Louis R. Avallone

Author: liz

  • Wanting It

    Wanting It

    Many admire that he says things other people are afraid to say. The conventional wisdom was that his popularity would fizzle, but instead, it has sizzled. He’s just a showman, they say. He’s been called an entertainer, and criticized as not being a politician. He’s not spent any time volunteering for political campaigns, walking neighborhoods, door-to-door, or spent much time at all in Washington, D.C. or pandering to the political class, or establishment politics.

    In fact, they say he is taking full advantage of the lack of leadership in the GOP, and having a little fun at his fellow Republicans’ expense. He’s been viewed as a growing problem for the Republican Party and a serious liability that continues to damage the GOP brand. He’s even been called “incendiary” and “ugly” by the chairman of the Republican National Committee.

    Many dyed-in-the-wool conservatives feel he has become a clown and a laughingstock to the general public. They say he’s not concerned about being correct, as much as he is about being loud, and that therefore, he’s just not credible.

    As one writer put it, “I think the problem is the Republican leaders…and the other candidates, don’t have the courage to say what they say in quiet, which (is) they think he is a buffoon…(t) hey think he is like a clown coming out of a small car at a circus.  It’s great he is entertaining and all that.  But nobody takes him seriously.”

    Many cringe when he says what he says about the issues, and conservative supporters become almost apologetic to their “more enlightened” family and friends, to excuse his comments. They almost always follow-up nervously, and dramatically, with the reminder that, “He just cares so much about this country, and wants to see it great again.”

    But for others, his success – and his millions of dollars – simply has not translated into any kind of respect, deference, or validation for his positions on the issues facing our country.

    And while many of you may think you know exactly who we’re talking about here, the rest of you think we’re talking about Donald Trump – but we’re not.

    In fact, every comment, which has been recited above, has been said, or written about, Rush Limbaugh. Yes, Rush Limbaugh. And yet it is also being said, almost verbatim, about Trump, as well.

    Even with such criticism of Rush, and after almost 25 years of folks demonizing him, 20 million Americans still tune in every day to listen to Rush, and his message.

    Many say it’s because he lifts the spirit of the average conservative American, who feels that our country’s best days are slipping behind us, and that the American dream no longer exists. Like Trump, and with pep-talk enthusiasm, many say that Rush makes his listeners believe that America is still an exceptional nation, that it’s best days are still ahead, and that Americans are capable of doing the extraordinary, when it comes to their own personal achievement.

    And like Trump, Rush may not be an expert on foreign diplomacy, agricultural subsidies, or military strategy, but his activism produces public action because his message inspires. His listeners also pay attention to what’s going on – even as voter turnout numbers continue to plummet across the country.

    His message is not unlike the one from Ted Cruz, who explained how his father fled from Cuba and arrived in the United States penniless with $100 sewn into his underwear, and that he was grateful to God that some well-meaning liberal didn’t come put his arm around his father and say, “Let me take care of you.”

    Rush’s message is along the same lines of the famous Zig Ziglar who once said, “Building a better you is the first step to building a better America.”

    You see, the message of Ted Cruz, Donald Trump, Zig Ziglar, or Rush Limbaugh is much larger than these men, their fame, or fortune: it’s about we, the people, and realizing our greatest and best potential comes from within us, granted by God – not from what some government bureaucrat decides is best for us. This message is why Rush Limbaugh now has 20 million listeners a day, and why Trump continues to lead in the polls.

    Yes, maybe the message can be said better, or more nicely. After all, the Bible says, “Speak the truth, but do it in love.” But the popularity of Trump’s message is not primarily because of Trump. It never has been, and it never will be.

    Like Rush’s nearly 30 years on the radio, Trump’s message will continue to resonate this year with millions of Americans – not because of his showmanship or his knowing the art of the deal, but because it’s a message that we already know to be true: We can do more for ourselves than we think is possible, and that there is greatness within all of us.

    While many may get distracted by the pundits who offer their critical commentary about Trump’s presidential campaign, his credibility, consistency, integrity, his qualifications, intellect, or even as they ridicule his supporters, and what damage this is all doing to the Republican Party, just remember this has all been done before – including to a man named Ronald Reagan.

    Trump may not be the best politician, or the best choice for a nominee, but as conservatives, we just want it to be morning again in America. And we want a leader, whatever his name, to want it as badly as we do.

  • Just Because I Said It…

    Just Because I Said It…

    During last year’s gubernatorial campaign, Governor John Bel Edwards explained that he was a conservative Southern Democrat, and West Point graduate who was pro-life and pro-gun. At times, though, he seemed almost ashamed to stand with his own Democrat Party, whose party platform represents irreconcilable differences with many of John Bel Edwards’ stated positions.

    President Obama even distanced himself from John Bel Edwards during the campaign for governor. The White House would later announce that the President would not endorse John Bel Edwards, at all, even though John Bel Edwards was the only Democrat in the race.

    Confusing, I know.

    And then presumed Democrat Party presidential nominee Hillary Clinton visited Baton Rouge last September, but Democrat candidate John Bel Edwards would not even appear on stage with her, or any of the other Democrat Party officials from around the state, who had assembled that day for Mrs. Clinton’s campaign rally and fundraiser. His reason: “scheduling” issues.

    Things are different now, after the election, though. So when Democrat Party officials and President Obama came to Baton Rouge (just this month), Governor Edwards was center stage this time, shoulder-to-shoulder with his fellow Democrats, and meeting with the President privately. The President praised the new governor publicly saying, “I’m just so proud of him, and I know he’s going to do some great work.”

    Presumably that “work” will include John Bel Edwards’ support of teachers’ unions, expanding the size of government, increasing public spending, raising taxes, pandering to minority voters, increasing the minimum wage, and keeping an open mind when it comes to supporting Planned Parenthood in Louisiana, accepting Syrian refugees, and establishing sanctuary cities in our state.

    If this is the work ahead, the Edwards’ administration has a steep mountain to climb in what is still a deeply conservative state, where voters elected Republicans to a majority of the seats in the House of Representatives – 61 out of the 105 – and in the Senate, where voters elected Republicans to 25 out of 39 seats. Knowing this, John Bel Edwards promised in his first press conference after the election that “we will be very inclusive and moderate.”

    Moderate? The “great work” the President praised (and expects) from John Bel Edwards is anything but “moderate”, though. So, which John Bel Edwards will be our governor for the next 4 years? For many, that’s a rhetorical question.

    For others, having to ask the question, in the first place, represents an underlying basis for their distrust of politicians, government, political parties, and the election process, altogether. It’s no doubt the main reason that there are more voters registering as “no party” in Louisiana than are registering as Republicans or Democrats, combined.

    Consider Jay Dardenne, as an example of how voters come to believe that politics is less about principles and more about illusions, or smoke and mirrors. While he was campaigning as a Republican candidate last year to be governor of Louisiana, Jay called John Bel Edwards’ Obamacare expansion proposal “foolish and insolvent” and that John Bel Edwards was “writing a check Louisiana can’t cash”. He said that John Bel Edwards only proposes “more and more debt” and that his promises represent a “liberal fantasyland,” adding, “he cannot bring all of Louisiana together”.

    So now, after he said all of that to the voters, what do you think that Jay Dardenne did next, after the primary election? Well, he endorsed John Bel Edwards, of course.

    Then, as fate would have it, Jay Dardenne was then named John Bel Edwards’ Commissioner of Administration – which is the new governor’s chief administrator – and now Jay will be working to turn those “liberal fantasyland” promises into reality for the rest of us.

    So did Jay Dardenne not mean what he said during the campaign? Or is it like that Adele song where she says, “just because I said it, doesn’t mean I meant it”?

    The bottom line is that until we, the voters, require honesty from our elected officials, and hold them accountable with our votes, and our attention to the issues, throughout the year, the dishonesty will continue. As with any good illusion, the hand is truly quicker than the eye, and without attentiveness, elected officials will continue to lie to us, “for our own good”.

    And whether you call it misrepresentations, omissions, exaggerations, denials, lack of transparency, fabrications, cover ups, broken promises, hypocrisy, or bait and switch – it’s not good for any of us, or the legacy that we will leave for the next generation.

    Whatever you believe, just be authentic with the voters. Don’t lie to make yourself look better, or conceal mistakes, protect your reputation, deflect the blame, deceive people, or steal the credit. Yes, I know, lots of people lie. In fact, Americans average about 11 lies per week.

    But honesty means everything, and it’s not just a “Republican” or “Democrat” thing, it’s a “human being” thing. And we remember someone’s honesty, or the lack of it, long after the details of its subject matter are long forgotten. Lyndon Johnson lied about Vietnam. Richard Nixon lied about Watergate. Bill Clinton lied about Monica Lewinsky. These are just a few examples.

    So, to the new administration, and legislature, in Baton Rouge, just know the voters will remember your honesty too, as you serve our state. We can handle the truth, we just shouldn’t be expected to manage our lives – or continue to vote for you – in the absence of it.

     

  • Finding the Right Words

    It’s important to avoid “stinking thinking”, as motivational speaker Zig Ziglar often said, which is when we allow ourselves to be gripped by negative thoughts and emotions, making us feel defeated, discouraged, and depressed. And “stinking thinking” can do that, indeed. Have you ever heard of the adage, “We are…what we think about?”

    In fact, how we speak to ourselves can be self-motivating and encouraging, or self-defeating and pitying. This is generally when folks remind us that it’s not what happens to us that matters – it’s how we choose to respond. Of course, the Bible tells us this also, “For as he thinks in his heart, so is he.” (Proverbs 23:7).

    Now, of course, we’ve all asked a friend on the phone, or just about anyone in passing, “How are you?” Maybe it’s the clerk at the grocery store, or the server at a restaurant.

    Some folks will say, “Not too bad, thanks.” You know right away that these are the proverbial “glass is half-empty” type of folks – and you know it by the words they use. “Not too bad” implies that there is always something to worry about, in their mind, or nothing is ever quite right.

    Well, what if they said, “I’m fantastic, thanks,” instead? Likewise, you’d know this was the “glass is half-full” type of person – again, simply by the words they chose – whether they really were really doing fantastic, or not. And by responding, “I’m fantastic,” it suggests this is someone who has a positive attitude and tends to look for the silver lining, even in difficult circumstances.

    So as we begin 2017, and a new administration in Washington begins to take its place, our national mood, and the words we use to describe ourselves, as a country, will necessarily change, as well.

    President-elect Trump’s “self-talk” is very different from President Obama’s. Trump uses positive words like “great”, “terrific”, “fortune”, “thriving”, and “huge.” He also says America will starting “winning again” and it will be “beyond anybody’s expectations” and, “we are going to win so much, you will get tired of winning!”

    He compliments those who are successful as “truly great leaders”, he talks about the “tremendous potential” of our country. The day after he was elected, he reminded us all that “America will no longer settle for anything less than the best.”

    He’s seems to always characterize whatever he is doing, thinking, or working on as the “finest”, “smartest”, and  “greatest”.  He talks about how we need the “smartest negotiators”, or how he has built the “best hotels”, or why he celebrates those who are excellent and “most highly sought after”, and why we need to build “the strongest military that we’ve ever had.”

    By contrast, though, President Obama’s favorite phrases over the past eight years seem to be those phrases that include the words “can’t” and “don’t,” and in particular, the word “frustrating.” He talked about how there is real anger and “frustration” in our country. And he often says how “frustrating” it is because he hasn’t achieved everything in his administration, exactly the way he had planned. He’s been “frustrated” with Republicans, with the Tea Party, as well as anyone in small towns who clings to “guns or religion or antipathy toward people who aren’t like them.”

    Instead of “thriving” in your job, President Obama believes “at a certain point, you’ve made enough money.” If you started a small business in your home, and grew it into a terrific company, he surprised you by saying, “You didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen.” Instead of growing the private sector of our economy beyond anybody’s expectations, President Obama was satisfied with it being just “fine”, surrendering to the belief that factory jobs moving to Mexico (like Carrier’s), are “jobs of the past” and “are just not going to come back.”

    Instead of talking about the tremendous potential of our country and taking responsibility as a leader, he still blames “the previous administration” for the economy, and for “less than loving Christians” who do not care enough for others. He appealed to the worst within us, saying his unpopularity is because “there’s some folks who just really don’t like the idea of a black President,” and that America has provoked terrorism because we’ve “meddled” in other countries. Instead of cheerleading for America as the “best”, he apologizes for us, instead.

    The truth is that how we talk to ourselves as a country is the loudest and most influential voice that we will hear. It can work for us, or against us, depending on the messages we allow. It can inspire us, or depress us, and the words we use make all the difference.

    Sure, we all can be guilty of “stinking thinking” at times, and that’s why, from time to time, we all need a “check-up from the neck-up,” in the words of Zig Ziglar.

    And one thing’s for sure: the election last November was our nation’s appointment for a “check-up from the neck-up” and America made a choice between two (2) visions: “winning” (optimism) or continued “frustration” (pessimism). As Winston Churchill put it, “A pessimist sees the difficulty in every opportunity; an optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.”

    May this new year be filled with opportunities for you and your family in which the difficulties might not seem all that difficult – and may you always find the “words” to say so.

  • Recently…

    Recently…

    Would you rather “feel” better, or “do” better? Your answer will tell a great deal about you, and may even help predict who will be elected our next President in November.

    You see, our brain circuitry is such that emotion overrides reason, and much more easily than the other way around. And while many voters think they are casting their vote based on their logical analysis of the issues, many really aren’t – at least not today, in our non-stop streaming, round-the-clock, always on, television, radio, and Internet news cycles.

    Because of the amount of available information to us on the issues, and the speed at which it is dispatched to us, there simply isn’t enough time in the day to analyze every new development or alert. Suddenly, then, our country is moving away from a cautioned, logical analysis of the issues, to a quicker, knee-jerk, emotion-based decision making process, instead.

    And if you said you would rather “feel” better, than “do” better, perhaps that is an indication that you’ve thrown in the towel, so to speak. Maybe now you’ve decided you won’t try keeping up with the constant barrage of breaking news and will move towards rely more on how a candidate, or an issue, “feels” to you, instead.

    It’s just a basic human principle, really. We like things that make us feel good. We avoid stuff that feels bad. Here are some examples of how emotion-based decisions are dominating our nation’s most pressing issues:

    You want to improve national security, but don’t want to engage in profiling all Muslims, or to turn away refugees coming into our country from Syria.

    You support the Bill of Rights, including the 2nd Amendment, but you feel that increased gun control legislation must be passed in order to “do something” about the rising gun violence in our communities.

    You believe that universal healthcare, controlled by the government, actually reduces access and increases medical costs for millions of Americans, but you don’t want to deny medical care to anyone, or for anyone not to be able to get the medicines they need to feel better.

    You know that the unemployment rate always increases whenever the minimum wage is increased, especially among the poorest Americans, but you feel like everyone is entitled to a living wage, and the dignity of supporting your family.

    You believe in the freedom of religion, but you don’t feel it’s right for any business owner to refuse service to a customer because of their sexual orientation.

    You know the poverty rate has remained unchanged over the past 50 years in our country, even after spending $22 trillion, but you don’t feel right about any legislation aimed to cut entitlement spending because the poorest among us deserve a “hand up.”

    We could go on and on here. All of these examples represent impossible choices for many voters, and the difference is between doing what we know is better, or doing what makes us “feel” better.

    It makes us “feel” better not to profile and to welcome refugees who are suffering, but according to the Department of Homeland Security (“DHS”), we could “do” better if we did profile. In fact, a former DHS employee testified that the San Bernardino terrorist attack could have been prevented if the Obama administration had not shut down his surveillance investigation on the grounds that he was profiling Islamic groups.

    You may “feel” better to support new gun control legislation because “something” must be done, but study after study has shown that nations with the strongest gun control laws have substantially higher murder rates than those that do not. Chicago has the toughest gun control laws in the country, for example, and they have the highest violent crime rates, as well.

    You may “feel” better to support universal healthcare coverage, but since Obamacare was enacted, there are 31 million Americans who still can’t afford medical care (and won’t for the foreseeable future).

    You might “feel” better advocating for a “living wage,” but the recent increased minimum wage law in Seattle resulted in the loss of 1,000 restaurant jobs within a month following that wage increase.

    Again, we could go on and on here, comparing how we may “feel” with the actual facts. The question is, “How much damage to our country, or lost opportunities to “do” better, is this shift to “feeling” better costing us?”

    How many more laws will the “feel” better crowd propose, that overrule our personal freedoms, from the freedom to worship to our right to bear arms? How much more of our national security will be compromised, because of political posturing? How long will we continue to remain silent, as hard work continues to be replaced with greater and greater entitlements by those who want to “feel” better? How much longer will we allow the government to run our lives based on what they “feel” is best for us, instead of us running them?

    No, good decisions don’t always “feel” good – not at first, at least – but that sure doesn’t stop them from being the best ones, either. Happy New Year to you all, and may God bless America.

  • Are All Candidates Honorable?

    About 4 out of 10 voters cast their ballots in last month’s run-off election, or had already early voted before Election Day. With such low participation levels, it reminds me of Thomas Jefferson’s saying that, “We in America do not have government by the majority. We have government by the majority who participate.”

    And in keeping with the Christian roots of our freedom, we love our neighbor and respect his choices, even if we do not agree with him. Although every candidate may not have earned the majority of the voters’ support, they each deserve our respect.

    But a reader commented to me recently, “How can you say that all candidates deserve respect? Does the desire to hold office make a person respectable? Does asking for something, like a vote, automatically earn one a title of honor?”

    No, it doesn’t, and he makes a good point. Of course, the dictionary definition of respect is “a feeling of deep admiration for someone or something, elicited by their abilities, qualities, or achievements”. It comes from the Latin word re- ‘back’ plus specere ‘look at.’

    My respect for candidates is not necessarily in admiration of their choices in life, or as an endorsement of their political views. Far from it. Instead, my respect comes from a realization that far too many of us choose to say, “to each his own,” or “that’s none of my business,” or “it’s not my place to judge”.

    My respect for candidates comes from an understanding that life is a fight for territory, and that once we stop fighting for what we want, what we don’t want will automatically take over. And candidates fight for what they want – instead of just wringing their hands.

    My respect for candidates comes from seeing how many other decent, hard-working people who don’t get involved because they find the cost of running for office, or serving in an elected position, or participating in politics, or taking a stand for anything – is simply too high of a price to pay.

    Of course, the Book of James tells us that “a person is justified by works and not by faith alone”. Yes, many of our neighbors only pray for our nation, and the dilemma we face in our culture. They worry about the erosion of our religious liberty, the decline of our education system, the deterioration of the family, and the fiscal irresponsibility of our elected officials – and yet they don’t go any further than worrying.

    We must do more, however, and this is why I believe candidates deserve our respect, even if only in the spirit of, “I do not agree with what you have to say, but I’ll defend to the death your right to say it.”

    So from neighborhood association meetings to church groups, from walking miles upon miles down city streets and country roads, knocking on doors and putting up signs – these candidates represent the old-fashioned, pioneer-like grit and determination that is the American way.

    Losing is no fun, of course, and being criticized for losing, or ridiculed for one’s opinions, isn’t either. But there is no shame or dishonor in losing an election – so long as the campaign was run with honor and integrity.

    There have been – and will be – lots of “I told you so” opinions, which will point out this reason or that reason, this issue or that issue, that made all the difference in one race or another, this election cycle. And there will be plenty of time for looking in the rear-view mirror.

    But for now, congratulations to our newly elected officials, and thank you to all of the candidates who ran.

    They deserve all the credit because they were “in the arena”. As Theodore Roosevelt so famously said: “It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena…who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement and who at the worst, if he fails, at least he fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who know neither victory nor defeat.”

    Whatever our politics, and however elated or disappointed you may feel about the election results this fall, we remain grateful to those candidates who gave us a choice, and the men and women who paid the ultimate sacrifice for there to be one.

  • National Identity

    When the folks in Washington begin talking about increasing the number of Syrian refugees in our country by over 250% from last year, or raising that number next year to as many as 100,000, many Americans wonder how we will be able to afford spending as much as $1.6 billion on these refugees annually, when we have not yet addressed the record number of American families already living below the poverty level in own country, and the historic unemployment levels that continue to weaken our communities.

    Yes, I know. I shouldn’t be concerned with that because of what it says in the Bible: “For I was hungry and you never gave me food, I was a stranger and you never made me welcome…” However, it also says, “Anyone who does not look after his own relations, especially if they are living with him, has rejected the faith and is worse than an unbeliever.” In other words, are we taking good care of our neighbors who already call this country their home?

    And before you start saddling up to ride that high horse you are about to ride off into the sunset on, please remember that the U.S. contributed nearly $500 million for humanitarian aid to the Syrian refugees, just this past September alone, and that is on top of the $1 billion contributed last year – more than any other country in the world.

    Even five of the wealthiest Muslim countries have taken NO Syrian refugees in at all, saying that doing so would open them up to an increasing risk of terrorism in THEIR country. Isn’t that what our own FBI and Department of Homeland Security is warning us, as well?

    But in light of the recent terrorism in France, the most stark danger for most Americans is that the profile of the great majority of Syrian refugees to this country do not (will not) meet the profile of the typical refugee family, as was revealed during testimony before a Congressional hearing last month. Instead of family members, more of these refugees are “young, single, males”. 

    And to add to that: The FBI director and the Homeland Security Secretary have admitted that there is not a system in place right now to properly screen and conduct background checks on these refugees, and soon we will have a whole new set of problems to deal with in our country, as a result.

    There have always been refugees, and the U.S. has always given them sanctuary. Times are different today, and at the root of this Syrian refugee matter is the erosion of national identities around the world, especially in Europe, where assimilation has been difficult.

    In fact, as early as 2011, French President Nicolas Sarkozy admitted, “We have been too concerned about the identity of the person who was arriving and not enough about the identity of the country that was receiving him.” British Prime Minister James Cameron said essentially the same, “(W)e have encouraged different cultures to live separate lives, apart from each other and apart from the mainstream. We’ve even tolerated these segregated communities behaving in ways that run completely counter to our values.”

    And while America’s shores once assimilated different cultures and religions into “one nation under God,” today the “great melting pot” in the U.S. often means only more political correctness. Before long, our own nation’s identity will begin to erode precipitously, as well, just as those European countries are experiencing now for themselves.

    And similar to the errors of those European countries, such as France and Great Britain, Obama continues to express indifference, regarding our open border with Mexico, which continues to be plagued by cartel violence, drugs, and other forms of illegal smuggling, illegal immigration, and now, he wants to increase the number of refugees in this country by 250%.

    Even dyed-in-the-wool liberals must see the parallels here with the European nations and the consequences of unchecked, unassimilated immigrants to one’s nation. The proverbial handwriting is on the wall.

    You see, a nation is a group of people who share a destiny, and with that destiny, an identity. The truth is that this national identity needs pride, and a sense of affection that is expressed to the exclusion of any other allegiance. This is the foundation of nation building. As it erodes, so will the nation. This is why it is abhorrent that Obama is not interested in American pride, or in “America winning,” as he recently said.

    Mr. President, we believe that America is exceptional, but not because of what it does or what you have to say about our country.

    It’s exceptional because of what it believes. And that is why, in the words of Ronald Reagan, “We are indeed, and we are today, the last best hope of man on earth”.

  • What’s Past is Prologue

    What’s Past is Prologue

    Can we talk for a minute? It’s about this governor’s race. Now, please understand, I’m the first one in line to expect a higher standard from myself, as well as from those whom we cast our ballots to lead our cities, represent us in Baton Rouge, and make our nation’s laws in Washington. But having high standards, and electing less-than-perfect public servants are not mutually exclusive, either.

    It’s entertaining for some to judge, and even ridicule, David Vitter for being…well…a sinner, or having otherwise made a mistake, or a regret that he wishes he could have gone back and had a second chance to do all over again. But that hardly makes him any different than any of us. He did not blame others, or his circumstances, as so many others in our culture are prone to do today. He didn’t allege there was some conspiracy against him. He said, “I am completely responsible. And I am so very, very sorry.” He also said he had “asked for and received forgiveness” from God and his wife in confession.

    Now, for Catholics (and Vitter is Catholic), confession is more than telling your sins to God on your way to work, or in the shower, and Him forgiving you. Confession for Catholics is a sacrament before a priest, instituted by Jesus Christ in his love and mercy, which permits all of us to reconcile with the church, and repent. Vitter did just that – and he did so many, many years ago, in fact.

    But do we all need to be defined by where we came from, or should it be about where we’re going? Unless you allow it to, why does your future need to look like your past? Abraham Lincoln had failed in business and had a nervous breakdown before being elected President. Lucille Ball was dismissed from drama school with a note saying she was “wasting her time.” The Beatles were first told by a recording studio that their sound was awful and that “guitar music was on the way out.” Michael Jordan was cut from his high school basketball team. Thomas Edison was told by a teacher that he was “too stupid to learn anything”

    The point is that if our past equaled the future, what chance – what hope – would any of us have to better ourselves, redeem our lives, or enrich those around us? Those who have reservations about voting for Vitter, not because of his politics, but because of his past, may need to be reminded that no man or woman is without a defect, or burden, or is wise enough to sidestep the effects of mistakes and bad decisions that we’ve all made in the past. A more accurate indicator of someone’s future, however, is the present moment, and what they are doing right now.

    Still, there is a reader out there who says, “Well, if Vitter did that 15 years ago, he’s probably going to do that again, and embarrass us because the best predictor of future behavior is past behavior.” While that is relatively true, it turns out that such conventional wisdom about the “past being prologue” is a gross oversimplification, according to psychologists who study this subject.

    For example, if you smoke a pack of cigarettes everyday for a year, your past is a pretty good indicator of your cigarette smoking tendencies for the near future. Same for exercise habits or drinking alcohol. That makes sense to me.

    However, over longer periods of time, it turns out that these kinds of high frequency, habitual behaviors can actually be changed forever. For example, someone stops smoking at age 55, even though they have smoked everyday since they were a teenager. Or a heavy drinker chooses his family, over the bottle, spends the rest of his or her life sober.

    People can change. You know that. And if not voting for David Vitter has virtually nothing to do with his politics, and everything to do with his imperfection, despite him remaining “clean and sober” and solidly representing our conservative values over the past 15 years, then here’s your stone, some Windex, and some paper towels – for that glass house you’ve built.

    No, I’m not making you the issue, or the bad guy. It’s just sometimes we seem to be more and more critical of others and want to correct their imperfections, yet we are slow to mend our own (no, I’m not going to point out yours, or mine, right now). We judge others, too often without mercy, and yet pardon ourselves, too often without question. This is one of the reasons that reality television shows are so popular: It often makes us feel better about ourselves, as we watch and think to ourselves, “At least that’s not me.”

    And maybe that’s what’s going on here. Maybe many of us are looking at David Vitter and saying, “At least that’s not me, and I’m going with the other guy, instead.”

    Well, I just hope on judgment day, God doesn’t say the same thing to me.

     

     

  • This Won’t Sound Good

    This Won’t Sound Good

    This won’t sound good. It will seem uncompassionate and unfeeling. Perhaps even mean. But here it goes:

    I really don’t care to hear about Lamar Odom anymore, or the headlines that seemingly wonder aloud how this could have happened. Yes, I know he has played on two (2) NBA championship teams. And that he apparently is quite soft-spoken, and very polite. And that he is beloved by all that knew him in the NBA.

    In case you haven’t heard, here’s what Lamar Odom did: He paid $75,000 to be with two (2) women for several days, at a brothel in Nevada, where he ingested a combination of herbal supplements and cocaine, eventually ending up unconscious, being transported to a hospital where he remained in a coma for three (3) days. His road to recovery will be painful and long, and we should all pray for his speedy recovery.

    But I also know there are many men and women in our armed forces who are seeking a speedy recovery too, like Lamar. Unlike Lamar, though, they have been wounded defending our country, and many have offered their very lives – and yet for many of them, there’s scarcely a story, or headline, or mention in the local newspaper of their contribution to something far, far greater than themselves.

    So no, I’m not interested in more Lamar Odom headlines and stories. Or how he and Khloe Kardashian have jointly gone to court to dismiss their divorce case, because they want to stay husband and wife. Or how Khloe is the only one allowed to be by his side in the hospital. Or of how she skipped her sister Kim’s birthday party, so she could stay by her husband’s side instead.

    And no, I’m not that interested in how he just wanted to be a basketball legend, and lost the ability to tell the difference between those who cared more about his fame and fortune, and the genuine people who cared more about him – and wanted him to succeed. I really am not interested either in how the brothel’s owner is threatening to sue Khloe for her husband’s bill for his “partying” with the women at the brothel.

    But you see, when I say I don’t care about any of those things, what I really mean is that I don’t care about those things as much as I wonder why there are not headlines and news stories on this subject that say, “Going to a Brothel and Snorting Cocaine Is A Really Dumb Idea.” Or “Follow Your Conscience, Make Better Choices, and Live With Fewer Regrets”. Or, “Faith and Family Can Help Us Choose What’s Good, and Not Just What Feels Good”.

    But that’s not what our culture is reporting. In addition, you have Lamar’s father blaming the Kardashians for ruining his son’s life. The media is blaming the harsh spotlights of Hollywood. And ESPN is blaming pop culture tabloids and reality television shows, to explain what drove Lamar to this point.

    It seems there’s always someone else to blame these days, and it’s become a generational sentiment today. Just going back to the 1992 presidential campaign, for example, if you questioned Bill Clinton’s marital infidelity, womanizing, draft dodging, drug use, or honesty, you were told, “What difference does it matter, it’s the economy, stupid!” Or if you supported impeaching Bill Clinton after the Monica Lewinsky matter, you were told this issue was due to a “massive, right-wing conspiracy,” and not anything that Bill Clinton did, of course.

    Sadly, from the sanctity of life, to the institution of marriage, to the freedom of religion, we are constantly reminded by too many in our culture that “character doesn’t matter” and that “right” and “wrong” is only a matter of convenience or perspective, instead of principle.

    But you know what? It does matter, because there are basic values about “right” and “wrong” that we must all share: Tell the truth, honor your commitments, remain faithful in God.

    After all, when things go wrong in life, it’s natural for us to blame, because then we don’t have to accept responsibility for what we did, or didn’t do. And we come by this quite naturally, in fact. Remember the Garden of Eden?

    God: “Adam, did you eat the fruit?”

    Adam: “Eve gave it to me.”

    But when we resort to blame, and refuse to take life on, or fail to accept responsibility for our circumstances, we hand over the power – the control of our very destiny – to others, as if other “people” or the government will fix everything for us, like a genie in a bottle.

    This is why I don’t care to hear any more about Lamar Odom. The sooner he – and our culture – can let go of our excuses, and we take responsibility for our own pursuit of happiness, the sooner we will have the power to change our lives, and our nation, for the better. And given Lamar’s “rags to riches” journey from Queens, New York, I suspect he would wholeheartedly agree – even if the headlines don’t say so.

  • Doing Hard Time

    Doing Hard Time

    It’s ironic. Just last month the ACLU sent a letter to the superintendent of Bossier Parish Schools demanding that “religious proselytization” at Airline High School stop immediately, especially with the principal’s unrepentant use of the phrase, “May God Bless You All.”

    Then there’s the Oklahoma Supreme Court who ruled during the summer that displaying the Ten Commandments outside the state capitol building violated a provision in the Oklahoma state constitution and therefore, the display had to be moved. In Alabama, a sheriff’s department was pressured into removing “Christian” decals from their patrol cars which read, “Blessed are the Peacemakers,” after being threatened with a lawsuit, and realizing the time and money it would take to defend themselves.

    Atheists continue to seek removal of “In God We Trust” from our nation’s currency, and an increasing number of groups are asking our school districts to remove the words “under God” from the Pledge of Allegiance recited by students. There’s even a Facebook page to banish the singing of “God Bless America” from the seventh-inning stretch of major league baseball games.

    Yes, it’s ironic. You see, it seems the only place in America where religious freedom is not being diminished, nor otherwise being dismantled, is in the very place where residents do not have full Constitutional rights to begin with – our prisons.

    While prison inmates lose many of their civil rights, the freedom of religion is not one of them. In fact, inmates are overwhelmingly spiritual, comparatively speaking – only 1 in every 1,000 prisoners will identify themselves as atheist, compared to 1 in every 100 Americans within the general population.

    And the importance of religion in prisons is recognized so much so that almost all of the nation’s 1,100 state and federal prisons employ at least one chaplain or religious services coordinator – nearly 1,700 professional chaplains in all. Could you imagine if every school in our country had a chaplain or religious services coordinator?

    Of course, the role of religion in prisons is not breaking news, really. The Gospel of Matthew says, “I was in prison, and you visited me.” And Saint Paul, in his letter to the Romans, explains, “The love of God has been poured out in our hearts through the Holy Spirit who has been given to us.” Essentially, whenever we have this sense of connectedness or belonging with other people, our physical and emotional health necessarily improves and when we get better on the inside – everything just tends to get better on the outside, as well.

    And the formula works, indeed. The rate of infractions while in prison, and the recidivism rate following their release from prison, is lower for inmates who have taken part of a prison fellowship program, compared to those who did not. In fact, recidivism rates are as low as 13% for inmates who participated in faith-based programs, compared to 50% who did not and unfortunately return to prison within three years from being released.

    In addition to one’s spiritual development, the cost of administering faith-based services for each inmate – about $250 per year – is a fantastic return on the dollar, especially when our prisons are greatly overpopulated and where the average taxpayer cost of care for each inmate is $31,286 per year.

    It’s a cruel reality for many people of faith in the general population that the freedom of religion may be most voraciously protected, and nurtured for growth, by our prison system, while our general population culture convenes daily to sanitize our schools, stadiums, courthouses, statehouses, and public squares from reference to any religious beliefs whatsoever.

    And even though the U.S. Supreme Court has declared that Americans have a right to hold religious beliefs and not be forced by the government to act in ways that violate those beliefs, we nonetheless are being restricted to fewer and fewer venues to act in ways that support our beliefs – from reading the Bible in schools to even saying “God Bless You,” whenever someone sneezes.

    If religion can help create more peaceful prisons and significantly reduce recidivism by connecting inmates spiritually, and making them far less likely to hurt others or to do wrong, then it seems that every cultural effort to disconnect the rest of us spiritually would have the opposite effect – making us all more likely to hurt others or do wrong.

    There are lots of folks out there who will read this column and begin pointing out the fallacies of embracing religion in the same spirit as our prisons do. They will also cite Constitutional and other legal arguments, one after another, on why it cannot be done the same.

    Legally, they may be right. But all I know is this, in the words Frederick Douglas: “It is easier to build strong children than to repair broken men,” and I can’t figure out for the life of me, why a minority of Americans are so hell bent on doing it the hard way, and making us all do hard time, in the process.

  • The Shepherd Tends His Flock

    The Shepherd Tends His Flock

    Pope Francis is only the fourth Pope to visit the United States. As he visits Washington, D.C., New York City, and Philadelphia, the crowds who come to see him stretch for as long as the eye can see. Many say that millions will crowd out one another to merely catch a glimpse of the Pope because our country, as well as across the world, are starving for spirituality. In fact, Mother Theresa once said that the poverty in the West is a different kind of poverty – one of spirituality, adding that “there’s a hunger for love, as there is a hunger for God.”[br]

    After all, Jesus had said the same, saying, “I am the bread of life. He who comes to me will never go hungry, and he who believes in me will never be thirsty….” And it is perhaps this point that explains why so many millions, even those who are not of the Catholic faith, will get up at 4:00 a.m. in the morning, or travel thousands of miles, if only to be in the presence of the Pope.[br]

    And as Catholics, we believe that whenever the Pope teaches a doctrine on faith or morals, and asserts his official authority as leader of the Church, he is to be held infallible, or otherwise incapable of error. But when the Pope makes statements about what many feel are political matters, and not of faith or morality, many say that the Pope is still infallible, and should not be questioned, especially by Catholics.[br]

    Recently, the Pope advocated for the U.S. to open its borders to refugees from around the world, saying, “When the stranger in our midst appeals to us, we must not repeat the sins and the errors of the past.” Is this a truth? Or is that his opinion?[br]

    Surely he knows that 80% of our population growth is already from immigrants that are in our country, and we spend $113 billion on the effects from illegal immigration, and that we’ve even set-up sanctuary cities for illegal immigrants by immunizing them from the laws of our very own country.[br]

    And surely he knows that our country is nearly $20 trillion in debt, and that unchecked illegal immigration has continued to overcrowd our schools and made learning more difficult for our children, since we know that smaller schools tend to have higher attendance and graduation rates, less violence, higher grades, and test scores.[br]

    I’m sure he knows that continuing to allow illegal immigration to grow chaotically, without a plan, means that our nation’s ability to care for the sick, regardless of their citizenship, will continue to decline, as hundreds of hospitals are now closing or reducing treatment services because the uninsured number of illegal immigrants continues to grow. The average wait time in a California emergency room, for example, is now 4 hours (and growing).[br]

    When he blames the Syrian refugee crisis on the “the god of money” or on a “bad, unjust” socio-economic system, but doesn’t comment on the Islamic State that has now taken over half of Syria, a third of Iraq and is expanding out into Gaza, Libya and Afghanistan – is this a truth, or is that his opinion?[br]

    He has criticized global leaders for their failure to combat climate change. But is it his opinion that the earth is warming, or it is a truth? Surely he knows that in 2014 there was record ice in Antarctica, record snowfall, record cold, and that the oceans are rising much less than predicted (95% less). Surely he know that nature produces much more CO2 than man, and that 99% of scientists don’t believe in man-made global warming.[br]

    Despite this all, how can we question the Pope if he is infallible? This illustrates the common confusion between infallibility and imperfection. After all, there are many Popes that even disagree with one another. Infallibility does not make a Pope’s private, theological opinions become “truth”. He learns the “truth” as we all do – through careful study. His infallibility, according to the Catholic Church, applies to “solemn, official teachings on faith and morals.”[br]

    Whether you believe or not that the Pope is infallible on matters such as immigration or global warming, we simply cannot have it all. Life is a series of trade-offs. You can’t have all of the joys of having children, and then have lots of time for yourself, or your career. You can’t eat poorly, and then have good health. You can’t speak up and remain silent.[br]

    So when the Pope offers his comments, surely he also expects us to consider there are trade-offs to achieve the great works we are called by God to accomplish, such as extending mercy to those who are suffering and coming to our country, while making sure we have a sustainable system in place to transition them from pain to prosperity.[br]

    After all, we are not called to merely accept our circumstances, but to change the things we can change. As Pastor Joel Osteen wrote, “You were not created to just get by with an average, unrewarding, or unfulfilling life. God created you to leave your mark on this generation.”[br]

    And we can do that. The path we take to do so may be different than Pope Francis imagines today in his speeches, but I’m sure he won’t mind how we do it – not because it may reveal his infallibility – but because it reveals the teachings of Christ truly are.