I have decided that since my bracket selections have all been booted from the tournament, I am going to spend the last week of the tournament cheering for the University of Kentucky. This seems like an odd choice, since I am usually a Duke Blue Devils fan.
There are many reasons that someone will choose to cheer for a certain college sports team. It could be that it was the school that they went to. Or it could be the school that they cheered for while they were growing up. Or maybe they know someone that went to that school and played for one of the sports teams. Like I said, there are a variety of reasons.
My reason in cheering for Kentucky is slightly different. Actually, it is kind of an oddball reason to cheer for a team. It actually has nothing to do with the University of Kentucky. It has nothing to do with the state of Kentucky. It actually has nothing to do with collegiate athletics. Instead, I am cheering for the University of Kentucky because I am a New York Yankees fan.
You may be have just read that previous sentence and said to yourself, "What does pro baseball have to do with college basketball?" Well, let me explain. You see, the last 6 times that the University of Kentucky Wildcats have won the NCAA men's basketball championship, the Yankees went on to win the World Series later in that same year. Yes, you read that right. When the Wildcats win the championship, so do the Yankees. This happened in 1949, 1951, 1958, 1978, 1996, and 1998.
This is quite the obscure statistic, but it does bode well for the Yankees (should the Wildcats win the tournament). You may say that just because a correlation exists does not mean that one event causes the other, and this is a true statement. However, I choose to look at this historically, and I do not want to mess with a winning formula.
Monday, March 28, 2011
Friday, March 18, 2011
A Message to Republicans - It's Time to Lead
After the election of President Obama in 2008, the outlook for the Republican Party was not good. They had just lost the Presidential election. And to make it worse, they lost seats in both the House and the Senate. The Democrats had written them off. The media had written them off. The Republicans had written themselves off, thinking that they would be a permanent minority party. All they wanted to do was get along and maintain the seats in Congress that they already had.
Of course, with this attitude, there would be no hope. The conservatives of the Republican Party were already upset with the out-of-control government spending and lack of leadership that had taken place during the previous Republican majority in Congress. Because of their disenchantment with the National Republican Party, they either did not show up to vote in the 2008 Presidential election, or they chose to vote for a 3rd party candidate. The Republicans had lost their base. The elected Republicans thought it more prudent to compromise on principle rather than take a stand on it. They had basically compromised their way into a minority. In other words, they failed to lead.
Then, the President handed them a gift, and that gift was Obamacare. The President, along with a Democrat-controlled Congress, pushed through a universal health care plan that no one had read, was going to cost the U.S. a lot of money that it did not have, and it would eventually put control of health care into the hands of bureaucrats. This was not a popular bill, no matter what the media or politicians tried to tell us. While most people agree that there are aspects of our health care system that need to be addressed and fixed, they knew that a government run system was definitely not the way to go.
Anyway, this bill helped to propel the recrudescence of conservatism in the U.S. This conservatism was seen most prominently through the Tea Party. People were finally stepping and saying "We've had enough of this!" People were tired of the government stepping into their lives. They were tired of the government spending money they did not have. They were tired of the arrogance of elected officials telling them what is best for them. People came to realize once again that the government is "of the people, by the people, and for the people." They realized that we do not have to accept the status quo.
So the people began to act, and rally, and have their voice heard. They elected candidates in their primaries that carried the same values that they had. They elected people that had the same vision for America's future. They took on many of the incumbents, and they were successful in unseating many of them. The people were finally getting a chance to see real representation in Washington. The Republicans won a resounding victory in the House, and they made tremendous gains in the Senate.
Alas, it seems that the Republican leadership has started to fail us again. I realize that the leaders in the Senate are limited in what they can do, since they are the minority party in that chamber. However, the leaders in the House have no such excuse. They have a majority, yet they fail to lead. Why is that? Do they not know how to lead? Are they afraid of confrontation? Are they afraid that they might upset some people?
Well, this has frustrated me for some time now, so I have several suggestions for the Republican leadership to win back the people that voted for them. If they lose these people again, they may never get them back.
Of course, with this attitude, there would be no hope. The conservatives of the Republican Party were already upset with the out-of-control government spending and lack of leadership that had taken place during the previous Republican majority in Congress. Because of their disenchantment with the National Republican Party, they either did not show up to vote in the 2008 Presidential election, or they chose to vote for a 3rd party candidate. The Republicans had lost their base. The elected Republicans thought it more prudent to compromise on principle rather than take a stand on it. They had basically compromised their way into a minority. In other words, they failed to lead.
Then, the President handed them a gift, and that gift was Obamacare. The President, along with a Democrat-controlled Congress, pushed through a universal health care plan that no one had read, was going to cost the U.S. a lot of money that it did not have, and it would eventually put control of health care into the hands of bureaucrats. This was not a popular bill, no matter what the media or politicians tried to tell us. While most people agree that there are aspects of our health care system that need to be addressed and fixed, they knew that a government run system was definitely not the way to go.
Anyway, this bill helped to propel the recrudescence of conservatism in the U.S. This conservatism was seen most prominently through the Tea Party. People were finally stepping and saying "We've had enough of this!" People were tired of the government stepping into their lives. They were tired of the government spending money they did not have. They were tired of the arrogance of elected officials telling them what is best for them. People came to realize once again that the government is "of the people, by the people, and for the people." They realized that we do not have to accept the status quo.
So the people began to act, and rally, and have their voice heard. They elected candidates in their primaries that carried the same values that they had. They elected people that had the same vision for America's future. They took on many of the incumbents, and they were successful in unseating many of them. The people were finally getting a chance to see real representation in Washington. The Republicans won a resounding victory in the House, and they made tremendous gains in the Senate.
Alas, it seems that the Republican leadership has started to fail us again. I realize that the leaders in the Senate are limited in what they can do, since they are the minority party in that chamber. However, the leaders in the House have no such excuse. They have a majority, yet they fail to lead. Why is that? Do they not know how to lead? Are they afraid of confrontation? Are they afraid that they might upset some people?
Well, this has frustrated me for some time now, so I have several suggestions for the Republican leadership to win back the people that voted for them. If they lose these people again, they may never get them back.
- You won because of yor agenda. Now implement that agenda. The Republicans need to realize that people voted for them because of the agenda that they ran on. We voted for them because of that agenda. We expect them implement that agenda when they get into office.
- Compromise is not something you should want, or expect. The Democrat idea of compromise is for the Republicans to agree to do things the Democrat way. They do not expect to meet in the middle. They want it their way, or nothing at all. That is how the Republicans should be. They won the election in an overwhelming manner. People wanted your agenda, which is why they voted for you. They did not vote for you so that you could compromise away the agenda.
- You cannot make everyone happy. This should be obvious. There are people that did not vote for Republicans, and they never will vote for one. So why even try to appease them? No matter what you do, they will be against it. So, you need to do what the people put you there to do - implement the agenda.
- Don't become moderates. This is what hurt the Republican party from about 1998-2009. After they took the nation by storm in 1994, they started to stray from their fiscally conservative ways. They started spending like the Democrats. They thought they were undefeatable. And because of that, they lost power. The Republicans nominated a moderate for President in 2008. If not for the conservative VP candidate that he picked, the Republicans would have lost by an even greater margin in the election. For some reason, the establishment Republicans think that the party needs to be more moderate in order to win elections. However, why would a Democrat vote for a Republican trying to be like a Democrat? The answer is that they will not do that. They already have a real Democrat running for their party.
- Conservatism will win when it is tried. When Republicans try to be like moderates, they lose elections. However, when they run as conservatives, they win. There is not much more to say here. People want elected Republicans to be conservative. When they are not, people will not show up to vote them back into office.
- Continue to listen to the people that voted you into office. This is something that no politician has been able to do. The Democrats don't listen to their constituents, either, but that is their problem. You are an elected official, put there by the people. You need to listen to them. You are to be there doing business for the people.
- The seat belongs to the people, not the elected official. When Sen. Ted Kennedy passed away, the media wondered what would happen to Kennedy's seat on the Senate. The man that eventually took Kennedy's place (now Sen. Scott Brown) answered that (it is not Sen. Kennedy's seat. It is the people's seat.) Too often, elected officials forget that they are there to serve the people. The people are not there to serve them.
- We want leaders. A leader makes tough decisions. They take responsibility. They take a stand on difficult issues. They risk losing popularity in order to do what is right, not politically expedient. All too often today, our elected officials make their decisions based on what is politically popular, not what is right. We want leaders who do what is right, not necessarily what is popular. One only needs to look at the state of Wisconsin. The Republican Governor and Legislature made the principled decision and stood tall in the midst of adversity in order to get difficult legislation passed. The were leaders, and they refused to be beaten down.
- Democrats want the power that you now have. Don't give them an excuse to get it back. The Democrats will stop at nothing to get power back.
- Don't start to look at the next election. One of my biggest pet peeves is people that start to run for office the day after the elections. These people need to leard that we elected you to enact an agenda, to pass bills that benefit the people. We did not elect you so that you could spend your time running for office again (and youa re getting paid by us to do that). People will vote for you if you do the right things while in office. Concentrate on doing what is right, and the elections will turn out fine.
Monday, March 14, 2011
Freedom of Speech and Fred Phelps
A few weeks ago, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the Westboro Baptist Church in its legal battle against Al Snyder, who sought to sue the church because of their protest at his son's (Lance Corporal Matthew Snyder) funeral. He was seeking damages due to emotional distress because of this church's complete lack of regard for him or the sacrifice that his son made for this country. I do not know of anybody that agrees with Fred Phelps and his family regarding their beliefs. However, many have come out to defend the Supreme Court's ruling on this matter.
As I paused to think about the decision, I tried to conclude in my own head whether this decision was the right decision to make. Our Constitution is to be applied to all Americans equally (even though the courts have not always applied it that way). Decisions from the court are to be based on laws, especially our Constitution. Court decisions should not be based on one's opinions or emotions. The more I struggled over this, the more I realized that the court, unfortunately, did get this decision correct. Just because I do not like what one person (or group) is saying or doing does not mean that they do not have the same freedoms that I have.
The Phelps family (probably emboldened by the recent Supreme Court decision) is now planning to protest at the funeral for 7 children of the Clouse family that died tragically in a fire last week. Here is a hardworking, blue-collar family who has just suffered such a great loss, and this despicable group of people wants to protest at the funeral. These people have no shame. I can't imagine the pain and agony and loss that the Clouse family is experiencing, and the Phelps family wants to make it even worse. However, just because I find these actions appalling does not necessarily make their actions illegal.
When the founders drafted the Constitution, they were keenly aware of what it was like for the government to stifle speech that they (the government) did not approve of. The founders did not want that kind of environment here in America. They understood the need for opposing ideas to be openly debated. They understood the importance of the ability of the masses to disagree with the elected officials. They understood the importance of elections, so that if the citizens thought that it was time to change the leadership, then they could make the change via elections. So they included the freedom of speech in the 1st Amendment.
Due to current events, we can see what it is like for governments to stifle the free speech of dissenters (just look at places like Libya and China). If these nations do not like what people are doing or saying, they arrest them and throw them in jail, sometimes even executing people who are trying to cause "trouble" for the government. If the government takes free speech rights away from people, it becomes easier to take away other rights, because the people are not able to speak against the government.
Let's think about this in the context of religion. The church that I go to preaches an evangelistic message. They preach right vs. wrong, holy vs. unholy, heaven vs. hell. Some will find this offensive. If these few are offended, they do not need to come to the church. They can choose to stay home. If the government starts to limit what can be preached based on what is offensive to some (and some would argue that they already do), then we, as Christians, would be offended by the government and their usurpation of religious freedoms. The church will then be severely limited in what they are able to legally preach. So, just because someone disagrees with what we say or we disagree with what someone else says does not mean that we should stifle their ability to speak freely. This becomes a Pandora's Box that should not be opened.
This freedom of speech has endured since the founding of our country, but there have also been limitations put on it over the years. You cannot say things in order to create a panic (this is the "You can't yell fire in a crowded theater" argument). You cannot knowingly lie about others with the intent to damage their reputation (libel and slander). These are, in my opinion, common sense measures to ensure that our freedom of speech does not allow us to ruin somebody else. In other words, along with the freedom of speech, we have the responsibility to use that freedom wisely.
If we decide that free speech rights apply to some and not to others, then we will become like some of these other nations we see today who are persecuting their own people. We cannot, and should not, stoop to the level of dictators and tyrants. For America to flourish, we need to be able to express our ideas and opinions about what would make this a better country, which will sometimes work for us and will sometimes work against us.
Now, with this being said, let me say that I in no way agree with the Westboro Baptist Church and what they are doing. These people are a despicable and appalling people. God told us through His Word to hate sin, but he did not tell us to hate the sinner. The Great Commission tells us to reach out to the lost, not to take condemnation and judgment into our own hands. I believe that these people are neither Baptist nor Christian. They are a cult. They do not preach the God of the Bible. One day, when the shoe is on the other foot, how will they react if, and when, they are treated in this same manner?
As I paused to think about the decision, I tried to conclude in my own head whether this decision was the right decision to make. Our Constitution is to be applied to all Americans equally (even though the courts have not always applied it that way). Decisions from the court are to be based on laws, especially our Constitution. Court decisions should not be based on one's opinions or emotions. The more I struggled over this, the more I realized that the court, unfortunately, did get this decision correct. Just because I do not like what one person (or group) is saying or doing does not mean that they do not have the same freedoms that I have.
The Phelps family (probably emboldened by the recent Supreme Court decision) is now planning to protest at the funeral for 7 children of the Clouse family that died tragically in a fire last week. Here is a hardworking, blue-collar family who has just suffered such a great loss, and this despicable group of people wants to protest at the funeral. These people have no shame. I can't imagine the pain and agony and loss that the Clouse family is experiencing, and the Phelps family wants to make it even worse. However, just because I find these actions appalling does not necessarily make their actions illegal.
When the founders drafted the Constitution, they were keenly aware of what it was like for the government to stifle speech that they (the government) did not approve of. The founders did not want that kind of environment here in America. They understood the need for opposing ideas to be openly debated. They understood the importance of the ability of the masses to disagree with the elected officials. They understood the importance of elections, so that if the citizens thought that it was time to change the leadership, then they could make the change via elections. So they included the freedom of speech in the 1st Amendment.
Due to current events, we can see what it is like for governments to stifle the free speech of dissenters (just look at places like Libya and China). If these nations do not like what people are doing or saying, they arrest them and throw them in jail, sometimes even executing people who are trying to cause "trouble" for the government. If the government takes free speech rights away from people, it becomes easier to take away other rights, because the people are not able to speak against the government.
Let's think about this in the context of religion. The church that I go to preaches an evangelistic message. They preach right vs. wrong, holy vs. unholy, heaven vs. hell. Some will find this offensive. If these few are offended, they do not need to come to the church. They can choose to stay home. If the government starts to limit what can be preached based on what is offensive to some (and some would argue that they already do), then we, as Christians, would be offended by the government and their usurpation of religious freedoms. The church will then be severely limited in what they are able to legally preach. So, just because someone disagrees with what we say or we disagree with what someone else says does not mean that we should stifle their ability to speak freely. This becomes a Pandora's Box that should not be opened.
This freedom of speech has endured since the founding of our country, but there have also been limitations put on it over the years. You cannot say things in order to create a panic (this is the "You can't yell fire in a crowded theater" argument). You cannot knowingly lie about others with the intent to damage their reputation (libel and slander). These are, in my opinion, common sense measures to ensure that our freedom of speech does not allow us to ruin somebody else. In other words, along with the freedom of speech, we have the responsibility to use that freedom wisely.
If we decide that free speech rights apply to some and not to others, then we will become like some of these other nations we see today who are persecuting their own people. We cannot, and should not, stoop to the level of dictators and tyrants. For America to flourish, we need to be able to express our ideas and opinions about what would make this a better country, which will sometimes work for us and will sometimes work against us.
Now, with this being said, let me say that I in no way agree with the Westboro Baptist Church and what they are doing. These people are a despicable and appalling people. God told us through His Word to hate sin, but he did not tell us to hate the sinner. The Great Commission tells us to reach out to the lost, not to take condemnation and judgment into our own hands. I believe that these people are neither Baptist nor Christian. They are a cult. They do not preach the God of the Bible. One day, when the shoe is on the other foot, how will they react if, and when, they are treated in this same manner?
Wednesday, March 9, 2011
Missions Conference 2011
If you would like a list of speakers and events for the Missions Conference (as well as directions), please click here.
Please come and join us. I look forward to seeing you there.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)