What to Expect from the 110th Congress
Jan 04, 2007
The 110th Congress has now begun with the Democratic Party in control of it. President Bush now is appealing to them for bi-partisanship. Watching this is like watching the start of the second half of a football game between the parties, where the score is 40 for the Democrats and 0 for the Republicans. The strategy? The Republicans now ask to call it a tied game.
Of course, if the shoe were on the other foot, the strategy would be largely the same, but in reverse. Politicians must have quite a sense of humor.
The Democrats do not have complete power yet, but we can expect them to pass many bills with a thin majority, which will then be in danger of being vetoed by the President. There will never be enough votes to override a presidential veto. So it looks like we are back to what they call a "do-nothing Congress."
The President's new idea on the Iraq War means sending another 20,000 troops there as soon as possible. Some public relations man must have come up with the term "surge" rather than "escalation" of the troop level. It sounds better, but the math is largely the same. I often wonder if the President or one of his advisors have a secret agenda--to destroy the Republican Party altogether and ensure full power to the Democrats in the next election.
The McIlvany Intelligence Advisor (PO Box 84904, Phoenix, AZ 85071) writes,
"In America, the war against terrorism has been the justification for handing to the government and politicians, police state powers not seen since Nazi Germany or Soviet Russia and never before seen in America or envisioned by our founding fathers. Total surveillance of all citizens (not just Islamic terrorists); torture of prisoners, abolition of Constitutionally-protected prevention of arbitrary search and seizure; the neutering of the right to habeas corpus (which requires that an arrested suspect be formally charged with his crime and be given a fair and speedy trial); sharp limitations on freedom of speech if that speech is critical of the government or is 'politically incorrect' and much more also are all part of the 'anti-terrorist net' which is now descending on 300 million innocent, law-abiding Americans of all faiths, colors, and political persuasions."
That is a horribly long sentence, but I underlined the main items listed so that you can see them better at a glance. Yes, Russia itself now has more freedoms than we do. They even allow biblical material to be taught in public schools.
McIlvany then gives a very insightful statement, which I too have contemplated for some time now. . .
"During the dark, debauched Clinton years, Christians, conservatives, traditionalists, and pro-lifers were branded by the Clintons, Janet Reno, and their leftist comrades as 'the dangerous radical right wing' and even as 'terrorists' . . .
"Imagine if the Clintons had had the vast police state powers which Bush and the Republicans have birthed to 'fight terrorism' -- to use against Christians, conservatives, and traditionalists. As the political left takes root in Washington, will the Christian right take the place of Islamic terrorists in the crosshairs of their 'war on terrorism'? This writer fears so!"
I noticed some years ago that when the Democrats gained control, they were called the "tax-and-spend" party, because they always spent more on social programs than the tax revenues took into the coffers. The people then got tired of this and elected Republicans who promised to balance the budget. But then the Republicans overspent on the military buildups and foreign wars, bringing our national debt even higher.
When we get tired of one set of bad policies, we shift to another set of bad policies. In this way, we unhappily stair-step toward financial ruin. Half the time we spend to make America into a Union of Socialist States, and the other half of the time we spend removing Constitutionally-protected rights. In other words, first we move toward International Socialism (mislabeled "communism"); and then we move toward National Socialism (Nazi-ism). Between the two sides, we have effectively destroyed the American Republic as it was originally conceived.
McIlvany sees how the Republicans have been putting anti-terrorism laws on the books. He then looks into the future to see how a Democratic government would implement those same anti-terrorism laws. He sees the inclusion of Christians in the definition of "terrorists," unless, of course, they do not take the Bible seriously. A Democratically-controlled government, he believes, will be afraid of serious Christians, first calling them radicals, and then terrorists.
Those Denominations that focus only upon social programs, and which downgrade the Bible to a merely good book on par with the holy books of all religions, will be favored. All others could lose their tax-exempt status. They will then begin to prosecute the more outspoken and/or radical of the evangelical ministers. This will set the precedents for prosecuting the rest of us.
Given enough time--and apart from any divine intervention--it will eventually be illegal to set forth any opinion or argument that places one religion above another. Evangelism itself will be outlawed as "insulting" to the founders of other religions. Conversions could be considered to be as illegal here as in some other countries.
None of this would take place immediately, of course. But we have been moving toward that place for a long time. Each national crisis jolts us faster toward that goal.
You know, of course, that in my view we are soon going to see some major divine intervention that will change the course of history. In my view, the Babylonian system is too powerful for anyone to oppose on their turf. And, in fact, God raised up this system as judgment upon us, as certainly as He raised it up in the days of Jeremiah. So to oppose it by violence and force is neither helpful nor biblical.
The biblical solution is to engage in intercession and spiritual warfare in order to bring about a national repentance and change the hearts of the people themselves. Then and only then will God deal with the Babylonian system, for it has no power to oppose Him.
Rev. 11:15 sees the time when "the kingdoms of this world have become the Kingdom of our Lord and of His Christ; and He shall reign for the ages of the ages."
The Old Testament pattern in Jeremiah shows that Babylon will fall at God's appointed time. The pattern in Daniel 4 shows that the King of Babylon will ultimately declare Babylon to be under God--that is, under the God of Daniel (Dan. 4:34-37).
This pattern was repeated with Medo-Persia a few years after they conquered Babylon. King Darius, the Mede, made a decree in Dan. 6:25-27 declaring that everyone under his dominion must worship the God of Daniel. This is a double witness of prophecy for things that will shortly come to pass.
I will do a more detailed study on this tomorrow, God willing.
Dr. Stephen Jones