Leadership
The Iowa Caucuses and Economic Freedom
Over the past forty-five years I’ve given thousands of messages in various parts of the world–many of them focused on the theme of freedom in Christ and how it applies to nations.
But, I’ve only written one song during my lifetime–never published–but often in my heart when I sit down at a piano to plunk on the keys.
The name of the song is “Let the Lamp of Freedom Shine.”
After the Iowa caucuses and a recent economic report, that song is once again burning in my heart.
First, let me share a few thoughts about freedom. They contain three important ideas:
1. Freedom is a goal or END in life.
In an individual, it is the truth that sets a person free (John 8:32)–the heart of the salvation message. God wants all human beings to be free from the penalty, power and presence of sin. Only Jesus, the Savior, can accomplish those things in a human heart.
It’s also true that in nations, the degree of civil liberty is determined by the godliness found in the people and their laws. The more God-fearing and Christ-honoring a nation is, the greater degree of true freedom it will enjoy.
Why? Because freedom is not the license to do what you want. It’s the wisdom to do what you ought. It comes through trusting God’s Word, Christ’s salvation, and the power of the Holy Spirit.
Good people produce good laws = freedom in society. Thus liberty is a cherished goal of both individuals and nations.
2. Freedom is also a MEANS to an end.
Liberty is a means to both meaningful relationships and also to fruitful ministry. God liberates people to restore intimate relationship with Himself and fruitfulness in their service. Free people can love God and serve others.
In nations, the free-er a people are, the more successful they will be in helping protect other nations, provide finances and humanitarian aid, and serve the purposes of world evangelization.
Example: America in the 20th century used her freedom to defeat the Nazis and Japanese, rebuild Europe and be the first to help with human disasters around the world, and sent the most missionaries into other nations.
Another example: A non-free China, with three times as many people as the US, did not help the world in any of these instances. They were hindered from being a blessing to other nations.
Free individuals and nations can truly bless others.
3. Freedom is costly to achieve and maintain.
Benjamin Franklin wisely told an older woman after the US Constitution was ratified: “You have a republic, Madame, if you can keep it.”
Franklin and other founding leaders knew that freedom required character and commitment to achieve and maintain it. As Thomas Jefferson declared, “The price of liberty is eternal vigilance.” In other words, liberty needs to be fought for in human lives and national laws in every generation.
Here is Samuel Adams prophetic warning in 1779:
“A general decay of principles and manners will more surely overthrow the liberties of America than the whole force of the common enemy. While the people are virtuous, they cannot be subdued, but once they lose their virtue, they will be ready to surrender their liberties to the first external or internal invader…If virtue and knowledge are highly valued among the people, they will never be enslaved. This will be their security.”
History shows that godly nations have the tendency, over time, to allow sin to eat away at their foundations, and in so doing, take away their freedoms.
That is America’s problem in the 21st century. By abandoning God and the virtuous character that only He can create, we are losing our liberty.
Each year The Heritage Foundation and Wall Street Journal survey the economic freedom of nations around the world. Economies aren’t everything, but are often an indicator of the good principles of a given society. For many years, the United States of America was the free-est nation in the world because of the godliness of our people and laws.
Not any more.
Ed Feulner, Heritage Foundation’s founder explains:
“The 2016 Index shows that the United States’ global ranking is No. 11, with a score of 75.4 (on a 0-100 scale, with 100 being the freest).”
“Others might envy being No. 11 on a list of 178 countries, but we tend to hold ourselves to a higher standard. We’re trailing Hong Kong, Singapore, New Zealand, Switzerland, Australia, Canada, Chile, Ireland, Estonia and the United Kingdom. We’re not even the freest economy in North America.”
That’s an amazing fall from freedom. American economic liberty behind Estonia and Chile, and even second on our own continent to Canada?
Feulner continues:
“As recently as 2008, the United States ranked seventh worldwide, had a score of 81, and was listed as a ‘free’ economy (a score of at least 80). Today, its score of 75.4 — which matches its lowest score ever — means it’s ‘mostly free,’ the Index’s second-tier economic freedom category.”
The United States of America, “mostly free?” Land of the free and home of the brave?
On the economic front, Feulner lays out our downward spiral:
• Rule of law: Property rights are guaranteed and the judiciary functions independently and predictably. But the protection of these rights has been uneven. Polls show that public trust in government is at the lowest it has been in a decade.
• Government size: The top individual income tax rate is 39.6 percent. The top corporate tax rate is among the world’s highest: 35 percent. Total government spending amounts to about 39 percent of gross domestic product. That’s $29,867 per household. The national debt clocks in at a staggering $135,000 per taxpaying family.
• Regulatory efficiency: The regulatory burden continues to increase. More than 180 new major federal regulations have been imposed on business operations since early 2009 with estimated annual costs of nearly $80 billion.
• Open markets: The average tariff rate is 1.5 percent. High tariffs increase the price of clothing, sugar imports are restricted, and foreign investment in some sectors is capped.
Heritage ends its analysis with this question and mandate:
“‘So is the United States destined to continue this slow decline? No. We can change course. Restoring economic freedom is prerequisite to revitalizing and brightening America’s future,’ writes index editor Anthony Kim. ‘2016 is the year to reaffirm the principles of limited government, free enterprise, and rule of law so that we can reconstitute an America where freedom, opportunity, and prosperity flourish.’
Take three minutes of your day and watch Heritage Foundation’s powerful summary of the 2016 Economic Freedom Index. Here it is.
Which brings us to Iowa–the opening dash in the race for the US presidency. Many people believe that this election could determine global history for the next one hundred years or more. That’s because if America does not turn back to freedom in 2016, we could be headed off a financial and societal cliff that will engulf the world in chaos.
I know that’s been said about other US elections. But it’s never been truer than today.
In the United States, the Democrat Party is leading us toward that cliff. Their progressive agenda is fighting for a secular America, devoid of God and biblical morality, and dependent upon a social welfare state. We have fallen from seventh in economic freedom to eleventh under their watch.
The Democrat presidential candidates consist of a disheveled 74 year old socialist (whose economic approach is one step from communism) and a 68 year old former Secretary of State who was responsible for four deaths in Benghazi, Libya–then lied about it. She also kept her government e-mails on a private server which may have comprised American security and could bring an indictment.
In the Iowa caucuses, 99% of Democrats voted for two white senior citizens. Guess it’s not really a party of inclusion and diversity at the present time.
On the Republican side, Texas Senator Ted Cruz used a strong ground game, a national base of support and principled leadership to pull off a stunning victory over real estate mogul Donald Trump. Ted Cruz is an articulate evangelical Christian. His wife is the daughter of career Christian missionaries.
He’s also Hispanic and in his mid forties (and not a Canadian citizen).
Marco Rubio, the freshman Tea Party senator from Florida also beat expectations and came in a strong third in Iowa. He is telegenic, likeable, with a strong message of restoring the American Dream (which is liberty). Marco Rubio is also Latino, and a humble and devout Catholic.
He, too is in his forties.
Ben Carson, an African-American renowned neurosurgeon came in fourth. He’s also a man of faith.
To summarize, in the Republican side of the Iowa caucuses, which registered a record turn-out of 186,000, sixty percent of the caucus-goers voted for minority candidates (Hispanic and African-American). Apparently the Republican Party is not just the club of old white males.
Funny how perceptions (or deceptions) can be totally false.
I believe that either Ted Cruz or Marco Rubio (or others!) could help lead an American renewal or renaissance. Leaders aren’t everything, but in biblical history they often were used by God to bring change. My wife leans toward Rubio. I lean toward Cruz.
Cruz-Rubio or Rubio-Cruz? Two young Hispanics pointing America back to godliness and freedom. Cruz signs all his letters and e-mails “For Liberty.” Rubio talks about freedom to pursue the American Dream.
Let the Lamp of Freedom Shine!
I’m going to be praying, serving, giving, voting and humming that song all year long in 2016.
The Fox Princess Knocks Out the King
I apologize if you’re getting tired of political commentary. But 2016 is a presidential election year in the United States and the stakes have never been higher.
For better or for worse, America is the leading nation in the world economically, militarily, and spiritually. We are also a nation in agonizing decline.
But three times in American history, God has brought revival to this nation to renew the culture and bless the world. I’m praying for another one, and for godly political leadership to arise from it.
Enter Megyn Kelly and Donald Trump.
This week the Fox princess knocked out the king.
For those not familiar, let me introduce you to Megyn Kelly, a rising-star on the Fox News Channel. Fox News is the most watched cable station in the United States. It was started by Roger Ailes nearly twenty years ago as an alternative to the liberal mainstream media in the US.
Fox’s oft-repeated goal is to be “fair and balanced”–bringing healthy debate from all sides of the political spectrum (while supporting traditional or Judeo-Christian values).
I’ll never forget turning on Fox years ago and watching Michael W. Smith sing an entire song live about the supremacy of Jesus Christ on an evening news broadcast.
I’ve been committed to watching ever since.
Megyn Kelly is a young, vivacious news anchor who hosts “The Kelly File” every weekday night at 9 pm (EST). Her juggernaut program is now second only to Bill O’Reilly’s “The Factor” as the most watched cable news program in the country.
Megyn Kelly is not my favorite broadcaster–though she’s smart, talented, has a great sense of humor, and seems to care about people and issues. She’s strong on three areas of public policy: the military (fighting evil in the world), the Constitution (she’s a lawyer who believes in Lex Rex) and free markets (the Good News applied to economics).
She is weaker on the moral or social issues of the day–where I take issue with her. She also comes across at times as what Rush Limbaugh calls a feminazi.
A bit too strong for me.
But overall, she’s a young, refreshing voice in the media who generally points her audience toward the truth.
She is, at the present time, the princess of Fox News.
As many of you know, in August of 2015 during the first Fox Republican debate, Megyn Kelly served as a moderator and asked a pointed question of GOP front runner Donald Trump.
Here it is:
“Mr. Trump, one of the things people love about you is you speak your mind and you don’t use a politician’s filter. However, that is not without its downsides, in particular, when it comes to women. You’ve called women you don’t like ‘fat pigs,’ ‘dogs,’ ‘slobs’ and ‘disgusting animals.’ …
Your Twitter account has several disparaging comments about women’s looks. You once told a contestant on ‘Celebrity Apprentice’ it would be a pretty picture to see her on her knees.
Does that sound to you like the temperament of a man we should elect as president, and how will you answer the charge from Hillary Clinton, who was likely to be the Democratic nominee, that you are part of the war on women?”
Strong question. Fair question (he had said all the above). She and the other moderators asked equally hard questions of the other candidates.
But Donald Trump took offense, denounced Megyn Kelly, and began a five month feud in which he added her to his childish hit list.
She didn’t back down.
Fast forward to tonight.
When this article is sent to your e-mail box, it will be one hour before the second Fox News debate–taking place four days before the Iowa caucuses when the first votes for the 2016 presidential election will be cast.
Megyn Kelly, Bret Baier, and Chris Wallace will again be moderating.
Donald Trump won’t be there.
He said this week he wouldn’t come because of his grudge against Megyn Kelly and Fox News (those aren’t his words, but that’s the reality). Up to this point, Donald Trump has soared as a political bully on the American stage who takes on the establishment, conventional wisdom, and every perceived grievance of the electorate.
But in this fight between little Megan Kelly and the The Donald, there’s only one winner:
The Fox Princess has knocked out the king.
He’s a no-show.
She will question the other candidates and Iowans won’t get to hear Donald Trump live in debate.
No matter how you spin it, I believe Trump’s “I’m taking-my-toys-and-going-home” tantrum is a mistake. It’s thin-skinned, petty, mean-spirited, narcissistic, and un-presidential. Will he do the same thing when he’s offended by Vladimir Putin or Ayatollah Khamanei?
Time will tell if other American voters agree with me.
I am constantly reminding myself that good governmental leadership boils down to character, competence and public policies.
- To what degree is the prospective leader’s character Christ-like, selfless and steady?
- Is he or she experienced in life, decision-making, running an operation and/or governing?
- Do the leader’s policies protect God-given rights and promote freedom and blessing?
On these three counts, Donald Trump is suspect on point one. He doesn’t appear to have the character and integrity that all great leaders possess.
So why is he soaring in the polls and even being endorsed by evangelical leaders ( e.g. Robert Jeffers and Jerry Falwell Jr.)?
Because the American people are looking for a king.
Some of Trump’s kingly traits are admirable. Tough. Strong. Non-PC. Anti-establishment.
But we better look deeper.
Many Americans are mesmerized by Donald Trump because of his king-like stature. We’re being betrayed by our current leaders, wimps on the world stage and robbing us economically. Many think Donald Trump is the only candidate who can turn the ship of state in the right direction.
But here’s the rub. Many are also smitten by three secular idols that make up the aura of Donald Trump: Money – he’s a billionaire. Sex – he’s married to a former super model. Entertainment – he’s a media star.
If Donald Trump were poor, married to the girl-next-door and camera-shy, do you think he’d be drawing thousands of people to his rallies? (Only Bernie Sanders fits that bill because he promises to give everybody free stuff).
The answer is no.
Yes, he has some populist qualities but he’s also the secular embodiment of greatness. And like the Israelites of old, be careful when you ask for a king. He may be a “head taller” than the rest, but his character weak.
You may get Saul when you really need David.
As to point three on the leadership test, no one has cautioned us better about voting for Donald Trump than Dr. Everett Piper, president of Oklahoma Wesleyan University.
Here are his recent words:
“Anyone who is pro-abortion is not on my side. Anyone who calls women “pigs,” “ugly,” “fat” and “pieces of a–” is not on my side. Anyone who mocks the handicapped is not on my side. Anyone who has argued the merits of a government takeover of banks, student loans, the auto industry and healthcare is not on my side.”
“Anyone who has been on the cover of Playboy and proud of it, who brags of his sexual history with multiple women and who owns strip clubs in his casinos is not on my side. Anyone who believes the government can wrest control of the definition of marriage from the church is not on my side. Anyone who ignores the separation of powers and boasts of making the executive branch even more imperial is not on my side.”
“I’m a conservative. I believe in conserving the dignity of life. I believe in conserving respect for women. I believe in conserving the Constitution. I believe in conserving private property, religious liberty and human freedom.”
“I believe in morality more than I do in money. I hold to principles more than I yearn for power. I trust my Creator more than I do human character. I’d like to think that all this, and more, makes me an informed and thoughtful citizen and voter. I’ve read, I’ve listened and I’ve studied and there is NOTHING, absolutely nothing, in this man’s track record that makes Donald Trump ‘on my side.'”
“I refuse to let my desire to win ‘trump’ my moral compass. I will not sell my soul or my university’s to a political process that values victory more than virtue.”
Call that another knock-down.
Then go watch the Fox princess and her cohorts grill the other contenders for president of the United States.
I’ve Made My Decision for Election 2016
A number of months ago I likened the 2016 presidential election to the National Football League.
I said that there were many good teams (sixteen Republican candidates) and I wanted to see them compete in the regular season (early debates and campaigning).
Then they would fight it out in the playoffs (early voting states) and then I would decide who I was going to support.
That was then and this is now.
I’ve already made my decision for 2016.
I’ve also made my football pick as the NFL playoffs begin. A number of good teams that will compete in the wild-card round, then the division playoffs, and the conference championships to earn a spot in the Super Bowl. I believe it’s possible that New England, Denver, Carolina, and Arizona could go all the way.
But you heard it here first: The Seattle Seahawks will win the 50th Superbowl on February 7, 2016.
Now back to the more important contest.
Leaders don’t ultimately determine the fate of nations, but they can influence either their revival and prosperity or their decline and malaise. Many examples stand out of how godly kings were instruments of renewal in early Israel and Judah (e.g. David, Solomon, Asa, Jehoshaphat, Hezekiah and Josiah). There are also examples of bad leadership that led to national demise (e.g. Rehoboam, Jereboam, Ahab and Manasseh).
However, it is the people that ultimately determine the fate of nations and civilizations. And since we don’t have many kings in our day (though some might disagree with me on that), but rather vote for whom we want to represent us in leadership positions, it’s even clearer that the folks are in the driver’s seat.
We elect bad leaders when we ourselves are uninformed and apathetic. We elect good leaders when we are wise and engaged. Modern-day elections are a “mirror” on the righteousness or immorality of the majority (or influential minority) of a nation.
In 2016, We, the People of the United States have a big decision to make for president of the United States.
I’ve voted for a number of Democrats in my lifetime and I wish I would have voted against Richard Nixon in 1972 when I first voted in a presidential election.
But this year that won’t be a consideration.
Hillary Clinton is the clear front-runner on the Democratic side, but I couldn’t vote for her due to reasons I will soon share. Bernie Sanders is a very passionate man, but he is energetic about the wrong things (getting Big Government to control more of our lives). His brand of socialism is usually the second-to-the-last-stop on the train wreck of national destruction–just above either communism or dictatorship.
America doesn’t need an increased bloating of statism.
Martin O’Malley is a decent former governor, but doesn’t have any traction. I predict that Clinton and Sanders will duke it out for a number of months and Clinton will emerge as the nominee–if she’s not indicted by the Justice Department for her personal e-mail charade.
Then, all bets are off on the Dems side.
So, I’m going to support and vote for a Republican. I don’t like some aspects of the Republican Party which, in many ways, has become “Progressive-Lite” in Washington D.C.
But this year there is no alternative. Historically, the Rs have stood for faith, family, God, life, freedom, smaller government, and fighting evil more than the other party.
George Washington was Republican in “heart”and our greatest president (“First in war, first in peace, and first in the hearts of his countrymen”–Henry Lee). Abraham Lincoln was second, and the very first Republican president who saved the Union and abolished slavery.
Another admirable Republican was Ronald Reagan whose economic and military policies ultimately brought down the Evil Empire (USSR) which enslaved half the world in the 20th century.
What made these men good presidents and what is my criteria for choosing our next leader?
The measuring stick has three clear lines on it:
1. Character–usually influenced by their faith in God. Are they men or women of faith, integrity, justice, compassion, fairness, humility and other godly characteristics? That’s my number one citeria because, in the end, right makes might as Lincoln famously said. Since righteousness exalts a nation (Proverbs 14:34) then righteous leaders are needed to renew it and guide it.
2. Competence. Does the prospective leader have a strong leadership resume and experience? Do they know how to lead and inspire people? Have they served admirably in either the private or public sector and do they have the skills to guide one of the largest nations on earth?
3. Policies are the final leg to the “Good Leadership Stool.” Will the new president’s ideas strengthen and encourage faith in God, promote strong marriages and families, ignite economic growth and opportunity, stand for life and justice, and protect the American people and bring blessings to other nations?
I also take into account factors which include campaign organization, elect ability, diversity, the need of the hour, and other considerations.
With that in mind, I’m enthusiastically supporting Ted Cruz in 2016.
Ted is a man of strong evangelical faith and consistent character. He has a tremendous resume as an attorney, Solicitor General of Texas, and US Senator who has uniquely fought the Washington establishment. He is a skilled orator and debater–maybe the best in the field as seen in the debates. And his policies are right down the line in favor of faith, family and freedom.
He is young, vibrant, would be our first Hispanic president, and has the best grassroots organization to win in the entire country.
Showing breadth of support, his campaign raised $47 million in 2015 which included nearly 700,000 small donors (we are one of them). Those donors cover 66% of all US zip codes.
Ted Cruz has state leadership teams–1,400 strong in membership–in Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, Nevada, Georgia, Alabama, Arkansas, North Carolina, New Jersey, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, Mississippi, Minnesota, Florida, Arizona, Michigan, and Washington. They’ve also announced state chairs in Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, Wyoming, Idaho, and California.
In the first four primary and caucus states–Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, and Nevada–the Cruz team has county chairmen in place in all 171 counties. And after the first four states, they have congressional district coordinators in place in each of the 163 congressional districts that comprise the 24 states that hold their primary or caucus before March 15th.
Additionally, the state teams have access to over 175,000 volunteers across the nation who have signed up to help make Ted Cruz the next president. That’s why Politico says: “Cruz has Trump and the rest of the field beat on organization.”
For that and the big three reasons, I’m voting for Ted Cruz.
If he’s able to become our next president, I’d like to see him put together a “Dream Team” of other leaders (such as Ronald Reagan did in 1980) to help bring a needed jolt of reformation to our government. How about these, or like appointments?
- Marco Rubio as his running mate–fellow Senator, Latino with a Catholic background and great vision and speaking skills.
- Donald Trump as Secretary of State (how would you like him negotiating with the ayatollahs?).
- Lindsey Graham as Secretary of Defense.
- Ben Carson as Surgeon General.
- Chris Christy as Attorney General.
- Rudy Guliani as head of Homeland Security.
- Carly Fiorina as Commerce Secretary or Technology Czar.
- Jeb Bush as Secretary of Energy.
- John Kasich as head of Health and Human Services.
- Mike Huckabee as Ambassador to Israel.
- John Bolton as UN Ambassador.
- Dana Perrino as Press Secretary.
- Franklin Graham as Counselor to the President.
- Paul Ryan continuing as Speaker of the House.
- Ron Paul serving as Federal Reserve Chairman.
- and Rand Paul taking over from his fellow Kentuckian as Senate Majority Leader.
I think you get the idea.
Of course both the Seahawks and Ted Cruz might not win. That’s okay. May the very best man or woman rise to the challenge.
But I’ve made my decision and encourage you to make yours.
Ted Cruz for US president in 2016.