Can We Stop Celebrating the False Pride of Diversity?

Well, I just missed it.

The LGBTQRSTUVWXYZ Community has been marching and shouting their “Pride” in downtown San Francisco all weekend. In fact, the festivities began days before I was leaving on a jet plane back to DFW Airport.

I saw the ad spots on TV while I was chilling in my motel suite in Redwood Shores for a week. Don’t ask my 87-year-old father what he thinks of the Gay agenda unless you want his honest opinion. “We’re not going to The City this weekend,” would be his simple reply.

Is he a “hater”? A “bigot”? Far from it. He’ll talk to anyone at any time about almost anything, and gently impart some practical wisdom along the way. Don't ask him about his sex life or ancestry and he won't ask about yours. He’s lived his whole life in the natural diversity of the Bay Area, attending school and working with all races. He witnessed the crumbling barriers to civil rights for the Japanese after WWII, the assimilation of hard-working Hispanics migrating into the state for seasonal farm work, the tenacity of destitute European immigrants and the hard-won mingling of Blacks as he navigated his own challenges of having a step-father.

He rolled his eyes at the impatience of the Black Power movement that lacked the finesse of nonviolent protests and legislative actions to reclaim what the Southern Democrats had stolen from African-Americans after the Civil War. Now he rolls his eyes at the latest “Pride”
movement.

For my dad, a Sheet Metal worker who also made my clothes and our furniture among other things, “pride” is the feeling one enjoys upon accomplishing a challenging task. It has nothing to do with skin color or sexual orientation or individual peccadillos.

Here’s the real test of “diversity”: when San Francisco hosts a weekend of celebration for the White, Heterosexual, Gender-cemented, Long-term Married, Full-Time Employed, Intact Families, then we’ll know that all diversity is celebrated. But it won’t happen.

The word “pride”, like “gay”, has been redefined for exclusionary purposes, not acceptance of all. The symbol of the rainbow has been expropriated to flaunt the very aberration for which the Judeo-Christian God condemned the entire earth.

I’m sure my dad has known many people who were other than a majority ethnicity, heterosexual, gender-confident, gainfully employed, successful in marriage, etc. They didn’t flaunt it.  Co-workers, friends, and family just went about their business, keeping private issues private, just as he did. Individuals were celebrated for their personalities and accomplishments, not their assignations.

When we start flaunting societal aberration, we lose the cohesive culture that sustains communities. When everything but the norm is celebrated and those who don’t participate are punished, we lose the very anchors that hold us in the safe harbor of society. This is where a sense of security allows us to use our boldness to accomplish great things in service to others.


In an article titled, The Downside of Diversity,

"Harvard political scientist Robert Putnam -- famous for "Bowling Alone," his 2000 book on declining civic engagement -- has found that the greater the diversity in a community, the fewer people vote and the less they volunteer, the less they give to charity and work on community projects. In the most diverse communities, neighbors trust one another about half as much as they do in the most homogenous settings. The study, the largest ever on civic engagement in America, found that virtually all measures of civic health are lower in more diverse settings."

Instead of evolving to merely accept the unique among us, we’ve been forced to throw parades for them, alienating us all and degrading the truest sense of pride - the dignified self-respect that results from our unique contributions toward a cohesive culture that seeks to benefit the whole.

I don’t celebrate diversity. I celebrate the proud accomplishments of those whose contributions to society foster effective unity that guarantees liberties for all, without the multicolored confetti.

Am I Hater? A Bigot? After a week spent with my elderly dad (am I allowed to say “elderly”?), I’m wondering if, by the time I’m his age, San Francisco will be hosting a Unity Parade for those of us who stayed true to traditional principles and quietly modeled the norm.

It's not necessary on my account, but I do wonder what that flag would look like. I'll take pride in the fact that my father taught me how to sew if I happen to come up with an appropriate design. In the meantime, I'm content with an All-American Independence Day celebration every year.

We the Future

I don't always win contests, but when I do, I like to brag about it.

Especially this one. Because it's not really about me. It's about the future of our Republic.

In October of 2016, I received an email push from Constituting America, promoting their organization's We the Future Contest.

I had just finished polishing up my Our Nation's Foundations lessons that I present every other year in the public intermediate school where I serve as Library Specialist, so I had the pdf updated and saved. Considering the work that this fine organization does, I decided to go ahead and enter the Best Teacher Lesson Plan contest, in the hopes that my efforts would at least be seen by those who promote Constitutional studies. Then, I promptly forgot about it.

On February 1, 2017, I received another email from Constituting America, congratulating me on winning the contest! At the end of April, I received a large box of goodies.

On May 4, I received the promised monetary prize of $2,000!

The best reward is knowing that my efforts will be promoted much further than my Library. My hope is that many teachers, librarians, parents and church leaders will utilize the lesson plan that demonstrates Our Nation's Foundations by creating a giant graphic on a wall depicting the Bedrock of Natural Law that guarantees our Unalienable Rights, the layer honoring the Rule of Law by displaying the original 17 federal laws in our Constitution, the five Pillars of Principle: Limited Government, Individual Liberty, Personal Responsibility, National Security and Private Enterprise, supporting our 3 Separate but Equal Branches of Government: Executive Branch, Judicial Branch and Legislative Branch. 

Here is the pdf: Our Nation's Foundations 

Here is a video of my PowerPoint, for older students and adults: 

Constituting America was founded by actress Janine Turner and patriot Cathy Gillespie. The mission of Constituting America is to utilize new and innovative means to reach, educate and inform America's citizens and youth about the importance of the U.S. Constitution and the foundation it sets forth regarding our freedoms and rights.

This organization encourages patriots of all ages to enter their contests to learn and promote Constitutional education by offering impressive prizes for the winners. 

While still in her teens, Janine's daughter, Juliette wrote and published two excellent resources for students: Our Constitution Rocks! and Our Presidents Rock! She continues to work with Constituting America to promote patriotism. 

As a Librarian, I encourage everyone to "check it out!" You may be their next winner. 

James Madison - Patriot

As a young man, James Madison started a literary and debate club before the Revolutionary War, researching and discussing political systems and current events.  After serving in the Continental Congress, he wrote our nation’s Constitution, committing his life to a country built on the strong foundation of liberty.

James Madison was a Patriot.

Why would anyone want to be a Patriot? Patriot: a person who vigorously supports his or her country and is prepared to defend it against enemies or detractors.

Why would we want to defend our country? Because it’s the only country specifically designed to defend our natural rights. Our founders established a form of government whose purpose is to protect our liberty.

What’s so great about Liberty? Liberty is the idea that you get to control your own life, as long as you’re not harming others. Most other nations throughout history have been designed to control their citizens, not the other way around.

The U.S.A. was founded to be ruled by We the People. It’s our job to make sure the government protects the Constitution that protects our liberty.

We the People need to know enough about the Constitution to make sure our elected representatives are doing their jobs properly.

So, if We the People don’t do our job, then those we elect forget that their job is to protect our rights, and they may start thinking of themselves as our rulers instead of our public servants.

Citizens who are committed to protecting our nation and Constitution are Patriots.

Are you a Patriot? Do you love Liberty? Do you want to protect it for future generations?

If so, memorize this oath and think about what that looks like in your own life.

“I hereby declare that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America.”

Congratulations! You’re on the way to becoming a Young Madison!

James Madison - Believer

James Madison studied theology under Princeton University President John Witherspoon, whose teaching combined religious doctrine and the power of human reason.

Young Madison committed himself to religious liberty and was skilled at working with others of differing points of view.

His faith helped define his patriotism. Freedom to express one’s conscience, under the sovereign hand of God, was paramount to him.

Our Constitutional Republic was founded on “Natural Law”, defined as “laws of the Creator.”  This, primarily, prevents our representatives from limiting our unalienable rights, because they must answer to a Higher Power who bestows the true scope of our liberties.

Without an acknowledgment of and subordination to a Creator, these protections are dependent upon the benevolence of our would-be rulers. This was considered too risky for James Madison- architect of our Constitution.

Does this mean that atheists and agnostics can’t be true Patriots? No! But they must acknowledge that our system of government is founded on the existence and authority of a Creator, because this is the concept that limits the otherwise unbridled rule by our elected officials.

Our founders determined that our system of government would be best administered by those who had a commitment to Judeo-Christian principles. They realized that a Biblical morality provided the best rule for individuals who would be participating in our new Republic.  

The American justice system is based on Mosaic Law and the organization of its administration.

The vast majority of colonists were Christians or deists, very familiar with Biblical teaching, helping the new citizens understand and approve our Constitution.

Imagine if our founders lived in an age of memes, logos and graphics, like we do today. What pictures would they create to demonstrate to citizens and elected representatives how the “laws of the Creator” are the foundation for our nation?

Patriot Challenge: Talk about this with your family and friends, and create appropriate graphics to convey this information.

James Madison - Scholar

Young James Madison suffered many challenges to his health, but this did not prevent him from applying himself to vigorous academics.

He was well-aware that “Knowledge will forever govern ignorance; and a people who mean to be their own governors must arm themselves with the power which knowledge gives.”

You don’t know how the things you learn today will enable you to be a leader in the future. Every bit of knowledge you obtain will help you in some way.

Besides making academic goals and pursuing them with all diligence, I recommend that you follow young Madison’s example by reading as many books as you can. After devouring his father’s private library by the time he was a teenager, his father sent him off to Princeton to expand his knowledge.

Here’s your next Patriot Challenge:

Make it a habit to read one novel or biography and one non-fiction book at the same time, at all times. Why a biography? Because the lives of real people are even more fascinating that characters from a novel! Section 921 in any Library are my favorite bookshelves! Not even the best authors can make that stuff up!

Patriot Challenge: Keep a reading journal and take notes on passages that are interesting to you. You’ll be pleasantly surprised and fascinated by the many unexpected connections you’ll find! Discuss those interesting ideas with a friend or family member to help clarify your own opinions.

You too will discover, like young Madison, that knowledge gives you power. The more knowledge you gain, the power you will have to govern yourself. Self-governance is the key to Liberty! It also gives you the power to help control situations and lead others.

James Madison - Protector

As a young man, James Madison was named Commander in the Orange County militia and elected to the Orange County, Virginia Committee of Safety. These groups were in charge of preparing the residents for defense and imminent offense against the British as talk of colonial independence grew louder.

Madison’s own fragile health prevented him from fully participating in militia exercises, but his astute and thoughtful planning was a welcome contribution, proving that no matter what limitations may plague us, there are always opportunities to use our talents and skills.

Patriot Challenge: make a list of your strengths and weaknesses. Jot down present and future ways you could be using your gifts and talents in spite of your limitations. Remember- humility is a strength! James Madison was always humble, allowing others to elevate him to positions of authority as they recognized his skills. Are there ways you can work to overcome your physical, mental or emotional weaknesses? Make a personal improvement plan.

Protecting our nation was a priority throughout Madison’s life. He was instrumental in writing the Bill of Rights, as well as the rest of our Constitution, protecting the liberties of United States’ citizens.

During his term as President, Madison waged the War of 1812, protecting our nation from British efforts to stifle our trade overseas and kidnap our American sailors.

A Patriot is a Protector. How do you contribute to the safety and liberty of your family and community?

James Madison - Writer

James Madison knew how to take up arms to fight any enemy of his family, community, and country.

But, more often, he used the power of the pen to persuade others of the duties and privileges of citizenship.

Effectively communicating valuable principles and policies can prevent many battles!

Patriot Challenge: Identify your core principles and those of your family. What is worth protecting and promoting? Are there principles that should be shared by all citizens to help make our country strong? Make a list.

With whom can you communicate these ideas and commitments? How would you share them with your peers?

Do your social media interactions clearly reflect your principles?

Are you communicating your principles to family members and other adults in your life in a respectful way?

Do you know that, as a citizen, your opinions and concerns matter to your local, state and national representatives?

Are they representing your principles? That’s their job! How will they know, if you don’t tell them?

Communicate your opinions respectfully and regularly to those who have the job of representing you as they fulfill their oath to protect the Constitution.

After clarifying your principles regarding government, write a letter or email to your local, state and national representatives.

If you don’t already know who your representatives are, find them here: Find Your Elected Officials

What Trumpism Has Wrought

March 9, 2017 was a banner day for those who have developed binary brain syndrome.

Republican Speaker Paul Ryan, in a pathetic display to sell RINOcare (repeal in name only) to his colleagues, actually said, “This is the closest we will ever get to repealing and replacing Obamacare. It really comes down to a binary choice.”

Ryan said the same thing last July, falsely reducing voters’ options to either Trump or Hillary.

On social media, melodrama is spreading from overwrought responses to political pundits who dare to hold Conservative icon Ted Cruz accountable to his promises. Some Cruz devotees have forgotten that the human brain can entertain the concept of and. Real life is not an either/or proposition. One can support Senator Cruz and hold him accountable to Conservative principles. There are a few patriots left who remember that vigilance is the price of liberty.

There were other options besides voting for Trump or Hillary. The real problem started long before those two degenerates became the nominees. It began when citizens accepted the false premise that we must continually choose between bad or worse. The only result we get from falling for this deception is further removed from Constitutional principles.

This is the method Progressives use to replace the rule of law with the rule of man. The plan is working perfectly.

How many times were we told that Trump would be less destructive than Hillary? Millions of Republicans bought into the false dichotomy and willingly opted for a little destruction. In order to justify the betrayal of nearly every Conservative principle, many “Republicans” and “Conservatives” overcompensated by becoming fanatical apologists for their new leader. They branded anyone who dare criticize Trump as traitors who obviously support Hillary.

Conservatism was turned on its head and distorted to necessitate blind devotion to Trump. This skewed philosophy now extends to President Trump’s policies. Republicans and Conservatives are condemned for using their own discernment or the rule of law to judge the President’s actions. We are ordered to embrace them, like loyal Trumpists.

It’s official - many on the Right have willingly relinquished their human brain functions and accepted the limitations of binary compromise. Conservatism, Republicanism and Constitutionalism have been superseded by Trumpism. This, my friends, is why trading patriotism for nationalism historically leads to fascism.

Those on the Left are busy entertaining the many ways they can sabotage our Republic.

We’ve just made their job that much easier.

The Test

I spent Friday morning covering or removing all the informational displays I have posted in and around my school library. Due to state and district testing regulations, all “instructional materials” must be hidden from sight during the administration of the yearly mandated assessments. On years when I display a giant graphic of a Federal Building representing our Constitutional Republic, this becomes quite a challenging chore.

Because, heaven forbid, we teach children to use the tools around them to help them be successful while they are being tested. As if after their first glance at these eye-catching, creative, laminated, informational displays, our students still notice their existence. Question from a student in March: “Mrs. Branstiter, where are the Fiction books?” My answer: “Oh, you’re looking for Fiction? If I were you, I’d start in the area of the Library marked with half a dozen ‘Fiction’ signs. But that’s just me.”

My afternoon was spent at a district Library Specialist meeting for much-needed practical tips and commiseration among fellow paraprofessionals trying to preserve our jobs by dancing as fast as we can to keep our jobs relevant. (In some cases, this means actual dancing, like hosting an after-school Tap Club).

Besides wrestling with topics like technology challenges and student misbehavior and celebrating small large and small victories on various campuses whose administration and teaching staff value our contributions, we received a legislative alert. This handout reads: “President Trump has effectively proposed eliminating all federal library funding…” Over $200 million taxpayer dollars has been funding public municipal and school library technology and “innovative” reading programs for years, without question, as part of line-item budgeting.

Of course, being one of the largest states, Texas has received a vast majority of these grants and appropriations, including federal funds for online research resources, grants to libraries, interlibrary loan programs, summer reading programs, technology assistance and continuing education for library staff. This information included a link to a video displaying all the communities in my state that benefits from federal largesse. Dots on the map kept popping up until the state was nearly covered. I’m sure residents of Nebraska, with a total population of around 2 million, feel gratified to know that their tax dollars are helping to fund library services for over 28 million Texans.

Do I think that public and school libraries are important? I sure do. Do I believe that literacy programs are vital for an educated citizenry? You bet. Do I want to keep my job? Yep.

It would be very easy for me to follow the suggestions on this handout and contact my representatives to implore the continuation of federal funding to my state, local and school libraries. And, for a brief moment, I considered spreading the word to my fellow educators and participating in a campaign to Save Our Libraries!

Then, I remembered that document I have to cover up in my own school library before testing: the Constitution of the United States. A quick study of the seven Articles within this document reveals a glaring absence of the directive to use federal funds for state libraries. In fact, the tenth Amendment is very simple and concise on this issue: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.”

Does my state value libraries? I’m proud to say that most of Texas cities and municipalities have made consistent efforts to promote and support local libraries. As a matter of fact, a spouse of one of our school district’s Library Specialists was just chosen as President-Elect of the Texas State Library Archives and Commission agency.

In the past decade, Texas public school district libraries have not received the same enthusiastic efforts, however. I have found that a large part of my job is to advocate for my own programs and position.

So, instead of campaigning for the continuation of federal funding for Texas state and public school libraries, I will be in more frequent contact with the TSLAC, advocating for continued support of library services within my state. Because state libraries are not a federal issue under our Constitution.

And even though our Founding documents will be hidden from view during state tests, I’ll continue to teach them to my students and do my best to remember them when I’m tempted to forsake the rule of law for reasons of expediency.

Imagining My Grandmother

I received a packet of photos from my father today. He’s 86 and wants to make sure his daughters get the mementos we’ve requested before he leaves this earth.

This photo is of my paternal grandmother, born at the turn of the last century near Sebastopol, California, apparently taken while she was married to her first husband, a French-American named Barbier.

It looks like this spunky young woman, born Mabel Amanda Feige, could be rolling a cigarette after dance or drama class. Her hair is bobbed except for one long spiral curl draped over her shoulder. She and her sister, Josephine, were actually taking turns dressing up in their brother's Navy uniform.

Before long, she’ll lose her husband in the influenza epidemic of 1914, finding herself a widow with a young child, named after his father, Harry.

This is before women have won the right to vote, but I doubt if this ever stopped her from expressing her opinions, political and otherwise. She’s a rebellious Catholic, eventually meeting a small man from San Francisco who will marry her, give her another son (my father) and drive her crazy because he seems to love the city more than his family.

My grandfather, Albert Engelhart, survived the 1906 San Francisco earthquake at age 10. He took advantage of numerous legally questionable opportunities to make a lot of money, as the City by the Bay was being rebuilt. When crime in the burgeoning city became a troubling issue, my grandmother wanted to move south, to the suburbs, but he refused. They divorced, remarried and divorced again - scandalous! She bought some land in Redwood City and lived with her boys in an unwired, unplumbed garage for the next 12 years, building her adjacent stucco home herself, with the sporadic and unreliable help of a male cousin. I remember marveling at the hand-carved beams and doors in the ceiling of her modest Mission-style home.

Mabel remarried and divorced my grandfather and eventually married Milton Stuart, a man my father revered as his stepfather, who tragically died of cancer a year after I was born. My grandmother suffered debilitating strokes by the time I was eight years old and was in and out of nursing homes until her death when I was 16. She cried when she realized she would never teach me how to knit.

Now that I have this photo, I prefer to imagine her as a bit of a rebel. Mabel Amanda was a woman who didn’t need the label of “Feminist” to express her individuality. Both of her given names mean “lovable”, but I have a feeling that she was loved on her own terms.

Remember that SCOTUS Decision on School Prayer?

Many Americans have joined the outcry to “bring prayer back to schools!” Well-meaning, morally upstanding patriots lament the day that government “kicked God out of our schools” on July 25, 1962, as a result of the contentious Supreme Court ruling on Engel vs. Vitale. This 8-1 decision determined that school-sponsored prayer violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, which states that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.”

Justice Hugo Black, describing the majority reasoning, interpreted the Establishment Clause as a means to prevent government interference in religion, extending this to include non-denominational prayer. Justice William Douglas, in his concurring opinion, expanded this restriction to forbid government financial aid to religious schools. This ruling, while initiated by a New York state disagreement, resulted in a nation-wide ban on school-sponsored prayer in public schools and a prohibition on tax funds for religious schools or school-sponsored activities in public schools.

Explaining his sole dissent, Justice Potter Stewart argued that the Establishment Clause only prohibited a state-sponsored church. He reasoned that, in accordance with the traditional interpretation of the First Amendment, a non-denominational prayer offered by school staff did not “establish religion”.

Interestingly, the majority opinion went so far as to add the observation that government involvement in religious affairs often resulted in persecutions and wars.

Now, 55 years later, there is a flap regarding faith in a Frisco, Texas school. About seven years ago, the administration of Liberty High School designated a classroom for Muslim students to use for 30 minutes to comply with their religious requirement to pray five times a day. According to Principal Scott Warstler, this solution was offered to reduce the number of Muslim students who were being dismissed from school in the middle of each afternoon to be transported to their home or mosque for their corporate prayer time. The room serves as a regular classroom during the rest of the day. Students of all faiths may use the room for prayer during the same designated period, although Principle Warstler admitted that it is not typically used for prayer by students who are not Muslim.

How does this arrangement conform to the Engel vs. Vitale Supreme Court ruling in strict effect since 1962? School property, funded by taxpayers, is being used primarily to accommodate the specific faith requirements of one religion. The school district argues that the prayers are led by the students themselves and the room is open to all faiths during that prescribed prayer time, thus remaining in compliance with the law.

The Frisco high school campus is not the first to offer accommodations to the Islamic faith. Schools in Tucson, Arizona, Riverdale, Maryland, and San Diego, California have all made accommodations for Muslim students for prayer.

Due to the high population of Muslims in Dearborn, Michigan, Muslim students attending public school are allowed prayer accommodations and early release from classes on Fridays.

So, faithful Americans can rest easy- prayer has been returned to public schools!

Parents may want to ask their own children how often they take advantage of this opportunity.

An Abomination of Desolation

Biblical prophecy foretells of an event in which a religious usurper and his followers “shall profane the sanctuary, even the fortress, and shall take away the continual burnt-offering, and they shall set up the abomination that maketh desolate.”— Daniel 11:31 (ASV)

This verse may very well pertain to something yet to come, but I would argue that an abomination that causes desolation occurred on March 8, 2017, outside the Cathedral of Tucuman, Argentina.

An idolatrous celebration of radical feminism culminated in a disgusting pantomime of abortionists murdering the infant Jesus by ripping the Messiah from the womb of his mother, Mary, as she proudly thrust her defiant fist in the air.

This is blasphemy of the highest order. These women are not protesting the Catholic doctrine or Christian tradition or even common decency. They are rallying for their own oppression.

Besides denying the life-giving, honorable, beautiful, irreplaceable purpose bestowed upon women from the beginning of time, these protestors are contradicting the very facts of history since the incarnation.

Before the coming of Yeshua, everyday life was a dismal, oppressed existence for females, even in the most progressive cultures of the time. According to Probe Ministries, “In ancient Greece, a respectable woman was not allowed to leave the house unless she was accompanied by a trustworthy male escort. A wife was not permitted to eat or interact with male guests in her husband’s home; she had to retire to her woman’s quarters. Men kept their wives under lock and key, and women had the social status of a slave. Girls were not allowed to go to school, and when they grew up they were not allowed to speak in public. Women were considered inferior to men.”

In fact, if Mary had not opted to give birth to her unplanned child, women all over the world might be suffering Sharia Law that females experience in Muslim countries today. According to Dr. Alvin Schmidt, in his book, How Christianity Changed the World, “Christianity is the best thing that ever happened to women.”

Muslim rule “is the polar opposite of what the New Testament says regarding a man’s relationship with his wife. Paul told the Christians in Ephesus, ‘Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her.’ And he added, ‘He who loves his wife loves himself.’"{3}

Jesus acknowledged and engaged women in equal conversation about lofty ideas! He elevated Mary of Magdalene and Martha to discipleship. Women are portrayed in vital roles in history regarding both the birth and death of the Savior of the world. Jesus displayed mercy toward a woman who would be stoned in the Middle East for her crime of adultery today.

The Apostle Paul, writing epistles in the society in which he lived and ministered, admonished church leaders and husbands to treat women with respect at all times, acknowledging that women are also made in God’s image. Paul even went so far as to invite women to pray aloud during worship services! The Apostle Peter taught the churches that women are more than objects of desire and beauty, or baby factories, instructing the females of the flock that their true adornment should be found in a beautiful moral character of service.

 
Current radical feminism that blasphemes the incarnation of our true liberator is a wanton return to female oppression and desolation of spirit. This should be an abomination to everyone, as revealed by this revolting display of ignorance and sacrilege. 

All Other Ground is Sinking Sand

I've been reprimanded, chastised and censored for my #NeverTrump stand.

I will not be moved.

While other Republicans and Conservatives are tripping over one another to proclaim their devotion to President Trump, I'm just stubbornly standing firm on this rapidly eroding rock.

They're perfectly happy to compromise every Republican principle to accept Trumpism, even if it means hoisting their picks and axes to chip away at Conservative values. Constitutional acumen? Not necessary. Statesmanship? Who needs it? Moral standards? Whack! Autocratic tendencies? We're all in!

I've been told that I'm too pessimistic. "Give Trump a chance! Stop protesting Trump and his voters," they admonish. I know I'm in the minority now. According to foxnews.com, "Conservatives appear fully behind new Republican President Trump, based on a straw poll Saturday at the annual CPAC summit in which attendees gave him an 86 percent approval rating and overwhelming agreed that he was 'realigning' the movement."

You see, this is why I won't stop complaining. This is what I warned about during the entire election campaign. By entertaining the thought of Donald Trump representing Republicans or Conservatives, we've abandoned the very definitions of these titles. By electing him, we've admitted that they didn't mean much to us anyway.

To those who condemn me for pointing out that they have sold out to a con-man, rest assured that I don't spend all my time protesting. You may be content letting Trump redefine the Right, but I never will. There will be a remnant of us who remember and retain what it means to stay true to our nation's foundations. That's why I teach Constitutional principles in the public school. Someone needs to let the next generation know how we lost our Republic and why it's vital to get it back again to protect our unalienable rights under the Rule of Law instead of the cult of personality.

Don't get me wrong- I rejoice when Trump listens to his Mike Pence and accidentally does something to protect the Constitution. But I won't forget what we've sacrificed for the "win". In four to eight years, we'll realize that the noble principles on which we once stood have been thoroughly demolished and we can never again claim the high or solid ground.

I'm just afraid that, by then, Trumpism will have convinced Republicans that wallowing in quicksand is terrific.

Boehner Bursts the Bubble

On the same day that President Trump made another vow to repeal and replace Obamacare in his rambling and self-congratulatory speech at CPAC in Maryland, former Speaker John Boehner was in Orlando, Florida, casually refuting that promise at a conference hosted by the Healthcare Information and Management Systems Society.

The ease with which Boehner, a smoker who now serves on the board of tobacco giant Reynolds American, declared that "They're basically going to fix the flaws and put a more conservative box around it," betrayed the freedom of a man no longer required to play his part in the political theater of Washington, D.C.

Exposing the drawbacks of the independent thinking of Republicans, he admitted, "In the 25 years that I served in the United States Congress, Republican never, ever one time agreed on what a healthcare proposal should look like. Not once." Conservatives would like to imagine that dedication to free market principles kept them from imposing federal solutions on a manufactured crisis.

With Trump at the helm, who prides himself on claiming the role of "fixer", and advised by Steve Bannon, who advocates Economic Nationalism, it's easy to accept the brutal honesty coming from Boehner. Maybe Republicans won't admit it as readily as Progressives, but they must relish the opportunity to leverage this crisis to their benefit.

Does Bannon imagine a federally managed healthcare plan as part of the nationalist investments he promotes? 

From independent.co.uk:
"Unlike Republicans for the past thirty years, Mr. Bannon seems keen on public infrastructure spending. Indeed, he sounds positively Keynesian in his ambitions.
'I'm the guy pushing a trillion dollar infrastructure plan,' he says. 'With negative interest rates throughout the world, it's the greatest opportunity to rebuild everything. Shipyards, ironworks, get them all jacked up. We're just going to throw it up against the wall and see if it sticks.'"

Instead of "making a conservative argument for limited government, Bannon joins in the attack against the social democratic content of the New Deal and goes beyond it to push for a more executive-centered state. Here, the crusade of run-of-the-mill conservatives to roll back government and welfare state merges with the authoritarian nationalist agenda of ideologues like Bannon."  - peoplesworld.org

While President Trump continues to lead his followers in chants, vowing to "Repeal and Replace!" he knows they'll gladly support him if he decides to use his big brain to fix it. Controlling a sixth of the economy is too tempting to relinquish, for the oligarchs of either party.

Character Matters

This morning, we all woke up to the news about Michael Flynn resigning from his position as President Trump’s National Security Adviser. The formal excuse for his ouster was that he lied to cover up his totally legal actions. What?

Because, apparently, Trump holds people in his administration to a high moral standard.

The questions regarding the timeline of his discussions with Russian officials about U.S. sanctions against them just became too uncomfortable for the Trump administration to bear.

Before his soon-to-be boss was inaugurated, Flynn called a Russian ambassador on the day Obama levied punishment for overblown charges of meddling in our election affairs. Even if that’s considered fine and dandy in transition etiquette, under whose directive did his phone call occur? And, why did Trump congratulate Putin in a tweet the next day for his mild reaction to the sanctions? But that’s none of my business.

This story actually just reinforced my thoughts resulting from a Facebook exchange I experienced over the weekend. I had posted my review of the movie 42 in a conservative Constitutionalist group. The administrator of the group replied, “WTH does this have to do with the Constitution or Conservativism?”

I replied with a one-word alliteration: “Character.”

He continued to lecture me on the lengthy and complex group rules into which he had invested much time and ego, requiring all members to make only posts and comments on and about his narrow list of approved subjects, among other specified parameters of discussion.

My first thought was, “Either he didn’t read my article, breaking his own rules by posting uninformed judgments, or he doesn’t consider the subject of morality to be pertinent to conservative Constitutionalism. Frightening.

In public reply, he instructed me to read the group rules and he would be “glad” to answer any questions I might have. My question was, “Why do you need me to reread the rules?” as he had not cited any violations.

While awaiting his reply, I continued the discussion about my original post, including a link to a comprehensive list of quotes by our nation’s founders regarding the high standard of character necessary to a successful Republic. This was ignored.

The administrator eventually replied to my policy question by citing his paragraph decreeing that all posts must pertain to either the Constitution, Conservatism, history, or the founders, and the mandate to invite discussion. In reply, I commented: “Done and done.” He “liked” that response.

I guess I should have added one more “done” because, by then, I was most sincerely done with a group whose administrator has such a hard time considering the topic of character as an essential ingredient to Conservatism.

Don't Like the View? Move the Window.

Ideologues resist compromise. It's not because they are more stubborn than other people. They just understand that every concession to the opposition is a blow to the bedrock of principles.

Pragmatists readily compromise, especially those active in the politics of the Left. They have perfected the strategy of asking for a pony and settling for a kitten when it was the cat they wanted all along- for now. 

If you're not familiar with the Overton Window, let me enlighten you. It is a theory developed by Joseph Overton, a former vice president of the Mackinac Center for Public Policy. It describes the "window" of political options presented for debate. Skillfully and consistently, Progressives have been moving the window of discourse rapidly leftward. By proposing Marxist policies and accepting one more compromise toward socialism at a time, the Constitution becomes the big loser.

The pragmatists on the Right, limiting themselves to the narrow scope of the Overton Window, pretend they are logging wins by conceding to the least egregious demands.

Republican voters took a cue from our pragmatic Congress when they enthusiastically endorsed a "yuge" compromise to the GOP. They failed to take advantage of the remarkable opportunity, in the aftermath of the Obama administration debacle, to elect a true Conservative Constitutionalist. Instead, the electorate compromised fidelity to the Constitution and high moral character at every turn of the campaign to elect a president who believes he can rule by fiat from his Twitter account.

This has resulted not only in the discomfort of Republican ideologues but a revolt by the radical leftists. Don't be surprised when someone representing the values of Socialist Bernie Sanders is elected in 2020. If the Right can endorse an egotistical nationalist to satisfy his populist following, Progressives will push for nothing less than their ultimate goal.

Ideologues on the Right understand that once we compromised each and every principle of Republicanism, we literally gave up our "high ground" forever.

Because once you've demolished the bedrock of your values, you have nothing left to stand on when the enemy rushes in to plant his flag on your hill. Then your view from your cell window looks rather bleak.

Conservative ideologues must make every effort to rebuild the foundations of our Republic. How do we reestablish the bedrock of our nation? By teaching the next generation what they are at risk of losing: nothing less than the unalienable rights that are protected only under a Constitutional Republic. Let's teach them to rebuild our nation with our window to the world firmly framed in the Right Wing of our home, where the pleasant, balanced view of our rights and responsibilities in a free society are clearly beheld by us and our posterity.

The Donald's Dirigisme

On January 7, The Hill reported:

“During a White House meeting, Rockwall County, Texas, Sheriff Harold Eavenson told the president about a lawmaker who was offering asset forfeiture legislation he believes would aid Mexican drug cartels. 

“Who is the state senator? Do you want to give his name? We'll destroy his career," Trump offered. 

It turned out to be the Conservative and female Texas district Senator in Fort Worth, Konni Burton. She responded to the threat:  She “has filed a bill eliminating civil asset forfeiture, and has issued a statement defending her push.

‘Property rights are one of the foundational rights in any free society and the taking of property by government is no small matter’, Burton said, adding, ‘I will not be discouraged or deterred. The moment for reform of our system of asset forfeiture has arrived.’

The Senator also took a shot at the the man who touched off the controversy–saying “I have never met with Sheriff Eavenson, nor even heard of him before yesterday.’”

When the President learned that Nordstrom’s department store had decided to pull his daughter’s fashion line from their stores, he angrily tweeted: “My daughter Ivanka has been treated so unfairly by @Nordstrom. She is a great person – always pushing me to do the right thing! Terrible.”

The next day, Trump’s top advisor, Kellyanne Conway doubled down by publicly plugging Ivanka’s products. After an immediate uproar, Press Secretary Sean Spicer announced that Conway had been “counseled” concerning the mistake.

Did President Trump receive counseling as well? Curious minds want to know.

Were these mere faux-pas by inexperienced politicians who don’t see a problem with picking winners and losers in the private sector?

Do representatives of this administration need verbal babysitters? If our elected officials and their representatives don’t know the difference between running reactionary defense maneuvers and promoting political digisme (economic planning and control by the state), we’re in for a wild ride.

Are these merely ignorant missteps, or is Trump’s administration clearly revealing its true nature? After all, wasn’t his campaign, directed by Kellyanne Conway, actually running on the “refreshing” premise that Trump was “just saying what was in his head"?

Why should we interpret his words differently, now that he’s elected? Has he stopped telling us what he really thinks? Or, is he telling us exactly what he really believes?

Neither conclusion is reassuring. 

Iron Sharpens Iron

It used to be popular to “poke” someone on Facebook. It was merely a way to get someone’s attention. Lately, much “poking” has occurred over political debate. It acts more like a provocation.

Oh, I know I’m stubborn. But, I figure if you’ve got an opinion, you should hold it so firmly that you can confidently promote it by provoking others to a healthy debate.

But, I’ve learned I’m a bit odd. I can champion my opinions and never get offended by someone else’s opposing opinion. In fact, I seek them out, because….

“As iron sharpens iron, so one person sharpens another.” Proverbs 27:17

As I share my firmly held opinions and read the responses that too often devolve into personal attacks because I don’t share their firmly held opinions, I am clarifying my principles and conclusions. (I don’t quibble on facts!)

Usually, the “sharpening” results in stronger foundations and more precise descriptions of my principles and conclusions.

Opposing responses force me to ask myself, “How did I come to this conclusion?” So, I revisit the facts (sometimes there is additional information I need to consider) and re-examine my principles (Creationist- check. Conservative- check. Constitutionalist- check) to review my opinions.

While I rarely change my opinions (because I do my homework on facts and have very basic principles), this process helps me during a debate, because I’m forced to be more precise in my arguments, and am able to present them from the various perspectives I have considered. Granted, sometimes my sarcasm can do more harm than good- I need to work on that.

The commentary associated with Proverbs 27:17 admonishes believers to conduct conversations with the purpose of edification- making each other wiser for participating. Conversing only with those with whom you agree will never provoke deeper thought, and may do harm by reinforcing false assumptions. Challenging the positions of others provides opportunities to sharpen the mind and vocabulary by defending strongly held conclusions.

This can be done without giving offense as long as the discussion does not devolve into presumptions or personal attacks. Those who become offended and resort to name-calling are not as confident in their opinions as those who can argue without taking offense, and therefore do not reap the benefits of becoming sharpened in the process.

Sadly, healthy debate is not encouraged in school anymore. In fact, especially in establishments of “higher education”, it is discouraged. Dogma and politically correct constructs are indoctrinated. This eliminates the opportunities to challenge incorrect facts or weak principles and fosters the idea that opinions are inviolate- that they are somehow part of one’s person that should never be threatened.

Vigorous debate and pointed arguments are healthy if they are done with the motive of sharpening our tools of debate without actually drawing blood.