Townhall Meeting with MO Sen. McCaskill's Aid on 7-27

Americans for Prosperity organized a townhall meeting MO Sen. McCaskill's aid yesterday night. The turnout was around 500 people! I hope that during the August recess that citizens across the country will take the time to attend townhall meetings in their area to voice their opposition to not only nationalizing American healthcare, but the thought-crimes legislation and Cap-&-Tax.

A soldier asked for an apology from the Senator for supporting nationalized healthcare, which isn't the Constitution she swore to uphold as part of her oath to office. Great comment about the general welfare clause...



Well said!



John Bubb and Steve Nowel, two Campaign for Liberty members, express their concerns about the nationalizing the distribution of health care in America in the beginning of this footage.

Not a Fan of Tiptoeing

All around you, people will be tiptoeing through life, just to arrive at death safely. But dear children, do not tiptoe. Run. Hop. Skip, Dance...just don't tiptoe. -Shane Claiborne

Moses...choosing rather to be mistreated with the people of God than to enjoy the fleeting pleasures of sin. He considered the reproach of Christ greater wealth than the treasures of Egypt, for he was looking to the reward. Heb. 11:24-25

Where are the young men and women of this generation that will how their lives cheap? - John Piper

Jesus: Captain of Our Salvation

As I was following footnote in my Bible this morning, I found a verse that didn't get:

10 For it became him, for whom are all things, and by whom are all things, in bringing many sons unto glory, to make the captain ["founder," ESV] of their salvation perfect through sufferings. (Hebrews 2, KJV)

It seems like this verse is saying that Jesus was made perfect through suffering. But this couldn't be if Jesus knew no sin (2 Cor. 5:21, Heb. 4:15) from the beginning (Jn. 1:2).

While I was reading Matthew Henry to understand this verse, I was encouraged by the KJV rendering of Greek word "Archegos" as "captain" rather than "founder" in the ESV.

Jesus leads us through the battle against temptation; he is our caption and he's got a winning a battle plan. Even more, it's through the battle against unbelief and sin that we are purified and perfected.

Matthew Henry writes:

[1.] In finding out such a person as should be the captain of our salvation; those that are saved must come to that salvation under the guidance of a captain and leader sufficient for that purpose; and they must be all enlisted under the banner of this captain; they must endure hardship as good soldiers of Christ; they must follow their captain, and those that do so shall be brought safely off, and shall inherit great glory and honour.

[2.] In making this captain of our salvation perfect through sufferings. God the Father made the Lord Jesus Christ the captain of our salvation (that is, he consecrated, he appointed him to that office, he gave him a commission for it), and he made him a perfect captain: he had perfection of wisdom, and courage, and strength, by the Spirit of the Lord, which he had without measure; he was made perfect through sufferings; that is, he perfected the work of our redemption by shedding his blood, and was thereby perfectly qualified to be a Mediator between God and man. He found his way to the crown by the cross, and so must his people too. The excellent Dr. Owen observes that the Lord Jesus Christ, being consecrated and perfected through suffering, has consecrated the way of suffering for all his followers to pass through unto glory; and hereby their sufferings are made necessary and unavoidable, they are hereby made honourable, useful, and profitable.

Mo. Sen. Purgason expected enter the GOP Primary for open U.S. Senate seat

State Sen. Chuck Purgason, who is term-limited, will join Cong. Blunt in GOP primary to replace Sen. Bond.

Both Blunt and Robin Carnahan have well over $1 million in their campaign coffers, according to the AP.

I'm not sure that Purgason can beat Carnahan in the general because of her high name recognition. (How is that we've become an aristocracy?) But then, I don't think Blunt, who voted for the first bailout, can either. While Robin Carnahan will likely vote like her brother Russ, who represents Missouri's 3rd District in Congress and has voted with Obama 100% of the time, she can portray herself "representing Missouri in Washington DC instead of representing DC in Missouri" because she's not currently in Congress. But so it goes with most campaign mumbo jumbo; it's not really about the people, it's about the Parties keeping power.

But it's nice that someone is courageous enough to stand up for taxpayers even if victory is a long shot.

"Healthcare is a good, not a right"

Ron Paul's weekly column opens with an important distinction between "goods" and rights."

Political philosopher Richard Weaver famously and correctly stated that ideas have consequences. Take for example ideas about rights versus goods. Natural law states that people have rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. A good is something you work for and earn. It might be a need, like food, but more “goods” seem to be becoming “rights” in our culture, and this has troubling consequences. It might seem harmless enough to decide that people have a right to things like education, employment, housing or healthcare. But if we look a little further into the consequences, we can see that the workings of the community and economy are thrown wildly off balance when people accept those ideas.

First of all, other people must pay for things like healthcare. Those people have bills to pay and families to support, just as you do. If there is a “right” to healthcare, you must force the providers of those goods, or others, to serve you.

What I think is the most disturbing about Obama's nationalize healthcare plan is that it is moving us towards the most inefficient possible why to distribute the "good" of healthcare.

A friend once said to me, "Healthcare shouldn't be about efficiency." I didn't know how to respond at the time. Now I'd say, "Of course it is. If it's not efficient, then less people get cared for. Isn't the whole point of the reform is that more people should have access to healthcare?"

Read Dr. Paul's entire column.

What was your purpose in making that comment to me?

When someone makes a critical remark, what do you think is the best way to respond?

I think I'm going to start responding with a question like "What was your purpose in making that comment to me?"

What do you do when people make critical remarks to you?

College Students Talk About Campus Activism at EFSummit09

Every year, Eagle Forum invites students to speak who have promoted a conservative message on their college campuses at the Collegian Summit.

Kevin DeAnna from American University gave a great speech about why he believes changing culture is as important as winning elections. He discussed how students must be actively promoting conservatism on campus and should not be deterred by protesters. He also encouraged conservatives not to accept the Left's narrative, their definitions. Conservatives should be on the offense rather than the defense: "campus is where you can make history." He suggested students read Saul Alinsky's Rules for Radicals.

Mary Daly from Norte Dame shared how a coalition of students worked together to oppose Obama speaking at the commencement last Spring.

Amie & Katie Kieffer shared about the difficulties they had sponsoring the conservative speaker Star Parker at U of St. Thomas. The students contacted local media to expose the administrators biased decision to block Parker from speaking.

Question from a student: why oppose keeping health records in a federal online database

Phyllis Schlafly responded to this question, but there is something I would have added if I were responding to this question.

As vaccinations for sexually transmitted diseases like HPV--which haven't been well tested--are mandated, I worry that as some students cannot attend public schools with out such vaccinations, citizens might not be able to renew driver's licenses or board planes.

This is only one example of how allowing the federal government to keep and access our health records would make it tempting to "encourage" citizens to get their vaccinations by excluding them from privileges like travel, driving, or something else.

Rep. Tom Price on Healthcare Reform

I finally connected to the internet to attempt "live blogging" from this year's Eagle Forum Collegians Summit at the Heritage Foundation in DC.

Rep. Tom Price from Georgia just finish talking about Healthcare Reform. He covered a lot but I think his best point is that there is a false dichotomy between letting insurance companies or the federal government provide our healthcare. What about putting the patient in charge!

The question is...how.

Rep. Price suggests that the federal government could provide some incentives to families and individuals through the tax code to purchase medical insurance among other comments.

He finished by saying that a fairly liberal health care reform bill will pass the U.S. House this session and it will be up to the U.S. Senate to defeat it.

Why calling a Constitutional Convention is like playing Russian Roulette with the Constitution

In-between speakers at the Collegians Summit, Phyllis Schlafly, president of Eagle Forum, took a few minutes to explain the why calling a Constitutional Convention is like playing Russian Roulette with the Constitution.

She covered a short history of previous attempts to call a Con Con to add a Balanced Budget Amendment, but the two big reasons that calling a another Constitutional Convention is a bad idea are:

1. The Likelihood of a Runaway Convention

Would the Constitutional Convention have a wide-open agenda in which any constitutional amendment could be considered, or even an entire substitute Constitution offered in place of our present one? Does Con Con provide the opportunity for those who would like to make major alterations in our government?

2. Liberal Delegates Controlling It
How would we elect the persons who would decide which amendments to consider, to propose to Congress and then the states? Nobody knows how the delegates would be selected, who would be eligible, or from what districts they would be chosen. Moreover, it's like that the Democratic majority in Congress would play a large part in that deciding that process.

Doing the Impossible: Removing the "hazards and vicissitudes" of Life

My roommate subscribes to Time magazine, and why I let that magazine distract me, I don't know.

Distraction #1 - an article on FDR:

It's old news that F.D.R.'s New Deal did not end the Depression. On that score, there was little difference between Roosevelt and Herbert Hoover.

Ok, maybe the White House needs a copy of this week's Time magazine. I don't think it's old news since nationalization of banking and the car industry, bailouts, Cap & Trade, and National Health Care will be our generation's "New Deal" and is being sold as THE solution to our problems. That's why we needed to pass these solutions right away--even before anyone reads them. (And why isn't there a name for it yet? Maybe, "Our Turn, Our Deal"...)

But unlike Hoover, F.D.R. seized the occasion to shape a legacy of durable reforms. For that accomplishment — along with winning World War II — historians routinely rank him among the greatest Presidents.

Ah ha, so today's bailouts are not about reviving our dead economy, but about "durable" reforms. They why all the hype to pass this urgent legislation?

...F.D.R.'s greatest achievements came later. Their essence can be summed up in a single word: security.

But how safe did FDR make us? Our economy tanked again--this isn't the first time--and there are still citizens are still that qualify as being in poverty. Social security is nothing more than a ponzi scheme.

All the major New Deal reforms that endured had a common purpose: not simply to end the immediate crisis of the Depression but also to make America in the future a less risky place, to temper for generations thereafter what F.D.R. called the "hazards and vicissitudes" of life.

The only value of this article is makes FDR's political philosophy crystal clear: the federal government should play all-provident God.

That is, it is impossible to remove the "hazards and vicissitudes" of life unless you're God.

In an inaugural address in Jan. 20, 1937, he said:

Such symptoms of prosperity may become portents of disaster! I see one-third of a nation ill housed, ill clad, ill nourished.

Time's interpretation:

The address in its entirety makes it clear that when he spoke of that "one-third of a nation," F.D.R. was not referring primarily to the victims of the Great Depression, which he thought was ending. He was speaking, rather, about the accumulated social and human deficits spawned by more than a century of buccaneering, laissez-faire American capitalism — deficits that he considered not yet fully redeemed in 1937.

Free markets--deciding who you want to sell to, how much you want to produce and what to charge--leads to freedom, not disaster. Disaster comes through regulated markets, which is why there are was a crash in 1929--the government mandated how much farmers could produce and how much to charges for their products, as well as enacting other types of regulation.

Why don't we hold hearings to review why the Federal government has not kept us safe from the "hazards and vicissitudes" of life? For that matter, shouldn't we be able to sue the Federal government for any and every loss? Wouldn't this be the end conclusion of FDR's line of reasoning?

But this is all old news.

True Woman Conference 2010

I'm not sure that I'll be able to go to any of the 2010 True Woman conferences, but I find the below video deeply encouraging. To think that there is a movement of women who desire to reflect a biblical view of womanhood leaves me hopeful for the future. Strong families depend upon strong women and men who desire to see God glorified in their lives and families.