Okay, you are good at math. Try this one. If the Boehner bill becomes law it promises to raise the debt ceiling $900 billion (.9 trillion). If the current debt ceiling is $14.3 T, what will be the new debt ceiling? Answer: $16.3T. That is because of automatic baselining. Each year the fed gov't assumes that the next year's budget will grow by some percentage. It is now around 10% per year. So if you do that for 10 years, you accumulate $1.1T of extra spending needed automatically. 14.3T+.9T+1.1T=16.3T. Welcome to government math. So Boehner's $915 billion in accumulated 10 year spending is nicely counteracted by the increase of baseline. Looks like Washington has snookered us again. We need to elect someone who institutes Zero Baseline Budgeting in 2012.
A chicken has the ability to survive on most any seeds or grains for a diet. For that reason the traditional farming of chickens simply consists of letting them out of the chicken house to roam the farmstead and clean up spilled grain and eat weeds and seeds. But if inclement weather keeps the chicken couped, the farmer can scoop up the grain in the driveway of the granary or barn, dirt, gravel and all and toss it to the chickens. They will pick it clean. For that reason, when something is of little value or meager, the expression, "chicken feed" is used to describe it. We are going to get chicken feed budget cuts from Washington. When the government runs an annual $1.6T budget deficit and the best deal the House can get is about $90 billion in annual cuts, it will be almost imperceptible-- 2% of the entire budget. Chicken feed.
A soldier would just say "nuts", and tell the Democrats "I ain't voting for anything." Retreat, regroup, launch a later offensive. Indeed it might seem better to simply let Obluffer go on spending and ruining our credit rating since we are so powerless to stop the spending. But of course that might damage our nation's economy for years to come with high interest rates and runaway entitlements. This truly is a time of a silent national crisis.
More worrisome than the debt however is what Obluster told La Raza recently. Beck had this on his website glennbeck.com. He said he was very tempted to take matters into his own hands, i.e., operate dictatorially. La Raza, the socialist outfit of Mexican Nationalists who want USA to hand over everything from Texas and Colorado to California over to Mexico, wildly cheered and applauded the Prez.
You know I really don't fear Obama and his dictatorship daydreams so much. Who I fear is the real dictator who is serious about taking over this country and uses Obama's precedents of taking over auto companies and controlling banks. Of using the peronistas--those who pay no taxes--to riot in the streets. Of his methods of hooking so many people on government assistance, medicine, pensions, and jobs, that they look to the government for all that matters. Of his use of the EPA and agencies to hyper-regulate and make businessmen criminals for trying to do business. And I fear those who will stand and applaud and cheer wildly as this takes place.
Thursday, July 28, 2011
Saturday, July 2, 2011
Painting your house
I'm going to send a shortened version of this to the newspaper for an editorial.
Some folks have told me that EPA overreach will not be an issue in the next election. I disagree and though it won't be the main thrust, I think it should be highlighted as an example of the dictatorial bureaucracy that is being set up to snuff dissent in the future.
So you want to paint your old house? Not your residence but perhaps your rental house, your cabin by the lake or your business is what you have in mind. Well, you can't unless it is post 1978 in construction and won't have children more than 6 hours per week. For example, a day care or school obviously falls in this category. Maybe your little shop on mainstreet can argue its way clear of this regulation. It takes a pro who has Lead-Safe Certification. He will have correct equipment (Hazmat suit, disposable headgear and shoe covers, and P100 respirator), training (all day EPA course), license, testing equipment, and know-how to set up containment and abatement procedures.
This "act" went into effect over a year ago, but until recently was not enforced and no fines were given. But since the first of the year, draconian fines have been handed out to many contractors and individuals. What? You say you must have missed the Congressional vote on this new law? No, you didn't. There was no vote. It is simply done by executive fiat--EPA wrote regulations that required Lead-Safe. Homeowners can still paint their primary residence. Cleverly the bureaucrats have also exempted work done by charities where volunteers do work and receive no remuneration. Think about the tornados in Tuscaloosa or Joplin. If Lead Safe practices were required, the costs would be astronomical and vols could never do any relief work. Politically, that would be hard to defend. But what about folks like the Laborers For Christ who built much of a recent church project for my church? They ask for minimum wages in order to buy accident insurance for the volunteers who otherwise go to great personal expense to help with these projects. No, they have to get certified and follow EPA rules. They are paid. Bottom line: if you are an evil businessman, you have to follow the rules.
Suppose you simply disregard the Lead-Safe rules and get caught painting your wife's day care in your pre-1978 home (doesn't matter if the day care is in the new addition. It depends on when property was first built.) ? Fines are levied up to $32,500 PER JOB and $3750 PER DAY out of compliance. The days when dad handed his son a paintbrush and taught him to paint are fading. But say you just shrug and hire a pro? Costs are headed up dramatically to reflect the added procedures. And this doesn't affect painters only. It affects ANYONE who disturbs more than 6 square feet of lead painted surface doing a job. (2 s.f. if a HUD project) This applies especially to window installers who remove trim boards in order to install a new window. I am not certain about this but the EPA class instructor seemed to indicate that window jobs are covered no matter how small the square footage. It also pertains to heat and air, plumbing, carpenters, electricians and anyone doing construction. Weirdest of all is roofers. How, you might wonder, would a roofer disturb lead paint? If he puts on drip edge, he might flake off paint and then the entire facia board is counted as 'disturbed'. The ground under eves must be draped with plastic or tarps out 20 feet from the house--and cannot be reused. (Plus vertical drapes if there is wind. Is there ever 'no wind' in Oklahoma?) I asked the instructor what happens when there are shrubs around the house? He noted that those have to be draped well enough to be sealed. Don't think your roofer will do this for free. Once repairs are made, the certified Lead Safe technician must keep a log of the entire project including proof of cleaning (pictures) and cannot clear more than 40 s.f. of surface with an appliance before discarding.
As a conscientious landlord, I've acquired the training ($275 class) and license ($300). Lead poisoning is a bad hazard. But I disagree with EPA in many ways. Their pamphlet, which I am to distribute to all renters, "The Truth About Lead Paint Poisoning" says, "Once poisoned, it's for life and can never be reversed." That's a baldfaced lie. Lead Chelation Therapy has been used by physicians for years to cleanse people of lead. I have a friend who got a dire, near-death case of lead poisoning 30 years ago. And after chelation, is doing quite well, arguing spiritedly with me at nearly age 80. So I asked the EPA communications director for USA Southwest Region about that statement. He vacillated with what to say and told me that if I looked at other EPA literature, they state, "the effects of lead poisoning can never be reversed." Which is to say that the psychological trauma will always be remembered even after chelation. I would say that their pamphlet is a scare tactic. Now think, if lead poisoning was a common and pernicious hazard, why didn't the federal government declare that all old houses had to be tested and stripped accordingly? This would have provided the ultimate shovel ready stimulus plan, providing jobs in the moribund construction industry for several years! In fact the National Assoc. of Home Builders alleges exactly that logic in a lawsuit over EPA rules.
Most contractors who have been forced to comply saythe reg is just a means of shaking down the tradesmen for high fees. I asked, who enforces this? EPA answer: We are asking people to turn others in. This has caused much consternation and back-stabbing on the part of competitors in large metro areas. It will surely spred to small towns like ours. But when you hear about "neighbors turning in neighbors" does this remind you of Soviets or Nazis? I refuse to turn in other landlords or contractors. Heck, if they don't know how to do the Lead-Safe stuff, I would volunteer for that part of their job. Around here, we are all doing our best to just make a living! So talking to the contractors who took the course with me, I have discovered that the 3 main snitches are some neighbor or another contractor who doesn't like the guy who got the job, or some neighbor who doesn't like the construction next door, or disgruntled employees. It's a great way to enforce something important!
So what if a renter scrapes and paints without approval? He is held harmless but the landlord is held responsible if the rug rat ingests paint flakes. (But that is because we are evil businessmen) What I am going to do to combat the EPA is start a revolution among my renters. As I hand out my brochures, it will be accompanied with estimates of how much of their rents are due to the EPA, and if they want cheaper rents they need to vote the party of Big Government Control out. It won't change anything in OK, already a red state, but I would love to see this become a nationwide campaign.
If we don't get EPA under control, it will certainly illuminate a precedent for how some future socialist can gain control by using the bureaucracy. Because tyranny doesn't stop. No tyrant wakes up one morning and says, "Well, that's enough tyranny. I won't do that anymore." Already our Mayor Nicholson tells about how EPA is standing by with a regulation that would require every incorporated town in America to catch all storm water and then treat it before releasing it into rivers. He calls such regulation "crazy" as does Representative Frank Lucas. How could such a rule be done? Have they not seen our inability to control storm water like Katrina or Minot? Farmers will soon face fines for creating dust (and counties with dirt/gravel roads too). Insecticide spraying must not have more than 1 foot of drift. Good-bye crop dusting industry! Many of these regulations are scheduled for Jan. 2013.
All these EPA rules have one common thread. They all hit hard at small town America or rural America. Now think. Farmers vote 85% Republican. Small towns are lopsided bastions of non-Democrat voters. Looks like a political vendetta to me. What do we need? Someone to pull the plug on EPA would be a good start. Congressional hearings would be lesser but good for those who have less fortitude to stand up to bureaucrats run amuck. Americans need to be educated to what is happening to their freedom.
Some folks have told me that EPA overreach will not be an issue in the next election. I disagree and though it won't be the main thrust, I think it should be highlighted as an example of the dictatorial bureaucracy that is being set up to snuff dissent in the future.
So you want to paint your old house? Not your residence but perhaps your rental house, your cabin by the lake or your business is what you have in mind. Well, you can't unless it is post 1978 in construction and won't have children more than 6 hours per week. For example, a day care or school obviously falls in this category. Maybe your little shop on mainstreet can argue its way clear of this regulation. It takes a pro who has Lead-Safe Certification. He will have correct equipment (Hazmat suit, disposable headgear and shoe covers, and P100 respirator), training (all day EPA course), license, testing equipment, and know-how to set up containment and abatement procedures.
This "act" went into effect over a year ago, but until recently was not enforced and no fines were given. But since the first of the year, draconian fines have been handed out to many contractors and individuals. What? You say you must have missed the Congressional vote on this new law? No, you didn't. There was no vote. It is simply done by executive fiat--EPA wrote regulations that required Lead-Safe. Homeowners can still paint their primary residence. Cleverly the bureaucrats have also exempted work done by charities where volunteers do work and receive no remuneration. Think about the tornados in Tuscaloosa or Joplin. If Lead Safe practices were required, the costs would be astronomical and vols could never do any relief work. Politically, that would be hard to defend. But what about folks like the Laborers For Christ who built much of a recent church project for my church? They ask for minimum wages in order to buy accident insurance for the volunteers who otherwise go to great personal expense to help with these projects. No, they have to get certified and follow EPA rules. They are paid. Bottom line: if you are an evil businessman, you have to follow the rules.
Suppose you simply disregard the Lead-Safe rules and get caught painting your wife's day care in your pre-1978 home (doesn't matter if the day care is in the new addition. It depends on when property was first built.) ? Fines are levied up to $32,500 PER JOB and $3750 PER DAY out of compliance. The days when dad handed his son a paintbrush and taught him to paint are fading. But say you just shrug and hire a pro? Costs are headed up dramatically to reflect the added procedures. And this doesn't affect painters only. It affects ANYONE who disturbs more than 6 square feet of lead painted surface doing a job. (2 s.f. if a HUD project) This applies especially to window installers who remove trim boards in order to install a new window. I am not certain about this but the EPA class instructor seemed to indicate that window jobs are covered no matter how small the square footage. It also pertains to heat and air, plumbing, carpenters, electricians and anyone doing construction. Weirdest of all is roofers. How, you might wonder, would a roofer disturb lead paint? If he puts on drip edge, he might flake off paint and then the entire facia board is counted as 'disturbed'. The ground under eves must be draped with plastic or tarps out 20 feet from the house--and cannot be reused. (Plus vertical drapes if there is wind. Is there ever 'no wind' in Oklahoma?) I asked the instructor what happens when there are shrubs around the house? He noted that those have to be draped well enough to be sealed. Don't think your roofer will do this for free. Once repairs are made, the certified Lead Safe technician must keep a log of the entire project including proof of cleaning (pictures) and cannot clear more than 40 s.f. of surface with an appliance before discarding.
As a conscientious landlord, I've acquired the training ($275 class) and license ($300). Lead poisoning is a bad hazard. But I disagree with EPA in many ways. Their pamphlet, which I am to distribute to all renters, "The Truth About Lead Paint Poisoning" says, "Once poisoned, it's for life and can never be reversed." That's a baldfaced lie. Lead Chelation Therapy has been used by physicians for years to cleanse people of lead. I have a friend who got a dire, near-death case of lead poisoning 30 years ago. And after chelation, is doing quite well, arguing spiritedly with me at nearly age 80. So I asked the EPA communications director for USA Southwest Region about that statement. He vacillated with what to say and told me that if I looked at other EPA literature, they state, "the effects of lead poisoning can never be reversed." Which is to say that the psychological trauma will always be remembered even after chelation. I would say that their pamphlet is a scare tactic. Now think, if lead poisoning was a common and pernicious hazard, why didn't the federal government declare that all old houses had to be tested and stripped accordingly? This would have provided the ultimate shovel ready stimulus plan, providing jobs in the moribund construction industry for several years! In fact the National Assoc. of Home Builders alleges exactly that logic in a lawsuit over EPA rules.
Most contractors who have been forced to comply saythe reg is just a means of shaking down the tradesmen for high fees. I asked, who enforces this? EPA answer: We are asking people to turn others in. This has caused much consternation and back-stabbing on the part of competitors in large metro areas. It will surely spred to small towns like ours. But when you hear about "neighbors turning in neighbors" does this remind you of Soviets or Nazis? I refuse to turn in other landlords or contractors. Heck, if they don't know how to do the Lead-Safe stuff, I would volunteer for that part of their job. Around here, we are all doing our best to just make a living! So talking to the contractors who took the course with me, I have discovered that the 3 main snitches are some neighbor or another contractor who doesn't like the guy who got the job, or some neighbor who doesn't like the construction next door, or disgruntled employees. It's a great way to enforce something important!
So what if a renter scrapes and paints without approval? He is held harmless but the landlord is held responsible if the rug rat ingests paint flakes. (But that is because we are evil businessmen) What I am going to do to combat the EPA is start a revolution among my renters. As I hand out my brochures, it will be accompanied with estimates of how much of their rents are due to the EPA, and if they want cheaper rents they need to vote the party of Big Government Control out. It won't change anything in OK, already a red state, but I would love to see this become a nationwide campaign.
If we don't get EPA under control, it will certainly illuminate a precedent for how some future socialist can gain control by using the bureaucracy. Because tyranny doesn't stop. No tyrant wakes up one morning and says, "Well, that's enough tyranny. I won't do that anymore." Already our Mayor Nicholson tells about how EPA is standing by with a regulation that would require every incorporated town in America to catch all storm water and then treat it before releasing it into rivers. He calls such regulation "crazy" as does Representative Frank Lucas. How could such a rule be done? Have they not seen our inability to control storm water like Katrina or Minot? Farmers will soon face fines for creating dust (and counties with dirt/gravel roads too). Insecticide spraying must not have more than 1 foot of drift. Good-bye crop dusting industry! Many of these regulations are scheduled for Jan. 2013.
All these EPA rules have one common thread. They all hit hard at small town America or rural America. Now think. Farmers vote 85% Republican. Small towns are lopsided bastions of non-Democrat voters. Looks like a political vendetta to me. What do we need? Someone to pull the plug on EPA would be a good start. Congressional hearings would be lesser but good for those who have less fortitude to stand up to bureaucrats run amuck. Americans need to be educated to what is happening to their freedom.
Wednesday, June 1, 2011
EPA regulations
Obama is going to lose in 2012. A week ago, I wrote he would lose because of economic problems. But even if he magically gets past that, the Republican candidate should skewer him on his EPA policies which go beyond absurd and target rural areas and farming. These edicts are so stunningly looney, that I believe even someone in an urban area would choke on the overreach, especially if it is pointed out that the real poor in America are those who live in rural areas. It's Obamacare Reaction all over again. Go after Obama for abusing the rural poor the way Dems have so often gone after Republicans for hurting the poor. So here's a little quicky speech I would write for a candidate.
"Barack Obama didn't get Cap and Trade. So he decided to implement his version of environmentalism by executive dictate. For example, cities will now have to capture all their runoff storm water and treat it. Imagine how difficult this will be, even for an urban city. How is New Orleans supposed to catch all the hurricane storm water? I catch myself wondering who would write such an outlandish regulation. Someone with no sense of reality? Now think about those small towns and tiny hamlets in our countryside. Is a town of 50 people supposed to catch their rainwater and install a treatment plant that they can't even afford for their drinking water? The poorest people in America live in rural America. Why are we picking on them?"
"The EPA has new rules to curb dust. They don't like farmers plowing fields and they don't like dusty roads. Kick up a cloud and you get fined. Never mind that dust is heavy particulates and non-toxic. It's just dirt! How can you farm and not have dust? They have a new ban on burning in agriculture. This will not only make farming prohibitive and drive up the cost of food as never before. It is unsound ecology. Good stewardship of grasslands and forests requires burning to control brush and diseased tree stands. It's safer than pesticides. Elect Obama again and you'll see these natural landscapes die. Farmers and foresters make a living on these resources and they are already maintaining them far better than a foolish federal government."
"There is a now a regulation for sprayer drift. If you spray crops, the sprayer drift cannot exceed one foot. In practice it is impossible to limit drift to these dimensions. Ever watch a crop duster? Another rule re-classifies milk as an oil substance. A farmer who spills milk had better cry. He must now go through the same kind of rigorous environmental clean-up that a big oil company does."
"Maybe we need to stop asking what kind of an ivory tower nitwit wrote and approved these rules and ask, Why? All these jaw-dropping regulations are aimed at rural America. Rural areas don't vote for Obama and this is Chicago-style hardball payback politics. You and I, we never voted for these regulations. Congress never voted for them. They are done by executive order. And rural America constitutes the poorest people in our country, the least able to pay the EPA's extortion. I call on Obama to call off the dogs. Stop this vindictive campaign against rural folks. They don't ask for much. They work hard. They are still the backbone of America. This kind of partisan tit-for-tat is the last thing our country needs. It is old style political payback that we are tired of. Rural America needs jobs, Mr. President , not worn out politics and rules enforced by fiat. We need a new approach and a new leader."
"Barack Obama didn't get Cap and Trade. So he decided to implement his version of environmentalism by executive dictate. For example, cities will now have to capture all their runoff storm water and treat it. Imagine how difficult this will be, even for an urban city. How is New Orleans supposed to catch all the hurricane storm water? I catch myself wondering who would write such an outlandish regulation. Someone with no sense of reality? Now think about those small towns and tiny hamlets in our countryside. Is a town of 50 people supposed to catch their rainwater and install a treatment plant that they can't even afford for their drinking water? The poorest people in America live in rural America. Why are we picking on them?"
"The EPA has new rules to curb dust. They don't like farmers plowing fields and they don't like dusty roads. Kick up a cloud and you get fined. Never mind that dust is heavy particulates and non-toxic. It's just dirt! How can you farm and not have dust? They have a new ban on burning in agriculture. This will not only make farming prohibitive and drive up the cost of food as never before. It is unsound ecology. Good stewardship of grasslands and forests requires burning to control brush and diseased tree stands. It's safer than pesticides. Elect Obama again and you'll see these natural landscapes die. Farmers and foresters make a living on these resources and they are already maintaining them far better than a foolish federal government."
"There is a now a regulation for sprayer drift. If you spray crops, the sprayer drift cannot exceed one foot. In practice it is impossible to limit drift to these dimensions. Ever watch a crop duster? Another rule re-classifies milk as an oil substance. A farmer who spills milk had better cry. He must now go through the same kind of rigorous environmental clean-up that a big oil company does."
"Maybe we need to stop asking what kind of an ivory tower nitwit wrote and approved these rules and ask, Why? All these jaw-dropping regulations are aimed at rural America. Rural areas don't vote for Obama and this is Chicago-style hardball payback politics. You and I, we never voted for these regulations. Congress never voted for them. They are done by executive order. And rural America constitutes the poorest people in our country, the least able to pay the EPA's extortion. I call on Obama to call off the dogs. Stop this vindictive campaign against rural folks. They don't ask for much. They work hard. They are still the backbone of America. This kind of partisan tit-for-tat is the last thing our country needs. It is old style political payback that we are tired of. Rural America needs jobs, Mr. President , not worn out politics and rules enforced by fiat. We need a new approach and a new leader."
Tuesday, May 31, 2011
1944
One of my favorite songs never made the charts. Twila Paris sang the haunting "1944" on her Where I stand album.
"He was 21 in 1944
Unknown and thrown upon a distant shore.
Sent there by his mother
With love behind her tears.
Just a young American,
Who chose to rise above his fears.
And as I watche him struggle up that hill
With no thought of turning back
I cannot help but wonder
What did he die for..."
Stop there and think. Did he fight just so you could have a cushy life and security? Was it so you could demand more benefits from politicians? Did he fight so that our country could be like others hwo take over or controll the most inmportant industries--health, finance, autos, energy and the banks (optional to throw all the Jew bankers in concentration camps). Did he fight to create a vast underclass of peronistas who pay no taxes but always hsow up at election to demand the taxpayers take care of them. Did he fight for separation of church and state where the State has all power inthe public square? All these things are the hallmarks of fascism so maybe we can presume that the young man in 1944 fought against such things. What did he fight for? The song continues
"What did he die for when he died for you and me?
Made the sacrifice so that we could all be free?
I believe we shall answer each to Heaven
For the way we spend a priceless liberty.
Look inside and ask the question,
What did he die for, when he died for me?"
Maybe we should go back farther to the Revolutionary War and ask what those who risked everything, what did they fight for? No family had as much invested in the Revolution as the Adams family, John and Samuel, wives, and children. John Adams, co-author of the subsequent Constitution was about as plainspoken as you can get. "The great glory of the American Revolution was that it bound together in one indissolvable bond, the principles of Christianity and civil government." Now that doesn't mean that our government is a substitute for faith or a stand-in for Christianity. But I take it to mean that the Constitution was designed to reflect, as bes tthe authors could, those principles of their Christian faith. (By the way, why do people say the founders were all dieists?) I guess I agree with John. And so Memorial Day is more profound than just honoring the dead. It means to me that I need to join the fight for what my country is all about--freedom put together by Christian belief and the freest government possible.
Paris's song has a second verse that tells where that freedom to be all you can be came from.
"Came the darkest days of AD 33
Struggle 'tween the depths of hell and Heav'n's eternity
Sent there by His Father,
With Love behind His tears.
Only Son, Beloved One, upon whom Hope of all the years.
And as I watched Him struggle up that hill
With no thought of turning back
I cannopt help but wonder
What did He die for when He died for you and me?
Made the sacrifice so that we could all be free?
I believe we shall answer each to Heaven
For the way we spend a priceless Liberty.
Look inside and ask the question,
What did He die for when He died for me?"
"He was 21 in 1944
Unknown and thrown upon a distant shore.
Sent there by his mother
With love behind her tears.
Just a young American,
Who chose to rise above his fears.
And as I watche him struggle up that hill
With no thought of turning back
I cannot help but wonder
What did he die for..."
Stop there and think. Did he fight just so you could have a cushy life and security? Was it so you could demand more benefits from politicians? Did he fight so that our country could be like others hwo take over or controll the most inmportant industries--health, finance, autos, energy and the banks (optional to throw all the Jew bankers in concentration camps). Did he fight to create a vast underclass of peronistas who pay no taxes but always hsow up at election to demand the taxpayers take care of them. Did he fight for separation of church and state where the State has all power inthe public square? All these things are the hallmarks of fascism so maybe we can presume that the young man in 1944 fought against such things. What did he fight for? The song continues
"What did he die for when he died for you and me?
Made the sacrifice so that we could all be free?
I believe we shall answer each to Heaven
For the way we spend a priceless liberty.
Look inside and ask the question,
What did he die for, when he died for me?"
Maybe we should go back farther to the Revolutionary War and ask what those who risked everything, what did they fight for? No family had as much invested in the Revolution as the Adams family, John and Samuel, wives, and children. John Adams, co-author of the subsequent Constitution was about as plainspoken as you can get. "The great glory of the American Revolution was that it bound together in one indissolvable bond, the principles of Christianity and civil government." Now that doesn't mean that our government is a substitute for faith or a stand-in for Christianity. But I take it to mean that the Constitution was designed to reflect, as bes tthe authors could, those principles of their Christian faith. (By the way, why do people say the founders were all dieists?) I guess I agree with John. And so Memorial Day is more profound than just honoring the dead. It means to me that I need to join the fight for what my country is all about--freedom put together by Christian belief and the freest government possible.
Paris's song has a second verse that tells where that freedom to be all you can be came from.
"Came the darkest days of AD 33
Struggle 'tween the depths of hell and Heav'n's eternity
Sent there by His Father,
With Love behind His tears.
Only Son, Beloved One, upon whom Hope of all the years.
And as I watched Him struggle up that hill
With no thought of turning back
I cannopt help but wonder
What did He die for when He died for you and me?
Made the sacrifice so that we could all be free?
I believe we shall answer each to Heaven
For the way we spend a priceless Liberty.
Look inside and ask the question,
What did He die for when He died for me?"
Wednesday, April 27, 2011
History?
I must say that I have noticed things on History Channel which are quite at variance with such noted historians as Will Durant and Paul Johnson. Today I was watching "States" which is an hour program with about 5 states taken one at a time and each is given a history/geographical/cultural tour.
And there was Kansas. I about choked over some of their facts. Now of course in a 10 minute span you have to be brief and that means a quick statement or two. Now of course I could understand if a mistake was made in saying that North Carolina's chief cash crop was, say, cotton instead of tobacco. After all, it isn't the geography channel. But to make a bozo on history!
Ach! Examples. It was stated that Kansas had a rich history in the cattle trail drives when the Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe railroad shipped cattle from Dodge City. And that the cattle could just as well have been shipped from New Orleans. Hmm. Seems like I remember the Union Pacific and Abilene using the Chisholm Trail was what spawned the cattle drives from Texas. And the reason they weren't shipped out of Ft. Worth or New Orleans was that the rails after the civil war were hideously destroyed. Ever try to drive cattle through LA swamps? Abilene was the first because of a myterious disease in Texas cattle, "Texas Fever" didn't affect the Texas cattle but it killed the settlers' cattle in the North. So KS passed laws forbidding Texas cattle east of certain defined boundaries. Abilene was on the boundary and had the rails completed to that point in 1867. And an Illinois livestock broker who was quite honest offered a fair deal to the Texans. Later the drives shifted up the Texas trail to Dodge City.
Eventually the drives stopped in 1886, the History Channel asserts, because the state of KS passed a law that didn't allow TX cattle. Well, yes the state did extend the boundary to be the entire state in 1887. But trail drives had been in decline after 1880 because the southern railroads were rebuilt. What really ended the drives abruptly was the epic winter of 1886. That was the winter that killed 90% of the cattle in Montana, bankrupted Teddy Roosevelt in N. Dakota and sent him back to NY politics. It had suddenly become apparent to everybody in the livestock business that you had to have barns and hay and fences to raise cattle in winter. After the fact, in 1887, KS passed the ban on TX cattle. We now know that cattle from TX had developed immunity to the ticks that caused Texas Fever. Just dip 'em.
"States" went on to declare that Wichita was the primary hub for early aviation development. There were 11 airports there in 1929. And they said that Kansas was perfect for aviation because it had strong winds. Uh, whoa! So does just about every state from Texas to Montana. What was unique about southern KS was that KS has almost 250 days of fair weather each year, in which a good test flight could be made over flat land around Wichita. Secondly, the best oils, lubricants and high octane aviation fuel was being refined in the crude methods of the day from Kansas and Oklahoma crudes. And finally Kansas at the turn of the century had a very strong reputation for entrepreneurship--Kansas Spirit. Don't tell me to fly a kite, I'll build a plane!
I guess I won't pick at the show just because they point out that the signature crop is wheat but don't explain why. Wheat grows well in dry climates and winter wheat, the original middle Turkish strain does best in a climate zone like Kansas. And was brought to Kansas by German Mennonite immigrants who got run out of Russia in the 1880s. By becoming a state early (1861) Kansas is full of immigrant communities.
But it does make you wonder what else you are hearing on History Channel that is wrong. Maybe they spend too much time looking for Sasquatch and the Abomnible Snowman. I never could see what that had to do with history.
And there was Kansas. I about choked over some of their facts. Now of course in a 10 minute span you have to be brief and that means a quick statement or two. Now of course I could understand if a mistake was made in saying that North Carolina's chief cash crop was, say, cotton instead of tobacco. After all, it isn't the geography channel. But to make a bozo on history!
Ach! Examples. It was stated that Kansas had a rich history in the cattle trail drives when the Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe railroad shipped cattle from Dodge City. And that the cattle could just as well have been shipped from New Orleans. Hmm. Seems like I remember the Union Pacific and Abilene using the Chisholm Trail was what spawned the cattle drives from Texas. And the reason they weren't shipped out of Ft. Worth or New Orleans was that the rails after the civil war were hideously destroyed. Ever try to drive cattle through LA swamps? Abilene was the first because of a myterious disease in Texas cattle, "Texas Fever" didn't affect the Texas cattle but it killed the settlers' cattle in the North. So KS passed laws forbidding Texas cattle east of certain defined boundaries. Abilene was on the boundary and had the rails completed to that point in 1867. And an Illinois livestock broker who was quite honest offered a fair deal to the Texans. Later the drives shifted up the Texas trail to Dodge City.
Eventually the drives stopped in 1886, the History Channel asserts, because the state of KS passed a law that didn't allow TX cattle. Well, yes the state did extend the boundary to be the entire state in 1887. But trail drives had been in decline after 1880 because the southern railroads were rebuilt. What really ended the drives abruptly was the epic winter of 1886. That was the winter that killed 90% of the cattle in Montana, bankrupted Teddy Roosevelt in N. Dakota and sent him back to NY politics. It had suddenly become apparent to everybody in the livestock business that you had to have barns and hay and fences to raise cattle in winter. After the fact, in 1887, KS passed the ban on TX cattle. We now know that cattle from TX had developed immunity to the ticks that caused Texas Fever. Just dip 'em.
"States" went on to declare that Wichita was the primary hub for early aviation development. There were 11 airports there in 1929. And they said that Kansas was perfect for aviation because it had strong winds. Uh, whoa! So does just about every state from Texas to Montana. What was unique about southern KS was that KS has almost 250 days of fair weather each year, in which a good test flight could be made over flat land around Wichita. Secondly, the best oils, lubricants and high octane aviation fuel was being refined in the crude methods of the day from Kansas and Oklahoma crudes. And finally Kansas at the turn of the century had a very strong reputation for entrepreneurship--Kansas Spirit. Don't tell me to fly a kite, I'll build a plane!
I guess I won't pick at the show just because they point out that the signature crop is wheat but don't explain why. Wheat grows well in dry climates and winter wheat, the original middle Turkish strain does best in a climate zone like Kansas. And was brought to Kansas by German Mennonite immigrants who got run out of Russia in the 1880s. By becoming a state early (1861) Kansas is full of immigrant communities.
But it does make you wonder what else you are hearing on History Channel that is wrong. Maybe they spend too much time looking for Sasquatch and the Abomnible Snowman. I never could see what that had to do with history.
Saturday, April 23, 2011
Mark
This is Easter week and this article is what we call Christian apologetics. I was at our home bible study Monday this week. Pastor Tom made note that some skeptics argue that since Mark was the first gospel published and since it doesn't quote Jesus saying he was the Messiah, then maybe the rest of the gospels were Christian propaganda pieces written later by other writers. Ha! I had never heard this argument, but I can imagine it is a favorite with the historical critic skeptics of Christianity. It offers a nice rationalization for their skepticism. Since by nature I am a skeptic, I always enjoyed mixing it up with those guys. And this is for your Easter enjoyment.
Say you accept the Mark account but disbelieve that Jesus is Savior and Lord. My question is, have you read it closely? For example in Mark 1 at the baptism of Jesus, God's voice says, "this is My beloved Son." and then in Mark 12:6 Jesus told a parable about a landlord who finally sent his "beloved Son" and then tennants killed him. (meaning himself and the Jewish people) He finishes with the quote, "the stone which the builders rejected became the chief cornerstone; this came about from the Lord." Meaning that he, the beloved Son was that rejected One who was the chief cornerstone of salvation. And 'Lord' means YHWH, i.e. God's name. YHWH, "I am that I am" was also abbreviated "I am". When before the Sanhedrin, ruling council of Jews, they asked him in Marks account, "Are you the Christ, the Blessed One?" And he said, "I AM. [yikes!! Did you hear that!!] and you shall see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of Power and coming with the clouds of heaven." Son of Man is the guy who appears to God the Father, the Ancient of Days, in Daniel 7 vision of heaven. [Any questions?] And then even if a bonafied skeptic doesn't want to believe this, note what happens to the high priest and council in the next verse, They tore their clothes upon hearing this blasphemy (someone claiming to be God or having His power) and condemned him to death for that reason. Hey, pay no attention to what I say, just notice the behavior of those who were experts in Judaism.
Mark also has those interesting passages about how we are to forgive others so that our Father in Heaven will forgive us. (11:25-26) Who can forgive? Well if Joe and John have a disagreement and Leroy comes along and says, "I forgive you," Joe and John will look at him weirdly. What 3rd party, some Leroy, can come along and forgive my fight? If I hit you, only you can forgive me. Or God who has power over all things, can forgive. So when Jesus claims to be able to forgive sins or says to the woman he healed in Mark 8:34 "Daughter your faith has made you well" how does a mere man, a Leroy, know about someone else's faith? Can he read her mind? Shall we go to Darfur or some other place with horrible strife and say, Leroy says you are forgiven and Leroy knows your faith is good? That's idiocy! Or Jesus really is Who He says He is.
Mark 8 is the best. Jesus asks his disciples and Peter in particular who they said he was and Peter answered, "Thou art the Christ" Christ, Messiah, anointed one was to come to save the people from their sins according the Hebrew scriptures. Jesus took the title Son of Man (of Daniel fame) and explains how he must suffer and rise again(of Isaiah fame). Then Jesus launches into troubling words, "If anyone wishes to come after Me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross,and follow Me...whoever loses his life for My sake and the gospel's shall save it." Now that means that Leroy ain't your savior and only Jesus is. And that we have to give ourselves up to trust in Him. Functionally that is God because only God can save according to the Old Testament scriptures. "Jesus" means "God saves" and Is. 43 says, "I, even I AM the Lord [YHWH] and there is no Savior apart from Me." And Jesus says in Mark 16, "in My name you will cast out demons" and in Mark 13:13 "You will be hated by all for My name's sake." Now what would cause people to go into a rage over a silly old name unless the name mean that God incarnate in Jesus Christ is the only savior? That blows all those schemes about getting into heaven because we are going to prove to God that we have been a good person and have been sincere, etc. The gospel, "good news" is that we are saved only by God's mercy and grace that comes through repentance--which is our only hope. That is Jesus's first and central message (Mark 1:15).
And then again, he says "the Son of Man is Lord [God's name again!] of the Sabbath." He tells his followers in Mark 8:38 that He is judge of the world.
But maybe one of the more interesting reasons for believing that the Salvation of the world comes through this Jesus is that Mark spends 6 chapters out of 16 on his death and resurrection. Why would you spend almost half the book talking about how someone died if they were just a teacher? Wouldn't you expound on their teaching? For example, Tycho Brahe, the tremendous Danish astronomer of the 16th century whose careful measurements of the planetary motions allowed Johannas Kepler to postulate his theory of planetary motion, had a most unusual death. Does anybody remember it or do they remember his discoveries instead? Kepler had an interesting death too. Recall it? The point is that no one even considers this important. We study their scientific discoveries and ideas. But Jesus's death was the punch line of the book--the atonement for all of mankind's sin. (And in case you are interested, Brahe died of bladder explosion when he went to a party given by the King of Denmark in his honor and drank too much.)
Okay, so the gospel of Mark has fewer words of Jesus, just tells more about what his actions were. If this is the gospel Least indicative of Jesus's divinity, what must the others testify to!
Anything less than this ain't much "good news" because we would flunk.
Say you accept the Mark account but disbelieve that Jesus is Savior and Lord. My question is, have you read it closely? For example in Mark 1 at the baptism of Jesus, God's voice says, "this is My beloved Son." and then in Mark 12:6 Jesus told a parable about a landlord who finally sent his "beloved Son" and then tennants killed him. (meaning himself and the Jewish people) He finishes with the quote, "the stone which the builders rejected became the chief cornerstone; this came about from the Lord." Meaning that he, the beloved Son was that rejected One who was the chief cornerstone of salvation. And 'Lord' means YHWH, i.e. God's name. YHWH, "I am that I am" was also abbreviated "I am". When before the Sanhedrin, ruling council of Jews, they asked him in Marks account, "Are you the Christ, the Blessed One?" And he said, "I AM. [yikes!! Did you hear that!!] and you shall see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of Power and coming with the clouds of heaven." Son of Man is the guy who appears to God the Father, the Ancient of Days, in Daniel 7 vision of heaven. [Any questions?] And then even if a bonafied skeptic doesn't want to believe this, note what happens to the high priest and council in the next verse, They tore their clothes upon hearing this blasphemy (someone claiming to be God or having His power) and condemned him to death for that reason. Hey, pay no attention to what I say, just notice the behavior of those who were experts in Judaism.
Mark also has those interesting passages about how we are to forgive others so that our Father in Heaven will forgive us. (11:25-26) Who can forgive? Well if Joe and John have a disagreement and Leroy comes along and says, "I forgive you," Joe and John will look at him weirdly. What 3rd party, some Leroy, can come along and forgive my fight? If I hit you, only you can forgive me. Or God who has power over all things, can forgive. So when Jesus claims to be able to forgive sins or says to the woman he healed in Mark 8:34 "Daughter your faith has made you well" how does a mere man, a Leroy, know about someone else's faith? Can he read her mind? Shall we go to Darfur or some other place with horrible strife and say, Leroy says you are forgiven and Leroy knows your faith is good? That's idiocy! Or Jesus really is Who He says He is.
Mark 8 is the best. Jesus asks his disciples and Peter in particular who they said he was and Peter answered, "Thou art the Christ" Christ, Messiah, anointed one was to come to save the people from their sins according the Hebrew scriptures. Jesus took the title Son of Man (of Daniel fame) and explains how he must suffer and rise again(of Isaiah fame). Then Jesus launches into troubling words, "If anyone wishes to come after Me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross,and follow Me...whoever loses his life for My sake and the gospel's shall save it." Now that means that Leroy ain't your savior and only Jesus is. And that we have to give ourselves up to trust in Him. Functionally that is God because only God can save according to the Old Testament scriptures. "Jesus" means "God saves" and Is. 43 says, "I, even I AM the Lord [YHWH] and there is no Savior apart from Me." And Jesus says in Mark 16, "in My name you will cast out demons" and in Mark 13:13 "You will be hated by all for My name's sake." Now what would cause people to go into a rage over a silly old name unless the name mean that God incarnate in Jesus Christ is the only savior? That blows all those schemes about getting into heaven because we are going to prove to God that we have been a good person and have been sincere, etc. The gospel, "good news" is that we are saved only by God's mercy and grace that comes through repentance--which is our only hope. That is Jesus's first and central message (Mark 1:15).
And then again, he says "the Son of Man is Lord [God's name again!] of the Sabbath." He tells his followers in Mark 8:38 that He is judge of the world.
But maybe one of the more interesting reasons for believing that the Salvation of the world comes through this Jesus is that Mark spends 6 chapters out of 16 on his death and resurrection. Why would you spend almost half the book talking about how someone died if they were just a teacher? Wouldn't you expound on their teaching? For example, Tycho Brahe, the tremendous Danish astronomer of the 16th century whose careful measurements of the planetary motions allowed Johannas Kepler to postulate his theory of planetary motion, had a most unusual death. Does anybody remember it or do they remember his discoveries instead? Kepler had an interesting death too. Recall it? The point is that no one even considers this important. We study their scientific discoveries and ideas. But Jesus's death was the punch line of the book--the atonement for all of mankind's sin. (And in case you are interested, Brahe died of bladder explosion when he went to a party given by the King of Denmark in his honor and drank too much.)
Okay, so the gospel of Mark has fewer words of Jesus, just tells more about what his actions were. If this is the gospel Least indicative of Jesus's divinity, what must the others testify to!
Anything less than this ain't much "good news" because we would flunk.
Friday, April 8, 2011
Gettysburgs biggest hero
So the Democrats and Obama don't think our military are essential personnel? Once again I realize why I work so hard against them. I don't know if many people realize that we are coming up on the 150th anniversary of the War Between the States or Civil War. On April 12, 1861 rebels shelled Ft. Sumpter in Charleston Harbor. It was right after Lincoln was inaugurated (was March Madness days back then, not the current Jan. 20). And the war ended April 9, 1865 at Appromatox Courthouse, Virginia. I have no trouble remembering the day since it is our anniversary. But the days I like to remember is July 1-4, 1863. On July 4 the Union won both Gettysburg and Vicksburg, and arguably turned the tide of the war--forever decimating Lee's army and cutting the South in half by controlling the Mississippi River. If by some weird chance I am ever asked to talk during Black History month, here is what I might say... You hear people trying to score political points all the time with talk of Reparations. It is part of our family's lore that we lost two cousins at the aptly-named Cemetery Ridge at Gettysburg, fighting for Chamberlain's Michigan Regiment. I won't ask anybody for reparations. Honor them, not me. I was born 87 years after the battle. It was terribly bloody. On Cemetery Ridge 6000 men died in an hour. That was by single shot rifles and close combat and cannon balls. The War had 600,000 deaths, about 20% of the adult males in the country. You would think a country would never get over something that bad. But I want to tell you how it did. At the end of the battle on the evening of July 3, there were 21,000 men lying wounded on the field. Meade tried to pursue Lee down into Virginia and in those days there weren't sufficient field hospitals to take care of a battle where 150,000 men killed 27,000 and left 21,000 too weak to walk and losing blood, dying as the days drug on. Ironically, the battle had been fought on a farm owned by a freed slave and the neighborhood had many former slaves who farmed. The town of Gettysburg was burned to the ground and the citizens fled. But Lydia Smith did not. Lydia heard the cries of the men left on the battlefield and summoning courage, began to bring them water and food. In fact she spent her life savings over two weeks trying her best to keep men alive. It made no difference to her if they were Confederate or Union. She helped them all. Now here's my question. Why would she do that? The answer I once got from a scholarly Afro-American was that blacks of that time were extremely forgiving followed by a confused shrug. True. Why is that? Lydia grew up in Africa, and learned aminism, the belief that there are hundreds of terrifying nature gods behind every rock and tree and animal. If they aren't placated, the gods would turn on you. They never answered the question of what lies beyond the grave. Or what is the meaning of life. Then, although she was once a slave, Lydia came to America where she heard about a new God, the one who said, "There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free" and "I am the Lord, the God of Israel, who has brought you out of Egypt, and out of the house of slavery." This God was One who gave meaning to your life, forgave and accepted you no matter your circomstances, and saved your life. This was Savior, Lord and Friend Who would follow after you no matter what you were going through. When the church sang "and before I'll be a slave, I'll be lying in my grave, and go home to my Lord and be free!" she knew exactly Who she was talking about. Lydia Smith visited about 10,000 wounded soldiers at Gettysburg. It is estimated that she saved the lives of roughly 4,000 men. Honor her by learning how to forgive and follow your Lord like she did.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)