assumptions."




So "interfering" on behalf of the democratic protestors in Iran is off limits, but we can "interfere" on behalf of a wannabe dictator? Is this guy for real?