Obama must go – it is that simple. While Romney has never been my first choice as the Republican contender, nor my second choice, nor third, nor even fourth, almost anyone will be better than BHO. Not only is he arguably the worst president the United States has ever had, but if he gets back in for a second term there is every reason to believe he will cause irrevocable – even fatal – damage to the nation.
Thus it is vital that all concerned Americans, including all responsible Christian Americans, do all they can to get Obama out. And that means getting Romney in. Now I have already penned two detailed articles on why this must be so:
In those pieces I reminded my readers of the fact that we are not voting for a theologian-in-chief, but a president. Christians who are concerned about a Mormon president and think they can just sit this one out are simply being naive in the extreme, and will cause untold damage if their carelessness and irresponsibility means Obama gets back in by default.
So this election is not about voting Romney in. It is really about voting Obama out. That is the reality which we must face. To buttress my case I will here deal with two new important articles which have just appeared. The first comes from the distinguished Harvard University historian, Niall Ferguson. His piece, “Obama’s Gotta Go,” is the cover story on the latest Newsweek.
The lengthy article deserves to be read in full, but let me pull a few quotes out from it. First a few words about the economy: “Welcome to Obama’s America: nearly half the population is not represented on a taxable return—almost exactly the same proportion that lives in a household where at least one member receives some type of government benefit. We are becoming the 50–50 nation—half of us paying the taxes, the other half receiving the benefits.
“And all this despite a far bigger hike in the federal debt than we were promised. According to the 2010 budget, the debt in public hands was supposed to fall in relation to GDP from 67 percent in 2010 to less than 66 percent this year. If only. By the end of this year, according to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), it will reach 70 percent of GDP. These figures significantly understate the debt problem, however. The ratio that matters is debt to revenue. That number has leapt upward from 165 percent in 2008 to 262 percent this year, according to figures from the International Monetary Fund. Among developed economies, only Ireland and Spain have seen a bigger deterioration.”
Consider also health care: “No one seriously doubts that the U.S. system needed to be reformed. But the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) of 2010 did nothing to address the core defects of the system: the long-run explosion of Medicare costs as the baby boomers retire, the ‘fee for service’ model that drives health-care inflation, the link from employment to insurance that explains why so many Americans lack coverage, and the excessive costs of the liability insurance that our doctors need to protect them from our lawyers.
“Ironically, the core Obamacare concept of the ‘individual mandate’ (requiring all Americans to buy insurance or face a fine) was something the president himself had opposed when vying with Hillary Clinton for the Democratic nomination. A much more accurate term would be ‘Pelosicare,’ since it was she who really forced the bill through Congress.”
What about foreign policy and the Middle East? “In the case of Iran he did nothing, and the thugs of the Islamic Republic ruthlessly crushed the demonstrations. Ditto Syria. In Libya he was cajoled into intervening. In Egypt he tried to have it both ways, exhorting Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak to leave, then drawing back and recommending an ‘orderly transition.’ The result was a foreign-policy debacle. Not only were Egypt’s elites appalled by what seemed to them a betrayal, but the victors—the Muslim Brotherhood—had nothing to be grateful for. America’s closest Middle Eastern allies—Israel and the Saudis—looked on in amazement….
“Remarkably the president polls relatively strongly on national security. Yet the public mistakes his administration’s astonishingly uninhibited use of political assassination for a coherent strategy. According to the Bureau of Investigative Journalism in London, the civilian proportion of drone casualties was 16 percent last year. Ask yourself how the liberal media would have behaved if George W. Bush had used drones this way. Yet somehow it is only ever Republican secretaries of state who are accused of committing ‘war crimes’.”
He concludes: “The voters now face a stark choice. They can let Barack Obama’s rambling, solipsistic narrative continue until they find themselves living in some American version of Europe, with low growth, high unemployment, even higher debt—and real geopolitical decline.
“Or they can opt for real change: the kind of change that will end four years of economic underperformance, stop the terrifying accumulation of debt, and reestablish a secure fiscal foundation for American national security. I’ve said it before: it’s a choice between les États Unis and the Republic of the Battle Hymn. I was a good loser four years ago. But this year, fired up by the rise of Ryan, I want badly to win.”
But regardless of how bad Obama is, and will be, there are plenty of foolish evangelicals who will refuse to vote for Romney because of his Mormonism. They seem to prefer hanging on to their supposed religious purity while letting the entire nation be destroyed. Thanks guys – that’s a great legacy to leave to your children.
Evangelical senior statesmen Norman Geisler has just penned a terrific piece which every single one of these clueless believers should read. Until they do, let me offer parts of it to you. He asks, “Should an Evangelical Vote for a Mormon for President?”
He offers seven reasons why we should, beginning with this: “We face a painful dilemma of voting for a liberal professing Christian (Obama) with Muslim leanings or a cultist Mormon who claims to be Christian. The truth is that we do not live in an ideal world; we live in a real world. Realistically, we have only two candidates who could win the election, and we can only vote for one. To stay away on Election Day is to throw our vote away. Further, even on religious grounds, a liberal Christian denies as many, or more, essential truths of the Christian Faith as does a Mormon. So, in this election any religious test as to who is more in harmony with evangelical beliefs is basically a washout.”
Here are two more: “Three, Martin Luther once said that he would rather be ruled by a competent Turk than an incompetent Christian. Likewise, on the issue of life, it would be better to vote for a Pro-Life Mormon than for a Pro-Abortion Liberal Christian. After all, the right to life is a basic constitutional right. In fact, the right to life is the right to all other rights. The dead don’t have any rights. Abortion has already taken some 50 million American lives and Romney is certainly a better bet to stop this continuing holocaust than Obama who favors even partial birth abortions.
“Fourth, there are other issues that are important—character counts. In the character contest, from what I know of the two candidates, Romney wins on personal moral character. Both his individual and political integrity appears to be much better than that of his rival who, contrary to expectations, has turned out to be an all-too-typical Chicago politician, as is evidenced by his leftist leaning appointees and his questionable political tactics.”
He concludes: “As for the seven criteria listed above, the first one is a washout, and Romney is the unanimous winner of the other six. So, despite my disappointment on the religious issue expressed in previous posts, and given the circumstances and the choice of either Romney or Obama, I have decided that a vote for Romney is the best thing I can do for the future of America.“
Exactly right. November 6 in America may be one of that nation’s most important days. Of all people, biblical Christians had better make sure they do the wise thing, the right thing, and the sensible thing on that day.
Thanks Bill.
I have had reason to investigate the activities of ‘Emilys List’ and wonder how big an influence this group is on Obama ( and particularly Michelle)?
To get financial support, mentoring and various other supports to further ones career, these female politicians need to pledge full allegiance to all pro abortion initiatives, including support for full term abortions, partial birth abortions etc.
I have just discovered that for the upcoming NT and ACT elections, all female candidates of the Labor party, are members of EL.
Anna Bligh, Lara Giddings, Julia Gillard, Nicola Roxon and all of Gillards female front bench are all members.
The influence of this group cannot be underestimated.
Have you ever written an article on them Bill?
I’d love to read it, if you have.
They need to be exposed.
It also shows the desperate need for more Christians in our political arena.
Annette Williams
Lets get straight to the point; keep a Muslim out of ruling a nation, keep sharia law out of any country, keep another liar out of heading a nation. Know the truth.
Judith Bond
For the sake of the free world, I pray that Obama is thrown out of the oval office ASAP!
Mario Del Giudice
Is there more than 2 people who you can vote for? Voting on Abortion with these 2 seems pointless as it was perfectly legal, and thriving as an industry under the bush administration. so why would it be any different under romny? After all he isnt one man but a party? the Same party as bush? I am not saying who to vote for; just saying to vote for the republican party on the abortion issue would seem pointless.
ps forgive my ignorance of your election system.
Russell Boden, UK
Thanks Russell
Yes people can vote for a third party or an independent or do a write in, etc. But the reality is we have only two men representing two parties – one of which will get in. And in the past we have had stubborn independent candidates run, divide the conservative vote, and allow the Democrats to get in. So any of these other options, along with not voting at all, will simply mean one thing: Obama gets back in by default, and it is the end of America as we know it. That is why it is so vital for Christians to vote, and to vote Obama out (which means, vote Romney in).
Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch
URL for Geisler’s article?
Andrew White
Oops, sorry – thanks Andrew, forgot to add them. Both links are now in at the end of the article.
Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch
It seems the Newsweek piece has ignited a firestorm for its act of betrayal against the rest of the media.
Romney is going to have the mother of all battles coming up. With the way the media is its a miracle that Republicans get as many votes as they do.
Damien Spillane
Thanks Damien
Yes as expected. But Ferguson has replied to his critics – see here:
This is the most sensible thing I have read or seen in the lead up to the coming US election. Romney is the lesser of two evils, by far the lesser, from what we can see now. However, if he does get elected, I’m pretty sure it will be just matter of time before he disappoints everyone. Think of the promises made by Obama during his pre-election campaign, every one broken. They are all liars and puppets for who is really in charge.
Karen Hamilton
America can’t afford four more years of incompetence and failure. We need to ask ourselves what economists like Thomas Sowell and Walter Williams would do. And they wouldn’t give Obama four more years.
Daniel Kempton
The other point that needs to be made in reply to Russell Boden’s query, is that the USA has first-past-the-post voting which means that, unlike with the much superior preferential voting system, a vote for a third candidate is usually wasted. As Bill said, in the case of the election for President of the USA there are only two real options and unfortunately even if a better candidate were to stand as an independent, a vote for them is wasted and would do nothing towards getting rid of Obama.
Ewan McDonald, Victoria.
I will use this topic at my next bible enquiry class – so thanks! What is Emily’s list?
ilona sturla
A group supporting pro-abortion women in political life – see here eg:
Ilona,
Just to expand a bit further on Bills comments about what Emilys list is.
The core belief on which this organization operates is that women are in every way equal to men and should have the complete say over their bodies including when they are pregnant.
As a result they reject anything that infringes on what they consider is their complete and utter ‘reproductive rights’.
In practice, this worldview means that they must reject the idea of unborn babies being human and entitled to any legal protections until they are born ie They seek to have abortion legalised up until the point of birth at the sole discretion of the mother. They never support any legislation that ‘humanises’ the babies (even giving them pain relief for their impending abortions, even when they as brutal as partial birth abortions), that would be an admission that the baby is in fact human, and feels the human condition of pain, they always oppose giving information to women about their unborn babies like personhood or heart beat bills, anything that attaches humanity to the unborn is seen as a threat to their rights as women.
In their perfect world, women should be entitled to have abortions for any reason or even no reason, not requiring any consent from anybody (partners, doctors etc) for the full term of their pregnancy. They therefore must reject that the unborn baby is a living and separate being and it certainly should not have any rights above its mother.
Please read these attachments to learn more:
Emilys list writes a congratulatory letter to its members on the passing of this law reform
newsweekly.com.au/article.php?id=4468
You may also be interested (and disgusted) to check out their website to see which of our current ALP politicians are members of this shameful group.
emilyslist.org.au
Annette Williams
Very wise words from John MacArthur:
“So what I would say is- look, whether or not a person who runs for president or vice president or congress or senate or governor, whether or not that person is a Christian, is not the issue- that’s not the role of government. You’re not choosing a pastor. Since when all of a sudden do we think that someone’s religion is the issue in picking a president anymore than it would be an issue in picking a pilot to fly you somewhere? I don’t really care what the religion is, I just want to know he can land the plane.”
Thanks Bill.
I have had reason to investigate the activities of ‘Emilys List’ and wonder how big an influence this group is on Obama ( and particularly Michelle)?
To get financial support, mentoring and various other supports to further ones career, these female politicians need to pledge full allegiance to all pro abortion initiatives, including support for full term abortions, partial birth abortions etc.
I have just discovered that for the upcoming NT and ACT elections, all female candidates of the Labor party, are members of EL.
Anna Bligh, Lara Giddings, Julia Gillard, Nicola Roxon and all of Gillards female front bench are all members.
The influence of this group cannot be underestimated.
Have you ever written an article on them Bill?
I’d love to read it, if you have.
They need to be exposed.
It also shows the desperate need for more Christians in our political arena.
Annette Williams
Lets get straight to the point; keep a Muslim out of ruling a nation, keep sharia law out of any country, keep another liar out of heading a nation. Know the truth.
Judith Bond
For the sake of the free world, I pray that Obama is thrown out of the oval office ASAP!
Mario Del Giudice
Is there more than 2 people who you can vote for? Voting on Abortion with these 2 seems pointless as it was perfectly legal, and thriving as an industry under the bush administration. so why would it be any different under romny? After all he isnt one man but a party? the Same party as bush? I am not saying who to vote for; just saying to vote for the republican party on the abortion issue would seem pointless.
ps forgive my ignorance of your election system.
Russell Boden, UK
Thanks Russell
Yes people can vote for a third party or an independent or do a write in, etc. But the reality is we have only two men representing two parties – one of which will get in. And in the past we have had stubborn independent candidates run, divide the conservative vote, and allow the Democrats to get in. So any of these other options, along with not voting at all, will simply mean one thing: Obama gets back in by default, and it is the end of America as we know it. That is why it is so vital for Christians to vote, and to vote Obama out (which means, vote Romney in).
Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch
URL for Geisler’s article?
Andrew White
Oops, sorry – thanks Andrew, forgot to add them. Both links are now in at the end of the article.
Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch
It seems the Newsweek piece has ignited a firestorm for its act of betrayal against the rest of the media.
Romney is going to have the mother of all battles coming up. With the way the media is its a miracle that Republicans get as many votes as they do.
Damien Spillane
Thanks Damien
Yes as expected. But Ferguson has replied to his critics – see here:
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/niall-hit-road-barack-ferguson-responds-liberal-blogosphere
Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch
This is the most sensible thing I have read or seen in the lead up to the coming US election. Romney is the lesser of two evils, by far the lesser, from what we can see now. However, if he does get elected, I’m pretty sure it will be just matter of time before he disappoints everyone. Think of the promises made by Obama during his pre-election campaign, every one broken. They are all liars and puppets for who is really in charge.
Karen Hamilton
America can’t afford four more years of incompetence and failure. We need to ask ourselves what economists like Thomas Sowell and Walter Williams would do. And they wouldn’t give Obama four more years.
Daniel Kempton
The other point that needs to be made in reply to Russell Boden’s query, is that the USA has first-past-the-post voting which means that, unlike with the much superior preferential voting system, a vote for a third candidate is usually wasted. As Bill said, in the case of the election for President of the USA there are only two real options and unfortunately even if a better candidate were to stand as an independent, a vote for them is wasted and would do nothing towards getting rid of Obama.
Ewan McDonald, Victoria.
I will use this topic at my next bible enquiry class – so thanks! What is Emily’s list?
ilona sturla
A group supporting pro-abortion women in political life – see here eg:
http://www.endeavourforum.org.au/newsweekly_articles/emily.html
Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch
Ilona,
Just to expand a bit further on Bills comments about what Emilys list is.
The core belief on which this organization operates is that women are in every way equal to men and should have the complete say over their bodies including when they are pregnant.
As a result they reject anything that infringes on what they consider is their complete and utter ‘reproductive rights’.
In practice, this worldview means that they must reject the idea of unborn babies being human and entitled to any legal protections until they are born ie They seek to have abortion legalised up until the point of birth at the sole discretion of the mother. They never support any legislation that ‘humanises’ the babies (even giving them pain relief for their impending abortions, even when they as brutal as partial birth abortions), that would be an admission that the baby is in fact human, and feels the human condition of pain, they always oppose giving information to women about their unborn babies like personhood or heart beat bills, anything that attaches humanity to the unborn is seen as a threat to their rights as women.
In their perfect world, women should be entitled to have abortions for any reason or even no reason, not requiring any consent from anybody (partners, doctors etc) for the full term of their pregnancy. They therefore must reject that the unborn baby is a living and separate being and it certainly should not have any rights above its mother.
Please read these attachments to learn more:
An explanation of the reforms and the amendments that were rejected
http://www.prolife.org.au
Emilys list writes a congratulatory letter to its members on the passing of this law reform
newsweekly.com.au/article.php?id=4468
You may also be interested (and disgusted) to check out their website to see which of our current ALP politicians are members of this shameful group.
emilyslist.org.au
Annette Williams
Very wise words from John MacArthur:
“So what I would say is- look, whether or not a person who runs for president or vice president or congress or senate or governor, whether or not that person is a Christian, is not the issue- that’s not the role of government. You’re not choosing a pastor. Since when all of a sudden do we think that someone’s religion is the issue in picking a president anymore than it would be an issue in picking a pilot to fly you somewhere? I don’t really care what the religion is, I just want to know he can land the plane.”
Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch