I recall encountering, in the misspent days of my youth, a comic book character who had come up with an ingenious way to break the habit of eating between meals: He would simply never stop eating, in which case there would be no "between meals." Unfortunately, some have given up drinking in similar fashion. The late Sen. Paul Douglas of Illinois long ago compared most alleged fiscal conservatives to reformers who cry out for temperance "in the intervals between cocktails." Little has changed since then, save perhaps the brevity and infrequency of the intervals.
Should those who believe in the gospel of Jesus Christ, and the fundamental values of the Judeo-Christian ethic be free, like everyone else is free, to defend that outlook, and promote it, and attempt to inject it, in the pubic debate; whether it be in regards to the law, or public policy, or public employment, or in the local school district where their children attend, because they believe that that is their moral responsibility before God, but this too: that it is in fact the very foundation of free government and its hopes for enduring success? Or are such beliefs unAmerican, and in particular: too "personal," and thus too "invasive," an assault into the rights of others to be allowed?
Last weekend, April 28 and 29, 2011, I attended the 22nd annual home-school convention of MassHOPE, at the Worcester, Massachusetts, convention center, where I was able to offer my reading program, Alpha-Phonics, to new home-schoolers. I am well known to older home-schoolers whose children are now adults. Thousands of them taught their children to read with my program and they always thank me whenever they see me.
Although the costs of public education keep going up every year, academic achievement in these schools continues to decline. Why? If you’ve read Charlotte Iserbyt’s well-documented expose of government education, The Deliberate Dumbing Down of America, you would know why.
Let us pretend for a moment that the United States’ government — which we’ve caught in lethal lie after lie, whose financial credit is as shaky as the that of the homeowners its malfeasance forced into foreclosure, and whose worldwide empire relies on deception, torture and secret prisons — is finally and unprecedentedly telling the truth.
Has the next shoe fallen yet? And what is the next shoe? Already our government has been warning us that a "backlash" response to the reported killing of Osama bin Laden is likely, as our enemies in terror will almost certainly seek to avenge the death of their holy martyr. They will try even harder to penetrate America's anti-terrorist defenses and inflict major damage and heavy casualties upon American people and property, CIA Director Leon Paneta has assured us.
Here's a non-rocket science question: If you expect a reduced harvest of wheat, corn, rice or any other commodity some time in the future, what would be the wise thing to do about your consumption today? I bet that the average person would answer: Consume less now so that more will be available in the future.
I am opposed to U.S. involvement in the war in Libya. I feel confident that the vast majority of Americans, if they once again understood the moral and political fundamentals upon which this nation was founded, would oppose this war as well.
Osama bin Laden is dead.
It’s unknown, though, if he ever existed, at least in the narrative by which we “knew” him. Oh, he was a real live human being, but whether he was actually the mastermind behind the 9/11 attacks or the figurehead in charge of al-Qaeda is debatable. Some wonder if he was just a creation of our federal government — a well-crafted piece of propaganda, a person to hate, a target if you will — allowing the United States to invade foreign lands in search of supposed terrorists and weapons of mass destruction while at the same time motivating Americans to exchange liberty for security.