Saturday, April 23, 2011
Risen to show His authority over death.
Risen to show that the promises of the Lord have been kept.
Risen to show that we who hear, believe and accept His sacrifice are now and forever joint heirs with Christ in the kingdom of Heaven.
This is not to gloat over those who reject Christ, nor to make them feel guilty for their sins. We have and continue (in spite of our best and sometimes not so best efforts) to sin too. This is not an "us against the world" celebration. (Although it is often framed that way.)
It is simply a joyous celebration of relief and thankfulness that God is a God who keeps his promises.
Notice the lack of the word "our" in front of "God" in that last sentence. That is because there is only one God. The truth does not change for the preferences of those who dislike it. As Christians we celebrate today, the truth and faithfulness of God, while reminding ourselves that not all will believe. Knowing also, that of those who believe, not all will accept.
May the rest of the world see and accept the truth and sacrifice of God this year that we may all be together in Heaven.
A Joyous resurrection Day to all.
"But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them that slept.
For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead.
For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.
But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming.
Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power.
For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet.
The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death." ~ 1 Cor 20-26
Thursday, April 21, 2011
Governor Walker is also receiving death threats on Twitter. Someone up in my area has called a business that they thought was being patronized by Sen. Leibham and told them that having Sen. Leibham as a customer wasn't good for the business.
Since when is this acceptable behavior? This is not a television show about the mafia, this is Wisconsin. Behaving in a way designed to terrorize a single woman? (Would you want your mother or your sister to be treated like that?) Threatening the governor? Making veiled threats to a business owner? What do these people think they will accomplish by behaving this way?
Let me just say that the light of day is the best disinfectant for this sort of infestation. I hope every citizen who has been threatened in such a fashion will stand up for American values and call the bullies out in public. Let their friends and neighbors see what kind of people they really are. And when you've done that, drag them into court and make sure there are consequences for such behavior.
This is my state, and people should behave themselves or leave. We can have all the differences of opinion we like, but taking that discussion into the arena of physical intimidation and death threats is unacceptable. "We will never be abandoned by Heaven while we act worthy of its aid and protection". While Samuel Adams was referring to the nation when he made that statement, it applies equally as well on the state and individual level. How is this "acting worthy of " anything except shame, fines and jail?
It is my sincere belief that the people of this state will not stand idly by while a small, badly behaved, bunch of unruly hooligans bully those who are doing their level best to save our state from bankruptcy or their supporters. For those who are the neighbors, friends and supporters of these people, keep an eye out for them. Call the police when necessary, and if,(as may, sadly and shockingly be the case in Madison-our capital city) they won't help, then step up and help out yourself. Do not allow such childish tactics to become a substitute for the rule of law. We are better than that here.
"Talk no more so exceeding proudly; let not arrogancy come out of your mouth: for the LORD is a God of knowledge, and by him actions are weighed." ~ 1 Sam 2:3
Tuesday, April 19, 2011
Wondering what's been going on with some of the other guests since they were on the show?
- Josh Tolley has had an article picked up by GCN. You can read it here.
- Alexandrea Merrell has been enrolled in God's boot camp. Read about it here.
- DR and SR continue to blog at The Maritime Sentry. (There's a link in my blogroll.)
- Suzanne Venker continues to do interviews to promote "The Flipside of Feminism".
- I haven't heard from Mr. Lynch in a bit, but I'm keeping an eye out for the sequel to "American Midnight".
- The Baron continues the excellent work he has been doing at the Gates of Vienna-also linked on my blogroll.
- Rep. Kestell continues to work towards the vision of a fiscally secure and Constitutionally correct state.
- Jake Speed did not win the special election to replace Mr. Huebtsch, but continues to work towards the restoration of the Constitution in his community.
- Ethan Hollenberger continues to be politically active and is hosting a radio show at Marquette University.
- Thomas is doing well in his first year at college and is planning a concert in May. For those who like the intro music to my show-he'll be playing that at the concert too. Come on down, hear some great music -originals and covers - and help him pay for college.
"And I say unto you my friends, Be not afraid of them that kill the body, and after that have no more that they can do." ~ Luke 12:4
Thursday, April 14, 2011
I just watched a report on MSNBC which stated that Paul Ryan's budget plan is going to starve and kill old people. That's the actual language they used. Shocking, isn't it? What kind of country would allow their old people to be starved and killed? (See minute 2:20 into the video.)
Apparently the folks at MSNBC think that the seniors of this nation are going to be imprisoned, starved and killed in order to bring government spending under control in Mr. Ryan's budget. What's that you say? That's not the case? Oh, the seniors and their families are just going to have to find another way to pay for their food and care than through government handouts? Well that's quite a bit different isn't it?
The assumption that, without a government handout, these older folks will be allowed to starve and go without their medications assumes quite a lot that may or may not be true.
- It assumes that the senior citizens themselves will not take any action to replace the funds and health care plans that are currently being provided by the government. (And isn't Obamacare supposed to take care of all our health needs? But, wait, that's right, Obama care will be rationed and seniors, being at the end of their lives simply won't be eligible for the best treatments.)
- It assumes that the families of these seniors will not be pitching in to help Mom, Dad, Aunt Mary and Uncle Joe either.
- It assumes that our churches and community organizations won't be picking up any of that slack.
- And, finally(at least for this post) it assumes that drug companies and doctors will deny these people the access they need to proper health care.
Those are a lot of assumptions and for the most part, I don't think any of them are accurate. This is the most charitable nation in the world and if we lack the character to help ourselves, as senior citizens, or our fellows, as younger people, then what hope is there for the world?Doctors complain now that they are unable to donate their time and talents to help needy patients, because of government guidelines that demand that if they treat one patient for free, they must charge medicare nothing for treating medicare eligible patients. Does that sound like doctors are going to deny care to truly needy patients? (But, wait, I forgot about Obamacare again. Under Obamacare, if doctors don't limit themselves to prescribing only the government recommended treatments, they will be draconically fined and possibly jailed.)
Drug companies already offer free and reduced cost pharmaceuticals for the truly needy as well. That doesn't sound like people are going to be denied what they need for their lives by the greedy drug companies either. (In fact, it almost looks like the drug companies aren't quite so greedy as many have been led by the nose to believe.)
Certainly I am not saying that everyone's needs will be met in these or other ways by families and communities, but then, the government's entitlement programs are letting quite a few people "fall through the cracks" as well. The truth is, that no system is perfect. No system is going to truly meet the needs of everyone equitably. That's not even a realistic goal. If I have to choose between the two options, I prefer to choose a system that encourages people to get involved in the care of themselves and others, rather than a system that relieves me of the burden of caring for my fellow man because "that's what I pay my taxes for", so I won't have to be bothered.
Because, in the end, that's what government entitlement programs are, right? A way to foist our uncomfortable duty to our fellow man off on a faceless entity so that we don't have to be bothered when we see someone in need? We are better than that, and Mr. Ryan knows it. It's time the people at MSNBC knew it too.
The truth is that Mr. Ryan's budget is not going to yank these entitlement programs out from under people. It is going to slowly change the programs so that we can get our act together with regard to caring for our own at the local level.
It is a necessary plan if we do not want our children and grandchildren to live in poverty because they have to pay for our excesses. And that's the bottom line.
"And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned, and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing." ~ 1 Cor 13:3
Tuesday, April 5, 2011
Mr. Prosser is painted as a man of bad temper for calling another judge names a year ago. The response of another justice to this outburst was to write an e-mail stating: "You are a very active participant in the dysfunctional way we carry-on. (As am I.) You often goad other justices by pushing and pushing in conference in a way that is simply rude and completely nonproductive. That is what happened when David lost his cool. He is not a man who attacks others without provocation." to yet a third justice who leaked the blow-up. (in violation of the law) His past as a D.A. is brought up and his integrity questioned over a case from 20 years ago that was handled in what was regarded as a reasonable fashion, with regard for the victims at that time.
Ms. Kloppenburg is painted as a raging liberal with no sense of ethics or decency because she used an abuse case in commercials to denigrate her opponent and refused to stop the ads even when requested to do so by the victims. Her supporters have the appalling slogan, "A vote for Kloppenburg is a vote against Walker", for a post which is supposed to be about the rule of law rather than partisan politics. She has also been described as: "Joanne Kloppenburg, a die-hard lefty with zero judicial experience who has all but promised the state’s thuggish public unions that she will be their firewall in stopping Governor Walker’s reforms via judicial fiat."
It is important to note that the ads were run by a third party. However, if I were the candidate in question here, I would have done everything and anything in my power, including dropping out of the race, to stop those ads and to avoid being characterized as unethical and biased. Any judicial candidate who would be satisfied to be elected with such commercials, (whether they were put out by the candidate or a third party), or to be portrayed as so very partisan is not fit to sit on the bench.
The hard, cold facts are that Mr. Prosser has served for years as a judge as well as holding several other posts. He is generally well respected and liked and regarded as an impartial judge who rules according to what the state constitution says.
Ms. Kloppenburg has served as a lawyer and, while in college, and assistant to Judge Abrahamson and Judge Crab. she has been passed over for judgicial appointments by governors conservative and liberal. (I would like to see a supreme court justice candidate with some actual time on the bench as a judge, but that is my personal opinion.)
For those who seek a test of character to decide for whom to cast their vote, let me say that Ms. Kloppenburg is supported by the unions who have been behaving so very badly over these past weeks and she is supported by Planned Parenthood. Mr. Prosser is not. Draw from those facts what conclusions you will as to the character of these two candidates.
The bigger questions to me, that this race has brought to light, are: 1.) The appalling behavior at and within the WI supreme court. Perhaps I am a bit of an idealist, but I always thought that judges were above that sort of petty squabbling and certainly above catering to any sort of partisan politics. That's their job, to sort out what the law says, not to create new law. (That's the job of the legislature, not the judiciary.)and; 2.)The appalling assertion of Ms. Kloppenburg's supporters (You know, those same folks who actually WANT a democracy-why anyone would prefer such an unstable and unfair form of government over the wonderful republic our founders gave us is beyond me. It must be sheerest ignorance of history and human nature.) that they prefer an activist judge, rather than one who will base their rulings on the law and the WI State Constitution. Really!? How dumb are we?
"He that turneth away his ear from hearing the law, even his prayer shall be abomination." ~Prov 28:9