Read this

Click me to read

Political Rambling

Today is NC's primary for the November elections. Rather than join most of the United States on February 5th, we wait three more months to have our primaries. The lateness does not matter that much except usually by this time a presidential candidate has been picked and it does not really matter who you vote for. This year is an exception for the Democratic party, NC's primary actually has some meaning in that race, but since McCain is really the only guy left for the Republicans their presidential primary is, to quote Matthew West, "going through the motions".

The fact that McCain will be the the eventual Republican nominee bugs me, as I don't particularly like McCain, he has some good things going for him but I have felt all along he is more in the mold of a Kennedy style liberal than a Reagan conservative. At the start of '08 there were several candidates who would have been a better choice but in a bewildering display of indecisiveness the public seemed to go with McCain more as a default, "he has been there before" choice rather than the best candidate for the job.

The Republican party only has itself to thank for this mess, then again the leadership probably does not even view this as a mess. :p Still, I am not a fan of the idea that staying home on election day "teaches leadership in a party a lesson" it could actually do irreparable damage to our already muddled political situation. Our government is so far from where it was when this nation was first founded, political correctness is killing us, our inability to have or stand by any type of principle is eroding our very society. Yet decayed and decrepit, we continue to meander though darkness refusing to turn to the light, unaware of the impending precipice. Ugh, it is enough to make you want to get into politics if only to try to bring about a little bit of change for the better. :)

Huck's Rising

Anyone who has been following the Presidential race or for that matter, just listened to the news over the last two days probably knows there was a Presidential primary in Iowa Thursday night and the eventual winners were a bit of a surprise to the political pundits and so called experts. Obama won on the Democratic side with 38% and Huckabee won on the Republican side with 34%

I personally think it is rather silly to put so much weight on who a handful of people in Iowa or New Hampshire and South Carolina think should be the President. But ever since Jimmy Carter won Iowa and went on to win the Presidency our news media seems to think the people in these states have a better grasp over the political climate than anyone else. The news media certainly does not have a grasp as evidenced once again by the "surprising results" out of Iowa.

If you have been a constant reader of the blog, you probably know I am a Mike Huckabee supporter. I know he is not perfect and his record for 10 years as Arkansas's Governor while solid did involve some things I personally would not agree with. At the same time I feel he is best option from the mixed "GOP candidate" bag. I have talked to a number of people who like Huckabee but feel he has no chance to win the nomination so they would rather sit back and see what happens before they make a political decision.

This is, in my opinion a reflection of the lack of backbone in our society. You like a candidate, but you don't think he will win the nomination so you are not going to support him?? Of course he will not win if people have that thought process! In order to enact change you have to be willing to stand up and support a candidate because he is the best candidate for the job regardless of if you think he will win or not. People sometimes are content to let the process move along and then after the conventions are held and Presidential candidates are decided on, then they will support whomever their party's nomination is.

If this is how you operate when it comes to elections, I would encourage you to not be complacent and rely on your political party to pick who they want as President, which will happen if people don't take some time to read about the candidates and their positions. (This does not mean listening to the news media and who they think would be a good choice, as evidenced once again by the Iowa primaries, they rarely have as firm a grasp as they would want you to believe.) Once you have studied all the candidates, make an educated decision on who you personally feel should run for President long before the your party does and then support 100% whomever you choose!

For me that candidate is Mike Huckabee, like I mentioned above, he is not perfect and he has done things I would not agree with but I feel he is the best man for the job regardless of those negatives. I would much rather support Huckabee in a losing cause than be drawn into supporting "Rockefeller Republicans" like Giuliani or Romney. The fact that Huckabee even with paltry fund raising, (2.4 Million vs. $63 million for Romney and $47 million for Giuliani) won in Iowa shows that people are not quite ready to turn in their social conservative badges which is rather encouraging to me.

It is my hope that Mike Huckabee gets the GOP nomination but even after that, the fight against the Democratic nomination, (which I have believed for a while will be Obama, his win in Iowa just caused me to be more firm in my position) will be an uphill battle. As Christians we just have to remember that no matter what happens in November, God is the ruler of the universe and He is in control no matter what happens or who sits in the Oval Office.

Also, regardless if you are a Republican or Democrat tonight would be a good chance to learn some more about the candidates for both parties. ABC is televising debates for both parties starting with the Republicans at 7pm EST tonight. Just remember to push mute when George Stephanopoulos decides to come on and give his thoughts. ;)

Huckabee for President

Yup that is right, I am making a post about the upcoming election. In just under a year, we in the United States will have our 55th presidential election. You might be thinking to yourself, "uh yeah, it is one year away, why are you posting about this William?" That is actually why I have not posted this earlier, I figured I would wait until we had a year to go before the election. :D

I guess a lot of people don't really start following the election and campaigning until after the respective primaries for each party. That is fine, but if you don't pay attention now, then you really will not have an idea of who to vote for in the primary! I am not going to try to convince anyone who they should vote for, but I am going to say who I think would be the best President out of everyone running. That is Mike Huckabee.

You might have noticed the Huckabee for President image on the sidebar to the right, it has been there several weeks. You may not have heard of Mike Huckabee, most people have not. You may only know about Giuliani, or McCain or Clinton or Obama...that might have to do with them being the "front runners" But just because someone is a "front runner" does not mean they are the best guy for the job. Unfortunately we currently seem to have this "follow the leader" or "do what is popular" mentality in America.

Because of this, unless the word gets out about better candidates like Mike Huckabee and for a lesser extent Ron Paul no one is going to know who they are come primary time. There is a bit of catch 22 there because if they had the funding they could help get their name out, but to get the donations they have to have their name out there for people to actually know to donate to.....

So I just want to encourage you to track the candidates in our upcoming presidential election, research their views and make an educated decision not one that is just following along with the crowd. After doing that I was more than convinced that out of all the candidates running Mike Huckabee is the right man for the job, but his name is only going to get out there if more people speak up. :) There is a good video interview of Mike Huckabee on his website HERE it is a bit long and if you are on dial up then I apologize it really is worth it though. :)

Erroneously???

I had planned this morning to blog about the David Crowder Band but before I started, I noticed this article on USA Today's website and I realized this is something a little more substantial than a band with good music

From USA Today LINK
55% of Americans think founders wanted Christian USA

"Most Americans believe the nation's founders wrote Christianity into the Constitution, and people are less likely to say freedom to worship covers religious groups they consider extreme, a poll out today finds.

The survey measuring attitudes toward freedom of religion, speech and the press found that 55% believe erroneously that the Constitution establishes a Christian nation. In the survey, which is conducted annually by the First Amendment Center, a non-partisan educational group, three out of four people who identify themselves as evangelical or Republican believe that the Constitution establishes a Christian nation. About half of Democrats and independents do."

I love how USA Today gives it's opinion that more than half the United States is wrong in their belief. While not specifically spelled out in the Constitution, the idea of having a government not based on God would have been unthinkable to the framers of our Constitution. When the Constitution was written, the only possible explanation for the existence of the Universe was creation by God. The Constitution did not specifically mention God because to the founders it was a given that God created the heavens and the earth. By not adding God the founders were in no way creating a "secular" nation in the modern sense of the term. The concept of "secularism" as it is used today didn't even exist in 1787 when the Constitution was written. It is largely a twentieth-century concept, one that has arisen with the myth of Darwinism and a false belief that science should be our guild in the world rather than the Bible.

"Half of Americans say teachers should be allowed to use the Bible as a factual text in history class. Charles Haynes, a senior scholar at the First Amendment Center, says the Constitution "clearly established a secular nation where people of all faiths or no faith are protected to practice their religion or no religion without governmental interference.""

I agree with Mr. Haynes that the Constitution gives freedom to people to practice whatever religion or none at all as they so desire. But as mentioned above, at the time of our Constitution the United States was a God fearing Christian Nation. The first reading textbook of that time was The New England Primer which starts off with, "In Adam's Fall, we sinned all" can it get any more clear than that? God was in almost every aspect of their culture! Most of the the first colonist were fleeing religious persecution in Europe. The Founders knew this and did not want that happening in America, so we have the First Amendment, giving us freedom to practice our religion as well as freedom of speech to talk in public about our religion. Even with this freedom to be "secular" if someone so chose, the framers most certainly did believe that religion and religious values should influence the government and its policies.

On the day that the first Congress finished its work on the First Amendment, George Washington was called on to issue a Proclamation to the people of the United States to thank God for the freedoms we enjoy. Eight days later the First President's opening paragraph in this Proclamation said: "Whereas it is the duty of all nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey His will, to be grateful for His benefits, and humbly to implore His protection and favor . . ." By stating "acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey His will" George Washington and the framers of our Constitution were clearly showing that they believed in the one true God and His will should guide us. Any suggestion that the Constitution "clearly established a secular nation" is false.

Still Secularists insist that the absence of the word "God" means that the Constitution created a godless government in America, never mind the fact that there have been multiple suggestions to amend the Constitution and add it. There were efforts to add "Almighty God" and "Jesus Christ" to the Preamble for example, and several members of Congress suggested that "In the Name of God" should be inserted before the Preamble. Even though Congress was never able to come to an agreement on how God should be phrased the individual states did. With the exception of Oregon where the words "Almighty God" appear in the state religion clauses rather than the preamble, all 50 states have God mentioned in one form or another in their constitutions with "Almighty God" being the most popular.

Unfortunately our spiritual culture has now shifted so far from where it was during our founding, that even if the word "God" was in the Constitution, it probably would not make any difference. Secularist would just dismiss it as a mere formality. There are 50 reasons to believe that this is true. Secularists dismiss all references to God in the state constitutions, so there is really no reason to believe that they would view things differently with our nation's Constitution.

LINK to the whole USA Today article