VoteKansas.org

I recently delivered a Sunday address entitled "The 3-Dimensional Life." This address was motivated by my belief that a major part of America's overall problem today derives from the fact that most people, including our leaders, live 1-dimensional lives. For the most part, they are ignorant of the past and oblivious to the future. Such people are incapable of making wise decisions, because they are only living for the present.

Without an appreciation and awareness of the past, we have no foundation on which to build our lives. Such people have lost all sense of history and heritage, and, without a heritage, they have no understanding or pride in who they are. Neither do they comprehend the morality, convictions, and sacrifices of their ancestors.

Furthermore, without cognizance of the future, we have no rudder or compass to guide us. People who live only for the present have no overriding sense of accountability or consequence. They judge their actions only in the light of immediate results with no regard for the plight of future generations.

Unfortunately, it seems that the vast majority of Americans are living a 1-dimensional life. And there seems to be little doubt that today's civil magistrates are sacrificing the future of America upon the altar of money, power, and ambition. Such conduct will quickly doom our once-great country.

Take a look at the average history book today. Where are the great stories of Washington and America's other Founding Fathers? They are practically nonexistent. Where are the references to the two Great Awakenings that revived spiritual piety in America? Where is the devotion to America's founding principles contained in the Declaration of Independence, U.S. Constitution, and Bill of Rights? All of this is totally lost to America's current generation.

[Chuck Baldwin's Web Site|Full Article|Note on Reposting]

Those of you who heard my radio program back in 2001 know that I predicted then that George W. Bush would do to the Republican Party much the same thing that Bill Clinton did to the Democratic Party. However, I must confess, I could not then realize the magnitude of that prediction.

Most of us remember that it was the election of Bill Clinton in 1992 that was the impetus for the Republican revolution of 1994. If you recall, a congressional election sweep of the magnitude of 1994 had not been seen in the previous seventy years. It is a truism that Bill Clinton helped to elect more Republicans than the Republican National Committee could ever dream about. Now, the same thing is happening with George W. Bush. In spades!

[Chuck Baldwin's Web Site|Full Article|Note on Reposting]

One of Shakespeare's most oft-quoted phrases comes from Romeo and Juliet, where Juliet asks Romeo: "What's in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet." Accordingly, President Bush and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid can call their immigration bill by any name they want to, but it is still amnesty, and it still stinks!

Hopefully, readers are aware that the Bush/Kennedy amnesty bill is being debated in the U.S. Senate this week with both the White House and senate leaders hopeful of quick passage.

If it passes, the proposed immigration bill would immediately give all 12-20 million illegal aliens already in the United States "probationary" citizenship. It would also put an estimated 60 million immigrants on the path to citizenship over the next 20 years. In exchange for granting U.S. citizenship to tens of millions of illegals, the bill promises to better protect America's borders.

However, what is abundantly clear is that the federal government's idea of border enforcement is totally without meaning or merit. Consider the fact that the United States already has copious laws against illegal immigration, including punishment for businesses that hire illegals. So, what good have these laws done? Very little.

[Chuck Baldwin's Web Site|Full Article|Note on Reposting]

I recently delivered an address to the people of Crossroad Baptist Church in Pensacola, Florida entitled, Our Christian Duty.

For sure, "duty" is a much under-appreciated word among this irresponsible, avant-garde generation. Fortunately, this has not always been the case.

America's history is replete with the stories of brave and selfless men and women who were willing to do their duty, regardless of personal cost or sacrifice. Without them, this country, and the prosperity we have enjoyed, would never have existed.

Great American patriots from George Washington to Douglas MacArthur have paid eloquent tribute to the virtue and dignity of doing one's duty. In fact, it is no hyperbole to say that the difference between mediocrity and greatness is the attention, or lack thereof, to doing one's duty.

In my address, I noted the duty that we Christians have to God, our families, and our country.

Our duty to God is summarized in the Great Commandment, which is to love the Lord our God will all of our heart, soul, mind, and strength. As Christian men, our duty to our families is to provide our children with firm, loving discipline. And our duty to America is eternal vigilance, that we might preserve the historic principles that birthed this free land.

[Chuck Baldwin's Web Site|Full Article|Note on Reposting]

No less than ten Republican hopefuls in the 2008 White House race participated in the first national GOP debate last Thursday, May 3. Even before the 90-minute debate had concluded, media pundits were declaring that former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney had won.

Even my friend, MSNBC's Joe Scarborough wrote, "During the debate I was flooded by e-mails from Republican activists and voters who told me Romney was dominating the debate." Scarborough went on to say, "Among those Red State Republicans (who will elect their party's next nominee), Mitt Romney won while McCain and Giuliani failed to meet expectations."

As with most political pundits, the entire focus of the debate centered on only three contenders: Arizona Senator John McCain, former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, and Romney. In fact, in his post-debate summary, Scarborough's only reference to anyone other than these three names was a fleeting mention of the "Sam Brownbacks of the world."

Yet, when one looks at MSNBC's own poll, a much different picture emerges. According to this poll, there was a clear winner alright, but his name was not McCain, Giuliani, or Romney. It was Texas Congressman Ron Paul.

Consider the before and after polls, as they appear on MSNBC's web site. See it at:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18421356/

[Chuck Baldwin's Web Site|Full Article|Note on Reposting]

I suppose there was a time in American politics when there was a significant difference between conservatives and liberals, between Republicans and Democrats, and between Christians and unbelievers. However, with only limited exceptions, that time has largely gone. When it comes to the salient issues that are currently waging war against America's future survival, it is extremely difficult to distinguish those differences.

If one removes the issues of abortion and gay rights from the debate, there is precious little that distinguishes the modern Christian conservative from his liberal counterpart.

Federal spending sure doesn't apply. President George W. Bush and his fellow "conservative" Republicans have the dubious distinction of outspending practically every administration and Congress during the entire 20th century. Only the Franklin Roosevelt and Lyndon Johnson administrations compare to the insatiable spending habits of the current administration.

Then there is the illegal alien invasion currently taking place in America. What was virtually nonexistent twenty years ago and only a minor nuisance before Bush was elected President has now become a full-fledged assault that threatens our country's very survival. And remember, the Republican Party controlled the entire federal government during the six years that the bulk of this invasion was taking place. And, except for a few conservative congressmen (mostly in the House of Representatives), not only did they do nothing to stop it, they sat back and watched as President Bush actively encouraged and facilitated it, something he is doing to this very day.

[Chuck Baldwin's Web Site|Full Article|Note on Reposting]

That America's two most recent presidents, Bill Clinton and George W. Bush, have been guilty of egregiously flawed and fallacious decisions and activities is obvious. However, at what point do bad policies and conduct become treasonous? At what point do we conclude that our country's Chief Executive has crossed the line of mere inanity or naïveté and has actually become a threat to our national security and survival?

Those who listened to my radio talk show when Bill Clinton was in office know how I daily chronicled what I believed were acts of treason. No, I am not talking about his numerous sexual affairs. I'm talking primarily about what became known as Chinagate.

There is a plethora of evidence to support the accusation that then-President Bill Clinton deliberately facilitated the transfer of military (including rocket and satellite) technology to Communist China in exchange for large donations via highly placed Chinese operatives. That, more than the Monica Lewinsky affair, should have been the basis of impeachment. However, the Republican majority in Congress chose to do absolutely nothing about Clinton's treasonous conduct in Chinagate. Now it is President George W. Bush who is pushing the envelope.

As I have already stated in this column, I believe an independent investigation should proceed aggressively in order to determine whether or not President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney deliberately manufactured evidence to support a preemptive invasion of Iraq. If it is proven they did, they should both be impeached.

However, I believe there is another area of malfeasance committed by G.W. Bush that is equal to anything Bill Clinton did: his determination to facilitate a Mexican invasion of the United States and the decision to merge America into a trilateral North American Community.

[Chuck Baldwin's Web Site|Full Article|Note on Reposting]

It is no hyperbole to say that conservatives throughout America are extremely disappointed and disillusioned with the national Republican Party. This discouragement is only deepened as they peruse the field of prominent candidates being trotted out as "frontrunners."

It appears that conservatives will be asked to choose between the chameleon Mitt Romney, the pro-amnesty-for-illegal-aliens John McCain, and philanderers Newt Gingrich and Rudy Giuliani. A few conservatives seem slightly excited that former Tennessee senator Fred Thompson is mulling entrance into the presidential race. However, a closer inspection of his voting record finds him to be just another globalist neocon, who would do little to change things in Washington, D.C. For example, Americans for Better Immigration gives him a puny career grade of "C."

The Republican Party's unwillingness to advance a genuine conservative has left millions of grassroots Republicans on the verge of leaving the GOP. For example, a poll at the recent CPAC meeting found the "overwhelming majority of conservatives displeased with the leadership of the Republican Party, and most conservatives scowl at the thought of having to vote for Rudoph Giuliani, John McCain, or Mitt Romney."

In fact, the displeasure of grassroots conservatives with the GOP manifested itself in the creation of the Conservative Exodus Project (CEP), which was formed immediately following the recent CPAC meeting. According to organizers, CEP "is a vehicle for conservatives to leave the GOP if a real conservative presidential candidate is not chosen in 2008." Members pledge either to not vote, or to vote third party (e.g. Constitution Party).

[Chuck Baldwin's Web Site|Full Article|Note on Reposting]

Evangelical Christians are already beginning the process of selecting the Republican presidential candidate whom they can anoint as their successor to George W. Bush. Somehow, evangelicals have this deluded idea that President Bush is one of them. How they came to this delusion both fascinates and escapes me. Bush is anything but one of them. However, most evangelicals believe he is, and today it seems that illusion is greater than reality, anyway. Bush proves that more than anyone I have ever known. But enough about Bush.

The question burning in the minds of evangelicals today is: Which Republican candidate for president will we anoint? There are several possibilities, but apparently Congressman Ron Paul is not one of them.

[Chuck Baldwin's Web Site|Full Article|Note on Reposting]

Chuck Baldwin's commentaries are copyrighted and may be republished, reposted, or emailed providing the person or organization doing so does not charge for subscriptions or advertising and that the column is copied intact and that full credit is given and that Chuck's web site address is included.

Please visit Chuck's web site at http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/.