CRINO's: [C]hristian [R]epublicans [I]n [N]ame [O]nly

---

POLITICS & RELIGION / CINO'S + RINO'S = CRINO'S: [C]HRISTIAN [R]EPUBLICANS [I]N [N]AME [O]NLY

---

Many of our pastors and Christian leaders today are far more interested in not offending the powers that be than they are in speaking the uncompromising message of truth. This is especially true if the political power has an "R" behind his name. It doesn't seem to matter to a tinker's dam whether that man promotes policies that expand abortion-on-demand, that further legitimize aberrant sexual lifestyles, that leave our borders open to terrorists, that eviscerate constitutional freedoms, or that explode the size and scope of the federal government. Because he is a Republican, he is "good" and must not be opposed.

Dear Brother Pastor: Dare To Be A Micaiah

~ By Chuck Baldwin
October 24, 2006

Today's column is a heart-felt appeal to my pastor-brethren. If there was ever a time when God's men in America needed to stand independently and courageously for that which is right, it is now. And if we, the pastors and preachers of America, will not stand for what is right, how can anyone else be expected to stand? Specifically, are we God's men, or have we become the lackeys for powerful politicians? I fear that in far too many instances, it is the latter.

Throughout history, God's true champions were stalwart, independent men. Men who could not be bought or bribed. Men who chose the life of unpopularity or even prison rather than kowtowing to kings or potentates. Men such as the Old Testament prophet Micaiah.

We all remember the story of Micaiah, don't we? Micaiah was the prophet who warned Ahab and Jehoshaphat regarding their imminent battle at Ramoth-gilead recorded for us in II Chronicles chapter 18.

What fascinates me about the story of Micaiah is that all the rest of the prophets, some 400 of them, said only what the king wanted to hear. Not one of them was willing to speak the truth. Not one of them was willing to defy the king's wishes. Not one of them was willing to put their allegiance to God above their friendship with the king. Then Micaiah entered the story.

Micaiah stood boldly before the king of Judah and the king of Israel and courageously told the truth. He did not try to curry favor with the king. He did not try to ingratiate himself with the king. He courageously spoke truth to power. And, as one might expect, he was not rewarded for it-at least not in this life. In spite of this, Micaiah stood as a true champion of God. A man among men. God's man.

Where are the Micaiahs today? Especially among our national Christian leaders, where is Micaiah?

It seems that many of our pastors and Christian leaders today are far more interested in not offending the powers that be than they are in speaking the uncompromising message of truth. This is especially true if the political power has an "R" behind his name. It doesn't seem to matter to a tinker's dam whether that man promotes policies that expand abortion-on-demand, that further legitimize aberrant sexual lifestyles, that leave our borders open to terrorists, that eviscerate constitutional freedoms, or that explode the size and scope of the federal government. Because he is a Republican, he is "good" and must not be opposed.

In such a case, have we preachers not become glorified politicians? Have we not become the servants of men?

In the story of Micaiah, it was both the "good" king Jehoshophat and the "evil" king Ahab that had made the decision to disobey God and imperil the lives of their countrymen. Both the "good" king and the "evil" king needed to hear the truth. And while they heard it not from the rest of Israel's prophets, they heard the truth from Micaiah. Both men heard the truth from Micaiah.

Whether a president, senator, or congressman is a "good" Republican or an "evil" Democrat, they need to hear a consistent message of truth from God's preachers. Our political leaders (of both parties) need to be held accountable for their misdeeds, their erroneous policies, and their unconstitutional decisions. If today's pastors would be as concerned about speaking the truth as they are about who is being elected and about not offending Republicans, our country would be much better off. Much better.

I dare say that if Al Gore or John Kerry had been elected President, they would not have been allowed to do half of what George W. Bush has gotten away with, because pastors and Christian leaders of every stripe would have shouted their disapproval from the housetops. But because Mr. Bush has an "R" behind his name, those same pastors and Christian leaders sit fat and happy-and silent. The result: George W. Bush has inflicted more lasting harm on America than Bill Clinton ever thought about inflicting. That's not an affront to George W. Bush, nor is it praise for Bill Clinton. It's an indictment upon America's pulpits.

There is another element to this discussion, one that almost everyone seems to have forgotten. When the Jewish leaders brought accusation against Jesus to Pilate, do you remember what their charge was? It was, "If you don't crucify Jesus, you are not a friend to Caesar, because Jesus is not a friend to Caesar." The fear that Pilate might be regarded as unfriendly to Caesar and that Jesus was already regarded as not being a friend to Caesar caused Pilate to consent to Jesus' death.

Forget that Caesar had enslaved the Jewish people. Forget that he was their oppressor. Forget that they labored under the heavy hand of Caesar's tyranny and taxation. They, the Jewish leaders, had formed a friendly alliance with Caesar, an alliance from which they personally greatly benefited. Therefore, they would let no one, not even their Messiah and Savior, jeopardize their friendship with Caesar.

It grieves me deeply to report that, in my estimation, this desire to be Caesar's friend has eclipsed the willingness of many of today's pastors and preachers to speak the truth. More than that, they even seem willing to join those forces that seek to silence anyone who dares challenge Caesar. Once again, especially if Caesar has an "R" behind his name.

We preachers must remain independent from the fetters of the desire for popularity or political approval. We must not give in to the temptation to become glorified politicians. As preachers, we have but one task: preach the truth, stand for the truth, and defend the truth. Whether the truth hurts Democrats or Republicans should not concern us. Whether we are considered "friends" to presidents should not matter. Who knows how Israel's history might have been changed for the better if those 400 prophets had followed Micaiah's example and not groveled before Ahab. Who knows how Germany's history might have been changed for the better if that nation's 14,000 pastors had followed the example of Dietrich Bonhoeffer and not groveled before Hitler.

By the same token, America's future will be largely determined by which example today's pastors and preachers decide to follow. Dear brother pastor: dare to be a Micaiah.

© Chuck Baldwin

Chuck Baldwin's commentaries are copyrighted and may be republished, reposted, or emailed providing the person or organization doing so does not charge for subscriptions or advertising and that the column is copied intact and that full credit is given and that Chuck's web site address is included.

Editors or Publishers of publications charging for subscriptions or advertising who want to run these columns must contact Chuck Baldwin for permission. Radio or television Talk Show Hosts interested in scheduling an interview with Chuck should contact chuck@chuckbaldwinlive.com.

When responding, please include your name, city and state. And, unless otherwise requested, all respondents will be added to the Chuck Wagon address list.

Please visit Chuck's web site at http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com.

Send A Link For This Article To A Friend Send an e-mail message with a link to this article to anyone/everyone in your address book. Click on e-mail [envelope] icon, below

---

Democrat Smokescreen Avoids Real Issues

---

POLITICS / A DEMOCRAT-CONTROLLED CONGRESS MEANS EVEN BIGGER TROUBLE LIES AHEAD FOR AMERICAN PEOPLE

---

Democrat Smokescreen Avoids Addressing The Real Issues Facing The American People . . .

Democrats have a potentially masterful plan for removing Republicans from majority control, but what is their plan for action if they win?

The agenda-less party has become infected with a paralyzing negativity.

Democrats and the mainstream media are engaged in an elaborate scam. They have undisguised contempt for traditional values voters. On immigration, no matter how poorly Republicans have performed, the Democrats' approach would be significantly worse. They would open the borders wider, discourage assimilation further and promote amnesty harder. On the economy, they would increase domestic spending even more. They would raise their taxes at the inevitable expense of choking the life out of our robust growth and increasing the deficit and national debt. The middle class and poor would be hurt. They would compromise the security of every American in the war on terror.

"I hope this election is going to mark the demise of values voters ... that they don't determine the election the way they were seen to have the last time around." ~~ Newsweek's liberal Jonathan Alter

Christian conservatives are blind to the left's contempt for them or self-destructive enough to contribute to the ascension of the party that boos the Boy Scouts and filibusters Constitution-honoring judges.

New Column: Without Conservative Help, Democrats Shouldn't Bet The Farm

~ By David Limbaugh
October 23, 2006

The real question facing voters in November is whether Democrats will be able to do to the entire legislative branch what they've done to their party. The agenda-less party has become infected with a paralyzing negativity born of its singular hatred for President Bush. Will that mindset be permitted to seize control of our legislative branch? Will disgruntled conservatives collude to make this happen?

How many times have you heard Democrats decrying the Bush administration for having no plan to win the peace in Iraq? We might have executed the initial phase of the war masterfully by removing Saddam, they now grudgingly concede, but we didn't anticipate and plan for the problems that would arise after his removal.

Putting aside a debate over that assertion, let's apply the same standard to their agenda for America today. Shouldn't we ask: "Democrats have a potentially masterful plan for removing Republicans from majority control, but what is their plan for action if they win?

Let's just look at the most important issues: the war on terror, including Iraq, the economy, social issues and immigration. In each category, they either have no plan or are unwilling to publicize it for fear that Rovian Republicans will pick it apart and expose its flaws.

On immigration, no matter how poorly Republicans have performed, the Democrats' approach would be significantly worse. They would open the borders wider, discourage assimilation further and promote amnesty harder.

On the economy, they would increase domestic spending even more. And in their compulsion to punish the "rich," they would raise their taxes at the inevitable expense of choking the life out of our robust growth and increasing the deficit and national debt. Though the middle class and poor would be hurt, the rich would feel it, too -- and that would be almost as gratifying as hating President Bush.

On social issues, Democrats and the mainstream media are engaged in an elaborate scam. I've been saying for years that they have undisguised contempt for traditional values voters. They are proving it daily through their concerted drive to suppress the values voter turnout.

Their inconsistent pretense to represent this very block of voters was revealed as the fraud it is by recent comments of Newsweek's liberal Jonathan Alter, who said, "I hope this election is going to mark the demise of values voters ... that they don't determine the election the way they were seen to have the last time around."

It is inconceivable that Christian conservatives are blind to the left's contempt for them or self-destructive enough to contribute to the ascension of the party that boos the Boy Scouts and filibusters Constitution-honoring judges.

On national security generally, Democrats would ratchet up even further their opposition to almost every tool we use to prosecute the war.

On Iraq, if you concede that conditions there are discouraging, you still -- as a responsible voter -- must ask yourself what Democrats would do differently -- unless you are just too angry to care. Democrats are irreversibly committed to the myth that Iraq is not part of the war on terror -- never mind that all global jihadists themselves radically disagree.

This commitment requires Democrats to deny the consequences our precipitous withdrawal would necessarily have on the war on terror -- and thus on America's security. The April 2006 NIE report concludes that our withdrawal from Iraq would embolden terrorists and make us more vulnerable at home. Other experts who Democrats are fond of citing, like James Baker, also warn that it would create worse civil and ethnic strife and cause Iraq to become more of a hotbed for terrorist mischief. But, hey, reversing Bush's policy and discrediting him must take priority over the national interest.

Not only would the Democrats' Bush-hating and policy-bankruptcy be demonstrated in their approach to the issues; it would also play out in their endless investigations against the president and possible efforts to impeach him upon taking control.

Don't discount the possibility that all this hype about conservatives staying home is a carefully orchestrated ruse to suppress their turnout. Even if it isn't, the liberals' arrogance and premature boasting will surely motivate to the polls all but those rare, implacable conservatives, because even disgruntled conservatives know we can't afford to teach big-spending Republicans a lesson in the middle of a war.

Consider also that Republicans are better organized and funded and possess more intensity, that many polls have oversampled Democrats and that as the election approaches, voters will more seriously compare the parties' respective fitness to protect America. Democrats better not bet their farms just yet.

Copyright David Limbaugh 1994-2006

Send A Link For This Article To A Friend Send an e-mail message with a link to this article to anyone/everyone in your address book. Click on e-mail [envelope] icon, below

---