Reading vs. Study
I am forever amazed and never impressed with the number of men who call themselves teachers of the word of God who incessantly boast about how they can spend an entire day, week, month, or year studying one single word in their bible. Having been born with the cursed ADHD syndrome (long before they had a clue what it was), I can only sit for about five minutes listening to men like this speak. I liken this mentality to the biologist who gets millions of dollars worth of grants to study the gnat. Absolutely sure he can find something in the gnat to help us better understand life, he labors rigorously for decades until finally, one day, he discovers one with an extra appendage. Concluding he has proven the theory of evolution, he writes a book, gets another few million dollars to continue his research, and dazzles great multitudes of dupes with his ability to speak for hours and say absolutely nothing of any meaningful consequence. Meanwhile a hundred million people are killed in one war, 55 million in another, 500 million in another, and this biologist doesn’t even know his country’s at war again. For decades I have considered finishing my masters and going on to get a PhD because it seems so many people hang of the words of those who know so much about so little. Then I came up with this definition describing them. A PhD is one who knows so much about so little.
I suppose it would be extremely narrow minded of me to think these freaks of society contribute very little to the overall scheme of things considering how much time they have spent focusing on the gnat. So, I will simply conclude it is a fact I can’t confirm one way or another. Is society better off because of people like Einstein, the guy who discovered nuclear fission. Let’s see, we killed over a hundred thousand people at Nagasaki and Hiroshima with just two bombs, in just two days. Wow! That’s something we should all be proud of. And now, with the current nuclear stockpiles around the world, we could make the earth completely uninhabitable in about fifteen minutes. I am a retired history teacher. I have read the books about the struggle by our President and his cabinet of advisors in deciding whether or not to use “the Bomb” to end WWII. I believe their conclusion that more Americans would have died needlessly if we hadn’t dropped that bomb was correct. All of those facts acknowledged, I still have to ask if society is better off with the millions of megatons of destructive power we now have in our nuclear arsenals, or if we would be better off without this technology altogether. I have a simple (not simplistic) answer to that question. Unless God was intervening in the affairs of man, preventing him from self annihilation, he would have totally destroyed himself and the planet within a millennium of his creation. So, the only reason we haven't completely destroyed ourselves with our "great learning" is that God isn't ready to allow that to happen. He is literally staying the hand of man until all of those whom He has chosen come into His kingdom. One must not conclude because someone is a genius he offers more to society. Many highly educated men, including theologians, have little to offer society, or in the case of theologians, the church, because they know so much about so little.
The human brain is an incredible phenomenon. Brain research indicates most people (of course there are always exceptions), learn best by moving from gathering general information and then drawing conclusions about that information by moving slowly to the specific. By extrapolation, using the gnat analogy, I humbly suggest the bible scholar who spends inordinate amounts of time dissecting tiny bits of godly wisdom, misses out on the massive amounts of wisdom found in the other 1200 chapters, 31,000 verses, and 775,000 words. Personally, I read massive amounts of information from the bible daily and then move slowly to particular parts of what I read for the purpose of better understanding the specifics. It has been suggested one can't ingest massive amounts of insight and wisdom from such reading. I can't speak for anyone else, but when I read I actually learn something. And after more than 37 years, when I read God's word I continue to absorb information like a sponge. And no matter how many times I have read a particular passage, each time I re-read it, I learn something more about God's nature and His purpose for us. I have never suggested, nor have I ever believed either reading or studying should be practiced exclusively by any serious theologian. What I have discovered is great multitudes of men who have graduated from some of the most reputable Cemetaries (sic) and bible colleges in the country who are incredibly ignorant of the overall picture the bible gives us about the plight of man and His solution to man's problem. Upon questioning many of them over the past thirty-eight years, I have been overwhelmed to learn few if any of them have any yearly plan of reading the bible from cover to cover even once. And the overwhelming majority of pastors with whom I have spoken for more than three decades find nothing wrong with the fact they haven’t read the bible from cover to cover once in their entire lives.
I can only conclude, from my personal observations, that few men who claim to be called of God to minister the word of God take James 3:1 seriously. Recently, one pastor actually suggested to me, on more than one occasion, how ignorant so many men standing in the pulpit are who believe in the phrase, “Sola Scriptura.” who never spend any time reading the writings of great men of the faith (though biblically, there are no great men) in the history of the church. First of all, I would like to humbly reply that no man called of God who prayerfully fills his heart, soul, and mind daily with massive amounts of His word being enlightened by His Holy Spirit could ever be classified by any truly intelligent person as ignorant. Second, I will readily admit there are great multitudes of men standing pulpits across this land who proclaim "Sola Scriptura" who don't read God's word any more than those who proclaim the need to read the great works of the great men who have proceeded us in the faith. I have, however, heard men who were obviously not formally educated, who could not masterfully speak the English language, preach powerful sermons, making it abundantly clear they spent massive amounts of their daily lives with Jesus in His word. I am not opposed to reading things by men like Spurgeon or Calvin. I have read dozens of books by such men over the past 37 years. I've also read contemporary "Christian" writers like McArthur, Piper, Driscoll, Adams, Begg, Swindoll, Warren, McClarin, Rutz, LaHaye, Jenkins, and Stanley; and yes, I'm quite aware some on this list are heretics, and some who are reputed to be pillars of the faith are pretty weak theologically. I find them interesting, but not particularly inspiring. I don’t believe I have ever received any insights from them I could not have gotten directly from God, had I spent the same period of time studying His word. What I have learned by reading some of their books is that there is nothing new under the sun. God tells his chosen men in every generation, who are willing to read and study His word, the same things. My wife chuckles when I share some profound insight one of them has written in one of his books, retorting, "You have been preaching that for decades."
I am disturbed by the growing trend toward universalism and reinterpreting scripture in light of today’s cultures. The good news is that this rise is one of the many signs that Christ return is imminent. He warned us false Christs and false prophets would rise and mislead many. And he warned us the multitudes, not the called, would follow their false teachings. Mega-church pastors, beware. “When so many love the message you speak, there is great danger, what you speak is not God’s word.” In closing I would like to suggest we need to concentrate on spiritual growth of Jesus’ disciples, not church growth (numbers alone). Many a pastor has been sorely disappointed to discover, upon close examination, the incredible growth of his church in numbers over a year did not translate into appropriate spiritual growth of those attending. By that I simply mean we need to be spending a great deal more time discipling those over whom we have charge than developing strategies for reaching those who are not the elect. Properly discipled children of God will draw the called, with whom they have to do daily, to the body of Christ; who can then be discipled to go into their world and preach the gospel.
Saturday, November 28, 2009
Wednesday, November 25, 2009
Paul Washer
I was listening to a message by Paul Washer today. He is considered by most conservative, God loving, bible thumping, evangelicals to be a solid preacher of the word. I was shocked to hear him suggest we need to preach the gospel and not to get caught up teaching eschatology. I am forever amazed at the number of preachers who seem to think the gospel is only found in Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. Let's see, the gospel is, by definition, the good news about Jesus Christ. Uh, I think that good news begins in Genesis 1:1 and culminates in Revelation 22:21. The sixty-six books we have in our contemporary codexes are the gospel. One of the most significant prooftext of this point is written by Paul when he tells us in Galations 3:8, The Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel beforehand to Abraham, saying, "All the nations will be blessed in you." And the final words of Revelation tell us, He who testifies to these things says, "Yes, I am coming quickly." Amen, Come Lord Jesus. The grace of the Lord Jesus be with all. Amen. The Revelation is from chapter 1 and verse 1 to chapter 22 and verse 21 the record of the fulfillment of all the other sixty-five books prophesied was to come.
I was truly disappointed with Paul Washer, until I considered how young and inexperienced he is. What I found more disturbing this week were the comments by another pastor, R.W. Glenn. His suggestions had to do with whether or not a pastor should have a time set aside daily just for reading the Bible with the idea in mind of reading it in its entirety several times yearly. I find the fact that the question would arise rather disturbing. How can one accurately exegete scripture if he doesn't read it in its entirety several times a year. More importantly, how can a pastor convince those he is discipling they need to commit a significant amount of time daily in their own study of God's word, if he are not doing the same. My wife often asks me, when I am scheduled to preach or teach, if I am ready. My response is that God has been getting me ready for nearly thirty-eight years.
Maybe I'm exceptionally dense, but I find I have to read God's words over and over and over to get any sense of their true meaning. He is so incredibly omnipotent, omniscient, and immutable, that my finite brain just can't grasp it all without reading the words of His magnificent revelation to us in these 66 books until my eyes get sore and my brain can't absorb anymore information. And, I pray that won't happen until they lay me in the grave.
I find the disturbing trend that many of the "up and coming" young pastors today rely way too much on Spurgeon and way to little on Scripture. I would like to humbly suggest there is nothing wrong with reading Calvin, Spurgeon, Torrey, Lewis, Piper, or any of the other, so called, giants of the faith. But, there is everything wrong with reading them more than one reads God's word. When we get our theology from them, it tends to be top heavy with their own biases. I have read works by all of these men and many others whose reputation as pillars of the faith is indisputable. I have discovered at least one of them has received the exact same insights I have received directly from God about His word as I was reading it for myself. I pray that doesn't sound arrogant. I wouldn't suggest for a moment I am a theologian an par with any of these men. All I am suggesting is that preachers of God's word must first go to God and His word daily, reading, studying, examining, re-examining, cross referencing, and then reading some more before they lay it down and read what another preacher has or had to say about any given passage.
In closing, I want to make it clear I think Paul Washer is a man of God who speaks the words of God in his messages. I'm confident as he matures, he will realize some of the things he suggests in his messages, though certainly not heretical, are exegetically weak.
I was truly disappointed with Paul Washer, until I considered how young and inexperienced he is. What I found more disturbing this week were the comments by another pastor, R.W. Glenn. His suggestions had to do with whether or not a pastor should have a time set aside daily just for reading the Bible with the idea in mind of reading it in its entirety several times yearly. I find the fact that the question would arise rather disturbing. How can one accurately exegete scripture if he doesn't read it in its entirety several times a year. More importantly, how can a pastor convince those he is discipling they need to commit a significant amount of time daily in their own study of God's word, if he are not doing the same. My wife often asks me, when I am scheduled to preach or teach, if I am ready. My response is that God has been getting me ready for nearly thirty-eight years.
Maybe I'm exceptionally dense, but I find I have to read God's words over and over and over to get any sense of their true meaning. He is so incredibly omnipotent, omniscient, and immutable, that my finite brain just can't grasp it all without reading the words of His magnificent revelation to us in these 66 books until my eyes get sore and my brain can't absorb anymore information. And, I pray that won't happen until they lay me in the grave.
I find the disturbing trend that many of the "up and coming" young pastors today rely way too much on Spurgeon and way to little on Scripture. I would like to humbly suggest there is nothing wrong with reading Calvin, Spurgeon, Torrey, Lewis, Piper, or any of the other, so called, giants of the faith. But, there is everything wrong with reading them more than one reads God's word. When we get our theology from them, it tends to be top heavy with their own biases. I have read works by all of these men and many others whose reputation as pillars of the faith is indisputable. I have discovered at least one of them has received the exact same insights I have received directly from God about His word as I was reading it for myself. I pray that doesn't sound arrogant. I wouldn't suggest for a moment I am a theologian an par with any of these men. All I am suggesting is that preachers of God's word must first go to God and His word daily, reading, studying, examining, re-examining, cross referencing, and then reading some more before they lay it down and read what another preacher has or had to say about any given passage.
In closing, I want to make it clear I think Paul Washer is a man of God who speaks the words of God in his messages. I'm confident as he matures, he will realize some of the things he suggests in his messages, though certainly not heretical, are exegetically weak.
Wednesday, November 4, 2009
Open Letter
Below you will find an open letter to Barack Obama. I think it warrants reading, so I placed a link to in on my blog.
Saturday, October 17, 2009
America is not a Democracy
It seems appropriate, since I was an American Government teacher for over sixteen years, to explain something about the founding principles of our country for those of you who did not listen when your high school government teacher explained them. First of all, These United States of America are not a democracy. In a democracy everyone gets to vote on all matters of economic, social, and political concern. Democracies only work in very small groups of people who all have basically the same belief system. America was established as a democratic republic. In this kind of government, citizens elect people to represent them as they deal with the needs of the country. The key point here is that these representatives are elected to represent their constituents, not their own selfish ideals. When our Constitution was written, a group called Anti-Federalists opposed it because it had no protection from big government. After several months of debate, the Federalists (those who favored big government, they would be today’s liberals) agreed to make a bill of rights a part of the first congressional sessions to get the Anti-Federalists (states rightist), to agree to ratify the proposed constitution. The Anti-Federalists position regarding government was very similar to the current conservative movement.
A second point is that there are constitutional governments and there are governments with constitutions. These United States of America were a constitutional government until Barack Obama became President. When the elected leader and those who write legislation (Congress) ignore the constitution and no one puts them in jail, a country is no longer a constitutional government. Barack Obama and his Democratic Congress have approved a spending budget that absolutely, unequivocally, and illegally taxes the rich to pay for the needs of the poor. The only reason Congress can constitutionally tax us is to pay for those things we cannot provide for ourselves. Highways and a standing military are simple examples of such things.
The original Bill of Rights had twelve amendments. We finally ended up with ten that I will summarize here. The First Amendment guarantees the freedom of speech, religion, assembly, and press. The Second Amendment guarantees the right to bear arms as a protection against tyranny in government. The Third Amendment guarantees protection from having soldiers stay in our homes in times of peace. The Fourth Amendment guarantees us protection from unreasonable search and seizure. The Fifth Amendment covers such things as due process, double jeopardy, self-incrimination, and eminent domain. One could write a dissertation on each of these points, but I will resist the temptation to elaborate for the sake of brevity here. Most have heard the statement, “I plead the fifth.” It simply means one does not have to answer any question he believes will incriminate him in any way in a criminal investigation. The Sixth Amendment guarantees the right to a trial by jury and rights of the accused; confrontation clause, speedy trial, public trial, and right to counsel. Two actual cases got the Supreme Court to rule that one has the right to counsel before answering any questions in an investigation where he is a suspect and legal counsel in court for free if he can’t afford it. The Seventh Amendment has to do with a civil trial by jury. The Eighth Amendment prohibits cruel and unusual punishment and excessive bail. The Ninth Amendment and Tenth Amendments are crucial in helping us understand what is being done illegally by Barack Obama’s administration. I will quote each verbatim here, “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.” And, "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." The ninth means that any rights not specifically explained does not mean the people do not have them. The tenth means those powers not specifically designated to the federal government nor prohibited to the states belong to the states. In other words, rights not specifically given to the federal government or denied to the states, belong to the states.
Next, I think it is important for us all to know the major differences between conservative (right wing) political theory and liberal (left wing) political theory. Conservatives (right wing politicians) believe in limited government, tax breaks for the top 5% if its citizens and corporations, trickle-down economics, and protecting helpless, unborn babies. Trickle-down economics simply means the wealthiest people in the country are the ones who start and expand businesses that employ people; so the government gives them tax breaks so they have more money to start new or expand established businesses. History has proven over and over again such tax breaks lead to more money being taken into the federal coffers because of the increasing numbers of people who pay taxes on earned income. Left wing liberals tend to tax the rich and famous to the max, which means they have less money to invest in expansion or starting new businesses, which means less people are employed, which means less products are produced. The only place where right wing politicians believe government should intervene in the lives of its citizens is to protect helpless unborn babies. Conservatives believe babies need adults to protect them from the selfish, innocuous desires of left wing radical ideologues who conclude the only way a woman can live a carefree life is to allow her to murder any results of her harlotry. Sorry, but there’s no other way to describe a woman who first gives herself to wanton pleasure and then kills the seed of that pleasure. She is a whore who needs no protection for her whoredom. Women who get abortions should be tried for murder. Doctors who abort babies should be tried for murder. That is the biblical view. And it is not up for debate. Finally, limited government means government must not do anything for citizens they are capable of doing for themselves. Liberal politicians believe citizens are too stupid to decide for themselves about such things as abortion or health care, so they don’t wish to hear what their constituents have to say on such matters. Unfortunately, most of their uninformed constituents don’t know the facts, so they are easily duped into believing their representatives will take care of them.
As a government teacher, I recall each year asking my students how many of them wanted free health care. Every single student, every single year, raised his/her hand. Then I asked them how many actually believed free health care was really free. Most got a dumb look on their face. Then I asked them who they thought paid for this so-called free health care. They hadn’t a clue. This course of questioning allowed me to explain the theory of robbing the rich to pay for the needs of the lazy. Upon completing my explanation, I asked them again, how may were for free health care. No one raised their hand. Those who knew already they were going to be the lazy who wanted free handouts didn’t have the nerve to identify themselves to the others yet. They knew instinctively, or because their parents were already living the carefree life of laziness on the coattails of those who were paying their welfare checks, they would not be popular if they divulged their future plans so early.
Universal health care is the epitome of the antithesis of limited government. There are so many things wrong on so many levels with Obama’s proposal for the public option that I don’t know where to start. His claim that private insurance companies need to have competition is categorically absurd. Government provided insurance is not competition. Government does not have to make a profit, so it can charge less than it cost to actually administer a program. It simply raises taxes to cover unaccounted for costs. To suggest such foolishness is competition suggests government thinks people are too stupid to recognize the idiocy of the claim. Obama has rejected every sensible recommendation made by conservatives on the issue. Allowing any company that desires to do so compete in each state to insure its residents is the simplest and most cost effective way to provide competition, but Obama’s administration has rejected this simple, proven method of reducing insurance costs. It seems clear his administration is determined to shove his plan down our throats no matter what we want. It seems he is determined to destroy capitalism as we know it and as our founding fathers intended it to function. To suggest every citizen and aliens who are here illegally in this country have the “right” to health care is utter foolishness. First of all, we already do care for anyone who has an emergency need in all of our hospitals. Insurance companies are already calculating such cost into our coverage. That is why illegal aliens go to emergency rooms to get examined for flu symptoms. We do not turn down anyone in our emergency rooms. So it is utterly ignorant to suggest anyone is denied health care in emergencies. It simply is not true. Second of all, there is nothing in our Constitution that suggests health care is a right. Third, to suggest it is free is even more absurd. Those who think the rich owe them something are really the only ones who fall for this foolishness. Those too lazy to do for themselves, want someone else to do for them. I am quite aware there are some truly downtrodden people who might be, for one reason or another, temporarily in need of assistance, but the overwhelming number of people today who want free handouts are quite simply and obviously lazy gluttons, drunks, and dopers who are just too lazy to get a job and provide for themselves and their families.
I’m weary of truly ignorant (not stupid, they just don’t have all the facts) people suggesting republicans haven’t provided any alternatives to the Obama plan. Competition has proven over and again a gazillion times that prices will go down when companies are allowed to compete. At the present time, it is mind boggling to realize insurance companies are so powerful they have gained monopoly control of insurance in any given state. There is no competition and they are not effectually regulated. Frivolous law suits are another reason health care costs are so incredibly out of control. People are allowed to sue for the most absurd reasons, and even when they lose, doctors pay for legal representation and court costs. We are all paying for these frivolous suits through increased medical care costs and increased insurance premiums. Every time a court grants a million dollars for a ten dollar mistake by a doctor, we all pay. Obama’s administration has flatly rejected every suggestion made by conservatives. He and his cronies have summarily refused to consider any plan suggested by anyone outside of his inner circle.
Another serious problem that increases medical costs is legal associations who have powerful lobbyists in Washington. A lobbyist is a person who is paid by a group of people with the same interests to wine and dine congressmen, convincing them to vote for legislation favorable to their client(s). They are those people Obama promised he would identify and eliminate when he got into office. Of course, like his promise of no new taxes on those making less than $250,000 a year, he has failed to diminish the power of lobbyists in Washington by one iota. Quite the contrary, he has jumped in bed with them faster than any President in the history of this country. His stimulus package Congress has spent more money in ten months than did George W. Bush in eight years. If you honestly think you are doing the right thing supporting this spendaholic, I truly feel sorry for your children and grandchildren, because they will be paying dearly for Obama’s complete lack of competency at dealing with the economic and health care needs of this country.
It’s important to note that America is already a mixed economy. That means we have many socialists programs. Most countries are mixed economies. Even Communist China allows capitalistic economic activities to function with little government interference. Medicare, Social Security, welfare, Medicaid, and unions, are examples of socialists programs. Government allows some companies (water and power) to have monopolies on their products and then regulates how much they can charge for their products. These are socialistic in nature. However, by and large, we are a country that promotes free-trade and competition in the market place because we believe it stimulates economic growth. Government does not set prices on products, so the best product for the money is the one most people buy rewarding the company that was creative and well managed to prosper while those who do not produce a good product and are not well managed fail. When Bush decided to begin bailing out companies in the latter category, he was responsible for the downward spiral of economic gloom Obama is now continuing to fuel. Bush was a dismal failure and, in my personal opinion an incredible disappointment when it came to handling economic problems in this country. He handled Afghanistan and Iraq brilliantly, but his domestic policy left much to be desired. There is no company too big to fail, only leaders of governments to ignorant to allow them to do so. It is a hazard of the free market that when companies fail because of bad leadership, people loose gazillions of dollars. When let alone, some multi-millionaire genius steps in, buys up the failing company, reorganizes it (Lee Iacocca of Chrysler fame), and makes millions for himself and the company. Or, the company simply closes down its production, many people are temporarily unemployed, the economy experiences minor or major shifts, and a few months later, voila, the economy begins to revive because of the incredibly resilient spirit of the American people.
I will close this discussion with one final thought. When liberals suggest God would be a liberal, they simply demonstrate, once again, their complete lack of understanding of the facts. God would be neither a conservative nor a liberal, but His word teaches He agrees with conservative ideology most of the time. He would be disappointed with doctors who are more concerned with making as much as they can make with little concern for the well being of their clients. But, He would not provide free health care for people who are able to work and earn enough to pay for their own health care but choose to spend what they have on cable TV, cell phones, fancy clothes, booze, drugs, gambling, and/or other forms of entertainment. It is a given that we must come up with some kind of significant health care reform. But it is also a given that it must not have any grounds in allowing the government to get involved in it.
Finally, God has made it clear unborn children are to be protected with reckless abandon. Abortion is clearly and unarguably murder of the innocent; and anyone who supports it has no right to call himself a follower of Christ. God is opposed to welfare. His word insists those who do not work should not eat. The stranger, alien, downtrodden, and infirmed in Israel were allowed to glean the leftovers in the fields of the farmers of ancient times, but they were never given freebees for doing nothing. Welfare reform (a good thing) still goes way too far at supporting social misfits than it does to encourage them to get off their proverbial butts and go to work. Nowhere in scripture do we see any suggestion God would want government to intervene and force people to help others by involuntarily taking money from the rich to provide for the poor. Often, though not always, poor people are poor because they made bad choices when they were young. Often, though not always, they made those poor choices because they weighed the advantages and disadvantages of taking a more productive path (getting advanced schooling) and decided to take the easy path instead(dropping out).
I’m not sure why anyone, accept those who made bad choices, would conclude it is the responsibility of those who worked hard, got an advanced degree, and made sacrifices when they were young, to support, in any way, those who made bad choices. It seems the overriding stimulus for such ill conceived thinking is some kind of false sense of responsibility for failing to make it clear to those who made bad choices what the result of those bad choices would be. When the simple fact is that some people make bad choices because they want what they want and they want it now! In the final analysis, there are some people for whom we can do nothing when it comes to helping them to make good choices. They are determined, for more reasons on more levels than I could ever hope to address here, to become wards of the state simply because that option is open to them.
I could wax eloquently for days on end about the problems with the tack the current presidential administration is taking. It is so blatantly obvious there is only one explanation for its existence. God’s word teaches in the final hours of history as we know it, people will accumulate unto themselves teachers who will tell them what they want to hear, thus they will be unable to hear and/or understand the obvious truth. It seems we are in that period of history. Every time I write a letter to the editor trying to inform the uninformed, I get blasted by those who have been blinded by their own greed. That’s okay. I have no illusions about such people. They will never believe or understand the truth. Some of you, however are truly being duped by the incredibly inept argument posed by those left wing ideologues who would figuratively like to have you for lunch. I trust this blog has enlightened someone. If you have any comments to make, I invite you to do so. I invite open and civil dialogue on the important issues because that is what this country is all about. Please submit your questions or comments below and I will be happy to address them.
God Bless,
David L. Purkey
It seems appropriate, since I was an American Government teacher for over sixteen years, to explain something about the founding principles of our country for those of you who did not listen when your high school government teacher explained them. First of all, These United States of America are not a democracy. In a democracy everyone gets to vote on all matters of economic, social, and political concern. Democracies only work in very small groups of people who all have basically the same belief system. America was established as a democratic republic. In this kind of government, citizens elect people to represent them as they deal with the needs of the country. The key point here is that these representatives are elected to represent their constituents, not their own selfish ideals. When our Constitution was written, a group called Anti-Federalists opposed it because it had no protection from big government. After several months of debate, the Federalists (those who favored big government, they would be today’s liberals) agreed to make a bill of rights a part of the first congressional sessions to get the Anti-Federalists (states rightist), to agree to ratify the proposed constitution. The Anti-Federalists position regarding government was very similar to the current conservative movement.
A second point is that there are constitutional governments and there are governments with constitutions. These United States of America were a constitutional government until Barack Obama became President. When the elected leader and those who write legislation (Congress) ignore the constitution and no one puts them in jail, a country is no longer a constitutional government. Barack Obama and his Democratic Congress have approved a spending budget that absolutely, unequivocally, and illegally taxes the rich to pay for the needs of the poor. The only reason Congress can constitutionally tax us is to pay for those things we cannot provide for ourselves. Highways and a standing military are simple examples of such things.
The original Bill of Rights had twelve amendments. We finally ended up with ten that I will summarize here. The First Amendment guarantees the freedom of speech, religion, assembly, and press. The Second Amendment guarantees the right to bear arms as a protection against tyranny in government. The Third Amendment guarantees protection from having soldiers stay in our homes in times of peace. The Fourth Amendment guarantees us protection from unreasonable search and seizure. The Fifth Amendment covers such things as due process, double jeopardy, self-incrimination, and eminent domain. One could write a dissertation on each of these points, but I will resist the temptation to elaborate for the sake of brevity here. Most have heard the statement, “I plead the fifth.” It simply means one does not have to answer any question he believes will incriminate him in any way in a criminal investigation. The Sixth Amendment guarantees the right to a trial by jury and rights of the accused; confrontation clause, speedy trial, public trial, and right to counsel. Two actual cases got the Supreme Court to rule that one has the right to counsel before answering any questions in an investigation where he is a suspect and legal counsel in court for free if he can’t afford it. The Seventh Amendment has to do with a civil trial by jury. The Eighth Amendment prohibits cruel and unusual punishment and excessive bail. The Ninth Amendment and Tenth Amendments are crucial in helping us understand what is being done illegally by Barack Obama’s administration. I will quote each verbatim here, “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.” And, "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." The ninth means that any rights not specifically explained does not mean the people do not have them. The tenth means those powers not specifically designated to the federal government nor prohibited to the states belong to the states. In other words, rights not specifically given to the federal government or denied to the states, belong to the states.
Next, I think it is important for us all to know the major differences between conservative (right wing) political theory and liberal (left wing) political theory. Conservatives (right wing politicians) believe in limited government, tax breaks for the top 5% if its citizens and corporations, trickle-down economics, and protecting helpless, unborn babies. Trickle-down economics simply means the wealthiest people in the country are the ones who start and expand businesses that employ people; so the government gives them tax breaks so they have more money to start new or expand established businesses. History has proven over and over again such tax breaks lead to more money being taken into the federal coffers because of the increasing numbers of people who pay taxes on earned income. Left wing liberals tend to tax the rich and famous to the max, which means they have less money to invest in expansion or starting new businesses, which means less people are employed, which means less products are produced. The only place where right wing politicians believe government should intervene in the lives of its citizens is to protect helpless unborn babies. Conservatives believe babies need adults to protect them from the selfish, innocuous desires of left wing radical ideologues who conclude the only way a woman can live a carefree life is to allow her to murder any results of her harlotry. Sorry, but there’s no other way to describe a woman who first gives herself to wanton pleasure and then kills the seed of that pleasure. She is a whore who needs no protection for her whoredom. Women who get abortions should be tried for murder. Doctors who abort babies should be tried for murder. That is the biblical view. And it is not up for debate. Finally, limited government means government must not do anything for citizens they are capable of doing for themselves. Liberal politicians believe citizens are too stupid to decide for themselves about such things as abortion or health care, so they don’t wish to hear what their constituents have to say on such matters. Unfortunately, most of their uninformed constituents don’t know the facts, so they are easily duped into believing their representatives will take care of them.
As a government teacher, I recall each year asking my students how many of them wanted free health care. Every single student, every single year, raised his/her hand. Then I asked them how many actually believed free health care was really free. Most got a dumb look on their face. Then I asked them who they thought paid for this so-called free health care. They hadn’t a clue. This course of questioning allowed me to explain the theory of robbing the rich to pay for the needs of the lazy. Upon completing my explanation, I asked them again, how may were for free health care. No one raised their hand. Those who knew already they were going to be the lazy who wanted free handouts didn’t have the nerve to identify themselves to the others yet. They knew instinctively, or because their parents were already living the carefree life of laziness on the coattails of those who were paying their welfare checks, they would not be popular if they divulged their future plans so early.
Universal health care is the epitome of the antithesis of limited government. There are so many things wrong on so many levels with Obama’s proposal for the public option that I don’t know where to start. His claim that private insurance companies need to have competition is categorically absurd. Government provided insurance is not competition. Government does not have to make a profit, so it can charge less than it cost to actually administer a program. It simply raises taxes to cover unaccounted for costs. To suggest such foolishness is competition suggests government thinks people are too stupid to recognize the idiocy of the claim. Obama has rejected every sensible recommendation made by conservatives on the issue. Allowing any company that desires to do so compete in each state to insure its residents is the simplest and most cost effective way to provide competition, but Obama’s administration has rejected this simple, proven method of reducing insurance costs. It seems clear his administration is determined to shove his plan down our throats no matter what we want. It seems he is determined to destroy capitalism as we know it and as our founding fathers intended it to function. To suggest every citizen and aliens who are here illegally in this country have the “right” to health care is utter foolishness. First of all, we already do care for anyone who has an emergency need in all of our hospitals. Insurance companies are already calculating such cost into our coverage. That is why illegal aliens go to emergency rooms to get examined for flu symptoms. We do not turn down anyone in our emergency rooms. So it is utterly ignorant to suggest anyone is denied health care in emergencies. It simply is not true. Second of all, there is nothing in our Constitution that suggests health care is a right. Third, to suggest it is free is even more absurd. Those who think the rich owe them something are really the only ones who fall for this foolishness. Those too lazy to do for themselves, want someone else to do for them. I am quite aware there are some truly downtrodden people who might be, for one reason or another, temporarily in need of assistance, but the overwhelming number of people today who want free handouts are quite simply and obviously lazy gluttons, drunks, and dopers who are just too lazy to get a job and provide for themselves and their families.
I’m weary of truly ignorant (not stupid, they just don’t have all the facts) people suggesting republicans haven’t provided any alternatives to the Obama plan. Competition has proven over and again a gazillion times that prices will go down when companies are allowed to compete. At the present time, it is mind boggling to realize insurance companies are so powerful they have gained monopoly control of insurance in any given state. There is no competition and they are not effectually regulated. Frivolous law suits are another reason health care costs are so incredibly out of control. People are allowed to sue for the most absurd reasons, and even when they lose, doctors pay for legal representation and court costs. We are all paying for these frivolous suits through increased medical care costs and increased insurance premiums. Every time a court grants a million dollars for a ten dollar mistake by a doctor, we all pay. Obama’s administration has flatly rejected every suggestion made by conservatives. He and his cronies have summarily refused to consider any plan suggested by anyone outside of his inner circle.
Another serious problem that increases medical costs is legal associations who have powerful lobbyists in Washington. A lobbyist is a person who is paid by a group of people with the same interests to wine and dine congressmen, convincing them to vote for legislation favorable to their client(s). They are those people Obama promised he would identify and eliminate when he got into office. Of course, like his promise of no new taxes on those making less than $250,000 a year, he has failed to diminish the power of lobbyists in Washington by one iota. Quite the contrary, he has jumped in bed with them faster than any President in the history of this country. His stimulus package Congress has spent more money in ten months than did George W. Bush in eight years. If you honestly think you are doing the right thing supporting this spendaholic, I truly feel sorry for your children and grandchildren, because they will be paying dearly for Obama’s complete lack of competency at dealing with the economic and health care needs of this country.
It’s important to note that America is already a mixed economy. That means we have many socialists programs. Most countries are mixed economies. Even Communist China allows capitalistic economic activities to function with little government interference. Medicare, Social Security, welfare, Medicaid, and unions, are examples of socialists programs. Government allows some companies (water and power) to have monopolies on their products and then regulates how much they can charge for their products. These are socialistic in nature. However, by and large, we are a country that promotes free-trade and competition in the market place because we believe it stimulates economic growth. Government does not set prices on products, so the best product for the money is the one most people buy rewarding the company that was creative and well managed to prosper while those who do not produce a good product and are not well managed fail. When Bush decided to begin bailing out companies in the latter category, he was responsible for the downward spiral of economic gloom Obama is now continuing to fuel. Bush was a dismal failure and, in my personal opinion an incredible disappointment when it came to handling economic problems in this country. He handled Afghanistan and Iraq brilliantly, but his domestic policy left much to be desired. There is no company too big to fail, only leaders of governments to ignorant to allow them to do so. It is a hazard of the free market that when companies fail because of bad leadership, people loose gazillions of dollars. When let alone, some multi-millionaire genius steps in, buys up the failing company, reorganizes it (Lee Iacocca of Chrysler fame), and makes millions for himself and the company. Or, the company simply closes down its production, many people are temporarily unemployed, the economy experiences minor or major shifts, and a few months later, voila, the economy begins to revive because of the incredibly resilient spirit of the American people.
I will close this discussion with one final thought. When liberals suggest God would be a liberal, they simply demonstrate, once again, their complete lack of understanding of the facts. God would be neither a conservative nor a liberal, but His word teaches He agrees with conservative ideology most of the time. He would be disappointed with doctors who are more concerned with making as much as they can make with little concern for the well being of their clients. But, He would not provide free health care for people who are able to work and earn enough to pay for their own health care but choose to spend what they have on cable TV, cell phones, fancy clothes, booze, drugs, gambling, and/or other forms of entertainment. It is a given that we must come up with some kind of significant health care reform. But it is also a given that it must not have any grounds in allowing the government to get involved in it.
Finally, God has made it clear unborn children are to be protected with reckless abandon. Abortion is clearly and unarguably murder of the innocent; and anyone who supports it has no right to call himself a follower of Christ. God is opposed to welfare. His word insists those who do not work should not eat. The stranger, alien, downtrodden, and infirmed in Israel were allowed to glean the leftovers in the fields of the farmers of ancient times, but they were never given freebees for doing nothing. Welfare reform (a good thing) still goes way too far at supporting social misfits than it does to encourage them to get off their proverbial butts and go to work. Nowhere in scripture do we see any suggestion God would want government to intervene and force people to help others by involuntarily taking money from the rich to provide for the poor. Often, though not always, poor people are poor because they made bad choices when they were young. Often, though not always, they made those poor choices because they weighed the advantages and disadvantages of taking a more productive path (getting advanced schooling) and decided to take the easy path instead(dropping out).
I’m not sure why anyone, accept those who made bad choices, would conclude it is the responsibility of those who worked hard, got an advanced degree, and made sacrifices when they were young, to support, in any way, those who made bad choices. It seems the overriding stimulus for such ill conceived thinking is some kind of false sense of responsibility for failing to make it clear to those who made bad choices what the result of those bad choices would be. When the simple fact is that some people make bad choices because they want what they want and they want it now! In the final analysis, there are some people for whom we can do nothing when it comes to helping them to make good choices. They are determined, for more reasons on more levels than I could ever hope to address here, to become wards of the state simply because that option is open to them.
I could wax eloquently for days on end about the problems with the tack the current presidential administration is taking. It is so blatantly obvious there is only one explanation for its existence. God’s word teaches in the final hours of history as we know it, people will accumulate unto themselves teachers who will tell them what they want to hear, thus they will be unable to hear and/or understand the obvious truth. It seems we are in that period of history. Every time I write a letter to the editor trying to inform the uninformed, I get blasted by those who have been blinded by their own greed. That’s okay. I have no illusions about such people. They will never believe or understand the truth. Some of you, however are truly being duped by the incredibly inept argument posed by those left wing ideologues who would figuratively like to have you for lunch. I trust this blog has enlightened someone. If you have any comments to make, I invite you to do so. I invite open and civil dialogue on the important issues because that is what this country is all about. Please submit your questions or comments below and I will be happy to address them.
God Bless,
David L. Purkey
Saturday, October 3, 2009
I have a need to blog! It's kind of pathetic that guys like me always have to be trying to say something important. I've been working fifty-five to sixty hours and hunting one morning a week (Saturdays). Sundays are filled from the time we wake to about 8:30 in the evening doing glorious things for the kingdom of God. Not complaining mind you. It's awesome to eat breakfast every Sunday morning with our brothers and sisters in Christ, to go from there to my fifth grade Sunday School boys, from there to church service, from there to lunch with a group of people who just decide each Sunday to have lunch together, from there to home to get ready for small groups at six when our small intimate group gets together for dinner and bible study, which usually ends at about 8:30. Sharon and I go to bed exhausted but renewed spiritually. The only problem is that it takes about two hours after such a revitalizing day to come down to earth, so we literally don't get to sleep until 10:30 or 11:00 P.M. Then we get up at 5:00 A.M. to begin a new week. We really do live a pampered life, compared to those who fight traffic and crime in big cities. But, sometimes we forget how blessed we are.
To begin with, I have a beautiful bride of 36 years who loves Jesus and me in that order. I serve in a church filled with dear men and women who love God. I have a good job, though I tried with all my heart to be unemployed until January when I will begin collecting medicare and social security. I only live ten miles from one of the finest hunting spots in the nation. I only live twenty miles from one of the finest fishing spots in America. My boss just gave me a newer truck that is comfortable, quiet, and easy to drive. I'm trying to find a down side to this, but no matter how hard I try, I can't. Life is good. Jesus is gooder, And, being his child is the goodest. I know my English sucks, but I'm quite sure you get the point.
When Sharon and I moved to Montana in '93, we had no idea what God had in mind for us. Things have always been better than they were in Arizona and Sourthern California. But, there were times we questioned the wisdom of coming 1600 miles with no job awaiting us. We struggled for a few years, but God kept us in His grace and made sure we got to where He wanted us. All I can do is praise Him for His wonderful grace. Now, at 64 years old, I am getting to retire from the work force. Of course, that doesn't mean we will quit working. It only means we will be working at those things we believe are of eternal significance. I have been praying for this time in our life for many years. It will be a time of rich and abundant fellowship and labor in God's vineyard. I am so looking forward to it that I sometimes forget He has things for me to do right now. I work with people every day who are lost and floundering through life looking for answers to the most basic of questions: Why am I here? I have to keep reminding myself there is not a moment in our lives when God hasn't a purpose for us. Please pray for us that we will speak boldly as we ought when the opportunity arises, that we will be sensitive to the eternal needs of those around us, that we will be pleasing to Him in all respects, and that we will love the Lord God with all or our heart, soul, and mind. God bless.
To begin with, I have a beautiful bride of 36 years who loves Jesus and me in that order. I serve in a church filled with dear men and women who love God. I have a good job, though I tried with all my heart to be unemployed until January when I will begin collecting medicare and social security. I only live ten miles from one of the finest hunting spots in the nation. I only live twenty miles from one of the finest fishing spots in America. My boss just gave me a newer truck that is comfortable, quiet, and easy to drive. I'm trying to find a down side to this, but no matter how hard I try, I can't. Life is good. Jesus is gooder, And, being his child is the goodest. I know my English sucks, but I'm quite sure you get the point.
When Sharon and I moved to Montana in '93, we had no idea what God had in mind for us. Things have always been better than they were in Arizona and Sourthern California. But, there were times we questioned the wisdom of coming 1600 miles with no job awaiting us. We struggled for a few years, but God kept us in His grace and made sure we got to where He wanted us. All I can do is praise Him for His wonderful grace. Now, at 64 years old, I am getting to retire from the work force. Of course, that doesn't mean we will quit working. It only means we will be working at those things we believe are of eternal significance. I have been praying for this time in our life for many years. It will be a time of rich and abundant fellowship and labor in God's vineyard. I am so looking forward to it that I sometimes forget He has things for me to do right now. I work with people every day who are lost and floundering through life looking for answers to the most basic of questions: Why am I here? I have to keep reminding myself there is not a moment in our lives when God hasn't a purpose for us. Please pray for us that we will speak boldly as we ought when the opportunity arises, that we will be sensitive to the eternal needs of those around us, that we will be pleasing to Him in all respects, and that we will love the Lord God with all or our heart, soul, and mind. God bless.
Sunday, September 27, 2009
AHighlyIntellectualAccountofaWhitetailDeerHunt
Recently, as I sat in my blind one mornin’, durin’ the huntin’ season,
Ponderin’ the majesty of God’s somewhat indecipherable creation,
I saw a bunch of shootin’ stars dart across the early mornin’ sky
And then I saw somethin’ that was
A lot more than just a plain old shootin’ star,
Though, since I’m not a star expert—one of them astronomolies—
I don’t for sure know what it was,
Maybe it was a comet, or a asterisk, or some dang thing like that.
I also heard a Great Horny Owl, as well as a whole bunch of turkeys,
Makin’ a horrible racket some two hundred yards away.
Of course how far away they were is really anybody’s guess.
I just like to think I can judge sich things.
And I also heard the rattlin’ of antlers, maybe about seventy yards away,
It was one of them battles between two larger than life bucks—them’s men deer—
Vyin’ for the right to father the next generation of whitetails
That would re-populate this here particlar neck of the woods.
That battle demonstratin’ their superiority is repeated thousands,
Maybe even a gazillion times a year,
Throughout our part of this North American continent
We like call the good old U.S of A.
And I also heard the yelping of coyote pups
And the eerie howling of their progenators.
And, the, never to be mistaken for anything else, sound of honkin’ geese
As they passed over, journeyin’ to a warmer, more hospitable climate.
And to my disfrazelment, I heard the disgusting, annoying,
Seemingly entirely unnecessary sound of a big ole rooster pheasant,
Who apparently only makes that disgusting, annoying sound
For the very purpose of being disgusting and annoying.
Nah, there’s gotta be a reason for him to make such a godawful sound;
Though in my un-infinitesimal wisdom,
I haven’t the slightest idea what it might be.
I also got to see another wondrous, once in a lifetime sight the other mornin’.
About a hour before sunrise, while the moon was still ashinnin’ bright,
I seen, with the aid of my trusty Nikon by-noclars,
A magnificent whitetail man deer—that’s a buck—
Standing right smack dab in the middle of a lea
(an’ for you city folk, a lea is an open field surrounded by a bunch of trees)
Anyways, that big old buck was standing right smack dab in the middle of that lea
Just snortin’ up a storm,
Apparently—and I say apparently ‘cause I couldn’t see her at first—
Apparently that buck was attempting to attract a lady deer—that’s a doe—
Though I’m not so sure she really was a lady, the way she was actin’;
‘Cause pretty soon she come runnin’ outta them trees near the edge of that field
Straight at that ole buck an’ began doin’ her part of the matin’ ritual.
Now that ritual’s been going on for a bazillion years, maybe even longer.
But it was the first time I ever seen it live, up close, and personal,
And I gotta tell ya, I was impressed.
Anyways, in less time than it takes Clint Eastwood’s orangetang Clyde to sneeze,
She was standing right next to that big old buck—that’s a man deer.
Why, she was so close I wasn’t even sure at first there was two of ‘em;
That was, of course until they began circlin’ one another.
And I gotta tell ya, that was a sight. 0000 doggie! It was just like they was dancing.
For every move he made, she’d make an equal and opposite counter move,
Just like one of them physicasts formulas; you know what I mean;
For every action, there’s some equal and oppositional reaction, or something like that.
Well, let me tell ya, the physicalness there, ‘twixt them two was somethin’ to behold.
And, just ‘cause I was there that early, crisp, November mornin’,
I got to see ‘em in all their glory—a buck and a doe courtin’ one another.
Man-a-live!, National Geographic’s got nothin’ on me no more!
And then, by golly, as if that weren’t enough, just a day or so later,
One more’n half a dozen of them loud, obnoxious goblin gobblers
I had heard in the distance just a few days before
Come a struttin’ out of the bushes, not more than 40 feet from where I was sittin’.
And they never even suspected I was in the neighborhood.
I knowed that to be true ‘cause they didn’t fret none, not even a skosh;
They just meandered off across just about 70 foot of open field
An’ disappeared into the brush on the other side.
And then somethin’ did spook ‘em cause they all took ta flight,
Gobble gobbling up a storm, like you never in one lifetime ever did hear,
Like someone was a pinching their funny bones or somethin’,
Like they was really scared. I mean, I never saw turkeys fly so quick
And make so much noise in such a short space of time.
And as if that weren’t enough, I got ta see a huge, and I mean real huge owl.
I don’t know what brand or model he was, ‘cause I’m no horticulturist.
Don’t misconstrue me; we all know the world needs them hi-tech biological gurus,
Just as much as it needs them that favors the intellectual side like me.
Anyways, I saw that old owl swoop down from a tree and nab somethin’—
pro’bly a field mouse—and fly right off outta sight, back into them woods,
Pro’bly back onto a distant tree limb.
And I can tell you, that tree limb would have ta be a big one to hold that big old owl.
I mean he had to of weighed thirty, possible even forty pounds.
And I ain’t exaggeratin’ none neither, leastways not on purpose.
He was indespicably the biggest hooter I ever did see.
Yeah, the opportunities are seemless, sittin’ in the woods in a huntin’ blind,
Waitin’ for that big buck—that’s a man deer—ta pop outta the woods
During the daylight hours so’s you can shoot ‘im and take ‘im home,
And brag about him to your friends and neighbors.
And maybe, just maybe have ‘im mounted so’s you can just gaze on him
Those days when you can’t go out and sit in that blind,
And watch all them adventurous animals romp and revel
In the beauteous out of doors in the wondrous wooded forests of eastern Montana.
Yeah, I knew there was a reason, in June of '93, on that hot summer afternoon
While we was roastin’ in the afternoon sun in Arizona, an’ I mean roastin’.
It was a hundred and twenty-four degrees in the shade and there weren’t no shade.
Anyways, I knowed there was a reason I and my better’n average half
Come ta this high plains country.
Now all I gotta do is convince her it was the right thing ta do.
Of course, with my immeasurable intellect,
That shoots right off the other end of that there richter scale,
That shouldn’t be too difficult a task.
by D.L. Purkey
Recently, as I sat in my blind one mornin’, durin’ the huntin’ season,
Ponderin’ the majesty of God’s somewhat indecipherable creation,
I saw a bunch of shootin’ stars dart across the early mornin’ sky
And then I saw somethin’ that was
A lot more than just a plain old shootin’ star,
Though, since I’m not a star expert—one of them astronomolies—
I don’t for sure know what it was,
Maybe it was a comet, or a asterisk, or some dang thing like that.
I also heard a Great Horny Owl, as well as a whole bunch of turkeys,
Makin’ a horrible racket some two hundred yards away.
Of course how far away they were is really anybody’s guess.
I just like to think I can judge sich things.
And I also heard the rattlin’ of antlers, maybe about seventy yards away,
It was one of them battles between two larger than life bucks—them’s men deer—
Vyin’ for the right to father the next generation of whitetails
That would re-populate this here particlar neck of the woods.
That battle demonstratin’ their superiority is repeated thousands,
Maybe even a gazillion times a year,
Throughout our part of this North American continent
We like call the good old U.S of A.
And I also heard the yelping of coyote pups
And the eerie howling of their progenators.
And, the, never to be mistaken for anything else, sound of honkin’ geese
As they passed over, journeyin’ to a warmer, more hospitable climate.
And to my disfrazelment, I heard the disgusting, annoying,
Seemingly entirely unnecessary sound of a big ole rooster pheasant,
Who apparently only makes that disgusting, annoying sound
For the very purpose of being disgusting and annoying.
Nah, there’s gotta be a reason for him to make such a godawful sound;
Though in my un-infinitesimal wisdom,
I haven’t the slightest idea what it might be.
I also got to see another wondrous, once in a lifetime sight the other mornin’.
About a hour before sunrise, while the moon was still ashinnin’ bright,
I seen, with the aid of my trusty Nikon by-noclars,
A magnificent whitetail man deer—that’s a buck—
Standing right smack dab in the middle of a lea
(an’ for you city folk, a lea is an open field surrounded by a bunch of trees)
Anyways, that big old buck was standing right smack dab in the middle of that lea
Just snortin’ up a storm,
Apparently—and I say apparently ‘cause I couldn’t see her at first—
Apparently that buck was attempting to attract a lady deer—that’s a doe—
Though I’m not so sure she really was a lady, the way she was actin’;
‘Cause pretty soon she come runnin’ outta them trees near the edge of that field
Straight at that ole buck an’ began doin’ her part of the matin’ ritual.
Now that ritual’s been going on for a bazillion years, maybe even longer.
But it was the first time I ever seen it live, up close, and personal,
And I gotta tell ya, I was impressed.
Anyways, in less time than it takes Clint Eastwood’s orangetang Clyde to sneeze,
She was standing right next to that big old buck—that’s a man deer.
Why, she was so close I wasn’t even sure at first there was two of ‘em;
That was, of course until they began circlin’ one another.
And I gotta tell ya, that was a sight. 0000 doggie! It was just like they was dancing.
For every move he made, she’d make an equal and opposite counter move,
Just like one of them physicasts formulas; you know what I mean;
For every action, there’s some equal and oppositional reaction, or something like that.
Well, let me tell ya, the physicalness there, ‘twixt them two was somethin’ to behold.
And, just ‘cause I was there that early, crisp, November mornin’,
I got to see ‘em in all their glory—a buck and a doe courtin’ one another.
Man-a-live!, National Geographic’s got nothin’ on me no more!
And then, by golly, as if that weren’t enough, just a day or so later,
One more’n half a dozen of them loud, obnoxious goblin gobblers
I had heard in the distance just a few days before
Come a struttin’ out of the bushes, not more than 40 feet from where I was sittin’.
And they never even suspected I was in the neighborhood.
I knowed that to be true ‘cause they didn’t fret none, not even a skosh;
They just meandered off across just about 70 foot of open field
An’ disappeared into the brush on the other side.
And then somethin’ did spook ‘em cause they all took ta flight,
Gobble gobbling up a storm, like you never in one lifetime ever did hear,
Like someone was a pinching their funny bones or somethin’,
Like they was really scared. I mean, I never saw turkeys fly so quick
And make so much noise in such a short space of time.
And as if that weren’t enough, I got ta see a huge, and I mean real huge owl.
I don’t know what brand or model he was, ‘cause I’m no horticulturist.
Don’t misconstrue me; we all know the world needs them hi-tech biological gurus,
Just as much as it needs them that favors the intellectual side like me.
Anyways, I saw that old owl swoop down from a tree and nab somethin’—
pro’bly a field mouse—and fly right off outta sight, back into them woods,
Pro’bly back onto a distant tree limb.
And I can tell you, that tree limb would have ta be a big one to hold that big old owl.
I mean he had to of weighed thirty, possible even forty pounds.
And I ain’t exaggeratin’ none neither, leastways not on purpose.
He was indespicably the biggest hooter I ever did see.
Yeah, the opportunities are seemless, sittin’ in the woods in a huntin’ blind,
Waitin’ for that big buck—that’s a man deer—ta pop outta the woods
During the daylight hours so’s you can shoot ‘im and take ‘im home,
And brag about him to your friends and neighbors.
And maybe, just maybe have ‘im mounted so’s you can just gaze on him
Those days when you can’t go out and sit in that blind,
And watch all them adventurous animals romp and revel
In the beauteous out of doors in the wondrous wooded forests of eastern Montana.
Yeah, I knew there was a reason, in June of '93, on that hot summer afternoon
While we was roastin’ in the afternoon sun in Arizona, an’ I mean roastin’.
It was a hundred and twenty-four degrees in the shade and there weren’t no shade.
Anyways, I knowed there was a reason I and my better’n average half
Come ta this high plains country.
Now all I gotta do is convince her it was the right thing ta do.
Of course, with my immeasurable intellect,
That shoots right off the other end of that there richter scale,
That shouldn’t be too difficult a task.
by D.L. Purkey
Thursday, September 10, 2009
This is an email I received a few day ago. I think it is worth your time to read, so I have posted it here. It addresses Barbara Boxer's stupit comments to a general in the United States Army.
Babs:
You were so right on when you scolded the general on TV for using the term, "ma'am," instead of "Senator". After all, in the military, "ma'am" is a term of respect when addressing a female of superior rank or position. The general was totally wrong. You are not a person of superior rank or position. You are a member of one of the world's most corrupt organizations, the U.S. Senate, equaled only by the U.S. House of Representatives.
Congress is a cesspool of liars, thieves, inside traders, traitors, drunks (one who killed a staffer, yet is still revered), criminals, and other low level swine who, as individuals (not all, but many), will do anything to enhance their lives, fortunes and power, all at the expense of the People of the United States and its Constitution, in order to be continually re-elected.
Many democrats even want American troops killed by releasing photographs. How many of you could honestly say, "We pledge our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor"? None? One? Two?
Your reaction to the general shows several things. First is your abysmal ignorance of all things military. Your treatment of the general shows you to be an elitist of the worst kind. When the general entered the military (as most of us who served) he wrote the government a blank check, offering his life to protect your derriere, now safely and comfortably ensconced in a 20 thousand dollar leather chair, paid for by the general's taxes. You repaid him for this by humiliating him in front of millions.
Second is your puerile character, lack of sophistication, and arrogance which borders on the hubristic. This display of brattish behavior shows you to be a virago, termagant, harridan, nag, scold or shrew, unfit for your position, regardless of the support of the unwashed, uneducated masses who have made California into the laughing stock of the nation.
What I am writing, are the same thoughts countless millions of Americans have toward Congress, but who lack the energy, ability or time to convey them. Regardless of their thoughts, most realize that politicians are pretty much the same, and will vote for the one who will bring home the most bacon, even if they do consider how corrupt that person is. Lord Acton (1834 - 1902) so aptly charged, "Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely." Unbeknownst to you and your colleagues, "Mr. Power" has had his way with all of you, and we are all the worse for it.
Finally Senator, I, too, have a title. It is "Right Wing Extremist Potential Terrorist Threat." It is not of my choosing, but was given to me by your Secretary of Homeland Security, Janet Napolitano. And you were offended by "ma'am"? Have a fine day. Cheers!
Jim Hill
16808 - 103rd Avenue Court
East South Hill, WA 98374
Babs:
You were so right on when you scolded the general on TV for using the term, "ma'am," instead of "Senator". After all, in the military, "ma'am" is a term of respect when addressing a female of superior rank or position. The general was totally wrong. You are not a person of superior rank or position. You are a member of one of the world's most corrupt organizations, the U.S. Senate, equaled only by the U.S. House of Representatives.
Congress is a cesspool of liars, thieves, inside traders, traitors, drunks (one who killed a staffer, yet is still revered), criminals, and other low level swine who, as individuals (not all, but many), will do anything to enhance their lives, fortunes and power, all at the expense of the People of the United States and its Constitution, in order to be continually re-elected.
Many democrats even want American troops killed by releasing photographs. How many of you could honestly say, "We pledge our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor"? None? One? Two?
Your reaction to the general shows several things. First is your abysmal ignorance of all things military. Your treatment of the general shows you to be an elitist of the worst kind. When the general entered the military (as most of us who served) he wrote the government a blank check, offering his life to protect your derriere, now safely and comfortably ensconced in a 20 thousand dollar leather chair, paid for by the general's taxes. You repaid him for this by humiliating him in front of millions.
Second is your puerile character, lack of sophistication, and arrogance which borders on the hubristic. This display of brattish behavior shows you to be a virago, termagant, harridan, nag, scold or shrew, unfit for your position, regardless of the support of the unwashed, uneducated masses who have made California into the laughing stock of the nation.
What I am writing, are the same thoughts countless millions of Americans have toward Congress, but who lack the energy, ability or time to convey them. Regardless of their thoughts, most realize that politicians are pretty much the same, and will vote for the one who will bring home the most bacon, even if they do consider how corrupt that person is. Lord Acton (1834 - 1902) so aptly charged, "Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely." Unbeknownst to you and your colleagues, "Mr. Power" has had his way with all of you, and we are all the worse for it.
Finally Senator, I, too, have a title. It is "Right Wing Extremist Potential Terrorist Threat." It is not of my choosing, but was given to me by your Secretary of Homeland Security, Janet Napolitano. And you were offended by "ma'am"? Have a fine day. Cheers!
Jim Hill
16808 - 103rd Avenue Court
East South Hill, WA 98374
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
