Archive for the ‘Crazy 88s’ Category

Another New Direction

February 10, 2013

   Recently I made the decision to leave my long time position as contributing blogger at Delaware Politics due to changes at that site that I could not abide.

   I asked those who were loyal followers of my writings and rantings to follow me here at my own site Politically Frank, and it would seem that many did just that. I would like to thank all who did, for that loyalty.

   I come here today, to again ask you to follow me as I again make a change. After leaving D P,  I was approached by a group of people who I have come, over time, to respect, both for their personal integrity and their political knowledge. They have asked me to come on board a new project intended to find a new way to deliver the conservative message, and to move the political discussion within the state of  Delaware in a more reasonable direction, one that doesn’t  necessarily include angry rhetoric.

 This project will include a website, www.delawareright.com  and a Facebook page as well http://www.facebook.com/DelawareRight  .

  I have been asked to contribute to this project as a blogger, and I am humbled to have been included in this project, that I see as having the potential to actually build a bridge between the varying factions within, not just the Republican Party, but also the conservative movement, and the entire political landscape of Delaware, rather than building walls as has been the goals and intentions and the result of many others who have placed themselves as the voice and the face of conservatism.

  The website is up and running and the blog has several of my past articles, I hope to be adding to them soon as time allows. I come here today to ask you to join us in this venture, we are asking people of all political affiliations and ideologies to join us, to debate, discuss and decide how best to work together to move Delaware forward, not just as Republicans and conservatives, but as citizens of the great state of Delaware.

  Please like us on Facebook and share with your friends, we at  Delaware Right welcome all to join the discussion.

 Thank you.

  P.S.  I will continue to post from time to time here at Politically Frank, there will be times that I have things to say that are not of a political nature that will fit better here, so I hope that you will keep an eye out for those as well as my postings at Delaware Right.

Open Thread Jan. 31st

January 31, 2013

  I am asking for some help  friends and neighbors. I am limited on how much I can post, so please feel free to comment on anything that has your attention in the political world. Be it local or national.

  Thanks for the help.

New Direction

January 19, 2013

  This is a post I have posted over at Delaware Politics, for those who were not aware, I was also a contributor at that site, that will no longer be the case. Anyone who has followed me at that site, I would hope will now follow me here. Thank you.

   I had planned to write a post this weekend talking about how there is currently a group of people who do nothing but run around with their hands in the air shouting about tyranny.

  I was going to point out that they present themselves as both the voice of the GOP and the conservative movement. They are neither. They are small minded people who can never do more than challenge the ideas of others, while being unable to put forth more than talking point, bumper sticker rhetoric. They seek power, yet are unable to recognize that with power comes responsibility, not only to use said power to help people, but to be responsible in their personal actions.

  I have instead, after some thought and after certain actions by others here at Delaware Politics, decided to go in a different direction, both with this post and with my so called contribution to the political conversation.

   I have come to the conclusion recently that Delaware Politics has taken a turn down a path that I am no longer comfortable with traveling. there are some who will say it was I who made a turn, and that may be fair, but whatever the case, I see myself and the management here heading in two separate directions.

  I have always felt that the best way to learn, is to listen to the ideas of others, even those whom we may disagree with. It has become clear that here at Delaware Politics there has been a decision made to silence opposition. Certain ideas and opinions are no longer welcome here. This site belongs to David Anderson, he is free to use it as he sees fit and to allow whomever he sees fit to do as they please.

  I personally in the past was given that same freedom to write about topics that were not always in agreement with David, yet he never attempted to silence me or my views. That is no longer the case. There has been a clear new direction here, where one person has taken it upon themselves, with David’s blessing, to delete comments not only from myself, but from anyone who dared to disagree, under the thinnest excuse of them being personal attacks.

  The site no longer, in my opinion, welcomes the open and free exchange of ideas that it once did and has instead become a site being run as a totalitarian site by proxy.

  Therefore, and I am sure some will welcome this, I have also decided to take myself in a new direction.  I will no longer be contributing to Delaware Politics, I will limit my writing to my own site www.politicallyfrank.wordpress.com  and facebook .http://www.facebook.com/#!/frank.knotts.1I welcome all to friend me on facebook as I will be linking to my site any post I write. I hope that many of you will follow me, not to be in competition with Delaware Politics, but so that there can be a place for that open and free exchange of ideas that Delaware Politics once was, I welcome all. I even welcome that person who is so determined to silence that exchange.

  This has been a tough decision for me, I was once kicked off of this site for my opinion on abortion, David Anderson asked me to return and made me feel welcome, I no longer feel welcome, therefore I will take my opinions and express them elsewhere.

 

2013 Cut Backs

December 23, 2012

  It has been announced that due to rising healthcare cost that will be imposed on small business owners as the health care plan now known as Obama-care is implemented, some small businesses will be forced to make deep cuts into their work forces and to make changes to the full-time status of many employees.

  Unfortunately this will include the small business known as North Pole Enterprises, also know as Santa Claus.

  Santa has announced that in the coming year of 2013 he will be forced to cut his elf force in half, and the remaining elves will be cut to only 38 hours a week and no longer considered full-time employees due benefits.

  This of course will put a great burden upon the remaining elves to fill the growing demand for toys. It is believed that Santa will most likely have to pick up a hammer himself and possibly even Mrs. Claus will be forced out of the kitchen and into the work shop to help save the struggling business.

  Of course these changes will affect the amount of toys that can be produced and delivered, it is believed that the Chinese are already ramping up to fill the gap left by the declining production numbers from the North Pole.

  Pres. Obama in a statement assured the people of the world that he and his administration would do everything possible to see that the elves who are laid off will be able to receive unemployment benefits forever. He also has called on the remaining elves to unionize and force Santa to keep them at any cost, even if it means completely destroying the business.

  Pres. Obama went even further and said that if all else fails, he is willing to nationalize North Pole Enterprises, he believes that by combining GM and NPE he could revitalize the failing union system.

  This announcement by Santa is merely the leading edge of what is to come in the coming years of Obama-care. We can expect similar announcements from the Easter Bunny, and I have heard that the Tooth fairy is borrowing 90% of the money she is leaving for children and cannot sustain this for more than another two years and will be turning over operations to a family in West Virginia who have great experience with the loss of teeth.

  Are we looking towards a future that sees small businesses disappearing only to be replaced by nationally subsidized quasi private ownership? I fear so.

Goodbye!

December 21, 2012

  Just in case all of the talk about the end of the world is true, I just wanted to say goodbye.

  Most people have at least heard something about the world ending related to the Mayan calendar. The way it goes is that because the Mayan calendar doesn’t project beyond Dec. 21, 2012, well the world will end today.

  Actually it has come to light, but has not been reported as loudly, because a good end of the world story rocks, the calendar actually does project past 20112, but hey, let’s not ruin their fun.

  I tried to tell my wife I didn’t need to buy Christmas gifts, well because the world would end before Christmas. She wasn’t having any of that and said if there were no gifts, then the world would actually end.

 So let me say that it has been fun knowing you all here in blog land, and if the world doesn’t end, I’ll see you all after Christmas.

 I hope that the holidays finds you all well and safe, may God bless you and your families, and let us all keep the families of  New Town, Conn. in our hearts and our prayers and remember how blessed we are.

 Merry Christmas!

Is Your Church A Slave To Government ?

June 3, 2012

   I should start this post by explaining to those who don’t already know , I define myself as a Christian but hold no allegiance to any organized religion or denomination.  I came to my faith through the reading of the Gospel and then through the reading of the Bible in context.

   I tell you this only to inform you of my personal belief system and to show that I have no axe to grind with any other religion or denomination, I do believe that I am less likely to see faith as a team sport due to this, but I understand the need some people have for an organized system of faith. That is the freedom we have here in the United States. The freedom to worship as we see fit.

   That actually brings me now to the point of my post. Is your church really free?

   First answer two questions. Is your church incorporated? And is your church filed as a 501c3? If you answered yes to either, then you may not have as much religious freedom as you think you do.

   The founding of this nation was based on two fundamental ideas of freedom, one was the freedom of speech, especially political speech, and secondly the freedom of religion.

   Now many of you know how I feel about keeping my faith and my government completely separate. I feel that one’s faith will suffer relative to the amount of government involvement in said faith. Personally I see no need for the organized public prayers that others seem to need to legitimize their own faith. I am also not sure that I would want  to be involved with a church that spent more time preaching about politics than it did about the Gospel.

  But again I recognize that some people desire that their churches were more outspoken on political issues. They seek to mobilize the parishioners to act as a voting block. Again in my view this comes down to religious freedom, if you are attending a church that is politically motivated and you are not, you can choose another church. And the same is true of the opposite, you are free to seek out a politically motivated church.

  This has become very important in recent months with Pres. Obama speaking out on two very social issues. First is the mandate that religious organizations must supply insurance that pays for contraceptives for their employees, even if that goes against their doctrine. The second is Pres. Obama’s recent statement of support for homosexual marriage.

  Many people have been disappointed that their churches and church leaders have not been outspoken enough on these two issues and to call for political reactions to the president’s position. Now in fairness there has been limited and subtle response from the black  community and a legal challenge from one organization.

  For this post however I am asking why has there not been a more fervent outcry from the pulpit.

  One has to believe that one reason, if not the reason, is that the churches fear losing their tax exempt status. They fear that if they were to call for a political reaction to these attacks on their faith, that the government would react by repealing their tax exempt status.

  But is that even possible? I don’t think that it is, since the churches are protected by the First Amendment under the freedom of religion clause. So why do so many churches and people alike believe that the government has the power to tax the churches?

  Well mostly because in 1954 then Senator Lyndon B. Johnson was a driving force to adding churches to the tax code under section 501c3, or better known as the tax exempt code.  Johnson sold this as a favor to the churches, but what it has done, is to silence the pulpit. As I said earlier, out of fear of losing this tax exemption.

  But does the federal government have the power to grant tax exemption? A better question is, does the federal government have the power to tax a church? I say no, again since the first Amendment puts the churches squarely outside the purview of government, then the government cannot place a tax upon a church with the threat of shutting down the church if the tax is not paid. So if the government cannot tax a church, then there is no need for tax exemption.

  Even the I R S recognizes this in their own code 508 (c) (1) (A), the code says,

 “The notification requirement set forth in IRC 508(a) is subject to exceptions and these are listed in IRC 508(c). Under IRC 508(c)(1) there are several exceptions to notice which are applicable to (A) churches, and their integrated auxiliaries, and conventions or associations of churches, or (B) any organization, other than a private foundation, the gross receipts of which in each taxable year are normally not more than $5,000.”

  What this means is that churches and their auxiliaries have no need to apply for tax exemption. So if the I R S feels that there is no need to apply for tax exemption by churches, then one would have to believe that there is nothing to lose. Churches are also automatically tax deductible according to IRS Publication 526 which says, “Organizations That Qualify To Receive Deductible Contributions, You can deduct your contributions only if you make them to a qualified organization. To become a qualified organization, most organizations other than churches and governments, as described below, must apply to the IRS.”

  The second thing that modern churches have chosen to do that ties them to government is to incorporate. Why?

  Well there are three reasons that most likely seem attractive to some churches, these being,

   1. A corporation has limited liability protection

  2. A corporation may exist in perpetuity

  3. A corporations may hold title to real property

 However there is another legal attribute  to a corporation that may not be as desirable to churches and one that the churches may not have been made aware of, a corporation can sue and be sued. This is extremely important I feel since states like Delaware have passed  homosexual antidiscrimination laws along with homosexual civil union laws and there is still a push for homosexual marriage laws, so how long before a homosexual couple will be bringing a law suit against a church for refusing to perform a homosexual marriage? And since the church has already established a legal connection between the church and government, they have given government a perceived sovereignty over the church.

  It is the legal entanglements that the churches have chosen to take on in an attempt to safeguard themselves, that have actually put them at the greatest risk, not only from individuals, but from the very government that should have no say, what so ever, over the free exercise of their religion.

 Point of fact, in  the case of  Hale vs. Henkel the U.S. Supreme court said this about corporations,

 ” Upon the other hand, the corporation is a creature of the State. It is presumed to be incorporated for the benefit of the public. It receives certain special privileges and franchises, and holds them subject to the laws of the State and the limitations of its charter. Its powers are limited by law. It can make no contract not authorized by its charter. Its rights to act as a corporation are only preserved to it so long as it obeys the laws of its creation.”

Hale v. Henkel, 201 U.S. 43 at 74 (1906)

 

So you can see that any type of legal entanglement on the churches part with government is to the detriment of the church.

  In 1811 a bill was ratified by Congress to incorporate the Protestant Episcopal Church in Alexandria, Virginia, when the bill was presented to then President James Madison for his signature, he promptly vetoed the bill and in a veto message stated,

“Because the bill exceeds the rightful authority to which governments are limited by the essential distinction between civil and religious functions, and violates in particular the article of the Constitution of the United States which declares that ‘Congress shall make no law respecting a religious establishment.’ The bill enacts into and establishes by law sundry rules and proceedings relative purely to the organization and polity of the church incorporated… This particular church, therefore, would so far be a religious establishment by law, a legal force and sanction being given to certain articles in its constitution and administration.” 

 

 

  It would seem that President Madison understood that any legal recognition of the church by the government, even if such recognition was sought by the church, was beyond the original intent of the Constitution. It would seem as though he also understood that in seeking such recognition the churches were actually seeking a license, in essence the churches were seeking a legal statement that they had permission from the government to exist. But due to the First Amendment no such license is needed.

  I know that there are many people out there who are looking to their churches and church leaders to speak out on the pressing social issues of the day, and they are not receiving that which they seek. I would say to those people, talk among your fellow parishioners, tell them that you and your churches need not be slave to the government just to retain a tax exemption that the government doesn’t even have the authority to bestow upon the churches. Tell them to throw off all the chains that government has placed upon their freedom to worship and to speak out on the issues that effect them and their families.

  Even if they are forced somehow to pay taxes, would that not be better than the forced silence that they live under now?

   I will leave you with the words Of President John Adams,

  “The church is the moral compass of society.” But in order to remain a true and faithful compass, the church must remain separate and independent of the influences of that society, particularly its civil government. It must be a “free-church.” Should the church become subordinate, or in any way controlled or co-opted by the civil government (a “State-Church” system), it can no longer effectively serve as that society’s moral compass. Unless it is respected, no one will listen to what it has to say. ”

 

 

This One Is For My Daughter

April 26, 2012

   I believe it was somewhere around the third grade when my daughter came home from school and informed her mother and I that she wanted to be a teacher when she grew up.

  Now of course this is most likely not that unique, but what is, is that she has never wavered from wanting to become a teacher. She is now in her second year of college with her major in elementary child education. And if I might say so myself, she is doing quite well.

   My daughter is blessed with a truly caring heart, she is what we need more of in the field of education, a person who wants to teach, not because it pays well or for the benefits, but because they truly want to teach children.

   Today she brought the following link to my attention and asked if I would post it, and like any proud father I couldn’t deny her. I also happen to agree with her. I can only imagine how offended my daughter must be to have people such as the teacher in the article, in the same profession that she has worked so hard to enter.

  Please read the article and watch the video and if you, like us, are offended that such a teacher could still be teaching then click on the second link and sign the petition to have the teacher removed.

  http://shine.yahoo.com/parenting/stuart-chaifetz-secretly-tapes-autistic-son-school-discovers-220500111.html

  http://www.change.org/petitions/to-the-new-jersey-legislature-and-congress-pass-legislation-so-that-teachers-who-bully-children-are-immediately-fired

 

Matthew 6

January 28, 2012

  I know that it seems as if all we down here in Sussex County talk about is prayer here and prayer there.

  We have become the county of the prayer law suit. Our county council has been sued over its former practice of holding an organized prayer during its monthly meetings and the Indian River School Board was also sued for holding an organized prayer during its meetings.

  This post will center more around the IRSB issue, than the Sussex County Council suit. This is because I believe that the council has solved their issue by now saying a prayer before calling the meeting to order. This has not always been the case and is why they were sued.

  I have made my opinion on this issue well-known. I feel that once these public meeting are called to order, the elected officials become a body government and no longer are acting as individuals and so, are no longer afforded the same rights as individuals.

  Some might ask why is Frank Knotts again writing about something that both he and others have debated to the point of being obnoxious. Well because there are those on the other side of this issue who feel the need to continue to push the issue.

  The Supreme Court of the United States recently declined to hear the case involving the IRSB. This means that the lower court ruling in the 3rd District Court remains the final word, at least for now. That ruling was that the IRSB must stop its long practice of holding an organized prayer during its meetings.

  I would suggest that the IRSB solve this issue in the same way that the Sussex County Council has, say the prayer before calling the meeting to order. Simple, no?

 Well it seems as if this would not suit some. There are those, both on the board and in the community, that feel that this is a cause worth fighting for.

  I was listening to the Dan Gaffney Show on WGMD, live from Jimmy’s Grille, on Friday morning, when Dan called Robert Wilson to the microphone. Mr. Wilson is a member of the Indian River School Board.  Mr. Wilson then proceeded to discuss the law suit and the ongoing attempt to mobilize the public in an effort to over turn the court decision.

   Mr. Wilson stated that of course the Board itself would abide by the court’s decision, and would continue to seek legal recourse to over turn the ruling.

   Mr. Wilson then spoke of the citizens who are now coming to the meetings to say prayers during the portion of the meeting set aside for public input. There are fifteen minutes at the beginning and fifteen minutes at the end of each meeting. During this time the public is free to address the Board about issues facing the school district, and it would seem to offer up prayers.

  This act of so-called civil disobedience seems to have been organized by Sussex County’s self-appointed champion of prayer Eric Bodenweiser. Mr. Bodenweiser, who ran a failed campaign for state senate, who was vocal during many of the debates concerning the Sussex County Sheriff’s push for expanded powers and who was voted out of the Sussex County GOP Executive Committee after making what many saw as unethical statements about how the Sheriff’s issues could be solved by some backroom dealing, has become a  fixture at the IRSB meeting and has been offering prayer during the public portion of those meetings.

 Mr. Bodenweiser has been joined in this display by at least one other notable member of the Sussex County community, that would be Don Ayotte. Mr. Ayotte has also been vocal in his support of the Sheriff’s push for expanded powers. Mr. Ayotte has  sought to hold offices within the Delaware and Sussex GOP. He is currently the Vice Chair of the 37th Rep. Dist. and has recently announced his intentions to run for the 3rd councilmatic dist. in Sussex against the Democrat Joan Deaver.

  Let me state first, that I feel that anyone who wishes to use the public portion of these meetings to say a prayer are well within their first amendment rights of free speech. I only hope that they do not in their exercising of this right, prevent others with actual school board business from being heard.

   Let me return to Mr. Wilson on WGMD for a moment, on Friday morning Mr. Wilson called on religious leaders in the community and the public itself, to please come out to the board meeting and to say a prayer during the public portion to show support for prayer and for the board.

 To me this is a clear demonstration of what concerns myself and others about this type of blending of faith and government. Here we have an elected official more concerned with calling people to the meetings to pray, then to focus on issues facing the district.  I have been listening to WGMD for many years now and I don’t recall Mr. Wilson taking the time to send out a message asking citizens to come to the meeting to discuss the PTA or to talk about any of the other issues facing school districts across the state. Yet he is motivated to call on people to come to the meeting and to monopolize the public portion of the meeting with prayer.

  This is not to say that Mr. Wilson is not a good member of the board, it is to ask why he is more concerned with having the public  attend now then it seems that he was in the past, at least he is now more vocal.

  During his time on air Mr. Wilson stated that if anyone wanted more information on participating in this act of civil disobedience, that they could contact himself or Mr. Bodenweiser.

 When asked by Dan Gaffeny if the board had considered continuing the organized prayer in spite of the court’s ruling, Mr. Wilson said that, “they” would probably send Mr. Christopher around to arrest them. So it would seem as if Mr. Wilson also thinks the sheriff has arrest powers.

  This issue has been debated back and forth in many forums. Mostly it has been addressed from a constitutional perspective, in other words from the point of view of man’s law. Personally I believe that the Constitution is clear on this issue, that there is a clear intent within the First Amendment that the Founders intended for there to be no blending of faith and government.

 Of course there are those who will say that since the word separation does not actually  appear in the text, then there is no such intent. Okay, I disagree and we could argue that again if you like.

 However, I feel that there is a higher authority that also warned us against blending faith and government. That would be Jesus.

 Of course we all know of the “render unto Caesar that which is Caesar’s and unto God that which is God’s”.

  I happen to feel that Matthew 6 is very relevant to this issue, it seems to be speaking directly to us on this issue.

  Look to Matthew 6:19-21;

 19Lay not up for yourselves treasures upon earth, where moth and rust doth corrupt, and where thieves break through and steal:

 20But lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust doth corrupt, and where thieves do not break through nor steal:

 21For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.

   Or  maybe 6:24;

  24No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon.

  Of course the most telling verses on this issue from Matthew come in 6:1-8;

  1Take heed that ye do not your alms before men, to be seen of them: otherwise ye have no reward of your Father which is in heaven.

 2Therefore when thou doest thine alms, do not sound a trumpet before thee, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, that they may have glory of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward.

 3But when thou doest alms, let not thy left hand know what thy right hand doeth:

 4That thine alms may be in secret: and thy Father which seeth in secret himself shall reward thee openly.

 5And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward.

 6But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly.

 7But when ye pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen do: for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking.

 8Be not ye therefore like unto them: for your Father knoweth what things ye have need of, before ye ask him.

  So I ask, are those who are seeking to institute this organized prayer during public meetings, really serving and holding to the word of our Saviour? Or are they merely seeking to draw attention to their own earthly desires?

  In my opinion the idea that we must speak a prayer through a microphone, or that we must say our prayers out loud and in some organized group to be heard by God, is insulting to God and borders on heresy. My understanding of the Gospel is that God knows my needs even before I do. I do not pray for outcomes, I pray to give thanks, and I certainly do not dare to tell God what it is I need.

  All would be served better if we would spend more time in silent prayer for our own souls and work to make the world surrounding us better one soul at a time, our own. If we do this, then all that we do and come into contact with will benefit.

 

Who Lost The Game?

January 15, 2012

  Well now that the NFL season has ended for the Denver Broncos and Tim Tebow, the question is who lost the game?

  I have to admit that I was unable to see the last game of the 2011 season for the Broncos, and possibly the last for Tim Tebow as a Bronco. I was working, so maybe someone can fill me in on who lost the game for the Broncos.

   I understand that the topic of Tim Tebow has been covered to the point of being obnoxious. However I feel that it deserves one more look.

   Like many I could not understand the fascination with a quarterback who was universally described as not being ready for the NFL. It would seem that he was attracting most of his attention based on the fact that he was a Christian who was, so-called, outspoken about his Christianity. The fact that he would kneel and pray after a touchdown or a game. That he would give thanks to God first and fore most.

  But really was this  unique? I have been watching football and other sports since I was about nine years old. There has always been players who would first thank God for the blessings that they received. There have been many players who would kneel and give thanks after a touchdown. So why Tebow? Why has  he been embraced by the nation more so say than a Troy Polamalu, he has been making the sign of the cross on the field before and after every play and on the sidelines since coming to the NFL.

  Of course many of the most outspoken supporters of Tebow will tell you that they are just so happy to have a person who is so clearly Christian succeeding. But again Tebow is not the  first. So again, why the stir now?

  To be fair there has been quite a bit of what might be described as being negative attention from some in the media.

  I do believe that his faith has driven both sides of the Tebow question. I also believe there is a political aspect to the topic. We shouldn’t forget that Tebow came to national attention after the Super Bowl commercial he made with his mother with a pro-life theme. Clearly abortion is a huge political issue.

  Let me say, from what I can tell from the public image of Tim Tebow, he is an example to both the young and old. He is an example of how we should all live our lives. But not because he is a football player, not because he is a successful football player. His strong faith should be an example to all who call themselves Christian. This is true whether he is a football player, or a farmer, or a doctor, or a dishwasher.

  I have actually heard some people saying that the Broncos were winning because of Tebow’s strong faith, well maybe, one never knows. Possibly God has been working through Tebow to inspire others to follow the word of Christ. If so, I think many have missed the message, since most of the praise has been for Tebow’s courage, instead of for Christ.

  Ever since Tebow has taken on the role as starting quarterback for the Broncos the story has been Tebow. It would seem to someone who knows nothing about the game, that one man could win alone. Story after story talked about Tebow this, Tebow that.

  So now what? Did Tebow lose the game? Will his supporters now say that it was the defense that let Tebow down? Is God testing the faith of those who felt so strongly about Tebow? Has Tebow done something in his private life, or merely within his heart, that has angered God, so that God removed his football support of Tebow?

  I don’t know what part Tebow’s faith played in his success or his failure, other than I do believe that faith in God can give you an inner strength that allows you to rise above challenges. However, we all know that there are many players in the NFL who have not exactly lived a Christian life. There are many in the NFL alone who have murdered, raped and sold and done drugs who have been what some would call successful.

  I would encourage those who were so moved by Tebow’s demonstrations of faith on the field, to also seek out others away from the field. Look for the person who holds the door for the person behind them. Look for the young man who helps the elderly lady to her car with her groceries. Look for the person who returns the wallet they find on the street, along with the large amount of money within.

  In other words, look for examples of living a moral upstanding life in everyday life. Be it from an NFL quarterback, or your neighbors, or a stranger you have never met. 

  More importantly strive to be an example of living a moral upstanding life. Remember, if Tim Tebow inspired even just one person to seek God through Christ, then he is a success, and if you or I inspire even just one person to seek God through Christ by the way we go about our lives and the little everyday things we do, then we are an equal success.

 

 

After The Revolution

January 1, 2012

  The world’s history is filled with revolution. There has been revolution since the beginning of time. One could say that the original sin committed by Eve was a form of revolt against God’s law.

  Surely since the formation of societies and governments, revolution has moved the world, sometimes for the better and many times to the detriment of mankind.

   2380 BC (short chronology): A popular revolt in the Sumerian city of Lagash deposes King Lugalanda and puts the reformer Urukagina on the throne.

 206 BC: Ziying, last ruler of the Qin Dynasty of China surrenders himself to Liu Bang, leader of a popular revolt and founder of the Han Dynasty.

 73–71 BC: The failed Roman slave rebellion, led by the gladiator Spartacus.

 49–45 BC: Julius Caesar crossed the river Rubicon heading part of the Roman army and marched on Rome. After overthrowing and assuming control of Pompeian government, he was proclaimed “dictator in perpetuity”.

 A.D.

 6–9: The Great Illyrian Revolt of various Illyrian tribes against the Roman Empire

 1418–1427: Vietnamese led by Lê Lợi revolted against Chinese occupation.

 1606–1607: The Bolotnikov rebellion for the abolition of serfdom, which was part of the Time of Troubles in Russia.

 1688: The Glorious Revolution in England overthrew King James II and established a Whig-dominated Protestant constitutional monarchy.

 1768: The Rebellion of 1768 by Creole and German settlers objecting to the turnover of the Louisiana Territory from New France to New Spain.

 The above list is but a small sample of the thousands of revolts throughout history, around the world. I collected them from Wikipedia, here is a link to the complete list, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_revolutions_and_rebellions .

  Of course no list of revolts or rebellions would be complete without,     

 1775–1783: The American Revolution establishes independence of the thirteen North American colonies from Great Britain, creating the republic of the United States of America.

  It can be and has been argued that the American Revolution is the single most important event in the history of mankind, second only to the birth of Jesus the Christ, in changing the course of mankind.

  Some might argue that the Civil War and the Bolshevik Revolution are equally as important. While these conflicts were both significant events, they have not had the lasting effect on the world as did the American Revolution, in my opinion.

  No matter which revolution or rebellion that you think is the most significant, the conflict itself is actually secondary to what follows.

  What happens after the revolution? Of course if the powers that are being challenged are victorious, then it is likely that little will change. Often there will be retribution against the rebels for daring to revolt in the first place. Another question about what happens after the revolution, depends on who is revolting and what they are revolting against.

  Not all revolutions are inspired by good intentions. Many revolutions are in fact stirred solely for the acquisition of power, while others seem to have the best intentions for the good of the all, end up installing some of the most tyrannical regimes known to man.

  If we take the American Revolution as an example of doing it right, we see that our Founding Fathers worked as hard after the revolution, as did the Patriots who fought during the war.

 After the last shot was fired and the building of a new nation began, it was important that the Framers did not abandon their revolutionary principles.  It would have been very easy for them to simply take control of the new government and to ignore the principles put forth in our Founding document, The Declaration of Independence.

 The fact that the new nation actually had to create a second governing document because the first, The Articles of Confederation, did not work to guarantee those principles, is a testament to the conviction of those who founded this nation.  It was this vision, and the strength of integrity that allowed the Framers to see the error of their ways, that empowered them to voluntarily disassemble what they had put together, only to improve on it in a way that has allowed this nation to exist as the shining light of Liberty for the last two hundred and twenty-five years.

   Each and every one of us face similar challenges in our everyday lives. Certainly our choices may not have the impact that those of our Founding Fathers have had, but it is through holding to so-called first principles that we find our way through life.

  As this new year begins we must ask ourselves, are we showing the strength of integrity that is needed to make these choices?  As someone who is extremely interested in political affairs, I can’t help but relate the views I have expressed here, to what has been unfolding here in Delaware for the last couple of years. Specifically within the GOP of the state and of Sussex County.

  We within the GOP of Delaware in general and within Sussex County specifically should take a long look at where we are headed.  I don’t think that it is too much of a stretch to call what happened within the Delaware GOP in the  last two years somewhat of a revolution.

  The last election cycle saw a career moderate, to leftist Republican politician defeated in a GOP primary. We also saw another party endorsed candidate defeated in the same primary season. Following these victories by a grass-roots movement within the GOP we lost the general elections. Some saw this as a failure of the revolutionaries, the revolutionaries saw it as unfinished business.

 Once the dust had settled from the election there was a bloodless  coup d’ etat within the GOP. First there was a cry for the resignation of the State Chairman Tom Ross which resulted in his resigning. At the same time there was growing discontent with the leadership of the Sussex County Chairman Ron Sams as well, which also resulted in his stepping down.

  For full disclosure I played my small part in this so-called revolution. Like many within the GOP in Delaware I felt that many of us who considered ourselves the more conservative faction of the party, were under represented within the party leadership. We felt that the time had come to take control of the party. We wanted a more rank and file focus from the party, a bottom up organization. We wanted the voter to have the loudest voice within the party.

 Like all revolutions we had our battle cries, things like RINOs, establishment, and elitist party leadership. Another one we were fond of was upstate elitist party establishment RINOs, just to cover all of our bases.

 Depending on your perspective you could say that the revolution was a success. It was  able to topple the state chairman and the Sussex County chairman as well.

  Clearly there were two icons of the revolution, these would have been the two candidates who upset the party endorsed candidates in the GOP primaries. These two candidates inspired many rank and file voters to become involved and  actually working on a political campaign for the first time ever. They should have been the new leaders and the new face of the GOP.

 In the one’s case they chose to disengage for the most part to focus on personal task. Coming back long enough to make a presidential endorsement that has angered many of their former supporters, due to the fact that the person they endorsed has no resemblance to the principles that the revolution held to.

 The second chose to stay engaged, they actually took a leadership role within the party. Though some of the things that have happened during their leadership time, has left some wondering if it was for the best.

 So now we are headed for  another election cycle and due to the revolution, the party is in turmoil. One has to wonder, have those who stirred the revolution held to the first principles of the revolution? Or have they become that which they revolted against?

  We have to ask, have the founders of the revolution worked to create, sustain and maintain a bottom up organization? Or have they succumb to the seduction of power? Have we substituted one establishment elite for that of another?

  It falls to those of us who demanded change, dare I say it? To be the change we demanded.

 We here in Sussex County are about to select new leadership, will we seek to hold to the principles of the revolution? Or will we simply install another administration that seeks to direct instead of lead, will we demand that the voter have the loudest voice? Or will we settle for leadership that feels that they know more than the rank and file?

 I have to admit that I have had to ask myself these same questions. Have I held to the principles of the revolution? In some cases I have found myself lacking. So this is not judgement of others, it is simply a warning, that if we want to achieve that which we fought for, then we must hold true to the so-called first principles of the revolution. The first being personal integrity. The second being holding ourselves as well as others accountable.