Thursday, April 17, 2014

Enough is Enough

The trouble with a scandals is that each drip only serves to magnify the next. The Obama
administration is proving to be one of the most corrupt in our nation's history. Worse, the lapdogs in the American media has willfully allowed them to get away with that corruption because they approve of the political agenda of those in office. From Benghazi to Fast and Furious, and now to the IRS scandal, we see a government that is out of control. The elected officials that we appointed to serve us has failed us miserably, and if I had the sole power and authority I would fire every last one of them in the Federal government.

This government has left American citizens to die overseas, including it's own Ambassador to Libya. It ordered it's security forces to take no action and the number of dead in Benghazi would have been far larger had Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty not disobeyed those orders and rendered aid to those in peril. Their thanks? A government that sought to diminish their actions by attributing the attack to a protest that got out of hand. In short, they lied. The media lied. The left lied. In sowing their deceits, they insult the memory of the fallen. They disrespect their sacrifice and they disrespect their families.

Attorney General Eric Holder, who once stood for terrorists, allowed guns to be shipped to drug cartels resulting in the deaths of two Federal agents and hundreds of citizens South of the border. While he was crying on the shoulder of those who share his political ideology and seeking their comfort, I wonder where the families of the fallen will receive their succor? In contrast to the loss of life courtesy of his Department of Justice, his treatment before Congress pales in comparison. Then there are the cases brought before his office for intimidating voters at the polls. Did he prosecute the Black Panthers? No, he allowed them to walk. So much for enforcing the laws of the United States and upholding his oath of office.

Did I mention that he and President Obama chose not to try the terrorist in custody for attacking the U.S.S. Cole and denied the families of the deceased the justice that they had long awaited and deserved? What did they say to the families to whom they denied justice? Not a damned thing. They just blew them off, adding insult to injury. I can only imagine the terrorist laughing at them when he received the news. But wait, at least President Obama closed Gitmo and got rid of water boarding prisoners like he promised, right? Not hardly. Gitmo is still open and water boarding prisoners is still at the discretion of the President. Then there is the IRS scandal. Hold on to your socks folks, because it only goes downhill from here.

The funny thing about emails is that even if you delete them, they are still archived by back up storage. I'm betting that Lois Lerner is wishing that she had set up an alternate account like others in the Administration did to avoid messy subpoenas about now. Her own words describe criminal activity that would net her decades in a Federal prison. How much do you want to bet that Eric Holder isn't in any rush to prosecute that case either?

The left has a long history of using the government to attack their political enemies. Here in the States, we used to take a dim view of that behavior. But recent revelations about the IRS, OSHA, the FBI, and FEC make that point of view questionable these days. At first, the Feds lied about what happened. Remember the old story about the targeting of conservatives by the IRS for "special treatment" just being the actions of a few misguided people in the heartland? Then the story changed and now it is Washington D.C., and not the maligned workers in Ohio that are at fault. Then it narrowed to the Director of non-profits. Then a Congressman, Elijah Cummings, was revealed to have had a hand in the directing the affair. Feel like betting the buck stops there? No? I wouldn't either.

You may remember Congressman Cummings as the gentleman who tried his best to derail the investigation into the scandal and his harsh words for those who believed that there was a cover up. Isn't it funny how those who have something to worry about are often the loudest voices on the left? Whether this was because he was involved in directing the IRS or because he is trying to cover up the possible involvement of the White House, is something that is unknown as of right now. Speaking of the White House, I wonder if President Obama still believes that there isn't a "smidgen" of wrong doing at the IRS? Isn't it interesting how whenever he says something, it is later proved to be false? Recall when he said that if you like your doctor/insurance you could keep them, period? Yeah, turns out that wasn't true, just like his prognostications on the IRS investigation turned out to be false. But it gets better.

Emails also reveal that had the scandal not broken, the IRS in collusion with the Department of Justice were trumping up criminal charges for their political enemies. Now, I may be a bit seasoned, but that is far worse than anything that Richard M. Nixon ever thought about doing. In fact, the doings of this administration reaches a level of rot only seen once in the history of the United States and in my opinion, trumps Tammany Hall.

But this isn't the first time that the left has been at the center of corruption. There was the House banking scandal, the House Post Office scandal, charges of bribery and sexual impropriety, and so forth. While Democrats were not alone in these, they were the greatest perpetrators by far. It isn't even the first time that the left has gotten caught with it's hand in the cookie jar. Recall when Obama first attained office? Remember how The National Endowment for the Arts was planning on using code words to hide the use of public funds for propaganda? Remember how all of that pointed to Valerie Jarrett's office? See the recurring pattern of behavior yet?

And then there were the leftist agitators who once billed themselves as paragons of virtue when President Bush were in office. Remember how they screamed about the budget? Funny, but I don't hear a peep out any of them about anything regarding Benghazi or the IRS scandal or any cover ups. They wrung their hands and shed tears of sorrow for the vast deficit that President Bush ran up. But when President Obama outpaces him by a factor of four, nothing. Not one damned word. Ditto for the Americans that died in the sand in Benghazi, and the same for the innocent citizens targeted by a hostile government. If ever there were a reason not to listen to those whiners, it is their stark hypocrisy.

Always I am asked by people why I have little or no use for those of the left. If you have ever seen the arrogant, self important, self righteous look on Lois Lerner's face knowing what she did to innocent people, you have your answer. They sicken me, just as Lois Lerner and Elijah Cummings sicken me. It speaks volumes about your political ideology if you have to use the trappings of government to silence political dissent. We have seen this before in places like Lubyanka, the Gulags of the Soviet Union, and Tiananmen Square. We were told about the dealings of the secret police in tyrannies across the globe, and about camps where the innocent were sent to be worked to death by a cruel and unjust government if they were lucky, and executed outright if they were not. This, Piers Morgan, is why the second amendment exists. Not to hunt, but to defend one's self from the enterprises of tyranny. If an American citizen is subject to these travesties, how much more so are those who live in States where you have no arms with which to defend yourself? But he, and those pompous jackasses who think like he does, doesn't care about your rights or your freedoms. They only care about the power of the State.

The power of any State is enough to terrify any man of conscience. This is because the State has the ability to deprive you  of your property and of your very life. If misused, it is a tyranny and the bane of mankind. Even where the government is beneficial, it must still be watched carefully. That is why the deaths of American's overseas is important, that is why the government arming drug lords is important, and that is why targeting citizens who dissent from the government's position is important, and why allowing the private citizen to retain his arms is a vital check to such abuse of power. A government should be afraid of it's citizens, not the other way around.

Our elected officials no longer listen to us. Where once they were our representatives, now they hold themselves as our masters. What other explanation can there be for Nancy Pelosi who famously said that we can know what is in the bill when they pass the bill? When she locked out Republican representatives from legislative sessions, do you honestly believe that she had their constituents in mind when she did that? Who was representing them? Nobody, that's who. We once fought a war of revolution over that. It was only when the uproar began that she relented. The Federal government has only grown more predatory since then under leftist guidance.

Remember when Rahm Emmanuel and Barack Obama said that they wanted a civilian enforcement agency that was just as well equipped and trained as the U.S. military? Did you know that Federal agencies across the board are being armed and equipped like a paramilitary force? Think that there is a connection there? I don't know, but I do know that you cannot trust the government, and this episode that involves the DOJ, FBI, IRS, Department of Labor, FEC, etc. proves it.

Our founders didn't trust the government because men run it. Because men are not perfect, they are susceptible to corruption. As men are susceptible to corruption, they must be watched to insure that the freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution are not abridged. Perfect logic, but those of the left scoff at such an idea. Just as Piers Morgan scoffed at those who believe as I do, that the government cannot be trusted. You do not place such trust in any institution run by man. Only God is worthy of such trust, and last I checked Barack Obama does not walk on water.

If the American people do not awaken to the perfidy transpiring right under their nose, then freedom will be lost. Our apathy has allowed our government to break free from our control. It now runs rampant upon our fellow citizens. Next week, who will it's victims be? What happens when the government decides that it doesn't agree with those who believe that abortion is wrong? Or that the States should have the lions share of legislative authority because they are closer to the people? Just as the National Socialists came for their citizens one by one, this government is poised to do the same.

Never before has an American's own government viewed them as an enemy. Yet, if you consider yourself to be a conservative, that is exactly how the Federal government views you. From Homeland Security to the military, Christian conservatives find themselves to be the targets of training exercises that brand us as enemies of the State. Congressmen openly state that they do not give a damn about Constitutional limitations in the pursuit of their agenda and that has been caught on video many a time. President Obama told Medvedev that he couldn't provide something to Putin until after the election. What was it that he couldn't provide? The news never asked him.

So anesthetized are we that many of us no longer even pay attention to the workings of our own government. Jefferson said of public education that it was "for every man to decide for himself what will secure or endanger his freedom." This is why we teach government in our public schools. But when we succumb to apathy, we enable corruption to set in. Once, we could count on the news media to alert us to the potential dangers of government, but no longer. The media watchdog is firmly under the control of the government. Reporters fawn over their favorite political leaders and contribute heavily to their campaigns in direct violation of ethical and employer restraints. Oddly, they have the same smug, self righteous expression on their faces that Lois Lerner did at her Congressional hearings.

It will soon be too late to act if we do not rouse ourselves to action. We still have the opportunity to use the ballot box to correct the situation. If we wait much longer, that option will be closed to us. For the love of God, do not allow that to happen. First, write to the person in both the House and the Senate who represents you. Demand that they pressure the DOJ to appoint a special prosecutor to investigate these agencies. Demand the prosecution of Lois Lerner and anyone who had a hand in these underhanded tactics. Demand the truth, and don't hesitate to vote them out of office if they do not comply.

We owe our founders and our forebears at least that much.

Wednesday, March 26, 2014

A Question of Deity

Over at New Zealand Conservative, I responded to a demand by an atheist for empirical evidence for the existence of God. This was the second time that I have responded to his request, which was nothing more than the person making another lame attempt to ridicule believers, as so often happens with atheists these days. But it got me to thinking that there are people out there who have real doubts and are searching for clarity. This article is for them.

First, the demand for empirical evidence of God is flawed. If an atheist demands such proof, he knows that you cannot produce it. However, that does not mean that God does not exist. Allow me to explain. Mathematics is a language that is used to describe reality. While there are empirical elements to mathematics, they are not the only objects found in mathematics. Socrates took a slave who had never studied mathematics and from his mind alone, he was able to figure out how to calculate the area of an enclosure that had imperfect sides. Thus did Socrates prove a priori knowledge, that is knowledge that is not obtained via the senses. Plato expanded on that theory and created his forms which correspond to the varying levels of reality. At the other extreme we find Aristotle, who only believed that the world could only be known through the senses.

While other empiricists, notably David Hume, embraced Aristotle's point of view that nothing enters the mind, but through the senses, none of them has presented competent proof that that is the case. In fact, I believe that both polar opposites are wrong. The world cannot be divided up into a priori or a posteriori and left at that because the world is far more complex than that. The truth, I believe, lies somewhere in the middle. This brings us to the question, can science give us knowledge? It can, but only to a point.

The principles that higher mathematics are founded upon arise only from thought. Yet, mathematics works. We know this because the technologies based upon higher mathematics, works. Because it works, we know that we know mathematics using Plato's definition of knowledge. That is, that one can only know something if one has a reasonable, and true belief. There was once a time when science acknowledged it's mother, philosophy, but the Enlightenment changed science, and not for the better.

Science uses reductionism, and to a lesser extent synthesis, to explain the world in which we live. But during the Enlightenment, men grew proud in their knowledge and thought themselves above the petty concerns of theology and philosophy. Once, all could sit together quite comfortably, but no longer. The advent of post modernism finished that process, and now Science views philosophy and theology as evils. Thus the three have become adversaries in competition for the minds of men and their relations have grown acrimonious.

I once contemplated the nature of the cosmos and made certain deductions based on what I already knew about astrophysics. Imagine my surprise when science proved what I already knew. The Cosmologists proved it a posteriori, and I proved it a priori. Two different methods, one result. Now, I don't expect you to merely take my word for it. For all you know, I am a notorious liar. I only ask that you accept the epistemological evidence and the evidence of Socrates' reasoning as your evidence that there is knowledge that exists outside of our senses.

Now that we have arrived at the indisputable fact that there are things that exist outside of the empirical world, given the fact that there are mathematical truths based upon pure thought and the explorations of Socrates, one must admit that there are things that exist independent of empirical evidence. Therefore, science cannot provide us with all knowledge. Think about that for a moment. If it is impossible for science to yield all of the secrets of reality, then that means that there exists things outside of the scope of science. Yet, science would not exist today as we know it, if that reality did not exist. I have proven that there is a place that science cannot know. One that it can never truly know, given it's marriage to empiricism. That was the price of the Enlightenment.

This is why the demand for empirical evidence is a flawed one. On the one hand, science demands such proof, while on the other, science as we know it would not exist without a level of existence that cannot be sensed. But the paradox exists only if one denies such a reality. About now, the smart money is banking on that being the place where God dwells, and they would be right. That does not mean that God cannot be experienced through the senses, but it does mean that we cannot circumvent His will, and experience Him that way if He does not wish for us to do so.

It isn't that one cannot detect the hand of God moving in the world. It is that one cannot detect it if one has a closed mind. The atheist does not seek God because he is convinced that he does not exist. For whatever reason, he has weighed the evidence, and found it lacking. Problem solved, so why would he continue to look for God? The happenings in the world occur as a series of random events and that is that. Man's inhumanity to man, war, pestilence, and death all combine to create a dirty, mean, and hostile world. There can be no God in such a world. Or could there?

It is not God, but man's free will that creates these things. The Almighty gave men free will so that they could decide for themselves whether to be cruel or kind to one another, whether to feed the hungry or allow them to starve, and ultimately to decide for themselves the very existence of God. If man is to blame anyone for the ills of the world, he had best look in a mirror. So why does God allow all of this to continue? Why does He not intervene in the lives of men and set them straight? Why does He allow the innocent to suffer? Because if we are to ever learn, He must. Those of you who are parents, know this to be true.

The parent of a child guides and protects them the best that they are able, but if that child is ever to grow into an adult, they must first experience life for what it is. This leads to injury sometimes, occasionally to tears, and sometimes to death. But every parent knows that their child must live through these things in order to grow and to learn. We try our best to shelter and protect them, but we cannot be there every minute of every day. Sooner or later, they will escape our supervision and the dice will be rolled. Usually, the child comes out alright, but sometimes that doesn't happen. God is much the same. If He always intervened in our lives, why would we need free will? We would be nothing, but automatons. Only doing what we were directed to do. That is not life. It is only a mockery of life. A cruel jest played by a cruel God. But God allows us to make our own choices and to roll the dice. Sometimes, the dice does not fall in our favor.

Man has always sensed the spiritual world. The world that cannot be touched by empiricism. In the years of the Neanderthal, they used animism, and believed that the departed lived on in that world. The Indians of North America believed in the world of the spirits, as did the Asian Indians. In fact, every place that has known man, has known that world. It is only empiricism that denies it, but it is impossible to know all of reality through the senses, as I have shown.

If one keeps an open mind, the hand of the Creator will reveal itself to you. Bill Nye may wish that God would one day show up at his door and introduce Himself and give him a business card, but that is never going to happen. Yet we humans instinctively know that we are not alone. The stark world of the existentialist is a dreary place. Thankfully, we do not have to live in that world. The faith of the believer provides great strength in dark times. We all know someone who has leaned on God in those times. When desperation or grief threatens to overwhelm us. When compassion moves us to the aid of another or when the eyes of a child regard us, and we are filled with joy. Those are the subtle signs of His presence in the world.

I cannot make the non-believer realize what I know to be true. That would violate free will, all I can do is to argue for what I know to be the case. Each man must make their own decision until the day that they come face to face with God. On that day, there will be no doubt. On that day, men will weep. That is why I pray for them and pray that God will show them mercy. I believe that man needs God now, more than he ever has. Our world is in terrible shape, our nations line up against one another, and there is hunger and suffering. We live in a culture that is a spiritual wasteland. Is it any wonder that there is a need for hope?

Hope is the one thing that atheism cannot grant. It maintains the outlook of the existentialist. That we are alone, that our life is a joke, and that death only brings oblivion. If that is not a recipe for depression, I don't know what is. If pre-historic man could find faith, why cannot modern man? Why reject the one thing that can truly turn your life around? Is existentialism such a draw that everyone is clamoring for it? I don't think so.

A man lives in a reality where both the physical and spiritual mingle. Without the spiritual, you only have half a world. The atheist will tell you that there is no hope offered by the spiritual because it doesn't exist. I know that they are wrong. I have seen that they are wrong. Those who have died and returned know that they are wrong as well, and one of those was a neurosurgeon. Imagine the surprise of his colleagues when he returned with a tale of that world. Or the child who returned from that other side after meeting his aborted sister who died before he was even conceived, and was never told about it. He also recalled what his father said to God in the Chapel of the hospital when he died, and told him word for word what he had said. Definitive proof of that other world? No, but how many more examples does it take before someone gets a clue that maybe there is more to our physical existence than meets the eye?

Perhaps Christ said it best when he was hung on the cross, beaten and bleeding, he said, "Forgive them Father, for they know not what they do."

To that, I can only say Amen.

Thursday, March 20, 2014


*** Update ***


“We will know, and all the world will know, what your word is worth,” said Dmytro Lysak, who was beaten by Ukrainian authorities during the recent demonstrations. He also said, "“the U.S. could take steps to really cut [Putin] off, but it seems your government does not want any risk at all … this will cause huge losses in future.” - H/T The Blaze.


That is what happens when you hang your hat on empty words. Even words made by men of character. That is the trouble with a Republic, the men who follow may not be men of honor who will support the promises made before. That is why the character of a man is important. Men of character will honor the promises of the past, while men who abuse honor will not. President Obama feels no compunction to honor another man's commitment made on his nation's behalf. It is a sad thing to see.


Now the world sees that which American's discovered years ago, that their politicians are not men and women of virtue and character. That they have no honor, and that agreements forged to bring about peace are no longer worth the paper that they are printed on. The men and women in Washington are moral cowards. Posturing and bristling on cue for the cameras, but secretly hoping that the darkness does not come for them. Nobody believes that America still defends freedom precisely because we do not. What was once a truth, has become a myth.


President Obama relinquished American leadership of the West. He has relinquished leadership of NATO, he dithers when action is called for, and he is a man of no real substance. He is a man who has pretended to have character and virtue, and when the Presidency required it, he blinked. There was nothing there. That is why the American ambassador died in Benghazi, it is why conservatives were targeted by the IRS and FEC. It is why his government makes promises on the one hand, and breaks them on the other with Obamacare. You can't fake character, either you have it or you don't.


There is a price to be paid for our lack of character. Sometimes that price is embarrassment when we are caught in our wrong doings. But sometimes the cost is in human life, as Ambassador Stevens found out in Benghazi. Now that price is being asked for in the Ukraine. One Ukrainian soldier has already paid with his life, how many more Ukrainians will die? How many more will be asked to pay for America's lack of character and will?


We are led by cowards.