Politics
Reviving America: The Way of the Cruz
I don’t think I need to convince anybody that American culture and politics are nearing life support at this present time.
On the domestic front, we continue to disintegrate morally as a nation. In foreign policy, the USA is more disappointing to its allies and weak in the eyes of its enemies than possibly any point in our 240 year history.
Which brings us to Election 2016–a turning point for the US and the world.
Don’t assume a wrong idea about the title above. It’s a play on words.
What will bring about the reviving of America?
One of the drawbacks to learning the Spanish language through secular institutions is that they don’t teach you religious words. I took Spanish for five years in junior high and high school. Then, as a Christian missionary, I began traveling to Central and South America and tried to use the language I’d learned.
I did pretty well on the basics. But I’d never been taught important words like Jesus Christ (Jesus Cristo), the Holy Spirit (Espiritu Santo), repentance (arrepentimiento) sin (pecado) and faith (fe). (I should have known “fe” because it’s part of the name of the capital city of New Mexico: Santa Fe =Holy Faith).
There was another important word I didn’t know that we currently associate with a certain candidate for president of the United States.
His name is Ted Cruz. Both he and his surname are Hispanic. You might be able to guess the meaning of his name just by looking at it.
Cruz means “Cross.” It’s a reference to the wooden Cross that Jesus Christ died upon to save us from our sins.
So the current senator from Texas is Ted Cross, or “Ted of the Cross.”
I want to apply that meaning in an unusual way to the presidential election this week.
If you are following the political scene, watching the debates, and reading various media articles, you are undoubtedly aware that businessman Donald Trump is in the driver’s seat for securing the Republican nomination for president.
The Republican field started with seventeen qualified candidates–what many call the “deepest bench” ever of good men and women who could serve as POTUS. Thirteen of that group never gained traction and are sitting on the sidelines.
Only four remain.
During the initial winnowing, Trump soared based on his business/wealth/entertainment stature as an outsider who listened to the anger of the Republican (and American) electorate. He refreshingly decried the political establishment. He rightly railed against open borders, the lobbyist gravy train, declining religious freedom, and the tyranny of political correctness.
His blunt style and powerful personality quickly won over about a third of the Republican primary voters, including many Christians and evangelical leaders.
In the beginning, I, too, was fascinated by him.
But over time it became apparent that 1) Donald Trump knew very little about faith in Christ, 2) His character was extremely childish and offensive, 3) His “conservative principles” were, at the least, suspect, 4) Some of his businesses practices were dubious, and 4) Most people liked him because he was a king-like figure who would channel their frustration with the DC elite.
To read more about Trump’s king-like appeal, I recommend “Christians Demand a King” by Bill Blankshaen.
If Donald Trump gets the Republican nomination or becomes president of the United States, there will be much more to say on this subject.
But back to the four-way race.
Here’s where the Republican delegate count stands today: Trump – 458. Cruz – 359, Rubio – 151, and Kasich – 54. A candidate needs 1237 to win.
So far, Donald Trump has won 14 states, Ted Cruz beat him in six states and Marco Rubio, the senator from Florida, captured one state. If you are into the details, Trump has done the best in states with open primaries or caucuses where independents and dis-enfranchised Democrats can vote on the Republican side. Cruz has prevailed in most of the closed primaries.
Donald Trump seems to have a “high floor” or base of support that comes in at about 35%. In a four way race, this strong nucleus has propelled him to a dozen victories. In those races, the other three candidates have split up the remaining votes with Ted Cruz usually taking second as well as winning the six closed primaries.
Thus, there’s been a consistent 65% vote against Trump. Analysts call this his “low ceiling.” Most people believe in a two-way race, Donald Trump would lose–especially to Ted Cruz–who’s beaten him six times.
Which brings us to the pivotal moment in the race for president.
On Tuesday, voters in Florida (99 delegates) and Ohio (66) and a few other states will cast votes. Ohio and Florida are winner take all. Many people believe that if Donald Trump wins them both (165 delegates) then he will be well on his way to winning the Republican nomination outright or getting the delegates needed to deny him at the Cleveland convention.
I believe that Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, and John Kasich would all make good presidents who could point America in the right direction. Ted Cruz is my first choice. Rush Limbaugh says that Cruz is “the closest candidate to Ronald Reagan that we’ve seen in our lifetime.”
I agree.
Rubio is also a young, rising star. He’s a man of faith, good character, and excellent policies. He confessed this week that he shouldn’t have used Trump-like tactics to try and topple the front runner.
Humility is refreshing.
John Kasich has the best resume and experience of them all. He’s also a man of faith, compassion, and competence.
But the problem is that if all three stay in Tuesday’s Ohio and Florida primaries, it’s likely that Trump will win both states. It’s simple divide and conquer. Trump wins with his 35% core.
It’s possible that Kasich will win Ohio. He’s a popular governor there. But to make sure he gets enough votes, Cruz and Rubio should withdraw this week and tell their supporters to go to Kasich.
It’s a little more iffy in Florida–Rubio’s home. Though he is a good closer, it appears that Rubio will lose Florida to Trump due to finishing poorly in last week’s primaries. For him to win, the same strategy should be used. Cruz and Kasich should withdraw and point their voters to Rubio. If they do, then, instead of dividing the non-Trump vote, Rubio will beat Trump and take the 99 delegates.
Cruz, Rubio, and Kasich should meet alone tonight after the debate and commit to that strategy.
But there’s another way.
From Erick Erickson:
“Rubio drops out [in Florida] and Cruz publicly declares Rubio his running mate. They barnstorm the nation with Rubio throwing the punches at Trump and Cruz talking about their vision for the future. They crisscross Florida raising voter awareness that voters need to vote for Cruz. They go to Missouri, North Carolina, etc.”
“Once they get through March 15th barnstorming the country together, they divide up the states with Rubio going as Cruz’s surrogate. Rubio hits New England. Cruz goes elsewhere. They have some joint events together.”
“Doing so shifts the conversation. Doing so forces voters to pay attention to the changed dynamic. And they head to Cleveland with either 1237 delegates for Cruz or at least more than Trump. It gives them a head start on having a general election ticket, which gives them an advantage over the Democrats.”
“In the process they unite the party and they beat Trump. In the process they start making the case against Hillary.”
“It can be done. It is possible. But the Marco Rubio supporters have to dare to believe and be willing to set aside grievances with Cruz to win.”
I’ve felt from the beginning a Ted Cruz-Marco Rubio ticket would be the best choice to lead America forward. The’re both young, articulate, minorities, faith-filled and principled men who would make a powerful Dream Team.
They’d also unite the Republican Party. Cruz is the outsider who will do even more than Trump to change Washington. Rubio would make a wonderful peace-maker in Congress.
But here’s the difficulty. It will take the “way of the Cross” to get there.
What does the cross of Jesus Christ represent? It speaks of sacrifice, humility, laying down your rights, and suffering to achieve the greater good.
Reviving America will require nothing less. In this scenario, Ted Cruz must be humble enough to withdraw in Ohio and pick Rubio as his running mate. Rubio has to humbly realize that his path to the White House has dimmed and be willing to sacrifice the top job for the present (his day may come).
They must both go in the opposite spirit against Donald Trump. All of them, especially Marco Rubio, must make the Jesus-like choice to lay down his dreams for the good of the nation.
Let’s go a step further. I believe if either of them humbly take the second spot then victory can be achieved. Cruz-Rubio or Rubio-Cruz. There are different strengths to both teams.
But in each case, one must take a step of humility.
Up until now, I’ve admired both of them for their faith and perseverance. But reviving America requires more than faith. It demands humility, sacrifice and death to self.
And we shouldn’t just be pointing at them. What can I do today, this week, this month, this year to go the way of the cross in my own life? What do I need to change? Where is humility and sacrifice required in God’s unfolding plans for me and you?
Let’s pray for Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio and practice humility in our own lives. The first condition of 2 Chronicles 7:14 is “If my people will humble themselves…”
That’s the opening key to revival.
It’s the way of the Cross.
The First Election in Post Christian America?
The Super Tuesday results are in and both Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton are leading their respective parties.
This means we are on the verge of having an entire presidential election built on anger and envy.
Today I want to define the bigger cultural problem we’re facing in America. Next week I will propose the short-term and long term solutions.
But first I want you to ponder the following:
Is this the first major election in post-Christian America?
One year ago I was very excited about the 2016 race. After seven dreary years of watching America be divided and transformed by a secular progressive ideological administration. I was heartened that many good people had stepped up. 2016 looked like a great year to point the American electorate back to a freedom agenda.
The Republican side included a number of good-to-excellent governors, two sharp US senators, and a couple of successful business people–with at least four of them being “outsiders” (Trump, Fiorina, Carson and Cruz). They were also a great racial mix of America–black, Hispanic, Indian (Bobbie Jindal) and white.
The Republicans had become the “Big Tent” Party. On the other side stood two old white insiders.
I likened my initial excitement to the beginning of football season. There’d be many contests, then the playoffs, and in the end, the best candidate would prevail.
Because most of the contenders were God-fearing, conservative-oriented people, I assumed that one of them would rise to the top. That’s still possible, but not in the case of the current front-runner who could be the Republican nominee.
Let’s first look at the main remaining candidates and then size up the Church and electorate.
Hillary Clinton
It appears after Super Tuesday that she is sailing toward the Democrat nomination–though she’s a non-inspiring campaigner, a political camelion of sorts, a voice from the past, and appears to have a problem with integrity and truth-telling.
When she was asked by an NBC journalist whether she’s ever lied to the public, she looked flustered and blurted out, “I try not to!”
Try telling your wife you “try not to commit adultery.”
There’s a good chance Hillary will be indicted in the next six months for breaking the law and compromising the security of the United States with her e-mails. If not before the election, then maybe after she becomes president–whereas she can be the first POTUS in history to pardon herself.
Richard Nixon must be rolling in his grave.
Bernie Sanders
If the world were made up of utopian college students, then Bernie would be crowned emperor. You have to like his sincerity about wanting to give everybody free stuff. He’s a modern day Robin Hood (take from the rich and give to the poor) teamed up with Santa Claus.
I wanted to write an article about him naming it “Santa Hood,” but it sounded too inner-city.
Then there’s the problem with socialism: The second “S” in USSR stood for “Socialist” and that nation imploded economically. Cuba has been exporting socialism for years and it’s the basket case of the Caribbean. Socialist Venezuela is on the verge of collapse.
Yes, I know that Europe has many smaller social democracies. But they’re dying spiritually and economically under the paws of government control. Is that that the path that America wants to take?
Managed “socialist” economies only produce one thing over time: equal poverty for all (except for a few elites). Yet, it’s been hilarious to listen to Bernie’s college-age followers talk about socialism. Some even think it’s a form of social media!
Memo to America: It’s time to break up the monopoly of public education and begin teaching liberty again. Ignorance is not bliss. It leads to less opportunity, lower standards of living and ultimately tyranny.
Marco Rubio
He’s young, articulate, charismatic, and Hispanic. He stumbled when attacked by Chris Christie, but has rebounded and just won his first state (Minnesota). In my view he would make a young Ronald Reagan in the 21st century–a good president. He’s not as rigidly principled as Ted Cruz–but thoroughly conservative.
It’s unfair to call him establishment. He became a senator via the Tea Party.
Ted Cruz
He’s probably the only true outsider in the race who is hated by Washington, D.C. for his principled stands. Though not as humble or charismatic as Rubio, his lawyerly, constitutional approach is refreshing. He now has three states under his belt including the large, critical state of Texas.
Howevr, notice that both the secular press and Washington power brokers hate Ted Cruz. That tells you who would make an excellent 45th president.
Donald Trump
Right now he’s the likely Republican nominee, and in my view, that’s concerning. Though I appreciate him initially taking on the entrenched Washington and political correctness, his true character has come out over the past few months and it’s not presidential.
In temperament, he’s simply a junior high bully. He’s says he’s conservative now, but lived most of his adult life as a pragmatic liberal. As president, we don’t know what we’d get. There are no core principles in Donald Trump except self expression.
Here’s the most thoughtful article I’ve seen on the Donald, written by missiologist/revivalist friend George Otis, Jr.
It is well worth your time.
The real draw of Donald Trump is a frightened and angry American electorate that is fed up with the corrupt staus quo (that’s a good thing), but is looking for a King. Trump is tall, brash, and monarch-like. And he also embodies the secrets loves (idols) of many Americans: 1) He’s rich (money). 2) He has a supermodel wife (sex), and 3) He’s an entertainer (fame).
That’s what many Americans desire. They personify their longing in the towering personality of Donald Trump. Hence the powerful draw of his populist message and secular messiah image.
I’m extremely worried about Trump choosing the next Supreme Court justice. That goes for many other areas of public policy. I have no such concerns with Ted Cruz or Marco Rubio.
The American Church
My greatest disappointment over the past months has been with Christian leaders and conservative pundits who have joined the Trump bandwagon. They, too, are so upset at the political establishment that they seem willing to support anything that will crush it.
But I would remind them of this simple truth: the end doesn’t justify the means. The goal of renewing our government is not worth it if done through a foul-mouthed, temper-tantrum bully who doesn’t even believe in the essence of biblical faith–needing God’s forgiveness.
That’s horrendous compromise. It will not have a good ending. Think of King Saul in the Old Testament.
One of the saddest statistics is the number of “evangelicals” that are voting for Donald Trump (and Hillary Clinton). That tells you much about the state of the Church. We already know that many liberal denominations no longer teach God’s truth. But evangelicals have withstood the progressive tide in the past because of their born again values and biblical worldview–taught in the Bible-believing churches.
However, a Rubicon of sorts was passed in 2008 and ’12 when many Christians sat out the election or voted for Barack Obama because of his charisma. In 2016, many evangelicals are joining the Trump tsunami–which reveals one thing: a stunning failure of discipleship on the part of the Church.
(Click here to read a good article by Bill Blankshaen on Christians voting for Trump.)
The American Electorate
There are 323 million people in the United States (third largest country on earth) who are not easy to classify. But it’s increasingly clear that this generation isn’t attuned to the values of their fore bearers. A large segment of our nation fails to understand liberty, does not love or respect God, live for worldly pursuits, and nearly half the nation is receiving some kind of government support–and liking it.
Elections in free nations are cultural “mirrors”: what the people value, they will elect. Right now the majority of voters seem to be valuing a Republican Bully and a Democrat Liar. The voters appear frightened, angry, and envious of others.
Those are not the values of a free and virtuous people.
We’ve had 45 presidential elections in our 240 years as a republic. Yes, we’ve elected some pretty bad leaders during that time (think James Buchannon, Warren Harding, Andrew Johnson, and even Richard Nixon). But during those eras, spiritual awakenings and the Judeo-Christian ethics of the people held the nation together.
We are now in vastly different territory under a mountain of moral and financial debt where virtue and knowledge are no longer the bulwark of freedom. We are about to nominate a worldly bully and a corrupt liar to run against each other for president.
Thomas Sowell agrees. Read his sobering assessment here.
Both Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton call themselves Christians. But the proof is in the fruit. Both are extremely weak in character–with Trump being childish and Hillary, devious. Clinton’s worldview is clearly secular progressive and Trump’s is all over the map. Both of these disqualify them from guiding a free nation.
But currently they are leading the pack due to another discomforting possibility:
We may be witnessing the first election in Post-Christian America.
(Next week: “Hope Can Be Found in the Way of the Cross.”)
Leadership Lessons from New Hampshire and Super Bowl 50
I had the privilege of working with Loren Cunningham, the founder of Youth With A Mission, during the late 1980s. Loren is one of the wisest leaders I’ve ever known–and just watching him made a powerful impact on me.
Two character qualities really stand out in Loren’s life and the lives of other great leaders. A political primary and the world’s most watched annual television show recently brought those qualities to the forefront in America.
What leadership lessons can we learn from New Hampshire and Super Bowl 50?
I spend part of my time as an ad junct professor for Faith Evangelical College and Seminary located in Tacoma, Washington where I serve as an assistant professor of Global Leadership. This quarter I’ve been crafting some new leadership courses for graduate students.
What I learned from Loren Cunningham has been placed central in the curriculum. Here are two of his leadership nuggets:
The number one quality of a leader is self control.
I remember hearing Loren share these words in 1986 and I immediately questioned the absoluteness of the statement. What about faith, love, diligence, hard work etc. Why was self control the most important leadership character quality?
Loren explained that leaders are models of behavior for all who follow or watch them. Their influence is great and so their actions must be circumspect.
For example, how many people and churches have been ruined by a pastor’s lack of self control when he committed adultery with a secretary, and that moral failure tore both the families and church apart and left a stain on the ministry of Christ?
Baptist minister Gordon Hanstad says that “the greatest gift I can give to my people is my own personal holiness.”
Exactly. Only self-control in leadership, in all areas of life, protects others from being devoured by the wolves of hypocrisy and disallusionment. No wonder the Bible holds leaders (teachers) to a higher standard of conduct (James 3:1).
Here is the second leadership gem from Loren Cunningham:
Authority from God is given to people on the basis of humility.
In other words, true power and authority does not come from a booming voice, a strong personality, or a larger height than everyone else. The greater your humility, the more moral authority you have in your leadership.
Powerful vocal cords, style, personality, and stature are given by DNA. They are not moral. How a person chooses to live in a fallen world–honest about their mistakes, willing to admit error and be known for who they really are–is what creates the strongest and best of leaders. Humility is harder to achieve and more crucial to wise leadership than physical strength.
King David is an example. Though he was a dynamic and powerful warrior, it was his tender heart and willingness to repent and acknowledge his failures that produced great leadership. You can find his humble heart splashed throughout many pages of the Psalms (Check out Psalm 51).
Jesus Christ has the greatest authority of anyone who’s ever lived because he had the greatest degree of humility. No sin in his case. Just the beauty of self-sacrifical meekness that died for the transgressions of the world (Philippians 2:5-11).
Self control and humility. They form the core of truly successful leaders.
There are many other qualities that are important in leadership. I list ten attitudes and ten actions in my book Leadership for the 21st Century: Changing Nations Through the Power of Serving. But self-control and humility are the most necessary and endearing. Why? Because leaders handle power.
Let’s look at those attributes (or lack of them) in two recent events.
New Hampshire Primary
The United States just held its first primary vote in the Granite State in the run-up to the 2016 presidential election. For the Democrats, Bernie Sanders beat Hillary Clinton 60% to 39%–with 95% of the people that highly valued “honesty” voting for the seventy-four year old Socialist.
In other words, Sanders’ transparency and authenticity (despite terrible Robin Hood and Santa Claus fiscal policies) earned his victory over the former Secretary of State who many viewed as an untrustworthy liar.
Hillary has not showed self control and humility. Bernie seems more sincere.
On the Republican side, Donald Trump cruised to a stunning outsider victory with 35% of the vote. Trump is a powerful American icon who could ride the wave of anger and angst all the way to the White House.
But fellow Americans beware. Though Mr. Trump says he is a Presbyterian and holds up his mother’s gift Bible in front of evangelical audiences, he must not be listening on Sundays. He admitted recently that he’s never asked God or anybody else for forgiveness in his entire life.
Ponder that statement. The Donald never had the guts and character to admit (and forsake) any sins or mistakes. That’s not a wise heart to have sitting in the Oval Office. It’s the same problem our current president has of never admitting wrong but always blaming others.
Contrast Donald Trump’s lack of humility to Ted Cruz’s apology to Ben Carson for the incorrect message sent out to caucus goers. Or Marco Rubio admitting that he blew it in the last debate, apologized to those who’d worked hard for him in New Hampshire, and promised to never do it again (Proverbs 18:13).
We need those kinds of leaders sitting at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.
Super Bowl 50
Sunday’s 50th Super Bowl was the third most watched television show in history. It show-cased Peyton Manning of the Denver Broncos in probably the last game of his illustrious career against the up-and-coming Carolina Panthers and their young MVP superstar, Cam Newton.
Peyton’s team won the game 24-10–not with his aging arm, but with a tenacious and opportunistic defense.
After the contest, Manning acknowledged that the other side of the ball was responsible for the victory and thanked his teammates for the privilege of playing with them. All of his career, Peyton Manning–who will have a special wing built for him in the NFL Hall of Fame–has carried himself with dignity and character.
After getting trounced in Super 48 two years ago, Manning humbly congratulated Seahawk quarterback Russell Wilson for the win and sought out cornerback Richard Sherman to see if he was okay (he’d been injured in the game).
Class act for many kids to emulate. Self control and personal humility–especially after an agonizing defeat.
Not so after Super Bowl 50. Losing quarterback Cam Newton sat slumped in a chair hiding under a sweatshirt hoody. He gave tortured one-word answers to the interviewers and even walked out of the room after three minutes.
A few days later Carolina coach Ron Rivera defended Newton: “That’s who he is. He hates to lose. That is what you love in him. I would much rather have a guy that hates to lose than a guy who accepts it.”
No, Ron. You can have a guy who hates losing and loves winning with self-control and humility.
Cam Newton justified his own poor leadership example this way:
“Show me a good loser and I’ll show you a loser… If I offended anybody that’s cool, but I know who I am and I’m not about to conform nor bend for anyone’s expectations because yours or anybody’s expectations would never exceed mine…Who are you to say that your way is right? I have all these people who are condemning me saying this, that and the third, but what makes your way right?”
Sorry, Cam. Both self control and humility are the right way to win AND lose.
Who says so? God. No amount of narcissism or self-pity can change that.
In fact, here’s a lesson from Russell Wilson.
The most watched television show ever was Super Bowl 49. At the end of the game, with the New England Patriots leading 28-24, quarterback Russell Wilson dramatically led the Seahawks to the New England one-yard line with thirty seconds to play. Seattle was one down away from repeating as Super Bowl champions.
On the following snap, Wilson threw a quick slant pass to intended receiver Ricardo Lockette that was intercepted by Malcolm Butler–sealing the victory for the Pats.
It may have been the most devastating Super Bowl moment of all time and certainly for the young quarterback.
But Wilson bowed his head and walked calmly off the field. Here’s how he explained later:
“The play happens, and they pick the ball off. And I take three steps,” Wilson said. “And on the third step God says to me, ‘I’m using you. . . . I want to see how you respond. But most importantly I want them to see how you respond.”
Russell Wilson passed the test.
Memo to Cam Newton: Give Russell a call. He can help you grow in self control and humility.
They remain the real marks of true leadership.