Buttigieg Twists Bible Verse To Justify Attacking Christian Conservatives

Hey, Pete Buttigieg.  Since you pretend to like scripture so much, here are some you may enjoy.  Then again, maybe not since you seem to only believe certain parts of the Bible, and tend to pick and scriptures strictly for the purpose of demonizing opponents. 

You demonize President Trump for attempting to reduce reliance on food stamps, which he HAS done by creating an economy that has put more people back to work than at any time in the last half century.  You seem to want people dependent on you for free stuff.  What does the Bible say about getting a free ride when you’re able to work?

2 Thessalonians 3:10-12 NASB  (10)  For even when we were with you, we used to give you this order: if anyone is not willing to work, then he is not to eat, either.  (11)  For we hear that some among you are leading an undisciplined life, doing no work at all, but acting like busybodies.  (12)  Now such persons we command and exhort in the Lord Jesus Christ to work in quiet fashion and eat their own bread.

Matthew 26:11 NASB  “For you always have the poor with you; but you do not always have Me.

This is not saying that you should not help the poor, but should focus on Jesus.  When you are focused on Him, you’ll do what God wants you to do to help the poor.

You complain that Trump wants to secure our borders and ensure our sovereignty by building a wall.  Was Nehemiah evil for wanting to rebuild the wall around Jerusalem?

Nehemiah 2:17-18 NIV  Then I said to them, “You see the trouble we are in: Jerusalem lies in ruins, and its gates have been burned with fire. Come, let us rebuild the wall of Jerusalem, and we will no longer be in disgrace.”  (18)  I also told them about the gracious hand of my God upon me and what the king had said to me. They replied, “Let us start rebuilding.” So they began this good work.

Nehemiah 6:15-16 NIV  So the wall was completed on the twenty-fifth of Elul, in fifty-two days.  (16)  When all our enemies heard about this, all the surrounding nations were afraid and lost their self-confidence, because they realized that this work had been done with the help of our God.

When surrounding tribes and leaders protested the building of the wall around Jerusalem, what did God’s servant tell them?

Nehemiah 2:20 NIV  I answered them by saying, “The God of heaven will give us success. We his servants will start rebuilding, but as for you, you have no share in Jerusalem or any claim or historic right to it.”

Just like those who come here illegally have no share in America, or at least aren’t supposed to.

Obama Doesn’t Want America to be a Super Power

Here’s another spoonful of sand on the mountain of evidence that Obama hates America and everything she stands for.

Obama and the progressives are hell-bent on destroying everything Americans have worked for over 200 years to build. Freedom, liberty, wealth, and prosperity are about to be destroyed in America unless he is stopped.

As I’ve said before, Obama may not be THE anti-Christ, but he sure as heck is at the very least a false prophet.

---

http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2010/04/14/obama-whether-we-like-it-or-not-we-remain-a-dominant-military-superpower/

Obama: “Whether we like it or not, we remain a dominant military superpower”

posted at 7:52 pm on April 14, 2010 by Cassy Fiano
[ Obama ]    printer-friendly

I know how many of you just hate the fact that the United States is a dominant military superpower in the world. But don’t worry. Obama is our president now, and he’s here to change all that. Unfortunately, for the time being, we have to reconcile ourselves to this: that, like it or not we remain a dominant military superpower.

In all seriousness now, this is a disturbing way of phrasing this. This statement was made at the closing of his Nuclear Security Summit. It’s a nice coincidence, considering he’s doing his best to weaken us with his new policy on nuclear weapons.

And I guess this video explains why he would enact such an awful policy. Apparently, there are just tons of people — Obama included — who can’t stand the fact that we are a dominant military superpower in the world.

Why would that bother an http://www.cassyfiano.com/wp-admin/post-new.phpyone? Why would anyone want America to become a weaker country? (Yes, that was a rhetorical question.)

Now, Obama may have been simply referring to the fact that we get dragged into world conflicts. As a world superpower, that is true. But as I recall, we are supposed to be a force for good in the world. Part of being a force for good in the world means that, occasionally, we have to be the “world’s police”.  (This part I don’t necessarily agree with.  As a “force for good,” we don’t have to be “world police.”  We establish relations with nations, possibly station forces their, and defend our interests and allies.  It’s pretty much that simple.  The more people who are our LEGITIMATE allies, not just money leeches, and the stronger we are to deter aggression, the more stable the world becomes, and the less we are called upon to “walk a beat.”) Let’s think about WWII and Germany. If Obama was president then, would he have bothered fighting the Nazis? Or would he have just let them continue their evil reign throughout Europe, murdering millions along the way? Yeah, sure, it’s easy to say now, in retrospect, that of course he would have helped to liberate Europe and destroy the Nazis. But remember his position on preventing genocide during the campaign? Specifically, he said that preventing genocide in Iraq was not a good enough reason to keep our troops there. Why should we believe he’d have wanted to stop Hitler if he wouldn’t have had a problem letting Hussein continue his tyranny and terrorization of Iraq? The point is, being a superpower in the world is a good thing. There will always be a superpower in the world, and if it isn’t us, who would it be? China? Russia? During FDR’s term as president, we weren’t a superpower, and look at what happened. Germany and Japan took our place, and look what that led to. England was bombed relentlessly for years. Major countries in Europe were invaded and taken over, like France and Poland. Japan joined with the Axis Powers and invaded China and French Indochina. Had we been a stronger superpower in the word at the time, we might have been able to prevent these countries from coming to power. The lives of millions and millions of innocent people could have been saved.

The point is, we are needed in the world to be a superpower, and to use our military power as a force for good in the world. The United States is a rare country in this. We may have to act as the world’s police occasionally, but we never act for our own gain. If we fail to be that force for good in the world, it will open the door to another situation similar to what enabled WWII to be possible. If we’re not the superpower, then we can’t keep countries like Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea in check. Al Qaeda will be able to unleash their terror on the world with literally no one to stop them. Who will step up against them if we won’t? Canada? England? France? Yeah, right.

The scary thing is that our Commander-in-Chief can’t see this. He looks at our military dominance, and our role in the world as a force for good, and thinks it’s a bad thing.

---

Obamanomics: Deficit Has TRIPLED, and Will Likely Increase by at Least $1 Trillion a Year

By the White House’s own estimates, the deficit over the next decade will increase by not just $1 Trillion, but by $1 Trillion EACH YEAR! That’s a conservative estimate, as most experts are beginning to feel that under Obama’s “leadership” our deficits will increase by nearly double that.  Russia and the Soviet Union already tried this and failed.  WHY ARE WE LETTING THIS COMU-SOCIALIST AND HIS DEMOCRAT MINIONS TRY IT AGAIN HERE IN AMERICA?

THEY MUST BE STOPPED AT ALL COST.

With this new admission of debt guilt, shouldn’t this pretty much drive the last nail in the coffin of Health Care Reform/Takeover?  Not to mention Cap-and-Tax.

Our economy and nation can’t hide behind fake figures and phony numbers for much longer.  Not with the staggering debt Obama is piling on to the next 10 generations.  It’s like Michael Moore trying to hide behind a blade of grass.  As the rate of decay of our economy increases at a blistering pace, pretty soon everything we own will be worthless, our currency will be worthless, and no one will earn enough money to buy even a loaf of bread.  Anyone remember pre-war Germany?  A wheelbarrow full of D-Marks wouldn’t buy a loaf of bread.  We will all be peasants.

The scene towards the end of “History of the World, part 1” is especially poignant here.  As the peasants are storming the castle, the king is told by his adviser that “the peasants are revolting!”  The king ignorantly and snobbishly replies “They certainly are!”  Dictator Obama and the liberal rats in Washington better wise up before they find themselves roasting on a spit.

http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/20090824/cumulative-deficit-estimate-for-next-decade-increasedtrillion-since-may.htm

Cumulative Deficit Estimate for Next Decade Increased $2 Trillion… Since May

By Trader Mark
Posted 24 August 2009 @ 07:45 am ET

I guess we’ll post this along the lines of “if you pass the stimulus plan, unemployment will only go to mid 8%” or “if you don’t give Goldman Sachs the TARP money, the world will end immediately” and other such incorrect mythologies. Long time readers know where I stand on government figures which are backwards looking; not to mention guestimates of the future… if the guess from government is correct THIS time around (chuckle here) the budget deficit for the next decade now will stand at $9 Trillion.

Last time government chimed in with an estimate? Way back… 3 whole months ago; when they said the deficit would be $7.1 Trillion. Missed it by *that* much. That’s ok, government estimates are made to be broken. Usually I try to give them more than 3 months to be wrong by a factor of 27% but I think within government circles that accuracy (+/- 25%) is considered “dead on”, and reason for promotion.

$9 Trillion over a decade is just under $1 Trillion a year. Consider until this year (partly by phony accounting for wars and financial rescues that were not counted in the budget by the former administration) the largest annual budget deficit we ever had was under $500 Billion. [Jul 28, 2008: US Budget Deficit to Half a Trillion] This year we have an excellent chance of $1.6 Trillion. Heck we just put up a $180B month [Aug 12, 2009: July Budget Deficit $180.7B]. With the economy only slowly recovering in 2010 (and subject to a double dip with higher inflation), and the main drivers of tax revenue (employment, real estate, consumption) not expected to be recovering much next year I think we have an excellent chance for another $1.5ish Trillion year in ’10. Especially after Obama and the Dems number fall this winter as the “Main Street” economy is not quite so awesome as the “Wall Street” economy and plans for Stimulus 8.0 are drawn up. Plus the next housing program give away; the next cars program; and helping the states out with their budget shortfalls in 2010. Oh yes, increased food stamps, another 13 week extension of long term unemployment, increased welfare for those who still fall out of unemployment, and I am sure a few other things I am forgetting. (cursory green shoots inserted here)

Now the good thing by layering on debt to inflate asset values AND stoke “prosperity” [Jun 5, 2009: 1 in 6 Dollars of Income Now Via Government; Highest Since 1929] [Jul 30, 2009: Cash for Clunkers a Bit Hit, Government Asks “What Can we Buy You Next?”] , is you might punish your currency month after month, but it should drive incremental tax revenue gains from stocks and (gosh) even real estate as more (ahem) “wealth” is created. Not in real terms, but in nominal… and most Americans only live in a nominal world. So if the currency drops 15% and your government is able to stoke some combination of your 401k, and house up 15% – you really gained nothing but you’ll feel great because most people only look at their 401k and housing values, without understanding the currency. Now if you happen to be one of those American souls who simply is trying to get by in a harsh world, and you don’t happen to own stocks or real estate? Well, you’re job then is to pay for your life with 15% more of a devalued currency – making everything 15% more expensive in real terms. But really, it’s not about you – we have a financial and political elite to take care of and only by coming together as one can we do it. Reverse Robin Hood style. Remember, inflation is GREEEEEEAT! (as long as your are not in the bottom half) [Aug 18, 2009: Bloomberg Opinion – Deflation Theory is Lemon We’ve Been Sold]

Even more funny is that the nominal increase in tax revenue (created by government shuffling money from the future to now to create “GDP growth”) might put a dent in near term deficits … by pathetically adding to long term deficits. Remember – in a nominal world there is no cost benefit analysis; only benefit benefit analysis. We get our goodies today, and the costs get stuffed “somewhere else” for “someone else” to deal with. Listen to the masses with the siren call of “free government money, I want mine!” not realizing they are taking from themselves… with interest. That’s called living in a nominal world. And not being real.

***********************

(Don’t miss this last paragraph.  This sums up why our money and economy will be worthless in the very near future if we don’t STOP THIS INSANE SPENDING AND ALL OF THESE SENSELESS BAILOUTS.  Obama and the democrats are killing our country.  We MUST stop them, any way we can.)

America is (but not for long) still under 100% debt to GDP. We are on a clear path to surpass Japanese debt to GDP (a staggering 200% debt to GDP) within the decade. US Debt Clock (as of Aug 09) read $11.7T; GDP is say $13.5T. Throw the next decade’s (conservative) $9T on top and you are at a juicy $21T debt circa 2019 aka 150% of GDP. I think that’s conservative – we are overachievers and will “beat” that. Since the government figures just were raised $1.9T in 3 months you can see how quickly we could jump from $21T in 2019 to (some higher number). Once we pass 200% debt to GDP, it will all be uncharted territory for a modern developed country. Our annual growth rate of debt is now trouncing Japan, so it’s the story of the tortoise and the hare. Although in this case you don’t really want to be the hare. I also conveniently left out the $40T in unfunded liabilities (i.e. IOUs) sitting in Medicare. I’ve also left out the healthcare “reform” – considering the original estimates of Medicare were off by a factor of 10x within the first year of it’s implementation… well, you can do the math. And just for kicks let’s throw in the $1 Trillion pension disaster that is looming (currently being hidden by… accounting tricks) [Mar 4, 2009: Bloomberg – Hidden Pension Fiasco May Foment Another $1 Trillion Bailout] That’s just sort of icing on the cake at this point.

Did I mention how the debt will increase even more quickly if government debt interest rates permanently jump up as the world sees the increasing risk of investing in America?

Stanford University economics professor John Taylor, an influential economist, told Reuters Television Friday the U.S. budget deficit poses a greater risk to the financial system than the collapse in commercial real estate prices.”If that gets out of control, if interest rates start to rise because people are reluctant to buy all that debt, then that can slow the economy down. So, that’s the more systemic concern I have,” Taylor said.

Via Bloomberg

• The U.S. government’s long-term budget outlook is darker than expected, with projected deficits over the next 10 years totaling $2 trillion more than had been forecast, according to an Obama administration official.
• A White House budget review set for release Aug. 25 will show cumulative deficits over the next decade amounting to $9 trillion, up from $7.1 trillion that the administration predicted in May, the official said on condition of anonymity because the figures haven’t been made public.

Really a trillion here, a trillion there – what does it matter. All I know is many Americans were gleeful per my review of national news this weekend they got new cars. (granted many now have a new layer of debt) Others are gleeful they can get their first house via money trees grown in D.C.. (and when many default on their close to no money down mortgages in 3 years – it will be ok, no skin in the game after all) Citigroup and Bank of America bondholders are happy that they never had to take a hit despite the biggest crisis in 80 years. Goldman Sachs is happy they got fulfilled dollar for dollar on AIG counterparty risk. AIG is just happy to be in existence and seeing its stock surge 20% a day, subsidized by US taxpayer. And we’re all happy these actions plus more are making the stock market inflate. It’s really all about happiness after all. Can we put a price on that?[Mar 31, 2009: Financial Rescue Pledges Now $12.8 Trillion] Hey! That was supposed to be a rhetorical question!

[May 29, 2009: In 1 year, US Taxpayer on the Hook for $55,000 More per Household] Stop it! There is no price too high to bear for happiness of our people and concurrent transfer of wealth from the middle to our financial oligarchs. Get with the program!

For another source to fact check the Administration:

• The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office has estimated deficits between 2010 and 2019 will total $9.14 trillion.

Considering the CBO thought we’d be $1.1 T in hock for 2009 in (one third of the way into the fiscal 2009 year) December 2008 – they only understated the reality by 45% …Now we want them to guestimate how bad things will be not 1 year but 10 years out, so let’s take it all with multiple grains of salt. If they are only off in the decade by the same amount they were off in this 1 year it is really +/- $5 Trillion over 10 years. And since no one really knows how it will turn out, the best course of action is to continue policies as is and buy happiness (not to mention higher equity prices). “Someone else” (benefit benefit) analysis will worry about these things in 2019.

[May 23, 2008: David Walker on CNBC this Morning]

[Mar 26, 2008: Annual Spring Entitlement Warning Falls on Deaf Ears]

[Nov 23, 2008: David Walker in Fortune Magazine]

[Jun 12, 2009: NYT – America’s Sea of Red Ink was Years in the Making]

[Aug 5, 2009: Federal Tax Revenue Plummeting]

Obamas Sell Out America Road Show

With the audacity of a dope, Barack Hussein Obama, the Obamasiah, the distributor-in-chief of the earned to the undeserving, who has been groomed to sell out America since he was a young man studying at the feet of terrorists and communists, who has been rehearsing the sellout of his country since the beginning of his presidential campaign, has just put act one of the Great American Sellout on the public stage.  Apologizing for American greatness?  What has the great nation of America done to make the world better anyway?  Let’s look at a few examples.

• Founded a nation based on individual freedom and capitalism that has advanced the human condition more in the last 200 years than in all of the previous history of mankind
• Pulled Europe’s bacon out of the fire not once, not twice, but THREE times in the last century
  • World War One
  • World War Two
  • The Cold War
• Saved the rest of the world twice
• Following WWII, rebuilt most of the world AT OUR OWN EXPENSE including THE COUNTRIES RESPONSIBLE FOR DESTROYING IT IN THE FIRST PLACE
• Even in the face of ever increasing taxes and a slide toward socialism, America is still THE MOST CHARITABLE NATION ON EARTH
• Any time there is a disaster or trouble around the world, who does everyone turn to for help, money, and/or military force?
  • No other socio-economic system on earth has been able to generate the kind of wealth and prosperity that America has
  • More than any other nation on earth, that wealth and prosperity has been used for good and to foster freedom

Yes, Mr. Uh-Bama,  America may not be perfect.  However, she is light years better than any other nation on this planet.  If that were not true, why do millions of people risk everything to come to America every year?  For all of you apologists who keep putting down America, I have two words for you: GET OUT! There is no other nation on earth where you could put down your own country and government like you do without being thrown in jail or executed.  If you dislike America so much, I have a deal for you.  You renounce your citizenship, surrender your U.S. passport, and I’ll take up a collection to give you a ride to the border or the beach.  As you exit America, don’t let the door hit you in the butt on the way out.

Echo Of Europe

By INVESTOR’S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Friday, April 03, 2009 4:20 PM PT

Leadership: Sixty-one years to the day after Truman signed the Marshall Plan rebuilding war-torn Europe, President Obama apologizes to French youth for U.S. arrogance. Our defense of freedom is no shame.

---

Read More: Business & Regulation

---

News reports quoted French men and women hailing the first African-American president of the United States as a hopeful sign for global racial reconciliation.

But is there another reason they’re so smitten? Might they be imagining the decline of America and the rise of a Eurocentric multilateralism?

Barack Obama’s words to the thousands of squealing young French and German fans at the Rhenus Sports Arena in Strasbourg certainly seem in harmony with such hopes.

“In America,” the president claimed, “there’s a failure to appreciate Europe’s leading role in the world. Instead of celebrating your dynamic union and seeking to partner with you to meet common challenges, there have been times where America has shown arrogance and been dismissive, even derisive.”

President Obama promised that “America is changing” and that there would now be “unprecedented coordination” in our policies.

He lamented that “we got sidetracked by Iraq”; he extolled the “social safety net that exists in almost all of Europe that doesn’t exist in the United States.”

And he described the G-20 summit he just attended in London last week as “a success of nations coming together, working out their differences, and moving boldly forward.”

But is multilateralism really the great hope for the future that the president and his French and German devotees are convinced it is?

“We just emerged from an era marked by irresponsibility,” the president claimed in reference to the global financial crisis.

But when he flaunts his “excellent meeting with President Medvedev of Russia” to begin the reduction of U.S. and Russian nuclear stockpiles with the claim that working with Moscow will “give us greater moral authority to say to Iran, ‘don’t develop a nuclear weapon,’ to say to North Korea, ‘don’t proliferate nuclear weapons,’ ” isn’t he actually embarking on a new era of naive foreign policy irresponsibility?

The Russia and Communist China the president wants to “partner” with are directly responsible for giving Iran and North Korea the nuclear expertise and equipment that have empowered those two oppressive terror states to pursue the ability to incinerate a city.

And does the president really believe that Kim Jong-il or the Ayatollah Khomenei respond, as he put it, to “moral authority” the way civilized leaders do?

It’s Europe that has things to learn from America, not vice versa.

Europe can learn that with an injection of U.S.-style market competition, French patients need not wait month-upon-month for heart bypass surgery. They can learn that Iran is a clear and present danger requiring force from a united free world, not talk.

While they’re at it, they might also learn to express some gratitude for the $13 billion American taxpayers shelled out during the post-war years (over $100 billion in current dollars) to rebuild their countries — after the U.S. came to their rescue during the war itself, spilling the blood of hundreds of thousands to defeat Hitler.

The United States of America is the world’s lone superpower — unless and until we choose to relinquish that responsibility.

The last thing our sometime friends and allies across the pond need is a U.S. president bemoaning America’s role in the world and serving as an echo chamber to those in Europe who would like to see us weakened or irrelevant.

Big transatlantic moment as Barack Obama bemoans “arrogance” of US and “insidious” anti-Americanism of Europe

Posted By: Toby Harnden at Apr 3, 2009 at 16:24:00 [General]

Posted in: Foreign Correspondents

Tags:

Barack Obama, Europe, nato, Rhenus Sports Arena, Strasbourg

Here in the Rhenus Sports Arena in Strasbourg, I’ve just witnessed what is surely a very important – I hesitate to say historic – moment in transatlantic relations. Barack Obama went further than any previous president in apologising for American behaviour.

“In America, there is a failure to appreciate Europe’s leading role in the world,” he said in a prepared speech delivered before a campaign-style town hall meeting in which he took questions from mainly French and German students.

“Instead of celebrating your dynamic union and seeking to partner with you to meet common challenges, there have been times where America has shown arrogance and been dismissive, even derisive.”

Barack Obama at the Rhenus Arena Pic: Toby Harnden

But he balanced this startling mea culpa – or, perhaps more accurately, a George W. Bush culpa – with a clear message to Europeans that blaming America for everything was unacceptable.

“In Europe, there is an anti-Americanism that is at once casual, but can also be insidious. Instead of recognising the good that America so often does in the world, there have been times where Europeans choose to blame America for much of what is bad.”

Then, in classic Obama fashion, he sought to find a synthesis between the two poles. “On both sides of the Atlantic, these attitudes have become all too common. They are not wise. They do not represent the truth.

“They threaten to widen the divide across the Atlantic and leave us both more isolated. They fail to acknowledge the fundamental truth that America cannot confront the challenges of this century alone, but that Europe cannot confront them without America.”

I was standing beside a White House official who told me afterwards that the speech was a concerted attempt to draw a line under the Bush years and offer an olive branch to Europe.

The time is fast approaching when Obama will have to be more than the unBush – that will not get him a pass in Europe indefinitely. He recognises this, saying: “I think it is important for Europe to understand that even though I am president and George Bush is not president, al-Qaeda is still a threat.”

In concrete, immediate terms Obama wants to use his vow to rebuild America’s global relations by securing more troops for Afghanistan.

The rather woolly US language on this subject last week now seems to be hardening up considerably with Obama saying that although “we will be partnering with Europe on the development side and on the diplomatic side” that isn’t in itself enough.

“There will be a military component to it,” he said. “And Europe should not simply expect the United States to shoulder that burden alone. We should not, because this is a joint problem, and it requires joint effort.”

Word is that Gordon Brown has just pledged to send 1,000 more troops to Afghanistan. We should soon know whether the continental Europeans will also be – as Obama put it while standing alongside Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany – “stepping up to the plate”.

America’s “Wretched Refuse”

If America is such a bad place to be, why are the oppressed people from around the world still beating down the doors to get in?

by Eric Rauch

In the February issue of Christianity Today, Lisa Graham McMinn wrote a thought-provoking review of a recent book by Phil Zuckerman. Zuckerman’s book, Society without God: What the Least Religious Nations Can Tell Us about Contentment, is basically an indictment of what he believes is the hypocrisy of “Christian” America. Zuckerman’s point is that Americans, whom he describes as being very “religious,” actually display less compassion and love toward other people than the mostly irreligious citizens of Scandinavia.

McMinn’s review doesn’t bring up this point, but I always find it quite convenient that skeptics and atheists want to define America as a “Christian” nation only when it suits their statistics. Even though this country has a rich Christian heritage and Bible verses are literally chiseled into our government and state buildings, skeptics will usually deny this empirical evidence in their attempt to erase Christianity from America’s long religious tradition. However, when they want to accuse the American religious community of being less than faithful to their stated beliefs, the story becomes something else entirely. For atheists and agnostics, America is only a Christian nation when it can be used as a club against Christianity itself.

One of McMinn’s most important observations comes about midway through her review. While Zuckerman’s comparisons of Scandinavia and the United States depend on an “apples to apples” relationship, McMinn points out that it is not this simple:

• Most nations, including the United States and Scandinavian countries, have histories that include shining moments of courage, compassion, and prosperity, but also have darker moments of war, slavery, and systemic oppression. Sin cuts through every soul, and through every political body and institution. But nations also have unique features that lead them to develop along different paths.
• For instance, Scandinavian countries are smaller and less diverse than we are. The United States is a nation of immigrants, a grand experiment in forging a collective identity from people of different nationalities. We value this diversity enough to commit to the work it requires. We have the harder task of identifying our neighbor as kin because we don’t all look alike or come from similar backgrounds or share similar values. Scandinavian countries, as Zuckerman points out, are more homogeneous. Perhaps it’s not surprising, then, that strong welfare states emerged in countries where neighborliness often literally meant caring for one’s near or distant kin. That we have struggled more than they to embrace our neighbors, and have viewed those who look, talk, or eat differently than we do with some suspicion, makes sense given our history. [1]

McMinn’s point should not be overlooked or taken too lightly. This is a crucial fact that is frequently forgotten about our “melting pot” nation. No country on earth has the number of immigrants that America has. In fact, America IS a nation of immigrants. None of us are “from here.” The Statue of Liberty stands as a reminder that America is here to take the refugees of the world. A poem by Emma Lazarus adorns the Statue’s pedestal which reads:

• Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame,
  With conquering limbs astride from land to land;
  Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand
  A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame
  Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name,
  Mother of Exiles. From her beacon-hand
  Glows world-wide welcome; her mild eyes command
  The air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame.
  “Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!” cries she
  With silent lips. “Give me your tired, your poor,
  Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
  The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
  Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
  I lift my lamp beside the golden door!

America has unique problems because America has unique citizens. As McMinn states: “Americans generally believe that charity should be given freely and not demanded by the state, and that people should pay their own way through life.” This does not mean that America is now somehow off the hook for taking care of its citizens, far from it. The biblical example of compassion and responsibility is taught by the Apostle Paul in 2 Thessalonians: “If anyone is not willing to work, then he is not to eat, either” (2 Thessalonians 3:10). In other words, it is because of Christianity that America has the form of individual compassion that it has, rather than the state-run versions that characterize Scandinavian countries. For Zuckerman to then turn around and use this against the American people as being “uncompassionate” is stunning, to say the least. It proves nothing more than the fact that Zuckerman already had his mind made up before he wrote his book.

McMinn concludes her review by making a very important final point: “Zuckerman sells humanity short. If people are content but no longer care about transcendent meaning and purpose or life beyond death, that’s not a sign of greatness but tragic forgetfulness… What does it profit a society if, as this book’s jacket notes, it gains ‘excellent educational systems, strong economies, well-supported arts, free health care, egalitarian social policies, outstanding bike paths, and great beer,’ but loses its soul?” Humanists who want to discount and ridicule the effects of a Christian worldview on a nation are making their determinations on strictly materialistic grounds. For them, a country with better bike paths and free health care is preferred to one with myriad uphill challenges to turning the “huddled masses” and “wretched refuse” into loving neighbors. Interestingly though, the skeptics always choose to live in this country, rather than their so-called egalitarian social paradises.

Why We Need Rich People

by Gary DeMar

“I remember I was very sad for many days when I discovered that in the world there were poor people and rich people; and the strange thing is that the existence of the poor didn’t cause me as much pain as the knowledge that at the same time there were people who were rich.”

—Eva “Evita” Perón, La Razón de Mi Vida (The Reason for My Life)

The rich often get a bum rap. Liberals are incensed when it is suggested that “the rich” get any type of tax reduction even though the top 50% of wage earners pay 96% of all income taxes. Since they spend more money, the rich also pay a disproportionate amount in sales, property, entertainment, and excise taxes. Without the rich, most people would not have jobs.

The first computer American Vision purchased cost $7500. It was huge and could only perform a few simple tasks, mostly word processing. The floppy disks were the size of dinner plates and held very little data (360K). Almost overnight, computer prices dropped and performance levels increased dramatically.

The first portable computer built by Compaq was the size of a sewing machine, but it was a vast improvement over what was then available. The hard disk capacity was 10 megabytes. Today’s laptops have multi-gigabyte drives, super thin monitors, built-in modems, CD/DVD drives that can play music and movies, and much more, all in a 2 to 4 pound package.

The first cell phones were the size of a small suitcase. You needed a shoulder strap to carry it. Now they are smaller than a half-pack of cigarettes. They are so cheap to own and operate that many people have given up using conventional (land-line) phone service.

What made these performance gains and price reductions possible? People with lots of money purchased the first high-priced machines. They had the financial ability to lay out “excess” capital for what most people would consider luxury items.

The research and development costs of any new technology are enormous. That’s why the initial entry of new products into the market is expensive. But over time, when costs are recouped and production increases, costs and prices fall. The first CD players cost hundreds of dollars. They now sell for under $10. DVD players sell for under $50. This price reduction has led to the end of higher priced and mechanically inferior VHS players and tapes. The spending by rich people fuels the market for future goods at lower prices which benefits everybody.

Slamming the rich by contending that they should pay more in taxes to equalize income is the sin of envy. Envy is not the same as jealousy or covetousness. The covetous person says, “I wish I had what he has, and I’m miserable that I don’t have it.” Envy is quantitatively different. “I’d like to have what he has, but I Banner: Biblical Critique on Inflation – Product Promoknow I can never get it. Nobody should be allowed to have it or at least that much of it. I’ll work to destroy it. Maybe I can get the government to make it illegal to own or too expensive to keep.” This is why the Bible describes envy as “rottenness of the bones” (Prov. 14:30).

Societies that struggle to exist economically are infected with envy. Prosperity in others infuriates the envier and moves him to destroy what he does not have and will not work to get. Western enviers are more sophisticated. We don’t burn a villager’s crops or sabotage his wells. We run for political office or vote for those who do so we can stick it to the rich in the name of “tax fairness.” The long-term result is the destruction of the prosperous man’s ability and incentive to create wealth. In the end, the destroyed crops, the poisoned well, the high taxes hurt all of us. With no “excess” capital, there is no one to buy those initially expensive goods that make life easier for all of us. So, instead of envying the rich man, thank him and work to be like him.

Cain was the first envier. He could have offered a sacrifice equal to that of Abel or offered a sacrifice that was from a pure heart. Instead, he murdered his brother for his success. It didn’t make Cain any more successful, but I suppose, for the moment, the act gave him satisfaction. Envy appears again in Genesis when the Philistines envied the prosperity of Isaac:

Now Isaac sowed in that land, and reaped in the same year a hundredfold. And the Lord blessed him, and the man became rich, and continued to grow richer until he became very wealthy; for he had possessions of flocks and herds and a great household, so that the Philistines envied him. Now all the wells which his father’s servants had dug in the days of Abraham his father, the Philistines stopped up by filling them with earth (Gen. 26:12–15).

The Philistines could have dug their own wells and inquired of Isaac to learn the methods of success. Instead, they destroyed his property to bring him down to their standard of living. Of course, with Isaac’s wells sabotaged, a drought would affect Isaac and the Philistines. But enviers don’t think ahead. They only care about dragging the successful down to their level of incompetence.

Modern-day economic theory feeds off the sin of envy. The first step is to promise the citizenry that they will get some of the largess of the rich. When that only goes so far, legislators will make it more difficult for the prosperous to remain prosperous. Obstacles will be put up to stifle their success, all in the name of equality. We’ve seen it happen before. The Communists had to build a wall around East Berlin to keep the industrious from fleeing the politics of envy.