Salt and Light

I wanted to take a moment to put my thoughts down on paper about what Memorial Day means to me. Of course my family looks at this day with a special reverence with Eddie being in harms way, but regardless of our personal family situation, this day is special and that tends to get lost in all the hoopla. Frank Salvato of the New Media Journal has said all I wanted to say and then some in his brilliant piece titled “Remembering What Memorial Day Is For.” Please take a moment to share this article with your family; yeah, go ahead and print it off and read it to your family. And when the friends show up or you go to their house for the cookout, read the article to them. That can be your moment of reverence that Frank so eloquently calls for in his article.

Man, are the libs furious over the Dems capitulating! As Rush Limbaugh pointed out today, how could the Dems give up on timetables to get out of Iraq if the election in November ‘06 was a mandate for them to do so? Why is it that Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi can’t get this legislation passed? Because the grassroots, many of you, have let Congress know that we will not tolerate de-funding the troops and cutting and running the way they did in Vietnam.

I’ve uploaded a post from the Daily Kos liberal blog and the anti-war crowd are spitting mad. In a post titled, “Channel Your Fury,” Meteor Blades actually does a good job in his or her analogy on the Dems surrender. (Please read before going on)

The one thing Meteor Blades so conveniently fails to remember when castigating “Some of these infuriators are House Blue Dogs, some are conservative Dems in the Senate, and they, to say it frankly, are holding the party hostage to a strategy of folding instead of raising,” is that it is exactly this bloc of Democrats that won them both houses. Hey Meteor Blades, you want to be infuriated with someone, blame Rahm Emanuel who poured millions of Democrat dollars to elect these House Blue Dogs. Blame Chuckie Schumer for working hard to get the conservative Dems in the Senate elected. The problem with your two “leaders” is they thought they could bully these freshmen congressmen into submission after they were sworn in. Dang, it seems as though these dudes actually meant what they said. I almost feel sorry for you guys, you never saw it coming; I mean you can almost understand how that could happen in the GOP (although that happens about as much today as we drill oil in America!), but for a Dem to actually stand on conservative values, I mean, it’s almost like, oh my gosh, could it be, there are a bunch of new Joe Liebermans running around Capitol Hill?!!

One thing that Meteor Blades is right about: the Dems either got completely snookered by Bush to wait until after September or they were hoping their base wouldn’t notice. You give them no respect! Although many are crazed anti-war hippies, the Left has very informed and highly active bloggers.

As you see Meteor Blades trying to rally the troops to try to defeat this new bill, we need to reinforce our side with emails, faxes, and phone calls thanking the President and GOP for standing firm on not giving in to timetables. Man, could you imagine what the Republican Party and the Bush Presidency would be like if they could actually muster up this type of spinal strength all the time? Yeah, I know, the GOP’s Spinal Osteoporosis seems to be worse than first diagnosed as evidenced by the immigration bill.

Well then, it looks like its time for the conservative grass roots to prop up these Ronald Reagan wannabes for the next 18 months before we swear in a new President and Congress.

Speaking of GOP candidates, it is looking more and more of a reality that Fred Thompson will be announcing his candidacy before too long. I think this weekend during the Memorial Day remembrance would be a good contrast to John Edwards’ call for anti-war demonstrations.

I want to make a prediction here on Salt and Light: it is a high probability that our next President will be a former senator from Tennessee, regardless of what party wins. Just think we will have an actor who portrayed President Ulysses S. Grant (Fred Thompson = Ronald Reagan) and an actor who portrayed President Clinton’s Vice President and a global warming expert (huh? Oh yeah, the inconvenient truth is that Algore actually was Vice President). Any bets on which candidate will win Tennessee?

Good evening!

Tomorrow morning I will be on WTIC’s “Sound Off Connecticut” with Jim Vicevich promoting my book, blog and talking about the GOP presidential contenders. You’ll be able to stream it live from the website or later in the day there will be a link to hear the interview. My interview begins at 10:10 Central Time. Wish me luck!

Well it seems like we are right back to square one with the illegal alien issue. There is a lot of posturing going on with both Democrats and Republicans and it seems that no one is happy. Here are some observations and then at the end I’ll share with you what I believe is the best solution.

1. Any time you pass a law that will rely on government bureaucracy to be part of the solution, you know that you are in trouble.

2. Any time you find yourself in agreement with Ted Kennedy, you had better rethink your position. Ted Kennedy was part of the last two immigration fixes, and we see where that got us. Besides, its Ted Kennedy for crying out loud!

3. Any legislation that allows someone here to remain under whatever circumstances you want to call them, it is a form of amnesty. If it is not amnesty, then those people who came here illegally would have the current laws that they broke, with the current punishments, enforced. If you change the rules after they have been broken and say, okay now we really mean it, then you are giving some form of amnesty. This leads me to my next point…

4. If this is the best the Congress and the White House can come up with because of political realities, then say so and admit that you are giving some form of amnesty. The majority of Americans do not want families split apart and do not believe that we can capture 12 million illegal aliens. Where conservatives become extremely angry is when you try to tell us that it isn’t amnesty when it clearly is. And no clever defintion from White House Press Secretary Tony Snow is going to change that! Mr. Snow said on the Rush Limbaugh Show during an interview conducted May 15, 2007: “The 1986 bill, Simpson-Mazzoli signed by President Reagan, did have amnesty. What’s amnesty? Amnesty is a way of saying, “We don’t care if you broke the law. We scrub your record clean. All is forgotten,” as opposed to what we’re talking about, which is you gotta admit you broke the law; you’ve gotta pay a fine. It is not a wrist slap. It’s a felony level punishment. You do not get an automatic path to citizenship. Instead, what you have to do is, after you’ve acknowledged you’ve broken the law, after you’ve paid a debt to society, then you go to the back of the line. If you break the law, you’re out of the line.” Again Mr. Snow, you’re changing the rules for those who have already violated the existing rules.

The proposal I want to set before you is the one presented by the Vernon K. Kreble Foundation and it is titled, Two Paths to Safety, and it is in my mind the best solution presented yet. It is a long read but it reads fast and you will find it fascinating. The strength of the proposal is in allowing the private sector run the guest worker program. I hope you will take the time to read it and then call your national legislators to have them at least investigate this proposal.

IS IT MORNING ALREADY???!!!! Oh, sorry for shouting. You ever had that panicked feeling waking up from a nap and think you’re late for work? Okay, so it wasn’t that bad, and I somehow came up with 3 1/2 pages of notes on the second GOP debate. It is amazing how good the moderators can be when they are actual journalists, as opposed to a former Democratic political hack and an average sportscaster who thought he was going to be the next Jay Leno who now thinks he is going to be the next Dan Rather (sorry Dan, not even you deserve to be compared with Keith Oblerman). The questions were very tough and actually had nothing to do with the Democrats and everything to do with actual issues interesting to conservatives.

I’m still underwhelmed by the whole crop of “country club candidates” as was aptly described by Chris Wallace. Okay, I know you want to know how I scored it, so I will actually rank them by how I saw their performance, going best to worst. I actually scored them on a scale of 1 to 10 (10 being the highest). My scoring system was based on my being an evangelical looking at all the candidates from a biblical perspective (Hey, the name of the blog is Salt and Light!). I looked at the substance of their answers, their delivery, their confidence, and coherence.

I added up each score I gave to each response from the candidate and then divided it by the number of their responses (number in parenthesis behind name). Yeah, it may not be scientific, so go get your own blog. Sorry, I’m tired. Anyway, there will be some surprises (I was after I did the tallying) and a few big jumps and some major slippage by some of the candidates.

Rep. Duncan Hunter (7): He came in third in my last debate ranking and I found this overall performance very strong. His first answer on defense was his standard answer but he is correct about the deployment of the Iraqi Army. This works and is working right now as is attested to by my son Sergeant Eddie Jeffers. Very strong on his answer about China and our trade imbalance with them. Also strong on why immigration is straining social programs and how to fix them. Address security problems with border first and then deal with internal problems. Outstanding response to the scenario given by Britt Hume (best journalist in the business). Won’t become President but gets my vote for SecDef in the Thomspon/Huckabee administration. (What? NOOO, Fred not Tommy!)

Rep. Tom Tancredo (6.8): A huge jump, up from ninth last debate to second! Wow, both California Congressman; it’s heart-warming to know that there are still strong conservatives in my native state (I’m still not moving back!). Response on defense is what is already happening in Iraq, so nothing earth shattering there. Good substance on deficit question but delivery was choppy; this cost a full point and the #1 ranking. Obviously very strong on immigration and I loved his comments on the other GOP candidates conversions needing to be on the road to Damascus instead of the road to Des Moines. Great response on global warming and strong but kind rebuttal of Rep. Ron Paul’s assertion about 9/11 attacks. What leaped him up almost to the top is the grand slam he hit in his response to the scenario attack.

Gov. Mitt Romney (6.57): Probably overall the best performance as far as being above average across the board with very few surprises. He kind of stumbled on his defense answer, and gave an excellent response on the economy. His one faux pas was his weak answer on why he should be considered a conservative and I have a perfectly good explanation: he’s a flip-flopper and Chris Wallace called him on it. (Hey, where’s the other Chris asking me about Hillary?) I think he handled himself very well on the abortion issue and he almost comes off as convincing, but he’s not there yet. His answer on immigration was good and he hit a home run with his answer on the scenario attack. I think his best answer because it was new was his answer for why there is not as many minority candidates running for president and he deftly connected the “civil rights” issue with poor education in the inner cities. Regardless of his performance at the debates, his past record and the Mormon issue may very well be too big a hurdle to leap over.

Sen. Sam Brownback (6.4): Completely blew the question about his support for implementing the Iraq Study Group findings; very weak - this cost him. His answer to the gas prices was very strong; more supply through domestic exploration. I don’t remember which question he was responding to, but he was clearly nervous and uncomfortable and he squinted his eyes and made a silly grin that looked as though he was passing something unpleasant. After that episode he scored a perfect 10 on his answer for abortion. That is why evangelicals will not compromise on abortion…well done Sam! I cheered when he answered the scenario attack question as this being about American lives and not public opinion.

Gov. Mike Huckabee (6): My personal favorite of the declared candidates, but I’m just not convinced that he’s ready for the presidency. Before the debates I was in favor of him running against Mark Pryor for Senate, but I think 8 years as Vice-President under President Fred Thompson (or only 4 if Fred passes the baton) would assure Huckabee as President in 2016; he’ll still be young enough. His weak link is clearly in foreign policy and he doesn’t exude a lot of confidence when he speaks on the issue. Obviously his support of the Fair Tax is very popular with conservatives and his castigation of Congress’ spending habits and equating it with John Edwards’ spending habits on haircuts was hilarious! Nevertheless I’m just not feeling the love for him as much as I was in the recent past.

Rudy Giuliani (5.71): Pretty much steady as he goes; strong answer on defense, good viewpoints on economy but did not directly address criticisms on economic record as mayor. I don’t remember which question Chris Wallace asked Rudy, but he wouldn’t answer the question and Chris called him on it. Rudy looked real bad on this one. Abortion answer; Rudy just doesn’t get it. Immigration idea with tamper-proof ID card okay but the rest of the answer was pretty watered down. His finest moment that got the loudest applause was when Rudy punk-slapped Rep. Ron Paul’s assertion that America somehow instigated the 9/11 attacks. Rudy was clearly upset with the Congressman and asked Paul to retract his statement, which Paul did not do. Rudy was pretty solid on his support of enhanced interrogation techniques.

Gov. Tommy Thompson: Gov. Thompson actually improved this time around although there was a couple of his patented buffoonery answers. I will tell you that his plan for Iraq has quite a bit of merit with many soldiers. My son supports the Iraqis choosing whether the US stays or not. Eddie says that the Iraqis know exactly what it means if the US leaves and if they voted for it, Eddie would leave with a clear conscience and not feel as though it was a wasted effort. Gov. Thompson’s answer on what program he would cut was incoherent saying his own Health and Human Services Department had terrible waste, while he was the Secretary of HHS! When asked which actual program he would cut, he slipped into the imbecile mode and went straight down the drain. Now his answer on stem-cell research was pretty strong and had a lot of merit. I didn’t really get his saying “trust but verify” in the scenario attack answer he gave other than wanting to invoke the name of Ronald Reagan as though conservatives go into some hypnotic trance at the mention of our greatest president of all times.

Sen. John McCain (4.57): McCain should be thankful that Jim Gilmore and Ron Paul were in attendance tonight; they deflected some of what would have been an overall disastrous performance. Nothing new or spectacular on his canned message about the Iraq War. His answer on federal spending was downright embarrassing; he even used the same drunken sailor joke, admitted it in the middle of it, and then blew the punchline! YIKES! His explanation to some questioning his conservative values by saying that real leadership is reaching across the aisle and forming bipartisanship was unsettling. Conservativism wins everytime when pressed steadfastly by ideologues such as Reagan. He’s not going to win any conservative friends on his immigration answer (which Romney attacked very effectively), or his answer on US interrogation techniques, however noble it may seem. Again his overall performance was that of an old man (I know and I’m sorry but it’s true); I cannot imagine him debating Hillary, Obama, or even Edwards. He will look terrible up against any of those three.

Rep. Ron Paul (4.4): Biggest blunder of the night attributing the 9/11 attacks to US invovlement overseas. The old GOP stance of not going to foreign shores, and although a valid constitutional and founding framers argument, all that was pre-9/11. I’m not willing to vote for someone who cannot make that distinction. All of his answers, again while draped in a constitutionalist framework, it will not energize any significant part of the conservative bloc of the GOP. His strongest moment was outlining which programs he would cut; he is obviously well versed in government waste and overspending.

Gov. Jim Gilmore (4.2): A big time slip for Gilmore, the consistent conservative. Yes he is and he basically used the same talking points and just to make sure he didn’t miss any, he actually read from his notes! Man that was ugly! He was actually strong on his defense answer but he completely blundered the third question he fielded (I don’t remember who asked him what). By the end of the night I thought about having a doll made in his likeness and we could call it the Chatty Cathy Politician Talking Points Doll. He’s done in my book.

Clearly after tonight the field needs to voluntarily whittle itself down to no more than seven. And Senator Fred Thompson, if you truly love your country and want to rescue the GOP from itself, please announce before Memorial Day. I can’t take this much more and voters need something to get them excited.

Well, in about 70 minutes, the GOP debate (which started about 9 months too early) will begin. I know, me too! But nevertheless, we have to do this. I’ll be posting my analysis sometime after the debate (that’s if my wife wakes me up as promised) and here is the question I sent to FoxNews for Governor Mitt Romney:

“Governor Romney, you said in your 60 Minutes interview that you cannot think of anything more appalling than polygamy and although I would argue that abortion is more appalling, I would like to ask this question: There are an estimated 30,000 polygamists across the West who say they are following fundamental Mormon doctrine, and it has been well documented that a large majority of plural wives are on welfare. Many state officials in Utah say it would be easier to prosecute the mafia then it would be polygamists. As President, how would you address this issue?”

What do you think the chances are of that question getting asked?

I’ve been asked that many times…why are we (conservatives) losing? Many reasons! We don’t put our money where are mouth is unfortunately. We complain about the mainstream media and then when we get wonderful news alternatives such as the New Media Journal, we don’t financially support them. We complain that NPR gets federal funding and they have an obvious liberal slant, but when we get the answer to NPR in the form of The Right Balance, again we close up our wallets. And we wonder how an organization such as MoveON.org and the other Looney Left supporters have so much clout, we play lip service to the antidote to MoveON.org, TheVanguard.org.

If you’ve ever wondered about MoveON.org’s effectiveness and ability to organize, then read the article, “With New Clout, Antiwar Groups Push Democrats,” found in of all places the New York Times. These people are organized, well-financed, and staffed not with a bunch of tie-dyed T-Shirt wearing, dope-smoking, Grateful Dead listening anti-war hippies. These are lawyers and political consultants that know how Washington D.C. works.

If most of us would just set aside one month of our Starbucks allowance and just one night out to dinner and do this only once a year, we can support these great organizations. Please join me and thank you in advance.

Yesterday I sent Senator Harry Reid a copy of a video compiled by Frank Salvato of the New Media Journal titled, “The Blood on Your Hands.” It is powerful and riveting! In the package I included a copy of Eddie’s article, “Hope Rides Alone.” Now am I naive enough to believe it will sway Senator Reid’s stance on the war being lost? I only look stupid! Nevertheless, I want the Senate Majority Leader and the rest of the Democrats to know that we are watching their un-American actions.

And guess what? Americans are not the only ones watching the Democrats, but so are Al Qaeda, as evidenced by the latest video release from their #2 man, Dr. Ayman al-Zawahiri. In this video Zawahiri states that the Surrender Bill passed by Congressional Democrats (and a couple of turncoat Republicans to make it “bi-partisan”) is proof of American “frustration and failure.” You can read the complete transcript at Laura Mansfield’s website. Ms. Mansfield is a counter-terrorism expert and a frequent guest on Greg Allen’s The Right Balance.

So Democrats and select RINOs, how does it feel to know you are bringing aid and comfort to our enemy? Actually, maybe not comfort because in the video Zawahiri laments the fact that when we cut and run, “this bill will deprive us of the opportunity to destroy the American forces which we have caught in a historic trap.” I wonder (he said knowingly)…is there any difference between the word “trap” and “quagmire?” Not according to Thesarus.com; the two words are synonymous. So not only does Dr. Zawahiri agree with Senator Reid and Democrats that we have failed in Iraq, but that we are in a quagmire.

And lest we forget and fail to give credit where credit is due, we must recognize the relentless efforts of the mainstream media in selling the Iraq War to America as a quagmire. I have to believe that they must be giddy and shocked that America once again has fallen for the “Vietnam is a quagmire” template; but then again they were probably counting on it.

So a congratulatory round of applause goes out to the anti-war left, the mainstream media, the Democrats, Al Qaeda, and the majority of novacained-brained Americans who have built an unholy alliance to bring the defeat of America. I know, I know, we haven’t really lost yet and that was only deflected by the once-used (and plenty of ink left) veto pen of President Bush. Actually, the President used a pen provided to him by the father of one of our fallen heroes.

You know what would be wonderful for America? I mean it would be as though the Hand of God had actually returned to our country and political and moral clarity once more prevailed and the fog of political correctness had been divinely lifted…if Democrats, the antiwar left, the MSM, and newly awakened Americans saw this Zawahiri video and were ashamed. Imagine their being ashamed for the role they played at emboldening our enemy and destroying the morale of our troops? Imagine if they see this as Frank Salvato so brilliantly portrays it as blood on their hands? It is not too late for us to turn the corner on this war. It is not too late for this country, at least the strong and no longer silent majority to stand up and resoundly drub congressional Democrats and the MSM for the role they have played in this.

Yeah, I know…but I serve a God who is still on His throne and is just waiting for America to call Him back into their lives. I love this country too much to give up. So who’s with me?

(Dave will be appearing Monday morning on Greg Allen’s show The Right Balance at 9:50 CST)

Just finished watching the GOP debates and one thing that really stuck out was all the Reagan wannabes in the Reagan Library. Here’s why everyone of them are Reagan wannabes; with the exception of maybe Governor Mike Huckabee and Congressman Ron Paul, all on the stage are first and foremost politicians. What made Reagan so effective is he was an ideologue. Many of the candidates commented on how Reagan spoke on principles and how he was an optimist; that is because President Reagan believed in the ideal of America. He didn’t use “It’s Morning in America Again,” or “A City on a Hill” for the purpose of a soundbite; he believed and lived those ideals.

I’m going to comment on each candidate’s performance by ranking them on how well they did, not on who I liked the best. Also, as an evangelical (who wrote about evangelicals and their stances), I will comment on how I think they came across to most evangelicals. Understand that I will be taking the “traditionalist” evangelical approach, based on a biblical worldview.

Gov. Mitt Romney: Romney was clearly the best speaker on the stage tonight. He never got flustered and only occasionally appeared to be using talking points. He was engaging, humorous, and came across as very approachable. I have a feeling that he made a lot of inroads with the evangelical community. He will not, however, be able to overcome the “Mormon Factor” with many evangelicals, including me. Why? See what Bro Dennis spoke of in the Pastor’s Perspective. Gov. Romney did a very good job clarifying his position on hunting down Osama Bin Laden; he came across as believable.

Gov. Mike Huckabee: In my book the strongest candidate from an evangelical standpoint. His strong anti-abortion position, his believable desire to have an ethical government, his very candid criticism of Bush’s firing of Rumsfeld (it came too late), were all strong positions. He made a lot of inroads with the middle class on his criticisms about jobs going overseas while CEO’s take multi-million dollar bonuses. My one criticism is that most of the time he was facing Chris Matthews while the audience and the camera were only getting a side view. His handlers need to fix that real fast. I’m a huge fan of his and that annoyed me so I’m sure many more were put off by it. Overall he did real well.

Rep. Duncan Hunter: I’m very familiar with Rep. Hunter because being an original Californian, I follow California politicians fairly close. I would say he was the big surprise of the night. A couple of times he came off as trying to press his talking points in, but overall his answers were quite succinct and gave the viewer a good look at his positions on the issues. He is very strong on national defense, including immigration. He’d be a good choice for VP. His comments on Iraq were spot-on!

Sen. Sam Brownback: Sen. Brownback also came across very strong on life issues, but his viewpoint on Iraq will not win a lot of votes. He, along with some of the other candidates, kept saying of what they would have Iraq do to cure their problems. Iraq is a sovereign, albeit shaky nation, and there is no civil war, 15 of the 18 provinces are completely stable, so I was unimpressed with Brownback’s recipe for success in Iraq. Nevertheless, Brownback will be pleasing to many evangelicals.

Rudy Giuliani: America’s Mayor places fifth by default because the remaining candidates did so poorly, with the exception of Ron Paul (he’s next). Now overall Mayor Giuliani did okay, but the more Rudy talks about abortion, the deeper he digs a hole with evangelicals. He’s banking on his candor with winning people over; that’s what is hurting him with the evangelical crowd. He is a double-minded man on an absolutely defining issue for the evangelical community. He is obviously strong on defense and he won many a conservative over with his praise of President Bush’s handing of the global war on terror. For me personally, I question the man’s character for the shady dealings he’s had with Bernie Kerik, the despicable way he publicly treated his second wife, and of course the abortion issue. Where he lost me forever tonight was when he said one party is not better than the other; well sir, I differ with you on that. Your centrist approach is what lost the GOP the 2006 election, regardless of what John McCain wants to believe.

Rep. Ron Paul: The best line of the night was when asked if it would be a good idea to have Bill Clinton back in the White House, Rep. Paul said since he voted to impeach Clinton it would obviously be a bad idea. Paul eschewed a predictable libertarian stance and his foreign policy outlook will hurt him with evangelicals. It is the evangelical community that pushed the likes of Sen. Brownback to pass legislation about the Sudan and AIDS in Africa. Evangelicals are not going to embrace an isolationist policy. Overall though he also was a surprise of the night.

Gov. Jim Gilmore: Gilmore definitely came across as competent and his record as Governor of Virginia is a good one, and I’m sure he scored a few points with being a “consistent conservative,” but in the end that will not carry the day. He should have used this opportunity to let people get to know him a little better. When he spoke extemporaneously he came across more personable, but every time he went back to his “consistent conservative” mantra, I shut him down. His best moment was his overall commentary on the Middle East problem, especially wanting to bring the American people forward to go the long haul on this global war on terror.

Sen. John McCain: were it not for Tancredo being a one issue candidate and Gov. Thompson’s overall buffoonery, McCain would have been dead last. His overall performance in a word was: horrible. It was painfully obvious that he was not comfortable getting off his talking points and when he did talk tough, even though it was believable, it was like your grandpa talking about how in the day he would have done this and that. Now he was strong on his comments about winning in Iraq and castigating the Democrats, but he still sounded shaky. Sen. McCain talked about activist judges yet he backstabbed then Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist by heading up the Gang of 14 removing the “nuclear option” to end judicial filibusters. His stance on embryonic stem cell research is a dead-ender with evangelicals. I was very underwhelmed by the Senator’s performance.

Rep. Tom Tancredo: Tancredo’s strong stance on the immigration issue has endeared him to conservatives, but that is all he has. The one chance he had to talk on foreign policy, coming to the aid of Israel, while his overall message was spot-on and will win friends with evangelicals, his delivery made it obvious that he’d rather talk about immigration.

Gov. Tommy Thompson: my pastor told me that everything I write should be sound, sacred, and sensible (man, this is going to be tough). Gov. Thompson, never mind his neglible oratory skills, was quite proud of his record in Wisconsin and I give him credit for the welfare reform he brought. What he failed to mention was his time as a Bush cabinet member; anyone remember that? Gov. Thompson was once HHS Secretary and let’s just say he didn’t leave on the best of terms. Debbie Schlussel explained it on her blog in a way I can’t (well I could, but she already did and I promised my pastor).

Well, there you have it. It’s hard for me to believe that I just spent an hour commenting on presidential candidates for an election that is 18 months away! (Time to go watch the end of the Warriors-Mavs game)

Another parable He put forth to them, saying: “The kingdom of heaven is like a man who sowed good seed in his field; but while men slept, his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat and went his way. But when the grain had sprouted and produced a crop, then the tares also appeared. So the servants of the owner came and said to him, ‘Sir, did you not sow good seed in your field? How then does it have tares?’ He said to them, ‘An enemy has done this.’ The servants said to him, ‘Do you want us then to go and gather them up?’ But he said, ‘No, lest while you gather up the tares you also uproot the wheat with them. Let both grow together until the harvest, and at the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, “First gather together the tares and bind them in bundles to burn them, but gather the wheat into my barn.” (Matthew 13:24-30)

This parable taught by Jesus was referring to evil living alongside God’s people in the world. When asked if the tares should be pulled from growing along with the wheat, Jesus taught that they would be harvested at the end to prevent damaging the good crop. The teaching answers why evil is allowed to prevail among good.

Before anyone gets their hackles up, I am not insinuating that the objects of my article are evil. In fact, I am going to approach the tares in a different way. Instead of representing evil, the tares in my article represent those presidential candidates who profess to be Christians but their words and actions reveal otherwise. And in the heated presidential race, I do not propose to wait to remove the tares from the wheat. These tares need to be removed now, before they get on the ballot in November 2008…

Go to Turning up the Tares to read the complete column.