Speak Now, Cause What Comes Next Isn’t Pretty

(Quick Thoughts)

In a 52-48 vote Amy Coney Barrett was elected as the next Supreme Court Justice replacing the late Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Yay! Okay, moving on. I wanted to speak on Ecclesiastes 3:7, “a time to tear, and a time to sew; a time to keep silence, and a time to speak;.” Amy Coney Barrett represented real women of faith, motherhood, and leadership. Beyond all the madness a mom of seven children who successfully graduated from Notre Dame Law School, lawyer, judge, and now Supreme Court Justice is a testimony for the ages. Why? Because she actually cared about her family while working and upheld her faith despite it being a central point of anguish in the eyes of the radicalized left. ACB reminds us that you cannot offend anyone if you are already deemed offensive. Therefore, speak up or forever hold your peace.

This victory is bound to be short lived regardless of who wins the coming election. Radicals will continue to protest and burn; deride and maim all they deem offensive. Christians must prepare for the coming persecution. Even if Donald Trump wins, he is only one man. Our federal government has reached beyond its limits. Corporations and special interests parade the capital. Globalism is shifting power and authority into elites who go unaccountable. Time moves onward while D.C. is slowly eclipsed by a paradigm shift not yet complete.

[Y]ou cannot offend anyone if you are already deemed offensive.

Whatever was once “the way of life” now stands at the precipice of an elite who simply do not give a damn. Beyond politics is a world now facing environmental disaster. Climate change falls in line with the ravaging of resources, pollution of water sources, declining ecosystems, and animal/plant extinction. Mark my words, no one man nor nation can withstand the coming tide.

Humanity is incapable of seeing once faltered political eyes settle in. Plato, it is surmised, wrote the Seventh Letter (my favorite letter) where he is describing events in Sicily. He becomes distraught by the corruption writing:

When, therefore, I considered all this, and the type of men who were administering the affairs of State, with their laws too and their customs, the more I considered them and the more I advanced in years myself, the more difficult appeared to me the task of managing affairs of State rightly. For it was impossible to take action without friends and trusty companions; and these it was not easy to find ready to hand, since our State was no longer managed according to the principles and institutions of our forefathers; while to acquire other new friends with any facility was a thing impossible. Moreover, both the written laws and the customs were being corrupted, and that with surprising rapidity. Consequently, although at first I was filled with an ardent desire to engage in public affairs, when I considered all this and saw how things were shifting about anyhow in all directions, I finally became dizzy; and although I continued to consider by what means some betterment could be brought about not only in these matters but also in the government as a whole, [326a] yet as regards political action I kept constantly waiting for an opportune moment; until, finally, looking at all the States which now exist, I perceived that one and all they are badly governed; for the state of their laws is such as to be almost incurable without some marvelous overhauling and good-luck to boot. So in my praise of the right philosophy I was compelled to declare that by it one is enabled to discern all forms of justice both political and individual. Wherefore the classes of mankind (I said) will have no cessation from evils until either the class of those who are right and true philosophers attains political supremacy, or else the class of those who hold power in the States becomes, by some dispensation of Heaven, really philosophic.

Wherefore the classes of mankind (I said) will have no cessation from evils until either the class of those who are right and true philosophers attains political supremacy, or else the class of those who hold power in the States becomes, by some dispensation of Heaven, really philosophic.

A perfect description of the United States right about now. We need those philosophers or we too will face the similar fate, but this time it may be at a global cost.

Lord Hear Our Prayers.

When The Eighth Grader See’s Through Them: The VP Debate Of 2020

(Quick Thoughts)

And I want to close tonight’s debate with the question posed by Brecklin Brown. She’s an eighth grader at Springville Junior High in Springville, Utah. And here’s what she wrote. “When I watch the news, all I see is arguing between Democrats and Republicans. When I watch the news, all I see is citizen fighting against citizen. When I watch the news, all I see are two candidates from opposing parties trying to tear each other down. If our leaders can’t get along, how are the citizens supposed to get along?” And then she added, “Your examples could make all the difference to bring us together.” So to each of you in turn, I’d like you to take one minute and respond to Brecklin. Vice president Pence, you have one minute (47:09 Transcript).

To Kamala Harris (D), Mike Pence (R), and the moderator Susan Page (journalist):

It is readily apparent that the establishment has turned to rubble. Your performances were degrading and, just that, a performance. A spectacle equivalent to Monday Night Raw or World Championship Wrestling on their worst nights. Both candidates lack respect for each other. As for Susan Page, her fault comes from being another biased journalist who decided to play along with Commission on Presidential Debates. Bruce Thornton (Professor and Researcher) published in the FrontPage Magazine the article, Ditch the Commission On Presidential Debates, said the following:

Finally, why does the Commission on Presidential Debates get to run the show and choose the moderators, who then get to choose the topics? The CPD was created in 1987 by the Republican and Democrat Parties to be their cat’s-paw. (Overstated? Steve Scully, the moderator for the next debate, was Joe Biden’s intern.) It’s funded by some private donations, but mainly by foundations and corporations––you know, lobbyists. In other words, the CPD is an organ of the bipartisan technocratic elite, especially the Democrat division, and the way debates are run reflect the interests of the political guild. That fact goes a long way to explaining why the moderators, questions, and management of the debate reflect the political establishment and DNC talking points. And it shows why Donald Trump has to debate two opponents: The Democrat candidate and the moderator.

Thornton is misplaced in his assumption that President Trump must debate two opponents. In my view of Trump, he is willing to argue with anyone and anything. However, Pence performance and Harris as well revealed the deep problems with two minute questions with one minute rebuttals, it makes everything trivial. Last night I posted on the Truth In Focus Facebook page the following:

  1. You want a serious discussion? Make the debate responses longer than 2 minutes.
  2. The VP debate is serious because there are good chances that Kamela Harris will become President if Biden is elected.
  3. Let third parties be in these debates already.
  4. Let’s stop having journalists lead these debates.
  5. Let’s ask real questions.

You know we have a problem when France has a better debate system than we do with their debate’s lasting anywhere between two to three hours. And Candidates can answer as long as they want but each are held to a final countdown (e.g. each Candidate receives 50mins to answer questions). America can learn by their example. Here are my solutions:

  • Let’s make a structure where the candidates are made to go through a debate a week for five weeks.
  • Debates last three to four hours each
  • Third parties are always included
  • Questions are written by philosophers, political scientists, students, doctors, and other non-establishment figures whose questions are approved by the moderator
  • Questions should be policy oriented with exceptions to character qualities, controversies, etc; use common sense
  • The moderator should be a lawyer or judge or an academic of respect without open bias toward any candidate
  • Debates should be held in a different state each week at a specific location
  • At least one debate must be a town hall setting and the rules are shifted to allowing the audience to ask questions which are again approved by the moderator
  • There are no time limits per question, the candidates can choose to respond as long as they want
  • Rebuttals are always allowed and encouraged; in fact, the conversation should naturally evolve throughout the debate so that questions do not have to be constantly asked but each candidate reveals their stances and true character

The Good Lord knows whether you truly care or not about the issues beyond your biases but I can hope you do.

Yours Truly,