Bedtime Tales
It’s been a long time since I’ve written about politics. It’s not that I don’t care about what’s happening in the political realm, but I get frustrated at apathy on the one hand and ignorant compromising on the other that I see among Christians who ought to be able to count on both hands, many times over, the number of times the wool has been pulled over their eyes in every election dating back to when the Moral Majority first gave evangelical voters a voice.
Lately I’ve been wishing I had some artistic ability because I’ve dreamed up a great idea for a political cartoon. I will have to draw you a word picture instead. I see a washtub floating on the sea, waves splashing all around. Crudely painted on the outside of this craft are the letters “G.O.P.” Inside it are three men: the butcher (Rudolph Giuliani, whose support for abortion makes him the obvious pick for that occupation), the baker (Mitt Romney, who is able to fabricate support for his supposed conservative credentials based on dubious ingredients, which include his new-found pro-life epiphany and a “faith” which both does and does not inform his political beliefs—whichever makes you feel more comfortable), and the candlestick maker (Mike Huckabee, a Christian whose beliefs give a faint light in the darkness, but that light seems to flicker with whichever way the wind blows). Outside the bobbing tub, tied to it with a thin rope, is a life preserver with the words “S.S. Liberty” printed on it, bearing up an optimistic and smiling Ron Paul, who does not appear to fear the huge waves around him. Sadly, one of the washtub’s occupants is sawing away at the rope with a saw labeled “Pragmatism.” Another is trying to submerge him with an oar named “Electability.”
Not surprisingly, many homeschoolers have decided that Huckabee is their man. Early in the Republican race, Homeschool Legal Defense Association (HSLDA) gave ex-Governor Huckabee a ringing endorsement, claiming that he would be the friend of homeschoolers and hold the conservative Christian banner high if elected president. I do find this surprising—while the average homeschooler may not be politically informed and know the background of a candidate who pushes all the right buttons in a high-profile political contest, and they count on the recommendations of trusted sources for whom to vote in big races, HSLDA does have the whole scoop which means they ought to know better. I have appreciated HSLDA’s principled stand for unpopular positions, such as being against vouchers and charter schools, but since Patrick Henry College was built on the outskirts of the corridors of power and the welcome mat has been put out by Republican lawmakers for those well-scrubbed and anxious-to-change-the-world students, their principles seem to be wearing thin. PHC is named after a man who is known for being one of our country’s foremost statesmen. Pragmatism and electability are flimsy stuff on which to build one’s statesmanship.
Ay, there’s the rub-a-dub-dub. Everyone wants to be on the winning team. Nobody wants to be a loser. So we look at polling data and listen to sound bites and ignore broken promises, hoping to keep a Democrat from the reins of power. Our political choices are often based on fear: what if Hillary got in the White House (again)?
The Values Voter Debate is the only Republican debate I have watched, and it is the only time I have heard Mike Huckabee speak except for some brief interview clips. If we were holding an election for king of our country, I might be tempted to vote for him. He’s personable and witty, and he has good intentions of using his political power for good causes. At one point in the debate, different people were allowed to ask the candidates some very detailed and specific questions and the candidates were only allowed to respond with a “yes” or “no,” indicated by lights on their podiums. Without an opportunity to explain his position on those detailed questions, Ron Paul consistently refused to go with the crowd’s sympathies for some tough situations when questioners asked the candidates to agree that they would use the power of their office to promote causes which are the hot button issues of the Christian conservatives. Even though I agree with the righteousness of the causes addressed, I do not agree with the idea of wielding presidential power in an unconstitutional way to achieve those good ends. I knew then that Ron Paul was a trustworthy man.
Let me remind you of which job we are discussing right now. We are not deciding whom to elect king of America, we are going to choose a new president. The man (oh, please, let it be a man!) we elect will place his hand on the Bible (oh, please, don’t let it be a Book of Mormon or the Koran!) and repeat these words:
I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.
By taking that oath, the president is stating that he will abide by the law of our land which is written in the Constitution, a document which specifically constrains the power of the man who sits in the Oval Office. Have you read it? Has Mike Huckabee? I wonder, considering the king-like promises and statements he has made. He has said he supports a federal ban on smoking and an internet sales tax. When he was governor of Arkansas, state spending increased over 65 percent (three times the rate of inflation). While he talks tough on immigration now, his “get tough” plan for dealing with illegal aliens is to send them back home and let them apply for citizenship from their own country (something called “touchback” by critics, who say it still rewards border crossers and is a kind of amnesty), and when he was governor he supported tax-funded college tuition for children of illegal immigrants and opposed legislation which would have curtailed public services to illegal immigrants. One of his campaign ads boasts of providing health care coverage to 70,000 uninsured children. This is the candidate leading the charge in the party which once talked of curbing statism. If he is elected, I won’t hold my breath waiting for him to be asked what part of the Constitution grants him the authority to promote all these good causes.
I could list many more examples of Huckabee’s statist (“The practice or doctrine of giving a centralized government control over economic planning and policy”) proclivities, but one of the biggest red flags for me, and the reason I am sorely disappointed in HSLDA’s support of this man, is his support of federal government involvement in education. Do none of you remember when the Republicans were promising to shut down the Department of Education, that behemoth which wants to micromanage the education of every child in this country, using its massive power to keep records of our children and looking for every opportunity (through “testing”) to profile and psychologically evaluate the young prisoners locked in that system? The “No Child Left Behind” Act is the vehicle for doing just that, and it was proposed by our “conservative” Republican president, and Huckabee supports it. He calls for greater federal funding for “music and art” programs as a solution for our education woes. He has recently been endorsed by the New Hampshire branch of the National Education Association (NEA), the first time they have picked a GOP primary candidate to endorse (remember that the NEA is a very liberal union which thinks homeschooling ought to be highly regulated if allowed at all). Perhaps they have paid more attention to his record as governor of Arkansas than HSLDA, when he signed a bill in 1999 which imposed greater restrictions on homeschoolers in his state:
The 1999 legislation called for a two-week advance statement of intent to home school or truancy charges would be filed. In addition the restrictions do not permit students to be withdrawn from school for the purpose of home schooling if the students are facing disciplinary violations. The compulsory attendance law was also revised during Huckabee’s governorship to require that attendance in school be required beginning at age 5, not 6, as previously.
HSLDA started a political action committee a few years ago called Generation Joshua. I have met some of the bright young people who work in this organization, most of them hoping to return our country to its Christian and constitutional roots. If they are looking to Mike Huckabee to do this, then they are pinning their hopes on the wrong star. The head of Generation Joshua (perhaps former head as I read a rumor that he stepped down because of HSLDA’s endorsement), Ned Ryun, is not so star-struck. You can read all his Huckabee thoughts here, where he reminds Christians that God’s Word says, “by their fruits you shall know them,” but let me sum up his well-informed position on the evangelical political hope in his own words:
I don’t think his die hard supporters want to be confronted with who he actually is, or what he’s done in the past. They’re living in the moment, have turned off their rational thinking and want to embrace him because he’s a Baptist minister and a Christian. I just know that I don’t want to be associated with him, or to have people think that he is what a social conservative looks like.
Friends, we need to get off this merry-go-round. It’s the same old story, the same old promises, and the outcome will be the same old thing. We get some crumbs from the political table and they wipe their feet on us until we are needed to further the statist agenda again. To conclude as I began, with a nursery rhyme analogy, if we follow that same old path we will find Tweedle-Dee and Tweedle-Dum waiting at the end of it. I suggest we throw out that worn-out tale and go back to a really good, old true story that begins, “We the People of the United States…”
This is cross-posted at Backwater Report.
December 18th, 2007 at 3:44 am
Oh, thank you, thank you, thank you for this post. It is wonderful. All it takes is a brief peek at the homepage of Mike Huckabee’s website to see that he has absolutely no regard for the law of our land. We are to be a people governed by law. He boasts of his socialized medical insurance plan for the children of Arkansas, as well as his complete support for the ungodly institution of the government schools. Both of these uses of power by the federal government are prohibited by the Constitution. Need Christians look any farther? Mike Huckabee boasts of breaking the law of the United States of America and then promises to do more of the same if he is elected to the office of President. He is promising to break his oath of office!!!! If he promises, out in the open, that he will lie and not keep his word. (He will either break his oath to “preserve, protect, and defend” the constitution, or he will not keep his campaign promises.) Then why would we trust him to keep his word on any of his ideas that we like? I am not doubting that he is a Chrisian. I am not doubting that he means well. He may be a very nice man, but he has told us that he will not be a man of his word. Sadly, he brings reproach to the name of our Savior. Don’t get me wrong. All of us sinners do this everyday, but he is doing it on a national stage, and has shown no sign of repentence. My belief is that he is merely ignorant, but that does not make him a better presidental candidate and certainly not one for whom Christians should vote. How can Christians vote for a man to be president who is so unaware of the requirements of the Constitution that he tells us about the ways in which he has violated it and how he plans to continue to violate it? All the while claiming the name of Christ.
It is my honest belief that Mike Huckabee could do more harm to this nation than perhaps most of the other candidates. As Carmen mentioned, one of his goals is to invoke a federal ban on smoking. While many Christians may support this and see it as a great idea because they don’t like smoking. It is first, of all unconstitutional. Second, it gives the government an amount of power that should be frightening to everyone who loves freedom. If Huckabee accomplishes his goal, what is to prevent the next president from imposing a federal ban on reading the Bible? Pick your issue. If the government has that authority, what will they pick next? Perhaps they will decide that having more than 3 children is bad for your health. They will have power that the Bible and the Constitution both forbid the federal government to have and all thanks to a Christian who will be voted into office by Christians.
Please, think about it. Look into what Mike Huckabee has done and what he says he will do. Pray for wisdom and guidance as you make your decision. Please don’t just take someone’s word that Huckabee would be a good candidate. Know for yourself. We as Christians are required to walk by faith, sometimes that may mean voting for a candidate who has “no chance” of winning, but he fits the Biblical requirements for leadership. We are to be faithful and to leave the results up to our God. He will work His holy will through the faithfulness of His remnant.
Blessings,
Kimberly
December 18th, 2007 at 5:08 am
“Carmon has an interesting essay about the presidental race”
read further…
http://hiddenart.blogspot.com/2007/12/piety-and-justice-our-modern-day.html
December 18th, 2007 at 5:45 am
Thanks Carmon for this post. Laurie
December 18th, 2007 at 5:55 am
Awesome post, Carmon! I have printed it to give to some friends who aren’t online. I hope that this is the year that Christian voters finally wake up this year and realize that we’re just being used. In my opinion, Ron Paul is the only candidate I can support with a clear conscience. (It was really fun to donate to his campaign during the Tea Party on Sunday!)
December 18th, 2007 at 6:42 am
WIth so many to choose from it is hard to decide .Thanks for the post and eye opener.
December 18th, 2007 at 7:45 am
Very interesting post! It brings up many of the concerns I have about Huckabee. I don’t want to live in a nanny state, even if I happen to agree with the nanny’s positions on certain issues.
I really don’t know who I’m going to vote for in the election as I have concerns about all the candidates. Sad to say that it really doesn’t much matter since California has not been competitive in years…
December 18th, 2007 at 7:46 am
Confession time for this commenter: I’m one of the apathetic ones. Nobody excites me. Even the prospect of Hillary for eight years doesn’t terrify me. I think the antithesis might purify the church and strengthen our faith in God’s provision and protection.
I feel about presidential elections like I do about the Christmas season. Why do we have to start so early? I’d rather spend my time playing with my grandson, fixing a good meal, lingering after the meal with good conversation, reading a good book.
I know that one (playing with my grandson) doesn’t preclude the other (becoming politically involved). But I’d like to wait until a few weeks before the Oregon primary and then delve into it wholeheartedly. It’s not that I don’t care, period. I just don’t care yet.
I remember the years where I cared desperately, the years my three year old asked folks who they were voting for and knew that Forbes won the Arizona primary. All that passion has leaked out of me like air out of a tire.
There it is.
I’m happy to listen to responses from anyone. Persuade me…if you can.
December 18th, 2007 at 10:13 am
I’m actually with you, Carol, in just about everything you said. I’m not excited about any of the candidates (but definitely against Giuliani and Romney). I’ve heard negatives about both Huckabee and Paul and don’t trust either. Hillary would be bad but I’m just not too worried about it because God is in control. I, too, don’t care “yet” — but I will in due time.
December 18th, 2007 at 10:15 am
In the lingo…. Carol and Ruthanne have been *neutralized*
December 18th, 2007 at 10:21 am
* neutralized *
Makes me feel like a zombie or something!
Actually I should have said that while I don’t care yet, I will when it counts.
December 18th, 2007 at 10:28 am
Great post Mrs. Friedrich!
I gave you a link.
December 18th, 2007 at 12:36 pm
Finally!
December 18th, 2007 at 1:10 pm
I’ve felt this frustration for a while. We attend a Bible believing church and we’ve been labeled as “liberals” for not supporting W. and voting for Peroutka the last cycle! We cancelled our membership with HSLDA when they came out in support of Huckabee and joined our state homeschool coalition. I see Huckabee’s idea of a benevolent, do-good state as much more frightening in the long run than my ability to homeschool. Anyway, thanks for the good post.
December 18th, 2007 at 4:11 pm
That was excellent; thank you so much for writing it! I think we will email the link to all our friends.
Have a joyful Christmas!
December 18th, 2007 at 4:50 pm
I was hopeful about Ron Paul also until I listened to this. I am not so sure now. What do you think?http://www.theamericanview.com/index.php?id=898
Brent
December 18th, 2007 at 7:48 pm
Hi, Brent…I know he’s not a theonomist, and I disagree with him regarding some of the statements he made to John Lofton, including his position on capital punishment and the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy in the military. However, if he sticks to his constitutional guns, as he has done while in Congress, then he is not going to dictate those things from on high, and there will be a greater opportunity for states (and the people of those states) to work for what is right at a more local level, giving Christians a chance to fight for what is right. If issues are decided in a top-down manner, we have very little chance to make a difference.
I do not believe in incrementalism as it usually means things get incrementally worse. Though it’s obvious from his honest answers about his views on homosexuality and abortion that he doesn’t have the same view of those sins and the biblical consequences for them as I do, I do think Ron Paul as president would be more likely than any of the Republican candidates to appoint judges who would vote to overturn Roe v. Wade, and I think he would thwart any federal expansion of rights for sodomites, unlike the current occupant of the White House who appoints them as foreign diplomats and recognizes their significant others in official ceremonies. Ron Paul is for a Defense of Marriage Act in Congress and you can read his position on protecting the life of unborn babies here.
That’s what I think
.
December 18th, 2007 at 7:51 pm
LOVE the cartoon! I really wish for that skill, too and hope that one day I might have time and/or energy to develop it.
December 18th, 2007 at 10:12 pm
[...] Carmon [...]
December 18th, 2007 at 10:25 pm
Wow, Carmon, that was a doozy. I actually got shivers reading it. Now that’s what I call good writing.
Four years ago, my husband and I made a hard choice. We decided to jump off of the Republican-as-expected road, and voted as our conscience allowed. It was tough – we lost friends’ respect, because they thought we were (chant it along with me here) throwing our votes away.
We have never felt so good after voting. It was actually exhilarating.
We anticipate the same this time around. We’re tired of same old-same old, and the only one who we believe will really cause change (for the good, I should clarify – there are plenty that will cause drastic change for the worse that are running as well!) is Ron Paul.
December 19th, 2007 at 6:32 am
[...] at Buried Treasure: Bedtime Tales Posted by suze Filed in Homeschoolers for Ron [...]
December 19th, 2007 at 6:33 am
[...] Carmon at Buried Treasure: Bedtime Tales [...]
December 19th, 2007 at 8:12 am
Hi Carmen, thanks for your reply. I also do not believe in incrementalism for the same reason. But would we not in some degree be voting for incrementalism if we vote for a candidate that is not willing to press the Crown Rights of King Jesus? Are we not held to a higher standard than the Constitution when we cast our vote as Christians?(Read Deut. 17v.14 and following) Have “We the People” not made ourselves to be the new Sovereign and removed God from His rightful position as Ruler with a Constitution that never mentions Him, but makes provisions for all religions to operate freely within our nation? Just some things to consider as Christian voters. Thanks for allowing me to post here.
Brent
December 19th, 2007 at 9:34 am
I would vote for Ron Paul because he seems to be for individual freedom and responsibility. The office of president is supposed to uphold the Constitution. I am gun-shy when it comes to supporting a candidate because they all seem to be alike. I liked what Ron Paul said on his official website though: You cannot trust some one just because they have an (R) after their name. (Grammatically Incorrect Warning-Beep, beep)
I think I am *neutralized* too. All I care about right now is having a baby. I sure empathize with Mary right now!
December 19th, 2007 at 12:28 pm
Hi Brent. I went over to the site you referenced and I read all of the comments. I am also in the middle of a Bible study right now on the servants of God. We have just finished Judges. We need to remember these people for how God used them for his purpose. It is amazing how very flawed some of these people were. Take Samson, for instance. He did practically everything wrong and yet the Lord used him. I am not saying that Ron Paul is chosen of God. In light of what I read over at the site you referenced, I would not want him for a pastor. But, I will vote for him for president. I have read his statement of faith and heard many of his speeches and interviews. He has a 20 year track record of sticking to the Constitution even when voting against the tide or standing alone. He is principled, honest and genuine. As a homeschooling mother, I want the government out of my life, not running it. We need a president who will uphold the Constitution and that is what Ron Paul will do. Remember, many of our founding fathers, also, were not perfectly Biblical Christians, yet I would vote for Washington, Jefferson or Madison in a hearbeat.
December 19th, 2007 at 9:22 pm
You will not find the “perfect” candidate or the one you will agree with all positions. Look at the whole, big picture (not just a few hot button issues). Ron Paul is the most unique Repub candidate in a long, long time. No wonder almost all of them sound alike – neocons. All this talk about the Constitution – he is the only one that will faithfully support the Constitution. He is a humble Christian and strongly pro life and pro family (married over 50 yrs to the same woman and 18 grandchildren). He is a patriot serving 5 yrs in the Air Force. The following web page accurately summarize why I am supporting him:
http://www.newswithviews.com/baldwin/baldwin420.htm
December 19th, 2007 at 10:13 pm
Carmon, I haven’t been by to visit for a while, but I’m always blessed when I do. I was alerted to this post by a friend and I’m so glad I clicked the link. Excellent post! The more I hear/read the less I care for Huckabee and the more I like Paul.
December 20th, 2007 at 12:14 am
Carol, I didn’t mean to ignore you about political apathy…I just didn’t care much about it as I’ve been dealing with some very sick children here
.
I don’t blame you for getting too excited over it and I agree with your assessment over a HIllary presidency, which would happen only by God’s sovereign Hand (in judgment, not blessing!) as will the election of any person who becomes president. Whenever we get anyone with an “R” after their name in that office, they campaign on the conservative side and usually govern as statists. When the other party is in power, the Republicans get religion and act more conservative, often keeping the bad guys from doing as much damage as they would like. Go figure.
I agree with Dana who says local (and state) elections are where we ought to expend our efforts, though the way federal power has been abused so much in the last 20 years, many dictates from on high are affecting our everyday lives, so I think we may need to care more about federal elections than ever before, which is why I really like Ron Paul. He wants to reign in those power grabs, and that is our best chance for making headway at keeping our liberty from evaporating. From the economy to the right to teach our own children, I’m afraid we need to care more and also pray harder that God would have mercy on our country.
December 20th, 2007 at 3:03 am
Did I forget to mention the Ron Paul bumper sticker on my car?
December 20th, 2007 at 11:24 am
I find it absolutely hilarious that while you state you support the Constitution, you know so little about it as regards to the office of the President of the Untied States. ALL the candidates, including Huckabee, Paul, Romney, Thompson, and the rest have all spouted “what they would do as President,” but this in reality has little to do with what they actually could or can do. Paul says he would do away with the IRS, CIA, and the FBI as well as get us out of the war with Iraq. He has simplistic ideas that are not going to go anywhere after he is elected, if he ever is. Like Huckabee, who, while he may desire to see a ban on smoking, truly realizes this is a personal preference and he could actually do no such thing. You have two little things that would probably stop any Presidential candidate from doing whatever they want whenever they want to: Congress and the Supreme Court. It is called the separation of powers.
Why do you think that the Democratically controlled Congress has had such a hard time passing a condemnation of the war in Iraq? Please, people get real. Huckabee has a Pastor’s heart and desires that people be treated with respect. This includes their health and welfare. What he was able to do as a Governor is completely different than what he will be able to do as a President. Plus, Huckabee is part of a denomination, Southern Baptists, that has publicly come out in total support of homeschoolers, offers homeschoolers help, prints homeschool curriculum, and has devoted an entire web site to homeschooling. No other denomination has come out so strong in support of homeschooling that I know of. State legislators always have greater power and control. Our government was set up that way on purpose. The same would be true for Romney.
The President has to be someone who will be a strong leader because he will be the director of the national will to get anything done.
I will give you some examples to consider from the Republican line up: Ron Paul, with some of his simplistic ideas may sound good at first, but in his time in office as a Senator, he has not garnered any support because he is seen as someone with his own agenda who will cut and run for his own purposes. Romney has flip-flopped so many times from being extremely liberal on same sex marriage, abortion, and such — you cannot trust him to be a national leader. Guiliani is a great leader that commands respect, but his own personal life and his social conservatism is dangerous. McCain is everywhere all over the map. That leaves Thompson or Huckabee. Now, which one would be strong of character and lead?
December 20th, 2007 at 7:17 pm
Huzzah! She is blogging politics! I have been looking forward to this for months. :+) What a *great* post! I totally agree.
Keep it up and I hope you are all well soon.
Love,
Kate
December 20th, 2007 at 11:08 pm
Mr. Heman…this is just too easy:
I find it absolutely hilarious that while you state you support the Constitution, you know so little about it as regards to the office of the President of the Untied States.
I am so glad I can be a source of amusement for you. I like making people laugh. I find your typo regarding the “Untied” States to be rather amusing, as well.
ALL the candidates, including Huckabee, Paul, Romney, Thompson, and the rest have all spouted “what they would do as President,†but this in reality has little to do with what they actually could or can do.
Then how, pray tell, are we supposed to decide for whom to vote, hmm? Perhaps by looking at what they have done in the past in their official capacities? You do not seem to think this is a valid option, as your following remarks make clear.
Paul says he would do away with the IRS, CIA, and the FBI as well as get us out of the war with Iraq.
I don’t believe he wants to do away with the FBI, but he considers the CIA to be not only unnecessarily redundant, but also culpable for some egregious over-stepping of boundaries. Haven’t you watched any Bourne movies? As for the IRS, I thought that was on the Christmas wish-list of most American citizens. Not sure why you find it so astonishing.
Like Huckabee, who, while he may desire to see a ban on smoking, truly realizes this is a personal preference and he could actually do no such thing.
Au contraire. Huckabee has taken cues from his predecessors and could very well use their precedent to issue presidential executive orders. It happens all the time. As for Ron Paul’s desire to do away with unconstitutional agencies and bureaucracies, some he can disband which are under the executive branch (such as law enforcement). He also frequently refers to using the “bully pulpit” of the president’s office to fight for a return to sanity in government. From the executive branch he can veto spending bills and propose budgets. And if President Bush sent troops to Iraq via executive order, Paul would be able to rescind that as the Commander in Chief.
You have two little things that would probably stop any Presidential candidate from doing whatever they want whenever they want to: Congress and the Supreme Court. It is called the separation of powers.
I think Ron Paul understands the separation of powers better than any of the other candidates. In fact, when President Bush insisted on unconstitutionally sending troops to Iraq to fight a war (read your Constitution about who is supposed to declare war), then Paul proposed a bill for Congress to declare war on Iraq to prevent such an improper usurpation of the powers of Congress. The craven Congressmen didn’t want to take that kind of heat, so they let the president use power not granted to him.
Huckabee has a Pastor’s heart and desires that people be treated with respect. This includes their health and welfare.
If he really had a pastor’s heart for helping people, he wouldn’t do it with other people’s money. That’s found in the 8th commandment, which trumps the Constitution.
What he was able to do as a Governor is completely different than what he will be able to do as a President.
Not completely different, just on a larger scale.
Plus, Huckabee is part of a denomination, Southern Baptists, that has publicly come out in total support of homeschoolers, offers homeschoolers help, prints homeschool curriculum, and has devoted an entire web site to homeschooling. No other denomination has come out so strong in support of homeschooling that I know of.
Ted Kennedy is a member of the Roman Catholic church, which is staunchly (officially) pro-life. Kennedy is a big-time supporter of pre-born baby killing. His affiliation has no bearing on the way he governs, sadly the case with almost all those in government, who are prone to use those affiliations for political gain, but when the rubber meets the road, their loose associations with Christian groups are meaningless. I imagine the Southern Baptists are against rape and murder, too, but Huckabee agitated for the release of a rapist who went on to rape and murder others.
The President has to be someone who will be a strong leader because he will be the director of the national will to get anything done.
What do you think the president needs to get done beyond the duties granted him by the Constitution? Furthering the federal role in education? Getting even more Medicare handouts for seniors? Waging new wars in foreign lands which have not attacked us?
Ron Paul, with some of his simplistic ideas may sound good at first, but in his time in office as a Senator, he has not garnered any support because he is seen as someone with his own agenda who will cut and run for his own purposes.
Oh, dear. First, he is a congressman, not a senator. As for garnering support, he has raised more money than Huckabee in the last quarter by several times…6 million dollars in one day, in case you missed it, a record for GOP fundraising. Huckabee’s website had a pledge drive, trying to get $1,150,000 by December 15. When that wasn’t happening, they changed it to a “December goal.” As for Ron Paul having his own purposes, I’m not sure what you mean by that. Do you mean his nefarious agenda of limiting government to what the Constitution allows for it to be? Let me give you one example of his “own agenda.” He is the only member of Congress who has opted out of the lucrative Congressional pension program. Sounds like a greedy dog to me. Or maybe he is the only one with principles among that native criminal class (see Mark Twain). Could it be that his colleagues don’t like him because he makes them look bad? I think someone likes him, though, judging by the money pouring in from hardworking, fed-up folks.
Now, which one would be strong of character and lead?
Now that’s the problem, isn’t it? You are willing to give compliments to serial philanderers and adulterers who support baby-killing, such as Giuliani (”i” before “u”), but a man who has been married to the same woman over 50 years, who has delivered over 4000 babies and never once considered doing an abortion, who has a solid principled voting record going back to the 1970s, who is as even-tempered as they come under some of the most unfair scrutiny in media history…he is scoffed at and derided as not being of leadership potential. Now, who is misunderstanding the Constitution and what it says about being president in the “Untied” States?
December 20th, 2007 at 11:50 pm
Dear Mr. Heman,
Tired and dealing with much sickness in my home, I’m also a bit irascible. Please forgive me for turning some of that on you. Please do, however, consider the real facts regarding Paul’s record vs. Huckabee’s, and the actual words of the Constitution as well as God’s Word concerning the limits of the jurisdiction of the state, and let’s not be too gullible as Christians as we are to be wise as serpents as well as harmless as doves. Having been around Republican politics for a couple of decades now, I have seen this scenario (semi-credible profession of faith must equal good candidate) replayed over and over and over… We always end up with bigger government and bigger problems. If Christians like you would be encouraged by Paul’s ability to raise money and support and begin to consider voting for him, then we could have a great impact on reversing that bad trend!
December 21st, 2007 at 6:41 am
Okay, Carmon ~ I confess your post has helped me begin to pay closer attention, especially to Ron Paul, starting now. Thanks.
Illness in a large family on top of holiday ToDos can definitely make a mom feel haggard. I’ll be praying for you today.
Love and hugs,
Ruthanne
December 21st, 2007 at 7:39 am
Well said, Carmon!
Y’all would probably get a kick out of my book, Turn Neither to the Right nor to the Left: A Thinking Christian’s Guide to Politics and Public Policy.
Merry Christmas!
December 21st, 2007 at 8:11 am
Oops, my tired eyes this morning noticed it’s Mr. Hemen. Sorry for the blooper. Maybe I’ll get some reading glasses in my stocking.
December 21st, 2007 at 8:33 am
Carmon, I am very sorry about your family’s sickness. I am praying for you.
These kind of posts help me become a *bit* more interested. I agree about the local level, and I have voted in every local and state election in the past decade (at least). I also pay very close attention to judicial candidates because of the havok or blessing they are capable of doling out.
This weekend I will speak with a young friend and former student (home for a surprise visit – he had expected to have to spend Christmas in Iowa!) who is working for a presidential candidate.
And I might start becoming “de-neutralized” (thanks, Dana!) in March or April.
Hugs, sips of tea, soft music, more hugs,
Carol
PS If I were in range, I’d come over and clean your toilets and wrap your presents…
December 21st, 2007 at 11:51 am
Carmon, this is a wonderful post and you know I completely agree with everything I know about your political sentiments, so I was kind of surprised that you said you’d consider voting for Huckabee if we were electing a king. A day or two after you posted this, I read that same comment at another blog, which made me wonder if you and the other blogger meant it as a kind of joke, but I thought I’d come back and ask you about it, just for the sake of clarity.
Given that the role of President is to be a public servant in carrying out the Constitution, whereas a king is the covenantal head of his people, ISTM that your statement was similar to saying that you’d have a higher standard when choosing an employee than when choosing a husband, and I know that can’t be what you meant.
December 21st, 2007 at 7:41 pm
Hi, Kelly. What a good question and observation, about a king being our covenant head!
I said I “might be tempted” to vote for him, and even with all those qualifiers, I was using hyperbole. I don’t think, in light of all the marks against him, even with his nice smile and witty repartee, that I would even want him to be king. I think that the same warnings God gave Israel regarding their desire for a king would definitely apply in his case, if he were king or president.
Do you think a president is not a covenant head in any way? I like the employee analogy, and the way our Constitution is structured, I think our government is “of the people,” but we do have representatives, who do act in that (limited) headship capacity, don’t you think?
December 21st, 2007 at 7:44 pm
Carol, if you ever want to come for a visit, I will save the bathrooms for you to clean
.
We are doing quite a bit better and the girls and I got to go shopping today. Tomorrow may be another story the way things are going! We are keeping up with laundry and housework and meals just fine with so many older children able to pitch in (the ones who aren’t on their deathbed).
Both prayers and hugs are greatly appreciated!
December 22nd, 2007 at 9:59 am
Thanks for the clarification.
All authority is delegated from God, of course, but in the case of a king that authority comes pretty much directly from God. A king not only embodies his kingdom but he also represents or mediates God’s justice on earth, and his people are bound to submit to him as far as he submits to God.
The difference between a king and our president is that the president is chosen by the people to oversee on their behalf the carrying out of the agreement between the states. This looks far more to me like a man who serves as a steward. We are in the position of the master and are not bound to obey him, but he is bound to obey the terms of his office.
In a sense it is a covenantal relationship, but I don’t see it as the President being a covenant head of the American people.
December 25th, 2007 at 9:20 pm
I only just recently have been hearing about Ron Paul. I mean, wrt what he stands for (limited gov’t). I heard the name, but hadn’t run across much written about him. Until December 20. Over at nationalreview.com, John Derbyshire’s column for that day, “Liberty! Liberty! Why I’m for Ron Paul,” bucked the NRO endorsement of Romney, and I was curious. I clicked on that column’s link to the RP website. I dunno why RP hasn’t been more prominent on my radar before. Is he lacking in conservative media puff? Does he have bad hair? Are the rich not for him? I dunno. It is heartening to read here that he is good at raising dough. I hope he uses it to get the message out to the GOP primary voters. I am in California, and the only time my vote counts in a presidential race is during the primary vote. On the big presidential election day, California’s electoral vote inevitably go Dem. But on primary day, California Republicans get to make a loud statement for a GOP contender, maybe give him the boost he needs to secure the nomination. Maybe RP will pull forward in the primaries, and clear the field. More power to him! (And less to the gummint.)
January 2nd, 2008 at 8:15 am
I’m a local coordinator for Ron Paul and a Theonomist. I’m not sure if Ron Paul is a theonomist, but he votes with the Bible on every issue I have read about. He is a strict constitutionalist. See his positions at http://www.ronpaul2008.com and Google Ron Paul for more info. This is an amazing campaign. I have been suprised at the trementous support that has been shown by passing traffic at our sign wavings.
I believe the words of Jethro apply to us and that Ron Paul meets the biblical qualifications for civil ruler, indeed, that he is the only one running for president who does. He has a good statement of faith and is a member of first baptist church of Lakeview TX. Church membership is one things I had to verify before helping him.
Contact me if anyone would like to discuss this more clintdiggs@gmail.com
He has raised more money this quarter than any other candidate, more money from the military than anyone else, and set two all time records for single day internet contributions. Watch for the RonPaulBlimp at a city near you!