Nukes

NewsMax.Com has a couple of sobering reports today. The first claims that it is a widely shared opinion in Washington that an Israeli airstrike/ special operations effort is in the works for Iran's nuclear facilities. The only question seems to be whether it will be timed to take place before or after the November election. The article offers some speculation as to how Iran might retaliate should such an attack occur.

The second piece is even more disturbing. Apparently there is some evidence that al Qaida has obtained as many as ten suitcase-type nuclear weapons each powerful enough to level half of Manhatten. There is concern that at least some of these may have been smuggled into the U.S. with the intention of detonating them in either Boston or New York during the political conventions soon to be held in those cities.

Let us pray to God that our Homeland Security Department is better than its critics have been telling us.

A Legacy of Freedom

Nikita Demosthenes has an interesting observation on the legacies of Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush:

In the encyclopedias and history books on the shelves 100 years from now, Bush will be rightly seen as being the one to finally turn the tide of tyranny and intolerance in the Middle East toward democracy and freedom. With more freedom in the Middle East, the terrorist groups will slowly decline as their potential members get real jobs and real careers.

This has always been the answer to Middle East unrest - which the left almost never admits: we don't need to throw money at existing dictatorships, we need to foster democracy.

One hundred years from now the left will be seen to have missed the boat on this issue just like they missed the boat on Ronald Reagan's courageous stand resulting in the demise of Soviet communism.

When it comes to the actual number of people freed from tyranny, the records of President Ronald Reagan and President George W. Bush are unmatched in world history. President Reagan's stand against Soviet communism led to the freedom of over 700 million people behind the Iron Curtain. President George W. Bush's stand against Middle East tyranny has already resulted in the freedom of over 50 million people in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Almost a billion people have tasted freedom for the first time due to these two American Administrations. When is the last time your heard an American network anchor - or a European leader - site these numbers? They're breathtaking.

We might add that the 50 million people liberated so far is a number that may well increase in the years ahead as other Middle Eastern tyrannies, Iran, for example, begin to realize that they are on the wrong side of history and begin to move toward granting their people more freedom. Or, perhaps more likely, the people begin seizing freedom for themselves.

It should also be noted that Bush is achieving this marvellous historical accomplishment at tremendous political risk to himself. There were no guarantees that the military operation in Iraq would be a success, and the outcome of that undertaking is still uncertain. Bush didn't do this because it was politically popular or expedient. He did it because he believed it was right, and if doing what was right costs him reelection then he is prepared to suffer that consequence.

This is one of the things about him that I personally find so admirable, and it certainly distinguishes him from the current challenger and any number of other focus group politicians for whom the phrase doing what's right is synonomous with doing what'll get me elected.

<i>Who </i>Lied?

According to a story at FoxNews.com it's beginning to look like George Bush told us the truth after all about Iraq's attempts to buy uranium from Niger and that Joe Wilson, winner of The Nation's truth-telling award, lied. Raise your hand if you're surprised.

Apologies are expected to start pouring in at any moment from all those who have been insisting for the past year that Bush lied to us about Iraq's attempts to obtain nuclear fuel.

Northwest Airlines Flight 327

Back from ten days in glorious Costa Rica! Many thanks to Bill () for his provocative pieces on the gold standard and economic policy in general in my absence.

I didn't look at a newspaper the entire time I was gone so I suppose I have some catching up to do on what's going on in the world. For example, this astonishing story may have been featured prominently in the news. If so, please forgive me for calling it to your attention here. In case it wasn't, however, don't miss this article. If you're a flier, or even if you're not, it'll give you a knot deep in your stomach. One wonders how the FAA can justify passenger screening procedures that elevate an incredibly stupid adherence to political correctness above the safety of those who travel by air.

Unless the Bush administration shakes itself free of the ridiculous pretense that ethnic profiling is somehow sinful and wakes up to the fact, obvious to all but the most rationally impaired bureaucrats in the upper echelons of the Department of Transportation, that the threat to the lives of our loved ones and ourselves is primarily a threat posed by swarthy Islamic Middle Eastern men, and unless it determines that people fitting this description should come under extra scrutiny from airport security, there is almost certainly another horrific episode aboard an American airliner in our future. Surely the Islamists haven't given up trying.

If this story hasn't broken yet I'd like to know why. Thanks to Glenn Reynolds at Instapundit for the tip.

Ok, just one more post...

In A Primer - Part V, I talked about the fiscal irresponsibility of governments once they have the freedom to inflate their currency and spend with abandon, placing the burden of the consequences on the next generation.

I just came across this link to Running On Empty by Mr. Pete Person that speaks to the subject. What I find refreshing is that he is someone from the Republican Establishment, Nixon Secretary of Commerce, a personal friend of the Alan Greenspan, secretary Snow and others and yet he has the integrity to articulate and explain the very dangerous road we are on, i.e. a $44 trillion debt in unfunded liabilities. His motivation for writing the book was "to protect our children". I don't know about you but that catches my attention.

He holds the Republican and Democratic parties equally responsible yet I wonder if, like Mr. Kotlikoff who wrote The Coming Generational Storm, Mr. Peterson isn't just another "voice crying in the wilderness".

And isn't it interesting that you don't hear about this crisis in the popular media.

WSC

A Primer - Part VII

In Closing...

I have enjoyed this opportunity to post some of my thoughts regarding the importance of gold to all Americans but my time is running out and I concede I haven't exerted the effort the topic deserves. I had little notice to adequately prepare and my thoughts were hastily written for which I apologize. The articles were somewhat disjointed and lacked continuity. I'm not a writer, I'm a software engineer.

But I'd like to leave you with one more thought: The Lord admonished the Hebrews to always maintain honest weights and measures. I believe he did this because, in his wisdom, he knew that any system that was based on dishonesty of economic standards was destined to become further corrupted morally and ethically and lead to its eventual downfall.

Fiat currency is the antithesis of honesty.

Today, the Arab world is moving toward commerce and settlement in the Islamic dinar, a gold coin, in there attempt to break away from the U.S. dollar hegemony even as the U.S. demonstrates via Iraq how such efforts will be met. Europe had a chance to do likewise but they decided on just another fiat currency, the euro. Yet these developments bring us ever closer to the possibility of a universal currency.

From the link below...

"For a half-century, the Keynesians have harbored a Dream. They have long dreamed of a world without gold, a world rid of any restrictions upon their desire to spend and spend, inflate and inflate, elect and elect. They have achieved a world where governments and Central Banks are free to inflate without suffering the limits and restrictions of the gold standard. But they still chafe at the fact that, although national governments are free to inflate and print money, they yet find themselves limited by depreciation of their currency. If Italy, for example, issues a great many lira, the lira will depreciate in terms of other currencies, and Italians will find the prices of their imports and of foreign resources skyrocketing.

What the Keynesians have dreamed of, then, is a world with one fiat currency, the issues of that paper currency being generated and controlled by one World Central Bank. What you call the new currency unit doesn't really matter: Keynes called his proposed unit at the Bretton Woods Conference of 1944, the "bancor"; Harry Dexter White, the U.S. Treasury negotiator at that time, called his proposed money the "unita"; and the London Economist has dubbed its suggested new world money the "phoenix." Fiat money by any name smells as sour."

www.mises.org/econsense/ch76.asp

Then consider this quote from one of history's most notorious bankers...

"Give me control of a nation's money and I care not who makes the laws."
Mayer Amschel Bauer (Rothschild)

It may not be a one world government we have to fear, but rather a one world currency.

The good news is that, today, gold is readily available to those interested in purchasing it. I list numerous sources for investment in gold bullion, gold mutual funds, and gold mining stocks at my Gold Page.

In closing, I would like to add this piece of information as illustrated by the last two graphs at the bottom of the page of the previous link.

It shows the value of the gold vs. the value of the dollar since the year 2000. Note that my comment there is that while it appears that the price of gold is going up, actually, it's the purchasing power of the fiat U.S. dollar that is declining...govern yourself accordingly.

I have thoroughly enjoyed this opportunity to share some of my thoughts with you, our viewpoint readers, and sincerely hope you found the topic interesting but the time has come to turn the helm over to who should be returning on or about the 16th.

Thanks for reading...

A Primer - Part VI

Who is John Galt?

The Chairman of the Federal Reserve is Alan Greenspan...arguably the single most powerful man on the planet as he directs the monetary policy of the United States. Historically, the official reserve currency throughout the world has been gold since most if not all countries settled their trade accounts with gold. In other words, if country "A" imported more goods from country "B" than it exported, then country "A" paid the balance to country "B" in gold.

Unfortunately, as I mentioned in a previous post, President Nixon terminated the Bretton Woods Agreement by reneging on the redeemability of dollars for gold in 1971.

Today, countries have accumulated huge numbers of dollars with which to settle their trade accounts but the dollar is reaching the end of its time line. As Voltaire said: "Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value - zero."

Visit Gold and Economic Freedom to see what Mr. Greenspan thought of gold and those who print paper money. Given Mr. Greenspan's eloquent dissertation on the subject, I can only see two possible conclusions, either Mr. Greenspan has sold out and become one of the very statists he railed against in his now famous speech at the link above or he sees himself as Ayn Rand's hero, John Galt, who's mission it was to stop the economic engine of the world and thereby forcing everyone to come to their senses.

Time may tell.

A Primer - Part V

The War Enabler...

When country "A" decides to declare war on country "B", its ability to do so is directly correlated to its ability to pay for its war machine. Troops, tanks, guns, an air force, bombs, a navy, and on and on.

When a country's currency is tied to a real asset such as gold and there isn't enough gold in the treasury, it simply can't pay the expense of waging war and alternative solutions are found.

A country on a fiat currency system has no problem printing the money to pay for the war machine so war it will be. For example, some say the US government has already spent $100 billion on the war in Iraq. Additional costs are estimated to be anywhere from another $50 to $200 billion. Where does all this money come from?

The simplified answer is probably something like: The U.S. Treasury prints paper Treasury Bonds that they "sell" to the Federal Reserve which prints the paper dollars required to pay for the T-Bonds. Now the government has the dollars to pay for efforts in Iraq and the Federal Reserve uses the T-Bonds as an asset against which they can print many more dollars (principal of fractional reserve) to be lent to banks across the country.

See this link for a graphic flow chart of the process:

Perhaps the most dramatic example of what this can lead to is from the Weimer Republic after World War I. It's instructive to realize that in the beginning, the Weimer Republic's currency was the 20 Mark gold piece, a coin about the size of one of our quarters. After World War I, the Weimer Republic was decimated and they fell into the trap of embracing a fiat alternative to honest money, the new currency became the 20 Mark paper note and as could have been predicted, the inflation began.

This was no ordinary inflation though, as the original 20 Mark paper notes eventually inflated to 4,000,000,000,000 Marks. That's 4 trillion Marks to buy what the original 20 Mark gold piece would buy only several years earlier. I have seen pictures of women loading wheelbarrows of paper Marks into the fireplace to burn for heat and cooking because they were worth less than wood. The government was printing them so quickly and in such numbers that, to conserve the ink, they only printed one side of the paper note.

I am reminded of an exchange with a women who lived through those times in the Weimer Republic after World War I in which she was asked, "how could you possibly support someone like Adolph Hitler through his rise to power?" The lady's response to the question put to her was quite simple, "when you have to catch rats to eat for food, any alternative appears more attractive."

I'm not saying this will be the fate of America, but visit this link for a candid assessment of the state of matter today. This article sheds some light on the financial mess our politicians have created:

The $44 Trillion Abyss

Scroll down to 12/13/2003 Interview on the left of the page for the Real Audio and MP3 links to listen.

A Primer - Part IV

Dollars, Oil, and the Euro...

One of the keys to the success of the dollar is that all OPEC oil transactions must be denominated in U.S. Dollars. This creates an enormous demand for dollars as any country in the market to buy oil must sell their currency in exchange for dollars with which to buy the oil they need.

http://socrates.berkeley.edu/~pdscott/iraq.html

From the link...

"But the need to dominate oil from Iraq is also deeply intertwined with the defense of the dollar. Its current strength is supported by OPEC's requirement (secured by a secret agreement between the US and Saudi Arabia) that all OPEC oil sales be denominated in dollars. This requirement is currently threatened by the desire of some OPEC countries to allow OPEC oil sales to be paid in euros."

and...

"The United States has at present little reason to fear a challenge to the dollar from Malaysia. But Malaysia is an Islamic country; and the US has every reason to fear a similar challenge from the Islamic nations in OPEC, were they to force OPEC to cease OPEC oil sales in dollars, and denominate them instead in euros."

And here's another discussion on the threat to the relationship between the Dollar and Oil.

http://www.rationalrevolution.net/opec_iraq_euro.htm

A Primer - Part III

Larry Summers and Gibson's Paradox...

For some background information on Gibson's Paradox, go to The Golden Sextent and scroll down to the Essays section. There you will see a link to Gibson's Paradox Revisited: Professor Summers Analyzes Gold Prices.
Then visit this article which brings it all together...

Taylor On US Dollar & Gold

From the link...

One very influential person in the Clinton Administration was very much aware of Gibson's Paradox, which Keynes noted was one of the best documented relationships in all of economics. Gibson's Paradox stated that if "real" interest rates decline, the price of gold will rise vis-a-vis the currency. BUT THE CLINTON ADMINISTRATION KNEW FULL WELL THAT A RISING GOLD PRICE WOULD HURT THEIR ABILTY TO LEVERAGE AMERICA'S FUTURE FOR THEIR OWN POLITICAL GAINS. Hence, the Clinton Administration began to intervene in the gold market to "cap" the price of gold, just as Lawrence Summers clearly noted they must do in a paper he co-authored while a professor at Harvard in the late 1980s.

A Primer - Part II

Roosevelt 1933...

Going back to pre-1933, we find the ubiquitous $20 gold piece (consisting of 1 ounce of gold) with a value of...$20 dollars of purchasing power.

The US was in trouble due to the Great Depression and the economists of the day were at a loss to solve the problem so it was decided the government had to "finance" the recovery by printing massive amounts of dollars. (Actually, one must wonder what type of solution this actually is since it's simply a hidden tax on everyone through inflation and increased taxes never help to pull an economy out of a recession / depression.) The problem was that gold was a reliable barometer for measuring inflation and if inflation was perceived to be on the rise (which it surely would) everyone would cash in their paper dollars for gold. So in the wisdom of the government, the decision was made to outlaw gold ownership by U.S. citizens.

Check out The Gold Confiscation Of April 5, 1933

It became clear to governments that they could not afford to allow people to own and keep their gold. Murray Rothbard explains

"Government could never cement its power over a nation's currency, if the people, when in need, could repudiate the fiat paper and turn to gold for money."

After the gold confiscation, the U.S. government immediately revalued gold at $35 per ounce. So that same $20 gold coin that was just relinquished by the good, law abiding citizens would now cost $35 dollars to repurchase...if it were legal to do so.

See this link for a detailed explanation:

Whatever Happened to Sound Money?

From the link...

"As James Bovard observes, "citizens had accepted a paper currency based on the government's pledge to redeem it in gold at $20 per ounce; then, when Roosevelt decided to default on that pledge, he also felt obliged to turn all citizens holding gold into criminals." [10] Roosevelt also condemned them as selfish traitors.

One day later Roosevelt reduced the gold content of the dollar by 41%, raising the price of gold from $20.67 per ounce to $35.00 an ounce. The devaluation resulted in a $2.8 billion "bonus" for the government." An especially tidy sum in those days.

This is clearly on of the most blatant and manipulative examples of the U.S. government reneging on a promise to it's citizens.

And, by the way, today that one ounce of gold in a $20 gold piece is worth about $400. It's interesting to note that, in the early 1900s, one could by a nice dress suit with that $20 gold piece and today they still can get a nice dress suite for the value of that $20 gold piece or $400. So gold hasn't gotten more expensive, rather the purchasing power of the dollar has declined...dramatically, thanks to the Federal Reserve.

Ann Coulter speaks out...

Interesting article by Ann Coulter on the Kerry pick for vp, John Edwards.

From the link...

Despite the overwrought claims of Edwards' dazzling legal skills, winning jury verdicts in personal injury cases has nothing to do with legal talent and everything to do with getting the right cases - unless "talent" is taken to mean "having absolutely no shame." Edwards specialized in babies with cerebral palsy whom he claimed would have been spared the affliction if only the doctors had immediately performed Caesarean sections.

As a result of such lawsuits, there are now more than four times as many Caesarean sections as there were in 1970. But curiously, there has been no change in the rate of babies born with cerebral palsy. As the New York Times reported: "Studies indicate that in most cases, the disorder is caused by fetal brain injury long before labor begins." All those Caesareans have, however, increased the mother's risk of death, hemorrhage, infection, pulmonary embolism and Mendelson's syndrome.

WSC

A Primer - Part I

Over the next week or two during 's absence, I will try to share a topic that I think every American / Patriot needs to be aware of through a series of articles. I'll break the material up into smaller posts to make it more convenient for the reader to assimilate the information at their own pace, and also to give an opportunity to research the facts I provide as time permits. I hope you find this effort to be time well spent.

One of the laws of the Human Condition is that man must be productive in order to survive. Historically, this productivity has been measured in everything from sea shells to gold and just about every commodity in between. These commodities enabled productive man to barter or exchange his wealth for other things he desired.

The problem today is that our productivity is measured in U.S. Dollars, a currency printed at will by the Federal Reserve. Originally, the currency of the U.S. was gold and silver. With the introduction of the Federal Reserve in 1913, they established a paper currency that was redeemable in gold and silver which meant that one could take their dollars to the bank and exchange them for like value in gold or silver. Whether you were a foreigner or citizen of the US, the dollar was "as good as gold". In 1933, President Roosevelt changed that and made it illegal for US citizens to own gold.

The Bretton Woods Agreement of July 22, 1944 replaced gold and established the U.S. dollar as the new reserve currency. After all, since the U.S. had literally saved the world during World War II, and was the only country left standing with a healthy economy in the aftermath, it was reasoned that the U.S. dollar (which was fully backed by gold of course) could and should serve as the reserve currency of the world.

Then in 1971, France became aware that the U.S. was printing dollars with abandon so the began to redeem their dollars for gold per the Bretton Woods Agreements that the U.S. had signed. President Nixon realized that this would be catastrophic for the U.S. as at that rate of redemption, our gold reserves would quickly be depleted so he reneged on the Bretton Woods Agreement and "closed the gold window" which meant that foreigners could no longer redeem U.S. dollars for gold. In other words, they were stuck with paper dollars they had accumulated worth nothing more than the "good faith and credit of the U.S." no longer redeemable for gold but for goods and services provided by the issuer, the United States. We, and the rest of the world were, for perhaps the first time in history, on a complete fiat currency standard experiment. As a result, it would be instructive to view a chart of the volume of dollars that have been created since then with no real backing whatsoever as it is an almost vertical graph.

It might also be interesting to note that since 1971, we transitioned from a nation with the greatest trade surplus to one with the greatest trade deficit. This is not a coincidence.

So if the Federal Reserve can print dollars with no tie to redeemability to a true asset, then the measure of one's productivity is totally arbitrary and subject to the whim and will of the Federal Reserve. Also, the freedom to print the world's reserve currency is extremely fortunate for the U.S.(France referred to it as "exorbitant privilege") as we have become the largest debtor nation in the history of the world. In the words of Dire Straits, the U.S. is getting it's "money for nothing and its kicks for free".

Think about it...

This just in...

Well, it looks like I might have to diverge from my previous comments about the nature of my posts since I just became aware of this timely article that I felt should be passed on.

Congressman Ron Paul is one of the few members of Congress I have respect for. He is a true American Patriot and his decision to vote for or against an issue is based on its ability to pass the litmus test of the U.S. Constitution. Needless to say, he votes against the vast majority of bills presented in the House as they, in fact, have no constitutional basis whatsoever.

Click here for an important issue you might be interested in.

And check out the honorable congressman's websites at: www.house.gov/paul/ and www.house.gov/paul/tst/.

WSC

While is away...

Clearly it would be folly for me to attempt to maintain the level of excellence RLC contributes to viewpoint so instead I will post some articles that have more of an economic / financial flavor hoping to challenge the reader to consider important issues in these areas that are typically below the radar of the popular media.

Originally, I named the viewpoint website "Patriot". I thought this was a name that spoke to the content found at viewpoint. After some discussions with RLC, it was renamed "Point of View" (after all, it is his website), but it finally evolved into viewpoint. Unfortunately, development of the website was well under way by this time and I simply haven't had time to update the address of the URL to reflect the latest name "viewpoint" so the address of the URL contains "pov" for "Point of View". It's a small matter though as most people will simply bookmark the URL and click on the bookmark to visit us.

I would also like to take this opportunity to mention that viewpoint is an extension of www.wscleary.com, an excellent example of shameless self-promotion, if I do say so myself. Seriously though, the website serves two important purposes for me. It enables me to learn the technology necessary to have an Internet presence and it enables me to use that knowledge to make personal areas of interest available on the Internet. As a result of my efforts, I can attribute several successful job interviews directly to this experience.

Among the pages at www.wscleary.com that reflect my interests over time are the PMZone, a set of web pages that would be of interest to anyone preparing for the Project Management Institute exam for certification. It provides a study section and a test simulator. Originally, I developed these pages to assist me in acquiring the PMI certification but I took on an assignment that made it impractical to pursue the certification because of time constraints.

The Gold Page reflects my interest in what is going on in our great country regarding the Federal Reserve, the US dollar and subsequent implications to the state of the Union.

I created The Guitar Page because of my interest in Classical Guitar and provide MP3 files of beautiful classical music for download.

And, lastly, I created viewpoint to give my brother, Richard, a forum that he can use to communicate his point of view regarding important issues of the day.

In the "Coming Soon" department, we plan to offer several new pages we hope will be of interest.

You may have noticed the "Other Websites" menu option at the left that takes you to a page of links to the websites of others we think you might enjoy. This is the first of three new pages.

We will also be rolling out a "Books" page that will contain links to recommended reading that are consistent with the topics presented at viewpoint.

I intend to add a link at the "Books" page recommending "Anything by E.W. Bullinger", a prolific writer of the 19th century. Two of his works I highly recommend are The Companion Bible which may very well be the most accurate version of the Bible available today, and his Commentary on Revelation which, among other things, provides a compelling case for the pre-tribulation rapture of the Church.

And finally, a "Downloads" page of links to documents in PDF format that Richard Cleary has written over the years. These can be viewed with any PDF reader such as Adobe Reader which is available for free.

Note that the viewpoint Feedback page may not be updated in RLC's absence but if you want to respond to one of my posts, feel free to email it to pobox@bellsouth.net and I will see that your comments get posted to the viewpoint Feedback page.

Stay tuned...

Good Choice for Veep:

That we may be of service to Senator Kerry in his ongoing search for a suitable vice-presidential candidate Viewpoint puts forward the name of...Al Gore. Gore has experience, name recognition, he was a journalist in Vietnam which gives him the cache of being familiar with war without the liabilities associated with actually having participated in it, and he would bring a little vivacity to offset Kerry's somnolence. He could also be counted on to be a raging bull as a campaigner given the chance to avenge his loss to Bush in the 2000 election. The fact that Republicans could be expected to capitalize on the fact that Gore sometimes tends to act as if he's lost his mind is a downside, but nobody's perfect. Sounds like an over-all good choice to us.

Voltaire, Call Your Office!

The 18th century French writer Voltaire is famous, inter alia, for having proclaimed what is perhaps the most well-known endorsement of free speech ever uttered: "I may not agree with what you say," he wrote, "but I will fight to the death for your right to say it." Sadly, this noble sentiment has not managed to penetrate the land of unbounded tolerance for all things morally and socially exotic but where speech is tolerated, apparently, only to the extent one says the approved things. No, we're not talking about New York or Los Angeles (although the day may not be far off when we will be). We're talking about Sweden, believe it or not:

Stockholm (ENI). A Swedish court has sentenced a pastor belonging to the Pentecostal movement in Sweden, Ake Green, to a month in prison, under a law against incitement, after he was found guilty of having offended homosexuals in a sermon. Soren Andersson, the president of the Swedish federation for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender rights (RFSL), said on hearing the sentence that religious freedom could never be used as a reason to offend people. "Therefore," he told journalists, "I cannot regard the sentence as an act of interference with freedom of religion." During a sermon in 2003, Green described homosexuality as "abnormal, a horrible cancerous tumour in the body of society".

This is what freedom of speech looks like in Sweden. Thank God for the first amendment.

What's He Saying?

I don't want to make too much of this and maybe I'm misinterpreting him, so you tell me, is William Rivers Pitt over at the anti-Bush site TruthOut actually hoping for an armed insurrection to depose the Bush administration? If not, what else does his poem mean? If so, is the entire left now howling at the moon or are there still a few sane souls to be found on that side of the ideological divide?

The concluding lines of Pitt's poem:

The fail-safe, should matters become grave: The next sentence after "...from the consent of the governed."

"That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."

Revolution.

The Declaration of Independence.

Which proves the existence of hope, again.

Misplaced Faith

Here's a piece on the different approaches to religion taken by President Bush and Senator Kerry. It gives a little insight into Bush, somewhat less into Kerry, except there is this interesting anecdote about the senator:

Kerry drew a more detailed contrast with Bush on his approach to science, in particular stem-cell research. Where Bush's attitude toward stem-cell research was shaped by his faith, Kerry declared his trust in facts. "We need a president who will once again embrace our tradition of looking toward the future and new discoveries with hope based on scientific facts, not fear," he said. Backed by the endorsement of 48 Nobel prize-winning scientists, Kerry said he would "listen to the advice of our scientists" before making his policy decisions (as opposed to evangelical groups). "I have full faith," he explained in an entirely nonreligious way, "that our scientists will go forward with a moral compass-with humane values and sound ethics guiding the way."

This is odd. After assuring us that, unlike Bush, he will base his decisions on scientific facts he talks about his faith in the ethical judgment of scientists, which leads one to wonder whether he is consulting the scientists for facts or for moral advice. It appears it's both, but then what's the point of his implicit criticism of Bush?

Bush's reservations about stem cell research have nothing to do with the scientific facts of the matter, of course, and everything to do with the morality of producing human embryos only to have them killed by extracting their stem cells. Why listening to scientists rather than theologians on a matter of morality is a particularly wise course of action is unclear. No doubt that if President Bush had a question about what stem cell research can do, he would consult scientists, but the important questions are about what we ought to do, and in that arena scientists qua scientists must be silent.

In what has to be one of the most vacuous comments of the campaign Senator Kerry says he has faith that scientists will follow a moral compass. Well, I suppose they will, although history gives us reason to wonder which way their needle points. Scientists have not infrequently been guided by the maxim, "If we can do it then we should do it," so one wonders what it is, exactly, that the senator bases his faith in the ethical judgment of his scientists upon.

Scientists, at least in Senator Kerry's view, deal only with facts. By their own admission, in addressing moral questions, they would be mere laymen encroaching upon the domain of theologians and ethicists. These, however, are the very people president Bush has properly drawn upon for guidance in the matter of whether the Federal government should fund stem cell research.

Kerry's beliefs, we are given to understand, lead him to consult scientists on a matter of ethics, whereas Bush's lead him to consult theologians and ethicists. And Kerry criticizes Bush?

For a much deeper look at how Bush's Christian faith shapes him as a man and as a president see Terry Eastland's piece in the March 1st, 2004 Weekly Standard titled Bush's Gospel.

Anathema

Christianity Today reports that Sojourners' David Batstone is calling for the Catholic bishops to excommunicate any Roman Catholic who supports the Iraqi war. In a letter to the Catholic bishops Batstone writes:

Sorry to speak so boldly, but you have no basis for so selectively narrowing your rich moral tradition. .. We recently have witnessed in the United States a decision and act by our political leaders to pre-emptively invade a sovereign nation-state. The social teaching of the Church explicitly prohibits and condemns such aggressive behavior. Pope John Paul II certainly understands this fact, as he made clear in an audience with President George W. Bush last month.

I have not heard one U.S. Bishop even suggest that Holy Communion might be withheld for any politician who enacted, or voted for, the immoral pre-emptive invasion of Iraq. Yet the consequent loss of human lives-both Iraqi and American-and the devastation of Iraqi society have been nothing short of tragic. Furthermore, this act of spiritual arrogance-invoking God's guidance while invading-has deepened historical animosities that surely will lead to more senseless bloodshed in the Middle East and across the globe.

Why is it that the bishops of the U.S. Catholic Church are unable to see this serious breach of morality? Over 250 of you are gathered in Colorado this week, and you only see fit to make public pronouncements about a sole moral issue.

Friends and brothers, I fear that your narrow-mindedness is turning the voice of the Church into something far worse than irrelevant. You risk stumbling into hypocrisy. I urge you to reclaim the full gospel of life, and announce it prophetically to those who would trample on the rights of the defenseless-those who have already been born as much as those yet unborn.

CT notes, however, that:

Most politicians who supported the Iraq war believed they were doing the work of justice and charity. A politician who supports abortion, however, would have a hard time saying he was protecting the unborn - the church radically differs on its teachings of abortion and war. "The killing of an unborn child is always intrinsically evil and can never be justified," the American bishops said in their most recent statement. The Roman Catholic Church has always held that war can be justified. The debate was whether invading Iraq met the qualifications of a just war, and it's worth noting that folks in the Bush camp tended to reference traditionally Catholic doctrine on this issue while folks in the Sojourners camp tended to take a more pacifist view.

CT does a good job of responding to Batstone's argument, and the entire article will be of special interest to Catholics as well as readers of Sojourners.