Last night Tucker Carlson interviewed Kanye West. I must say it was interesting. I had no idea Mr. West had a such strong relationship with God. It was encouraging. What I found even more riveting was Tucker’s conversation with one of his regular commentators, Jason Whitlock.
The fact is, I always find Jason Whitlock’s comments worth paying attention to. Last night was no exception. Of course the subject line tells it all. Mr. Whitlock described the Democrats as being focused on death. He cites abortion mostly. Others (I can’t remember any names) have come right out and declared the Democrats as a death cult. Whitlock’s comments got me to thinking along those lines and now I’m convinced those who say so may be more right than one first suspects.
Before I get into that, I’d like to delve a bit more into Jason Whitlock’s perspective as I’ve observed it. What I really like about him is he tends to think in godly terms. He and I both were somewhat conflicted about Kanye West’s statements. His sense overall was Mr. West struggles between fame and God. While I’d be more inclined to describe the conflict as between the trappings of fame and God, I cannot say Mr. Whitlock would disagree with me on that. It’s a small distinction, my specialty. Still, Mr. Whitlock got me to thinking deeper about the larger spiritual issues this artist faces. It is then when I saw the Democrats as a whole in a new light.
Of course they are all about death. Their spiritual leader, whether they recognize him as such, is death incarnate, or he would be if he were able to take human form. The spiritual leader of the Democrats is the devil himself. Not that many, if any, would publicly affirm this, but think about it. They deny God at every turn. They actively seek to remove God from any public place and as many private places as possible. For them, God has no place in science. He is not in control of the environment. They refute the natural order of man down to where they deny gender. He is barred from government and from schools. Public prayer is looked down upon, if not banned altogether. Those of us who turn to God are treated worse than second-class citizens. We are less than human to them. In short, their goal is nothing less than a godless society. While this will never happen, you can rest assured it won’t be from lack of effort on their part.
Now hang on to your hats, here it comes, the devil, the spiritual leader of the Democrats, wants us all dead. While Jesus promised eternal life for all those who believe on him…
John 3:14 And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up:
15 That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.
16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
Romans 6:23 For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.
… the devil makes no such promise, ever. What does that tell you? Without God, all you have is the life in front of you on this earth. If this life was all I had to look forward to, I’d make every effort to squeeze as much out of it I could too – maybe. Yet humans naturally seek to live longer and many seek evidence of life after death. Why?
Part of the reason is we are all hard-wired to want more. We want more material things, more love, more sex, more everything. Ultimately, we want more life. This desire is innate. Those who take their own lives do so mostly because the life they are now living is unsatisfying. I would speculate the rest end things because they anticipate a bleak future as well. The rest of us spend the brunt of our time trying to make the most of the life we have.
John 10:10 The thief cometh not, but for to steal, and to kill, and to destroy: I am come that they might have life, and that they might have it more abundantly.
Ahhh! That’s the spot! Not just life, but a more abundant life. Need I say who the thief referenced here is? How have those who cling to the Democrat party manifested themselves?
To steal: promoting “cashless bail” schemes that enable criminal behavior, redistributing wealth from those who work for their money to those who don’t
To kill: insisting on abortion on demand up to the last second prior to birth and beyond, releasing violent criminals back into society, encouraging the use and abuse of deadly drugs
To destroy: advocating violent riots that decimate cities, defunding police protection, implementing policies that destroys and erodes families, obliterates reproduction, encourages destructive behavior on all levels.
Aren’t we better than this as a nation? Given a choice between peace and turmoil, isn’t peace far more attractive? If you choose to forsake God or refuse to recognize God’s very existence, this choice is yours, but shouldn’t the rest of us be free to choose and believe our own path?
There is nothing the Democrats have to offer that I want any part of – at least nothing I am precluded from getting elsewhere. Other than death, they can only claim compassion by taking what is mine and giving to someone they deem worthy. No thanks. It is not your “compassion” I object to, it is how you manifest it. As for their obsession with death, I’ll choose life every time.
I distanced ourselves from the Young Republicans when the county chair showed up one night at our meeting and asked what we thought of our new President – Bob Dole. Yeah, it was that long ago. The problem we had was Dole was not the Republican candidate at the time because the primaries had not yet been held. We liked Steve Forbes. What we didn’t like was the idea we were being told who we were going vote for. If I were the county guy, I’d be asking who the YRs liked and why. You know?
First off, I contend that the first “Civil War” was not a civil war at all. The South did not “rise up” in order to overthrow any government. They opted out of the Union and formed their own government. It was an act entirely within their rights. If the first “Civil War” was indeed misrepresented then a Civil War II cannot rightfully be called such. However there is a much simpler reason for negating the idea of a “Civil War” in our Constitutional Republic. We are a nation of sovereign citizens, the idea that we can somehow “overthrow” ourselves is ludicrous. Now if a group of armed individuals descend on our nation’s capital and forcefully take command of our nation, well, that would be an actual insurrection. There is no constitutional provision for such an act and therefore the act itself would naturally be unconstitutional and therefore null and void.
jumping up and down, and pointing to the events of January 6, 2020. Calm yourselves, little ones. Nothing of the sort happened that day. Get over it. The fact is, your overzealousness in jailing hundreds of citizens for their alleged participation in those events has tainted the tree of justice. Since so many of those citizens have been outright denied due process, among other of their civil rights, it is now evident that none of them can rightfully be held and they should all be set free. I still advocate for reparations granted to them for ruining their lives. This does not mean that the actual perpetrators of the J6 chaos should not be brought to justice. To my knowledge none of the true villains have been charged, much less tried so true justice awaits. Now back to our regularly scheduled essay.
and destruction. It would bring death. It would destroy the fabric of our nation and could well mark the end of it entirely. Such a war would necessarily and ironically be fought between two camps, both claiming the desire to “save the nation”. One camp would consist of the usurpers, the globalists – those holding power and so-called “authority”. These same elitists have deceived many of our citizens claiming their seats by legitimate and legal means. The other camp would be populated by the dissenters. Those who realize the truth of who the usurpers really are. These citizens have been conned into believing the usurpers hold all the cards save one… violence. Stuck between the two camps are the masses. Most are innocent and confused as to whom to believe. The lies sold to them vary widely as they are custom-fitted to slip easily into their chosen lifestyle.
and maybe a few others should we really dig into the issue of election frauds.) WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO INSTEAD OF VOTING? Other than elections, we have kings and dictators and anarchy. Right up front, I will say there are those who make a pretty decent case for anarchy or the idea of having no government at all. While this might be attractive in theory, I believe anarchy has inherent flaws just as communism has inherent flaws. In the case of communism, the major flaw lies within the very premise. If everyone enjoys an equal result regardless of any efforts made, most will only put for minimum effort. In short, why work if I can not work and still eat? As for anarchy the major flaw again stems from human nature. There are those among us who naturally tend to assume control. These will rise until they control far more than their own homes. Thus I see some sort of government as necessary to assure the rights of all citizens are equally protected. I have yet to see a more efficient and viable concept than a constitutional republic. The problem with our own, as I see it, is we citizens failed to step up and do our duty to hold those we elect accountable. In short, we fell asleep at the wheel and now the bus is hurtling off a cliff.
Not to worry about her political future yet, she’s already considering a run for president. She did not indicate whether she would see the democrat, republican or communist party nomination.
Raids have consequences 
