There is a big hole in the hearts of Idaho Constitutional Conservatives four weeks before the Idaho Republican Primary Election. The emptiness and sense of despair in a State that voted in 2020 for Donald Trump (63.6%) for conservatives who see candidates running Statewide with large margins like Governor Little in a recent poll receiving 58% of the vote of Republicans it is demoralizing. He won the primary in 2020 with 38% of the vote, and only Raul Labrador running for Attorney General having a large lead over incumbent AG Wasdin is giving conservatives hope. Priscilla Giddings running for Lt. governor is still “in the hunt” and I support her 100%, but I am confounded by her strategy of not debating her opponent just as I am flabbergasted why Janice McGeachin has refused numerous times to debate her opponents. Idaho Republicans are going to go to the polls in May hearing only from candidates in the AG’s primary election. If one is running way ahead in the polls or way behind, We the People should have a chance to hear those asking for our votes. To not stand before the citizens is either an act of cowardice or an act of hubris—in my most humble opinion.
I want to center my thoughts around two ideas. Process vs principle and individual sovereignty (rights) and responsibilities. Everyday Idahoans understand that a political philosophy based on Biblical and Natural Law Principles should be the platform upon which legislative and executive decisions are to be considered. But process is also important, and this is where the Little- Bedke wing of the party wins every time. Principle (political philosophy) should define a strategic goal, tactics are all about process that over time—sometimes years, will help us to meet that goal. Trying to take big bites out of the apple every legislative session has proven to be frustrating to Idaho conservative law makers and the families they represent. The Liberal—Little—Romney—Bush—Kasich (LLRBK) wing of our party—also known as RINOs because their snouts keep growing every time the tell us they are conservatives, wins despite our being a Trump State. The Little-Romney wing of the party understands logistics and communications. They proceed to the field only after they have secured their positions with the press and special interests—who are the ones really calling the plays. Conservatives are always the “away team”, playing on the opposing team’s field with the opposing team’s referees. They even get to choose who calls the game (Betsy Russell and Melisa Davlin). We are and have been for a long time always playing “defense” which means we are always against the other team’s agenda instead of being for our own. We are always reacting to them instead of making them react to us.
So here is how we change the flow of the game. We proceed like Governor Younkin and Summer Seers did in Virginia. We tell citizens that no matter the issue—think specifically health care and education, that different from any place in the world the people are the source of political power in our country and State. The people transfer a very small portion of their power and responsibility to government. Because we are the source of political power, we can take back political power and the responsivity that has been transferred can be taken back quickly—just like parents led by a Muslim mother in Virginia took back the educational curriculum and administration in the State of Virginia. WE can do that in Idaho if we have leaders that are willing to give the people back their liberties and responsibilities. The same goes with what happen with Covid mitigation strategy in Idaho. Look how mitigation was handled by Republican Governors in Florida, Texas, and South Dakota. People made decisions based on the best interests of their families, not “experts” in government telling WE THE PEOPLE what was the best course of action. The overriding principles that define the positions that Conservatives should make is that rights and responsibilities belong to us and not to special interest lobbyists and corporate mercantilist companies and non-profits. Look at how government failed during the pandemic both on the medical and education side.
Back to the game. Our candidates are the “away team”. We don’t have the home field advantage and like all upstarts we must beat our opponents on their own “home field” with their own officials and announcing crews. For Janice and Priscilla to refuse to debate and go into the lion’s den to make their case they not only failed their own campaigns, but they failed the people who deserve to hear from those who are asking for their vote.
As a political candidate opens their soul to the voters, they can choose the weapons of engagement. Their personalities and demeanor, their political courage and political prudence, there sense of the issues and facts, and most of all their hearts. When you are the underdog, you don’t get to choose the field, you will play on, but you do get to choose to play the game or not.
You may win or lose the game, but at least choose to fight even—and especially when the odds are against you.
I am so sad that our candidates chose not to fight—even Mr. Little. Is there anyone willing to play hardball left in Idaho?
8 replies on “Get in the Game”
So here’s a question about Little’s poll numbers:
If the Voter goes into the polling booth and votes for Labrador (who has a good chance of winning) and Giddings (who’s polls also show that she has a good chance of winning), why would that same Voter vote for Little?
The Voter voting for Labrador and Giddings is highly UNLIKELY to vote for Little.
The poll numbers may not be consistent with reality.
Remember: “There must be 50 ways to leave your Governor”
Labrador is pretty much a do-nothing in whatever office he’s held. A typical bureaucrat. This is not what we need in Idaho.
Art Macomber is also running and from the sound of his YT posts, he’s exactly who is needed to replace Wasden. A knowledgeable lawyer, with thoughtful, inciteful answers to Idaho’s growing constitutional problems.
GETTING IN THE GAME vs. ENGAGING THE BATTLE
Anything that promotes the biblically egregious Constitutional Republic (aka the United States of America) is, in fact, a game – a very dangerous game.
This juxtaposed with the battle for the Kingdom of God here on earth as it is heaven, per Matthew 6:10 & 33.
Yes, a dangerous game – one that officially commenced in 1787 when the groundwork was laid for America to be all-but destroyed at the “hands” of the United States of America (aka the Constitutional Republic).
That’s right – America and the United States of America are NOT the same thing! Not even close.
In fact, early 1600’s Puritan America whose governments of, by, and for God were established upon the Bible’s immutable/unchanging moral law was sacrificed on the altar of the late 1700s Enlightenment United States of America whose humanistic government of, by, and for the people was established upon capricious man-made traditions (aka the biblically seditious Constitution).
The latter is also known as the Grand Experiment in Self Government. Self-government!?! Gee, what could go wrong? Everything, just open your eyes and look around you. Everything gone wrong in America nationally is the consequence of this monumental case of biblical sedition committed by the 1787 cadre of Enlightenment and Masonic theistic rationalists.
Thus, ours is not to save the United States of America but, Lord willing, to restore America.
For more regarding these two polar opposite forms of government, see Chapter 3 “The Preamble: We the People vs. Yahweh” of free online book “Bible Law vs. the United States Constitution: The Christian Perspective” at https://www.bibleversusconstitution.org/BlvcOnline/biblelaw-constitutionalism-pt3.html
Then find out how much you really know about the Constitution as compared to the Bible. Take our 10-question Constitution Survey in the sidebar and receive a free copy of the 85-page “Primer” of “BL vs. USC.”
Our Founding Fathers wisely chose not to have a theocracy like they saw fail with the Massachusetts Bay Company and like we have seen in modern day Russia, The Ukraine, and modern-day Babylon and Persia. God’s New Covenant is with We The People not with governments.
A government of, by, and for the people (juxtaposed with government of, by, and for God) is the epitome of humanism, doomed to failure. No wonder America finds herself teetering on the precipice of moral depravity and destruction.
A theocracy is precisely what the 18th-century “founding fathers” created.
There are no vacuums when it comes to legislated morality or what’s, more often than not, immorality. Consequently, a nation’s foundational ethical standard determines its God.
Thus, there is likewise no vacuums when it comes to religious-influenced governments, be it even Secular Humanism in its multifaceted forms, and it usually is.
When one understands that idolatry is not so much about statues as it is statutes, it becomes clear that all governments are theocratic (god ruled), serving either the true God or some false god, demonstrated by what laws they keep and consider the supreme law of the land.
Question: Were the governments in the Old Testament under the god Baal (or any other false god named in the Old Testament) theocracies?
Answer: Of course, they were.
Question: Was Baal (or any other god named in the Bible) real or were they merely ancient forms of We the People?
Answer: Merely ancient forms of We the People. See 1 Corinthians 8:4-6.
Consequently: “…There is no escaping theocracy [or theonomy]. A government’s laws reflect its morality, and the source of that morality (or, more often than not, immorality) is its god. It is never a question of theocracy or no theocracy, but whose theocracy. The American people, by way of their elected officials, are the source of the Constitutional Republic’s laws. Therefore, the Constitutional Republic’s god is WE THE PEOPLE.
“People recoil at the idea of a theocracy’s morality being forced upon them, but because all governments are theocracies, someone’s morality is always being enforced. This is an inevitability of government. The question is which god, theocracy, laws, and morality will we choose to live under?…”
For more, see online Chapter 3 “The Preamble: WE THE PEOPLE vs. YAHWEH” of “Bible Law vs. the United States Constitution: The Christian Perspective” at bibleversusconstitution.org/BlvcOnline/biblelaw-constitutionalism-pt3.html
“Render unto Cesar” Jesus never denounced civil government. He also never claimed that the government was a conduit for charity (love). The “Two Kingdoms”, read C. S. Lewis co-exists. If the principles of civil government rest on Biblical and Natural Law Theory, they can coexist—and that is precisely our problem today. Theocratic Christian monarchies ruled the Western world for 1000 years. They key is God in the hearts of “We the People”. A set of written rules works only if those that are to be governed have God in their hearts and are virtuous themselves. It is all about the rules of governance allowing for people to exercise their “free will”—liberty, which is the only gift God gives to man. Government—theocratic or otherwise does not distribute our own “free will (liberty). Everything else that we possess, or talents, skills and property, we “Hold in Trust”. Jesus was a great patriot intimately in love with His people, His Homeland, and our shared and promised destiny—not to any man-made government. Not to Theocratic rule. Not to “The Devine Right of Kings”
“Render Unto Cesar”
You’ve turned Christ render to Caesar statement on its head.
For the contextual interpretation, see Chapter 9 of the free book “The Romans 13 Template for Biblical Dominion: Ten Reason Why Romans 13 is Not About Secular Government” at https://www.bibleversusconstitution.org/Romans13/Romans13-contents.html
Scroll down to heading “Rendering to Caesar.”
With all due respect Ted, you never address my predicate or answer my question.