General

The United States remains stuck in political gridlock. As I mentioned last week, this is actually better than just sailing off a fiscal cliff without the possibility of changing course. Why?

Because the essence of courage and patriotism is resisting wrong in all its forms.

However, we are stuck in this painful and embarrassing situation because President Obama and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid keep telling us they won’t negotiate with the other side.

But all good leaders negotiate. So why the tough stance?

It all boils down to the truth about lies.

It would be helpful to remind ourselves that there is a vast difference between the God of the Universe who is the epitome of truth (Psalm 108:4, John 14:6), and the god of this world–Satan–who “was a liar from the beginning and the father of lies” (John 8:44).

This is why most epic stories or films are built around the concept of good and evil, truth and falsehood. And most of us cheer and feel good when truth wins out. We were created with a desire to love and affirm truth and resist and reject error.

A society is the most civil, free, and prosperous when it embraces and lives out the truth about God, human beings, and their God-given rights and responsibilities. The genius of “America” is not found in our geography or natural resources, but in our personal, social and political commitment to “In God We Trust.”

This is another way of saying that we believe in truth–and we find that truth in God and His Word. No wonder, one of our national songs is the “Battle Hymn of the Republic” which exalts the fact that “His truth is marching on.”

We Americans believe in the goodness of truth-telling.

But there is a devil and he is very good at lying. The entire human race is fallen because he told our First Parents a lie, they believed it, and everything changed (you find that dramatic story in Genesis 3).

Thus, much of human history is the tug of war between God’s truth (redemptive) and Satan’s lies (destructive). The destiny of nations can hinge upon whether they believe the lies or seek to live out the truth.

Which brings us to the Affordable Care Act, aka Obamacare, and the current struggle between Congress and the Administration. What is becoming painfully clear is that the Affordable Care Act (ACA), once touted to bring freedom and blessing to America, is based on a number of lies.

Here are my Top Ten.

1. The Affordable Care Act will make health care “affordable” to all.  But as people like me get on the exchanges and try to find policies, we are realizing that ACA makes health insurance more expensive for the majority of Americans. This is a major reason why so few are signing up and the government is actually embarrassed to report the dearth of sign-ups to date.

2. You can keep our own doctor. That was a falsehood from the beginning. Millions are set to lose their own personal care–and that includes our family– which was booted from our former coverage and doctor because of the demands of ACA.

3. You can keep your present insurance if we like. Again, countless families and individuals are finding this untrue as the regulations of ACA put some insurance companies out of business, cause employers to drop employees, and force others out of their present plans.

4. ACA will save the average family $2500 a year. On the contrary, a recent Congressional Budget Office Report (CBO – non-partisan) clarified that ACA will raise the average family’s insurance premiums  nearly $7500–which makes this a $10,000 fib.

5. Government-led health care will cover all the uninsured. This number is usually estimated at 30 million. But, now the same CBO tells us that even with ACA, probably 30 million people will still be uninsured. So why are we giving the government control over one-sixth of the American economy for no change in coverage?

6. ACA will improve health services and options. The data so far indicates exactly the opposite–that the ACA will lead to a doctor shortage (due to controls and regulations on private practice), to health care rationizing (just like in other countires with government-entrenched health care), and even the “death panels” of Sarah Palin lore. The inefficiency of government and the restraints on private medicine will lead to people die needlessly.

7. The new health care law will cost 900 billion dollars. Do government programs EVER cost what they say in the beginning? The most recent estimate is that ACA will cost three times that much–at least. And why is that so? Because when the government runs or controls commerce, then competition and personal incentives which keep costs down, are lost.

8. “You can’t change the ACA because it’s the law of the land.” This is one of the current excuses of  proponents. But it’s wrong. Human laws change all the time. They come, they go. They’re implemented, they’re altered. Prohibition was a bad law. It was chucked. Slavery was evil. It was banished. And by the way–you can’t have it both ways. The other current law of the land is the debt ceiling–a long established law that goes back to 1917. The president now wants to “change it” (increase the debt). Out of one side of his mouth he says you can’t change ACA, but out of the other side he demands it. And here’s another inconsistency: the president has already changed seventeen different implemental aspects of ACA himself. And now he bellows that Congress CAN’T change others–like delaying the individual mandate for a year?

9. “It was approved by the Supreme Court.” Yes, but the Supremes make bad decisions just like all human beings. Think Dred Scott and slavery (Dred Scott vs. Sandford – 1857) and abortion on demand (Roe v. Wade – 1973). Dred Scott was repealed because it was a terrible verdict. Roe v. Wade will also be rescinded one day due to its evil nature and convoluted reasoning. The ACA decision–thanks to John Roberts–has been soundly castigated by other members of the Court and various legal scholars.

 10. ACA is not a tax. That’s how this onerous bill was sold to the Congress and nation. Unthinking people believed it. Then John Roberts said it really was a tax. Well, that’s debatable. But here’s something that’s not: ACA subverts the Commerce Clause by forcing Americans to buy a product they don’t want. And it penalizes them for not doing so (IRS-style).

This is a small listing of the lies involved in the ACA.  Should a wise society base a major change in their health care delivery on such widespread deception?

I say no–and believe we should fight with all our might.

Here’s another truthful word from Neil Cavuto. In a TV commentary on September 19, after President Obama publicly blamed Fox News for the unpopularity of his law, Cavuto responded:

“Mr. President, Fox News isn’t what’s making Americans sick about your healthcare law. Your healthcare law is.  And excuse this departure from form. It’s time we set some things straight.”

“Mr. President, we at Fox News are not the problem. I hate to break it to you, sir. You are. Your words are. Your promises are. We didn’t sell this healthcare law. Sir, you did.

“Remember this, President Barack Obama?: ‘If you like your doctor, you will be able to keep your doctor. Period.'”

“Mr. President, tell that to tens of thousands of retirees at IBM and Time Warner and dozens of others, who’ve been dumped from their coverage and told to find their own coverage. Fox News didn’t break that news to them, Mr. President. Their companies did.”

“Fox News didn’t push more of those firms to hire part-time workers. Your healthcare law did. Fox News didn’t incentivize fast food restaurants to scale back their benefits. Your healthcare law did. Fox News didn’t make doctors want to opt out. Your healthcare law did. Fox News didn’t make insurance premiums sky rocket. Your healthcare law did. Just like Fox News didn’t grant hundreds of exemptions to companies that needed them. You did. And Fox News didn’t delay one key provision after another, including online enrollment for those small business exchanges. You did.”

“Just like it wasn’t Fox News that said we had to pass this to see what was in this. You did. Or was that Nancy Pelosi? Sometimes I’m confused. But of this I am not. Fox News didn’t re-do basic math. Sir, you did. Fox News didn’t say you can cover 30 million more Americans and not see a hit in premiums. You did. Fox News didn’t say you could throw in those with pre-existing conditions and not have to pay for it. You did. Fox News didn’t all but say you could get something for nothing. You did. Fox News didn’t come back years later and say, oh yea, we did raise some taxes. You did.”

“Here’s where you are right about Fox News, however, Mr. President. We can do math. And did. You cannot. And did not. We said it, and proved it. You didn’t. And we’re all suffering for it. Take it from the numbers guy at Fox. Numbers don’t lie. The number of Americans working part-time are nervous. The number of retirees days away from being dumped on exchanges are anxious. The number of company bosses with any news to pass along on those exchanges, but still clueless. The number of doctors who want out. The number of congressmen now opting out. No, Mr. President, none of those numbers lie.”

“But with all due respect sir, I can only conclude you do know; I know, I know you hate us at Fox. But please take a look in a mirror, and fast. You think we’re the skunk at your picnic. But that doesn’t mean we’re the ones that stink. Because that smell isn’t coming from the folks reporting on your law. Mr. President, that smell is your law.”

Very well said–and completely true.

So why won’t progressives negotiate a repealing, defunding or delaying or modifying of the Affordable Care Act? Don’t they see the problems and dangers? Do they really want what’s best for America?

Maybe some do. Only God knows. But even if motives are sincere, the truth is that this government takeover of the American health care system is bad public policy. It’s about power not compassion and will lead to economic ruin.

It’s also a house of cards. Lies always are. And once you admit it, the house collapses.

That’s why the president does not want to negotiate.

This morning Senator Ted Cruz from Texas finished the fourth longest speech in US Senate history–over 21 hours–using a filibuster-like tactic to draw attention to the problems of Obamacare. Cruz, like a majority of Americans, wants the Affordable Care Act defunded and repealed.

Why? Because it is the most destructive entitlement program in the history of the Republic which will sink the American nation into the fiscal abyss, the shackles of tyranny (think IRS), and another recession (or Depression).

Whether you agree with Ted Cruz’ tactical strategy or not, I ask you to pray for him and many other national leaders.

Mikhail Gorbachev just might be an inspiration for you.

First of all, a few thoughts on Ted Cruz. He’s a new-generation political leader of Hispanic background that you need to watch coming years. Ted is principled, smart, articulate, courageous, and just might run for president in either 2016 or 2020.

If we want “good vision” in 2020 (pun intended) keep your eyes on Ted “of the Cross” (Cruz in Spanish). We desperately need someone like him who will tell us the truth and lead the American nation back to the freedoms of godly government where faith, morality, family values, limited government, economic liberty and peace through strength reign as bedrock principles–not just a forgotten past.

There are others like him on the horizon–legislators Mike Lee (UT) and Marco Rubio (FL) come to mind, and also many conservative governors (Susanna Martinez (NM), Bobby Jindal (LA), Nicki Haley (NC), Mitch Daniels (IN), John Kasich (OH) and Scott Walker (WI)–to name a few. They all seem to be rising in stature and influence.

I believe there is a prayer correlation to their success. Here’s the Scriptural backdrop:

“The first thing I want to to do is pray. Pray every way you know how, for everyone you know. Pray especially for rulers and their governments to rule well, so we can be quietly about our business of living simply, in humble contemplation. This is the way God wants us to live. He wants not only us but everyone saved” (1 Timothy 2:1,2 – The Message).

I think the first time I prayed for a government leader was in a church service. Whoever was up front  led the congregation in praying for our president and other leaders.

Some year later, I began to pray for political leaders in small groups where we discussed some of the issues of the day and then bowed our heads to pray for our mayor, governor, president, or leaders of other countries. The group dynamic helped me remember that public figures needed our prayers.

Then I helped coordinate a large national prayer meeting in Washington, D.C. in 1980. Much of that day was spent praying for godly leadership in America. Six months later, the Reagan Revolution swept into town with many secular leaders voted out of office, and numerous others were elected to lead America in a different direction. The day of President Reagan’s inauguration, the Iranian hostages were freed–also a fruit of prayer and other factors.

So for about twenty years, I prayed for political leaders primarily when I was in a group setting, either large or small.

But I rarely did it alone in my personal quiet times.

Then God exploded 2 Timothy 2:1,2 on my heart. It teaches that:

• Prayer is the first or most important thing we can do.
• We should pray for all people on earth (verse 1).
• We should pray for political leaders including heads of nations (verse 2)
• Because good government is essential to peace and tranquility,
• And civil government and their leaders contribute to all people coming to salvation.

What an amazing intercessory promise: praying for righteous leaders and good government has a huge bearing on world evangelization.

So for the past twenty years, I’ve not just prayed for national leaders when it was convenient in large and small group settings, but have brought it into the center of my own personal prayer life.

The YWAM Prayer Diary helped me. It contains a page where you can commit to praying for different items on each of the seven days of the week. Since God said “first of all” to pray for “everyone and leaders,” I chose to use of the the first days of the week to pray specifically for local, national and world political leaders.

I believe it is one of my most important practices today. Why?

Because God says so.

To encourage you to add this practice to your own personal prayer life, let me refer to the former dictator of the Soviet Union, Mikhail Gorbachev.

I saw an article a few years ago (that resurfaced this week), that reminded me that our prayers for the supreme leader of the USSR in the 70s and 80s did not go unanswered.

I started praying for Mr. Gorbachev to come to faith, and for God to use him for his purposes in the mid 1970s. In 1980, I led a team into the USSR. We spent an entire day fasting and praying for the freedom of the Soviet Union, for its people and its leaders.

Nine years later, the Iron Curtain fell and eventually half the world was liberated from the clutches of  atheistic communism. In the past thirty years, many people in China, the USSR, and other communist states have come to faith in Jesus Christ.

And Mikhail Gorbachev is crucial to that decisive historical change.

He was the architect of glasnost (openness) and perestroika (restructuring or reformation) of the Soviet communist empire. As a part of a long line of dictators that included Lenin, Stalin, Khrushchev, and other tyrants, Gorbachev was assumed to be a hard-line communist.

Then an article appeared in March 2008 that indicated the Mikhail Gorbachev might be a Christian.

The suspicion emerged after private citizen Gorbachev paid a surprise visit to pray at the tomb of St Francis of Assisi (in Italy). Accompanied by his daughter Irina, Mr Gorbachev spent half an hour on his knees in silent prayer at the tomb. His arrival in Assisi was described as “spiritual perestroika” by La Stampa, the Italian newspaper.

The recent Syrian use of chemical weapons and the American response to it are dominating the news this week–as they should.

I have rarely seen such tense debate on national television over what to do. It’s also rare to have such strange bed-fellows in the debate: Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid joining John McCain, Lindsey Graham and Bill O’Reilly as war hawks, and Dennis Cucinich, Frank Leahy, Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity representing the doves.

To be honest, as Charles Krauthammer recently admitted, I’ve gone back and forth on what is the right course of action. 

But today I had to vote in a national poll of Christians leaders.

I said no to an attack on Syria.

Here are my thoughts. I’d love to hear yours.

1. Bill O’Reilly believes that America’s reputation in the world is at stake in the Syria dilemma. We’re known in history as a noble nation that backs noble causes. In the last hundred years we’ve freed more people from tyranny than any nation in history. We can’t let the use of chemical weapons go unnoticed or we will unleash every crackpot tyrant in the world to kill their people and abuse their power. I agree with Bill on this general premise.

2. America is a unique nation that has advanced the cause of freedom around the world. We never did it perfectly–but better than anyone else. Our stature is based on our trust in God, belief in His Word and principles, in biblical freedom, justice and compassion, and the God-given rights of people. However, our corporate culture is dangerously in decline because of turning away from God–making us morally weak, economically enslaved, and internationally vulnerable. Our true power will never be our firepower–but our hearts, morals, ideals, compassion, hatred of evil and zeal for good–backed up by the greatest fighting force known to man.

3. Many say we should bomb Syria because chemical weapons were used to kill over three hundred people and injure one thousand more. That’s gruesome and barbaric. But a double standard or poor memory seems to exist. Saddam Hussein gassed five thousand Kurds in the 1988 and probably over 50,000 of his own people over two decades. Yet Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and many others opposed our involvement in Iraq. Why the duplicity? Why is it a “principle” now to oppose the use of weapons of mass destruction, but not to oppose it under Saddam? Principles should never be politicized–otherwise they are not principles, but simply partisan chicanery.

4. President Obama made numerous, consequential mistakes that have brought us to the present crisis. First, as Democrat Charley Rangel observed, it was “embarrassing” for a US president to draw a “red-line” over the issue. It only tempted our enemies to taunt us.  In truth,  that red-line was passed several times in the past six months–so why play our chips now, and not then?  Is there simply a bruised ego involved here that is the real motivation for authorizing a strike? Is that a good reason to lob bombs or start a war?

5. The president of the United States then indicated that a surgical strike was imminent. Two days later he took a forty-five minute walk and changed his mind. He told us the strike didn’t have to be imminent–it would be just as effective in days, weeks or months. Really? Can’t the Syrian government move its targets during that time into residential neighborhoods behind masses of human shields? And if we bomb the heck out of them, aren’t we more guilty of the loss of innocent human life? No wonder Pope Francis is calling the world to fast and pray on September 7 for peace in Syria..

6. The administration’s expressed strategy is not regime change in Syria–but “a shot across the bow,” i.e. to make a point or save face. Is that a good military calculation? We spend a a half a billion dollars lobbing Tomahawk Cruise missiles priced at 1.5 million dollars each into the Damascus neighborhoods to say Na-Na-Na-Na Na! to the Syrian dictator? Won’t he just laugh in our face and continue the civil war, emboldened that America doesn’t have the guts to fight a war to win? (Anybody remember Viet Nam?).

7. Let’s back up and look at the bigger picture. How has the current US government’s foreign policy helped to bring either freedom or stability to the Middle East? We got rid of Ghaddaffi in Libya (after he had laid down his arms thanks to “Peace Through Strength” under Ronald Reagan); in return we have our embassy ransacked, our ambassador killed, and a fearful rise of jihadist elements in Libya. In Egypt, we get behind the ouster of Hosni Mubarak, then support the Muslim Brotherhood who tried to bring a worse from of Islamic dictatorship to the nation; the people cast off Mohammed Morsi and now hate America for our stupidity. Now in Syria we say that we want to help depose the dictator, Bashar al-Assad; but if he is defeated, it’s likely that he will be replaced by the rising jihadist element in the Syrian opposition forces.

8. We seem to have our foreign policy backwards. In nations that have never experienced biblical liberty, “stabilizing dictators” are far better than Islamo-fascist ones. Let’s be honest. The Middle East and America’s strategic interest were far better off under Ghaddaffi, Mubarak, and Assad than under the emerging alternative. We are essentially helping Iran–the real terrorist linchpin in the region–to foment an Islamic caliphate in that part of the world.

9. Let’s talk about Iran–honestly. It’s the real human scourge in the Middle East. Iran is the seat of the world’s most radical jihadist government which is brazenly committed to annihilating Israel and spreading holy war to the ends of the earth. It is the supplier of arms for Hezbollah and Hamas. Syria is simply its client puppet in closer proximity to Palestine. And Iran is possibly one year away from having a nuclear bomb. I have a suggestion for Congress as they meet next week. If you want to authorize a war declaration or get behind a wise use of force against evil, then authorize the military might of the United States to join Israel in taking out Iran’s nuclear capabilities–then support the freedom movements that were once vibrant in Tehran. As Iran goes, so goes Syria and the rest of the Middle East.

10. As to chemical weapons being used in Syria, there is a disagreement as to who really used them. Our government tells us it was Bashar al-Assad who reigned them down on a Damascus neighborhood. But why would he do that with UN inspectors on the ground? He’s winning the civil war in his nation. Why would he be so foolish to turn world opinion against him?

There’s another theory out there that you might want to read here. In a thought-proving and well documented article, Israeli-American foreign affairs expert, Yossef Bodansky, lays out the case that it was the jihadist opposition that used chemical weapons to frame the Assad regime and draw America and the world into the trap of deposing Assad.

11. Here is the pertinent part of Bodansky’s research:

“There is a growing volume of new evidence from numerous sources in the Middle East — mostly affiliated with the Syrian opposition and its sponsors and supporters — which makes a very strong case, based on solid circumstantial evidence, that the August 21, 2013, chemical strike in the Damascus suburbs was indeed a pre-meditated provocation by the Syrian opposition. The extent of US foreknowledge of this provocation needs further investigation because available data puts the “horror” of the Barack Obama White House in a different and disturbing light.”

“On August 13-14, 2013, Western-sponsored opposition forces in Turkey started advance preparations for a major and irregular military surge. Initial meetings between senior opposition military commanders and representatives of Qatari, Turkish, and US Intelligence [“Mukhabarat Amriki”] took place at the converted Turkish military garrison in Antakya, Hatay Province, used as the command center and headquarters of the Free Syrian Army (FSA) and their foreign sponsors. Very senior opposition commanders who had arrived from Istanbul briefed the regional commanders of an imminent escalation in the fighting due to “a war-changing development” which would, in turn, lead to a US-led bombing of Syria.”

“Several Syrian leaders, many of whom are not Bashar al-Assad supporters and are even his sworn enemies, are now convinced that the Syrian opposition is responsible for the August 21, 2013, chemical attack in the Damascus area in order to provoke the US and the allies into bombing Assad’s Syria. Most explicit and eloquent is Saleh Muslim, the head of the Kurdish Democratic Union Party (PYD) which has been fighting the Syrian Government. Muslim doubts Assad would have used chemical weapons when he was winning the civil war.”

“’The regime in Syria … has chemical weapons, but they wouldn’t use them around Damascus, five km from the [UN] committee which is investigating chemical weapons. Of course they are not so stupid as to do so,’” Muslim told Reuters on August 27, 2013. He believes the attack was ‘aimed at framing Assad and provoking an international reaction.’”

12. So things may not be what they seem. This same ploy was used in 1995 to draw America into bombing Serbia (under Bill Clinton). The winners of that charade? The Muslim forces in the region. Is it possible that a similar deception is taking place in Syria to draw the US to depose Assad which will lead to either chaos or Islamicist supremacy in another Muslim nation? 

Those are my dozen thoughts. I’d like to hear yours.

Here are some suggestions:

• We should not go to war in Syria, especially with a symbolic surgical strike. The US Congress should say no to presidential blunder and bluster. Syria is not Iraq. Bashar al-Assad is not Saddam Hussein. As Ret. Colonel Ralph Peters opines, “we should let both our enemies kill off themselves.”
• We should lead the humanitarian assistance to those suffering in the region. We should support the real forces of freedom.
• We should do everything in our power to stand by Israel and not trigger a war in the Middle East that builds a ring of terrorism around the Hebrew nation.
• Any military actions should be aimed, short-term and long term, at liberating Iran. Cut off the head of the snake and the body and tail will die.
• We should immediately approve the Keystone Pipeline and act with urgency to create energy independence in the United States. A disastrous entanglement in the Middle East will spike the cost of gasoline and plunge the world into global recession.

And we should join with Pope Francis and the Catholic Church in praying for God’s gracious intervention among the suffering in the region. We should also join with Intercessors for America in 21 days of fasting in prayer that begins on September 11.

Here is my prayer:

Father in Heaven–we desperately need your wisdom and clarity to respond to these incredible events taking place in the Middle East. Protect and inspire your people to bring the light of Jesus Christ into every home and neighborhood. Raise up godly leaders, both here and abroad who share your interests of life, liberty, and justice on earth. May your light and love triumph over the forces of darkness coming against the world. In the Name and through the power of Jesus, the Messiah. Amen.