Aucune!

“None!”  That was the French prime minister’s response to Winston Churchill when the British prime minister asked where the country’s strategic military reserves were located.  

France had just succumbed to Hitler’s panzers at the banks of the Meuse River, where the Germans swept to victory with little challenge.  

France had fallen.  How could this debacle have happened? 

It had its roots in pacifism. 

Between WWI and WWII, the German people were dispirited.  Their economy was in a downward spiral induced by the fall of American banks in 1929 and the reparations they were forced to pay after WWI.  In addition, their quest for national prestige had been rudely interrupted when they lost the first world war (commenced when a Bosnian Serb assassinated Archduke Ferdinand of Austria-Hungary, heir to the empire).  As penance for their Neaderthal ways, the Germans signed a non-aggression treaty with their neighbors on the Continent and England.  The treaty subjected Germany to loss of a substantial amount of land, payment of reparations, a prohibition on annexation of other states, and a decrease in military forces.  The parties also signed a pact by which all would draw down their weapons and demilitarize.  The Treaty of Versailles fostered a desperate hope, carried by the toothless League of Nations, as well as people throughout Europe, that there would be no more war.  

And so, in the aftermath of WWI, an isolationist mood prevailed.  Charles Lindburgh and Joseph Kennedy were at the forefront of the complacency in America.  Their overly optimistic view undermined our national security, and the American public rallied behind public figures who had no stomach for another fight and lacked the vision to secure a real peace.  (Reagan’s “Trust but verify” would have come in quite handy here). 

As the decade wore on and the governments of Europe became populated with appeasement-minded men, Hitler rose to power in Germany with the promise that he would restore the country’s right to rule the world and recoup its losses.  Unchecked by countries which hoped against hope for continued peace, der corporal enthusiastically built up his military in direct violation of the treaty.   Those who were willing to see, saw.  The rest turned a blind eye.  While Hitler abolished democracy in his country, induced conscription, and strengthened his armaments, the world sighed and looked the other way.    

In its first offensive, the German army invaded Poland and not one country  in Europe lifted a hand to stop it.  The consequences of their indifference would soon confront them.  Czechoslovakia was next.  Then came Scandinavia, which had done its best to remain neutral.  France couldn’t be far behind and indeed, was defeated soundly and promptly by Hitler’s forces. 

These days, the soaring rhetoric of liberal politicans has convinced many Americans that the road to true peace depends upon putting down our weapons, hollowing out our military, and placing our trust in madmen whose life’s mission is to destroy our nation.   History proves otherwise.  When are we ever going to learn?  Their premise involves a high degree of moral ineptitude and naïveté, since ignoring basic human nature is what usually gets us into these predicaments.  

There are two important lessons here.  Democrats in congress are hoping the American people will forget and move on, never learning the truth about who’s responsible for our current economic mess.  But unless we analyze our past mistakes, we are doomed to repeat them in future.  

The other lesson is this:  Just because you’re a pacifist doesn’t mean your enemies are.

Living in a Kakistocracy

Ever heard of a kakistocracy?  It’s government by the least qualified or most unprincipled citizens.   

If there were such an organization in our country, who do you suppose would be a member?   

Don’t make the mistake of thinking the answer depends on what your individual political preferences are.  Keep in mind that truth is truth no matter who is involved, no matter what year it is, and no matter what the prevailing whims of the general population may be.  Truth, in fact, is timeless.

It doesn’t matter how well the person communicates the idea, if it’s a bad idea.  It doesn’t matter how white their smile, because a smile can’t make something true.  If the messenger is wrong, he’s wrong.   

Here’s a piece of truth for ya:  Some people should not be allowed to govern because, 1) they are not qualified and, 2) they don’t have principles.  

Those who approach everything in life from a Christian worldview have an easier time understanding the implications inherent in embracing right and rejecting wrong.  Without these firm convictions, we bob and weave our way through life hoping for the best, grasping at half-truths, and arriving at good decisions by a process of hit and miss.  The manifestations are apparent in people who refuse to take responsibility for their own mistakes, who delight in the misfortune of their opponents, and who participate in cheating the electoral system.   

This stuff about principle matters, folks, and it doesn’t matter only in certain areas of our lives.  Principle is important at church, at work, and in relationships.  Our principles guide decisions about whether we can afford a certain car.  They help us to decide how much to pay for our clothing.  The same mental processes are used in deciding whom to befriend and why. Principles of truth must also be used when deciding whom we should vote for.   

If we don’t want to be ruled by a kakistocracy, each of us needs to habitually make principled decisions, even in the area of politics.  We should ask ourselves:  Do I side with the person who makes a stand for innocent lives, or do I follow the other person?  Do I stand with the person who has served his country well, or do I stand with the person who shows distain for it?  Do I stand with the person who talks about principles, or the person who lives them?  This isn’t rocket science, you know.   

A Christian worldview sees actions through the lens of timeless truths.  It recognizes that politicians are mortal, and they cannot bring us lasting world peace no matter what they say or do.  They will either bring temporary peace through strength, or they will bring war by appeasing the enemy.  

This worldview knows that mankind is not inherently good, only God is good.  Christianity shows us our real nature (which is sinful) and guides us to the right way of living (by turning our selfish desires over to Christ and allowing him to turn us into creatures that are acceptable to God).  Within these parameters, then, what we know must matter more than what we feel.  Guided by historical facts and not hysteria, the mature Christian can move through life confidently because he knows that no matter what the outcome, he has committed himself to God’s hands, and God will always make things right for those who believe in Him.

Fear not, unprincipled reader.  When you make wrong choices based on false hopes and dreams, you just might get your way.  

For awhile. 

But you will always pay a price.  The price may turn out to be living under the thumb of a kakistocracy.

Green Lights and Alrights

So you can rev her up
Don’t go slow
It’s only green lights and alrights
~ Harry Connick, Jr  “With a Wink and a Smile”

So.  Miss Sarah did just fine up there in St. Louis at the VP debate, didn’t she?  The fact is, of course, a matter of chagrin to major news networks, who were not permitted the luxury of editing out her good responses and showing only the gotcha moments.  Poor Katie, poor Charlie, poor Gwen: they couldn’t control her image, because the debate was broadcast to the world in real time.  This means Sarah Palin had a chance to show what she was really like to at least 70,000 Americans, who were able to decide for themselves who she is and what she’s about. 

And people liked what they saw, winks and all.  Turns out Sarah Palin is a bright, articulate, accomplished woman who can stand up to a career politician and shame him with a smile.   

On Thursday night, Sarah Palin proved that she can relate to average people because she’s an average, hard-working American herself.  She also showed that it’s possible to make a real difference by applying practical life lessons to achieve high goals.  This hockey mom proved her bona fides by running for her first office in an attempt to make things better for her kids.  She got noticed, and was eventually appointed as a state ethics commissioner who oversaw oil company activities.  She was mayor of a small town before being elected governor, and proved to the people of Alaska (larger than Texas and California together) that she is a leader who knows how to get things done.  Oh yeah, and she’s also raising four kids.

This is in contrast to both Obama and Biden, who prefer talk to action.   Biden, known for his yakability in congress, couldn’t best her in Thursday’s debate because she was allowed – finally! – to show her natural gift for cutting the crapola and stating her case in plain old English.  What a breath of fresh air! 

Senator Joe Biden, who has served in Washington D.C. for over 20 years, has proved that he is a Common Man by … riding the Amtrack to work every day from his home in Delaware to the District of Columbia?  Folks, how many common people do you know who can afford to take the train between work and home every day?  Did you know that the cost of his daily round-trip ticket is close to $200?  Do you know any average electricians, teachers, nurses or administrative assistants who can do that?  Me neither. 

To prove his mettle as an average joe, Senator Biden said during the debate that he talks to his constituents at a diner in his town “where I spend a lot of time.”  Oh, say it ain’t so, Joe!  The diner to which he referred closed in 1990.  This giant lie, easily verifiable, was ignored by his adoring fans in the press, who prefer to spend their time parsing every impression ever uttered by anyone in Alaska who has so much as seen the woman in person. 

What about the whopper he tried to sell us when he denied that Obama said he would sit down without preconditions and talk with the leaders of rogue nations?  Folks, the moment is memorialized on tape, and a quick review of film shows that Obama said in his July debate that he would indeed talk to Ahmadinijad without preconditions.  And he meant direct president-to-president conversations, and not the State Department schmoozing normally done before rising to the level of the head honchos.  How do I know this?  Because the questioner asked him specifically to repeat his answer. 

So let’s see – with Biden and Obama we get pontificating, prevaricating, pseudo-intellectuals who prefer to spout hypotheticals when faced with decisions.  On the other hand, we have Palin and McCain, who have shown courage under stress, integrity when faced with corruption, and authenticity as all-American icons.  Oh dear, tough choice. 

I’m a rebel at heart.  When two lawyers tell me I should trust them, my first instinct is to wonder why they would need to tell me I can trust them.   I have to see more than a college degree to know that the person is qualified to be the leader of the free world.   Instead, I look to maverick out-of-the-box thinkers with proven track records and verifiable accomplishments.  People like that deserve the green light, and I plan to give it to them in November.