Defenseless by Design?

What’s Behind Biden’s Refusal to Defend Our Borders? (Spoiler Alert: It is NOT Incompetence)

Biden’s border policy failures are not due to his incompetence; instead, they are by design. In fact, most (if not all) of his leadership and policy failures—whether relating to the border or national security, energy independence, the pandemic, or foreign affairs—play into his stated goal to “fundamentally transform America,” in lockstep with the objectives of the Progressive Left.

“Citizens of the World”

One of these overarching objectives is to establish a “global order,” where all people are considered “citizens of the world” and once-sovereign nations yield to an international governing body (i.e., the United Nations). Historically, this idea has been widely unpopular among both Democrats and Republicans, who have traditionally viewed America as a global force for good. Americans have long held the view that protecting our sovereignty is not only essential to preserving our freedom, but also to our ability to defend the defenseless around the world. This is in accord with God’s order of priorities, designed to incrementally expand our ability to serve others: “For if a man cannot manage his own household, how can he take care of God’s church?” 1 Timothy 3:5

A Borderless Society

The small group of elites influencing policy do not agree. They view America, the crown jewel of the free world, as an obstacle to their goal of achieving a borderless society. They know they must persuade Americans that relinquishing our sovereignty is noble and necessary for the greater good. Patriots who love our country and cherish freedom and sovereignty are viewed as impediments to the globalist agenda.

In an effort to diminish this patriotism they find so troublesome, those in power have set out to refute, disparage, or destroy all that is virtuous about America. Here are some of their apparent strategies:

1. End Free Market Capitalism

Identity Politics – Encouraging citizens to identify primarily with groups rather than as Americans causes people to focus on self-serving interests. Elevating distinctions in race, religion, gender, sexuality, socioeconomic status, medical status, and other individual characteristics over national identity (and even our humanity) erodes compromise and cooperation, each necessary for the peaceful co-existence of a diverse population.

Victimhood – Persuading these people groups that they are powerless victims of a corrupt system or oppressed by other groups removes personal responsibility, cultivates and justifies anger, and magnifies hopelessness. This inevitably leads to destructive behaviors such as rioting, theft, and senseless violence, resulting in mass chaos, further division, and, sadly, more significant numbers of actual victims.

Equity – As angry and hurting victims comprise a growing segment of the population, the powerful few promise “equity” (wealth redistribution and outcome equality) as the only solution. Hopeless people are historically willing to hand power over to their government in desperation for the promised relief. This paves the way for socialism, as individual liberties are seized in the name of “the greater good.”

2. Suppress Patriotism

Rewrite History – Rewriting U.S. history, tearing down monuments, and painting our Founders and the language of our Constitution (including, notably, our First and Second Amendments) as racist and even dangerous are strategies designed to undermine America’s heritage and exceptionalism, and to demonize patriotism and nationalism.

Destroy Institutions – The Church, the family, education, medicine, and local law enforcement, among others, were designed to empower and strengthen our society. Undermining or transforming these institutions to the point they cannot fulfill their intended purposes weakens us physically, spiritually, mentally, and emotionally, making us more vulnerable to the government’s attempts to exercise control.

Government Dependence – As society becomes more desperate, the government presents itself as the savior, promising an end to the chaos in exchange for more and more liberties. For example, the government works to persuade Americans that it is necessary to nationalize law enforcement, medicine, and control of property, as well as to restrict speech and the press, all in the name of protecting us from real or perceived threats.

3. Open the Border

Open Borders – Promoting a collectivist identity and labeling resistance as racist or xenophobic erodes our national identity and fosters “tolerance” for lax border security. Refusing to secure the border allows for uncontrolled, illegal immigration, increasing drug and human trafficking, and other violent crimes, contributing to the mounting chaos and instability.

Government Dependence – Mass, uncontrolled, illegal immigration increases competition for American jobs. This not only increases government reliance among illegal immigrants (who are more likely to be dependent on public assistance) but also among American citizens.

Caveat for Consideration

Many immigrants have a greater appreciation for “The American Dream” and the opportunities that abound under our free-market system than many of our native-born citizens. This is why, to the surprise of many far-left progressives, numerous immigrants have actually “left the Left.”

Defend & Preserve Our Constitution

God-fearing, freedom-loving, patriotic Americans must resist these strategies to undermine and destroy all that is noble and virtuous about America. Defending and preserving our nation and our Constitution is essential to defending and preserving our liberties against a global government that is not beholden to our Constitution or to the godly principles on which our government was established. In addition, other countries that value freedom and democracy depend on a free America to lead the way in the fight against power-hungry, abusive regimes and the tyranny and terror they inflict or sanction. Yielding our sovereignty to a secular, humanistic, global governing body like the United Nations is a move toward yielding every last remnant of individual liberty existing in the free societies around the globe.

What Can Patriots Do?

  • Refuse to villainize fellow Americans…period.
  • Understand equity versus equality: equality promises equal treatment and opportunity, while equity promises equal outcome (requiring unequal treatment).
  • Protect our institutions (churches, family, local law enforcement, etc.). 
  • Understand that despite the sins of men, America has been the greatest force for good and for freedom the world has known.
  • Recognize that a system cannot be inherently evil (discern between sinful people who run our systems vs. the systems themselves, which are neutral, apart from people).
  • Fight for our Constitution. Stand strong against infringements to our liberties in every area, and defend equal treatment under the law, free speech and press, freedom of religion, and the right to bear arms.
  • Be informed, pray, and vote! Stay in contact with elected officials at every level. Be undeterred by ridicule or other weapons of emotional warfare.
  • Most importantly, do not compromise objective truth. Refuse to live by lies. Communicate truth with kindness and humility.

Are Fact-Checkers Unbiased?

Fact-Checking the Fact-Checkers

Ahhh, the Fact-Checkers. Those unseen, unknown, self-proclaimed arbiters of truth. Arriving on the scene over a decade ago, fact-checkers have increasingly graced us with their presence in mainstream media, entertainment, academia and social media. Their claim to fame is their commitment to verifying factual claims without any hint of bias.

Appearance of Neutrality

Initially, the fact-checkers strained to maintain an appearance of neutrality. That has since given way to blatant displays of partisanship, as they assist in the take-down of those on one side (namely, the conservative side) of the political spectrum. Fact-checkers have played a substantial role in delegitimizing, censoring, demonetizing, de-platforming and canceling all those—including powerful influencers—who dare to disagree with the approved narrative (which has taken a rather abrupt, hard-left turn as of late).

Fact-checkers’ extraordinary ability to identify “misinformation” or “falsehoods” cannot be attributed to their research skills or knack for discerning truth. Rather, it is primarily a result of the unholy alliances they’ve forged with media and Big Tech.

Who are these Guardians of “Truth”?

So, who are these self-appointed guardians of the “truth” who arbitrarily slap labels on content that doesn’t satisfy their elusive and subjective standards? Let’s take a look at some ACTUAL facts about some of the more prominent fact-checkers. But, first, a disclaimer is in order: “Fact-Checkers: Mostly Misleading”

Important (and Verifiable) Facts about the Fact-Checkers


PolitiFact (famous for the “Truth-O-Meter” rating system and “Pants on Fire” rating) is operated by the Poynter Institute, which is funded by far-left activist and Democrat Party donor George Soros, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the Ford Foundation, the Tides Foundation and the Omidyar Network Fund (supported by the Clinton Foundation). Facebook accounts for over five percent of PolitiFact’s revenue. (It is noteworthy that the social media giant has admitted to pressuring fact-checkers to change their verdicts. PolitiFact refuses to confirm or deny whether it has been the subject of such pressure.)

An in-depth analysis revealed significant, anti-conservative bias:

  • Rated Hillary Clinton the single most honest politician in 2016
  • Mitt Romney (at the time, a conservative in good standing with his base) was given the lowest rating more times than all Democrats combined over almost 10 years
  • Republicans received “False” or “Pants on Fire” ratings as much as three times more often than Democrats.
  • PolitiFact ruled it objectively “False” to describe a person by his or her birth gender if that person identifies with another gender. (MBFC)

MBFC indicates that it rarely conducts its own fact checks. It primarily relies on the International Fact-Checking Network, which is founded by the Poynter Institute (funded by George Soros, et al.). MBFC is run by Dave Van Zandt, who, ironically, was forced to retract misleading information from his bio on the MBFC’s website.

MBFC uses a 3-part system that 1) assesses bias, classifying as Extreme Left, Left, Left- Center, Least Biased, Right-Center, Right, Extreme Right; 2) assesses factual reporting, classifying as Very High, High, Mostly Factual, Mixed, Low or Very Low; and 3) gives an overall credibility rating.

MBFC demonstrates substantial anti-conservative bias:

  • Gives “High Credibility” rating to:
    • 47% of sources considered left-leaning
    • 6% of sources considered right-leaning
  • Rates factual reporting as “Very High,” “High” or “Mostly Factual” to:
    • 56% of left-leaning sources
    • 11% of right-leaning sources
  • Labels as “Questionable Sources” most prominent conservative outlets.
    • Outlets included Newsmax, One America News Network, Breitbart, Townhall, Blaze, Washington Times, The Federalist, Gateway Pundit, American Thinker, and Daily Wire.
  • Labels as “Conspiracy Pseudoscience” (which it defines as relating to “unverifiable theories”) sources embracing Christian concepts or holistic health concepts, all of which were classified as “Low Credibility.”
    • Outlets included Answers in Genesis, Christian Broadcasting Network, Institute for Creation Research, Live Action, Children’s Health Defense, Natural News, and Prevention Magazine Negative “Questionable Source” or “Conspiracy Pseudoscience” designations are almost exclusively used for conservative sources, while some of the furthest-left sources enjoy middle-of-the-road designations.
    • It is notable that the sources in these sub-categories are almost exclusively classified as “Extreme Right,” as opposed to “Extreme Left,” even though the left and right are equally capable of extremes.

According to the MBFC website, any information related to the following topics is classified as “Conspiracy Pseudoscience”:

  • the theory that climate change is not a result of human influence;
  • anti-vaccination positions;
  • homeopathy;
  • catastrophism;
  • creationism; etc.

Note that MBFC does not flag information regarding evolution, even though it is a theory that is plagued with “unverifiable” assumptions that any fair-minded person must acknowledge. Neither does MBFC flag assertions that climate change is primarily driven by humans, despite the fact that this theory is also based on many unverifiable assumptions, many of which are roundly rejected by experts who are well-qualified according to fair standards.

The Fact Checker (Washington Post’s Fact-Check)

The Washington Post, including its Fact-checking division, is owned by Jeff Bezos, the CEO of and a Democrat-Party donor. Google and YouTube have provided funding to The Fact Checker. Fact Checker famously uses “Pinocchios” to rate statements by politicians and others.

Evidence of bias includes the following:

  • In 2016, Bezos deployed an army of 20 newspaper staffers to scour Donald Trump’s life “for any dirt” they could find on the presumptive Republican nominee, while noticeably not engaging staffers to investigate the lives of other candidates.
  • The Fact Checker developed its groundbreaking fact-check database when President Trump took office, claiming it had a duty to tally all presidential falsehoods. The Fact-Checker abruptly discontinued the correlating Biden database within his first 100 days and prior to his first joint address to Congress.


Snopes’ was founded by David Mikkelson, who recently admitted to plagiarizing from dozens of articles produced by other outlets and has been suspended from editorial production.
Snopes served as one of Facebook’s fact-checking partners from 2016-2019.

Evidence of anti-conservative bias includes:

  • Snopes’ fact-checkers have reportedly not engaged in a single fact-check on President Biden’s statements in connection with the Taliban’s takeover of Afghanistan. Conversely, Snopes fact-checked President Trump’s October statements regarding the Taliban.
  • According to the byline of the fact-checking article on President Trump, its author was Nur Ibrahim, whose LinkedIn page indicates she is a Harvard graduate who previously worked for Al Jazeera, the Arab network. is a partner of Facebook. It is a funded by the Annenberg Foundation, which has financial ties to Bill Ayers, notorious former leader of the Weather Underground group that took credit for bombing the U.S. Capitol and the Pentagon in the 70’s. The foundation financed an organization led by Ayers and Obama that funneled millions of dollars to projects promoting far-left policies, including the Global Village school, promoting “global citizenship” and the United Nations. The site, according to Wikipedia, describes itself as a “consumer advocate for voters that aims to reduce the level of deception and confusion in U.S. politics.”

Evidence of Bias:

  • Currently, the website is running a high-profile live Coronavirus “debunking” section where it strictly censors information citizens may post regarding the virus.
  • relies on information from the CDC and WHO—both of which are under fire for lack of transparency and conflicts of interest—to determine whether statements are aligned or opposed to a tightly-controlled and government-approved narrative.

So…What’s the Takeaway?

Overall, according to research, right-leaning outlets get more negative results from fact-checkers than those on the left. Perhaps even more importantly, the entire concept of fact-checking (at least within most current rating systems) is flawed and misleading. This is because the most effective lies are mostly true, i.e., they are truth with a slight twist, which, as it turns out, makes them false. The original occurrence of this type of subtle deception is found in Genesis 3:

“The serpent was the shrewdest of all…One day he asked the woman, “Did God really say you must not eat the fruit from any of the trees in the garden?”

Gen. 3:1

Of course, God had not said exactly that, but the woman was deceived. That lie—the statement that was partially true—was the downfall of humanity.

While fact-checkers may not be the downfall of humanity, it is important to understand that they may not be neutral—and many have proved not to be. They may be supported by or controlled by powerful people, including political activists, who have interests that impair their ability to be unbiased.

The Enemies of Israel

Israel wants peace, yet it is surrounded by enemies on every side who do not want peace. Hamas, the terrorist group holding political power in Palestine and who is bombing Israel, hates freedom and democracy. These terrorists chanted “Death to America” as they celebrated 9-11.

Unbelievably, our mainstream media and social media elites reveal an anti-Israel bias in favor of Hamas. They accuse Israel, implicitly or even overtly, of human-rights violations, simply for defending itself. They do not expose Hamas for using human shields, violating the human rights of innocent Palestinians. They do not tell the story of the incredible morality of the Israeli military. (Did you know that Israel provided an hour warning prior to bombing a building used by Hamas for terror operations in order to allow time for civilians to safely escape?)  

In every way, Israel has demonstrated that it wants peace. From withdrawing from Gaza in 2005, to offering peace talks, to making peace with Egypt and Jordan, Israel has persistently sought peace. Yet its enemies are not satisfied and are intent on the destruction of Israel.

If Israel’s enemies put down their arms, there would be peace. If Israel put down her arms, there would be no more Israel.

Israeli proverb

Our administration needs to offer its unyielding support to help Israel defend against those who hate us both, not only because Israel is our ally and a beacon of freedom and democracy in the Middle East, but because God requires us do to so:

“I will bless those who bless you [Israel] and curse those who treat you with contempt. All the families on earth will be blessed through you.”  Gen. 12:3

Court-Packing:  Road to Tyranny

In an alarming, but not surprising, development, the U.S. House recently introduced legislation to increase the number of justices on the U.S. Supreme Court—a practice known as “court- packing.”  If passed, the new law would give President Biden the opportunity to fill four new seats with justices who agree with his political objectives and are willing to uphold his agenda. (While Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, has indicated she does not support the bill, she does support the president’s commission to study such a proposal, so it is important for every American to understand the implications of this legislative maneuver.)

The Court’s majority alternates over time between a conservative majority (those who believe the Constitution should be interpreted as written) and a left-leaning majority (those who see the Constitution as a living, breathing document that must flex and move to either adapt to cultural change or to accomplish progressive objectives).  This shift happens slowly, as justices serve for lifetime appointments, providing stability in our system.  Court-packing would likely unleash a cycle that would undermine that stability:  With each change of administration, the party succeeding to power would simply add enough “aligned” justices to secure an advantage and overturn the rulings of the “previous” Court.  The Court would be fast-changing and completely subject to the political whims of those in power. 

That prospect is troubling, yet there is another implication that is even more disturbing.  Court-packing would immediately give the Democrat party control over all three branches of government. Not only this, but the progressive wing of the party (who is driving the agenda) is attempting to push through certain radical legislative objectives that, if passed, would make it almost impossible for a conservative to ever regain the presidency or a majority in Congress, potentially giving the Democrat party power in perpetuity. Those objectives include, among many others:    

  • “For the People Act” (H.R.1): This would take the power over elections from the states and hand it to Congress and permanently enact policies that undermine election integrity, such as eliminating voter ID, requiring universal mail-in ballots without voter authentication, legalizing ballot harvesting, allowing a person to vote with any name, and requiring the inclusion of non-eligible illegal immigrants in re-districting, among other policies that open the door to massive election fraud.
  • Granting statehood to Washington, D.C. and Puerto Rico: This would likely provide four additional, reliably-blue seats in the Senate. The Senate is currently evenly divided 50-50, and these additional seats would add up to a significant and lasting shift in power.
  • Granting amnesty to roughly 22 million illegal immigrants: This would providing illegal immigrants the right to vote, which, in turn, is expected to tilt the electorate to the left to a degree that permanently changes election outcomes. (As a reference point, California, a Democrat stronghold, was reliably red prior to the enactment of policies that incentivized mass illegal immigration.)
  • Expanding the lower federal courts to ensure a majority of appointees who share their progressive ideals and political objectives:  This is intended to increase the odds that even the most radical legislation will survive lower-court challenges. 
  • Abolishing the electoral college: The electoral college was designed to ensure that all states, even the smallest, have a voice in presidential elections.  Without the electoral college, elections would be decided based on a simple majority vote, and the most populous states, such as New York, California, and Illinois,  would largely determine presidential election outcomes.   

These policies are not only objectionable to a majority of Americans, but they violate the Constitution and would not likely survive constitutional challenge in today’s Supreme Court.  

Packing the Court, however, could change this outcome. Adding justices who are politically aligned with those in power—and who are willing to re-interpret our Constitution to achieve shared political ends—could allow even these radical policies to survive a Court challenge. 

If ultimately enacted into law, such policies could enable a handful of radical, progressive politicians to amass and retain enormous amounts of power…possibly in perpetuity.  It should come as no surprise that court-packing is a common tool of authoritarians bent on undermining liberal democracy:  Look no further than to Venezuela, Hungary, and Turkey. 

Court-packing is a dangerous idea that has no place in our democratic republic.

The Death of “Give Me Liberty or Give Me Death”

When did “Give me liberty or give me death!” give way to “I’ll give you my liberty if you’ll save me from death!”?

Our Founders had an appreciation for something we seem to have taken for granted (at least until relatively recently). That something is freedom. The Founders experienced life under a tyrannical government, and many of them gave their lives to ensure we would never have to endure the same. They preferred death itself over life in bondage to an overbearing government.

Because of their sacrifices, Americans have enjoyed more freedom than citizens of any other country. Over time, our liberties have eroded as we have increasingly trusted and relied on our government to solve our problems. The arrival of COVID has accelerated that trend. Out of fear, we have allowed the government to step in and take even greater authority over areas reserved solely for our control (such as our children’s education, our healthcare and medical decisions, our businesses, our parenting, etc.).

Many in positions of federal leadership have attempted time and again to exploit our fears to gain power. One of their strategies is to take real issues and dishonestly frame them in order to elevate our fears, then assure us that the government can save us. Unfortunately, we have too often willingly handed them the power they seek in exchange for their promise of a better life.

This tactic is not original–consider the serpent in the Garden of Eden. The reality is that those who promise us security in exchange for power are usually intent on depriving us of both. We would do well to keep this in mind as we evaluate ongoing attempts by our government to gain more and more power in exchange for protecting us from certain peril. We should embrace our Founders’ healthy skepticism.

“The ideal subject of a totalitarian state is someone who has learned to love Big Brother.” 

Rod Dreher, Live Not by Lies

The reality is that government cannot save us. No person or politician or political party can save us. Only our Creator has the power to save us, not by removing every obstacle, but by setting us on a firm foundation, despite the challenges we face. When we choose, in faith, to believe and to embrace His instructions for living, He empowers us to live life from a position of strength:

For God has not given us a spirit of fear and timidity, but of power, love, and self-discipline.

2 Tim. 1:7

If we will embrace God’s plan for us, we can operate out of faith and courage, regardless of how formidable the adversary or the challenge may be. In the context of our present situation, this might include refusing to affirm a dishonest framing of the issues, refusing to operate out of fear, and refusing to mindlessly accept powerlessness. We may not be able to change every outcome, but we can commit to standing firmly on the side of what is good and right and true.

The ordinary man may not be able to overturn the kingdom of lies, but he can at least say that he is not going to be its loyal subject. 

Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, Russian political prisoner

History teaches us that it often only takes one courageous person to lead the way.

Who’s in Charge Here?

Last week, known as Holy Week for Christians, a video and a shoe celebrating Satanism were on full display across the Internet, and many of us are troubled by what this says about where we are as a society.  How should we respond as Christians or conservatives when ideas are promoted that we see as harmful or even dangerous? Or when those ideas are not only expressed, but are shaping public policy in the form of laws that we are all forced to obey, and into public school curricula to be taught to our children? 

It is true that the expression of every viewpoint, no matter how unpopular, enjoys the protection of the First Amendment. Does it follow that we must allow every such viewpoint to have equal voice and equal sway in the shaping of public policy?  It is critical that we know the answer to this question.  And, if we look to our Founding Fathers, the answer is a definitive “no.”

Our Constitution provides for a representative democracy, under which the majority determines the laws and policies we choose to live under.  While our Constitution protects the freedom of every citizen to hold and express viewpoints that do not align with the majority, this freedom does not extend to dictating (or even shaping) law or policy.   Put simply, our Framers did not intend for government to enforce policies that are offensive to a majority of Americans (such as giving voice to doctrines that celebrate harmful behaviors).  

Sam Adams warned about this very thing:  

“If the public are bound to yield obedience to laws to which they cannot give their approval, they are slaves to those who make such laws and enforce them.”

We need to know and understand these concepts that underlie our system of self-government if we ever hope to put the reins of power back into the hands of the people.

Open Borders: Is This What Compassion Looks Like?

We’ve all known, or at least heard about, those amazing, compassionate, selfless families who open their homes to foster children.  These families offer a new start, sometimes a whole new life, to these precious children who’ve endured horrible beginnings. They truly make the world a better place.

Now imagine what would happen if CPS decided these families should be required to take in more and more children.  The families would no doubt do all they could, but wouldn’t they eventually exhaust their resources, diminishing their capacity to provide for the needs of their growing families?  How many beds could be squeezed into a house built for one family before the growing number of inhabitants were living in unhealthy and unsanitary conditions?  And, what if, among the new foster children, some needed special care, putting additional strain on family finances or stability? Or, what if these families were forced to take in children who were abusive to the other children?  Chaos would ensue. Poverty would befall the household.  Not only would the family be incapable of properly caring for its growing number of foster children, but it would have been stripped of the ability to take care of its own.  

A foster care system like this would make no logical sense. But this is what Americans are required to do every day by our current administration, as it forcefully advances a policy of open borders.  Americans, like benevolent foster parents, have always embraced the opportunity to receive and to help those who are suffering. Our very laws are designed to give those experiencing political or religious persecution an escape from abuse.  But our current administration is opening our borders to essentially anyone who wants to enter, and for virtually any reason.  Compassion, we are told, requires that we accept all who come, with very few exceptions.  But this is a fallacy.  This approach not only threatens the well-being of our citizens, but also of the very people seeking entry.  Many innocent and vulnerable migrants crossing our borders are being victimized in the process.  Consider, for example, the following: 

  • Research has indicated that 1 in 3 women is sexually assaulted and up to 80% of young girls are raped on the journey across the southern border. 
  • 11,000 to 15,000 unaccompanied minors are currently being held in abhorrent conditions, with up to 80 people in each 24- x 30-foot cell (approximately 9 square feet per person). There are not enough beds in these holding cells, which are separated by plastic or fabric.  It is reported that the smell of urine and vomit is overpowering, that fights break out, and that scabies, lice, the flu, and COVID-19 run rampant. 
  • Sexual assaults, according to at least one border patrol agent, go unreported, as the agents (who are working in ratios of 1 to 2 agents for every 300 to 500 immigrants) are overwhelmed, outnumbered, and fear being held responsible for what happens during their shifts. Adults and teenagers, according to this agent, will brag of raping multiple girls and even kicking them off the train that is transporting them to the U.S.
  • Children under the age of 5 regularly arrive without any adults, carrying a written address, giving our agents no other viable option but to deliver these children into the the addresses provided. (Understand, we’re dealing with different cultures, some of which are willing to send very young children alone, despite knowing the realities of what they may endure.)
  • Family units are given priority treatment, which provides an incentive to kidnap children (and for impoverished and desperate families from some cultures to “sell” children) for the journey across the border, and even to “recycle” the children for others who need them in order to more easily cross the border.

As for the effect on Americans, including legal immigrants, the toll is immense:

  • Unlimited numbers of migrants are being allowed entry without COVID-19 testing, even while Americans are suffering economic and other hardship due to extreme lockdown measures intended to eradicate or control the virus. 
  • Over 80 million of our tax dollars (and counting!) are earmarked for hotels to accommodate the mass numbers of illegal immigrants, while half a million citizens are homeless on our own streets, and while we have required our own National Guard to sleep in a parking lot (refer to incident at U.S. Capitol in January). Note that American citizens will pay approximately $72,000 per illegal immigrant over 6 months under this new policy.
  • Last month 100,000 illegal immigrants arrived at the border, for whom mass amnesty will alter the demographics of our country at a level never yet experienced.  This will, among other things, diminish citizens’ voting power (particularly for minority voting blocs in swing states), increase competition for jobs, reduce wages, raise the costs of medical care, affect teacher-student ratios, and increase numbers in poverty, leading to more drug use and criminal activity—all during an already existing economic and political crisis.

The reality is that wide-open borders are harmful to everyone. We, as a people, need to understand and embrace the concept that, before we can care for an unlimited number of “foster children” arriving in our country, we need to have our own house and our own budget in order, making sure our own “family” is healthy and strong.  

Scripture tells us that “[T]hose who won’t care for their relatives, especially those in their own household, have denied the truth faith.”  (1 Tim. 5:8a) Even believers are required to care for their own relatives rather than relying on the church. The rationale is that this protects the health of the church and, thus, its ability to care for others who truly need it and have no other options. (See 1 Tim. 5:16.) This response does not lack compassion. Just the opposite: It expands its reach.

Our government has drifted from this model at an increasingly rapid pace, heavily relying on loans and other resources from other countries, willingly undertaking excessive and debilitating debt.  In fact, many believe America is on the brink of financial disaster or worse. Without sufficient resources to care properly for our own citizens, we are simply incapable of properly caring for others, much less, an unlimited number of others.  

A truly compassionate response to the border crisis requires that we position ourselves to help the greatest number of people with the greatest needs.  This means we must get our own house in order, and we must require our elected officials to enact (and enforce!) sensible immigration laws designed to identify those who truly need our help, turn away or deport those who do not, or who do harm, and eliminate incentives to exploit the system. From this position of strength and stability, we will be able to share our home and our resources with those who come here with a genuine need for refuge.

Even the New York Times is telling Joe to Slow his Roll!*

Whether you call yourself a Democrat or a Republican (or other), it is so important to understand the consequences of the executive actions signed by Joe Biden during the first several days in office.  

While our presidents have become increasingly comfortable taking “executive actions,” Joe Biden has taken it to a new level, signing 40 executive actions by day 9, far exceeding every president in our history.  As a reminder, “executive actions” allow a president to impose policies on the American people without the approval of Congress (which is the only branch with the authority to make policy). While executive actions are not “laws” and are not permanent—the next president can overturn them—they do carry the “force of law” during a president’s term.  

As you might expect, whether we tolerate this “end-run” around Congress tends to change depending on whether “our” party is in power in the executive branch. However, with regard to many of the recently-signed executive actions, I believe every American has cause for concern. 

Here are some of the most consequential of the new policies:

  • Imposing new gender-identity rules.
    • Requiring that males be allowed to participate in female sports (among other rules), effectively ending girls’ and women’s sports, destroying their opportunities to prevail in their athletic disciplines.
    • Note: No decent person is in favor of denying another person of the right to be treated with respect and dignity. Our Constitution requires that our liberties end at the point where they infringe on another’s liberties. But this order violates that principle:  it elevates one group’s rights over the rights of a whole class of others (women). 
    • In addition to the impact on sports, these new gender-identity rules will affect churches and other tax-exempt organizations.
  • Requiring racial “equity” in health care and other areas. 
    • The concept of “equity” requires distribution of resources based on arbitrarily selected characteristics.
    • Pay attention to the recent change in talking points from focus on equality to focus on equity. Our Constitution requires that all people be treated equally under the law. But equity is counter to equality, requiring people to be treated differently, i.e., requiring takingfrom (or denying resources to) one class of citizens and redistributing to another class. (More on this soon.)
  • Rescinded ban on taxpayer funding for international abortion groups, disregarding the voters’ preferences.
    • This order highlights the power of the executive order to defy the will of the American people. According to one recent report, polling by Marist and the Knights of Columbus shows: 
      • More than 3/4 of Americans oppose.
      • A majority in Biden’s own party is opposed.
      • Nearly 2/3 of self-described pro-choice Americans oppose. 
      • 85% of independent voters oppose.
  • Canceled Keystone Pipeline; reversed President Trump’s environmental deregulation.
    • Expected to cost 11,000 American jobs.  
    • Will erode our energy independence.
    • Contributing to rising fuel prices.
  • Recommitted the US to the Paris Climate Accord
    • Requires taxpayer-backed financial investment and loss of freedoms and jobs for Americans, while other countries are not held accountable for their carbon emissions or for their fair share of financial investment. 
    • Cannot work as long as China, the world’s largest emitter of carbon dioxide, does not cooperate. Though it recently “pledged” to aim to achieve carbon neutrality by 2060, the Beijing regime admitted that China’s emissions would peak in about 10 years. Last year, China was approving new coal plants at the fastest rate since 2015. 
    • Note that if oil prices fall as a result of our reductions in demand due to our coming climate-change regulations, China, the world’s largest importer of crude oil, will have much to gain. 
  • Action allowing skyrocketing prices on Insulin
    • Instantly put the life-preserving drug entirely out of reach for many who depend on it.
    • Under President Trump, drug prices decreased for the first time in 52 years. Starting out with the highest prices of any country in world, under the “Favored Nations clause,” we were on track to pay the lowest price a drug was offered anywhere in the world.
  • Mask mandate in federal buildings and on federal property, both inside and outdoors
    • Note: Many are questioning why there is no mandate to re-open schools across the country, in line with the latest scientific evidence
  • Ended travel ban for Libya, Somalia, Syria, and Yemen
    • Ban was originally instituted by Obama-Biden administration, and was supported/extended by Trump based on security concerns; yet, current administration alleges the ban was rooted in religious animus and xenophobia.
  • Stopped construction of our (already funded) US-Mexico border wall. 
  • Imposed a moratorium on most deportations.
    • No exception is made for the over 90% of illegal immigrants who’ve committed criminal acts.
    • Court battles have ensued and at least one judge has ruled against.
    • Administration justifies the acting citing concerns over processing the huge number of deportations during the pandemic, yet at the same time is incentivizing more illegal immigration by talks of amnesty and by ending construction of the border wall (even as we are predicting an imminent border crisis as it is reported that caravans are again making their way toward our border).
  • Rejoined the World Health Organization (the WHO)
    • We will again provide generous financial support to the global organization that, at best, refuses to hold the Chinese Communist Party accountable for, and, at worst, was complicit in, the well-documented coverup concerning the original outbreak of the virus, which sparked the pandemic. 
    • The US had withdrawn its participation (and funding) in an effort to push for accountability, leadership change and reform.

Actions are also being taken in Congress at a breakneck speed. Moves are being made to legislate mail-in voting across the country (unconstitutionally taking the power away from state legislatures to determine the issue), as well as to grant statehood to D.C. (a constitutional “jurisdiction” that is the size of, and is run like, a city).  More on these items coming soon…

Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn’t pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same, or one day we will spend our sunset years telling our children and our children’s children what it was once like in the United States where men were free. 

Ronald Reagan


Calls for Unity…Exposed

Why is it that the incoming administration’s calls for unity don’t give us that warm feeling inside that makes happy tears well up in our eyes?  I mean, most reasonable Americans surely desire unity for our country, right?  But let’s be honest:  this feels much different.  

The first thing that probably comes to mind is that these sudden calls for unity by those ascending to (nearly unchecked) power are utterly hypocritical.  The people who have gained positions of power in our executive and legislative branches, and those people and institutions who coordinated efforts to ensure that outcome, certainly did not call for unity after President Trump won the election in 2016.  In fact, they spent four years peddling hatred toward him as well as toward anyone who dared to support him, attacking the legitimacy of the election, making endless accusations, conducting baseless investigations, and calling for everything that is exactly the opposite of unity.  Every single day.  Every single way.  BUT, there is an even bigger point here that we simply CANNOT miss…

The real issue is that these hypocritical calls for unity aren’t really calls for unity at all! Let me explain.

Unity happens when diverse people come together to get behind a greater purpose, or a shared vision. For example, our Founders, who were from all walks of life, set aside their differences and elevated their common goal of establishing this great nation where every citizen would have equal protection under the law, and where the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness would be secure.  Since then, diverse Americans have unified around a common love for this country and around the freedom and opportunity it provides.  This is a noble aspiration!  But make no mistake, this is NOT the aspiration of the powerful few who are now in control of our government.  

The powerful few are working to ensure not unity, but, rather, conformity

Conformity means acting in accord with a certain set of standards, attitudes, practices, etc.  We are being told by the most radical administration in our history to accept their standards, their vision for our country, a vision most Americans do not share and do not believe will serve the greater good.  Not only are they demanding passive acceptance, they are increasingly forcing active participation in (and promotion of) their own prescribed social “norms” and worldview, while silencing (read censoring) all political opposition. We are expected to silently and dutifully obey.  If we dare raise objections—no matter how reasonable or factual, and even if based on (real) science—we are canceled, shamed, de-platformed, vilified, harassed, or fired. Some high-profile politicians and media personalities have even begun suggesting—this is not an isolated occurrence—that all who supported or support President Trump are domestic terrorists and are in need of “de-programming.” 

These actions bear no resemblance whatsoever to the concept of unity.  Those wielding the most power are demanding total conformity to a worldview that runs completely counter to the values many (if not most) Americans hold sacred.  Even more concerning is that those ascending to power today, with the help of Big Tech and the mainstream media, have gained unprecedented control over the dissemination of information. When government controls the dissemination of information—the name for this is “propaganda”—democracy is threatened, to understate the case. A “state-run press” is perhaps the greatest threat to a free republic.  

So, what do we do now? Well, as it turns out, God has a lot to say about unity and conformity. While Christians are called to fight for unity, we are to reject conformity to worldviews that are antithetical to biblical truths, no matter how deceivingly beautiful the package may be. 

“Don’t copy the behavior and customs of this world, but let God transform you into a new person by changing the way you think. Then you will learn to know God’s will for you, which is good and pleasing and perfect.” 

Romans 12:1-2

“The highway to hell is broad, and its gate is wide for the many who choose that way. But the gateway to life is very narrow and the road is difficult, and only a few ever find it.”

Matthew 7:13-14 

“Don’t love this world or the things it offers you, for when you love the world, you do not have the love of the Father in you….This world is fading away, along with everything that people crave….”

1 John 2:15

For those of us who have serious moral and spiritual (and other) objections to the ideologies that have taken root in our government, thoughts about the future are disconcerting. I believe staying true to our convictions will become more and more difficult in the face of a government that has demonstrated a willingness to silence and even punish political dissenters. The fact that I am typing these words in a country founded on the principle of freedom of expression is shocking to me, but I do not at all believe I am overstating my concerns.

I’m grateful for the last four years, as I believe one of President Trump’s greatest gifts was emboldening faith-filled, freedom-loving, Constitution-revering, God-fearing Americans who had given up or given in to the tactics of intimidation and cancelation. We can and should continue to stand boldly and courageously for what is good and right.  Those of us who were inspired the last four years can inspire and embolden others around us who’ve lost their courage or motivation. God has not given us a spirit of fear, but of love, power and sound mind.

Most importantly, this may just become the greatest opportunity we’ve ever had to share the one true source of hope with those who find themselves in need of it. Hopelessness is the doorway to hope. Let’s stand ready to boldly share the path to our enduring hope.

I am leaving you with a gift—peace of mind and heart.  And the peace I give is a gift the world cannot give.  So don’t be troubled or afraid.”

John 14:27

Unshakable Hope (Where can I get some of that!?)

If you’re aware of what’s going on in our country, you may be feeling helpless, possibly hopeless.  If you believe our election was not free and fair and that roughly 76 million of us have been denied a voice in the governance of our nation, or if you have noticed the full-throttled effort by power players on the far left to strip all others of their most basic civil liberties, it is only natural to be discouraged. (That may be an understatement for some of us, who may or may not include me.;))  

For those of us who support conservative or traditional values (and particularly those of us who support President Trump), our freedoms—freedom of speech, freedom to worship, right to keep and bear arms, right to be treated equally under the law—are under open and relentless attack.  Those currently wielding the most power are imposing their far-left views on every American, with the possible exception of themselves, ironically. Mainstream media, academia, Big Tech, many of our largest, most powerful, private corporations, and, prospectively, the incoming administration (under the unchecked control of a single political party) have demonstrated their intent to punish any and all who dissent from their narrowly-defined “accepted narrative.”  In short, those of us who do not adhere to the “approved” ideology, which runs counter to the most sacred things we stand for, must be silenced, or even criminalized(!). 

While this is truly disturbing, even frightening, we can’t afford to be discouraged in our fight for what is good and right and true. The very definition of courage is the choice and willingness to confront agony, pain, danger, uncertainty, or intimidation. I want to commit to being courageous! Here are some facts that should encourage all of us (are you detecting a theme here?): 

  1. 7.6 million more Christians turned out for the election than in 2016.  This is HUGE.  As it turns out, maybe we’re finally realizing all that is at stake.  May we never be asleep at the wheel again.
  2. Based on the astonishing number of, and the sheer gravity of, the election irregularities, I believe we, as patriotic, faith- and freedom-loving Americans, are absolutely, positively, irrefutably in the majority. While the election issues are enraging, the response of so many millions of Americans is heartening. 
  3. Elections have consequences.  I believe the consequences of this election (whether or not the election was free and fair) will be drastic and may open the eyes and shock the consciences of many on the side of faith and freedom who have previously been complacent or even apathetic.  P.S. It wasn’t fair. :0 

Some of you who pay close attention are undoubtedly shouting to me (even though we both know you’re actually shouting at your computer screen—hee hee) that it is too late, that the next administration will throw open the borders, kill the filibuster, pack the Court, and grant statehood to D.C., essentially ensuring that no Republican can ever again be elected.  This is all true.  All of this might happen.  BUT, see 1, 2 and 3 above:  Christians are waking up; there are far more conservatives and moderates than there are the far-left, radical progressives (even though they have ascended to power); and, pain is an enormously effective impetus for change.  Additionally, with regard to open borders, it is not insignificant that President Trump won historic numbers of minority voters, particularly Hispanics, who tend to be socially conservative and deeply religious. While the headlines would tell you otherwise, the movement inspired by President Trump and other God-fearing, America-loving, Constitution-revering patriots is real and formidable…and continuing.  (Why else would they be so determined to remove President Trump from office with just over a week left in his term? Could it be that they fear his continued influence or a future presidential term?)

With or without President Trump, there are many people and many things in motion that should inspire us to continue to fight for our country and our freedoms. It is good to focus on the positives and to work for and pray for our President, for our leadership, and for our desired outcomes.

However, the bigger message is, our hope cannot be dependent on any person or any given outcome:   

“Do not put your confidence in princes, in human beings, who cannot save. When their spirit departs, they return to the ground; on that very day, their plans come to nothing.”

Psalm 146:3 

When we place our hope in anything that is uncertain—whether a person, a party, an election outcome, or any other thing—then when it disappoints us, which it eventually will, our hope is shattered.  So, if we are finding ourselves discouraged and disheartened and hopeless as a result of our circumstances, it may be an indication that we have put our hope in those things rather than in the only source that is guaranteed:

“Why am I discouraged? Why is my heart so sad?  I will put my hope in God! I will praise him again—my savior and my God.”

Psalm 42:5-6

“But joyful are those who have the God of Israel as their helper, whose hope is in the Lord their God.”

Psalm 146:5

 “And this hope will not lead to disappointment. For we know how dearly God loves us, because he has given us the Holy Spirit to fill our hearts with his love.”

Romans 5:5

“This hope is a strong and trustworthy anchor for our souls.”  

Hebrews 6:19

The most important thing to remember in the days ahead is that God is still on His throne. He knew this was coming and He knows where it is going. When we put our hope in Him, we can rest in knowing that our joy, our security, our very sense of well-being cannot be shaken, even if (when) our circumstances deteriorate, or the world falls apart around us. It is a hope that is secure. 

I highly recommend signing up for this brand of hope—it is not overrated.