See "BLOG TOPICS" Index in Sidebar, or use:
Google
 
Please read: The CONSTITUTION for the United States of America.
Read about: DR. CHUCK BALDWIN for President here.



"If we ever forget that we're one nation under God, then we will be a nation gone under."
- Ronald Reagan, 1984
Showing posts with label u.s.elections. Show all posts
Showing posts with label u.s.elections. Show all posts

Wednesday, August 27, 2008

Why Neither Obama Nor McCain Will Save Us

By John W. Whitehead - The Rutherford Institute - Aug. 27, 2008

"In daily life, it's a lack of understanding about government that prompts people to call Congress when they want the dog catcher, or to complain to a local council member about a federal tax change. Over time, it can add up to disenfranchised and apathetic citizens." — "Ignorance of History Is No Joke" (CBS News, July 3, 2003)

The problems Americans currently face seem insurmountable, and they only appear to worsen at every turn: the deepening moral and spiritual crisis, the erosion of civil liberties, militarism and perpetual war, our declining economy, joblessness, homelessness, the mortgage crisis, a disaffected youth, crime, violence and so on. But let's be honest: it's neither the Republicans' nor the Democrats' fault that we're in such a mess today.

We have no one but ourselves to blame.

We've gotten the government—and the society—we deserve. But what did we do to deserve this bloated, power-hungry, self-serving, war-mongering bureaucracy? How did our straight-laced Puritan nation of freedom-loving citizens give way to a self-absorbed, entertainment-obsessed society?

The answer is simple: we stopped caring, and we stopped paying attention. Consciously or unconsciously, we gave up on the American Dream and, in so doing, lost our way. The facts speak for themselves. Most Americans have virtually no idea what America stands for and little idea how their government should function. Seventy percent of American adults cannot name their senators or congressmen. Nearly a quarter can't name a single right guaranteed in the First Amendment. Two-thirds can't name the three branches of government.

A poll taken several years ago reveals that Americans are more familiar with the Seven Dwarfs, Three Stooges, Harry Potter, Homer Simpson and Superman than the news of the day, world leaders or classic literature. And although America spends in excess of $40 billion annually on public education, in comparing the literacy level of adults in seventeen industrialized countries, America is number ten on the list. If knowledge of self-government and freedom are the source of our democracy, then we are in serious danger as a country.

The American Dream was once encapsulated in the hope of freedom, the right to compete in a free market and the right to own a parcel of land that you could call your own. Now, that once noble dream has been reduced to a radical individualism that is best symbolized by cell phones and shopping in mega-malls.

In fact, Americans now spend more time in malls shopping than in churches or synagogues. By 1987, America had more malls than high schools. As sociologist Sharon Zukin writes, "In a society where we no longer have contact with nature or beauty in our daily lives, shopping is one of the few ways we are left to create a sense of ultimate value."

This "sense of ultimate value" used to be found in community life and in religion. But community life has collapsed so much that, as author Alex Marshall observes, Americans live "in one of the loneliest societies on the earth." Church groups, union memberships, dinners at home with friends, bridge clubs, etc., have been all but decimated, only to be replaced by social networking sites like Facebook and MySpace that keep users at arm's reach and interacting on their own terms. Corner groceries and drugstores, owned by people who actually work and live in the community, have generally disappeared and been replaced by the blandness of corporate chain stores.

Even religion offers scant comfort anymore. Indeed, there is little spiritual depth to the politically correct, all-inclusive theology that passes for civil religion today. And Christian fundamentalism (and its political offshoot, the Christian Right), with its emphasis on amassing power and establishing a theocracy, is certainly not an answer to the American spiritual crisis.

Little surprise, then, that many Americans have turned to politics with an almost religious zeal as the answer to what ails the nation. "Change" and "Believe" campaign slogans have been trotted out, only to be eagerly picked up and chanted like religious mantras. However, we'd do well to remember that governmental bureaucracy is fervently anti-change. As for trusting or believing in a politician, James Madison put it best when he pointed out that "if men were angels, no government would be necessary."

If there is to be any real hope for change, it rests, as it always has, in "we the people" because while we may be a large part of the problem, we are also the solution. And there is great power in this.

Each generation of Americans faces the responsibility of protecting and defending the Constitution. It may be comforting to think that the problems facing America could be fixed by the next presidential election. But that is not going to happen. Neither Obama nor McCain will save us.

Any real, lasting change will have to come from within you and me—not from a political savior. Thus, if we want change, it is going to take all of us pulling together, working in our communities, addressing our all-too-real human needs.

We need to recapture the spirit of that ragtag band of revolutionaries who beat back the British Empire and gave us the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. That will mean turning off the television, switching off the computer screen, learning more about our history and getting educated on the basics of our government and Constitution.

Then we need to act on what we know. It may start with voting, but that's the least we can do. Active, direct citizen participation at every level—local, state and federal—is the only real hope for change. As Mahatma Gandhi once said, "We need to be the change we wish to see in the world."


[by permission]

Read John Whitehead's other columns here.

Obama's "change" promises a continued path towards world government

Candidates from both parties will bring globalist programs

Barack Obama's July 24th speech in Berlin brought to light the Democratic Presidential candidates' globalist views, mirroring those of the Council on Foreign Relations and other globalist think tanks. Obama's praise of the European Union, calls for the "tearing down" of walls between nations and religions, and finally for world unity against climate change and terrorism reveal that an Obama Presidency will not bring change, but rather a continued erosion of national sovereignty and steps closer to world government.

Interestingly, Obama's speech was delivered beneath the "victory angel" statue in Berlin. As the Guardian reported on the 21st,

"The centrepiece of the European leg of Obama's visit will be his Berlin speech. Liberal and conservative politicians in Germany expressed consternation that Obama plans to address the crowds from beneath the golden angel statue which graces Berlin's Siegessäule, a landmark which Hitler moved to its present location as part of his bid to transform Berlin into the world capital Germania."

Obama's speech stated in part:

"That is why the greatest danger of all is to allow new walls to divide us from one another. The walls between old allies on either side of the Atlantic cannot stand. The walls between the countries with the most and those with the least cannot stand. The walls between races and tribes; natives and immigrants; Christian and Muslim and Jew cannot stand. These now are the walls we must tear down."

...

"Yes, there have been differences between America and Europe. No doubt, there will be differences in the future. But the burdens of global citizenship continue to bind us together. A change of leadership in Washington will not lift this burden. In this new century, Americans and Europeans alike will be required to do more -- not less. Partnership and cooperation among nations is not a choice; it is the one way, the only way, to protect our common security and advance our common humanity."

...

"The terrorists of September 11th plotted in Hamburg and trained in Kandahar and Karachi before killing thousands from all over the globe on American soil.

As we speak, cars in Boston and factories in Beijing are melting the ice caps in the Arctic, shrinking coastlines in the Atlantic, and bringing drought to farms from Kansas to Kenya.

In this new world, such dangerous currents have swept along faster than our efforts to contain them. That is why we cannot afford to be divided. No one nation, no matter how large or powerful, can defeat such challenges alone. None of us can deny these threats, or escape responsibility in meeting them. Yet, in the absence of Soviet tanks and a terrible wall, it has become easy to forget this truth. And if we're honest with each other, we know that sometimes, on both sides of the Atlantic, we have drifted apart, and forgotten our shared destiny."

Barack Obama's remarks mirror those of Richard Haass, the president of the Council on Foreign Relations, who stated that the problems of climate change and terrorism would require a surrender of national sovereignty and ultimately the formation of a world government. "Some governments are prepared to give up elements of sovereignty to address the threat of global climate change," stated Haass. "The goal should be to redefine sovereignty for the era of globalization, to find a balance between a world of fully sovereign states and an international system of either world government or anarchy."

Obama is not the only presidential candidate with globalist ideals. John McCain's proposed League of Democracies and support of North American integration is one example. Hillary Clinton's open support for world government is another.

Obama's promise of "change" will bring no such thing. A continuation of globalist policy towards world government and weakened national sovereignty will undoubtedly be pursued.

By Daniel Taylor - Old-Thinker News - July 24, 2008

Related: Media hails Obama’s Speech As Call For “New World Order”

[by permission]

Friday, August 22, 2008

The Meaning of Rick Warren and the Obama-McCain Interviews

By John W. Whitehead - The Rutherford Institute - Aug. 22, 2008

"I have never been considered a part of the religious right, because I don’t believe politics is the most effective way to change the world. Although public service can be a noble profession, and I believe it is our responsibility to vote, I don’t have much faith in government solutions, given the track record." — Rick Warren

The recent Saddleback Civil Forum on the Presidency was a wash. Both candidates, who claim to be Christians, spent much of their time pandering to the nearly three million television viewers who tuned in. But in terms of what presidential candidates John McCain and Barack Obama had to say, their responses were largely lacking in content.

However, the Saddleback Forum wasn’t insignificant. Its significance has less to do with what the two candidates had to say than in what the person asking the questions, Pastor Rick Warren, signifies for the future of Christianity in America.

The fact that it was Warren and not James Dobson, the Christian Right’s de facto Godfather, is particularly telling. It speaks of a decided shift away from the rigid, right-wing mindset that has dominated evangelical Christianity in America over the past three decades. Warren, pastor of the 23,000-member Saddleback Church in California and the best-selling author of The Purpose-Driven Life, seems to be about as far as you can get from the stigma of the Christian Right while still calling himself an evangelical Christian.

The Christian Right, represented by such prominent figures as Dobson, Pat Robertson and the late Jerry Falwell, among others, has long stood for the erection of a Christian State. As David Kuo, who served as Special Assistant to President George W. Bush documents in his book Tempting Faith, these Christian leaders worked hard to maintain ties to the Bush White House, complete with weekly conference calls to keep them updated on every facet of the president’s policy and political agenda.

However, the dismal failure of the George W. Bush presidency has led inevitably to the decline of the Christian Right—and can be credited with contributing to Warren’s rise to prominence. According to a 2005 Nation article, Warren “disassociates himself from the religious right, noting that he shares its position on social issues but doesn’t want to focus on them. He focuses on poverty, disease and aid to Africa.”

It’s not difficult to see why Warren, a mainline evangelical in the Billy Graham mold, is enjoying such popularity. Disillusioned by the power-hawking, war-mongering of the Christian Right, the nation’s 80 million evangelical Christians would have little trouble with the feel-good Christianity that Warren sells—non-confrontational, congenial and polite. That isn’t to say that it lacks substance, merely controversy.

As a recent Time article observed, like Graham, Warren “projects an authenticity that has helped him forge an exquisite set of political connections—in the White House, on both sides of the legislative aisle and abroad. And he is both leading and riding the newest wave of change in the Evangelical community: an expansion beyond social conservatism to causes such as battling poverty, opposing torture and combating global warming. The movement has loosened the hold of religious-right leaders on ordinary Evangelicals and created an opportunity for Warren, who has lent his prominent voice to many of the new concerns.”

Warren has avoided much that is controversial, such as abortion and gay marriage (what he refers to as “sin issues”). Instead, Warren focuses on issues that “unite,” such as poverty, HIV/AIDS, climate change and human rights. Warren is, whether consciously or unconsciously, shifting the national faith dialogue back to a pre-Reagan era, before the small group of leaders that have come to dominate the Christian Right turned Christianity into a synonym for right-wing theocracy.

Sidestepping the siren call of politics, Warren has taken aim at what he calls the “five global giants”: spiritual emptiness, selfish leadership, hunger, sickness and illiteracy. Empowered by his publishing success and with the support of his megachurch, he launched his PEACE initiative—an acronym for promote reconciliation; equip servant leaders; assist the poor; care for the sick; educate the next generation. Since coming up with the idea, he has taken his PEACE plan global, with Rwanda as his testing ground.

Warren is now being looked upon as America’s pastor. Suddenly, Christianity appears somewhat appealing again. Yet while there is much to commend this so-called New Evangelicalism, with its rejection of politics as the answer and its emphasis on carrying out Jesus’ mandate to care for the poor and helpless, there is also an important lesson to be learned. The rise of the Christian Right came about at a time when the evangelical church in America was doing its best to be non-controversial and inoffensive. The evangelical church’s subsequent failure to morally impact the culture and the legalizing of abortion can be directly attributed to the emergence of the Christian Right.

The Christian Right was, without a doubt, a semi-militant reaction to a society that seemed to be lacking a moral compass. And as journalist Chris Hedges points out in his book American Fascists, if a real crisis again arose in this country (such as another terrorist attack), it would not take much for the country to revert back to such a militant fundamentalism.

This brings us to the current presidential election. No matter who ascends to the White House, it’s clear that Christians will not enjoy the kind of access they laid claim to during the Bush administration—whatever good it did them. For example, abortions didn’t decline under Bush, and it’s doubtful whether they would under either Obama or McCain.

The lesson to be learned is this: what is needed now is not a return to the overly polite Christianity of the pre-Reagan era. Nor is it the politically charged Christianity of the Religious Right, but a brand of Christianity that does not shy away from speaking truth to power. In other words, the type of Christianity Jesus practiced.


[by permission]
Read John Whitehead's other columns here.

John McCain Pro Life? What A Joke!

by Dr. Chuck Baldwin - August 22, 2008

Once again, "pro-life" Christians are doing back flips to try and justify their compromise of the life issue by trying to convince everyone (including themselves) that John McCain is truly pro-life. However, these same people know in their hearts that John McCain shares no fidelity to the life issue in any significant or meaningful way. Like many in the Republican Party, McCain's commitment to life is about as deep as a mud puddle.

Dare I remind everyone that the "pro-life" GOP controlled the entire federal government from 2000 to 2006 and nothing was done to overturn Roe v. Wade or end legal abortion-on-demand? When George W. Bush took the oath of office in January of 2001, over one million innocent unborn babies were being murdered in the wombs of their mothers every year via legal abortions in this country. And when George W. Bush leaves office in January of 2009, over one million innocent unborn babies would still be murdered in the wombs of their mothers every year via legal abortions in this country. Eight years of a "pro-life" President and six years of the "pro-life" GOP in charge of the entire federal government and not one unborn baby's life has been saved. Roe v. Wade is still the law of the land, and abortion-on-demand is still legal in America.

Had John McCain and his fellow Republicans truly wanted to end legal abortion, they could have passed Congressman Ron Paul's Sanctity of Life Act. Year after year, Dr. Paul introduced this bill, and year after year, it sat and collected dust in the document room on Capitol Hill.

What would Congressman Paul's bill do? It would do two things: 1) It would define life as beginning at conception and, thus, declare the personhood of every pre-born child. 2) Under Article. III. Section. 2. of the U.S. Constitution, it would remove abortion from the jurisdiction of the Court. In practical terms, Dr. Paul's bill would overturn Roe v. Wade and end legal abortion-on-demand. So, where was John McCain? Why did he not support Ron Paul's bill and introduce a companion bill in the U.S. Senate?

How can John McCain, and his fellow Republicans in Washington, D.C., look pro-life Christians and conservatives in the eye in 2008 and expect that we take them seriously when they say that they are "pro-life"? If the GOP had truly wanted to overturn Roe v. Wade and end legal abortion-on-demand, they could have already done it. They controlled the White House, the U.S. Senate, and the House of Representatives for six long years, for goodness sake. The reason they did not do it is because they did not want to do it. They merely want to use "pro-life" rhetoric as a campaign tool to dupe gullible Christian voters every election year. And the disgusting thing about it is--it works.

The vast majority of notable "pro-life" leaders in the country are now trumpeting the candidacy of John McCain. And the best challenge they can come up with is "McCain better not pick a 'pro-choice' Vice President." Oh, shut up (to quote Jay Leno)!

John McCain openly embraces embryonic stem cell research. In 2000, he boldly said he did not favor the overturn of Roe v. Wade. John McCain was a member of the infamous "Gang of 14" senators from both parties whose purpose was to oppose pro-life, strict constructionist judges.

Speaking of judges, John McCain voted for the pro-abortion justice, Stephen Breyer, and the radical, pro-abortion, ACLU attorney, Ruth Bader Ginsburg. So much for the argument that we need John McCain for the sake of appointing conservative justices to the Supreme Court. For that matter, Republican appointments dominated the Court that gave us Roe v. Wade and the one that later gave us Doe v. Bolton. Proving, once again, that the Republican Party, as a whole, has no real commitment to the life issue.

John McCain also gave us McCain-Feingold. This is the law that keeps pro-life or pro-Second Amendment organizations from broadcasting ads that mention a candidate by name 30 days before a primary election or 60 days before a general election. This proves that John McCain believes neither in the right to life nor the right to keep and bear arms. (This is one reason why the Gun Owners of America gives McCain a grade of F.)

In a debate with George W. Bush in May of 2000, John McCain attacked Bush's support for the pro-life plank in the Republican Party. Still today, John McCain believes that babies who are conceived via rape or incest should be murdered. I remind readers, however, that there are no "exceptions" in the womb, only babies.

If all of the above is not enough, as a senator, John McCain has repeatedly voted to fund pro-abortion providers such as Planned Parenthood with federal tax dollars. In fact, McCain has voted to use federal tax dollars to support abortion providers at home and overseas. Yes, this "pro-life" senator (along with "pro-life" President, George W. Bush) has significantly increased federal spending for abortion providers to levels eclipsing even the appropriations authorized by President Bill Clinton and his fellow Democrats.

John McCain also supports the United Nations, which not only works to strip the United States of its independence and sovereignty, and banish our right to keep and bear arms, but is also the most radical, pro-abortion organization in the entire world. More babies have been aborted around the world under the auspices of the U.N. than any other single entity.

Tell me again, Mr. Christian Leader, how "pro-life" John McCain is. What a joke!

*If you enjoyed this column and want to help me distribute these editorial opinions to an ever-growing audience, donations may now be made by credit card, check, or Money Order. Use this link:

http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/donate.php

© Chuck Baldwin

This column is archived as http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/c2008/cbarchive_20080822.html


[by permission]

Read Dr. Chuck Baldwin's other columns here.  Dr. Baldwin is the 2008 Constitution Party candidate for President of the United States. His Campaign Web Site has more information. Chuck Baldwin's archived columns are reprinted here to give the U.S. voter a point of view different from that of the mainstream media and the autocratic establishment parties. Disclaimer: Neither Chuck Baldwin, Darrell Castle, their campaigns, nor the Constitution Party approve or endorse this blog.

Thursday, August 21, 2008

Chuck Baldwin at Freedom 21 Conference - video

Dr. CHUCK BALDWIN on globalism, gun rights, and the 2008 election; interview by Mark Anderson of American Free Press:


YouTube video (4:33)
Courtesy: afpsupporter

[We apologize for the poor audio quality. - ed.]

0.1% for Chuck Baldwin - is that all?

Nearly 2 in 3 voters want someone else

Stunning 62.4% of Americans would like to see better choices of candidates, parties in future

Besides those indicating they will not be voting at all, 2.5 percent chose other – despite the fact that all five minor party nominees were included as options for poll-takers. Among those five, Ralph Nader of the Peace and Freedom Party was the leader with 1.6 percent, followed by Bob Barr of the Libertarian Party with 1.2 percent. They were followed by Alan Keyes of the America's Independent Party nominee Alan Keyes with 0.7 percent, Cynthia McKinney of the Green Party with 0.2 percent and Chuck Baldwin of the Constitution Party with 0.1 percent. Another 0.4 percent said they planned to write-in their choice for president. ...

WorldNetDaily - August 19, 2008

[If that's all Americans think of the Constitution, we're in immense, terminal trouble. Read comments by Constitutionalists. - ed.]

Wednesday, August 20, 2008

Do you pray for America?

The following prayers are Scriptures adapted "vertically" to be prayed back to God. This pattern of worship, thanksgiving, confession and requesting will help prepare you to intercede for the elections. Use these Scriptures to prepare your heart to pray.

Pray the Scriptures for Election Day!

from: The Presidential Prayer Team

[This is a non-partisan effort. - ed.]

Tuesday, August 19, 2008

Are We Stupid, Crazy, or Both?



Are You Ready for Nuclear War?

By PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS - CounterPunch.org - August 19, 2008

Russia has made no threats against America. The post-Soviet Russian government has sought to cooperate with the US and Europe. Russia has made it clear over and over that it is prepared to obey international law and treaties. It is the Americans who have thrown international law and treaties into the trash can, not the Russians.

In order to keep the billions of dollars in profits flowing to its contributors in the US military-security complex, the Bush Regime has rekindled the cold war. As American living standards decline and the prospects for university graduates deteriorate, “our” leaders in Washington commit us to a hundred years of war.

If you desire to be poor, oppressed, and eventually vaporized in a nuclear war, vote Republican. ...

[...and if you want to kill more unborn and newborn babies, promote sexual perversion, socialism, and the new world order, vote Democrat. If you want to vote for the Constitution — and your liberty — vote for Chuck Baldwin and Darrell Castle of the Constitution Party. - ed.]