Fun and Frustration at a Job Fair

I apologize for the relatively long gap in posts. I’m busy with my work here in DC and I’ve also started work on my Doctorate.
The following is from my new blog at I’m including it here because I believe it’s subject matter is germane to the thrust of RevNev’s blog…

The other day I went to a job fair that was held in a building where I work. Almost all of the employers there were from one government agency or another. Out of 60 employers, only 4 were from the private sector.

Anyway, I went around heckling the representatives from the various agencies – one of my favorites was when I walked up to the INS folks and asked, “So… what do you guys do?” And they responded, “We help people stay in America.” To which I retorted, “You mean you help illegals stay in America.”

For the most part it was an enjoyable experience for me – going from one booth to the next asking for a job that pays a ton of money without me having to do any work, asking if they had any jobs for a person with absolutely no skills except the ability to call in sick, etc… it was fun.

But one booth actually made me angry. I can’t remember the name of the agency, but when I asked what they did, the man said that it was their responsibility to regulate and oversee the disbursement of TARP funds.

I got angry, “They’ve created a whole new agency just to oversee bailout money?”

I got angry because this comes on the heels of me learning that the Air Force chaplaincy is getting cut by 1/3. At a time when their workload is at a record high, they’re doing away with a third of their chaplains.

It really pisses me off that whenever a conservative says, “We’ve got to stop spending so much…” The liberal responds with, “You’re right… let’s look at the defense budget to see where we can make some cuts.”

It is true that the defense budget is the “single greatest” category in the Federal budget. And I think it should be. Why? Because every political scientist since Plato wrote The Republic around 380BC, everyone who has thought about it has understood that one of the primary purposes of government is the defense of it’s people and the protection of it’s land. Having a people who are secure in their land is essentially to literally every other aspect of societal and cultural development. Thus in the Constitution, when the Framers specifically discussed the military for the defense of the people, they weren’t being novel. They simply understood that a nation cannot develop and thrive if they have the specter of potential invasion hanging over their heads.

Incidentally, the Constitution doesn’t make provision for entitlement programs, federal law enforcement agencies, or agencies that want to see you naked before you can get on a private business’ plane. (By the way, I made that jab to the folks from the TSA – If I come work for you, when can I start making people get naked?) This is why conservatives typically are “pro military” – national defense is actually prescribed by the Constitution and is fundamentally prerequisite to the society being able to flourish. This is also while leftists, in the name of being “world citizens” and decrying the nation state as a relic of the past, typically wish we could just open our borders and disband our militaries.

So if cuts are to be made – and they need to be made – then start with bogus agencies started to oversee the distribution of a bogus bailout and move down the line… cutting funds from national defense, the one area actually spelled out in the Constitution, should come only as a matter of last resort.

That’s my take on it.

Liberals are Cowards

Ok, folks, I apologize to my dear fans who have been worrying themselves sick wondering where I’ve been or what I’ve been doing… well the simple fact is that I have a real job and this job involves helping people and providing first class counsel  (incidentally, on my most recent evaluation, I was rated as the best in my organization). So I’ve been busy. On top of that I’ve been preparing for a move (next week) to Washington, DC, that once honorable federal enclave now turned rancid cesspool thanks to all the you-know-whos and you-know-whats running rampant there. But never fear, though I’ve been very busy, I haven’t failed to think about and be concerned for our dear Christian – that means Conservative – readership.

Perhaps you’ve heard about how the leftists are planning on using reconciliation to pass the healthcare legislation – and when we point out that it is an underhanded tactic, they try to justify themselves by pointing out that Republicans used the procedure when they were in power. Now folks, remember all that I’ve said – leftists are liars, they’re stupid, they’re evil. They really are. When a conservative does any of these things they’re only acting like a liberal. That’s it. Anyway, the would-be overthrowers of the American way (the leftists) are once again proven to be lying imbeciles when one considers that Republicans used it to pass measures that were overwhelmingly desired by the American populace (like tax cuts for everyone) while the typically anti-American leftists wanted Americans to pay more. Furthermore, tax cut type measures are consistent with the American way. Now, in our present day, the socialists want to rework approximately 20% of the American economy, fundamentally changing how life (and death) occurs in this Nation… and they want to do so with legislation overwhelmingly opposed by the populace. See the difference? If you can’t, you’re probably a liberal.

But to add insult to injury, the cowardly anti-American leftists are posed to “deem and pass” this healthcare legislation – in otherwords, “consider” it passed without actually voting on it! They trounce the will of the People, try to rework the framework of the American way of life, support everything and everyone who is opposed to goodness and normalcy, despise the Constitution, and dare to act indignant when us good Americans use rhetoric reserved for times when a People are underthe thumb of a despotic ruler? They’re cowards, they’re evil, their liars.

Good Readers -you simply must remember, with the Left there is no mercy, there is no kindness, there is no compassion. They use that language to trick you into putting them in power so that once IN power they can put systems and rules in place to disregard your will.

People – you must speak up. I know, I know, part of being conservative is being, well, conservative. And that means we just work hard and go home and mind our own business. But while you do nothing, they’re changing everything. As Reagan once said, “The people with the most to lose will do the least to prevent it.” Let’s prove the Gipper wrong, shall we! Let your voice be heard!

Ronald Reagan on Socialized Medicine

On this, the eve of Obama’s attempt to strong arm Congress to adopt his plan for socialized medicine, I think it is wise to listen to these words from Ronald Reagan recorded in 1961 – it is AMAZING how the arguments are the same. Reagan’s cautionary words are still applicable.

The bottom line: The Leftists don’t really care about medical care. They care about control over your life.

Listen to Reagan’s words… especially you people on the Left!

Listen HERE.

Obama Is Right!

Ok, maybe you’ve seen THIS and maybe you haven’t. The Mayor of Las Vegas – former attorney for the mob – Oscar Goodman, has refused to meet with, or even greet, President Obama during the latter’s trip to Sin City. The reason?  Obama made comments that people saving for college shouldn’t “blow” their money in Vegas. And the mayor, on behalf of the casinos, is deeply offended at the idea of the POTUS giving sound personal financial management advice.  

Here’s the bottom line: President Obama didn’t call for the abolishment of the Gaming industry. He advised people to not blow their money when they’re saving for their future. This was sound advice on many levels (think of the people who would be empowered if instead of investing in the casinos, they invested in themselves!) but it is particularly prudent advice because the people most likely to blow their money at casinos are precisely those who do so to the detriment of their financial future. And while the former mob-lawyer Mayor wants to act indignant, I say so be it.

So, I’ll give credit where I think credit is due: Good advice to the common man, Mr. President!

Schooling a Single Soldier

I just got home from conducting a Singles’ Retreat in Kansas City. One of the classes I teach is a course in personal financial management – I do very basic stuff, but believe me, it is needed. Anyway, when I go over the section on investing – the power of time and compounding interest – I stress repeatedly that NOW, while they’re young and relatively free from financial obligations, is the best time to throw some money into their future and let it sit. I show how the prospect of retiring as a millionaire is doable.

Anyway, when I mentioned a reasonable amount – $2000 per yr – that I know they could afford, (because I know how much money they make, and I know they have no room-and-board type expenditures) one female Soldier looked at me in utter disbelief. She said to me, “I’d have to NOT go out to the club one weekend a month!”

I then went into a discussion about delaying gratification, having a long-term mindset, sacrificing a little now for a huge payoff later, etc…. and her response, “Well, you’re only young once and you’re not guaranteed to live until you retire.”

To that I said, “You’re right… it is your money and I believe you should do with it what you think best. But know this: When several years have passed and you come to your senses and you realize that you have squandered all your money at clubs and bowling alleys and parties with your friends and then you try to make up for your own lack of foresight and planning by trying to vote to get the government to take money from people like me who have made sacrifices and invested wisely… when you do that, don’t be shocked and surprised when we resist your efforts to cover your rear by taking from us.”

Dog gone it! I absolutely detest this low-class mentality that I want to do what I want but then use the coercive power of the law to take money from those who have been wise and prudent.

The Truth Is Out There!

In 1923, J Gresham Machen penned Christianity and Liberalism. The inclusion of the conjunction “and” was both intentional and indicative of the thesis of his still-celebrated volume: There is a fundamental difference and distinction between Christianity and Liberalism. The two are at odds, and utterly incompatible with each other.

Of course, Machen was referring to theological liberalism, with its alternative (and counterfeit) notion of “Christianity,” and not specifically political liberalism.

Still, given that most theological liberals are also – and I would add consequently – political liberals while consistent theological conservatives are also – and again, I would add consequently – political conservatives, I take it for granted that there is a connection to be made.

 In this post I want to refer to epistemology, or what is knowledge and how it is that we know.

 For our dear Christian readers, you’re undoubtedly already aware of what I’m about to write. And that is: Leftists of all stripes have a different understanding of what constitutes reality and knowledge and truth compared to the understanding of these things that comes from a consistent application of the cognitive processes employed by us. And unfortunately, since the agents of Leftist thought for all practical purposes control the various forums and venues that influence the culture, it is possible that as lamentable as it may be, that at least some of you have inadvertently adopted an epistemological framework that is in its logical consequences friendly toward liberal thought, which is, as I noted earlier, inconsistent with the Christian faith.

 To what do I refer?

 Specifically here I want to address the distinction between conservative and liberal understanding of the source of meaning. This is important because in subsequent posts I will unpack a few reasons why liberal thought is inconsistent with Scripture, and is therefore something that should be rejected and resisted by Christians.

 When it comes to art, literature, history, reality – you name it, a conservative epistemology understands that truth and meaning lie outside myself, or my “community.” Who determines what something means? The person – or group – who wrote it, painted it, sculpted it, built it, engineered it, etc. And what is our job? To understand what it is that is out there, outside myself, in its objective reality.

To illustrate, consider that conservatives approach Scripture asking, “What does this mean?” And to answer that question we engage in exegesis and in the process of doing so we attempt to understand what the passage is saying. We may end up coming to a different opinion as to what it means, but our goal and intent is identical: We are trying to understand the message conveyed by the author because we understand that it is that message that is authoritative for us. When we apply the same principle to things like the Constitution, we seek to understand “authorial intent” because we understand that the way to discover what the Constitution means is to understand what it is that the Framers meant.

Contrast this with the epistemology of liberalism. Leftists desperately need to convince you that meaning is not “out there,” standing like a pillar that doesn’t change regardless of the fads or trends of the culture. No, Leftists need and want you to believe that there is no inherent and authoritative meaning so that they can sweep into that vacuum and “provide” a “truth” that they can then repeat over and over until people think of it as a shared value.

To reuse the illustration of how Scripture is understood, Liberals don’t ask, “What does this mean?” Instead, they ask, “What does this mean… to me?” They don’t have much use for the meaning intended by the author, what’s important is what we think. And of course, what we think is influenced by the culture around us. And who shapes the culture? The leftists. But then when it comes to the Constitution, leftists like to call it a “living document” as opposed to a “dead document.” Now, this is where they trick you – they borrow the terminology of “living” and “dead” from language, and they say that to be “living” is to have present applicability, whereas a “dead” language is no longer used. But that’s not quite accurate…. A “dead” language is one that is no longer changing. The rules of that language are “set.” A “living” language is one whose rules still change and there is an ongoing “evolution” to it. What does this have to do with the Constitution? Leftists call it a “living document” and they confuse (as they do most things) the difference between interpretation and application. Leftists say that the Constitution can be reinterpreted – which means that it can be made to mean things that prior generations didn’t think it meant. In other words, it doesn’t matter what the Framers meant by, oh, the 1st Amendment. What matters is what we think it means.

There are vast differences between how liberals and conservatives process and understand and attribute meaning. Liberals believe that there is no inherent meaning, or at least that the determiner of that meaning is NOT the author. Conservatives, on the other hand, understand that meaning is determined by the author.

To see the lie of the leftist position, one simply needs to stop and reflect on the basic truths of human communication. When someone opens their mouth to speak, or puts their thoughts to paper, we intend to send a message. When a Leftist pontificates about the plight of the working man, he (or she) wants to be understood. But a consistent application of leftist epistemology would result in me interpreting their words however I want. Maybe I’m in a hungry mood, so while she’s going on and on, I decide that she’s talking about lunch. Of course, that’s ridiculous. The communicator is attempting to send a message, and it is our job to try to understand. Human communication hinges upon the fact that when someone speaks they send a message. Now, this truth we take for granted. But leftists would have you believe that in every other aspect of life we suddenly slip into some sort of surreal twilight zone in which those basic rules are no longer applicable.

So. All this to say: Leftists need people to forget that there is objective meaning in the world so that they can be the ones to come and fill that void for you. Be careful!

Another Example of Liberal Hypocrisy

Liberals are hypocrites. There is literally not enough time in my day to recount all the times that Leftists have cried foul when something is done by conservatives… and then try to use sleight of hand in order to get you, the good and honest American, to forget when they do it themselves.

Take THIS recent revelation made public by FoxNews. A contributor to various and multiple liberal campaigns is awarded a highly lucrative contract… in a no-bid process.

How’s that for a sweetheart of a deal!

Lessons Learned at the National WWI Museum

This past weekend I led a marriage retreat in Kansas City. My family and I decided to take advantage of our proximity to the National WWI Museum to stop in for a visit. First of all, let me tell you – if you are ever passing through KC, the WWI museum is well worth a stop. It is probably the most modern and technologically up-to-date museum I’ve ever seen. Because of how WWII eclipses WWI (for several reasons), while I know a great deal about WWII, I have learned relatively little about the Great War. A trip to this museum is highly informative.

I learned a couple things of profound importance –

First, I am a capitalist. However, let me be clear in saying that because of the presence of sin, every human institution – including business – can degeinerate into an abusive and self-interested venture. The governments of Europe at the dawn of the 20th Century were primarily old-school aristocratic in nature. They were self-absorbed and didn’t do a whole lot of governing beyond collecting taxes and enjoying life. Because they didn’t really give a rip about the people, they had virtually no desire to acutally DO anything, the rulers imposed no rules on business and industry – the cities of Europe turned into massive sweat shops on a scale that we never saw in America – and poverty was rampant. But the rulers did nothing, because they were happy to receive taxes and enjoy dinner parties. They made alliances with each other to protect their business interests so that the tax revenue from the highly lucrative companies wouldn’t be endangered. Anyway, it created a total mess – and when the balloon popped, it blew up big. Aside from the intense devestation of WWI, this era ushered in the Bolshevik Revolution, with the consequences of the latter being felt to this day. Would there have even been fertile ground for that kind of social upheaval had the rulers actually listened to their people at even the smallest point?  This point taught me that while I do believe in the importance of the free market, I believe it is important that we learn from history what happens when a government becomes totally hands off. Governments need to remember that they are instituted by God to restrain evil and promote good, which means there is a degree of proactivity.

Second, and perhaps more immediate, I learned that Vladimir Lenin had been in exile in Switzerland until 1917. At that time the Germans, hoping to destabilize the government of Russia and thereby get them to pull out of the War, agreed to secretly transport Lenin back into Russia. In short, Lenin was seen as the “ultimate weapon” and he was unleashed upon Russia. The move worked. As we know, Lenin began the Bolshevik Revolution, turned Russian civilization upside down, and created a situation that spread Communism far and wide. Over the years, countless hundreds of millions have perished and billions more have lived in fear of annihilation as a consequence. And to think it began as a tactical decision on the part of the Germans in WWI to break a stalemate on their Eastern Front. We sometimes do things without thinking about the longterm consequences. Of course, not every decision in life is going to have the consequences of unleashing Lenin on Russia. But the principle remains: Be careful, be very careful, before you make serious decisions because if you miscalculate… the consequences may be severe.

Does God Hate Haiti?

Below is a commentary on the recent tragedy by Dr. R. Albert Mohler, president of Southern Seminary in Louisville, KY. I’m posting his commentary directly because they represent the words of a very theologically and biblially mature scholar. On the one hand they serve as a correction to the many Americans who cannot fathom that God would be active in something like this and on the other hand, Mohler’s words are a rebuke to those who think that something like this is clear evidence of God’s singular judgment for a particular sin or series of sins. Without further ado:

Does God hate Haiti?

“The images streaming in from Haiti look like scenes from Dante’s Inferno. The scale of the calamity is unprecedented. In many ways, Haiti has almost ceased to exist. The earthquake that will forever change that nation came as subterranean plates shifted about six miles under the surface of the earth, along a fault line that had threatened trouble for centuries. But no one saw a quake of this magnitude coming. The 7.0 quake came like a nightmare, with the city of Port-au-Prince crumbling, entire villages collapsing, bodies flying in the air and crushed under mountains of debris. Orphanages, churches, markets, homes, and government buildings all collapsed. Civil government has virtually ceased to function. Without power, communication has been cut off and rescue efforts are seriously hampered. Bodies are piling up, hope is running out, and help, though on the way, will not arrive in time for many victims. Even as boots are finally hitting the ground and relief efforts are reaching the island, estimates of the death toll range as high as 500,000. Given the mountainous terrain and densely populated villages that had been hanging along the fault line, entire villages may have disappeared. The Western Hemisphere’s most impoverished nation has experienced a catastrophe that appears almost apocalyptic.”

Read the rest of Dr. Mohler’s piece. It’s well worth the read.

Brit Hume to Tiger: Turn to Christianity

I don’t know what kind of particular notion of Christianity it is that Brit Hume intends, but regardless, in this day it took guts for Brit Hume to publicly say that he believes Tiger Woods, a Buddhist, should convert to Christianity. Check it out: HERE.

What I want to point out to the readers of this site are the 18 or so pages of comments, virtually all of them trying to shout down Hume. You see, the heart of sinful man rages – absolutely rages – against the Lord and His Annointed One (a la Psalm 2). And while these deluded people individually and collectively fume and rage and demand that we be “open minded” and “tolerant” and “appreciate diversity”… yet they prove themselves to be liars and hypocrites at the most fundamental level when all their cries for open-mindedness and tolerance and appreciation for diversity grow silent and instead they seek to utterly silence, in every venue, anything that smacks of the Son of God. And these are the same people who in many cases insist that they know what is best for you, your children, your state, your nation. You can either side with them at the polls out of self-interest, or you can stand up and let your voice be heard.

%d bloggers like this: