The American Experiment on Trial

I wish to tread some dangerous territory for me and dip my pen into the arena of political science for a moment as I give some of my thoughts concerning the 2020 race of Governor of Washington State. The primary being completed we now know this race to be between the incumbent, Governor Jay Inslee, and his opponent Loren Culp.

Mr. Culp rose to the surface over something like thirty challengers to Inslee’s office. His race in the primaries was interesting, to say the least. Culp, I think, first made headlines when as sheriff, he refused to enforce the state’s new gun laws. His campaign for governor has been largely along the same tack. He holds to conservative/Republican ideals, but he is more than that. He separated himself from the rest of the Republican candidates in refusing to play politics as usual. While Joshua Freed, for example, spent most of his campaign efforts winning the favor of the Republican party, Culp spent all of his time winning the people of Washington State. With that in mind, I see the race between Mr. Culp and Governor Inslee as a different kind of horse.

This is not essentially a race between a Democrat and a Republican. 

It is that of course, but that is not what it is in essence. Mr. Culp doesn’t appear to be a Republican team player. He may become that if he wins the office, but he hasn’t particularly played by the Republican playbook. In many ways, he reminds me of President Trump in that area.

This race is not essentially a race between liberal versus conservative ideologies. 

It is that of course. Governor Inslee’s worldview is that of a liberal. In his bid for the presidency, his one platform agenda was to save the planet. His ideology is liberal to the core. His supporters are liberal. If he succeeds in winning this election, he will progress his liberal ideologies. Culp, on the other hand, appears to have a very conservative worldview. We may expect that if he wins the election for governor of Washington State, he will put forward a conservative agenda. Perhaps more conservative than the current Republican party would put forward. 

This race is not even essentially between big government and small government.

It is that too, of course. Governor Inslee is all about government oversight – of just about everything. His is a socialist worldview that sees government as the answer to the needs of the individual. Governor Inslee is, by profession, a lawyer. His career has been that of using governmental heads to manipulate circumstances for the good of his clients. Mr. Culp appears to be the opposite. He has been a businessman, a construction worker, and an elected county sheriff. He sees government as needful but in a limited capacity.

This is essentially a race contesting the American experiment of self-government. 

Governor Inslee wishes, though I am sure he would not say so in these words, to remove the power from the people. He sees government as the protector and provider of the masses. He views us as needy, lacking direction, and requiring the care of a “big brother.” He sees government as that big brother. Mr. Culp has demonstrated his commitment to the people. His entire campaign to this point has been grassroots. Meeting with the people of Washington State from nearly one corner of the state the other. He has conducted rallies with hundreds of people and, in every case, allowed them the liberty to choose whether or not to wear a mask. In this respect, he has demonstrated his faith in the individual to make sound choices for themselves. 

In short, this race puts the American experiment on trial. Will we continue to be self-governed? Will we give the government to the elite few who aspire to be professional politicians? The 2020 race for governor of Washington State will point which direction America is headed.

Marvin McKenzie

In the fields

America, the Land of Liberty

Everywhere we look these days it seems like there is someone else screaming about the injustices of the United States.

• We were terrible to the blacks
• We were terrible to the native Americans 
• We were terrible to the poor
• We were terrible to the Chinese 

Turns out Columbus was a bad person. So was, the way many tell it today, Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln. Oh forget it! It’s useless trying to name all the scum that has surfaced in the history of the US.

But I listened to the final episode of a podcast called Revolutions. The host did not publicly note the significance of this, but he did remark that, in 1848, at the bitter end of all the world revolutions of that year, all of those failed revolutionaries fled for their lives to, you guessed it, the United States.

Truth be told they weren’t the only ones making their way to America. They came from Spain, France, Russia, Ireland, Germany. Name the place, name the culture, name the race, creed or religion and you will find people from them who came here for a better life. Did it work out for everyone? Of course not. Success in life is not guaranteed by governments, no matter how beneficent. But they did come and they did have a chance, and many more of them than not did improve their place over where they had been.

No one has ever claimed the earliest people in our country were perfect. But I for one am thankful for the country they created and I am thankful to be a part of it.

“I pledge allegiance to the flag

Of the United States of America

And to the Republic for which it stands

One nation under God, indivisible 

With liberty and justice for all”

Marvin McKenzie

In the fields

Madeline Albright a Muslim?

Did you see the AP article entitled, The Latest: Albright says she’ll register as a Muslim[1]? She claims, "I was raised Catholic, became Episcopalian & found out later my family was Jewish. I stand ready to register as Muslim in #solidarity."

Albright’s position of faith is wrong on so many levels!

I notice she never once says she is a Christian. To be raised a Catholic is something that has been done to you. To become an Episcopalian is not much different from moving from New York to New Jersey; nothing’s changed but your address. To find out later that your family is Jewish should be of no consequence, so was Jesus’. So was all of the first Christians. Christians, whether their families are Jewish or Gentile, are instructed to leave those cultures behind for the Biblical culture of a New Testament Christian church.

Now she stands ready to register as Muslim. This statement is truly telling. Was she merely registered Catholic or registered Episcopalian? At some point then did she register as Jewish?

Mrs. Albright needs to take the time to check into the Muslim system of belief. According to their religion when one converts and becomes a Muslim, to leave that faith is punishable by death. I don’t imagine that’s what she plans to “register” in to.

Ok, here is the real concern. Albright, like so many people today, assume that being religious, or having been baptized into a certain denomination, or attending a particular church or even believing a particular creed is what makes one a Christian. It does not.

There was once a man who came to Jesus with much the same misunderstanding.

John 3:1-18 (KJV)

There was a man of the Pharisees, named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews:

The same came to Jesus by night, and said unto him, Rabbi, we know that thou art a teacher come from God: for no man can do these miracles that thou doest, except God be with him.

Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.

Nicodemus saith unto him, How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother's womb, and be born?

Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.

Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.

The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit.

Nicodemus answered and said unto him, How can these things be?

Jesus answered and said unto him, Art thou a master of Israel, and knowest not these things?

Verily, verily, I say unto thee, We speak that we do know, and testify that we have seen; and ye receive not our witness.

If I have told you earthly things, and ye believe not, how shall ye believe, if I tell you of heavenly things?

And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven.

And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up:

That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.

For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.

He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

Nicodemus could not wrap his head around Jesus’ teaching of the new birth. How could he? Only those who have been born can know what it means to be born. Only those who have been born again can know what it means to be born again.

(Photo from pixabay.com)

---

[1] http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/01/26/latest-albright-says-shell-register-as-muslim.html

The 45th President

Donald John Trump was sworn in today as the 45^th President of the United States of America. His inaugural speech was unique from those of recent memory.

Trump’s speech was not great by any means. He is not a polished orator. His gestures are far too repetitive and distracting. He cites no grand references to men of the past. He made few statements that will live on in the minds of thinkers or in the speeches of others to follow.[1]

Trump offered little to reconcile the parties. He spoke just as he did on the campaign and, honestly, just as plain Americans wanted him to. He evoked our confidence that he, perhaps for the first time since our founders led this nation, will work from the position of American interests and not political ones. He wasn’t trying to get himself re-elected in four years already. He wasn’t ensuring his party has favor in the future. 

President Trump rose to the podium to announce an interest in advancing the United States of America, and with it – Americans.

Here’s praying that he can do it!

Marvin McKenzie

In the fields

---

[1] I did appreciate the phrase, “When you open your heart to patriotism there is no room for prejudice.”

Can the American Democratic System Be Improved?

I recently listened to a journalist interview another journalist on the presidency of Barak Obama. Both journalists had a liberal perspective and were obviously supportive of Mr. Obama's administration. But they did recognize that there have been shortcomings. During the interview one of them made the statement that our democracy is not perfect.

I agree.

It seems to me that the difference between the liberal and the conservative is fundamentally a difference of opinion concerning what we do with this imperfect government.

•       The liberal views its imperfections as permission to change it. The conservative sees that it is flawed but doesn't trust sinful men to fix it.
•       The liberal views the government of the United States as a machine to be tinkered with, advanced and improved upon at the whim and will of its owners. The conservative sees it as a gift, given by God and delivered through the founders, to be protected and preserved.
•       The liberal tends to see things through rose-colored glasses and hopes all things will evolve for the better. The conservative looks at the world more realistically and knows things devolve and never evolve.
•       The liberal embraces change, believing it to be the path to better days. The conservative holds what he has, trusting God to bring about good in His time.

Our government is not perfect but it is a far cry above any other this world has known. We don't need to change it. We need to praise God for it and work to preserve it.

Marvin McKenzie

In the fields

My Election 2016 Thoughts

The 2016 elections are now just around the corner. It has been my position that I would not take a definitive position, especially concerning the presidential election, until the final hour. I wanted to get as much information as possible and I wanted to give God all of the time there is to move and work. But, as one preacher friend, reminded me just this week, "The ballots are already printed." 

This election has polarized many of my preacher brethren. There are some who imply that a vote for either of the party choices is tantamount to unchristian conduct. Others tell us a vote for anyone other than Trump is a vote for Clinton. I want to give my reasons for voting as I am.

I am going to vote for Trump for the following reasons: 

1. I voted my conscience in the primaries and did not win. 

2. A write in candidate is useless in Washington as the vote will be disqualified unless the name written in is a legally registered presidential candidate. 

3. I have enough issues with all of the “also running” candidates that none of them would be a more conscientious vote for me. 

4. That leaves me with only two choices and I am not voting for Clinton. 

5. To not vote at all would be irresponsible. 

6. A good friend, who has been fervently advocating voting our conscience and not voting for Trump, has repeatedly said he hopes Trump wins. To want him to win and to not vote for him to win is, in my view, hypocritical. 

THEREFORE; I will vote for the most viable candidate who most closely represents my own position.

Marvin McKenzie

In the fields

Don't Go There!

Isaiah 31:1-3 (KJV)

Woe to them that go down to Egypt for help; and stay on horses, and trust in chariots, because they are many; and in horsemen, because they are very strong; but they look not unto the Holy One of Israel, neither seek the LORD!

Yet he also is wise, and will bring evil, and will not call back his words: but will arise against the house of the evildoers, and against the help of them that work iniquity.

Now the Egyptians are men, and not God; and their horses flesh, and not spirit. When the LORD shall stretch out his hand, both he that helpeth shall fall, and he that is holpen shall fall down, and they all shall fail together.

Nobody in Israel thought Egypt was perfect. Their own history with Egypt attested to that. They knew only too well Egypt's fierce anger.

But at this moment in their history Egypt looked like their best option. On the other side stood Assyria and after her, Babylon. If Egypt was worldliness, Babylon was the devil. They were prone to lean more toward worldliness that Satan.

God said that they should have leaned upon Him.

I find in this a picture of the current state of believers in America. This election appears to be between "the devil" and "the world." 

On the one side we have a candidate who is opposed to almost everything we hold sacred. I have heard that she flatly pronounced that "Christians are just going to have to change."

On the other side we have a man who appears to hold a few more of our more valued principles. He is uplifted by some as the only candidate strong enough to possibly defeat our archenemy. But he is brash, proud, outlandish and unabashedly self promoting.

He is not our preference but many believe he is our only hope.

Not so!

Our only hope is the Lord.

He has always been our only hope.

Woe to them who go down to worldliness for help!

Now, I am not of the opinion that good men cannot vote for the man. Jeremiah objected at first, (I voted my conscience in objection to the current candidate in the primaries) but went down to Egypt and did not compromise in doing so. I, however, do believe that we must be warned not to trust in this man.

Our hope must be in seeking the Lord.

Two-Party Arsonists

I heard a political commentary describe this year’s presidential election like this, “Trump is the two party arsonist and Sanders his helping him gather wood.”[1]

The commentary fairly applauds the current situation, not suggesting that it is the best scenario in the world but that it may be the only scenario that can knock down the current two party lock on Presidential candidates.

I am not fan of the two party system, especially since it is nothing like our founding fathers dreamed. Washington was opposed to parties at all. But it does seem to me that the parties are natural outcomes of the founding of our country and, though they developed into what they currently are, existed philosophically from the beginning. The two party system became as powerful as it is because it represented the clear ideals of opposing political theory; big government versus small government. Each party has developed its platform, tweaking and refining it for the changing times. Each party also made room for those who were not so clearly set in the party ideals. We have more liberal Republicans and more conservative Democrats. The inclusivity has led to the current firestorm building in the two party world.

Neither Trump nor Sanders are the first to attempt to breech the two party system. They are, I think, the first to attempt to do so while claiming to be in the parties. Trump and Sanders did what no other outsiders seem to have considered; they crept in. Sanders of course in the Democratic party and Trump into the Republican party and from the vantage of an insider, they are attempting to break down the party walls. Ideologically the two men are polar opposites. Fundamentally and politically they are companions.

The commentator speculated that, perhaps our country needs to survive the tragedy that would be the result of either a Trump or Sanders presidency so that we can finally replace the two party system with something more effective. I doubt that will be the case. First of all, things seldom evolve. Devolution is much more likely. Second, even if the two parties become somehow impotent, the ideals represented in the most diverse of the two parties will remain and will almost surely reorganize into the same two parties, perhaps with new names. Thirdly – who’s to say we can survive the tragedy that would be either a Trump or Sanders presidency?

Marvin McKenzie

In the Fields

---

[1] Common Sense, Dan Carlin, Show 304, 4/16/15