For Whom Did I Vote in the Republican Primary?
Questions I Asked Myself Before I Voted in Early Voting Today.
1. Which candidate would best protect my freedom, especially my freedom of religion and speech. One of my favorite quotes is, "The first responsibility of a government official is to protect the people's freedom?" Any socialist government always squelches true freedom of religion. Despite all the Republican rhetoric by the candidates, only one candidate of the remaining four actually wants less government as exhibited by his words and/or actions. The other three have outlined programs and/or implemented policies that increase government control that intrude on citizens' rights. Since I believe the greatest danger in our nation today is rampant expansion of government, I voted for the candidate who some in our society would even criticize for wanting too little government intervention.
2. Which candidate has integrity? Since I believe the root of all the problems in our nation today stem from lack of character, I voted for the candidate that demonstrated the most integrity and character. There is only one of the candidates that I have not seen waffle, or be deceitful, and only one candidate that always gave straightforward answers without a touch of spin. This candidate's philosophy is so old fashioned that it would take more than a sound bite to explain his views to a modern world that is already almost to the bottom of the slippery slope of socialism. As Emily Dickinson says,
Much madness is divinest sense
To a discerning eye.
Much sense the starkest madness
If it is not the majority.
Assent, and you are sane
Demur, your're straightway dangerous
And handled with a chain.
If even liberals can recognize the worth of integrity as illustrated in the anecdote below, then shouldn't I as a Christian and a Republican?
A few years ago while visiting a church in Nashville, I heard the following story from Attorney David Gibbs, a young man of about 35 years old at that time. This young man works as a lawyer helping churches with their legal battles imposed by the liberals and calls himself a legal missionary. (About four years after hearing his testimony, I learned that he became the lead attorney in the Terri Schiavo case,) His testimony was so outstanding and demonstrated such courage that I was so touched that I have never forgotten it.
He told about how he thought about going to Duke University in preparation for his vocation, but it would cost at least twenty thousand a year. Therefore, he saw no reason to even apply, but his Dad encouraged him to try for a scholarship.
He thought it was hopeless because the people who would interview him would all be liberal lawyers. His Dad, however, encouraged him to go for it. He applied, and they sent him a notice to come for an interview, which was also expensive for him to do. He went and met, I believe, he said with 15 liberal lawyers and said he probably offended everyone of them. They even wanted to know if he actually believed in Jonah and the fish and in Noah and the Ark, etc. They interviewed him, I think he said for one hour and twenty minutes; and it was supposed to be only about 30 minutes. He told them he wanted to be a legal missionary. Then he went home and told his dad how badly the interview went. (His parents were very good Christians, and he had gone to a Christian school all twelve years. In fact his dad was also a legal missionary.)
To make a long story short, the lady who headed up the scholarship committee, called him; and his Dad answered the phone. They had given him the one full scholarship to Duke University for four years, and the lady told his Dad that they received hundreds of applications from students who have extremely high intellectual ability, but that his son had demonstrated character and that was something they never saw anymore. She said they did not know what a legal missionary was but were convinced that he would pursue that course since he said he would.
3. Which candidate has courage? I voted for the candidate who has demonstrated the most courage. Another favorite quote of mine is "The strongest man on earth is he who stands most alone." The candidate for whom I voted has shown the same courage this young man had to have when he faced the fifteen liberal lawyers at Duke University – the courage to stand alone while others ridiculed him. This candidate has had subject himself to ridicule in front of the nation and hasn't backed down.
For the rest of this article see this link: http://www.wpaag.org/Why%20I%20voted%20for%20this%20candidate%20in%20primary.htm or click Friday below; or if sent here just scroll down.
1. Which candidate would best protect my freedom, especially my freedom of religion and speech. One of my favorite quotes is, "The first responsibility of a government official is to protect the people's freedom?" Any socialist government always squelches true freedom of religion. Despite all the Republican rhetoric by the candidates, only one candidate of the remaining four actually wants less government as exhibited by his words and/or actions. The other three have outlined programs and/or implemented policies that increase government control that intrude on citizens' rights. Since I believe the greatest danger in our nation today is rampant expansion of government, I voted for the candidate who some in our society would even criticize for wanting too little government intervention.
2. Which candidate has integrity? Since I believe the root of all the problems in our nation today stem from lack of character, I voted for the candidate that demonstrated the most integrity and character. There is only one of the candidates that I have not seen waffle, or be deceitful, and only one candidate that always gave straightforward answers without a touch of spin. This candidate's philosophy is so old fashioned that it would take more than a sound bite to explain his views to a modern world that is already almost to the bottom of the slippery slope of socialism. As Emily Dickinson says,
Much madness is divinest sense
To a discerning eye.
Much sense the starkest madness
If it is not the majority.
Assent, and you are sane
Demur, your're straightway dangerous
And handled with a chain.
If even liberals can recognize the worth of integrity as illustrated in the anecdote below, then shouldn't I as a Christian and a Republican?
A few years ago while visiting a church in Nashville, I heard the following story from Attorney David Gibbs, a young man of about 35 years old at that time. This young man works as a lawyer helping churches with their legal battles imposed by the liberals and calls himself a legal missionary. (About four years after hearing his testimony, I learned that he became the lead attorney in the Terri Schiavo case,) His testimony was so outstanding and demonstrated such courage that I was so touched that I have never forgotten it.
He told about how he thought about going to Duke University in preparation for his vocation, but it would cost at least twenty thousand a year. Therefore, he saw no reason to even apply, but his Dad encouraged him to try for a scholarship.
He thought it was hopeless because the people who would interview him would all be liberal lawyers. His Dad, however, encouraged him to go for it. He applied, and they sent him a notice to come for an interview, which was also expensive for him to do. He went and met, I believe, he said with 15 liberal lawyers and said he probably offended everyone of them. They even wanted to know if he actually believed in Jonah and the fish and in Noah and the Ark, etc. They interviewed him, I think he said for one hour and twenty minutes; and it was supposed to be only about 30 minutes. He told them he wanted to be a legal missionary. Then he went home and told his dad how badly the interview went. (His parents were very good Christians, and he had gone to a Christian school all twelve years. In fact his dad was also a legal missionary.)
To make a long story short, the lady who headed up the scholarship committee, called him; and his Dad answered the phone. They had given him the one full scholarship to Duke University for four years, and the lady told his Dad that they received hundreds of applications from students who have extremely high intellectual ability, but that his son had demonstrated character and that was something they never saw anymore. She said they did not know what a legal missionary was but were convinced that he would pursue that course since he said he would.
3. Which candidate has courage? I voted for the candidate who has demonstrated the most courage. Another favorite quote of mine is "The strongest man on earth is he who stands most alone." The candidate for whom I voted has shown the same courage this young man had to have when he faced the fifteen liberal lawyers at Duke University – the courage to stand alone while others ridiculed him. This candidate has had subject himself to ridicule in front of the nation and hasn't backed down.
For the rest of this article see this link: http://www.wpaag.org/Why%20I%20voted%20for%20this%20candidate%20in%20primary.htm or click Friday below; or if sent here just scroll down.
posted by Debbie Pelley at Friday, February 01, 2008
1 Comments:
4. Which candidate will protect and uphold our Constitution and interpret it the way the founding fathers intended?. I believe the Constitution was inspired and is designed to allow the Christian religion to thrive and protect our freedoms. The candidate I voted for actually respects and honors our Constitution and tries to abide by its principles in all his decisions.
There are some areas on which I disagree with the candidate for whom I voted. I also concede that he does not have the political skills that our world expects from its candidates of today, but I see that as the society's problem and not the candidate's. (See letter to editor pasted below this email that explains this concern) But on the areas that are most important to me, he fits the bill better than any of the other four that are left.
Unless I change my mind, I will not vote in the general election if John McCain is the nominee. I think I can vote for Romney, but I am not really sure of that yet. See this link for the article that explains why I feel it would be better to allow a Democrat to be elected than to elect a liberal Republican. http://www.wpaag.org/republican_dilemma%20-%20beat%20Hillary%20or%20save%20the%20party.htm
And by the way, it takes courage for me to write this since so many people will disagree with me, but I could not refrain and respect my own integrity. This article can be found at this link: http://www.wpaag.org/Why%20I%20voted%20for%20this%20candidate%20in%20primary.htm
2/9/98 To the Editor:
We now have a politician in power with such gigantic political skills that he frightens and demoralizes his opponents like Goliath did the Israelites of old. Every day the media strut his favorable poll ratings before these opponents even as the invincible Goliath strutted before his enemies, defying any to come out and fight him.
The practice of political correctness by our entire society, even by those who think they disdain the very term and concept, has helped bring about this situation. Political correctness is based on lies and deceit. Instead of expressing one's true feeling and belief, one only speaks and does that which is either acceptable, laudable, politically expedient, or instrumental in the enhancement of career or position. Who in our society is not guilty to some degree?
Political correctness has now so permeated our culture that political spin (deceit and lies) by both parties is not only accepted as the norm but even demanded by the political parties and citizenry. Instead of responding to controversial issues with the heart and conviction, the politician responds with spins and actions calculated to win votes for himself and the party. The public in turn learns not only to accept but even admire those politicians who have the greatest rhetoric, spin, and finesse. With this political correct (and subtly evil) approach, the ultimate winner in many cases is often the most evil of all - because he is capable of the greatest deceit.
Many politicians with very good intentions have been caught up in this web of deceit because they believe if they are not re-elected or don't have high poll ratings, they can have little impact for good. This philosophy itself is a subtle, deceitful spin on the truth.
Mere human strength and wisdom cannot overcome or outsmart evil. Only God can do that, and He has promised victory only to those who are committed to truth. Candidates may win the race, but what have they won if they don't move us back to truth and righteousness, and freedom. It is quite evident that we have been losing the cultural and Christian battle for decades now. As long as both parties and society play by these ground rules based on political correctness and spin, virtue and integrity will never prevail.
Is there any politician, political party, or constituency out there who can trust as David did that truth and righteousness can still prevail and who will dare to do the right thing rather than the expedient and political correct thing.
Debbie Pelley
Jonesboro, Arkansas
Post a Comment
<< Home