A Conversation/Debate Tom(Bahama)Harkin and Christopher Reed

A tough young ex-Navy man, who runs his own business here in Iowa, decided to take on the Iowa Demoncrats biggest dog. And from what I see in this (debate) is he took a stick to the big dog and gave him a beating.

If you have spare change, send Mr. Reed a few dollars so that he can send Tom home to the Bahamas.

see the video here

IPTV

you can go to Mr. Reed's website,

here

Sarah Palin Photos

This is not an endorsement of the Palin/McCrazy campaign, and no I still will not be voting for them. A friend, who was at a Palin appearance in the last few days took these pictures. Since I'm not adverse to posting pictures of an attractive woman, and a Christian to boot, I offered to post them for him. So here they are, thanks Ted.














To bad he can't post them on the website he works for, but McCain/Feingold killed that.

A Third Party Vote and a Sovereign God

Our church decided to do something different than normal for Sunday School this quarter. Normally we have the different classes use material chosen for that specific class. I teach the Jr. High/Sr. High Class, we had been doing lessons I had prepared on Doctrine/Apologetics. The ladies were doing something about women of the Bible and the other adult class, mostly men were in something to do with the Judges. This quarter, all the classes are still meeting separately, but all of them are doing the same book and lessons.

Since this is not an advertisement or endorsement of that particular book/lesson, I'm simply going to say that the topic is related to the Sovereignty of God. If you want to know about the book ask and I'll give you the title and author, but for the purposes of this post, that info is irrelevant.

With the presidential election one month away, we are again hearing the usual arguments about how a follower of Jesus Christ should vote this election cycle. The following opinions are mine, you get what you paid for. But, there are several conclusions/assumptions that are givens in the following analysis. First, I will never ever vote for a candidate who supports the pro-abortion positions. I believe that man kind is created in the image of the Creator God, that all human life is therefore precious in His sight, and that someone who does not respect the right to life is worthy of God's wrath. Therefore I can not in good conscience support such a person. Second, I believe that the lesser of two evils, is still evil. I will not support a candidate simply because he is not as bad as his opposition. In a choice between Hitler and Mussolini, evil wins either way, therefore I will not support or vote for either of the two.

Using those principles then as a starting place, I can not in good conscience support either Barak Hussein Obama or John McCain. While many of you understand and agree with my position on BHO, you still are considering or maybe actively supporting McCain. I have previously established my strong dislike for McCain, here, so I will not repeat the litany of faults I contend deem him unworthy of my support. I will mention however that the economic chaos of the last 14? days has increased my contempt for the man, he is a socialist thru and thru. In crisis his immediate reaction is for government to do something/anything to fix the problem, and he will gladly steal the taxpayers money to do it.

Since Obama has voted in favor of infanticide, see this article by Andrew McCarty, also one by Jill Stanek and he considers a baby to be punishment, Punished with a Baby I have absolutely no use for BHO.

Consequently, my choices are limited. I can refuse to vote, something more and more people are doing. According to this article52 percent of "evangelicals" did not vote in the 2000 elections. I could also write in a candidate, something that is legal in all fifty states, I think. Our I could vote for a third party candidate.

And immediately people with an interest in seeing one of the two major party candidates begin to toss around the term "throwing away your vote". They claim that a vote for C candidate is a vote for B candidate, if they are a fan of A. And if they are a fan of B candidate they will claim that a vote for C candidate is a vote for A candidate. Now I ain't no genisus:). But a vote for C candidate is clearly a vote for C candidate, A and B can take a flying leap. And herein lies the greatest problem facing those who hold a worldview similar to the one that I hold. Far to many of them have believed the lie, that they must support A or B because the other candidate is evil, and that a third party can not win.

Some numbers for you to consider. I got these in just a few minutes of searching the internet. I'll give the sources, you can make your own case for their reliability. I simply took the numbers I found and did a few calculations.

According to numerous polls, some where between 70 and 80 percent of the US population claim some form of Christianity. See this page for details. Now lets narrow that down a little bit. According to this article, Publiceye "the number of persons in the United States who described themselves as either Evangelical or Born-Again between 1976 and 2001 fluctuated between 33 percent and 47 percent with a reasonable estimate being 35 percent of the population or just over 102 million people in 2003." So I think it is well within the realm of possibility that just over 100 million American voters would identify themselves as being within the group of people who hold a biblical/christian worldview.

In 2000 George W Bush received 50,456,002 votes in the general election and Al Gore received 50,999,897 votes. and as I stated previously, according to Publiceye 52 percent of that 100 million Evangelicals did not vote. Now, according to the same article, somewhere between 37 and 40 percent of the total votes cast for George W Bush were cast by Evangelical Christians. Using the 40 percent figure for ease of calculation, we are talking about 20,182,401 votes cast by Evangelical Christians for GWB. Using the same source of info, about 11 percent of Evangelical Christians voted for the Democrat candidate or 6,493,128 votes.

Here's the deal. If the group that calls itself Evangelical/Born-Again Christians, would as a group vote what they claim to believe, here are the resultant numbers. In 2000, GWB would have received 30,273,601 votes. Algore would have had 44,506,769 votes. And a candidate supported by that coalition of Evangelical/Born-Again Christians would have received 26,675,529 votes.

So according to my friends who continue to believe the lie, that we must support A or B because C can't win, Algore would have won the 2000 election. And they believed a lie. Because as I said previously 52 percent of so called Evangelical Christians Did not Vote in 2000. If you could convince 50 percent of those people 52,000,000 "christians" to vote their conscience, thats 26,000,000 "christians who did not support either A or B, you would have the potential for a vote total on the order of 52,675,529 with the up side potential of 78,675,529.

And here in lies the problem. Without pointing fingers at anyone in particular, too many of you have accepted the lie that a third party candidate can not win. You therefore give your support/vote to the lesser of the two evils while at the same time making it impossible for men of much higher moral standards and character to win office, because you are in effect voting to stop evil by accepting evil. And in so doing you reject the Sovereignty of God.

If God is Sovereign, and I believe He is. Then when you vote for evil, in an attempt to prevent evil, you are saying that God is not capable of preventing evil from assuming a position of power. This is totally contrary to God's revealed Word. Here is one of my favorite passages, which we studied in Sunday School last Sunday.

Daniel 4:17 "to the intent that the living may know that the most High ruleth in the kingdom of men, and giveth it to whomsoever he will, and setteth up over it the basest of men."
Again in verse 32 "until thou know that the most High ruleth in the kingdom of men, and giveth it to whomsoever he will."
Then Nebuchadnezzar's own testimony, " 34 And at the end of the days I Nebuchadnezzar lifted up mine eyes unto heaven, and mine understanding returned unto me, and I blessed the most High, and I praised and honoured him that liveth for ever, whose dominion is an everlasting dominion, and his kingdom is from generation to generation:
35 And all the inhabitants of the earth are reputed as nothing: and he doeth according to his will in the army of heaven, and among the inhabitants of the earth: and none can stay his hand, or say unto him, What doest thou?
36 At the same time my reason returned unto me; and for the glory of my kingdom, mine honour and brightness returned unto me; and my counsellors and my lords sought unto me; and I was established in my kingdom, and excellent majesty was added unto me.
37 Now I Nebuchadnezzar praise and extol and honour the King of heaven, all whose works are truth, and his ways judgment: and those that walk in pride he is able to abase."

Not convinced, how about Romans 13:1" Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God."

So here's my plan. I will vote my conscience. I will vote for a man who has evidence in His life that He has a proper understanding of government, the He understands his position is one given by God, that he is accountable to God and that secular government is something God ordained to rule among the affairs of men. I will vote for a man who believes that human life is created in the image of God, and is therefore worthy of our protection from the womb to the tomb. And I will not vote for someone simply because I think he is less evil than the other guy. I will trust the Sovereign God of the Universe to "rule in the kingdom of men", and assume that he knows far better than I in my finite little mind who should be the leader of this country. And if enough of you will do the same, my God is fully capable of putting into office C even when A and B are claiming that voting for C is a wasted vote.

Now it's possible that you have read all this and are not convinced. Fine, but I have one question for you. When you stand before the Lord someday, and you are asked why you voted the way you did, and you will be asked, we all must give account, I Corinthians 3 and 4 say so, how are you going to explain to the Creator of the Universe, the Only Wise and Sovereign God, that you, in your finite wisdom, voted for an evil man to prevent an evil man from assuming power? Good luck with that!!


Post Script,

Any corrections of spelling and grammar would be deeply appreciated.

The Clue Phone is Ringing

For any of you out there in the ether, who still believe that we live in a country with even some semblance of what it was designed to be, should answer the clue phone.
This country was supposed to be a Constitutional Republic. The elected leaders chosen by the citizens were to be bound by the Constitution to do only those things which it allowed.

For the last fifty years we have had much closer to a democratic social welfare state. Where the majority demand something and the elected leadership respond by handing out OPM (other peoples money). So if you wanted something real bad, you just had to get the majority to go along with you.

But today, we have now progressed into some sort of bastardized oligarchy

ol·i·gar·chy

1.
1. Government by a few, especially by a small faction of persons or families.
2. Those making up such a government.
2. A state governed by a few persons.


Read this from WIRED,

An aide in the office of Sen. Diane Feinstein, D-Calif., said Wednesday that the senator has received more than 91,000 e-mails, calls and letters regarding the legislation. Ninety-four percent of the authors of those notes were against the bill.

On the right, FreedomWorks, a conservative nonprofit, created the NoWallStreetBailout.com website, and has collected 41,415 names and statements from people who oppose it.

Widespread anger and opposition to the Senate's imminent approval of the Bush Administration's bailout proposal continued to spread online and overwhelm congressional offices in a flood of e-mails, faxes and phone calls on Wednesday.


And what did they do, were they bound by the Constitution?

Did they respond to the majority of the people?

No. They voted by a margin of 74 -25 to do what they want. Your opinion and the Constitution are completely ignored.

And for those of you still under the illusion that Juan Mc-Mark-O'Cain is somehow more conservative and different than BarelyBlack Hussein Obamba, well guess what, they both voted for the thing. Now there's a real conservative for ya. A man of principle, a man willing to take the hard position, a maverick, just like Barry Boy.

Update, And just a personal note to Senator Grassley, "Dude, you failed to pass the conservative/constitutional test, I will never vote for you again. As far as I'm concerned the Repugnant Party better start looking for your replacement, cause I'll do everything I can to see you lose."