Archive for the ‘conservatives’ Category

Update Note: If you are here because you are searching for the November 8th 2016 Conservative Christian election voter’s guide please click HERE.


We have quite a stream of readers of our blog from Southern California and I thought it would be helpful to post this.

This is courtesy of Craig Huey of Election Forum (HT).

Christians must definitely be informed in how they vote where they vote not against their principles but as much as for it.  You might not think there’s much reason to vote concerning presidential candidates but there’s still other candidates for other offices.

Here’s the voter’s guide for San Diego County:


We have changed our ratings system from the Thumbs Up to a Five Star system.

Every candidate is considered after thorough research; we also have a questionnaire for candidates to complete.

Here is our new rating system:

  •  : The best candidate. Our strongest endorsement.
  • : Very good.
  • : Acceptable.
  • Vote only to prevent worse candidate(s) from winning.
  • : Terrible. Do Not Vote. All your other votes will count.


Read Full Post »

Just as a warning I’m kind of passionate about this one.

Do you remember not too long ago people in an Ivy League School cussing and yelling at a professor in protest of need for safe space after students analyzing for “Micro-Agressions” (seriously, “Micro”) found that dressing up in certain costumes of ethnic and people group committed some Leftist blasphemy codes?  The contradiction doesn’t occur to them.  I think some in the Left are truly today’s Pharisees, absorbed in self-righteousness, who in the name of social justice justify go over the top in harassing those whom they don’t think is as upright as themselves.

I worry about my generation’s hypocrisy when it comes to freedom of speech when it doesn’t conform to the Leftist’s narrative.

What’s worst then Leftists immature trolls?  Leftists trolls gathering together in real time and space.

Watch this video of an event with a Conservative Speaker in Cal State Los Angeles:



Read Full Post »

Update Note: If you are here because you are searching for the November 8th 2016 Conservative Christian election voter’s guide please click HERE.


This is courtesy of Craig Huey of Election Forum (HT).

Christians must definitely be informed in how they vote where they vote not against their principles but as much as for it.  You might not think there’s much reason to vote concerning presidential candidates but there’s still other candidates for other offices.

Here’s the voter’s guide for Los Angeles County:


Read Full Post »

Man Walking Deserted HIghway in Utah
Some word on Christian and politics.  Most Christians have the intuition that when it comes to political views we shouldn’t choose a position or support someone that’s extreme for extremists sake but I think we also should not be moderate for moderate sake alone either; sometimes moderates mean those who continually compromise on good principles so as to look middle of the road.  More harmful policies has been caused by so called “moderate policies.”  Picking a position merely because it’s in the middle of everything isn’t wise in other instances of life as the pictures demonstrate above so why do we do it when it comes to politics?  We must also not forget that there is a leftward drift in our society and really things that are “moderate” today was what was liberal yesterday.  Again I’m not advocating to be an extremists for the sake of being extreme:  I think we should look for those who have sound economic, national and foreign policies and debate the merit of those policies rather than irrelevant attacks and personal attacks that occur too much today for cheap media sound bites.  Ultimately for the Christian we must ask the question of what is Biblical.

Read Full Post »

Refuting Cosmopolitan Abortionist piece

I don’t read Cosmopolitan.  But Planned Parenthood President Cecile Richards tweeted a link to an article titled, “The GOP Candidates Completely Disregarded the Reality of Women’s Lives.”  I clicked on it and I’m compelled to respond to the assorted bad arguments.

The part that Cecile Richards and other Planned Parenthood’s twitter account emphasized from the article is how the Republican candidates failed to mention “women” in a recent debate sponsored by Fox News.  Here’s that relevant paragraph:

Abortion was one of the biggest topics during the debate. And whether you’re pro-life or pro-choice, one of the most jarring aspects of the evening was seeing 10 men talking on stage about a medical procedure that nearly one in three women will have in her lifetime – without ever mentioning women. Seriously. If you read a transcript of the debate, candidates don’t bring up a “woman” or “women” even once when talking about either Planned Parenthood or abortion. It’s as if lady folk are just receptacles made for holding and expelling babies, not real people. Even the narrower category of “mothers” was left out of their reproductive rights talking points, save for two instances.

This quote and other portions of the article should be subject to further logical scrutiny.

Read Full Post »

Economic Facts and Fallacies Sowell
Order on Amazon: Economic Facts and Fallacies, 2nd edition

Economist Thomas Sowell is the man. I first started reading his books back in January 2012 and this is the fourth book I read. I must say I enjoyed everyone of them! In this volume Sowell examines some of the economic myths and mantras by political pundits and debunks them with clear thinking, sound economic principles and actual statistics. In light of the sensitivity of some of the subject matter I appreciate Sowell’s tone of the book in which he bring to bear scholarship without inflammatory rhetoric. I think an economist that can write in a winsome manner (without being boring!) is a rare gift that few can pull off. Don’t expect the book to just knock on progressives—I found myself being challenged as well, especially with economic and political propositions that most people just assume is true. Especially insightful in this book is his discussion about government intervention in urban areas with affordable housing—and how ironically the more the government is involved the more it hurt the poor. There are many materials here that appear in Sowell’s The Housing Boom and Bust. I particularly enjoyed his chapter on the third world as well. Reading this book makes me realize how so little of economics must Americans grasp—and how that can be detrimental to one’s own interests and where one land in one’s opinion of government fiscal policies.

Read Full Post »

10 Big Lies America Medved

Although I have not heard him for years, I enjoy Michael Medved’s radio show because of how he approaches people that disagree with him: he interacts with his guests and those who call in with a level of civility that is almost rare and unique on talk radio.  While I don’t believe the United States is always right, Medved’s book Ten Big Lies about America will challenge some of the narrative of the “Hate America First” crowd.  It is a brilliant and an enjoyable read.

Medved focuses his first chapter on the issue of American relations to Native Americans.  In the popular narrative of American history taught in some introductory college courses, one would think it was mere systematic genocide by the Federal government but Medved’s closer look reveal that at times the Federal Government at times restrained local whites from aggression.  Medved does not paint a false portrait that Americans never did anything wrong but he does show when it is exaggerated or taken out of context.  I appreciate Medved challenging the notion that native Americans were all peaceful but coming of Europeans—however the history of tribes versus other tribes indicate otherwise.  Medved also dealt with the claim of using biological warfare of blankets with germs against the Native Americans with consideration that the understanding of germs wasn’t understood at that time along with other errors surrounding this story being told.

Another chapter that I really appreciate with “Big Lie Number 3” that dealt with the claim by some that America’s founding fathers intended a secularized nation.  This is a subject that I love to read about.  I think the chapter did a good job showing that the founding father never intended to have a secularized state of the kind that progressives today envisioned.  The Founding Fathers were more religious in their views of things than some people realized.

Although I didn’t agree with everything Medved has to say about it nevertheless I did enjoy “Big Lie Number 10” about how America is in an irreversible decline.  I do think that are some moral issues that have worsen in our country but I also don’t think it’s totally irreversible.  Medved does a good job of showing how there were times in American history that the general social and moral landscape was worst than it is now—and how things turned around.  My own theological beliefs makes me realize that God is sovereign and He can turn things around with a revival and Reformation.

Other interesting aspect of the book I enjoyed include his interaction with the idea that only government programs can remedy economic downturns (he even made a quoting reference to Mises!) and also puts in perspective of the average American’s general prosperity.

I do recommend this book.

Available on Amazon

Read Full Post »

The Road to Serfdom

( Available on Amazon)

This is a classic political economical work that I finally got around to reading.  What made the book interesting even before I read the work is the story of its author, Friedrich von Hayek.  Hayek was at one time a prominent academic defender of socialism in his home country who later became an outspoken critic against socialism, communism and fascism.  An Austrian who experienced firsthand the rise of socialism and fascism in his own country, this book has a prophetic tone directed towards its English readers.  Hayek wrote this book from 1940 to 1943 during the height of World War Two to warn the English against adopting the same ideologies of the fascists they were fighting against; apparently fascists ideas have made inroads among some British elites.  Interestingly enough, the book’s prophetic flavor remains relevant today with its warning against statist economic policies.

Many things could be said about the content of this book.  A lengthy review would be impractical so what follows are some of the highlights.  One thing I appreciated from the book is Hayek’s discussion of planned economies.  “Planned economies” is truly a misnomer.  Hayek makes it clear that he’s not against planned economies per se, for instance in the case of individuals making rational economic decisions for themselves;  rather he is against the type of planned economies made by the government that comes with force from the rule of law.  His chapter on the relationship of planned economies and totalitarianism tells us one chief reason why government planned economies is bad.  I also appreciated the book’s discussion of Nazism’s socialistic roots which challenges the modern myths today that the Nazis were truly conservatives and right wingers in their values.  Readers who want to see the arguments further developed that the Nazis were socialists and left-leaning should consult the book Liberal Fascism, a wonderful work I read simultaneously with this book.  I also enjoyed Hayek’s last chapter which dealt with the suggestion offered by some that a global controlled economies is a great economic goal but Hayek argues that if planned economies can’t take off at the level of the state what makes one think it will work at a larger scale?  It will only make matters worst.  Great book!

Read Full Post »

The Housing Boom and Bust

 (Available on Amazon)

I learn tremendously every time I read the works of economist Thomas Sowell. This book is no exception. Here Sowell examines the recent housing boom and bust that happened in the late 2000s. Contrary to the opinions of liberal lawmakers and liberal pundits, the burst of the housing bubble is not a case of capitalism left unchecked; the book demonstrate that the boom and bust of the housing market is the result of government regulation and intervention. Sowell begins by documenting how zoning laws, open space laws and other host of regulations has the effect of rising costs of housing; the more ordinances a place has the more the cost goes up while places that has less arbitrary regulations tend to have lower costs of buying a home. The book also examine fiscal policies and government intrusion that forces financial institutions to make risky sub-prime loans; Sowell argues that this does no good to anyone, not to the ones who are borrowing (loses the house, ruining their credit, declaring bankruptcy), the lender (banks are not in the business of maintaining foreclosed homes), the market, other home buyers (the burden of costly risks of sub-prime borrowers end up being distributed to them) and tax payers. The book does a good job explaining the complexity of the market in clear to understand term. This book does a good job documenting how politicians doesn’t help and often the ones who are railing against business and banks for the housing bubble burst are themselves unknowingly the ones who are responsible for policies that led to the fiasco. Highly recommended!

Read Full Post »

end the fed Ron Paul

 (Order it on Amazon)

This is a book by former Congressman and Presidential candidate Ron Paul that focuses on monetary issue in the United States. And while it focuses on the specific situation in the United States Ron Paul does make the point in the book that the consequences of our bad monetary policy does have impact for the rest of the world. This book is critical of the Federal Reserve and argues that it is bad for our economy. It is not just merely an economic issue but Ron Paul argues that it is a moral issue as well. There is too much power given to the Federal Reserve with too little accountability and too much secrecy. To this day, the Federal Reserve has never been audited by the Congressional Budget Office. Some may object that the Federal Reserve does have Congressional oversight with the chairman of the Federal Reserve Board appearing before several Congressional committee; still, many questions are often not answered to Congress during these sessions. Still others might still defend the Federal Reserve as being a semi-private institution rather than a full government agency. Ron Paul argues in the book that the Federal Reserve has the worst of the Government and the Private Sector. In the end it boils down to the flawed economics of the Federal Reserve’s role end up causing the boom and bust cycle of today’s economy with messing with the supply of money. The printing of paper money and partial banking without any standard behind them is conducive to inflation. This is my first book by Ron Paul and I plan to read future works by him in the near future—he turns out to be more level headed than some of his followers I knew in college. Ron Paul does not believe that the Federal Reserve or the Government was behind 9/11, and does not unnecessarily demonize those in the Federal Reserve. I even appreciated the book sharing transcripts from Congressional hearings with different chairman of the Federal Reserve, be it Greenspan nor Bernake. The dialogue with Bernake about the housing bubble was the most interesting to me—Bernake totally didn’t see it coming despite Ron Paul’s concern. This was a year before the housing bubble burst. The book is also interesting for providing the personal background and influences driving Ron Paul—it also provides a personalize window into the connection of famous figures in the circle of Austrian School of Economics.

Read Full Post »


Purchase: Amazon

An excellent work by economist Thomas Sowell.  This is the second book I’ve read by Sowell and he doesn’t disappoint.  This book is about intellectuals, which he define as those whose occupation is chiefly dealing with ideas as the product that they market.  Here Sowell makes a good distinction between intellect and wisdom; and just because intellectuals deal with ideas do not necessarily mean they are wise or correct.  Nor does that mean they are smarter than others (such as doctors, chess masters, etc).  In fact, as Sowell goes on to argue in the book, typically intellectuals are those with specialized knowledge (versus ‘mundane’ knowledge) who seeks the approval of peers which can immune them from the typical tests of removing good and bad ideas through the market such as other job sector.  This in turn allows intellectuals’ bad ideas to go on for a long time and often intellectuals get away from the responsibility of their bad ideas with little or no consequences.  The book has a wonderful chapter on specialized knowledge that has led some intellectuals to think they thus have authority to speak on other areas outside of their specialty (think of Bertrand Russell, Noam Chomsky, etc).  I enjoyed Sowell’s example of this in the case of how some liberal intellectuals criticize police officers’ for firing too much rounds in officer related shooting.  The criticism often is without the consideration of studies on gunfire under stress, where a NYPD study shows the low accuracy of shooting under pressure (such as shooting a target 16-25 yards away in life-risking scenario results in 14 percent hit, etc).  At times intellectuals can be down right misleading with their twisted worldview such as the uncritically accepted notion in history that president Herbert Hoover did nothing during the Great Depression or how Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas is nothing more than a loner and a follower of Anthony Scalia, etc.  Readers will enjoy Sowell’s examination of the axioms intellectuals take for granted such as the “One day at a time mentality” of the elite versus long haul consequences of action.  I was surprise that the book devoted two chapters on intellectuals view on war.  I highly recommend this book and wish to read more like it.

Read Full Post »

10 Books Every Conservative

 Available on Amazon

Originally I was a little reluctant to read it, afraid it was parroting Republican party one-liners but it turns out to be better than expected and the author had a broader focus and was trying to get at something deeper with a “conservative worldview” (though my Van Tillian framework would say he needs to go further in the development of a worldview to be thoroughly Christian and Reformed). Thus, the lists of books he covered are not necessarily political books as some may think of it, but more broader and basic such as literary fictions (Lord of the Rings, Sense and Sensibilities) economic works and theological classics (Chesterton, C.S. Lewis’ The Abolition of Man and the Bible!). The author, a Catholic professor at Marquette is known for his previous book, “10 Books That Screwed Up the World.” is driven to see books with the question of what does it say about human nature which I would agree with is a good test question in terms of discernment of what a book means and it’s significance. It seems that he tried real hard to be broadly Christian without having much of Roman Catholicism that is contrary to Protestantism showing. His chapter on Lewis’ work, The Abolition of Man, and Orthodoxy by Chesterton has motifs in their critique of the materialistic and atheistic worldview that the Presuppositional apologist would appreciate (though they are not fully Presuppositional in the Van Tillian sense of the word). The book covers more than 10 books as the subtitle goes on to say: there’s four other works “not to miss,” and one imposter, with the imposter being Ayn Rand’s work. I think the author makes a strong conclusive case that Ayn Rand’s work ought not to be considered conservative, with the premise that conservatism is not about narcissism. I’ve read a previous work that went over Rand’s biography and her cultic narcissistic ideology is not pretty. Objectivism is in essence an atheist cult built upon the persona that Rand paints of her characters in her books. This book is definitely illuminating and makes me want to read for myself the books he suggested. In terms of disagreements I have with this work, I would dispute Aristotle’s work as being one of the canons of Conservative works though certainly there’s insight he had that will help it along the way. Throughout the book he talks about free will, and I sense he means libertarian free will, but it’s not the main point of his work. In the end, I would say this book is worth reading.

Read Full Post »

In light of all the sexual immorality and high profile infedility, Randy Alcorn shares with us his list that counts the cost of Sexual immorality.

As Christians, this is a timely reminder.

The original link is at http://randyalcorn.blogspot.com/2009/06/counting-cost-of-sexual-immorality.html

Here is the excerpt:

Personalized List of Anticipated Consequences of Immorality

  • Grieving my Lord; displeasing the One whose opinion most matters.
  • Dragging into the mud Christ’s sacred reputation.
  • Loss of reward and commendation from God.
  • Having to one day look Jesus in the face at the judgment seat and give an account of why I did it. Forcing God to discipline me in various ways.
  • Following in the footsteps of men I know of whose immorality forfeited their ministry and caused me to shudder. List of these names:
  • Suffering of innocent people around me who would get hit by my shrapnel (a la Achan).
  • Untold hurt to Nanci, my best friend and loyal wife.
  • Loss of Nanci’s respect and trust.
  • Hurt to and loss of credibility with my beloved daughters, Karina and Angela. (“Why listen to a man who betrayed Mom and us?”)
  • If my blindness should continue or my family be unable to forgive, I could lose my wife and my children forever.
  • Shame to my family. (The cruel comments of others who would invariably find out.)
  • Shame to my church family.
  • Shame and hurt to my fellow pastors and elders. List of names:
  • Shame and hurt to my friends, and especially those I’ve led to Christ and discipled. List of names:
  • Guilt awfully hard to shake—even though God would forgive me, would I forgive myself?
  • Plaguing memories and flashbacks that could taint future intimacy with my wife.
  • Disqualifying myself after having preached to others.
  • Surrender of the things I am called to and love to do—teach and preach and write and minister to others. Forfeiting forever certain opportunities to serve God. Years of training and experience in ministry wasted for a long period of time, maybe permanently.
  • Being haunted by my sin as I look in the eyes of others, and having it all dredged up again wherever I go and whatever I do.
  • Undermining the hard work and prayers of others by saying to our community “this is a hypocrite—who can take seriously anything he and his church have said and done?”
  • Laughter, rejoicing and blasphemous smugness by those who disrespect God and the church (2 Samuel 12:14).
  • Bringing great pleasure to Satan, the Enemy of God.
  • Heaping judgment and endless problems on the person I would have committed adultery with.
  • Possible diseases (pain, constant reminder to me and my wife, possible infection of Nanci, or in the case of AIDS, even causing her death, as well as mine.)
  • Possible pregnancy, with its personal and financial implications.
  • Loss of self-respect, discrediting my own name, and invoking shame and lifelong embarrassment upon myself.

I’m older now, turned 55 a few days ago. My daughters are grown, with children of their own. But the list of consequences of immorality is larger than ever. I have two sons-in-law and four grandsons. Many people have read my books, so the circle of people I would be letting down has grown. (For resources on this subject, see my book The Purity Principle, and my booklet Sexual Temptation: How Christian Workers Can Win the Battle.)

It would still break my heart to let down my Lord Jesus and my wonderful wife. That’s why I’m more careful than ever to avoid the little compromises and indulgences that could lead to moral disaster.

If we would rehearse in advance the ugly and overwhelming consequences of immorality, we would be far more prone to avoid it.

Read Full Post »

Interacting with people in various college campuses and universities for the purpose of evangelism and apologetics, I’m amazed at how regularly in the beginning of the conversation, some tell us to read things beyond what we believe, assuming that our Christian faith and Conservative views imply our ignorance of “the other side”.

Here’s a summary of two different studies on this topic of reading “the other side”

Originally from Yahoo, “People Choose News that Fits their Views”,


Conservatives buck the trend

Some findings from both researchers suggest that individual confidence and certainty play a role in what people choose to read.

People with stronger party affiliation, conservative political views, and greater interest in politics proved more likely to click on articles with opposing views, according to the Ohio State study.

“It appears that people with these characteristics are more confident in their views and so they’re more inclined to at least take a quick look at the counterarguments,” Knobloch-Westerwick noted.

However, Knobloch-Westerwick added that her latest study was not designed to assess reader motives, and that she hopes to more carefully study the issue in the future.

The Brigham Young University survey found that journalists also tended to read liberal blogs – perhaps a reflection of journalists’ political beliefs, although even conservatives said liberal blogs were often better-written, Davis pointed out.

Among the political blog readers, a similar trend emerged in which “liberals read almost exclusively liberal blogs, but conservatives tend to read both,” Davis said.

Davis offered another possible explanation for this trend among blog readers. Conservative views dominate talk radio, and so conservatives may feel more satisfied by that outlet and are willing to check out opposing views on blogs.

Read Full Post »

All the writers here at Veritas Domain have served in the military (two in the U.S, one overseas) and this entry concerns this topic: Veterans.

Here is the Homeland Security’s report that reference the possible Conservative Threats of disgruntled veterans being possibly ‘recruited’ by right wing violent extremists

Since this has went public, the head of the Department of Homeland Security has taken a lot of heat, and rightly so

What I find ironic is that the document begins by saying that “this product is one of a series of intelligence assessment…”, implying that there are data which is the foundation for the report’s conclusion

There must have been a committee or a group that actually put this report together, no doubt staffed with  some kind of ‘experts’

Imagine how much each one of these guys get paid, to put together this unclassified document, and the salary probably is up there in employing these “professionals” to produce the “intelligence” assessment.  I can’t help but to wonder how long did they take to research and write the report.  IT SHOULD BE EXPECTED that for the money involved behind this small report, it SHOULD BE done well: In other words, there should actual data in the document of the group’s finding.  High quality unclassified intelligence report have been put together before, such as the FBI’s finding on environmental terrorism which has a lot of data and empirical evidences, complete with proper source citations.

It is after, a “finding” by a bunch of paid “professionals” and not some conspiracy theorists sitting in some room typing up a report of hypotheticals.  Anyone can do that, and for less the cost too.

I like to know if they have data to substantiate the following conclusion, found on page seven:

The willingness of a small percentage of military personnel to join extremist groups during the 1990s because they were disgruntled, disillusioned, or suffering from the psychological effects of war is being replicated today.

Replicated today?  Who are these extremists groups? And what findings lead the report to state this?

The report asserted one of their evidence on page eight:

A prominent civil rights organization reported in 2006 that “large numbers of potentially violent neo-Nazis, skinheads, and other white supremacists are now learning the art of warfare in the [U.S.] armed forces.”

Your tax dollar is at work here, when the Department of Homeland Security’s intelligence is based upon an civil right’s group’s report and then it fails to properly provide the citation!  Undergrad education did not prepare them for the real world.

What is this unnamed civil rights organization that is prominent?  It is none other than the Southern Poverty Legal Center who’s reliability shows when it thinks of the American Legion as a hate group.

The report has now gotten the attention of those in the Senate, and Michelle Malkin reports that a few Senators have written to the head of Homeland Security.

April 16, 2009

The Honorable Janet Napolitano
The Department of Homeland Security
310 7th street, S.W.
Washington, DC 20528-0150


Dear Secretary Napolitano,

We write today concerning the release of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) report titled “Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment” prepared by the Extremism and Radicalization Branch, of the Homeland Environment Threat Analysis Division.

While we agree that we must fight extremists who are both foreign and domestic we are troubled by some of the statements your department included as fact in the report titled above, without listing any statistical data to back up such claims.

First, your report states that “Returning veterans possess combat skills and experience that are attractive to rightwing extremists…” without listing any data to support such a vile claim against our nation’s veterans.

Second, the report states that the millions of Americans who believe in the Second Amendment are a potential threat to our national security. Why? Do you have statistics to prove that law-abiding Americans who purchase a legal product are being recruited by so-called hate groups?

Thirdly, the report states that those that believe in issues such as pro-life legislation, limited government, and legal versus illegal immigration are potential terrorist threats. We can assure you that these beliefs are held by citizens of all races, party affiliation, male and female, and should not be listed as a factor in determining potential terror threats. A better word usage would be to describe them as practicing their First Amendment rights.

Also, you list those that bemoan the decline of U.S. stature and the loss of U.S. manufacturing capability to China and India as being potential rightwing extremists. We would suggest that the millions of Americans who have lost their jobs in the manufacturing industry to foreign countries are not potential terror threats, but rather honest Americans worried about feeding their families and earning a paycheck.

In closing, we support the mission of DHS in protecting our country from terror attacks and are proud of the many DHS employees who make this possible in conjunction with our state and local law enforcement. We ask that DHS not use this report as a basis to unfairly target millions of Americans because of their beliefs and the rights afforded to them in the Constitution. We also ask that you provide us with the data that support the unfair claims listed in the report titled above and to present us with the matrix system used in collecting and analyzing this data?

Finally, we look forward to your prompt reply and we offer our assistance to DHS in our shared effort to fight terrorism both home and abroad by using data that is accurate and independent of political persuasion.

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts