I have a plan - trust me!

Trust me … I have a plan….

Have you ever really listened to the speeches given by the candidates for the Republican nominee for the Presidential race?

It is really interesting to hear what they actually have to say once they get past all the thank you’s and obligatory praising of their teams and supporters.

Last night I listened to two of these people …and the differences were quite stark.

One was a little strained and clearly disappointed at having achieved only second place…while the other was upbeat and clearly exuberant as only a winner can be.

As they say…”winners are grinners, and losers can chose for themselves”….but that is not what I want to talk about today. Nor do I want to talk about how the Michigan result is not as clearly a Romney victory as the numbers indicate (although it appears that the delegate count will be either 15/15 Romney/Santorum or 13/17 Romney/Santorum. I find it very interesting that Romney claims victory with the vote and yet Santorum can rack up more delegates from this affair….but that is another story for another day.)

Today I want to look briefly at what these two guys said…and if I can, find a nutshell to wrap it up in.

Santorum appealed to the strength of the American people to build up the country when Government gets out of the way. He talked of the government being a tool and the responsibility being with the people. He spoke of dismantling federal entitlements and pushing that responsibility to the states. He spoke of smaller government, fewer regulations and constitutional guidance. While he indulged in some patriotic rhetoric in an attempt to reignite the patriotic fervor that will propel him forward, he used that sparingly and enticed the people to support his efforts to revive for them their rights as described in the Constitution.

This did not sound to me like a defeated man. It sounded like a man who loves his country and is only now finding the voice he needs.

And then I heard Romney….Mitt Romney, the man with a plan…..

I have no idea how many times he said…I have a plan….

I don’t know how many times he made claims about what he would achieve as President …without a single explanation of how he would do it.

His speech was long on rhetoric and short on specifics. A few meager attempts to refer to the Constitution did nothing to dispel my thinking…

What I heard was…”I have a plan….trust me!”

I don’t know about you, but I find those sorts of statements very discomforting. When have you ever thought a politician was trustworthy? Why would you just accept what he says without first determining the logic behind the statement?

I have to say that Romney has studied well. Our current President was swept to power on the back of his own statement that he “has a plan…a plan to fundamentally change America…a plan that provides hope”….

I can’t help thinking that Romney is following Obama’s lead….he has a plan…and we should simply trust that?

I confess I have not been to Romney’s website to actually look at his plan….it is likely to be there…it is likely to be spelled out quite well….so why is it that he doesn’t seem to be willing to articulate it in his speeches?

That is very simple to answer….we live in an era of sound bites….and when his plan is articulated; it becomes sound bite fodder…so he doesn’t.

On the other hand, Santorum has found himself beaten up over things he has said. The media (and his opponents) are merciless in their attacks on him (and Gingrich) for things they have said…often taken out of context, often misleading…but still the sound bite is there for the uninformed to salivate over.

But Romney?

He is clever….he has a plan….trust him!

With each passing day it becomes clearer to me that this year is Romney’s turn to screw up the Presidential race. The Republican establishment has decreed it…and thus it shall be.

Really?

Are you conservatives really going to sit back and allow the establishment to select your nominee for you?

The Republican brains trust are all sitting back in their ivory towers looking down at the conservative voters…and between puffs on their metaphorical cigars…they grin at each other and say….”We have a plan….trust us!”

I don’t think this race is anywhere near over yet. It is very clear that conservatives want Obama out…that is their highest priority…but I am sensing a growing movement that they want more than that. A Romney presidential administration meets their initial need to get rid of Obama….but it doesn’t meet their desire for a conservative administration.

And this where I believe that both the Romney camp and the establishment camp has missed the mark.

Santorum and Gingrich are said to be unable to get the women voters…especially those that are not interested in the intricacies of political discourse but base their opinions on the sound bites they hear between episodes of Desperate Housewives…and I suspect this is true.

And if it IS true?  What alternatives are left for the thinking conservative?

Good old Uncle Ron?

The libertarians among you will be saying “yes” and I confess that I find many of the Paul ideas appealing to the small “l” libertarian inside me. With the passage of time, Ron Paul’s ability to explain his positions has either improved, or I have simply understood better what he is trying to say.

I still find his foreign policy positions difficult to agree with but I don’t expect to agree with anyone 100%.

Anyway, here is what we are faced with, or at least what the media tells us we are faced with

-          Romney has a plan – but can we trust him?

-          Santorum is not electable because he hates women, college graduates and JFK speeches make him sick

-          Gingrich can beat Obama in a debate…but he is a philandering woman hater that no woman could ever vote for

-          Paul – he is just looney tunes…would make a great dinner guest but a President? Get real!

If we go by the media representations there really is no choice is there?

But wait….

Are we going to allow the media to choose our candidate? Who owns the media….the left? Well, yes, much of the mainstream media sold their souls to the left decades ago….but what about places like Fox, and many of the talk shows which are dominated by conservatives? Unfortunately, they are all about ratings…and are often in bed with the republican establishment.

So…the media is biased toward Romney….I still question why the left wants him as the candidate….perhaps they too believe that Obama and Romney are simply mirror images?

Just so you know…I am not in the “anybody but Romney” camp….I am in the “anybody but Obama” camp.

I just happen to believe that I have a better chance of winning the lottery (even though I NEVER buy a ticket) than Romney does of beating Obama in a general election.

Can we see any of the other three beating Obama?

Only if we decide that it is ok not to agree 100% with everything they say or do. Santorum’s weakness…some people just don’t like that he wears his faith on his sleeve. Does that mean he will make a bad President? Nope.

Some people don’t like that Gingrich has divorced twice…they assume that makes him a bad man and definitely a bad President. Really?

Some people don’t like Paul…they think he is insane…but his conservative record cannot be questioned. Does his goofy smile mean he will make a bad President? Nope.

It is time for people to stop listening to the sound bites…stop being lulled by the rhetoric and start demanding substance.

If we do that, we may avoid having Romney running for President. If we don’t , he will be the nominee….

Of course, that many not be a bad thing, right?

After all….he has a plan!

…..devereaux

The ethics of murder!

Just what exactly is an ethicist?

Last night I read a story about two ethicists who hold opinions that much of the world will disagree with. I will get to that in a moment…but first I want to understand what an ethicist actually is.

One would expect that it has to do with ethics…but what is that?

What is the basis of ethics…what is the purpose of ethics…and what do ethicists do?

A quick trip to dictionary.com tells us that one definition of ethics is:

“that branch of philosophy dealing with values relating to human conduct, with respect to the rightness and wrongness of certain actions and to the goodness and badness of the motives and ends of such actions.”

….and that an ethicist is….

“a person who specializes in or writes on ethics  or who is devoted to ethical principles.”

I am so thankful that we now have it clear….

An ethicist is a person who writes on a branch of philosophy with values relating to human conduct …with respect to the rightness or wrongness, or goodness or badness of the motives of such actions.

In other words, someone who tells you what is right or wrong.

And this is something we should listen to? These are people who are trained in determining what is right or wrong?

How so?

What is the compass they use to make that determination?

And who gives a rat’s ass what they actually say or think?

Ethicists…?

What makes them ethicists? Their course of study? Could it be their understanding of the world and how it works? Maybe they think they have an inside ear to God’s lips?

Philosophy!  Bullcrap if you ask me.

In a world where moral certitudes have been replaced by “do your own thing”…where freedom has come to mean “do whatever you want as long as nobody else is harmed”…where honor means “don’t get caught” and a man’s word is as valuable as a fast food container…what do philosophers offer us?

Deep thinking? Nope.

Understanding of human nature? Nope!

A guidepost that helps us develop our own moral compass? Nope…not even something as vague as that.

They give us…ethicists.

Form Australia we learn that two ethicists have decided that the arguments for abortion could also be applied to post birth situations. That if abortion was acceptable, so too should be the killing of babies after birth.

After birth abortions should be considered in numerous instances:-

-          Where the child may be able to live an acceptable life but would put a burden on the parents, we can kill the baby

-          Where adoption is an option, but could come back to haunt the mother, killing the baby should be an option

-          Where the baby has some physical or mental defect that could place strain on the future economy, kill the baby

To be fair, I cannot be critical without at least showing you their argument for this thinking….

“Both a fetus and a newborn certainly are human beings and potential persons, but neither is a ‘person’ in the sense of ‘subject of a moral right to life’. We take ‘person’ to mean an individual who is capable of attributing to her own existence some (at least) basic value such that being deprived of this existence represents a loss to her.”

So…these two ethicists are saying that it is ok to kill human beings (since both a fetus and a baby is a human being) because they are not yet people…they are simply potential persons.

Enough!!

I am sick to my stomach.

Ethicists indeed! What is their basis…what is their moral guidance…what is their belief structure?

Why not go all the way…elderly people are no longer people since they have used up all their potential…let’s kill them too?

What about people who are no longer able to contribute due to illness…or accident….kill them as well?

What about our returning warriors with arms and legs destroyed…with mental horrors plaguing both their conscious and unconscious states? Let’s kill them too.

Not too many years ago, people who thought the way of these ethicists would have been ignored…would have been expelled from any serious consideration…would have been denied any air time….but today?

Today, this world has moved so far liberal that these lunatics get air time…that their opinions are subject to serious consideration and discussion…

Ethicists?

These loons are not ethicists.

In 1976 Logan’s Run was released on the public. Starring Michael York and the great Peter Ustinov, the story is set in 2274 and on the surface, it all seems to be an idyllic society. Living in a city within an enclosed dome, there is little or no work for humans to perform and inhabitants are free to pursue all of the pleasures of life. There is one catch however: your life is limited and when you reach 30, it is terminated in a quasi-religious ceremony known as Carousel.

I imagine it was ethicists that eventually determined that life after age 30 was not worth living...and that Carousel was developed to lull people into believing that renewal was possible and indeed desirable….and, except for the fact that renewal was a euphemism for murder, it would have been wonderful!

Of course, not everyone believed in that sort of renewal…some ran, believing there was an alternative to the Carousel. They were hunted down and killed as runners…

But some still did escape and found that there was life outside…life where men and women could grow old. They learnt of the lies of the ethicists and the horror of the carousel.

But only if they got past a character named Box. Box was in charge of providing food for the dome.

“Box: Regular storage procedure. The same as the other food. The other food stopped coming. And they started.

Logan 5: What other food?

Box: Fish, and plankton. And sea greens, and protein from the sea. It's all here, ready. Fresh as harvest day. Fish and sea greens, plankton and protein from the sea. And then it stopped coming. And they came instead. So I store them here. I'm ready. And you're ready. It's my job. To freeze you. Protein, plankton...”

It seems that Box used all manner of foodstuffs to freeze and provide to the dome…including  the bodies of runners he had caught.

This is a nod to the classic 1973 movie starring Charleton Heston…”Soylent Green”…where the bodies of the dead were transformed into food called Soylent Green.

Is this the kind of world we want to live in?

Is this how the writers of Logan’s Run and Soylent Green saw society’s progression?

Until today, I found it difficult to understand that our culture could take that big step across a seemingly huge chasm…a step where we could listen to ethicists’ talk of murder without shouting them down in disgrace.

I ask again….what is an ethicist?

He is a person who throws morality to the four winds, who scatters souls thoughtlessly in the seas and oceans.

He is a man or woman who uses philosophy as an excuse to discard morality…who uses law to destroy compassion…who uses self-motivation and greed to destroy innocence.

Beware the ethicists…they will lead you all to the Promised Land…but not the land promised by God…

They will lead you to the land of Logan’s Run…to the land of Soylent Green.

When we abrogate our own intelligence in favor of those who claim greater knowledge…we abrogate our own freedom….we sell our souls to the minstrels of darkness.

Who are ethicists?

They are the leaders of the Brave New World…a world I want no part of.

They are the thought leaders behind the Occupy movement…they are the influence behind the throne in the White House…they are the corruption on the floor of Congress.

The one thing they are not…

…is ethical.

Do not allow ethicists to tell you what to believe. Should you do that, the salt from your tears will parch your skin as you watch the world you love disappear.

Beware, my friends…and stay strong.

…..devereaux

Gotcha!

The end of February fast approaches and with Super-Tuesday only a week or so away, the stakes for the Republican nominee could not be higher.

It is clear that Santorum is making big gains on Romney in Michigan…and I laugh when I hear people say that Romney should drop out if he should lose there…what a crock!

Actually, the whole nomination process is starting to collapse into a farce…and this is not necessarily due the stupidity of the candidates (although there is plenty of that to go around!).

No…it is due largely to the media determining what it is that the voter is really interested in…in other words it is the media that is driving our knowledge of the candidate’s positions and determining what we should be “allowed” to think about…and of course, since the media is in bed with the left, and has as a secondary goal the objective to sell product, that message becomes a testament to the left’s determination to control the conversation.

What do I mean by this?

Well, if you read or listen to media reports from the campaign trail, it would not take a great leap of faith to believe that the candidates have moved away from discussions of economics, and have instead embarked on a campaign premised on conservative social beliefs.

Why is this so?

Well, it is simple. The economy and discussions of economic answers is deadly to Obama. He cannot deny that his policies have failed to return America to the prosperity he promised. His excuse that he didn’t know how bad the economy was when he took office will only go so far to numb the minds of the brainless…and has no impact on the partly educated…so he has no way to win if the focus is kept on the economy.

But, if nothing else, the left is smart. They understand that by controlling the conversation, they can direct the electorates thinking to those things that incite an emotional response…a response predicated on feelings rather than logic.

And the left controls feelings.

Social issues are the ones that the left can control…with decades of liberal thinking permeating our culture, it is very easy for the left to ask the questions that they know will generate the answers they want to hear.

Obama is leading the charge with his claims of wanting to be fair, of appealing to the ”rightness” we all feel about everyone being able to succeed. And if we want everyone to succeed, then those that have already seen success should be forced to contribute more…to contribute their fair share so that others have a chance.

So where is the left media going with this?

They are cleverly making the social issue of the day contraception. After all, who would deny that a woman should be able to get contraception (except of course those right wing religious zealots stuck in the dark ages who believe contraception is immoral and therefor would ban it if they became President!)

Oh , what a clever message that one is.

What about abortion? That is not now a winning argument but it still raises the emotions…after all, it is only right that a woman has a right to choose…and of course, if contraception is banned, the abortion numbers will climb…all because of the dark age thinking of right wing religious zealots.

And who is paying their fair share?

And who are you or I to determine what is essentially a moral question that the individual should be deciding for themselves? If you restrict contraception or abortion, you are taking away the rights of a woman to make her own choices.

Oh what a clever trap the left has sprung on the unwary conservative.

If they are not careful they will look like the very right wing religious zealots the left is warning about, or they will back pedal and look like fools or simply people who do not know what they believe.

Oh what a clever fly trap these candidates are walking into.

And not one of them has noticed the trap. Not one of them has yet questioned the premise that is inherent in the questions on social issues. They continue to try to answer the question as it is asked, instead of rephrasing the question so they can answer what we, the voter, needs to hear.

As an example…

“Mr. Santorum, much has been said of your religious views as a Catholic on the question of contraceptives. What is your personal stand on this issue?”

This is a gotcha question…designed to do one of two things:-

-          Get Santorum to say that his religious beliefs do not support contraception

-          Get him to move back/away from his religious beliefs

(Note: you will never hear that particular question asked of a protestant.)

The only answer that makes sense of this question is the following:-

“I understand that contraception is a deeply personal issue, and that individuals determine their positions based on their own beliefs. My Catholic beliefs play a part in determining my position, however my beliefs are not the same as everybody else’s and that is what makes this country great. We do not all have to believe the same thing. And this is why it is vitally important that government stay out of the business of moral guidance. No person should be forced to pay to provide contraception to any other person. The provision of contraceptives is not a government responsibility and people who chose to use it should pay for them themselves. No if’s or but’s…under my administration nobody will be forced to pay for contraception nor will the government provide one dime of funding to organizations for the purpose of funding the availability of contraception.”

So…what about abortion?

Same answer….

“I am personally against abortion, but I recognize that the Courts have held abortion to be legal. I will not be involved in changing that law however I would personally support any challenges. Having said that, while I am President I will ensure that not one dime of taxpayer money is used to provide funding for organizations providing abortion services.  Under my administration no funding of abortion services will be permitted. If women chose to have an abortion, they must bear the responsibility for the cost of that, not the taxpayer. The government, however, will not prevent charitable organizations from providing those services…it just won’t fund them.”

Do you see how the question can be answered clearly and precisely without having to step away from personal beliefs, and by turning the answer to a discussion on the governments role?

Of course, the left media will simply lie about the answers anyway….but at least the question has been parsed away from a gotcha question and into a discussion of government.

These are two very obvious examples…but there are many more where the wrong questions are asked and where the wrong answers are given.

It is time for conservatives to take back control of the discussion…to ensure that the left does not dominate.

Here is another example.

There are several states that are looking at the possibility of mandating drug testing for welfare recipients as a way to reduce the spiraling costs of welfare.

While I fully support this concept, I find it amazing that the proponents of this are defending it using the wrong arguments.

The left is stating that to drug test everyone assumes that the recipients must be using drugs and that this is a government overstep into personal rights.

The right argues that when they have to get a job to earn the money that gets taxed so that welfare recipients can get their checks, they have to be tested for drugs…so why should the welfare recipient not be held to the same standard.

I am sure you have heard this argument a thousand times. Unfortunately, this argument puts you fair and square on the playing field of the liberals. They can counter that with very logical arguments all day long…it does not matter if they are right or wrong because that argument assumes one major thing…

…by making that argument conservatives are immediately accepting that the government has a RIGHT to take your money and pay welfare of any sort!

The argument conservatives should be mounting is that it is unconstitutional to provide ANY form of welfare…and it doesn’t matter whether they are druggies or clean, white or black, yellow or brindle….the redistribution of wealth through a welfare system is simply not constitutional.

Where are the voices saying that?

I don’t hear them…I hear them saying that it is “only fair” that welfare recipients be tested.

Only fair?

That is the same words that Obama uses when he wants to steal more money from the rich….only fair!

I am sick of “fairness”. It is an arbitrary word with no meaning when used in this context.

Is it fair that I have to pay higher taxes so someone else gets to sit on their duff all day?

Is it fair that I have to see the value of my investments decline through inflation, so that someone else can sit on the duff all day?

Is it fair that I have to pay $5 a gallon for gas because the currency becomes less valuable due to government printing presses running so that someone else can sit on their duff all day?

Yeah…funny how the concept of fairness can only go one way…it is not fair that someone has to sit on their duff all day without enough money to buy popcorn while they watch their big screen tv…all the while knowing that some rich CEO is working 80 hours a week creating wealth for himself and his country…it just isn’t fair that he gets to do that while all I get to do is sit on my duff all day.

Oh, boo f’n hoo!

You know…as much as I hate the interloper in the Oval Office, I have to confess that I admire his cajones….

Who else can stand up and say there is nothing that can be done about high gas prices? Huh? Really?

Who else can support algae as the next “soon to be proven as a failure” answer to America’s needs…and do it with a straight face…just months after the Solyndra debacle and the failure of all his other initiatives.

Who else can declare war on higher and middle classes and immediately say he is not proclaiming class warfare?

Who else can declare war on religious freedom while proclaiming religious freedom.

This double speak tyrant has learned well the lessons of the past. He knows that most people have been dumbed down so far that their average concentration span is less than 10 seconds….

“What did the President say? Oh yeah…religious freedom is good, or something…now turn the channel because I think those guys on Survivor are about to build a fire to keep warm.”

This is the mentality we have to deal with….the addicted are so addicted they no longer are capable of clear thought even if they wanted to. The left has succeeded in dumbing the country down to where nearly 50% think no harder than how to put out their hand for the next handout.

Is there a solution?

I don’t know.

Education would help, but how do you educate those who do not believe they need it? How do you educate those who believe the liberal lies? How do you educate those who rely on liberal media to tell them what they should think?

The answer is simple…one at a time. Every conservative must seek to educate their family, their friends, their coworkers…one at a time.

We are not looking for a conversion experience….we are looking to get them to ask the right questions, to think deeply and to rely on their own common sense.

Many will never change, they are a lost cause. Many will laugh at you…or worse…some will threaten you…and the occasional one will kick your butt….

You see, the last thing liberals can accept is being faced with the truth.

They will do anything to avoid that nasty reality.

But the truth is the panacea for all that is wrong with this country…

And the good people of this land who value the truth will never lay down and see it subverted, manipulated and hidden the way this administration does.

It is time to rise up and demand the one thing that the Constitution promises as your right….the “Right to LIFE, LIBERTY and the PURSUIT of happiness”…

There is no right to contraception…

There is no right to abortion…

There is no right to welfare…

There is no right to fairness.

Those created rights in fact prevent the very constitutional rights you DO have…life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

…..devereaux

Don't ask me...I'm only visiting this planet!

A week is a long time in politics, right? It is a long time in sports too…and many think a long time in music. But there is little doubt that in society a week is but a blink of the eye…a week may have long term consequences not because of the passage of time, but because of the occasional momentous events that can happen in an instant.

But if, generally speaking, a week is NOT a long time for society, what is?

Is a year a long time?

Maybe a decade?

What time frame do we see as being needed to effect momentous changes in society?

The liberal progressive march has been spread over decades….the transition from a God fearing country to a country where God is banned from the halls of public buildings has taken a mere half century.

As I pondered this my mind drifted back to the late Larry Norman and his lyrical essay on the decline of a nation, and indeed society. Written in 1973, it tells of the then decline in society as referenced by pop culture…

“Reader’s Digest

Alice is a drag queen, Bowie's somewhere in between

Other bands are looking mean, me, I'm trying to stay clean.

I don't dig the radio, I hate what the charts pick

Rock and roll may not be dead, but it's getting sick.

All over the world disc jockeys sound the same

And every town I play is like the one from where I came.

Rolling Stones are millionaires, flower children pallbearers,

Beatles said "All you need is love", and then they broke up.

Jimi took an overdose, Janis followed so close,

The whole music scene and all the bands are pretty comatose.

This time last year, people didn't wanna hear.

They looked at Jesus from afar, this year he's a superstar.

Dear John, who's more popular now?

I've been listening to some of Paul's new records.

Sometimes I think he really is dead.

It's 1973, I wonder who we're gonna see

Who's in power now? Think I'll turn on my TV,

The man on the news said China's gonna beat us,

We shot all our dreamers, there's no one left to lead us.

We need a solution, we need salvation,

Let's send some people to the moon and gather information.

They brought back a big bag of rocks.

Only cost thirteen billion. Must be nice rocks.

You think it's such a sad thing when you see a fallen king

Then you find out they're only princes to begin with

And everybody has to choose whether they will win or lose

Follow God or sing the blues, and who they're gonna sin with.

What a mess the world is in, I wonder who began it.

Don't ask me, I'm only visiting this planet.

………………………………………………………………....Larry Norman, 1973

When looking at these lyrics one must first understand the era they were written. The first clue is the title…”Readers Digest”.

In the late 60’s and early 70’s almost every house around the country subscribed to the Reader’s Digest. It was a small book filled with short uplifting stories and small humorous stories designed to inform, entertain and leave a positive and healthy message.

Today the Reader’s Digest as an organization is fighting a declining market. The Reader’s Digest magazine is long gone…and the company is little more than a direct marketing company, designed to sell products under multiple brand names. The Digest of the 70’s is no more…and is barely remembered …except by old farts like me. Even the title of this song foretold demise.

The first verse sets the scene….

Alice is a drag queen, Bowie's somewhere in between

Other bands are looking mean, me, I'm trying to stay clean.

I don't dig the radio, I hate what the charts pick

Rock and roll may not be dead, but it's getting sick.

All over the world disc jockeys sound the same

And every town I play is like the one from where I came.

The reference to Alice Cooper and David Bowie is a reference to the need to be outrageous, the need for rock and roll to depart from its musical roots and enter the world of dramatics… a trend that has not changed since then…singers to follow like Madonna, Michael Jackson led the charge toward today’s dramatics in the vein of Lady Gaga and every two bit performer who hides their lack of singing ability behind a dramatic performance.

The reference to drugs, lack of originality and that the music scene is controlled not by the people but by the record companies who bought airplay in various forms of pay to play schemes led to a very profound statement….”and every town I play is like the one from where I came”…a profound indictment on the loss of innocence, the loss of personality, the loss of character and individuality. He was not speaking of physical attributes…he was speaking of the destruction of individualism into a form of all inclusiveness where to be different was to be abhorred…the destruction of the individual.

He was foretelling the effect that society’s demands for all-inclusiveness would have on society…it was killing the very thing that made it great.

“Rolling Stones are millionaires, flower children pallbearers,

Beatles said “All you need is love” , and then they broke up.

Jimi took an overdose, Janis followed so close,

The whole music scene and all the bands are pretty comatose.

This time last year, people didn't wanna hear.

They looked at Jesus from afar, this year he's a superstar.”

Here we see a progression of the uselessness of pop culture. We see how the past is no longer relevant with pall bearers representing the hippies…and yet money is thrown at entertainers….The Beatles thought they had it sorted out…but nope…

The drugs sex and rock ‘n roll culture was taking more victims…and yet the music scene was not going anywhere. Adding insult to injury was the depiction of Jesus, not as a savior but as a superstar…one that was no longer a personal figure but a cult musical figure.

This verse continues the narrative of decline.

"Dear John, who's more popular now?

I've been listening to some of Paul's new records.

Sometimes I think he really is dead.”

Subsequent to the Beatles break up, the rumors of Paul McCartney’s death were rampant…but the music was all that mattered…and even in death, bad music, bad culture could prevail.

“It's 1973, I wonder who we're gonna see

Who's in power now? Think I'll turn on my TV,

The man on the news said China's gonna beat us,

We shot all our dreamers, there's no one left to lead us.

We need a solution, we need salvation,

Let's send some people to the moon and gather information.”

This could easily have been written today…changing 1973 to 2012….we still wonder who we are going to see…we still wonder who is in power now. We can’t determine the difference between the two major political parties because there is little difference…the threat from China remains…the search for salvation continues but today we seek answers in places far more distant than the moon.

“They brought back a big bag of rocks.

Only cost thirteen billion. Must be nice rocks.”

I am quite surprised by how accurate Larry Norman’s read of the current situation was. The rocks cost a lot…but at the end of the day are still rocks. Did the investment in getting to the moon create opportunities…no! Refusal of government to take that technology and further advance it, to develop moon colonies…to go where man has never been before…was stifled and buried with the bag of rocks.

And finally….

“You think it's such a sad thing when you see a fallen king

Then you find out they're only princes to begin with

And everybody has to choose whether they will win or lose

Follow God or sing the blues, and who they're gonna sin with.

What a mess the world is in, I wonder who began it.

Don't ask me, I'm only visiting this planet.”

The fall of nations foretold, and the reality that kingdoms are really not kingdoms. The Arab spring foretold…along with the continued demise of America.

The corruption of religion, the attack on religious freedoms, the collapse of moral guidance and certitudes…

The mess the world is in…in 1973 it was bad enough…but looking at this history it is no wonder that today’s world is so screwed up.

This song…part history lesson, part crystal ball is a warning to us all that demise follows pop culture…or is reflected by it?

If pop culture is a reflection of today’s world…it truly is a mess…

Larry Norman left this world in 2008, having been very influential in the development of Christian rock music. He was considered a fool when he wrote and performed these songs…songs that challenged the status quo…songs that demanded we be aware of the current path that leads us to a future of decline.

We refused to listen.

Whitney Houston is the latest of a long line of folk who have succumbed to the demise of this world…who have succumbed to the lie that is sex, drugs and rock ‘n roll.

Who will be next?

I don’t know, but it will be someone…because this is a perennial problem that is the result of the very lifestyles portrayed in this warning from 1973.

39 years ago, Larry Norman spoke a truth that is as valid in today’s world as it was in his.

How do we change course?

By speaking loudly, by educating the uneducated, by caring about who our leaders are and demanding they hold high moral values, by refusing to allow the excesses of pop culture to drive our society but rather by keeping our eyes firmly planted on all that is good, all that is just and all that is right.

We need to do the right thing…as corny as that sounds…

I don’t have the answers…I just know that our God given freedoms must be protected and defended at every turn…and that the liberal progressive march that has engulfed this country must be prevented from advancing any further.

The decline must be stopped…and then turned around.

We must play our part…after all, time is short…and as Larry Norman said…we are only visiting this planet.

…..devereaux