Louis R. Avallone

Category: Columns

  • For Crying Out Loud

    For Crying Out Loud

    Good grief, Charlie Brown!

    In December 1965, nearly 15 million viewers, or one-half of the television viewing audience, tuned in to watch “A Charlie Brown Christmas.” It has become the longest-running cartoon special in history, but it almost was canceled before it ever was aired. You see, the CBS network executives were less than impressed. Aside from the technical criticisms, resulting from a rushed production schedule, the executives did not want to have Linus reciting the story of the birth of Christ from the Gospel of Luke. It was thought that viewers would not want to be preached upon by an animated cartoon, especially from Biblical passages. Obviously, after 50 years of airing every Christmas, receiving an Emmy and a Peabody award, those CBS executives got it wrong.

    “There will always be an audience for innocence in this country,” said Charlie Brown’s creator, Charles Schulz. Nonetheless, the religious celebration of Christmas continues to face trivialization by an increasingly vocal and secular strain of society today.

    Retailers have tried calling Christmas trees, “holiday” or “family” trees. They’ve pressed-on with “Happy Holidays,” even though 67 percent of Americans prefer the greeting, “Merry Christmas.” Advertisers have pushed out “Christ” from Christmas and pushed on with “X-Mas.”

    Last year, a group calling themselves “American Atheists” purchased billboards that proclaimed, “Go ahead and skip church! Just be good for goodness’ sake. Happy holidays!” The year before that, another activist group spent big bucks to purchase a billboard advertisement in New York City’s Times Square – a 40 by 40 image that asks, “Who needs Christ?” and answers that question with “Nobody.” In 2012, there was another Times Square billboard that urged viewers to, “Keep the Merry. Dump the Myth,” with an image of Christ beneath a photo of Santa Claus.

    And as our 2016 elections fade, future candidates for public office will increasingly find that secular voters are the fastest growing minority group in America, all who are committed to keep religion out of government.

    After all, the number of people in America who believe in God has dropped almost 10 percent since 2009. And in our public schools, there is increasingly no room for recognition of any faith whatsoever, Christianity or otherwise. And more than 10% of the U.S. House of Representatives believe that the mere presence of our national motto (“In God We Trust”) on currency violates their Free Speech and Free Exercise Clause Rights.

    Goodness gracious. So what is it about Christ, or Christmas, that is so offensive?

    Well, you see, it’s not about Christmas at all – it’s Christ that’s the issue. While many might deny the existence of God, it’s much more difficult to deny Jesus, for whom we have historical evidence of his existence, even from secular sources that are outside of the Bible. Still, the life of Jesus is so powerful, and his words so meaningful, that even atheists cannot seem to get Him out of their minds. They must find it helpful to mock the religious beliefs of Christians everywhere with their billboards, even as they encourage non-Christians to do the same.

    Last year was the deadliest, worst year for Christian persecution than any other time in modern history – over 7,000 were killed. Additionally, over 2,400 churches were attacked, damaged or destroyed last year, which is more than double the number from the year before that.

    Even while it is true that 96 percent of Americans celebrate Christmas, only 51 percent consider it a “religious” holiday – and that number is declining. That means that the odds are pretty good, that when you are out Christmas shopping, the person ahead of you in line, or the person behind you, probably doesn’t consider Christ’s birth as the significant “reason for the season.”

    They may not realize either that buying more and more expensive gifts or all that “stuff” we buy at Christmas doesn’t mean we “care” more about our family or friends, especially when the teachings of Christ can demonstrate that love so much more than buying another gizmo or gadget. In fact, the person in line with you may not know the life of Christ very well at all, or his teachings of tolerance, and respect for one another and the goodness of life. Or of gratitude, and humility.

    So, while Charlie Brown first asked the question in 1965 on national television, “Isn’t there anyone, who knows what Christmas is all about?!” The answer has been the same for over 2000 years – it’s Christ. And for crying out loud, we ought to put that up on a billboard too.

    Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!

     

  • Getting the Third Degree

    Getting the Third Degree

    Since the day after the presidential election, the number of emails I’ve received has steadily grown. Nearly 5,000 emails now, and the number of messages on my Facebook page has risen into the hundreds. All of these communications have escalated into phone calls, and they are even writing letters – nearly a dozen received in the mail, just today.

    The messages all start out about the same. Here’s an example:

    Dear Elector,

    My name is Jeremy Levine, from Brooklyn, NY.

    The founders created the electoral college in order to safeguard the Republic from giving power to someone unfit for the responsibilities of office. Today, in this election, we have such a case. Not only is Donald Trump inexperienced, he is a threat to the safety and stability of our great nation. Trump has already made clear his positions that both disregard the Constitution and threaten huge segments of our citizenry. Furthermore, the people voted for Hillary Clinton by over a million votes. We ask that you, as an elector, honor the majority of Americans and uphold your duties to protect the Republic by preventing Donald Trump from assuming the presidency.

    Thank you for your time and consideration, I appreciate and respect the role you serve in our electoral process.

    Sincerely,

    Jeremy Levine

    So, what’s going on here? After all, for many folks, they think the Presidential election is over, and that Donald Trump won. Hillary Clinton has already conceded the election, saying, “We owe him an open mind and a chance to lead,” and even President Obama referred to Trump as “president-elect” when Trump visited the White House. Furthermore, Trump has already started assembling the leaders of his new administration, for both his cabinet and other key advisors.

    So, what gives? Well, it’s about the Electoral College, and the fact that on December 19, a slate of electors in each state will cast their state’s electoral votes and elect the next President of the United States, all according to Article 2 of the U.S. Constitution. You see, there are 538 electors in all 50 states, including the District of Columbia, and 306 of those electors are expected to vote for Trump on December 19. But if only 37 of those electors, who are expected to vote for Trump, actually vote for someone else – anyone else – or even abstain, then Trump won’t have a majority of the electoral votes available and Congress will decide who the next President will be. Yes, Congress.

    And this is the faint hope that liberals and progressives are clinging onto – to stop Trump from becoming the 45th President of the United States. So they are harassing electors with a constant barrage of emails, phone calls, letters, and social media posts, sometimes evening visiting their homes.

    There are “peaceful gatherings” being called for, in cities across the country, to reject the Electoral College, and there are online petitions, as well. There is a Change.org petition, now signed by almost 5 million people, and a MoveOn.org petition, signed by almost 1 million people – both of which are growing. The petitions encourage members of the Electoral College to cast their votes for Hillary when the college meets on December 19 because Trump is “unfit to serve” and that Hillary “won the popular vote” and should be President.”

    Sure, at first glance, the Electoral College seems unnecessary, at best, and illogical, at worst. After all, why would anyone support any system that doesn’t weight each person’s vote equally, regardless of what state they live in? For example, currently Wyoming gets 1 electoral vote for each 178,000 citizens, but California only gets 1 electoral vote for each 690,000 citizens.?

    What’s up with that? Why do votes in Wyoming count more than 3 times than those in California? After all, that’s not what our democracy is all about, right? Well, first, we’re not a democracy, we’re a republic and we elect representatives who vote for our laws, instead of us voting directly on those laws – which would be a pure democracy, instead. But you see, the founding fathers were actually terrified of a pure democracy (or “mob rule”) and if any of us want to protect the rights of any minorities in our country, we would be terrified too, because in a pure democracy, the rights of minorities can simply be voted away. As John Adams once wrote, “Remember, democracy never lasts long”.

    So, what does any of this have to do with the Electoral College electing the next President? Everything. It’s an example of the genius of our republic form of government insofar as it places the country’s best interest above any individual states’ interest, or balancing the influence of the farmer in Iowa, or the sugar cane farmer in Louisiana, with the powerful and wealthy industrialists and media elites of the big cities. The Electoral College is merely an extension of our republic form of government, no different than the very reason why each state is represented by two (2) Senators, regardless of population.

    It is an honor and privilege for me to participate in the constitutional process of electing the President of the United States next month — a vote cast by the son of an Italian immigrant, whose rights our founding fathers sought to protect with a republic, and long before most any Americans would fully understood why.

  • Let Freedom Ring

    Let Freedom Ring

    The 2016 campaign for president is over.

    And for millions of Americans this past election day, our country chose to let go of the past, and start anew.

    Today, it seems easier to recognize the abusive-like relationships that our country has gravitated towards, and clung to, over the past 50 years. Even though we knew better, we kept electing candidates for public office that were more interested in their welfare, than in ours. We supported one political party (or another) because they told us how much they cared, but never really helped us, at all.

    We kept accepting a watered down, blurred-line between what’s right and what’s not, just so that we might keep the peace for one more day, and be liked, rather than laughed at. It’s been more convenient to stuff our true feelings and be silent, or tolerate things that deep inside just didn’t feel right, so we might not be called names, or called into the court of public opinion.

    You see, many in abusive relationships simply don’t know what healthy relationships look like. And if you have grown up in an environment where you feel like you need permission from government to make even simple decisions, such as what doctor to use, or even how to spend your money, such as being forced to buy increasingly more expensive health insurance, then you may not recognize how unhealthy your relationship here is, in the first place.

    If you have only known relationships where you are blamed for others’ problems and unhappiness, by having your income taxed more and more, and still being accused of not doing enough, or putting enough skin in the game, then your relationship may seem normal to you. If you are belittled and trivialized for your feelings, such your concern about our border with Mexico, even though our government refuses to prosecute those here illegally, for the murderous crimes they commit – then yes, it may all seem normal to you.

    But it’s not. Not by a long shot. And if those blaming or belittling you happen to be popular, and likeable, it makes letting go of the relationship even harder, because who would take your side anyway, especially if you might be viewed as a bigot, a racist, or uncaring by speaking out?

    Maybe they call you names like “deplorables”, or humiliate you, put you down, and make fun of you in front of other people, by saying you “cling to guns or religion or antipathy toward people” who aren’t like you? Maybe they demean your faith, calling Catholicism “severely backward,” and “a middle ages dictatorship?”

    Maybe it’s their dishonesty or disloyalty to you that make the relationship abusive, such as Hillary Clinton using a private email server, exposing classified, national security information, and putting our families at risk, all while pretending she didn’t know what she was doing. Or how about so-called journalists who secretly championed one candidate, while smearing all the others, cheating during the debates, and still pretending to be impartial stewards of the truth?

    For others, an abusive relationship is being with someone who is consistently irresponsible and unwilling, or unable, to handle their responsibilities. Maybe that is like Secretary Clinton protecting our embassy that was burned-down, and those American killed in Benghazi? Or keeping American forces in Iraq to contain the spread of ISIS throughout the world, regardless of the popularity of doing such. Maybe it’s running up our national debt to nearly $20 trillion since 2009, even though economic growth has been the slowest in our nation’s history, and the number of people unemployed has never been higher.

    Yes, it was inevitable that this day would come. A point where we, the people, became aware that must let go of the abusive relationships of the past and realize that the pain of remaining in them, simply outweigh the desire to just keep “working it out”.

    That time for change is now.

    Today, the continued corruption from the Clintons seems less inevitable, and more intolerable. The media charade of objectivity is even less convincing now, but more contemptible than ever before.

    Career politicians seem more temporary, and the right to bear arms seems more certain. Our faith is less like something we must hide in the shadows, and more like something we can discuss in the town square.

    Our allies, like Israel, will trust again that we have their back, and Iran will never extort our nation again for $150 billion.

    It seems more likely today that genuinely affordable healthcare will be made available for more Americans than ever before, that our border will be secure, the jobs shipped overseas will return, and our laws, like our nation, will be restored to their rightful and respectful position in the world.

    And while I wrote this column several days before the November 8 election, I could be wrong about who is President-elect right now, but I don’t think I am, though.

    For whoever is being inaugurated in January, and for the reasons explained above, they will be President of a country whose voters have been changed forever by this election, for “a mind that is stretched by a new experience can never go back to its old dimensions.”

    So, let freedom ring, and may God bless America.

  • Just Listen to Me

    Just Listen to Me

    With the swearing-in of the 114th Congress last year, there are more African-Americans in the legislature than in any other period in history. And as you know, America elected its first African-American president in 2008, and then re-elected him in 2012. During this time, Eric Holder became the first African-American to hold the position of U.S. Attorney General, and then last year, Loretta Lynch became the country’s first African-American woman to serve in that role. More significantly, the number of elected officials who are African-American has risen nearly 10-fold what it was in 1970.

    And yet, there are too many in the African-American community who don’t feel heard. Maybe that’s because anyone can talk (especially a candidate asking for your vote during an election year). But not everyone can listen, or knows how to, at least.

    Is it any wonder, then, that this frustration – this anger – is expressed by protesting in the streets, staring down law enforcement, bringing traffic to a stop by standing in the middle of a freeway, or by looting businesses in our own neighborhoods and then setting them on fire? Most Americans – white or black – can understand the anger, whether it’s the seeming lack of equal opportunities or the high incarceration rates, or racial profiling – there’s plenty that needs to be cleared up. But why so much violence, and why now?

    Martin Luther King, Jr. was the pre-eminent advocate of nonviolence and one of the greatest nonviolent leaders in history. Even so, he was urged by many, during the 1950s and 60s, to use “any means necessary” to achieve the civil rights changes needed in our country. He refused. And while the protests he organized gave rise to the viability of black elected officials for the very first time in history, the connection between ordinary black voters and black elected officials, pretending to represent them, has seemingly eroded away completely.

    What other logical explanation could there be after Congress has now spent $15 trillion dollars over the past 50 years on poverty, yet the poverty rate today is virtually the same as it was in 1964? In fact, we are now spending close to $1 trillion per year on government assistance, yet 46 million Americans still live below the poverty line?

    This hardly sounds like a representative government, regardless of skin color.

    And America then elects the first African-American president 8 years ago, but almost one-half (1/2) of Americans believe today that race relations in this country are still getting worse, and that it has been the President himself who has driven us apart? Really?

    But the numbers show it too: During the past 8 years, the percentage of black Americans struggling below the poverty line has advanced, real median income among black households declined, and black food-stamp participants increased almost 60%. The number of black Americans owning their own homes has decreased, and black unemployment is twice that of white unemployment.

    Yes, there’s a lot to be frustrated about, no doubt. And we could go on and on, but you must keep in mind that government cannot “fix” all things for us, whether you are black or white. Government (however big you make it) cannot make you happy, make you feel respected or accepted, confer achievement, build your self-esteem, or eliminate life’s inevitable ups and downs.

    Yet we still need to be heard. As Martin Luther King, Jr. said, “[O]ur lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter,” and he was right. Violence was just never an option for him. He believed, “Nonviolence is a powerful and just weapon, which cuts without wounding and ennobles the man who wields it. It is a sword that heals.”

    So, as we prepare to elect our next president in November, all of us would do well to remember that we must elect candidates who don’t confuse doing something with actually accomplishing something. Or talking, when we just want to be heard.

  • A Fool’s Choice

    A Fool’s Choice

    Manners tell us what to do, and what to expect others to do, in return. We say “please” and “thank you”. We don’t intentionally embarrass one another, or ask personal, prying questions. We hold a door open for someone, give up our seat in a waiting room for someone who needs it more than we do.

    We dress appropriately, and shake hands with others when we greet them, and we don’t chew with our mouths full. These are all good manners.

    We do these things to show respect for other people, and as Emily Post says, because we are “recognizing and acknowledging their worth and value as human beings, regardless of their background, race, or creed.”

    So when San Francisco 49ers quarterback Colin Kaepernick refused to stand for the national anthem before games because he believes the United States oppresses blacks and other minorities, many couldn’t stop shaking their heads at just how unmannerly he was behaving (it’s not suprising that 3 out of 4 of us already feel that our country is more rude and less civilized than it was 30 years ago, but that’s another story).

    First, let’s get this out on the table for Colin, and those who feel his pain: The United States enthusiastically elected its first black president in 2008, and the American people, including white folks, decided to re-elect him in 2012.

    Secondly, since 2008, black poverty is up, and black employment is down, even as Democrats controlled both the White House and the Congress. Forty percent of black males are incarcerated, and 72 percent of black children are still being born to unmarried mothers. There are fewer blacks participating in the labor force since 2008, and the unemployment rate among blacks is more than double than it is among whites. And this is all happening under an administration filled with Democrats, whom black voters have supported 95% of the time in election, after election, after election. The same Democratic Party that has spent more than 50 years, and billions of dollars, on social welfare programs of every kind, only to have the poverty rate even higher today than it was back then.

    But the bottom line is this: It really doesn’t matter what he believes or knows about the facts of oppression in our country, or whether he’s unpatriotic, or he is simply wanting attention from the public. It’s unmannerly not to stand during our national anthem. Bottom line. And just because you can do something, whether you have the right or not, doesn’t mean you should.

    If Colin refuses to stand during the national anthem, then it is his freedom of expression to do so, whatever his beliefs. After all, some Americans do agree that our country is oppressive.

    On the other hand, many don’t agree with any of that, but they say they will defend Colin’s right to believe whatever he wants, nevertheless.

    But these are all fool’s choices, aren’t they; when we mistakenly think there are only two options, when in reality there are more? Do we have to choose between supporting Colin’s disrespect of the national anthem or silencing his freedom of expression?

    Of course not. You can pledge allegiance to your country, AND still exercise your freedom of speech. You can honor the United States Flag Code (Title 6, Section 301) which says that, “Everyone present, except those in uniform should stand at attention facing the American flag with the right hand placed over the heart,” and still effect change in your community.

    You can be tactful, or understanding of other people and sensitive to their opinions and feelings, and still assert your own ideas in a well-meaning fashion. But to do otherwise is simply unmannerly.

    Being mannerly means being aware that what you do, or share with others, affects the greater good for us all. It means recognizing that no one should “feel” good at the expense of everyone else’s liberty, whether it’s removing references to God in our schools or disrespecting our law enforcement.

    And if tact is the art of making a point without making an enemy, Colin Kaepernick’s rudeness during the national anthem is proof of what 3 out of 4 us already believe about the decline of politeness in our country and that we’re making enemies of one other as fellow Americans – far more often than not.

    It reminds me of what Abraham Lincoln said: “America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves.”

    This is why there’s more at stake here than a football player sitting on his ass. And there’s no more polite way to say that, at all.

     

  • We Talk About the Power of Prayer

    We Talk About the Power of Prayer

    We talk about the power of prayer. About how it can transform a life, enlighten and guide us. Inspire us.

    Many refer to themselves as “prayer warriors”, and they belong to prayer groups in churches all across our country, coming together to pray – everyday. Praying for healing. For peace. For wisdom. For the poor, and those who are hurting.

    But is prayer enough? The Bible tells us that faith alone, without works, is dead, “What good is it, my brothers, if someone says he has faith but does not have works?” And yes, oh Lord yes, we need both this year, if we ever needed them, for sure.

    This was no more evident in recent days than in the miraculous relief efforts of churches from all over our country, who rolled up their sleeves, packed up 18-wheelers that were full of supplies, drove into Baton Rouge and assisted those who lost nearly every material possession they owned during the historic flooding there.

    The truth is, though, our country has always needed its churches, and prayer. You may not have needed it – but our country has – and still does. It’s right there in the Declaration of Independence, hiding in plain sight. It says, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

    Did you catch it? The reason that prayer is so very needed for our country, and our very way of life, is that without the Creator, there are no rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. None. And because government’s duty is to protect these rights for us, it’s necessary that we elect men and women who pray. You don’t necessarily have to, but those whom we elect must.

    After all, if we continue to elect those who don’t acknowledge our rights come from our Creator, or that there is even a Creator, at all, how can these elected officials possibly pretend to protect our rights, if they don’t believe the Creator is the source of those rights to begin with?

    Put another way, we are all free to believe what we wish, or not to believe at all. This isn’t about your religion, and frankly, that’s a personal matter, anyways. But what matters to every single one of us is that we elect a government that acknowledges our rights come from God because, if they don’t come from God, they must necessarily come from man – and what man can give, man can also take away.

    There is more reason for concern here, though. The share of Americans who identify as atheists has roughly doubled in the past several years – and that’s just the beginning of it. In fact, for every 1 admitted atheist in our country, there are three more Americans that say they do not believe in God or a universal spirit, either.

    This declining faith is most evident in our young people. Consider that 70% of those ages 65 and older express an absolutely certain belief in God or a universal spirit, but only about half of adults under 30 feel the same way (51%).

    In fact, it is estimated that by 2050 the percentage of the U.S. population attending church will be almost half of what it is today. Those that profess no particular spiritual belief already make up 21% of our electorate – and that is up 50% from 2008.

    Non-believers even make-up a larger voting block than Catholics, than Protestants, or any other religious group out there.

    And for some reason, they also make up a significant portion of the Democratic Party – more than 25% of Democrats are non-believers. This influence was reflected in the 2012 Democratic Party Platform which did not mention, whatsoever, our Creator, in any shape, form, or fashion. In the Democrat’s 2016 platform, there were three (3) shorthand references to God, but in the context of an individual’s “God-given” potential (but no mention of any redeeming value that religion provides to society).

    But if it is too unholy of an idea to replace “God” with the arbitrary power of government officials, who pretend to know what is best for us, that limit what we can say, and that minimize the expression of our faith, then prayer alone is likely not enough for you.

    Instead, we must also elect men and women who believe in God (even if you don’t), to preserve our unalienable rights. And not because any of us are less holy, but because elected officials who already believe in God, already know it will never be their right, nor has it ever been, to decide yours.

  • Can’t Get Comfortable With That

    Can’t Get Comfortable With That

    They are not “comfortable” voting for Donald Trump, they say. Ted Cruz. John Kasich. Lindsey Graham. And now more than 75 Republicans have signed a letter urging that the Republican Party spend the party’s money on helping secure the Republican majority in the Senate, and not on Donald Trump’s presidential campaign.

    You are not comfortable? Not comfortable? Pardon me, but I don’t give a damn about your comfort. This election isn’t just about you, or your namby-pamby “wow, I’m a big kid now” culture of “what’s in it for me”.

    How “comfortable” was the First Infantry Division when they hit the beach at Omaha, knowing they would not likely survive the German snipers firing at them, as their landing craft doors swung open, during the D-Day invasion in 1944?

    How “comfortable” is the mother or father who watches their son or daughter go off to war, not knowing exactly where they are, or if they will ever see them again? Not knowing if they are enduring heat and hunger, or surviving mortar fire and roadside bombs?

    How “comfortable” were the American soldiers in the Revolutionary War, who were merely a group of civilians fighting the most formidable and professional army in the world, not to mention the world’s greatest navy? Or how “comfortable” were those who signed our Declaration of Independence, sacrificing their own lives and property, for the belief that our rights are granted unto us by our Creator, while committing High Treason against Great Britain and their sovereign, King George the 3rd, in the process?

    If this is the type of discomfort you feel you are experiencing, perhaps you can muddle through the pain, and choose the candidate most likely to protect our Constitutional principles, because it’s what our country needs, and not just because of what you want.

    Yes, we are all grieving the loss of the America we grew up in, and the erosion of the fundamental values that provided us all with a sense of security, identity and purpose as proud Americans. No, we didn’t always agree, but at least we felt like we could make a difference.

    And now, we no longer feel in control of our own lives. Well, how “comfortable” does that make you feel?

    How “comfortable” are you that government has seemingly crept into every nook and cranny, and that we can’t choose our doctor anymore, or the curriculum being taught in our schools, or even practice our religion in some instances, without being bullied into silence. How “comfortable” are you that we can’t even recite the Pledge of Allegiance “under God” without being sued? Or that we’re paying more and more taxes each year, and that household incomes are the lowest they’ve been in 20 years, and that 94 million Americans are not even working right now – how “comfortable” does that make you feel?

    How “comfortable” are you that any human being, whether they are Secretary of State or the secretary in your office at work, would lie to a grieving mother about how and why their son lost his life, like Hillary Clinton did about Benghazi?

    Some say they still cannot vote for Trump. He doesn’t look or sound the part. Some are considering voting for a Libertarian Party candidate, or not voting at all. Some have even said that they will vote for Hillary. Admittedly, they just aren’t “comfortable” with any of the choices.

    If this describes you, please reconsider how “comfortable” you have been over the past eight (8) years because a Hillary Clinton administration will essentially be the second game in a double-header of a major league baseball game where both teams end up losing.

    She wants to raise taxes on the middle class (saying everyone should pay their “fair share”) and she will continue deficit spending and increasing our federal debt with a $275 billion federal investment in public works spending. Her national security policy will be more of the same that allowed ISIS to gain power and become the world’s most dangerous organization, and her immigration policy will simply promote more sanctuary cities where people in our country illegally can evade prosecution of our laws and conceal themselves long enough to attack our homeland, all while political correctness continues to run amuck and silence the voices of those who should be heard.

    Not everything that feels “comfortable” is what we need, and not everything that is “uncomfortable” should be avoided. In fact, if you look back at your life, the times that you are most grateful for are often those times where you were not “comfortable” because it was in those times that you became stronger. And I believe the same can be true for our country.

    Trump may not be your choice, but he’s the only choice that makes sense. It’s a catch-22 situation, for many, many, principled people. But if you protest his candidacy, you will elect Hillary, and inadvertently preserve the very conditions that gave rise to his campaign (and your objections to it), in the first place. By not voting for Trump, you actually make it less likely that other principled conservatives will ever have a shot again, at least not anytime soon, to be elected to the highest office in our land.

    By then, unfortunately, it may just be too late. And as for me, I can’t just get “comfortable” with that.

  • When It’s All About You

    When It’s All About You

    President Obama’s remarks, at the memorial service for 5 slain Dallas police officers recently, was a sad reflection of why our nation is so divided, and why it’s not only important for us to do what is right in our communities, but to do it for the right reasons – and not just because of what’s in it, for you.

    That’s because you can easily judge the character of a man by how he treats those who can do nothing for him. After all, most people are really nice to those who can help them, in some way. Whether it’s your manager at work when you are asking for a raise, or your plumber when you have a burst pipe and water is running everywhere – we act differently when there’s something in it for us – even when it’s the right thing to do in the first place.

    And yes, having the POTUS attend this memorial service is both honorable and appropriate. But when the President took the opportunity at the memorial service to make a speech supporting more gun control legislation, in a room full of people hurting, with heavy hearts from the loss of these officers’ lives – it felt like the President came to Dallas more for what was in it for him – and about how a grieving community could help make the case for his political agenda.

    Unfortunately, this “what’s in it for me” culture is increasingly expected. Although the President’s remarks should have been only to express the nation’s sympathies to the grieving families and the law enforcement communities, as well as the Dallas community at-large, he took this solemn time to lobby the crowd, saying that “(w)e flood communities with so many guns that it is easier for a teenager to buy a Glock than get his hands on a computer or even a book.”

    First of all, none of that is true. None of it – not to mention that the killer in Dallas was not even close to being a teenager, or an at-risk youth. Secondly, Pew Research Center conducted a survey last year and found 87 percent of U.S. teenagers had access to either a desktop or laptop computer and books are plentiful in our communities. In fact, our public schools literally hand our children books every year, not to mention there are more libraries in the U.S. than McDonald’s restaurants. So why lie to an audience, not to mention one that is grieving, just to advance an agenda?

    Well, it’s not the first time for this administration. Remember the BP oil spill, and Obama’s moratorium on drilling in the Gulf of Mexico because he said it was a matter of national security? There are 32,000 Louisiana jobs dependent on drilling, and many drilling rigs were forced to leave the Gulf of Mexico because of inactivity – and they haven’t come back. In the end, the moratorium on drilling was used to help pass new alternative energy legislation in Congress, not increase our national security.

    Remember too that Obama began withdrawing our combat troops from Iraq in 2011, and justified doing so because he said we had achieved success and “(t)he tide of war is receding.” But it wasn’t true. To the contrary, our military advisors had warned that it was too soon to leave, and that the tide of war had not, in fact, receded. In the end, though, this single decision to withdraw from Iraq left the door wide open for ISIS to flourish, and expand their terror around the world – all while Obama could now make good on his 2008 campaign promise to withdraw our combat troops and he was re-elected in 2012.

    There are other examples of this “what’s in it for me” culture, but the bottom line is that it’s rotting our country from the top down. It is no doubt what is largely responsible for the increasingly deeper divisions between blacks and white, rich and poor, conservatives and liberals, etc. over the last 8 years.

    Yes, I know our culture, and all of the advertisements within it, promote this life being all about us, and what’s in it for us: “Have it your way,”  “You deserve a break today,” or “You’re worth it.”

    But the first sentence in the book, A Purpose Driven Life, perhaps says it best: “It’s not about you”.

    And our President should be the first one in line to say so – especially at a memorial service for those who put their lives in harm’s way, so he won’t ever have to.

  • Last Best Hope

    Last Best Hope

    It was the highest voter turnout in Great Britain in almost 25 years. In fact, more than 30 million British voters went to the polls last month and voted on whether Great Britain should withdraw from the European Union (or “EU”).

    What is the EU? Well, I’m glad you asked, because it wasn’t exactly what I thought it was, either. For starters, the EU is an economic and political partnership involving 28 European countries. The idea began after World War II on the premise that countries that trade with one another are less like to war with one another. It then developed into a single market, and by 1999, 11 of the EU countries even adopted their own currency, the “Euro”.

    You see, even though Europe does not have a common language, culture, or value system, the “EU” nonetheless has its own, single parliament system of government, and sets rules for its member countries on everything from the environment, transport, and consumer rights.

    The trouble is, most Europeans don’t really know how it all works, or who’s in charge, and there’s no real sovereignty for these countries, as members of the EU. For example, under EU law, Great Britain cannot prevent anyone from any other EU member state from coming to live in their country. Their border is completely open, as result. And because the EU makes the laws – the voters in Great Britain don’t have much of a say so, at all.

    This is one of the many reasons that almost 72% of the British turned out to vote on the issue of withdrawing from the EU. Some see it as these voters wanting to “take back” their country, or restore their national identity. And if so, we would do well in the United States to do the same.

    After all, a nation is a group of people who share a destiny, and with that destiny, an identity. But this national identity needs pride, and a sense of affection that is expressed to the exclusion of any other allegiance. But because there is no common language, culture, or value system in Europe, is it really any surprise that the British saw the foundation of their nation eroding away – and wanted to do something about it?

    Did you know that only 54% of us here in the U.S. are very proud to be Americans? Compare that with only 33% of people in Germany, France, and Italy (all EU members) that say the same about their own country. These are countries who are clearly losing their national identities – and quickly. The result is utter failure.

    Just look at France or Spain or Greece: these nations are replete with worker protests, and are facing mounting financial difficulties, and unchecked immigration of unassimilated migrant workers, many who are openly hostile to their own host nation, demanding continued entitlement to unsustainable, state-funded social programs, and threatening the peace and stability of that nation.

    Margaret Thatcher once said that Europe is “a classic Utopian project, a monument to the vanity of intellectuals, a program whose inevitable destiny is failure: Only the scale of the final damage is in doubt.” Indeed, she was right.

    But none of this is new. Back in 2011, former 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.”

    Former British Prime Minister James Cameron said essentially the same in 2011, “(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.”

    Does this sound familiar? 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. means that traditionalists get thrown into the boiling kettle of liberal diversity. Before long, our own nation’s identity will begin to erode precipitously, just as those European countries are witnessing now for themselves.

    And similar to errors of those European countries, such as France and Great Britain, President 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, as well as illegal immigration and terrorism. In fact, the authority of state and local law enforcement to enforce federal immigration law has been diminished under the Obama administration, as the federal government now largely abandons the prosecution of non-criminal illegal immigrants and allows them to remain in the U.S.

    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.

    Unlike the British, we cannot withdraw from any EU-like organization to save our country. We are everything that our country has protect its national identity – and we must act before it is too late. There is simply no place for us to go because, in the words of Ronald Reagan, “We are indeed, and we are today, the last best hope of man on earth”.

  • Our Own Worst Enemy Lives Within?

    Our Own Worst Enemy Lives Within?

    The horrific events at a nightclub in Orlando this month, where 50 people were killed, like those at an office Christmas party in San Bernardino or at a Navy Reserve recruiting station in Chattanooga, the bombing of the Boston Marathon, the attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, or the “workplace violence” killing at Fort Hood – too damn many are treating Americans too damn poorly these days.

    But we aren’t helping. You see, we actually teach other people how to treat us. Just ask anyone who is always trying to please others, or who is always putting others first, before themselves, because they would feel “guilty” or “selfish” for doing so. As Dr. Phil said, “You either teach people to treat you with dignity and respect, or you don’t – you shape others’ behavior when you teach them what they can get away with and what they cannot.

    As Americans, though, we aren’t teaching others to treat us well, at all, and we seem to be letting others get away with anything – even burning our nation’s flag, and parading their own, at our country’s political events.

    Instead of treating ourselves with dignity and respect, our news media, political candidates, college professors, and elected officials, including the President of the United States, just apologize incessantly for the flaws in our country.

    They say our economy is bad because the rich are getting richer, and that it’s immoral that we don’t provide free healthcare to everyone, as a right. Or provide a “livable” wage for everyone. They say that we’re a nation that was built upon the backs of slaves, and colonization, and imperialism. They say that our nation is filled with racists, bigots, and those who are so bitter that “they cling to guns or religion or antipathy toward people who aren’t like them.”

    They say you can’t recite the Pledge of Allegiance in our schools because it suggests we are one nation “under God” and that this might offend others. We’re removing the Ten Commandments outside our public buildings because they are “inappropriate, even though James Madison believed that, “We’ve staked our future on our ability to follow the Ten Commandments with all of our heart.”

    And instead of highlighting the sacrifices that our men and women in uniform have made for the cause of freedom around the world, our President tells Arab television viewers that America “sometimes makes mistakes.”

    He apologizes, on behalf of all Americans, to the European countries, by saying that “there have been times where America has shown arrogance and been dismissive, even derisive.”

    He even went before the Turkish Parliament to point out that “(t)he United States is still working through some of our own darker periods in our history,” instead of reminding them of how America has served as a beacon for freedom everywhere.

    Attitude just counts for so much. It really does. It’s infectious. It’s like when someone starts laughing uncontrollably, you can’t help but start smiling yourself.

    It’s a principle that works both ways, unfortunately. You see, all of this negative talk has had a marked effect on the morale of our nation. In fact, the number of Americans who think the United States “stands above all other countries” has declined to just 28 percent and the number of Americans who are extremely proud to call the United States home continues to decline.

    So, is America suffering these horrific events because we haven’t taught other people how to treat us, even those here at home? Is it as simple as Dr. Phil says? Perhaps.

    But maybe it’s also that when we repeatedly “bad mouth” or rundown America to ourselves, and around the world, we’re painting a picture of a country that is filled with people who simply aren’t worth treating with dignity and respect.

    So, the next time that you choose to remain silent, rather than standing up for yourself and speaking your truth, whether it’s religious freedom, or the safety and security of your family, remember that your silence may be teaching others that it’s okay to treat you poorly, or threaten you, or otherwise diminish your life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness (in favor of theirs, instead).

    If all of this sounds too mumbo-jumbo for you, just remember psychologists all agree that when we continue to put others first, while feeling resentful or badly about ourselves for doing that, our self-respect will inevitably suffer – and perhaps this is where we are as a nation today, and why it feels we are at war.

    And maybe, just maybe, this is why so many Americans seem so ready to simply make America great again. We want our self-respect back.