Stay with me and let me explain.

In the movie, The Book of Eli, Eli (Denzel Washington) is a lone black man in a white man’s post-apocalyptic world.  Though he cannot see those around him, he is not blind to the truth.   He walks throughout the land on a journey to deliver the one antidote to the hopelessness and despair that infects the people, turning them into brainwashed zombies in the service of Carnegie (Gary Oldman).  The antidote, The Book of Eli, is the lone surviving Bible known to man.  Committing it to memory by reading it every day, Eli is able to walk by faith, not by sight, for he knows the power of its message.  If you’re looking for a great bible study using this concept, click here.

The Book of Eli came to mind as I thought of two leaders, both of whom stood up against those who threatened them because of their message.  And, both were firsts in their own rights as leaders of a conservative, limited government message.

Margaret Thatcher

The first is Margaret Thatcher.  Known as the “Iron Lady,” she was the first (and so far only) female British Prime Minister.  I had the privilege of meeting her when, as a student studying in England in 1978, I went to visit Parliament in London.  I attended University in Grantham, Lincolnshire, which was in her district.  At the time, she had not yet been elected Prime Minister.

When she ran for the office, just about every labor union in England was on strike.  Determined, and some said, strident, she set out to revolutionize the economy.  She declared that the idea of nationalization, deficit spending, central control, and too much regulation had to end.  She cut government spending, subsidies to business, and slashed government red tape.

She once said:

Although 364 economists wrote to the Times and said, “This is outrageous; you’ll put us into a deep depression from a recession,” 364 were wrong, and the half dozen who supported us were right.

And those who urge us to relax the squeeze, to spend yet more money indiscriminately in the belief that we’ll help the unemployed and the small businessman, are not being kind or compassionate or caring. I have only one thing to say: U-turn if you want to. The lady’s not for turning.

Thatcher had to deal with a bunch of brainwashed zombies in her country that bought into the lie that they were powerless to help themselves.  They had  bought the lie that only government could solve their problems.  They were blind to the truth.  And when presented with the truth, like the power hungry who could “see” in the movie The Book of Eli, they could not grasp the truth.

Here is a link to a video clip about the struggles she faced from the PBS documentary, The Commanding Heights (the part with Thatcher starts about 2 minutes 47 seconds into the clip):

Herman Cain

The second is Herman Cain.  If elected president, he will be the first AMERICAN Black president – Barack Obama, because his father was from Kenya, was the first African-American President.

In recent days, Herman Cain has stood up to both Lawrence O’Donnell and the Occupy Wall Street crowd.  He’s not been afraid to question who is funding them, and what the motives of those people behind the scenes are.  And, he’s talked about what is needed with regard to getting out of the problems Americans face.  It’s the same antidote Margaret Thatcher proclaimed.  To see a clip of Cain’s comments on this, see

In the movie, The Book of Eli, Eli needed to remain steadfast, because he carried a message of hope that would free the brainwashed zombies of a post-apocalyptic America from the hopelessness and despair that enslaved them.  Margaret Thatcher became known as “The Iron Lady” because she stood steadfast against the attacks of the trade unions to deliver the antidote to hopelessness and despair that gripped England in the early 1980s.. 

Herman Cain carries the same message of hope to the brainwashed zombies of our nation that Thatcher carried to hers.  His is a message of rolling up one’s sleeves and getting to work.  But he can’t do it by himself.

There are still men and women in this nation who are not brainwashed zombies.  We, The People, need to help spread the antidote to the hopelessness and despair the “Occupy Wall Street” people are complaining about.  They need the antidote Mr. Cain has prescribed to restore faith, family and the American work ethic.

Now is the time to make your voice heard, and let Mr. Cain know you’ve “got his back.”

David Lantz is the author of 

Think Like Jesus, Lead Like Moses: Leadership Lessons from the Wilderness Crucible.　 To learn more about him, go to his website at

www.wisejargon.com

The Character of President Obama’s Father

While listening to the radio driving home one night, I heard an interview with Sally Jacobs about her new book, The Other Barack: The Bold and Reckless Life of President Obama’s Father.  Through listening to the interview, and reading about her book online (see, for example, http://yourblackworld.com/2011/07/07/new-book-says-president-obamas-father-considered-putting-him-up-for-adoption/  ), I learned that Obama’s father was a polygamist and an alcoholic.  I also learned that he had been an economist.  In 1965, he wrote a review of a publication on African Socialism in which he stated

“True there are cases in which nationalization is bad, but there are, likewise, quite a few benefits to be derived from it.”  (Obama, Barak H. (July 1965).  “Problems facing our socialism: another critique of Sessional Paper No. 10″.  East Africa Journal (Nairobi) 2 (4): 26–33. )

I’ve provided a link to the entire paper for those interested in the quote’s context, but it is clear that President Obama’s father saw nothing wrong with socialism.  In fact,  his review of socialism looked at how African socialism generally could work in Kenya specifically.

The Character of Herman Cain’s Father

Mr. Cain came to Indianapolis in mid-August, and I had the pleasure of hearing him speak to a crowd of about 200 people.  I was particularly impressed with the story he told of his father.  As a boy, Mr. Cain said to his father “why do we live in half a house?” to which his father responded “It’s not half a house.  It’s a duplex!”   Cain’s father didn’t attend Harvard, as Obama’s father did.  Instead, he worked three jobs – as a janitor, a barber and a chauffeur.  Cain said one of his father’s proudest moments was when he took his family to a new house he had saved money to buy, surprising his wife as well as his children, when he presenter her with the keys to the house.

The Character of the American People

I believe the question Americans should be asking themselves is what kind of people we want to be.  Do we want to be a people who believe that the way to get ahead in life is to take from the labor of others and aggrandize ourselves with that for which we have not worked?  Or do we want to be a people that seek to get ahead by the sweat of our brow and earn what we have?

Do you remember when Senator Obama, as a candidate for President, met Samuel Wurzelbacher, better known as “Joe the Plumber”? When asked about his tax plan, Obama responded by saying:

“If you’ve got a plumbing business, you’re gonna be better off [...] if you’ve got a whole bunch of customers who can afford to hire you, and right now everybody’s so pinched that business is bad for everybody and I think when you spread the wealth around, it’s good for everybody.”

Somehow, I think that Mr. Cain’s father would have been offended if someone tried to suggest that he should be the recipient of someone else’s hard earned money.  Listening to Herman Cain in Indianapolis, I got the distinct impression that the dreams he got from HIS father were to grow up to be a man of character, to work hard, to stand on one’s own two feet, and to help others when they needed help – but not to “share the wealth” of other people when he lent that helping hand.

Who we have as President, and the quality of their character, matters to the American people.

Back in 2001, Lawrence M. Stratton and Paul Craig Roberts wrote a paper titled The Fed’s “Depression” and the Birth of the New Deal in which they looked at the history of the Great Depression.  While I encourage anyone to read the entire article, the following statement at the end of their essay stands out:

“The great depression’s most serious and long-lasting consequence was not the collapse of prices and employment, but the displacement of the traditional reliance on individual responsibility with government guarantees of security. Beginning with Social Security, these guarantees have grown into the all-encompassing welfare state. This has changed the character of the American people, and it has changed the character of their government.” (emphasis added)

In 2012, we need a President with the character to remind America of the qualities this nation was founded on.  We need a President who doesn’t believe in spreading the wealth around; we need a president who believes in working hard to create wealth.  Herman Cain’s story is one worth telling, and I’m happy to share a part of it here.

David Lantz is the author of Think Like Jesus, Lead Like Moses: Leadership Lessons from the Wilderness Crucible.  To learn more about him, go to his website at www.wisejargon.com

In her chapter, The Chicken vs. the Eagle, on page 229 of the paper back version, Ms. Shlaes writes:

Roosevelt himself saw that while the program’s revenues might cover its costs now, the numbers from the actuaries suggested that there would not be enough money for old-age pensions for future generations.”

Imagine that.  FDR knew this was a ponzi scheme!  She goes on to quote Roosevelt, who said:

“It is almost dishonest to build up an accumulated deficit for the Congress of the United States to meet in 1980.  We can’t do that. We can’t see the United States short in 1980 any more than in 1935.”

Yet, we were short.  In fact, President Reagan appointed a commission to fix Social Security, at least for a period of time, in 1982 – right on schedule for when FDR knew the system would be bankrupt!

So, if the creator of Social Security knew it was a Ponzi Scheme, and Rick Perry and Herman Cain simply agree with its creator that it’s a Ponzi Scheme, then why won’t Americans face the truth that IT’S A PONZI SCHEME?

As We Head Toward the Cliff

No doubt, those paying attention to the debt ceiling debate can get plenty of information from all over the internet. Here, I want to touch on three topics.

First: How has America’s debt increased over the last ten years? The following chart demonstrates that our debt has gone from just under $6 trillion to over $14 trillion.

Second, in recent years, the Fed has been purchasing about 70% of our debt. The debt is issued in the form of treasury bills. The Fed doesn’t purchase Treasury Bills directly from the Treasury Department. Instead, Fed Chairman Ben Bernake will place an order with the Fed’s “primary dealers through a series of competitive auctions operated through the Desk’s FedTrade system.” These “primary dealers” include such companies as Goldmen Sachs, Morgan Stanley, the Deutsche Bank of Germany, and 15 others. These companies purchase the Treasury Bills at a private sale, and then turn around and sell them to the Fed with a small percentage markup. Of course, even a few tenths of a percentage point mark up on billions of dollars in Treasury bills results in millions of dollars in bonuses for these companies.

As a consequence, companies like Goldman Sachs (where former Clinton Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin, and former Bush Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson, work) are guaranteed a sure profit. This is why purchases of US Treasuries by the Fed have grown from just 10% of all Treasury sales to about 70%, as the accompanying chart demonstrates:

Here’s my analogy to this: A husband writes his wife a Cashiers Check for $100 drawn from money in their joint checking account. She then takes it to the bank to first cash the check and then put the money BACK in their joint checking account and log that as not only covering the cost of the money order, but as a net INCREASE in their checking balance of $100.

No one in their right mind would do that. The government shouldn’t do that either.

 Third, no one really knows what we should do, and what happens if we fail to raise the debt ceiling. The following from a recent PBS Newshour on May 16^th illustrates this point:

RAY SUAREZ: On one side of the argument, people from the administration are promising calamity if Aug. 2 comes and goes with no settlement for this, while some on the other side are saying, well it’s a detail. It’s — we will miss a couple of payments for a couple of days or a couple of weeks, but then, eventually, this will get settled.

Is the truth somewhere in the middle?

BINYAMIN APPELBAUM: We don’t know. You know, I think Robert Rubin, the former treasury secretary, said it best. He said, we don’t know what will happen, but why would you want to find out? And that seems to be, you know, a perspective that certainly all of our former treasury secretaries have, that you’re wandering off into an unknown space. There is no telling how markets would respond if the government stops paying some of its bills. Some people are willing to run that experiment. Others fear it greatly and don’t want to. But we really won’t know until, if and when we get there.

From this, I conclude that we should raise the debt ceiling, but only under the following 3 conditions:

1. We extract significant cuts in spending, either based on what Paul Ryan has indicated, or the Debt Commission’s requirements, or some combination thereof.

2. We create long term balance for our federal budget, including a balanced budget amendment and tax restructuring.

3. We enact a prohibition on the Fed using the Treasury Arbitrage system to continue monetarizing the debt. It make no sense for us to purchase our own debt, and prevents us from having an honest discussion on budget priorities in Washington.

If we don’t do these things, we might as well all become lemmings and look for a cliff to jump off from.

Through all of this, I’ve been amazed at how the availability of a book as a digital download makes a book into something more than just a book – it turns it into a multimedia platform that allows one to communicate both story and information.  While “old fogies” like myself may still prefer the touch and smell of a “real” book, the ability to turn an e-book into a portal to a world of information and entertainment has a ready audience:

Teenagers.  And I’m not the only person who thinks so.

Recently, a woman in my church who home schools her children, Shannon Baker, spoke to me about the possibility of using The Brotherhood of the Scroll for a group of seven high school girls to use as a bible study over the summer.  She had read my book several years ago, and thought that it might serve as a great way to get these girls into the Old Testament.   What Shannon didn’t know is that I had the study guide designed for just that purpose.  Since then, we’ve been talking about how home school families might use the book and study guide to create assignments that combine both Bible study and learning about ancient history.

This summer, she will lead “The Son Shine Girls” in a study of the history of the exile of the Jews to Babylon during the time of the prophets Jeremiah, Daniel and Ezekiel using my novel.  Additionally, they’ll write a critique of the process to share with other families who home school.  Here’s what Shannon and her daughter, Taylor, already have to say about their experience:

“This book is a great way to mix adventure with Biblical Truths. We have, and never will study these stories of bible the same again. Very fast paced and set for teens to learn about God’s word.”

To learn more about their experience and the reading schedule Shannon has put together, visit http://www.wisejargon.com/courses/brotherhoodflyer.pdf

Now, if you’re a writer – or someone that wants to take written material and make it useable for online use – a question you might have is:  How do I prepare my book for use by a multimedia audience?   My first piece of advice is to look for websites on the Internet that have information specifically suited to your written material, and learn how to embed the weblinks into your manuscript.

Here’s a two minute Youtube video I created where I demonstrate that you can download Amazon’s Kindle software to your PC for free, and then read a book that has weblinks in it.  Take a minute to watch the video to see how I’ve embedded hyperlinks in the Kindle version of The Brotherhood of the Scroll.

 The ability to click on the hyperlinks in the novel via the Kindle and learn about the people, places, events and ideas that come from actual history is what Shannon and The Son Shine Girls are discovering as they read the book.

A second thing one should do is to begin the entire writing process with the idea in mind that you are writing for “An Audience of One”.    Recently, I created this video to explain the concept:

If you’d like more information on this topic, I’ve written more extensively about what I call “Writing for an Interactive Audience of One” at http://hubpages.com/hub/Writing-for-an-Interactive-Audience

For now, let me just say that whether you are home schooling children, leading a group of people from work in an online project, or conducting a Bible study with friends scattered all over the globe, the use of ebooks with embedded media is fast becoming the way in which information will be communicated in the twenty first century.  I should know – I teach online for several universities, principally the University  of Phoenix.  In fact, in my next blog post, I’ll address how you might lead an online discussion based on the same principles of online instruction I employ as a university instructor teaching such topics as critical thinking, economics, and everyone’s favorite, statistics!

Did you know you can download the Kindle Software for your PC for FREE? You can then order The Brotherhood of the Scroll for just $8.50! Here’s the Kindle of the PC download link? http://www.amazon.com/gp/kindle/pc/download

To order The Brotherood of the Scroll for the Kindle, simply Click Here

Interestingly, each year since 2004, when we passed a federal law requiring it, Americans have celebrated the original signing of the Consitution on September 17, 1787.  As an adjunct professor for the University of Phoenix, I participate in a university – wide focus on the Constitution.  Yet, in spite of this annual ritual, it would seem that some in our nation draw a line at respecting this covenant between the People and their elected Rulers.  Evidently, the “ruling class” does not believe it is required to live under the requirements of this covenant – not required to aspire to the ideals that have made this country great.

Some don’t seem to think the Constitution has any power whatsoever, and therefore can’t understand all the fuss about paying attention to it.  One such person is Ezra Klein, a reporter for the Washington Post.

While I don’t want to elevate the Constitution to the status of Scripture, it is worth noting that even non-Americans have opined over the years that our Constitution is a remarkable document.  British Prime Minister William Gladstone once said:  ”The American Constitution is, so far as I can see, the most wonderful work ever struck off at a given time by the brain and purpose of man.”

A History Lesson from King Josiah of Judah

Why the uproar against following the constitution?  The answer is the same for any culture in any time in history when the ruling class feels threatened by those they claim superiority over.  The ruling class has always attempted to set itself above God, dictating to the people they regard as inferior to themselves.  Such was the case during the reign of Josiah, King of Judah from 641 – 609 B.C.

When King Josiah was 26 years old, laborers were repairing the Temple in Jerusalem when they found a copy of the Law of Moses.  You see, the two kings of Judah before Josiah – his father and his grandfather – had failed to obey the covenant of God’s word.  When they brought the word of God to Josiah, here’s what he said to the high priest (II Kings 22:13):

Go, inquire of the LORD for me and the people and all Judah concerning the words of this book that has been found, for great is the wrath of the LORD that burns against us, because our fathers have not listened to the words of this book, to do according to all that is written concerning us.

Did you catch that last sentence?  “our fathers have not listened to the words of this book, to do according to all that is written concerning us.” Isn’t that the same thing the American People have been saying to their rulers – that they have not listened to the words of the Constitution – our “book”?

When the priest came back and spoke with the young king, Josiah knew what he needed to do.  In II Kings 23:2, we read the following:

The king went up to the house of the LORD and all the men of Judah and all the inhabitants of Jerusalem with him, and the priests and the prophets and all the people, both small and great; and he read in their hearing all the words of the book of the covenant which was found in the house of the LORD.

Imagine that!  He read the entire Law of Moses, out loud, right there in the Temple.  Can you imagine what the Ruling Class of Josiah’s day said about this young, upstart, CONSERVATIVE king who actually wanted to pay attention to a covenant document that some argued had no binding authority whatsoever?  Probably the same thing the Ezra Kleins, Harry Reids and Nancy Pelosies of our day are saying.

Will the Restoration of the Constitution Succeed?

In the end, the reforms King Josiah instituted died when he was killed in battle.  With him out of the way, the ruling class of Judah returned to its destructive ways, and so the country was destroyed by Babylon in 586 B.C.  The lesson for us Americans is that we can’t leave the restoration of OUR Covenant relationship with each other – our Constitution – to “them”.  WE THE PEOPLE have an obligation to see that our nation follows this document – each and every one of us.

If we are successful, then we will have honored the words of perhaps the greatest American President, Abraham Lincoln, who said in the Gettysburg Address:

… we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain—that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom— and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.

So to Ezra Klein, and the liberal left he represents:  Yes!  When the Constitution is read in the House Chamber, the People’s Chamber, this will be an exercise of faith.  We, the People, have no faith in you and the rest of the Ruling Class.  We do, however, have faith in our heritage, in our Constitution, in our nation, and in our God under whom we live and draw breath.

Do you have a Bible Study that’s looking for new material?  Consider Think Like Jesus, Lead Like Moses: Leadership Lessons from the Wilderness Crucible You can find it at http://www.wisejargon.com/thinklead.htm

In a previous blog post, I talked about how the crossing of the Jordan River was a missional statement to the entire world.  In Joshua Chapter 4, verses 23-24, we read:

 For the Lord your God dried up the waters of the Jordan before you until you had crossed, just as the Lord your God had done to the Red Sea, which He dried up before us until we had crossed; that all the peoples of the earth may know that the hand of the Lord is mighty, so that you may fear the Lord your God forever. 

In reading of this event in the book of Joshua, I realized that my own church’s “crossing the Jordan” is not JUST about the membership of our church.   There are many people who are not members of our church who depend on the community ministries God has called us to provide.  These range from child and adult day care, to K – 7th grade school, to language training for Burmese refugees, to sports ministry outreach, to global missions. 

With that in mind, my son and I spoke with church leaders about a year ago and asked about video taping some of these people to ask them what the ministries of our church mean to them.  Here is one of a man named Tony who participates in our men’s basketball ministry:

Tony and the other ball players are thankful about the ministry that the community of believers at my church have provided. Additionally, notice how he talks about the spiritual blessing that he, as non-church goer, receive from the ministries of my church.  This, I believe, is from God.  Our ministries are not the work of this or that individual (regardless of how important key individuals might be), but are a result of God’s Spirit working through a community of believers. Without a community consecrated to the work of the Lord, such ministries are simply not possible.

And, if there is no foundational sense of community, then individuals will go their own way and create fractures in these ministries. 

In Chapter 6 of Joshua, God instructs that no one may take anything from the destroyed city of Jericho for their own personal use.  As a community, all Israel promised to obey this command.  But one person, a man named Achan, violated this command.  Joshua Chapter 7 provides a lesson when the unity of a covenant community is broken.  That lesson is this:  If even one man sins and breaks the covenant, the entire community is affected.  When Israel had consecrated themselves and followed the commands of God, they met with great success.  But when one man broke that covenant, Israel’s initial battle with the city of Ai failed miserably. 

As we go forward in this effort, I think the study of the Book of Joshua raises this important question:  Do we have a community of believers united, consecrated and on their knees before God in prayer?  Or, are we a bunch of people who worship in the same building in several different services scattered on Sunday?

Like Tony in the video, there are many who are watching to see if we are “walking the talk.”  On the weekend when we held the vote to leave the PCUSA, we held a prayer vigil before, during and after the vote process.   This year, we’re beginning a discipleship program.

Whether it is my church or any other, I think it is important to ask one’s self “What does it mean to be a member of MY local congregation?”  Hold your pastors, your church elders and other leaders in your church accountable to lead the flock into a conversation about what this means.  As a leader in my church, I desire that accountability. 

When I taught my class on Joshua: Leading Into the Promised Land, one of the books I used was Gene Getz’s “Joshua: Defeat to Victory.”  One of the insightful lessons he provides in discussing Joshua 6 is that God has 5 dimensions to His missionary strategy.  Getz writes:

The first dimension is “being”.  What “we are” as a local body of believers is foundational to having an effective missionary outreach into our local community.  “Being” what Christ commanded and prayed for in John’s Gospel should serve as a dynamic bridge to the world.  Our love for one another (John 13:34, 35), bearing the fruit of righteousness (see John 15:8), and unity (see John 17:20-23) all attract non-Christians, first to us, and then to Jesus Christ, the One who has made us what we are.  In many respects this was also God’s plan for the nation Israel in the Old Testament.

Israel understood that its entrance into the Promised Land was a response to God’s missional calling on their lives.  They spent time to consecrate themselves, to be intentional about what they were doing, and to be united in response to God’s calling to reach out to the world around them.

And now, as then, God is inviting us to respond to that timeless call.

———————————————————-

Do you have a Bible Study that’s looking for new material?  Consider Think Like Jesus, Lead Like Moses: Leadership Lessons from the Wilderness Crucible You can find it at http://www.wisejargon.com/thinklead.htm

I was born in 1956, two years after my dad came home from the Korean war.  In 1961, we moved out of an apartment we were living in and into a brand new house my parents had built.  Like my folks, millions of other people did the same thing.

Never mind the fact that the top marginal tax rate in 1961 was 91 percent. Never mind that President Kennedy didn’t start seriously pushing for a tax cut until 1963, and that it was enacted after his assassination in November of that year.  Never mind the fact that the Great Society programs of the Johnson Administration led to an explosion in government spending, adding endless bureaucracy to the American economy that in today’s economic climate would have seriously reduced economic growth.  Never mind that we increased social spending while at the same time we expanded spending on the war in Viet Nam, which in 2010 would kill any hopes for domestic economic growth.

Forget all those things, because in the years from 1946 to 1963, there was a “baby boom” going on.  Those young families, just like my family, needed new houses, new appliances, new cars, and new clothes.  The point:  There was a demographic tidal wave taking place.  Government policies could either “ride the wave” to facilitate demand for new goods and services, which is what the Kennedy tax cuts did, or be brushed away like a mosquito, which is what happened with the dramatic increase in government spending.

In those days, the economy was doing great, people were optimistic and wanted to start families, and nothing was going to get in the way of that.  Today, the economy looks bleak, the baby boom generation is looking at retiring, people are not optimistic, and people are waiting to start families.

I believe that this observation holds an important insight for how we deal with the economy.  We need to look at economic trends the same way we look at ocean tides.  Tides come in, and they go out.  You go surfing when the tide comes in – you ride the wave.  You look for sea shells when the tide goes out.  In both cases, you work with, not against, the tide.

In the 1950s and 60s, it made sense to promote policies that made it easy to buy a home.  You went WITH the tide of demographics.  In the 1990s and 2000s, we came up with what’s been called the “Sub prime” home loan program to promote purchases of new homes – at a time when the tide of new-home purchases was going out, not coming in.  It DID NOT make sense to pursue this policy – it went AGAINST the tide.

As I thought about these things, I recalled something in economics called the “Long Wave Theory” of the business cycle.  It was first described by the Russian economist Nikolai Kondratieff in his 1925 book, The Major Economic Cycles.  As a young man, majoring in economics, I never gave it much thought.  Now, in my 50s, I see how much it makes sense!

Here’s the point I want to leave with you today.  Much of what we do in terms of economic policy is built on short run (i.e., short wave) goals based on what is called “Keynesian Economics” (named after an economist named John Maynard Keynes).  We ignore the tides of long term economic trends, and tend to build economic policy in the flood plane of the tides that come in and go out.

We need to stop building economic policy on sand, and start building on firmer foundations.  If what I’ve said in this blog post isn’t convincing enough, then I encourage you to check out the book, Baby Boomers, Generation X and Social Cylces: Volume 1, North American Long Waves, by Edward Cheung.  It’s 320 pages.  You can get a synopsis by going to http://www.google.com/webhp?hl=en&tab=nw

Did you enjoy this post?  Become a fan of my facebook page at http://www.facebook.com/pages/Wise-Jargon-for-a-Linked-In-World/176996225656220 and follow me on twitter at wisejargon@twitter.com

Have you ever played the game, “rock, paper, scissors”?  First, we have a rock, made by a fist.  Paper covers the rock, made by an open hand.  Scissors cuts the paper, made by two fingers in a “victory” sign.  Finally, the rock smashes the scissors.

Let’s apply this analogy as we think about the role of centralized government, “the rock,” how the state governments interact on an equal footing with the central government in order to limit the central government’s growth, “the paper” of what we call federalism, and “the scissors” of individual liberty.

A warning from President Eisenhower

On January 17, 1961, President Dwight D. Eisenhower gave his farewell address. In that speech, he issued this warning:

“As we peer into society’s future, we – you and I, and our government – must avoid the impulse to live only for today, plundering for, for our own ease and convenience, the precious resources of tomorrow. We cannot mortgage the material assets of our grandchildren without asking the loss also of their political and spiritual heritage. We want democracy to survive for all generations to come, not to become the insolvent phantom of tomorrow.”

          Did you catch that?  Eisenhower said we “must avoid the impulse to live only for today.”  He said “we cannot mortgage the materials assets of our grandchildren without asking the loss also of their political and spiritual heritage.”  Wow!  If we borrow and spend for today, tomorrow our grandchildren will forfeit both their political and spiritual heritage.

          Finally, if we fail in this effort and consume our grandchildren’s inheritance, then democracy will “become the insolvent phantom of tomorrow.”   In other words, the idea of liberty and democracy will become, for our grandchildren, a ghost, a forgotten memory – and our grandchildren will live in an insolvent country.

          You see, Eisenhower feared the rise of a powerful central government – something he called the “Military Industrial Complex.”  We can represent this with the idea of a rock.  How does a rock grow?  Well, while rocks really don’t grow, mountains can if they become a volcano and erupt.  Constant volcanic eruptions will cause a mountain to grow from a small “rock” to a big one.

James Madison and the Tyranny of the Majority

          James Madison, one of the men most responsible for writing our constitution, was also concerned about the growth of a large, tyrannical central government.  Madison said that because we are governed by men and not angels, the government must not only be able to control the people, but equally important, must be forced to control itself.  To do this, we need to encourage the growth of factions – different groups of people who will divide the power of government so that no one group can gain an advantage over another.  This will force compromise in order to do anything, so that all interests are balanced.  Thus, the congress, the president, and the supreme court are all co-equal branches of government.  But in addition to these balanced powers, Madison relied on 13 (now 50) states which could balance the powers of the federal government.

         In this way, the “paper” of federalism covers the power of the central government – the rock – and checks its growth.

          But in recent years, the federal government has learned how to overcome the power of federalism:  Promise the states money if they will do what the federal government wants.  Using something called “federal mandates,” the federal government forces states to do something by promising them money.  The best example of this is how the federal government got all the states to raise the legal drinking age to 21.  While there was no way to force states to increase the drinking age to 21, they simply said they would withhold federal highway funding if the states didn’t do what they asked.  In a word, the federal government used blackmail to get the states to do what it wanted.

The People Vote Themselves the Money, and Cut the Paper of Federalism

          Notice that by covering the rock of central government with the paper of federalism, the size of government isn’t reduced – we simply stop it from growing larger for a time.  But the “military industrial complex” Eisenhower warned us against doesn’t just want the government to be “the referee” between private factions.  No, it wants to be a player, too.  And so, it wants to “provide services”; it wants to decide who should get these services.  It wants to change our behavior (buy “green” technology, stop smoking, redefine the definition of marriage, etc.)  More and more Americans are becoming consumers of tax dollars doled out by the central government.  As we rely on the government to bail us out, we consume to our hearts content until we can’t survive without help from the government – and so forfeit our liberty.  We don’t even realize what we’re doing.  We’ll gladly vote to use our scissors to cut the paper of federalism, unleashing the growth of the central government – the rock – to give us what we want.

          And so, warnings by people like Eisenhower and Madison are for naught.  We don’t even realize we’re feeding the “rock” of central government, which will turn on us and crush the “scissors” of our liberty.  Instead, we trust blindly in words read from a teleprompter, and like sheep, call those words “hope.”

          It’s a false hope. One which, in the end will lead us to plunder “for our own ease and convenience, the precious resources of tomorrow” and cause us to see the democracy we now enjoy “become the insolvent phantom of tomorrow.”  Only if you and I take an interest in this issue and do something about it will we turn the tide of tyranny which threatens to enslave us.

The name of the book comes, in part, from the “pitch line” for the Leadership Seminars the Coalition would provide.  That pitch line promised attendees that they would learn to “Think Like Jesus, Fight Like David, Lead Like Moses, and Run Like Lincoln.”

In the last chapter of the book, I briefly examine the following question: Is there a difference between this movement of grassroots activists and the movement the Christian Coalition tried to spark 15 years earlier?

In this post, I want to provide some excerpts from my book to answer that question here. 

1.  Like Moses when he first tried to take control, the methods of the Christian Coalition became self-serving.

As the Christian Coalition gained power and influence, it succumbed to the trappings of success.  In a video promoting the Christian Coalition, founder Pat Robertson said the mission of the Coalition was to mobilize Christians precinct by precinct “until once again we are the head and not the tail, and at the top rather than the bottom of our political system.“  I believe with all my heart that Dr. Robertson’s intentions were sincere, but that statement set a tone of “What’s in it for me” as a second wave of wealthier, politically connected individuals began to associate themselves with the existing grassroots structure that had been built in the early years.  In state after state, I learned of stories of my fellow state directors who had been nudged out of their position by wealthier, more aggressive newcomers.

            2.  The Church in America Had Lost Its Way

In 2005 I got to know a man by the name of Dr. Peter Jones, and learned about his ministry, Christian Witness to a Pagan Planet (now known as Truth Exchange).  His thesis was that pagan practices had infiltrated many mainline Protestant denominations and created something he called “neo-paganism.”  In his book, The Gnostic Empire Strikes Back, I found this amazing statement:

In the name of democracy contemporary society accepts and sanctions homosexuality, but should the church sanction practicing homosexuals and admit them to the Christian ministry?  Unthinkably, some now do, causing one to wonder if the process will ever stop. … Clearly democracy and the biblical definition of sexuality do not always agree!  Unfortunately some orthodox Christians, under the societal pressure of the democratic process, which they often identify as “the Spirit of God,” seem ready to accept the democratic agenda even if that means flying in the face of clear scriptural teaching on the structures of creation.”

This statement hit me in the gut.  As the State Director of the Indiana Christian Coalition when Dr. Jones’ book was published, I would repeatedly tell audiences that I was involved with the Coalition to “stand in the gap” against increasing government regulation and encroachment on Christian values, while the church did its job of preaching the redeeming message of the Gospel.  What Dr. Jones was saying was that the church (Protestant and Catholic, but especially mainline Protestantism) was crumbling from within.  In more recent years, we’ve seen increased evidence of this as the Episcopalians, Methodists, Lutherans and Presbyterians have fought over the authority of Scripture in this and other areas.  Many local congregations are seeking to leave their denominations, sparking fights over ownership of church property.

        3. The American People Were Not Yet Ready to Listen to the Coalition’s Message

In the 1990s, various groups like the Christian Coalition were warning about the growth of government, the explosion in spending, and the bloodguilt of abortion, but, America wasn’t ready to act on that message.  As I’ve considered this concept, a scene from one last movie, The Mask of Zorro, comes to my mind. 

In that movie, Anthony Hopkins plays an aged Don Diego (Zorro) who has emerged (“awakened”!) from several decades in a dungeon.  Walking with the use of a cane, he enters a tavern where a young tough, Alejandro, played by Antonio Banderas, demands another drink.  Drunk and penniless, he offers the bartender a silver medallion as payment.  Don Diego recognizes the medallion – it is the same one he gave two young boys long ago, when they helped him evade some Mexican soldiers.  As they speak, the soldier who had killed Alejandro’s brother rides by the tavern.  Alejandro sees the soldier through the window and becomes enraged.  To prevent the young drunk from running out to certain death while trying to take his revenge, the aged Zorro easily disarms him and knocks Alejandro to the ground.  What follows is this conversation between the two:

Alejandro:  I would have killed him.

Don Diego:  No, not today. He is trained to kill. You seem trained to drink. Oh, yes, my friend, you would have fought very bravely, and died very quickly.  Who then would avenge your brother?

Alejandro:  I’ve never lost a fight.

Don Diego:  Except to a crippled old man just now. … There is a saying, a very old saying: when the pupil is ready the master will appear.

 The point of my sharing this scene is this:  When Moses made his first attempt to rescue the Hebrews, he acted in his own strength; but that was only half the problem.  The other half of the problem was that the people really didn’t think they needed rescuing.  They mocked Moses, asking; “Who made you ruler over us?” 

 In the 1990s, the American People were not ready for the message the Christian Coalition had to share.  The American People mocked the Christian Coalition, and rightly so, partly because the organization was acting out of its own strength, and partly because they didn’t think they needed rescuing.

 The pupil wasn’t ready.  Americans were not yet ready for the emergence of their “Gray Champion” – their “Zorro,” if you will. 

But, perhaps, America is ready now.

You’ll find the above and more in Chapter 14 of Think Like Jesus, Lead Like Moses.  To learn how to order a copy, click here.