|
Ronald Dart's |
|
Opinion Archives |
|
October 31, 2003 Tax Cuts as a Diet Plan In reading Peggy Noonan’s fine book, "When Character Was King," I suddenly realized the truth of something I had been told but doubted. I had heard it said that the main reason for Reagan’s tax cuts (sold as supply side economics) was to put congress on a diet. Reagan realized that big government was becoming ever more intrusive into the lives of citizens and that it needed to be curtailed. He came to this realization before he ever entered politics. At the same time he realized how difficult it would be to change the trend. When I read this, I realized that there might indeed be some truth in the statement about Reagan’s tax cuts. They weren’t so much "Reaganomics" as they were the Reagan Diet for Congress. Congress couldn’t spend money they didn’t have, or so the theory went. The problem was that Congress didn’t stop spending and consequently gave us what has been inaccurately termed the Reagan deficit. But in spite of everything, the tax cuts did help the economy and set the stage for the strong economic years of the 80's. One wonders if President Bush’s current round of tax cuts may be round two of the Reagan diet. In this case, he is spending just like congress did in the Reagan years running up a significant deficit while stimulating the economy. Seems crazy for a man who says he is a conservative, but I suspect he is crazy like a fox. In running up spending now to stimulate the economy, he is hoping to ensure, not only his own reelection, but the election of an even stronger Republican congress. Why is that important? Because the biggest political issue this country faces right now is how to take government back from the courts into the hands of the people. The Democrats see this more clearly than a lot of Republicans and are fighting it tooth and nail. This is what is behind the outright filibuster of strong minority judicial appointments. Democrats are press ganging minority lobbyists to fight the nomination of minority judges. Why? To give cover so the white liberal senators can oppose them without being accused of racism. Robert Bork’s most recent book, "Coercing Virtue," is a hard read, but it lays out the problem of judicial activism–a world wide phenomenon. The judges are slowly taking over the government of country after country, and there is little that can be done about it. It was shocking to me, because I was taught in 8th grade civics that we have checks and balances in our system of government. Now I realize that once the Supreme Court has written a new law, there is not a thing we can do to change it. The first term of George Bush may end without a single veto of a bill that comes to his desk. The second term is likely to be very different. As Ann Richards once said, politics is not for the faint of heart. Sealing off Saddam’s birthplace I have been wondering when U.S. forces would start cordoning off some of these trouble spots. Looks like the effort has begun. What is interesting is the people of the village seem to be happily cooperating. Read the story. Halloween, Good or Bad? A new Essay by Allie Dart My opinion column has been on hold through my fall break, but I hope to be more regular starting now. October 1, 2002 1 Thessalonians Chapters one and two now available in Reflections September 30, 2003 Time Comes Out Time Magazine this week puts its Democratic Party credentials right there on the cover for all to see. As we approach the election year silly season, Time adopts the current party line, "Mission NOT Accomplished," complete with a picture of the president on the deck of the aircraft carrier Lincoln. Never mind that the event is out of date. It is the line of all the Democratic candidates at this point that the president has failed in Iraq. It is true that no weapons of mass destruction have been found. It is true that there is no provable connection between Iraq and the events of 9/11. It is also true that the links between Iraq and terrorism have been firmly established. And it is true that the President is succeeding in Iraq. In the end, he may fail, but not yet. And the American news media need to help be sure he doesn't. Even the diehard Democratic Candidates know we have to succeed in Iraq. What the Democratic candidates need to show is what, six months after the crushing defeat of the Iraqi dictator, Iraq should look like and what they would have done differently to make it look that way. It is no good saying they wouldn’t have gone to war in the first place. Few now are criticizing the president on that issue. What they are saying is that the president had no plan for post war Iraq. In these days when we are used to instant gratification, it is hard for us to understand why Iraq isn’t already pacified and holding democratic elections. But if one has any grasp of history at all, and any sense of what that society was like, he has to know that we couldn’t expect to be any further along at this point. I don’t recall the administration ever telling us that we would be. It’s politics, folks, pure and simple. Beat down the president, beat down his poll numbers, go negative and maybe, just maybe he’ll stumble and the opposition will be elected–read that, get hold of the reins of power. Actually, there is nothing particularly unusual about this. It is what happens in democratic societies where we are used to adversarial governance. But it is all highly problematic when we are at war, and we are at war. The problem is that in beating down the president, especially relative to the war, you automatically give aid and comfort to the enemy. The whole world reads our news magazines and listens to our political speeches. And when the criminals who run Terror Inc. read this stuff, they make terrible miscalculations that eventually cost American lives. The saddest thing about this war is that by not supporting the U.S. and British resolutions in the U.N., France and Germany caused Saddam to think we were running a bluff. If they had stood four square and supported a resolution for the use of force, it is entirely possible that Saddam would have folded his hand. And even now, all the unrealistic carping about post war Iraq–done for political gain–is going to cost still more American and Iraqi lives, because it makes the criminals think they might just win after all. Keep bleeding the Americans and they will go home. We need to make it abundantly clear that there is no way we are going home until we have finished what we came to do–no matter who is in the White House. The Democratic Ten, all capable, intelligent, experienced men, are causing me to see them as venal power brokers who are more interested in their own careers and their own party than in the lives and well being of the American people. I could forgive them if they were idiots. They are not. And note that I called the "terrorists" criminals, not terrorists–although there may not be much between the two terms. When the story is finally told, I think we will learn that the people behind all of this, the people who finance and encourage it, are motivated by greed and the lust for power. They are criminals. Religion has nothing to do with it. For the criminals behind all this, the suicide bombers are just useful idiots. So are some Americans. September 26, 2003 Box Cutters? Why is everyone so exercised over the obvious fact that weapons can smuggled onto airplanes? The only thing that shocks me is that people are shocked that box cutters can be brought on board. Doesn’t everyone realize that we can’t make airplanes safe from hijackers and bombers? What makes me feel safe when flying is not the inspectors at the gate, it is the passengers on board the plane who will never be intimidated by any weapon again. The 9/11 hijackers rendered the box cutters forever irrelevant. The only reason they worked was because no one knew what was at stake. Now we all do. Sky marshals are a good idea, but let’s serve notice on all hijackers. We the passengers aren’t going to sit still for it ever again. I think the terrorists know that. That’s why they are trying to get shoulder fired missiles into the country. Even this will probably be up to alert citizens to catch. The government can never put enough men on the ground around airports. It’s up to our national neighborhood watch folks. Be alert. September 23, 2003 A Personal Obituary Several have come here or have written asking for a statement regarding the recent death of Evangelist Garner Ted Armstrong. What follows is a statement I made for the Tyler Church of God and CEM's tape program regarding his untimely death.
My sermon that followed, "The Indispensable Man," is available from the CEM office on request. September 22, 2003 The Mystery of Arafat For the life of me, I cannot understand why this killer of babies and women is still alive. I have heard people say that killing him will make him a martyr. So what? How could life be any worse for Israel with posters of Arafat in Palestinian towns than it is with him sitting in Ramallah asking senior Palestinian officials, "Why don’t the Israeli’s have more dead?" As Mort Zuckerman wrote in this weeks U.S. News, "Arafat is not just a terrorist...but one of the inventors of terrorism." Zuckerman observes that the Israelis could kill Arafat with every bit as much justification as Americans can kill Usama Bin Laden. Why don’t they? Because the U.S. government and European leaders keep pressing Israel for more restraint. Meanwhile more Israelis die in the streets and the busses. Maybe it’s time for a litmus test for American politicians. Maybe reporters should start asking them if they are willing to put an end to American support for Palestinian terrorism by allowing the Israelis to deal with Arafat once and for all. He is a criminal, a murderer, and a liar. There will be no peace in the Middle Easy while his hoary head is still in Palestine. Be sure and catch Zuckerman’s clear headed analysis of what must be done.
Terrorism and the Black Death Over a five year period, from 1347 to 1352, one third of Europe’s population died of Bubonic plague–that’s 25 million people. The plague slowed down in the winter, but then exploded in the Spring. No one knew at first that it was a flea borne disease spread primarily by rats. There was no negotiating, either with the fleas or the rats. They just kept on doing what they do. Whether you think the terrorists are like the fleas or the rats, it still seems plain enough that negotiation is a waste of valuable time. Sanitation is the solution. That, and the killing off the carriers of the disease.
September 21, 2003 A new topical Bible Study is now online: The Hatred of God. September 19, 2003 Hardwired to Connect George Will today points to an important study just published that suggests human beings are designed to be in "authoritative communities."
This new report could turn out to be of enormous significance for families and churches. George Will does a good job of outlining the significance of the study. Read his analysis here. Topical Bible Study Today, I try a little experiment in creating a topical Bible Study on line. All you have to do is follow the links. To do the study, just read along until you find a blue link. Click on the link to study the page of reference. When finished, just click on "back" on your browser and you will be right back where you left. The study was developed from the notes of a recent sermon. A cassette tape of that sermon is available from CEM. It has the same title, "Disappointed with God." To take a look at the study, just click here. When finished, I hope you will let me know what you think of the study and if it has raised any question in your mind. September 17, 2003 Mort Zuckerman notes in this week’s U.S. News that, while we are in the early stages of an economic recovery, we are still losing jobs. He does a good job of laying out the problems and then concludes:
Maybe everyone will finally come to see that there is only so much the government can do to control the economy. Boom and bust is the story of all free economies since there were any. The whole idea of government involvement is to act as a buffer, slowing things down when the economy is overheated and then loosening up when the economy is slowing. But in the end, the whole thing depends on us. That said, I couldn’t help wondering if the huge boom of the 90's might have been overdone, and we are now paying for government laxity in keeping the lid on. I am no economist, but it seems plain to be that credit has been far too loose for far too long. But wait! Now is not the time to tighten credit. I just hope someone remembers when the money is flowing free that easy credit will have to be paid for someday. It all came home to me when the wife of the tenant in a house I own declared bankruptcy. She (not to be confused with he) had run up 41 thousand dollars in credit card debt. How many people did this all through the 90's and who now have to pay it off in one way or another. Did we hit a wall in our ability to borrow? Is that why we are in so much trouble today? I remember a time when the law said you had to have 30% down on a new car purchase and you could not borrow for more than 36 months. Maybe that was a bad idea. But how many people do you know who could not sell their car for what they owe on it? Do yourself a favor. Don’t borrow money for anything beyond essential housing and essential transportation. You can thank me later for the advice. September 12, 2003 Psalm 22 This is one of the first truly Messianic psalms. It prefigures Christ so profoundly that it has often found its way into music. Reflections on the 22nd Psalm are now available. September 9, 2003 What Islamists Fear Most No, it’s not the Third Infantry Division, although that is not something they want to see on the horizon. Tom Friedman told us in his landmark book, "The Lexus and the Olive Tree." They fear the democratization of information and communication that is slowly but surely eroding the old order. Friedman gave us an update last week when he cited an Arab version of the popular TV show American Idol. What he found so fascinating was that, in a land where most elections are decided by 99 to 1, the winner in this contest won 52 to 48. Read his interesting analysis of what this sort of thing means in the Arab world by clicking here. In his book, Friedman demonstrated clearer than I had ever seen the power of the Internet and technology to change the world, threatening old power structures and undermining the traditional elite of backward governments. He also warned about the possibility of a backlash, something we now identify as 9/11. Big things are happening in the world and God only knows where they are leading us. Stay awake. September 8, 2003 How to Look at the War on Terror If you think I only read conservative columnists, you are wrong. I read the New York Times and The New Republic. If you think I am a Republican, you are wrong. But it is a fact that the people I find making the most sense these days are conservatives of on stripe or another. I am not sure why this is so, but I hear a lot of people complaining that the Democratic party is not what it used to be. I read and hear a lot of spin on both sides of political and national issues, but there are still voices out there that tell the truth in simple terms–sometimes because they simply can no longer ignore it. Today found a remarkably clear column by David Horowitz (How to Look at the War on Terror) which reflects a viewpoint that I have been coming to myself. I was watching what they loosely call debate on television a night or so ago and two antagonists were exchanging views on the obvious fact that Iraq is now the "front line" in the war on Terror. The view from the left was that, true enough, Iraq is the front line but only because we made it so by going to war there. No one asked at that point where the front line would be if the President had not made his move on Iraq. It seemed obvious to me, and others have made the same point, that it is better to fight these people on the soil of Iraq than on American soil. So the political opponents of the administration have to find something to criticize. Last night a general who is getting ready to run for president complained that we had no plan for postwar Iraq. No one asked him what a good plan would have looked like by now. Does anyone really think that we should be all finished and ready to pull our troops out in four months? Iraq is a long term commitment and it seemed obvious to me that it was from the start. I can’t recall the President telling us it would be otherwise. Looking at the war on terror, anyone should be able to see that this will exceed the thirty years war in length. It will probably be the second "Hundred Years War." I can’t see that the U.S. has any option but to fight that war for as long as it takes. And I, for one, am glad the front lines are in Iraq. Don’t miss Horowitz’s column. Click here to read it. Liberation’s Children Be sure and catch Thomas Sowell today with a short book review of "Liberation’s Children," a new book by Kay Hymowitz.
September 5, 2003 What Terrorists Want Cal Thomas put his finger on something today. It is not what most want to hear, but it is true.
He was dead right, but they do hate our freedom. But Cal Thomas said something even more important. He said that the terrorists are not our greatest enemy:
Later, talking about why the president is having so much difficulty persuading other nations to join and help us, he offered a reason:
We are going to have to be very careful not to make the same mistake. To read Cal Thomas’ column, click here. September 4, 2003 Poverty Read Allie Dart's latest thoughts on how to protect your kids from poverty. Click here. September 3, 2003 John Kerry for President? I’m indebted to Jonathan Cohn (The New Republic), for catching a line in John Kerry’s speech announcing for the presidency. Kerry said, "I voted to threaten the use of force to make Saddam Hussein comply with the resolutions of the United Nations." Mr. Cohn thought this was a curious turn of phrase because the resolution John Kerry voted for was not for the threat of force (does the president need congressional approval to make a threat?) but for the use of force. Cohn wondered if maybe Kerry believed that the vote was actually one of those wink-wink, nudge-nudge sort of deals. I think that is exactly what Kerry believed. I think it is what the United Nations means every time it passes a resolution. More important, because of past actions of the UN and the US, that’s what Arab leaders think it means. And those people who allowed Saddam Hussein to think it meant something else during the lead up to the war did the world a grave disservice. A threat doesn’t mean a thing unless you are prepared to back it up. And fail to back up the threat one time, and no one will ever take you seriously again. John Kerry is playing the weasel on his vote to use force against Iraq. This sort of thing has cost a lot of lives in the past and we can’t afford to have it again. Ronald Reagan made a big mistake when he pulled out troops out of Lebanon after the bombing that killed so many marines. That, coupled with Clinton’s withdrawal from Somalia after the loss of life described in Blackhawk Down, encouraged America’s enemies to think we couldn’t take casualties. Bloody America’s nose, and she will back down every time, they thought. Reagan should have sent in a couple of Marine divisions after the bombing. Clinton should have done the same thing in Somalia. The Islamists are never going to love us, but they need to learn to respect us–to fear us, if that’s what it takes. After 9/11, Bush had no choice. And Afghanistan was not enough. Even Iraq may not be enough. The American people need to stop whining about the costs of this war. The whining may well make it cost more. September 2, 2003 1 Thessalonians Is it hard to be a Christian? I suppose it depends on where you are and what you are doing. There are people in the world, right now, who are being shamefully and brutally treated because they profess the name of Jesus. But you are probably not one of them. I certainly am not. Who do you know, personally, who has been killed because of his belief in Jesus Christ? Do you know anyone who has been beaten? Do you know anyone who has been jailed because he refused to dent the name of Jesus? I don’t. I think there are a lot of saints who will laugh at us if someday we meet them and claim it was hard for us to serve Jesus. When the church was new, it was worth your life in some places to admit your Christianity. There were times and places where you were relatively safe if you didn’t do anything. Some of the early churches were born in trouble and never had peace. One of these was the church in Thessalonica–the people to whom Paul’s letters to the Thessalonians were written. Paul wrote this letter a few weeks after he left Thessalonica, because he had heard what had happened there after he left. Paul had only been in Thessalonica three weeks when the Jews from the synagogue there prompted a bunch of ruffians to make an assault on the house where Paul had been staying. Paul wasn’t there at the time, and the disciples hustled him out of Thessalonica by night. Reading between the lines of Paul’s letter, we know that the disciples there had been the object of a lot of violence. Some of them had even been killed in anti-Christian rioting. The people were really discouraged. This word came to Paul in Corinth, not long after he wrote his letter to the Galatians. The year appears to be A.D. 52. Read to get the tone of Paul’s letter as he tries to encourage these embattled saints. Now beginning, Reflections on 1 Thessalonians.
|