Blog Archives

low tide

2/24/2015

By Jim Lyde
Chief Operating Officer

[Apologies to Carl Sigman and Robert Maxwell, creators of “Ebb Tide,” a beautiful song]

First the tide rushes in,
Plants a dream on the shore,
Then dams out the sea
And the sea is very still once more.

So we rush to your side,
A new oncoming tide
With one burning thought.
Will your minds open wide?

At last we’re face to face
And as you spurn with false embrace,
We can tell, we can feel,
Your greed is real.
Genuine,

In the rain, in the dark, in the sun.
Like the tide at its ebb
We are caught in the web
Of your harm.

The Founders’ incredible, swelling tide that led to the formation of a dream for humanity has stagnated. This nation is in danger of merging into the loathsome pool that contains the other countries of the world. America is losing its position of being an international inspirational example. By examining the history, writings and actions of the Obama Administration, one can clearly see that this tragedy is planned.

The plan is ongoing still, despite its resounding rejection by the people in November, 2014. My consternation is caused by Obama’s expansion of the meaning of “greed.” We the people have always been plagued by our leaders’ unscrupulous pursuit of money via the power of tenure. But now we are subjected to an administrative greed that includes the fruition of an ideology other than thievery. Obama is steadily moving our country toward being a socialist state. He is so obstinately dedicated to this cause that he routinely skirts or ignores the Constitution to make it happen. His followers, including the media, hide the President behind his historically unique status. His charm and persuasiveness disguise the fact that the truth is not in him. The members of Congress should emulate Obama’s zeal with indignant, substantive opposition. They do not.

The brilliance of our Founders is virtually unbounded. Their vision led to the inclusion in the Constitution of a remedy to this abysmal situation. It is found in Article Five:

The Congress, whenever two thirds of both houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose amendments to this Constitution, or, on the application of the legislatures of two thirds of the several states, shall call a convention for proposing amendments, which, in either case, shall be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the legislatures of three fourths of the several states, or by conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other mode of ratification may be proposed by the Congress…

The Convention of States Project is actively pursuing this goal. This very well organized effort invokes a strategy of generalizing the text of the proposed amendment (reduce the power of government) for the sake of uniformity. Check the link for more information. Yours truly is a proud volunteer. You should be, too!

A legislative solution, however, remains. Elsewhere in this blog is an editorial written by a true hero, Charles Krauthammer. Please read it. Krauthammer is right – Congress should “go nuclear.” Senate Democrats have blocked a vote on the funding of the Department of Homeland Security by denying the 60 votes required to avoid a filibuster. Today Republicans have countered by separating overall DHS funding (approved) and funding for Obama’s illegal executive orders (denied). Either way, the Senate should force upon the President the stated position of the people: Withdraw the filibuster provision from Senate rules just like Democrat Harry Reid did to get the D.C. Court of Appeals packed with liberal judges. Stand up to the socialist-in-chief and reject the harm that has been created. The current agenda item is the unconstitutional creation of immigration “law,” so to speak.

Reid beat up a second time!

Then, on to Obamacare! Recall that it was passed into law without a single Republican vote. A bill repealing this disaster should land on the President’s desk from the majority of Republican votes that now exists in the Senate. Such a bill likely would also have at least some Democratic support. The people would have an emphatic victory and validation of their will.

Honoring the will of the people? What a concept!

1 Comment

TURN-TABLE PIE "A LA REID"

2/24/2015

0 Comments

By Charles Krauthammer

I’ve been radicalized. By Harry Reid and Barack Obama. Goodbye, moderation and sweet reason. No more clinging to constitutional and procedural restraint. It’s time to go nuclear.

In the fourth quarter of his presidency, Obama unbound is abusing presidential authority to secure a legacy on everything from environmental regulation to immigrations, the laws of which he would unilaterally suspend. Republicans find themselves bleating plaintively about violations of the separation of powers. They thought they found an instrument of resistance in funding for the Department of Homeland Security. The House has funded the department except for the immigration service, which was denied the money to implement Obama’s executive amnesty.

But Democrats have filibustered the bill in the Senate. And as the night follows day, Republicans, not the filibustering Democrats, will be blamed for shutting down the department and jeopardizing the nation’s safety.

There is a way out for the GOP. Go nuclear. Abolish the filibuster. Pass the bill and send it to the president. Reid went nuclear in November, 2013 when he abolished the filibuster for presidential appointees and judicial appointees (below the Supreme Court). He did it to pack the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals with liberals.

My beef with Reid was not what he did but how he did it. The filibuster has grown in use over the decades to the point of dysfunction. Everything needed 60 votes. This is relatively new and nowhere to be found in the Constitution. My problem was the way Reid changed the rule: by a simple majority, 52 – 48, with no Republican onboard (and three Democrats defecting). As I wrote at the time, “If a bare majority can change the fundamental rules that govern an institution, then there are no rules.”

Reid went nuclear first. Time for Majority Leader Mitch McConnell to finish the job. Push the button. Abolish the filibuster.

Then pass the homeland security bill and send it to the president. He is likely to veto it, but the politics will have been radically changed. The current storyline is: Republican Congress won’t fund the Department of Homeland Security, threatening to shut it down. New storyline: Obama vetoes funding for DHS, threatening to shut it down.

Obama’s choice? Sign, veto or negotiate a compromise. If he vetoes, then Republicans take that issue to the country in 2016.

A GOP resort to the nuclear option might make Democrats come to their senses and negotiate a new understanding that any fundamental change in Senate rules – e.g., altering the filibuster – will henceforth require some agreed-to supermajority. No more bare-majority party-line coups. This would be ideal. But that’s for later. For now, go for the doable.

Abolish the filibuster and challenge the president. And when asked
“How can you do such a thing?” tell them to ask Harry Reid.

GOOD NEWS

2/24/2015

3 Comments

Convention of the States

A conference of 2,000 conservative and libertarian leaders earlier this year led to a great deal of discussion about using a Convention of the States to amend the Constitution and limit federal power. It’s a herculean task — two-thirds of the states would have to call for the convention, and then three-quarters would have to vote to ratify any amendments the convention submitted. But many called the War of Independence equally impossible — and that turned out pretty well.

Those amendments written by the convention could conceivably include almost anything, but some of the leading ideas included tax reform, a balanced budget and, yes, term limits for senators and representatives.

The conference was organized by John Aglialoro, the man who funded the “Atlas Shrugged” film trilogy and a long-time supporter of the free market. “We can never count on Congress to reform itself or limit its power,” Aglialoro told National Review. “We need to go around Congress to get this done.”

But even if the amendments are never ratified by three-quarters of the states, there could be two excellent reasons to push for a Convention of the States. First, the process itself could be very educational for the American people, reminding them of the debates in which the Founders worked over two hundred years ago to protect individual liberty — and how far the nation has strayed from those values. In doing so, it would also provide a forum for commonsense proposals endorsed by the majority of American voters — like term limits. Second, the mere threat of such a convention could serve as an impetus to Congress to enact some of these changes on their own, something they are highly unlikely to do without strong external motivation.

There are, of course, risks. Sending politicians to such a conference may generate the same sort of lack of reform that we see from Congress. Delegates from liberal states could attempt to add socialist programs to the Constitutions. But there’s risk in doing nothing, too.

And with approval levels for both the president and the Congress in the cellar, now might be the best time to push for solutions that don’t involve the federal government at all.

3 Comments

DIVERSITY

2/18/2015

1 Comment

                                                        By Jim Lyde
                                                 Chief Operating Officer

Diversity is not the problem; reaction to it is the problem. Americans are positively changing their views toward those who are different. However, so many actions are borne of unconscious predisposed behavior traits. Children have no control over the way they have been raised. The false beliefs and understandings that have been ingrained in all of us must be deliberately confronted from within after education and realization. With a nod to Martin Luther King, Jr.: “Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that.” For an account of the change in the views of a typical Midwestern white boy born in the mid 1940’s, please read "Political Correctness," in the VINTAGE TLC section this site.

But who among us has changed? In my lifetime change has come more from whites than from minorities. It seems that Caucasians have gained more from the eloquent verbiage and courageous acts of Martin Luther King, Jr. and others than have black Americans. The basically pure motives of marches and demonstrations in the mid-twentieth century have grossly morphed into the deceitful activities of rioting and many other criminal acts. Such behavior blasphemes the alleged intended purposes of the demonstrations.   It is an insult to a noble heritage of love and justice. Larry Elders “tweeted” to Al Sharpton: “Burn businesses, some mom & pop and black owned. Then complain about ‘lack of opportunity.’ Nice work.”

Previous TLC articles have lamented the fact that black society has not fully responded to the lives of millions of successful people in its midst. Hundreds of thoughtful, brilliant and communicative black leaders have promoted perseverance, education, traditional family and lawful behavior as keys to success. They have not received responses to the degree they deserve. Thanks to political correctness and evil race baiters, many people have been duped into viewing race relations, especially between law enforcement and black citizens, through a completely false prism. We need to be jolted into a truthful vision.

For example, law enforcement legally “profiles” every aspect of criminal investigation except the race of those involved. Racial profiling of black citizens is taboo, even though blacks commit crimes at a rate much larger than their population proportion would indicate. If a suspect is described as being black or the area has sustained a lot of crime committed by blacks, that’s the type of person who will be prioritized. Hispanics effectively complain about being profiled on our southern border. That complaint is ridiculous on its face. To date, very few illegal Mongols or Zulus have been apprehended. A practical improvement could be gained regarding this situation by securing our borders. If a suspect is described as being old, white, over-weight and driving a pickup truck my future might involve a conversation with the police. Cops try to catch crooks, period. Investigators profile for a simple reason: it works.

James Comey, our new FBI Chief, believes that law enforcement and race relations are at a “crossroads” and that this confrontation should be addressed now. He made a remark that deserves more scrutiny:

“Two young black men on one side of the street look like so many others [an] officer has locked up. Two white men on the other side of the street – even in the same clothes – do not. The officer does not make the same association about the two white guys, whether that officer is white or black, and that drives different behavior.”

That is a valid statement. My attention was drawn to the phrase, “…whether that officer is white or black…” If a black officer is more suspicious of blacks than similarly dressed whites, is racial discrimination necessarily involved if a white officer agrees?

It is trendy to demonize those of any race who physically discipline their children. Adrian Peterson of the Minnesota Vikings was accused of child abuse for switching his child. Although there were a couple of introductions to switches in my childhood, the belt was a much more intimate acquaintance. Corporal punishment may not be the answer, but DISCIPLINE certainly is! Undisciplined children may grow up to become the "progressive populace," symbolized by the shrill and mindless “flap-jawing” of the liberal media, or perhaps even the thieves and arsonists that loudly pretend to demonstrate against injustice. But noise is not usually related to logic. Liberals actually think that avoiding issues by yelling and name-calling is a way to win arguments. The liberal debating formula seems to be: distraction via insult = intelligence. The question here is: how many of these loud-mouths ever got their buttocks busted?

Charley Wilkison has written a splendid article on Officer Wilson and the tragedy at Ferguson, Missouri.   Within this article is a haunting sentence: "Imagine if law enforcement families encouraged burning down the area where a cop was murdered."   Let's let that sink in for a moment. If only we could find a calm environment, free of the distractive noises from all sides, and asked that question perhaps a meaningful discourse could begin.

1 Comment

healing the racial divide

2/18/2015

0 Comments

By Harry Jackson

Editor’s Note: It is suggested to the secular among us to read this article for the purpose of examining its value and to avoid laboring over its religious perspective.

The recent national crises and racial tension have underscored that America seems more divided than ever. On one hand, President Obama believes that our differences are just being exposed. On the other hand a few of us feel that the President and Attorney General Holder exacerbated the race problem. In some ways, both views are right. How could that be? America has come a long way since the lynchings of the 50s and days of Selma. However, we have a ways to go in terms of race, poverty, and class.

We could not have expected the President alone to work miracles with an issue that has plagued our nation from its beginning. Our political leaders can only do so much. All the institutions in society must work together to move forward, but the Church has always had a special role to play. While segments of the American Church have historically been blind to the sin of racism—and even justified slavery by distorting Scripture—other parts of the Church have led the way in ending racial injustice.

So how can the Church take the lead as we look for ways to draw Americans closer together and build greater understanding among the growing variety of ethnic groups that make up our great “melting pot”? Last week Thursday January 15th, I helped convene a meeting of over 150 ministers who met at the Potter’s House in Dallas, for a powerful closed door conclave called: The Reconciled Church: Healing the Racial Divide. Collectively, we represented a diverse group of significant leaders from across denominations and ideological backgrounds. These leaders represented over 40 million American Christians.

The purpose of that meeting was to reach consensus on how we can promote peaceful reconciliation and to collaborate on how bridges can be established for a brighter economic future in our communities. These social entrepreneurs and influencers are building tremendous ministries that address underlying cures for race, class, and poverty problems. Our nation deserves these better models of spiritual leadership. We have the opportunity to change the course of history within the American church and affect the globe. Our time is now.

The group believes that “Healing the Racial Divide” in our nation is achievable in the next 15 to 20 years by using what we dubbed “seven bridges to peace”. These bridges of peace serve as a framework for a lasting model of unity that is built on our concern for the well-being of all people. All of us agreed that the American church has been divided along class and racial lines. Therefore, we signed a covenant of reconciliation and committed to the process of healing the racial rifts within the church. Essentially, we agreed to multiply our good works and make them more multi-ethnic.

What became apparent during our time is that America’s clergy—those who remain devoted to the Word of God—are deeply invested in healing the divisions in our society. If we take unified action in moments of tension, we can do a much better job exhorting people to productive action than the mainstream media, which remains addicted to confrontation, scandal and shining the spotlight on the worst in human behavior.

We can take a cue from some of the most successfully reconciled organizations in our nation today: professional and college sports, which though not perfect, remain far more integrated than most churches and neighborhoods. Such organizations share a clear, common mission: to win, and each player is recruited for his or her ability to contribute to that goal. I believe if America’s clergy can continue to gain understanding from one another, we can build a sense of common purpose and solidarity across racial and ethnic lines among our churches and in our communities.

At the end of the day, the people in America’s urban centers are not so different from those in the nation’s suburbs and gated communities. We all carry the image of God, and desire respect, the benefit of the doubt and opportunity to advance in life. And I believe America’s pastors hold the key to cultivating this kind of understanding. We have the opportunity to change the course of history within the American church and affect the globe. Our time is now.

low tide

TURN-TABLE PIE "A LA REID"

GOOD NEWS

DIVERSITY

healing the racial divide

Archives

Categories﻿societyconstitutionRIGHTS﻿

Categories

society

constitution

RIGHTS