January 28, 2010 by Shane Kastler.

This week, the Tulsa Union Public School board voted 3-1 to keep a children’s book in their library that depicts a cartoon character who has lesbian parents.  Buster’s Sugartime is based on the PBS show Arthur and tells the story of Buster the Rabbit going to Vermont where he learns how to make maple syrup.  While there he also apparently goes to sensitivity training and learns how to embrace the “diversity” of homosexual marriage.  What does this message teach our kids?  Is it about making maple syrup or is it about pushing an agenda?

            When some concerned parents raised the issue with Union school officials the school chose to reject the parents’ complaints.  Undoubtedly many people might look at the story and say the parents over reacted.  Is Buster the Rabbit really going to teach kids to be gay?  If you downplay the significance of this then chances are you may be at least partially brainwashed already.  There is a radical gay agenda in this country and they have their sights set on your children.  And though I risk getting burned at the stake for saying it, the public schools are a willing pawn in the indoctrination plan.

            Make no mistake, the pro-gay, anti-God powers in our nation aren’t going to blatantly force their agenda.  I wouldn’t’ expect to see a book “Buster Comes Out of the Closet” anytime soon because that would tip their hand.  No, they’re much more subtle than that.  They slip the perversion in.  They come through the back door by having Buster have friends whose parents are gay.  And what does this do to the average unsuspecting grade school kid who reads it?  It subtly teaches him that homosexual marriage is acceptable…even normal.  Because homosexuality itself is acceptable…even normal.  And after all if Buster is OK with it…why shouldn’t you be?

            The Union school officials have said that they have several children of gay parents in their school system and they want them to feel “accepted.”  I certainly have no problem with that.  After all the children should not be punished because of their “parents” depravity.  But on the flip side, the children also should not be taught that the depravity of homosexuality is “normal” just to keep little Johnny from having his feelings hurt.  If Johnny’s dad were an axe-murderer would we write books about being accepting of axe-murderers to help Johnny feel “accepted?”  Probably not.  The fact is that homosexuality is seen for the lunacy that it is when anyone bases their morality on the teachings of the Bible, all major world religions, simple logic, or even nature itself. 

What Buster’s Sugartime failed to teach the kids was that Buster’s friend is not the natural offspring of the lesbian parents.  Indeed he cannot be because the formation of a child (or rabbit for that matter) requires both a male and a female.  And this, I think, is what sticks in the craw of homosexuals more than anything.  Basic science itself teaches that their sexual habits are abnormal, dare we use the word….perverse.  And since science, logic, morality, and basic common sense all line up against them…they must invade the schools and control the education of the children.  It’s the only way they can gain the cultural acceptance that they crave.  But I, and many others, won’t play along with their games by letting my children be their guinea pigs.

            The public school system in America is broken.  Regardless of how “good” the local school system is, or how devout school administrators or teachers may be, they are serving in a system that is radically anti-Christian and pro-gay.  Union has always been considered one of the “good” schools.  It’s suburban and has many wealthy families.  There are even a lot of conservative, evangelical churches that reside within the district…but that doesn’t matter.  The people have no voice because the government expects them to be faithful and obedient sheep.  Don’t rock the boat.  Don’t speak your mind.  And whatever you do…..don’t DARE question the government, the public schools, or the gay-agenda.  I’m sorry, but I refuse to play this game, especially with my children.  I’m not the government’s sheep…I’m the Lord’s.  And I won’t raise my kids to be good little brainwashed liberals who BAHHHHHHH they’re way to the slaughter getting a daily dose of “diversity” during the most impressionable years of their life. 

The Bible teaches that the most important commandment is to love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul, mind, and strength.  Did you heart that?  Not just heart, soul, and strength….but heart, soul, MIND, and strength.  We must teach our children to love God with their brains.  To see all aspects of education as relating back to the God who created the world and all things in it.  God must be paramount in all aspects of their life, including their education.  No let me ask you….how can that happen in an atheistic government school where GOD IS BANNED!  Answer?  It can’t.  I’m sorry, I know that angers a lot of people, but it’s true nonetheless.  Too many Christians today are focused on pleasing the world.  They’re focused on Johnny being a football star and Susie being a cheerleader.  And all too often they’re willing to sacrifice a God-centered education to see those vain dreams pursued.  But what happens when Johnny and Susie subtly accept the liberal dogma?  What happens when they see that their textbook is at odds with what Scripture teaches, and they’re parent’s claim to believe?  What happens when Johnny and Susie exchange their soul for the American dream, with their parent’s blessing?  What happens then?

            What happens then is another generation rises up and goes along with the system.  Another generation submits to the government schools so as not to be viewed as extremist.  Another generation plods along, ushering in America’s moral destruction.  But things COULD be different.

            I wonder what would happen if every Christian in the Union Public School system marched to the school, withdrew their children and said they weren’t taking it anymore.  What would happen if Union officials found themselves with ten kids at school on Monday because the rest of the parents are sick and tired of the agenda being force fed down their kid’s throats?  Would anything change?  We’ll probably never know because most people simply refuse to rock the boat.  They go along and get along.

            But America was founded by boat-rockers.  It wasn’t founded by British sheep who simply went along with the program.  America needs more boat-rockers today.  It needs more people willing to suffer some inconvenience for the sake of right and wrong and the sake of their children.  And make no mistake, if you rock the boat in this venue, you will suffer.  As a homeschooling parent I’ve heard it all.  I’ve been maligned and criticized.  I’ve been called an extremist and a fanatic.  I’ve been ridiculed, often by Christians (in fact usually by Christians), for not going along with the system.  But Jesus doesn’t call me (or you) to follow and embrace the world system.  He calls us to reach the world…by being different than the world.  He calls us to raise our children to love and fear Him.  Not to hand them over to an atheistic, secular, pro-homosexual entity to indoctrinate them to reject everything the Bible espouses.  I can’t do that.  I won’t do that.

            So what about Christian public school teachers? How should we view them?  Perhaps as missionaries, serving in a dark and Godless field.  Undoubtedly they need our prayers and support…but their mission field does not need our children to be added to the list of government sheep. You see, ultimately it’s the system that is broken.  It’s the system that is blatantly anti-Christian.  It is the system that disciples and it is the children who will pay.

            Don’t kid yourself.  If Union Public Schools is willing to stiff-arm concerned parents to further a gay agenda…you’re school will too.  In truth, they haven’t got a choice.  The deck is stacked against you and the Devil is the dealer.  He beckons you to come to his table and play a couple of hands with him.  He beckons you’re children to come and don’t rock the boat.  He teaches them that gay is good…God is bad and no one should ever question his dogma.  And if you don’t believe him, then go and read the children’s books in the school library.  Go and read Buster the Rabbit.  Surely you trust him don’t you?  He has friends that are gay.  Gay is good….God is bad.  Buster wouldn’t lie to you…….would he?

………

“You shall therefore lay up these words of mine in your heart and in your soul, and you shall bind them as a sign on your hand, and they shall be as frontlets between your eyes. You shall teach them to your children, talking of them when you are sitting in your house, and when you are walking by the way, and when you lie down, and when you rise.” (Deuteronomy 11:18-19 ESV)

Posted in Education, Current Events, Homosexuality | Print | No Comments »

December 3, 2009 by Shane Kastler.

The past week has been a crazy one for world famous super-golfer Tiger Woods. Two days after a National Enquirer story comes out about him having an affair, he is injured in a mysterious 2 A.M. car wreck in his front yard that involves him, a busted mouth, and his wife with a golf club. Sound fishy? Most people seem to think it does. To make matters worse, he refused to talk to the police for several days after the incident. Every time the police would come to his house for an interview his wife would answer the door and say he’s sleeping. I can’t help but wonder how it might go if the police ever showed up at my house and my wife told them to go away because I’m sleeping. I’m pretty sure the police would say, “Tell him to get his dirt-poor, white behind out here and talk to us or we’ll go in and get him.” Being rich and black has its advantages in our racially over-sensitive, country. Ask Barack Obama (or ask O.J. Simpson for that matter). Tiger Woods can tell the police to “stick it” and get away with it. Most people can’t. But the Tiger Woods fiasco is about more than a bizarre car wreck. His life is coming unraveled because his secret sins are being found out. Sooner or later that will happen to everyone and no amount of money, nor public relations firms can change that.

Tiger Woods has been groomed to be a famous golfer from the day he was born. He was on television as a two year old and his dad had dreams for his boy. There’s no denying that Tiger is probably the best golfer the world has ever seen. But even world class golfers are natural born sinners. Everyone is.

Woods is married to a Swedish model…but it appears that he has cheated on her from day one. This week, two different women have been mentioned as mistresses. One of them, a Los Angeles cocktail waitress, saved 3 years worth of text messages, voice mails, and emails to prove her association with Woods. In one embarrassing voice mail, Tiger tells her to take her name off of her cell phone account so it won’t show up on his caller ID. This call was made two months prior to his wife giving birth to their first child, so it seems that his whole marriage has been marked by infidelity. This week, Tiger admitted to “transgressions” but chose not to elaborate. That’s OK, it’s not our business. But Tiger Woods’ greatest need (and everyone else’s) is to elaborate and repentantly confess their sins to Jesus Christ and begin a brand new life that only he can provide.

The Bible says: “Take note, you have sinned against the LORD; and be sure your sin will find you out." (Numbers 32:23) and “Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.” (Galatians 6:7) Make no mistake, Tiger’s sins have found him out, and he is in the process of reaping some embarrassingly painful consequences for the seeds that he has sown.

For his entire career, Tiger’s “image handlers” have been able to craft him as a superhuman golfer and world class human being. The golfing skills can’t be denied, but his transgressions are now available for all the world to see. Hopefully, this debacle will be used by God to humble Tiger and draw him to the cross of Christ. Hopefully his wife will show him grace, even though she doesn’t’ have to, and they will work out their problems. Hopefully Tiger will turn from his sin in repentance and commit his life to Jesus Christ as Lord. He’s now in a mess that his handlers can’t fix. No one can fix it, but God alone. Tiger is a sinner, just like you and just like me. The main difference is that his sins are more public because he’s famous.

Tiger Woods is a phenomenal golfer…but he’s not superhuman. He’s a sinful human. Here’s hoping he “sees the light” and comes to Christ before this temporal life ends and the eternal consequence for his sins begin.

Posted in Current Events, Eternal Issues | Print | No Comments »

September 4, 2009 by Shane Kastler.

I’ve always loved reading Thomas Sowell’s work. His cool-headed, logical, common-sense approach to the world is like a breath of fresh air in our politically correct and deeply twisted world of situational ethics. In his September 1 column, Suicide of the West, Sowell writes on the recent release of the Lockerbie bomber, Abdel Baset al-Megrahi as yet another sign that the West is handing over its civilization to Isalmic extremists with no attempt to defend themselves and see true justice served. Sowell quotes Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, who said: "The timid civilized world has found nothing with which to oppose the onslaught of a sudden revival of barefaced barbarity, other than concessions and smiles." Clearly this “concede and smile” approach to terrorism is Barack Obama’s policy. Not to mention his worldwide “apologize for America” tour that he’s been on since taking office.

Obama’s pacifism has been tried and failed before. In the 1930’s British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain famously made concessions to a new, up and coming German leader named Adolph Hitler. But smiles and concessions didn’t work with him. Only bombs, guns, and armies would stop this lunatic bent on world domination. The Obama liberals of the world don’t seem to realize this, and consequently their policies will eventually cripple and kill western civilization if they’re not stopped. There’s a way to deal with bullies…be it in the schoolyard or on the international scene. And common sense Westerners used to know how to do it. Sowell writes:

“Neither the Constitution of the United States nor the Geneva Convention gives rights to terrorists who operate outside the law. There was a time when everybody understood this. German soldiers who put on American military uniforms, in order to infiltrate American lines during the Battle of the Bulge were simply lined up against a wall and shot– and nobody wrung their hands over it. Nor did the U.S. Army try to conceal what they had done. The executions were filmed and the film has been shown on the History Channel. So many "rights" have been conjured up out of thin air that many people seem unaware that rights and obligations derive from explicit laws, not from politically correct pieties. If you don’t meet the terms of the Geneva Convention, then the Geneva Convention doesn’t protect you. If you are not an American citizen, then the rights guaranteed to American citizens do not apply to you. That should be especially obvious if you are part of an international network bent on killing Americans.”

In short, fire must be fought with fire….not international groveling and the release of mass murderers like the Lockerbie bomber for “compassionate reasons.” The unjust judge in Scotland who let him free because of his terminal cancer is simply slapping the face of the families of those whom he killed. They didn’t see a “compassionate” end to the their life, and weren’t allowed to live long enough to get cancer. They were incinerated. If true justice had been served the Lockerbie bomber would have never gotten cancer either. He would have been executed as a criminal against humanity…and as a lesson to other would-be terrorists that if you kill innocent people, we will kill you. That isn’t barbaric…it’s simply common sense justice. And its sorely lacking in our upside-down, right-is-wrong world of today.

Posted in Capital Punishment, Current Events | Print | No Comments »

July 23, 2009 by Shane Kastler.

Several years ago, when I was a college freshman, I accidentally locked my keys in my truck in a Wal-Mart parking lot. Uncertain of what to do, my first response was to get some wire out of my tool box and try breaking in through the window and unlocking the door. All the while, an older man was watching me from a few cars over. After a couple of minutes, the man rolled down his window and told me he was going to call the police. To him, it looked like I was committing a crime. And I have to admit, it looked rather suspicious. A young punk with a coat hanger trying to enter a locked vehicle should arouse anyone’s curiosity. And the man rightly left the scene and called the police. When they came, they asked for my driver’s license, which I showed them. They ran a check on the tag, proving the vehicle was mine. Then they helped me “jimmy” the door so I could get on with my life.

It looked suspicious, and I was accused by another person of committing a crime. Did I mention that I am white? The recent arrest of black Harvard professor Louis Henry Gates is the latest example of an arrogant black man thinking he can get away with anything because he’s black. And if anyone ever questions him over anything in life, he can accuse them of being a racist and the President of the United States will back him up.

The Gates case sounds like a crock from the word “go.” Apparently he locked himself out of his house, and then tried to break in. He was an innocent man caught in an awkward situation, and someone rightly called the police. The whole situation looks suspicious, REGARDLESS OF WHAT COLOR YOU ARE! But when police arrived on the scene, Gates immediately accused them of racism. When they asked him for identification, he initially refused. Then he threw a fit because they were singling him out because he was black. No, Dr. Gates….they were singling you out because you were trying to break in to a house.

This issue could have been diffused in a matter of minutes if the spoiled brat Harvard professor had simply explained the situation and shown identification from the start. But NOOOOOOO…he had to start screaming about racism. I would be willing to bet if there was REALLY a black man breaking into his house, Gates would expect the police to intervene. And if they didn’t (after all they wouldn’t want to appear racist by apprehending a black thief)……if they didn’t intervene he would accuse them of racism for not protecting his house….because he’s black.

Gates problem is not that he’s black. His problem is that he’s an arrogant jerk that’s been handed everything in life because of Affirmative Action. People like Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, etc. have trained a whole generation of black people to cry racism at the drop of a hat, and forego any sense of personal responsibility. Gates knows he can get away with anything because in our country today the unpardonable sin is to be a racist. Nobody wants to be branded a racist….so everybody is supposed to look the other way if you see, for example, a black man breaking into a house. And if someone has the nerve to call the police, they’re immediately branded as a racist.

President Barack Hussein Obama spoke of the Gates incident in a prime time news conference in which he said the police acted “stupidly” and that it was proof that we still have a long ways to go in terms of race relations in this country. Excuse me? It’s “stupid” for police to question a man breaking into a house? I beg to differ. I would say it would have been stupid for the police not to have questioned that. Especially after they received a call over it. The only stupid thing they might have done was not realizing they would be accused of racism.

I know that racism still exists in many circles of our world today. As a white male, I’m in a position to be discriminated against everyday. Over the years I’ve applied for numerous jobs in which the employer said they would prefer to hire a woman or a minority. Amazingly, the government encourages this blatant racism known as Affirmative Action. Undoubtedly, other races face discrimination as well, including black people. But need I remind anyone that we have a black man currently serving as President of the United States! And though many don’t want to admit it….Obama was elected President because he’s black. If a white man had run with Obama’s glaring lack of experience and qualifications, he would have been laughed off of the national scene. But not Obama. And now, anyone who questions anything Obama does is considered a racist.

Unfortunately, we have a “perfect storm” for the destruction of America. Obama has quickly acted to take over the nation with a system of “czars” who answer to no one but him. He’s taken over the banking industry, the automobile industry, and is poised to take over the health care industry as well. He’s traveled the world running down America while kissing up to terrorists and arrogant Europeans who despise us. And he’s in the process of bankrupting the country by spiking our national debt to historic levels. AND NO ONE CAN QUESTION HIM BECAUSE HE’S BLACK! Surely you’ve noticed….any Conservative who tries to question his antics is marked as a racist. And no Democrat has the spine to confront him….they’ve made that abundantly clear from the start.

The situation is indeed dire. Obama seeks government control of everything; and his desires are bankrupting the nation. And with the race factor thrown in….no one will try to stop him. The perfect storm exists for our destruction…and Obama is doing his best to do it in short order.

In conclusion, Barack Obama and Louis Henry Gates are both an embarrassment to their race. Both the black race and the human race. Its sad that America’s first black President will also be remembered as the man who single handedly dismantled our country. There are many black people who I believe would do an outstanding job as President, but they will never get elected because they’re not liberal enough. Clarence Thomas made that clear in 1991 when the smear campaign was waged against him during his Supreme Court confirmation. Thomas said the reason for his “high tech lynching” was because he was black man who dared think for himself instead of accepting the black liberal mantra of the way things should be. His punishment was to have his reputation destroyed by liberal Democrats and the leeches in the media.

In part, I agree with Obama’s press conference statement. I believe the Gates case does prove that we have a long way to go in this country in terms of race relations. Some how, some way, we have to get back to a level of sanity where the police can do their job and question a man breaking into a house. And that man, if he’s innocent, will simply explain the situation instead of going berserk and accusing the police of being racists. Calm, controlled, sanity is what we need. But I don’t expect to have it with a spoiled brat Affirmative Action, Liberal President who’s never worked a day in his life……defending a spoiled brat Affirmative Action Harvard professor who can be as hateful as he wants to anyone he wants anytime he wants and then accuse anyone who confronts him of being a racist. Yes indeed, our country has a long way to go.

Posted in Current Events, Politicians, Political Issues | Print | 5 Comments »

May 6, 2009 by Shane Kastler.

On May 5, the British government’s Homeland Security director, Jacqui Smith released a list of sixteen people who are banned from entering their country because of their political views. The list includes murderers, racists, and various other criminals. But one notable name is conservative talk show host Michael Savage. His crime? Expressing conservative political views, such as a need for border security and opposition to gay marriage, that England thinks could cause “community unrest” if allowed to enter their nation. Savage never espouses violence, and in fact has been very critical of terrorists who use violent means to make their point. Clearly he is being singled out for committing the unpardonable sin of being conservative. His thoughts and opinions have caused him to be banned.

Today, the United Kingdom has proven beyond doubt that it has more in common with Soviet Russia and Communist China than it does any “free” nation. It is ironic how Liberals who claim to value “free speech” suddenly desire to suppress and even outlaw any “free speech” that is critical of their views. The same thing is happening in America where things like “Hate Crimes” legislation seeks to punish a criminal for what he might have been “thinking” when he committed a crime; and the “fairness doctrine” which seeks to silence conservative talk radio by requiring stations to also play liberals. So who would determine whether a commentator is conservative or liberal? Michael Savage criticizes both parties; so would he be exempt from the Fairness Doctrine?  Regardless, the government has no business dictating to radio stations what kind of political discourse they can and cannot air.  The British government is out of control, and America is right behind them.

Regardless of what Great Britain or the United States says, I’ll continue to listen to Michael Savage. Though I don’t agree with him on all issues, I enjoy his program…and I completely agree with his right to have and state his opinion as passionately as he wants to. Britain’s ban is ridiculous, and if I were planning a trip there I would cancel it…not that I have any desire to go there anyway. Keep reading, for more reasons why I am a regular listener to The Savage Nation, and why I think he trumps all other radio talk shows.

… … …

I confess. I love listening to Michael Savage on the radio. I know I’m not supposed to say that because most people see him as a homophobic, hate-mongering loud mouth that puts people down. But of all the commentators on the radio, he is hands down the most brutally honest concerning issues that many conservatives are too scared to touch.

I’ve listened to most of the conservative radio talk shows at one time or another, and to be honest, I seldom listen to any of them now except Michael Savage. While I agree with the political views of other conservatives, I can’t stomach much of their shtick. Sean Hannity, repeats the same worn out arguments over and over again. Regardless of the topic the caller brings, Hannity babbles on like a broken record. Bill O’Reilly is the most arrogant specimen I’ve ever tried to endure…and I AGREE with him on most issues. Quite frankly I’m glad he’s no longer on the radio because it wasn’t really his venue. He’s good at reading off of a teleprompter on his TV show, but not very good at thinking on his feet, as evidenced by the amount of “ummms” and “uhhhhs” on his radio show. I gave up on O’Reilly for two reasons. First, I heard Savage make an argument on his show one day for why Obama was doing something. Then, TWO DAYS LATER, I heard O’Reilly make the same argument and brag to his chick, lackey, co-host about how his brilliant shrewdness had analyzed the situation. I believe he stole the idea from Savage, then claimed it as his own. Secondly, I read O’Reilly’s book: A Bold Fresh Piece of Humanity and was nauseated at how in love he is with himself. The basic premise of the book is that if everyone were as courageous, smart, outspoken, and all together as wonderful as him, then the world would be a better place. I’ll pass on O’Reilly.

Rush Limbaugh has been the king of conservative media for many years for a reason. His arguments are logical and articulated in a clear and entertaining fashion. But my complaint with him is that he is too reluctant to criticize the Republican Party. A group who I believe needs to be held accountable for its leftward slide. In contrast, Savage will call out anybody. Evidenced by the fact that he has been more critical of George W. Bush than any other conservative commentator because of Bush’s massive government spending, lenient immigration standards, and leftward policy lurches.

Savage is also the only person on the radio willing to tackle and speak out on problems in our society that are destructive and should be obvious to all. Homosexuality is not only sinful, it goes against nature. It destroys society by destroying marriage and destroying the family. But the “gay mafia” as Savage calls them, has brow beaten most Americans into submission, but not Savage. Though he lives and broadcasts from San Francisco (he calls it San Fran-Sicko), he regularly calls out the homosexual community for the fascists that they are as they try to silence anyone critical of their behavior and what it does to society at large.

Savage is one of the only cultural commentators who points out the fact that obnoxious children need to be disciplined rather than drugged with Ritalin. Savage points out that boys need to be taught to be young men, rather than feminized as our current education system seeks to do. Savage is an outspoken critic of global warming and is an outspoken advocate of increased oil drilling. But Savage is more than just an astute observer of American society, he is a student of history as well. Tune into The Savage Nation and you might here a history of the Muslim conquests, or an analysis of Franklin Roosevelt’s “New Deal” and how it prolonged the Great Depression, or you might hear commentary on the similarities between Barack Obama and former Cambodian dictator Pol Pot, or an explanation of Fabian Socialism. With Savage you get accurate commentary on a variety of issues, argued logically, in an entertaining fashion. And sometimes, he loses his temper, which can be equally enjoyable to listen to for various reasons.

Our society has become inoculated against righteous indignation and assertive calls for justice. We are taught to speak sweetly and softly, while our nation is ruined by radical, anti-God, liberalism. Perhaps what we need is a little more outspoken and LOUDLY SPOKEN dissent against the dangerous absurdities of our society. Jesus turned over tables in the Jerusalem temple to protest the charlatans who had taken over his “Father’s house.” Americans likewise should speak out more loudly, clearly, and regularly about the evils that are taking over our country. Savage speaks out, unapologetically, and for this he should be commended.

Another thing I love about The Savage Nation is how he handles callers. I loose patience very quickly with “call in” shows that give the average Joe in the street air time to ramble on about his illogical opinions on every subject. Savage takes callers, and drops callers in mid-sentence if necessary, when they begin to drone on. Even when they’re agreeing with him. This I appreciate and enjoy. Furthermore, when he argues with a caller that disagrees with him, he points out the lack of logic in their arguments, and doesn’t allow them to change the subject when he’s proving them wrong. Again this is refreshing in our “nicey, sweetsy” world of talk radio where everyone’s opinion is considered equal, regardless of how asinine their opinion is.

I don’t agree with Savage on everything. At times he can be too harsh or resort to too much name calling. Sometimes when he quotes the Bible or talks about religion he comes to conclusions that I would disagree with. While he holds to a “Judeo-Christian” worldview, I don’t believe he would claim to be a “born again” Christian. But when I compare him to others in talk radio, he wins the day hands down.

When his show first comes on, he has a disclaimer that says: “The Michael Savage show contains adult language, adult content, and psychological nudity. Listener discretion is advised.” But don’t let that scare you. He rarely, if ever, uses profanity, (in fact last week he corrected himself in mid-word and said “heck” instead of “hell”) and the “adult content” is simply his criticism of things like homosexuality. As for the psychological nudity, that is simply him exposing his “psyche” or mind for all to see. Nothing perverse.

Regardless of whether he’s talking about huge topics like the end of western civilization…or telling funny stories about his dog Teddy. Regardless of whether he’s taking on the “gay mafia” or giving a recipe for meatballs. Regardless of whether he’s giving dietary advice (he has a Ph.D. in medical botany) or contrasting rap music with Beethoven…Savage is always honest, opinionated, entertaining, and accurate with his analysis. By listening to Savage you can learn a lot and laugh hard. You hear news stories that others aren’t willing to touch. And in our world of political spin, illogical argumentation, and liberal insanity, Michael Savage will give the brutally honest truth about the ills of our society…and he’ll do it in a way that stimulates the mind and often tickles the funny bone. THAT’S WHY, I listen to Michael Savage.

Posted in Current Events, Politicians, Political Issues | Print | No Comments »

April 30, 2009 by Shane Kastler.

(NOTE:  This is somewhat lengthy paper I wrote on the history of Conservatism vs. Liberalism in America.  Read it if you wish.)

The History of Conservatism & Liberalism in the American Republic:  From Jefferson vs. Hamilton to the Political Right vs. Left

By Shane E. Kastler

In the summer of 1776, the American colonies were in turmoil. Outrageous taxes charged by the British government; a lack of representation, and a desire for freedom had captured the minds and hearts of many colonists. As representatives from the colonies gathered in Philadelphia to discuss a declaration of independence from Britain, many feared and suspected a long and bloody war would be the result. Naturally, some opposed the idea of independence and would thus have to be convinced of the need. The best of orators would be needed for this task. Men like John Adams, Patrick Henry, and Alexander Hamilton could be counted on for such prestigious work. But there was a “lesser” job that was also required. This “Declaration of Independence” would need to be fleshed out in written form.

The founding fathers assigned this task to a committee made up of men who simply felt too busy and too important to do the job. Therefore the assignment was given to a young, bashful, red-headed and little known Virginian by the name of Thomas Jefferson. One of the few things known about Jefferson was that he had a very prolific pen. When left alone in his study he could powerfully craft documents to meet a number of needs. Within a couple of days work, he had written his declaration of independence and the Continental Congress took on the task of editing the document for their mutual agreement.

Perhaps the most well known phrase in the document, which has been memorized by multitudes of Americans:

“We hold these truths to be self evident that all men are created equal; and endowed by their Creator with inalienable rights including life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.”

While this was the version that was ultimately accepted, it was not what Jefferson initially wrote. Rather than “self evident” Jefferson declared these truths to be “sacred”—a word that conjures up images of Divine blessings that some of our founders, most notably Benjamin Franklin had issues with. At Franklin’s recommendation the word was changed to “self evident” and thus the document had at least somewhat lesser of a religious tone. Jefferson was much chagrined. Though in spite of these editorial revisions, the Declaration still clearly pointed to our Creator as the one who blesses us with truth, liberty, and human rights.

While most likely not a “born again” Christian, Jefferson had a healthy respect for God and a true desire to see religious liberty be the hallmark of American spirituality. It is Thomas Jefferson who is credited with coining the phrase “separation of church and state”; a phrase that has been picked up and used by Americans including the Supreme Court of the United States. In shocking rulings the Court has based decisions upon the “wall of separation that was to exist between the church and the state.” Yet the phrase “separation of church and state” is not found in the United States Constitution; the Declaration of Independence; nor any other founding American document. Jefferson used the phrase in a private letter written to the Danbury, Connecticut Baptist Association who feared the growing Federal government would try to dictate matters of religion to them. Far from being a rule to ban religion from the government or public square, Jefferson’s phrase was meant to allay Christian fears that Government would interfere in their free exercise of worship.

While Jefferson assured the Danbury Baptists that government would not interfere with their religious practices; the U.S. Constitution explicitly said it would not. In the very first amendment to the Constitution freedom of religion was protected with these words:

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”

The so called “establishment clause” has been used and abused by scores of secularists to try and succeed in doing everything from banning prayer in school to ripping down monuments of the Ten Commandments in court houses. Yet none of these activities are in violation of the Constitution; though ironically, prohibiting them are. By the state taking a stand for or against religion they are blatantly “respecting and prohibiting the free exercise” of religion. Such bans and government meddling are direct violations of the Constitution.

If a school required adherence to a specific religion then an argument could be made for government intrusion. But prayer, Bible reading, public displays of religion, including nativity scenes or Ten Commandment monuments are clearly not an establishment of religion. Because it requires no one to accept the tenets of said faith. America cannot escape its heritage of being founded on Christian principals by many people who were of the Christian faith. Admitting and honoring this Divine past is simply an exercise in History rather than a government establishment of religion.

While Thomas Jefferson’s views on religious liberty were clearly “pro-faith” his view on government as a whole should be studied and embraced by liberty loving Americans. The first political schisms began to show their faces early in our Nation’s history. Members of George Washington’s’ cabinet, who had been largely united in the cause of Independence had very different view on the role of Federal government in the lives of its citizens. The Federalists, led by Alexander Hamilton and John Adams sought to establish a strong (some might say overbearing) Federal government that would grant stability to the nation by providing a National defense; a National bank; and a hierarchical system of government. Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, and others who came to be known early on as “Republicans” saw this growing Federal government as a grave threat to the cause of liberty. Jefferson famously said that “the government that governs best is the one that governs least.” Much like modern day Conservatives; Jefferson sought a Federal government that had very minimal power and control over the daily lives of its people. An early advocate of “States Rights” Jefferson believed that the more local a government was, the more adequately it would be equipped to meet the needs of its particular region. For example, rather than a large and cumbersome Federal government, which was at that time headquartered in New York, dictating local matters to far away states. Jefferson sought to allow the states the freedom to make their own decisions, assuming they didn’t violate the U.S. Constitution. Again, the Constitution explicitly stated that this would be in the case in the tenth amendment which says:

“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

In other words, any powers not specifically granted by the Constitution to the Federal government were matters for the individual states to decide. Clearly, this amendment is being largely ignored by the Federal albatross that exists in the 21^st century.

As a case in point, the recent ruling by the Supreme Court that the Ten Commandments monument should be removed from the Alabama Supreme Court, at that time headed by Roy Moore, was clearly outside the bounds of Federal jurisdiction. Not only was such a ruling not in line with the establishment clause; the ruling was a direct violation of the tenth amendment which requires the Federal government to keep their nose out of Alabama matters. If, for example, Massachusetts decides that they don’t want the Ten Commandments in their court house then they are legally allowed to make that decision. But Massachusetts convictions cannot be forced upon Alabama as an established Federal law. And yet travesties of justice like these are committed on a frequent basis by an out of control Federal judiciary.

Amazingly, this rift that existed in Washington’s first cabinet between the Federalists and the Republicans continues to exist today. Though the names have changed and at times the divisions have morphed into several factions; for the most part a two party system has dominated American politics for over two centuries. In an array of semantic confusion, the Federalists of Revolutionary America became the Whigs and Republicans of Civil War America, and then became the Democrats of New Deal and 21^st century America. The Republicans of Jefferson’s time became the “State’s Rights” Democrats of the Civil War, which once again shifted to the current Republican party of our day. While the names have changed and sometimes simply switched camps; these two overarching political and governmental philosophies have remained constant. One group seeks Federal government control; while the other group seeks Individual liberty without an overwhelming Federal presence. One group seeks to expand government with programs and taxes, while the other group seeks to limit government by eliminating programs and cutting taxes. While hybrids of these two philosophies exist in some circles, the broad political philosophies still hold true.

Republicans, including Jefferson, saw a need for a certain amount of Federal governance. For example, the Federal government would be the protector of the people’s rights by providing a strong national defense. But the common belief of men like Jefferson was that “government made a great servant but a lousy master.” The government was meant to serve the people, yet today many people think they exist and are allowed to function as a gift from the Federal government. And therein lies one of the most inherent dangers in a large and cumbersome Federal entity. People are prone to look at government as their ultimate provider and protector rather than God. This sad and fearsome slide towards secularism began in early America, peaked during Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal Administration, and continues to hold sway over millions of Americans today who’s first reaction to any tragedy be it natural, accidental, or terrorism related is “where is the government?” Our people have exchanged the freedom they were meant to have by founders like Jefferson, for government control that more closely resembles Soviet Russia than the United States. With cradle to grave government control, some seek a Federal babysitter to meet their every whim and need rather than a Federal guard dog that will stay out of the way and let them live how they choose to, provided they don’t violate another citizen’s rights to do the same.

American Liberalism is a form of Socialism that is very similar in philosophy to Communism made famous by such dictators as Joseph Stalin, Fidel Castro, and modern day China. While many on the political left bristle at such suggestions the facts bear out the truth of this comparison. Communist regimes want no power to be conceived of higher than themselves. The last thing a dictatorial government wants its people to believe is that all people are accountable to a Sovereign God for their life and actions on earth. Such “theistic” views threaten the strangle hold these governments have upon their people. Communism, like American Liberalism, is an obvious system of power that is easily corrupted by its adherents because its core message is an evil denial of the ultimate power of an Omnipotent God. Therefore Communism, like American Liberalism, is in direct conflict with Biblical Christianity and the principals of freedom and liberty inherent in a Republican form of government. Just because American Liberals may sound sweeter and talk in more loving and flowery phraseology doesn’t mean their underlying desires for governmental control are any more benevolent than the heavy handed tactics of a militant dictator. American Liberalism, like Communism, means government control at the expense of Divine worship and personal liberty.

Ironically, this type of government control was the very reason the United States of America became a country in the first place. The British monarchy of King George III had driven the colonists to a state of rebellion because of its smothering taxation and despotism. Though they had fiercely fought and won freedom from the monarchy, some within the government sought to re-attach the yoke of oppression under a different name. Rather than a King ruling over the nation, the Federalists sought to have a Federal government rule the people in much the same fashion. Men like Jefferson fiercely opposed this and sounded the alarm early on. Yet Jefferson’s pleas were drown out by the overwhelmingly influential Alexander Hamilton.

Hamilton was a protégé, almost a son, to President George Washington. Born out of wedlock and raised on the island of St. Croix, Hamilton migrated to America and fought in Washington’s Army during the War for Independence. Immediately recognized by General Washington as an extremely able soldier of tremendous organizational skills and intelligence; he was made a member of Washington’s staff serving as Aide-de-Camp. When Washington was overwhelmingly elected as the first President of the United States, he sought to have a group of advisors who would assist him in the administration of the government. Though not specifically laid out in the Constitution, Washington’s plan for a “Cabinet” became a fixture in Executive American government.

Washington’s Cabinet sounded like a “who’s who” of great American patriots. John Adams was Vice-President and President of the Senate based upon his 2^nd place finish in the Presidential election. Thomas Jefferson, who had just completed a five year stretch as Ambassador to France, was tapped as the first Secretary of State. And Alexander Hamilton, a brilliant financier, was named the first Secretary of the Treasury. Though today, a “pecking order” is somewhat established by the Presidential succession laws, in Washington’s time Cabinet power was largely up for grabs, and Hamilton seized it early on. He was clearly seen as Washington’s right hand man and closest confidant. Subsequently, many of the arguments that Republicans like Jefferson made to the President fell on deaf ears.

Hamilton had a massive job ahead of him as Treasury Secretary with a Nation nearly broke from a long and expensive war with Britain. Many of the individual states were deeply in debt because of war costs, but Hamilton had a plan to alleviate the states of this burden. His plan of “Assumption” called for the Federal government to take over the war debts of the individual states. Kind of like a modern day “consolidation loan” Hamilton sought to unify the state debts into one massive national debt. On the surface this might seem like a tremendous blessing to the states, but make no mistake Federal strings were attached. The reliance and power this would give to the Federal government made men like Jefferson way too uncomfortable. Furthermore, the Southern states had already worked hard to eliminate much of their war debts; so the North would stand to benefit much more from the measure. The ultimate lynch pin for whether or not this plan would pass was the support (or lack of support) granted by President Washington. The most revered and influential man in America, Washington eventually backed the Assumption plan which led to its acceptance. Again Jefferson was bitterly disappointed with even more political fights and disappointments to come.

Alexander Hamilton’s next desire was to establish a National bank that could boost the economy and provide loans to the business sector. While Jefferson did not oppose financial institutions per se, he cringed at the thought of one that had as much government influence as Hamilton’s plan called for. No doubt seeing the “hand writing on the wall” Jefferson entered into an act of shrewd cunning in order to grant Hamilton the support he sought for his bank.

In what has been called the most important dinner party in American History, Thomas Jefferson invited Alexander Hamilton and James Madison over to his house for dinner. Many years later, as President, Jefferson would become legendary for his dinner party deals and politicking; but this dinner party dwarfed all others in its bearing on history. Jefferson was a loyal Virginian who favored the “State’s Rights” doctrine of his fellow Southerners. Furthermore, with the Nation’s capital in New York or Philadelphia; Jefferson feared that too much Northern Federalism would permeate the government. He desperately wanted to move the capital South so that he and other Virginians could keep an eye on it. His belief was that the Federal government would become way too radical unless it was in a physical location that forced the Northern Federalists to be aware of their Southern Republican brethren. To grant the Nation’s capital to any one state seemed unwise, therefore Jefferson proposed that a “Federal city” be built to house the Capital and the President’s office and home. A tract of land on the Potomac River, surrounded by Virginia and Maryland, both Southern states, was suggested for the new capital that would be named after the first President, Washington, D.C. If it was support for a National bank that Hamilton sought, Jefferson said he was willing to grant it…IF, Hamilton would support plans to move the capital to Washington. The agreement was made, and the rest is history.

With his first term as President coming to completion, George Washington desperately sought retirement. He longed to be back on his farm at Mount Vernon and to hand the reins to another. But both political sides balked at such an idea. Jefferson’s Republicans and Hamilton’s Federalists were united in their desire for Washington to serve another term. While the two sides had drastically different ideas about government, they were in agreement on their desire to see America succeed, and they couldn’t see that happening without Washington’s unifying presence. Washington finally acquiesced and won a second term by unanimous support of the American people. Four years later when he finally did step down, the scene was set for a bitter fight to assume his mantle. The Federalist John Adams and the Republican Thomas Jefferson squared off in the infamous election of 1796 and again in 1800. Historians have declared that the 1800 election could have very well been the most vicious campaign in American History. Both sides slandered the other in a vain attempt to gain power. “Dumpster diving” newspaper reporters were employed to find, or make up, dirt on political opponents. When it was all settled, Adams won the battle for the Presidency in 1796, though he might have lost the greater War of Historical importance. Jefferson, who finished second, was named Vice-President according to the current law of the land, and would go on to win the Presidency in 1800.

Although by 1800 Adams and Jefferson were bitter enemies, this was not always so. During the 1780’s both men had served in Europe as ambassadors of the United States, Jefferson in France and Adams in Britain. During this time a strong bond was forged between the two. So much so that Adams referred to his son John Quincy as “our” when talking about him to Jefferson. Adams stated that John Quincy almost considered Jefferson to be a second father to him. Likewise, Abigail Adams serves as a powerful feminine influence to the widower Jefferson. In her forthright manner, she implored him to send for his daughter living in America so that his family would be united. Jefferson eventually took her counsel with Abigail actually picking up Jefferson’s daughter when her ship docked in England. Abigail stated that her husband John had no closer confidant in the world than Thomas Jefferson. They were the stereotypical example of opposites attracting. Adams was a short stocky, outspoken Northerner from Massachusetts with a legendary temper. Jefferson was a tall, lean, bookish Southerner who hated confrontation. Their friendship flourished while in Europe, but was severely strained once they jointly served in Washington’s cabinet, and was all but destroyed by the election of 1800.

The first twelve years of the Presidency saw a Federalist in power. Though technically Washington was a political neutral, his policies were so heavily influenced by Hamilton that he is largely considered a Federalist; and Adams was clearly a Federalist. But Jefferson’s 1800 election ushered in twenty-four years of Republican dominance. Jefferson served from 1801-1809, followed by his protégé, and fellow Virginian James Madison from 1809-1817, followed once more by another Virginian James Monroe from 1817-1825. During this period of Republican dominance, the Nation grew in numbers and in land. Jefferson’s Louisiana Purchase, considered the greatest real estate deal in History, doubled the size of the country for a paltry $15 million. It was also during these years that Jefferson’s legacy began to grow and become enshrined in American lore. As Jefferson and the Republicans grew in stature, the Federalists of John Adams day began to wither. In 1824, Adams’ son John Quincy won the Presidency only to lose it after one term to a Southerner, Andrew Jackson. While Jefferson’s name grew more famous and John Adams grew more forgotten the two had an amazing reconciliation in their later years.

Benjamin Rush, who had served with both Jefferson and Adams in the Continental Congress, had kept up correspondence with both men; and he pleaded with them both to contact each other. Finally on New Years Day 1811 John Adams picked up a pen and wrote wishing Holiday wishes to his old friend and enemy. Jefferson wrote back in what would be the first of 158 letters to go back in forth between the two. They discussed everything from books to philosophy to education to religion. When Adams’ beloved with Abigail passed away in 1818, Jefferson consoled his friend as no others could, having lost his own wife Martha at the age of 39 and remaining a widower to the end. In 1826, the curtain was closing on these two lions of the American Revolution. Adams, 90, and Jefferson, 83, were both in poor health. As providence would have it, John Adams passed away on July 4, 1826; the 50^th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence. His final words were: “Jefferson survives.” Though unbeknownst to him, his final words were in error; for Thomas Jefferson in had passed away in Virginia five hours earlier. Thus two of the most influential men in American History, the second and third Presidents of the United States both died on the 50^th anniversary of the Nation’s Independence. An eerie coincidence that many read as a sign from Heaven that America was indeed a gift from God to the world. A nation where freedom would exist unlike any other nation in world history. A freedom that would have to be fought for and defended on countless battle fields. And a freedom that would have to be protected in government from those within the nation who would seek to undermine and even destroy it.

Jefferson’s political descendants remain. They can be seen in all liberty loving Americans who want nothing more than to live their lives in peace and earn a living by the sweat of their brow. They can be seen in the local and state governments that believe they can better serve their people than a faraway Federal dictator can. They can be seen in the home schooling parents that wish to provide a solid Christian education to their children without the atheistic and secular control of a government that scoffs at all they believe in. They can be seen in a movement of Conservatism that seeks relief from overbearing taxation that punishes hard work and robs citizens of the finances that are rightfully theirs. Jefferson’s political descendants can be seen in those who truly believe that “we hold these truths to be self-evident (and sacred). That all men are created equal and endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, among which are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” Jefferson’s personal belief was that “all men” included black men as he sought early in his career to see slavery abolished. Today his political descendants can be seen in those who stand up for the equal rights and opportunities granted to black, white, male, female, children born and unborn. Though occasionally taken to an extreme, the majority of Jefferson’s political descendants can be seen in the faces of hard working, truth seeking, liberty loving Americans who work hard for their families, and expect their government to work hard for them; rather than against them. Jefferson’s political descendants are there. They live daily in what many would call the political right. Adams’ and Hamilton’s political descendants exist today as well in a position that has veered so far to the left and away from anything any of the founders would have ever dreamed of. Indeed many within 21^st century America seek to take the Federalist philosophy to a totalitarian extreme. Re-enslaving the people to overwhelming taxation; government banned religion, and legalized infanticide.

The “American Experiment” has now lasted well over 200 years, but will America remain the world power and bastion of freedom it once was? Excessive governmental control is the very antithesis of liberty, but Federal control is mushrooming in our nation today. The election of Barack Obama as President has caused the radical, left to seize power…and the results will be nothing short of catastrophic to the American people, and the cause of liberty. It’s a fight that has existed since our Nation’s inception, and it will continue one. Will government be your Master? Or will it be your Servant? In a free society like ours….the people decide. The question remains….which will they choose…and what will become of our once cherished Nation of Freedom and Liberty.

Posted in History, Current Events, Political Issues | Print | No Comments »

October 8, 2008 by Shane Kastler.

Since the economy is making so much news these days, I thought I would recommend a great (and easy) book on understanding how the economy works.  The book is called, Basic Economics: A Common Sense Guide to the Economy, and is written by Thomas Sowell.

As a business major in college, I was required to take several classes in Economics, Finance, Accounting, etc……but I learned a lot more about economics from Sowell’s book than I did in any college class.  In the book he explains how free markets work, how prices are affected by supply and demand, how competition controls prices, and how government intervention usually screws everything up.  When the government gets too involved in economic situations, they distort the true value of things, thus creating financial havoc.

Thomas Sowell is what you might call a "Liberal’s worst nightmare"– he’s a black conservative who frequently speaks out against Barack Obama and democratic policies.  Sowell also has a fascinating life story.  A high school dropout who joined the Marine Corps, Sowell eventually got a GED, then earned degrees from Harvard and Columbia University before earning a Ph.D. in Economics from the University of Chicago.  So he knows way more than most of us ever will about the economy, but he’s able to explain it in a way that simpletons like me can understand.  His political commentary is very insightful as well and you can read it at townhall.com.

In conclusion, if you want to understand what in the world the news guys are talking about with the economy.  Or if you want to understand why Obama’s economic philosophy will be detrimental to our nation.  Get a copy of Sowell’s book.  It’s informative, well-written, and best of all, easy to understand.

Posted in Current Events, Political Issues, Book Reviews | Print | 3 Comments »

April 8, 2008 by Shane Kastler.

I’m an Oklahoma Sooner fan and that’s no secret to anyone who knows me. But as I watched Kansas play in the NCAA championship game on Monday night, I think I was more nervous than I’ve ever been watching the end of any Sooner game. Since I’ve lived in the Kansas City area since 2000, I’m really a lot more familiar with Kansas basketball than I am Oklahoma. With football it’s a different story because the Sooners are on TV every week even in KC….but with basketball, the Jayhawks dominate the local headlines. 

And I’ll admit that I became a much bigger Jayhawk fan when Bill Self was hired in 2003. Self, an Oklahoma native, is a guy that I feel like I’ve known for years. I remember him playing at Oklahoma State back in the early 1980’s….and I attended several Tulsa University games when he was coach there in the late 1990’s. Bill left Oklahoma and headed north the same year I did in 2000. He went to Illinois and I went to Kansas City. Then Bill moved to Kansas one year before I did. He went to Lawrence in 2003, I came to Pleasanton in 2004. When Self came to Kansas I predicted he would win a National Championship within 2 years (I missed it by 3) because with some people you can just tell that they’re destined for greatness, and Self is one of them. So I’m a big Bill Self fan, and consequently, I always want to see the Jayhawks succeed….but late Monday night, it appeared to be over, and I was anticipating a lot of sad faces here in Jayhawk land.

During halftime of the game, I wrote my weekly newspaper column for the Linn County News. It was an article on the importance of the Bible in a Christian’s life. With 2 minutes left in the game, I was working on a different article in my head. I was going to postpone my “Bible” article one week because I knew there would be a lot of broken hearts in Kansas, so I was thinking of writing an article on how to deal with disappointment. I was thinking of verses to use. I was thinking of how I could use the gut wrenching Jayhawk loss as a platform to minister to the folks of Linn County, when something very strange began to happen on my TV screen. KU began to rally.

Of course rallying from 9 points down with 2 minutes to go never really succeeds in basketball because it requires you to foul the other team so you can stop the clock. And anyone who has reached the skill level of an NCAA athlete will simply drain a series of free throws to put the game out of reach…..AWWWW, but not MEMPHIS! The Tigers had attained a gaudy 38-1 record by pummeling a series of Conference USA cream puffs into submission. Most of their games weren’t all that close, so why should they care about free throws? Consequently, they became a lousy free throw shooting team….and finally…in their 40^th game of the season…..it caught up with them.

At this point, I’ll also make some comments regarding Scripture because (believe it or not) Scripture played a big role with some of the key participants in this game. Chris Douglas-Roberts, Memphis’ superstar, has a part of Psalm 37 tattooed on his right arm. Perhaps you noticed when he shoots free throws; he taps his right arm after each dribble, then shoots. It’s kind of a “good luck charm”….that didn’t turn out too lucky. While I commend him for having Scripture in his life, I would warn anyone against using God as a “good luck charm.” The Bible is not a rabbit’s foot, nor a lucky clover….and so there can be real danger in approaching Scripture from an “abracadabra” perspective. As fate (or providence) would have it…it was Roberts who tapped his good luck charm 3 times….then MISSED the free throws that kept Kansas alive. But there was someone else using Scripture inside the Alamodome on Monday night as well.

Ronnie Chalmers, the dad of KU guard Mario Chalmers, had 2 Bible verses in his pocket, that he continually pulled out and read during the game. “Be still, and know that I am God,” Psalm 46:10 and “God is a refuge and strength. A very present help in trouble,” Psalm 46:1. So was Mr. Chalmers using Scripture for a good luck charm, or was he simply seeking some strength from the Lord? I can’t answer that, but what I CAN tell you, is that a couple of minutes later….with the game all but over…..Ronnie’s son Mario took a pass with 5 seconds left….took one dribble to his left….then heaved a desperation 3-pointer with time running out…..while he was falling backwards…..that SOMEHOW went in and sent the game into overtime. And I think everyone watching the game, knew deep down inside, that it was over. KU dominated a Memphis team in overtime that was completely shocked and deflated. I was happy for the Jayhawks and the whole state of Kansas. They were due for some good news. One other comment I’ll make about the game concerns Roy Williams, KU’s former coach. Many KU fans have seethed at Roy for jilting the Jayhawks for his alma mater North Carolina back in 2003. Roy had turned down NC back in 2000 and then stupidly promised he would never leave KU. (The book of James warns us not to make bold assertions of a future we know nothing about.) But by 2003, things had changed: Roy now had an athletic director that he despised, he had just lost the National Championship for the 2^nd time at Kansas, and he had the opportunity (maybe for the last time) to go home again. He took it, and became the biggest goat in KU history. Fast forward 5 years. Saturday night, Bill Self’s Jayhawks pummeled Roy and the Tar Hills by 18 points. KU got their revenge because Roy got humiliated.  So, where do you find Roy on Monday night?….Sitting in the stands at the Alamodome, watching the championship game, wearing a big Jayhawk pin on his shirt. Say what you will about Roy Williams, but he’s a class act in my book. If it were me….being ripped by the KU fans for 5 years….I would have probably told them where they could stick their Jayhawk….but Roy’s a bigger man than me. He graciously cheered on the school he led for 15 years. And you have to wonder if he wasn’t secretly wishing he was still on KU’s bench. Several fans in Carolina swear that Roy’s heart is still in Lawrence….and they’re probably right. But, in all honesty, if Roy had stayed at Kansas…..KU would NOT be celebrating this morning. Roy’s departure brought Bill Self. And Bill Self brought with him an unrivaled ability to recruit All-Americans; a desire to play ferocious defense, and a knack for taking a bunch of superstars, and teaching them to play as an unselfish “team.”…..and ultimately it’s “teams” not “stars” nor even coaches that when titles. Congratulations to Bill Self and the Kansas Jayhawks. They’re the 2008 National Champions….the best “team” in college basketball.

Posted in Current Events | Print | 2 Comments »