Long Knives

Some Native American tribes referred to the U.S. cavalry as “long knives” because they carried swords or sabers. The modern version of a long knife is a politician who claims to represent a certain collection of principles but violates them time after time. He or she is guilty of knifing the gullible constituents in the back. To be candid the mortal wounds are not always the fault of the weasel-like politician. Sometimes the voters just “assume” that a candidate accepts their point of view and fail to properly examine the leader wannabe. The real knife wielders do talk the talk, but when the constituent is busy living life, the politician inserts the blade, rams it in and twists it.

Learning the lingo of a constituency without sharing its priorities or values is the first step in progressive pandering. As we have noted with Mitt Romney, his mastery of the conservative lexicon is lacking, but as the campaign moves forward, his utterances become more palatable to the “base.” He is learning the language and they are ignoring the obvious. We are facing the same stage, same play with different actors. The script is constant, and in our theater of campaign drama we ruefully anticipate the final scene as the big government statists and the latest version of “political wonder-boy” gleefully shove the shivs into our self-deluded backs. Each presentation ends the same. As the curtain falls, we stagger in disbelief that we’ve been misled once again. The searing pain from the knife becomes dull as we ponder how did this happen again?   

Admittedly the loosely defined conservative coalition of the GOP has struggled to unite behind a single anti-Establishment, anti-Mitt candidate. The difficulty was that each pretender was overloaded with baggage of varying kinds. Newt’s burden is himself….his personal life, his caustic persona and his flighty inconsistency. Rick Santorum’s steadfast message is appealing to many, but his statist, big government approach and his self-righteous sermonizing turns others away. Dr. Paul (choose one or more of the following complaints) is too old, too non-glamorous, too cranky, too wacko on foreign affairs or (the BIG ONE) too unelectable. It’s odd that many criticize Congressman Paul for his apparent appeal among independents and young people yet believe that the eventual GOP nominee must moderate in order to win independent voters. Can you say cognitive dissonance? Can you say hypocrisy? Can you say philosophical confusion?

Since the beginning of our Republic and its devolution into the “factions” that President Washington decried in his farewell address, we have struggled to hold onto the dream envisioned by the Founders and Framers. The Federalists and Anti-Federalists, Democratic Republicans, Whigs and a host of others have labored to capture their interpretations of the vision. In addition….each faction or party has undergone its own internal battles for purity of message and intensity of purpose. We should understand by this point in our national development that we cannot find the perfect party, candidate or office holder who represents each of our preferences, principles or priorities. Even when we join together for a common purpose, we drift apart because of significant differences and opinions. Our political history illustrates that, at some level, we have maintained our individuality…our uniqueness as children of God and inheritors of liberty. Isn’t it reasonable, therefore, that our closest “ideal” party, candidate or office holder should be one who honors and defends our individual liberty? Why bother trying to form expedient coalitions that are doomed to disintegrate? Why not support those political and social entities that are committed to our personal freedom? It seems that as we strive to unite under false colors, we are merely postponing the eventual dissolution of our weak alliances. We are kicking the can of inevitability down the road with no solid underlying justification for doing so.

As our nation races closer to irrelevance, we may believe that we hear the bugle in the distance as the cavalry rides to rescue our nation from its precarious position. The long knives are coming….just in time to save us from ourselves and our collapse. We must be vigilant, however, that their leader is not the modern-day version of General G.A. Custer and that we have our last stand at Little Big Horn. What is worse…..a knife in the back or an arrow in the heart? The outcomes are the same, but it may be better to die with honor than to suffer the agony of betrayal.

Comment:  cearlwriting@hotmail.com

www.littlestuff-minoosha.blogspot.com

Tuesday from 6-7:00pm on 1370 WSPD. www.wspd.com

Greater Expectations

You are probably familiar with the fable about the Emperor’s New Clothes. If we were writing a story about today’s gallant knights who are running for office to save our nation, we would probably note that they’re wearing tin-foil armor. They are clothed with the fragile protection of expediency that they expect us to assume is principle.  Every candidate from every party or movement is to some degree a flawed warrior. For those of us who must choose our standard bearer, we are faced with the unenviable task of choosing a lesser leader. When we consider whom to choose, we should reflect about what our previous choices have yielded so that we do not compound one error with another. We do not require a leader who wears the faulty armor. We must have leaders who have principled minds and courageous hearts.

While at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) last week, I was struck by the dichotomy of passions that I witnessed. On the one hand supporters of various candidates and issues were vociferously promoting their “new best thing,” while on the other hand the overall tenor of the event was tenuous and somewhat subdued. For some Mitt was the best choice, and for others Newt or Rick was the obvious pick. Dr. Paul’s support was somewhat muted because of many liberty-oriented groups decisions not to participate in this year’s cattle call.

http://youtu.be/5BjhJLhSbYg

Is that all there is? Is this the best that America has to offer? Are Mitt, Newt, Rick, or Barrack the true guardians of liberty that our Framers had hoped would succeed them? Are Mitch McConnell and John Boehner the most virtuous and courageous people available to lead the Senate and the House of Representatives respectively? Yes, each of them is flawed….dangerously so, but those of us who are dissatisfied with them and their positions, policies or practices have not explicitly identified our criteria for leadership.

While we may choose to support the most electable or the best option available, we are admitting that our standards have sunk to the point of non-existence. Even in our local or congressional races we celebrate people whom we believe are better than the incumbent but are sorely deficient in principle, integrity and honor. Although we may whine about the paucity of principle among our candidates, we ignore the ones who are steadfast and solid because we perceive that they cannot win. That observation is true because it is a self-fulfilling prophecy. If we settle for lesser candidates in order to win, we shall always lose in the longer run. By promoting or electing lesser candidates what do we win? Perhaps a little more time before the Republic implodes, but not much else. We allow them to chisel away at our liberty and deny us the use of our property bit by bit.

Times have changed, Patriots. When we yet enjoyed our inalienable G_d-given rights and our Constitutionally-protected freedom, we could occasionally afford to elect an unprincipled charlatan or two. Today, however, the landscape has been altered. Each and every day we encounter another abuse from our government, and we cry for men and women of courage and principle to stand up and say “No More!” We must exercise our “greater expectations.” Close enough is not good enough any longer. Electable but seriously-flawed candidates will continue the destruction of our Republic and the future for our progeny. Greater expectations must be the order of the day and all our subsequent days. We have been identified as an exceptional people and nation. An exceptional people does NOT elect inadequate leaders just because they call us exceptional. An exceptional people insist that leaders be principled, honorable and honest. Maybe we should demand the “NOTA” (none of the above) option in our elections until we begin to attract the quality of candidates who are worthy of the Founders’ and Framers’ visions. We should exercise our greater expectations.

We have recently celebrated the 200^th anniversary of Charles Dickens’ birth (b. 7 February 1812), our present constitutional republic has been in effect for 225 years, and our Declaration of Independence was issued some 236 years ago. Our greater expectations have been submerged in expediency and pragmatism as we march toward our tyrannical nirvana. Our liberty has been forfeited on the altar of electability and we have selected or elected leaders who compromise away our heritage….while we allow it. I am painfully aware that no one is perfect. I also know that the perfect candidate cannot satisfy the expectations of 312 million people. If we are convinced, however that a candidate is resolutely committed to identifiable principles then we can choose to support or reject that candidacy for legitimate reasons. Without a clear exposition of principles…we are blindfolded in the dark while trying to detect the least objectionable contestant.  

Truly I do understand the terrible fix that we’re in, but we’ve got to cure ourselves of the self-defeating strategy of falling for the first girl that shows some thigh or the buff guy with the six-pack abs. We must demand more of our candidates….more depth, more principle, more integrity and more courage. Glitter and almost-good enough does not cut it. The John Boehner’s of the world are absolutely undermining our liberty and our nation. Obama and his Marxist clan are destroying our nation. Unprincipled Republicans are allowing it. We must not be complicit. We must be insistent and consistent.

cearlwriting@hotmail.com

www.littlestuff-minoosha.blogspot.com

A Legacy

As the proud (very, very proud) grandfather of 3 (soon to be 4) wonderful young people and children, one of my greatest concerns is what type of legacy I will leave for them. I don’t mean legacy in the way that most career politicians use the term….a notable political achievement. No, the legacy that I seek is the one that is firmly implanted on their hearts and their characters. Each of them has unique talents and abilities that equip them well for becoming producers and contributors as they mature. For any living thing to flourish it must have the proper atmosphere or environment. My hope as I mold my legacy is that I do enough to provide my grandchildren with a healthy environment for their personal development.

Like many people I have a desire that I want my grandchildren to remember me, but I prefer that they always recall what they have learned from me. My own maternal grandfather was a great source of wisdom for me as I was growing up, and even though I do not get to spend as much time with my grandchildren as I enjoyed with Grandpa, I would hope that I influence them in a similar fashion. Although I have many preferences and priorities, I do not necessarily want to teach them what to think, but I do wish to help them to learn to think rationally. Certainly I hope that they become warm-hearted and generous, but I wish their minds would lead their hearts. There are innumerable opportunities for helping others, so it requires discernment and reason to choose the best method for achieving the most good.

If I were given absolute control over my grandchildren’s futures, I would bless them with the 4-F’s for their futures. Faith, family, freedom and fun are the cornerstones for a well-squared life in my view. It begins with faith because as a Christian, I understand G_d’s wisdom, mercy and grace. They have sustained me in my darkest times, and counseled prudence when I become too self important. Family is the anchor of this worldly life. If one is blessed to have a loving, forgiving and helping family, then most of life’s obstacles can be surmounted. Freedom is a gift from The Almighty, secured by His Son, and nourished by a loving family. Without liberty….without freedom…life can be robotic and unfulfilling. My definition of fun in this context is “doing what you love and loving what you’re doing.” A typical working lifetime is more than half a century long. To endure 50 years of drudgery damages the spirit. Fun at work, at play, at home or where ever is an important aspect of a complete life.

Obviously I want my grandchildren to share my faith and its comfort, but that is a personal matter between each of them and Him. Young people who are convinced that they are immortal often fail to see the need for a Savior. My prayer is that they discover and accept Him sooner rather than later. The supportive family dynamic is something that their parents, their grandmother and I can nurture each and every day. We must remember that our anxieties or impatience can sometimes undermine our desire to build the strong reliable family unit. My passionate desire to have my grandchildren yearn for liberty is one that I rant, rave, preach and speak about quite frequently. My fear is that my intensity may be somewhat off-putting for my beloved progeny.

Fun is a more difficult concept to transmit. The best method for doing so is to live it. Allow the kids to learn by observation and osmosis. We must encourage them to find their talents and their niches without pounding them into the round holes of our expectations and hopes for them. We must be willing to permit them to develop as square pegs as long as they do so with integrity and honor. The results will be worth it.

The beauty of a legacy of this nature is that it need not be probated. No attorney or the government will get a piece of the action when my grandchildren claim their inheritances. Who knows….they may try to tax it before I take my leave from this earth. If so, I’ll fight it. A legacy is a terrible thing to waste….paraphrasingly speaking.

Our Tuesday show will air tomorrow from 6:00-7:00pm on 1370 WSPD.  www.wspd.com

Comment: cearlwriting@hotmail.com

www.littlestuff-minoosha.blogspot.com

Righteousness and Piety

A righteous person or cause is morally upright, virtuous and wholly justifiable. A pious person or cause is dedicated to duty. Certainly some element of piety is desirable among our people, our clerics and our political leaders. There should be a strong commitment to duty among them, but if they do not seek righteous goals, their piety is squandered on unworthy goals. Shifting from the theological to the political context, we can observe that pious politicians are dedicated to their visions or their views of what our societal goals should be whereas the righteous among them yearn for an honest virtuous nation that rewards individual initiative. The problem is that too many of our political elites trumpet their piety but ignore the righteous pursuits. False piety is a sin. We are all familiar with the Sadducees and Pharisees who visibly seemed pious but may have lacked righteous hearts.

The parallels between our political elites and the ecclesiastical class are eerie. The politicians say the right things time and again. They pledge their undying devotion to personal liberty and constitutional government. They are piously devoted to saying what they believe the people view as righteous sentiment. False piety, void of righteousness leads to hollow shells of politicians…no cores, no serious convictions, no center of true public service. They mouth the platitudes and simultaneously push our buttons as they attempt to lure us with their piety and devotion to principle. The pious ones always know what to say and how to behave when the people are watching them. It’s under the cover of darkness and behind the marble walls that their true unrighteousness becomes apparent. They worship themselves and government. Just as the priestly class has been called to serve but succumbs to the glamour and trappings of privilege so too has the political class been summoned to serve as leaders for our Republic but nevertheless fall under the spell of power and advantage.

Priests who are pious but unrighteous are treated deferentially by the worshipers who respect their positions. For the most part the people are unaware of the carnal nature of the clerics’ personalities. The priestly piety fools the parishioners for a time. Eventually, however, the trappings of grandeur and the vestments of self-interest become apparent and the credibility and character of the pious priest are exposed as shams. Politicians who hold office are treated as infallible wizards who understand the mysteries of the governing process….who can fathom the incomprehensible depths of complex legislation….who seemingly have their fingers on the pulse of government. We ultimately discover, however, that their wizardry is deficient, their knowledge is lacking and their fingers are often misplaced. They are fallible, but nevertheless continue to impress us with their government-induced piety.

The trappings of piety are often impressive. The priest or the politician fits the mold of the true believer as if they were selected by central casting. As many of us have learned, first impressions are sometimes deceiving. Through experience we may have discovered that airs and appearances do not fully expose the character of a person.

He who walks righteously and speaks what is right, who rejects gain from extortion and keeps his hands from accepting bribes, who stops his ears against plots of murder and shuts his eyes against contemplating evil--- this is the man who will dwell on the heights…

Isaiah 33: 15-16 (NIV).

When we encounter a righteous cleric or politician, our amazement is merged with fear and awe. Someone whose life is reflection of his beliefs and his faith often intimidates us (See Tim Tebow). We envy his passion, his courage and his self-certainty. We may even be afraid of someone whose passion, integrity and righteousness makes us feel inadequate. The person whose principles are non-negotiable earns our respect, but sometimes they become targets of derision. In the church such a person is branded as a zealot. In the vineyards of politics she or he is described as an extremist. The True Believer will never yield, never compromise. The righteous believer marches on through the catcalls and the name calling and never flinches. The righteous person is at peace with herself or himself, and doesn’t cut deals or corners to reach an objective.

The time has come for our people to identify and reject the false trappings of piety. If we are to save our Republic, we must select leaders who have a passion for our Constitution and our liberty. We must choose an extremist who is extremely committed to freedom.

Comment: cearlwriting@hotmail.com

www.littlestuff-minoosha.blogspot.com

   

Honor Bound

What is honor? How do we define it? More importantly, perhaps, is how do we practice or hold it? According to one of the many versions of Webster’s, honor is “high regard or respect, glory, fame, good reputation, or adherence to principles considered right, integrity.” Most of us seem capable of recognizing honor when we witness it, and fewer of us appear equipped to routinely practice it. For many, an honorable person is one who is worthy of praise, but for some, a person of honor deserves derision for being so “old fashioned and hidebound.” In a sense I believe that the latter view is the most prevalent in our nation today.

People of true character and honor often intimidate others. The light of their rectitude casts shadows on their peers. As a nation we have cherished our honorable heroes although there has been a cottage industry of historians who have tried to crumble their feet of clay. The difficulty with praising or admiring a person of honor is that we are not privy to their innermost thoughts, their daily actions or their unguarded moments. Honorable people might not always be honorable. Just as brave people are identified during times of stress and danger, honorable people should be measured by their commitment to principle when the opposition is the greatest. Bullies are not honorable, but when the moment arrives, they can be. Cowards are generally unworthy of honor, but if they rise to face the foe courageously, they can acquire honor. If one does one’s duty, is it honorable, or must one perform an extraordinary act of valor?

This column was germinated because of the resignation of a football coach. Not a President, nor a military leader or a prominent legislator….a football coach. A man whom I respect has resigned under a cloud of suspicion. I’ve always believed him to be an honorable person…a man of high principle and integrity. Some rules were broken by a few of his players, and he supposedly failed to report the infractions to his supervisors. Pundits and other players have speculated that he was seeking to protect the wayward players from “facing the music,” but the deeds were discovered, the story was transmitted far and wide, and the coach must now take the hit. The players, thus far, have been levied a five game suspension for their misdeeds. The coach resigned because of his apparent cover-up. Ever since Watergate we’ve been told that the cover-up is greater than the original transgression. In a sense that may be true. Clearly, breaking additional laws or rules should compound the penalty, but prosecutors, persecutors and pundits too often appear to ignore the guilty rabbit in order to chase the fresh scent.

In some situations the leader who risks his reputation for his squad would be lauded. The dynamic changes however when the squad is composed of young men with a sense of entitlement who have no financial resources. The scenario becomes murky, then dark when an infraction of a rule is hidden to save the images of the players….and perhaps the coach. A similar action by the coach in a different context would be praised as an act of honor. This time the act has been condemned, and the coach has left a post that he cherished. The line between honor and disgrace is a very thin one.

Just as the revisionist historians demean our heroes and deflate their reputations, so too will the story of the coach and his cover-up be written in tabloid fashion. History is never perfect because history cannot be precisely written. When eye witnesses disagree about a recent event, how can we expect the historian to “get it right” after time has passed? Will the coach’s honor be restored or upheld at some later date by a friendly author? No, because we rightfully distrust the accuracy of authors, historians and politicians. The coach’s legacy has been chiseled into the stone of memories. I continue to believe that he is an honorable man. I do not question his integrity. He made the wrong decision, and he and his reputation will forever be tainted.

Comment:   cearlwriting@hotmail.com     or   www.littlestuff-minoosha.blogspot.com