HILL-BILLY
…the 2008 political follies
By
Doug Krieger
Now
I’ve done it. Just when you thought I’d gone completely spiritual on you . .
. I wade into the political fray and lose my salvation in the process or at
least my sanity!
Billary Clinton, twofer (two for the price of one)—or the phonetic sounds of HILL-BILLY—pepper the electronic waves with ever-increasing sarcasms and fatigue. The second coming of Clinton awaits the faithful amidst the on-again, off-again racial derisions, charges and counter-chargers propounded by America’s first black President. Better yet, media inflations of the same wrought by interpolations derived from off the cuff remarks by Bill will do as well.
Just who is really running this contest anyway? When it comes to political machinations—the ability to dissuade, persuade, contrive, and seduce the American voter—this election is by far the superior performance of all such past predilections.
Billions are being spent on running for America’s top spot—and most of these long distance runners are running out of funds early in the game (Note the likes of Rudi Giuliani’s tireless efforts racing towards oblivion, so it would appear.). Everyone’s trying to “breathe new life” into their lackluster campaign.
Alas! American pop culture is about to elect her first “jazz and pizzas” Commander-in-Chief. Did somebody say ISSUES? Who cares – looks (miscellaneous character traits to the contrary), communication skills, inane promises, coalitions of the holy and unholy (on an “as needed basis”), money, more money and the most money – all this and more superfluous posturing, confirmation and denial (i.e., “plausible denial” preferred) are simply wearing out the American electorate.
As long as it sells copies, we’ll make mountains out of molehills and inflate the least lucrative comment into a major fight “between whomever” just to feed the blood-thirsty cravings of a populous whose insatiable quest for “politics as usual” leaves one breathless, given the incessant pronouncements of change, more change and the MOST CHANGE on the floor of this Roman Coliseum.
DEMS. & REPS. ARE BOUGHT AND SOLD
Have you noticed the bizarre antics of the Democrats lately? If you haven’t, you’re living in a shell or trusting the ever-beneficent media that they know best. Here’s Dennis Kucinich being left out of the Demo-fray, while the forever-running-for-President Allen Keys is excluded by CNN in the Republican Florida debate. Who’s running this thing anyway?
Are Kucinich and Keys viable candidate? Of course not—but all this equity, fairness and effort to present the full spectrum of available political choices is less than genuine—disingenuous is more like it, and the corporate-media moguls know it. And, in so far as the Constitution Party, Libertarian Party, Green Party, Peace and Freedom and all the other also-rans (third parties)—which the Directory of U.S. Political Parties list some 53 in all, you’d never know they existed – thanks to these same money and media moguls.
Just how intertwined are the Dems. and Reps. in such monetary antics? Plenty. After all, they’re the ones who set monetary policy, which in turn makes or breaks their corporate sponsors—sponsors which have manifold interest in their elected officials. Certainly, this IS the American way these days. The best politician that money can buy—that’s the American credo, and it simply cannot be denied—we are loathe to flaunt the financial efforts of the leading candidates as if monetary prowess equates to Presidential credentials. Maneuvering one’s ethics, convictions and character into this political minefield of Corptocracy, compromise and consensus is beyond the art of the adroit—it’s the quest of the ascendant political master—ultimately, the one who “understands dark sayings” – who “understands dark sentences” or “understands sinister schemes” (Daniel 8:23) – but more of this later.
Let’s consider the candidates, please – with this understanding from the get-go:
After nine months of fundraising, the candidates for president in 2008 have already raised about $420 million. This presidential money chase seems to be on track to collect an unprecedented $1 billion total. By some predictions, the eventual nominees will need to raise $500 million apiece to compete--a record sum. To find out where all this money is coming from, explore (these) options. Year-end reports are due to the Federal Election Commission by Jan. 31. (Race for the White House, Opensecrets.org)
|
Democratic Candidates |
|||||||
|
NY |
$27,859,861 |
$22,623,680 |
$90,935,788 |
$40,472,775 |
$50,463,013 |
$2,347,486 |
|
|
IL |
$21,343,292 |
$21,519,790 |
$80,256,427 |
$44,169,236 |
$36,087,191 |
$1,409,740 |
|
|
NC |
$7,157,233 |
$8,271,938 |
$30,329,152 |
$17,932,103 |
$12,397,048 |
$0 |
|
|
OH |
$1,011,696 |
$888,774 |
$2,130,200 |
$1,803,576 |
$327,094 |
$0 |
|
|
Republican Candidates |
|||||||
|
MA |
$18,396,719 |
$21,301,756 |
$62,829,069 |
$53,612,552 |
$9,216,517 |
$17,350,000 |
|
|
NY |
$11,624,255 |
$13,300,650 |
$47,253,521 |
$30,603,695 |
$16,649,826 |
$169,256 |
|
|
AZ |
$5,734,478 |
$5,470,277 |
$32,124,785 |
$28,636,157 |
$3,488,628 |
$1,730,691 |
|
|
TX |
$5,258,456 |
$2,169,644 |
$8,268,453 |
$2,824,786 |
$5,443,667 |
$0 |
|
|
AR |
$1,034,486 |
$819,376 |
$2,345,798 |
$1,694,497 |
$651,301 |
$47,810 |
|
|
CA |
$536,357 |
$618,117 |
$1,890,873 |
$1,758,132 |
$132,742 |
$50,000 |
|
|
MD |
$21,218 |
$10,139 |
$22,768 |
$10,139 |
$12,629 |
$12,876 |
|
And – the guys who dropped out by January, 2008:
|
Candidates who have dropped out of the race |
|||
|
D |
DE |
$8,215,739 |
|
|
R |
KS |
$4,235,333 |
|
|
D |
CT |
$13,598,152 |
|
|
D |
AK |
$379,795 |
|
|
D |
NM |
$18,699,937 |
|
|
R |
CO |
$3,538,244 |
|
|
R |
TN |
$12,828,111 |
|
(Source: Race for the White House – opensecrets.org)
Now, as you click on these lives links to the individual candidates, you’re able to superficially discern the “sources” of their funding—ultimately, however, you’re left pondering the figures? Open Secrets helps to clarify things:
BUSINESS / LABOR / IDEOLOGICAL SPLIT:
Most members of Congress — even Democrats — get most of their PAC contributions from business interests. Democrats usually get a substantial sum from labor unions; something Republicans rarely get. Newcomers to Congress - particularly in open seat races - may draw significant funds from ideological groups.
In almost all cases, the complexion of candidates' financial backers changes once they win public office. The proportion of business dollars tends to rise, even for Democrats, as members get their committee assignments and begin tapping the industries they oversee for campaign contributions. Among incumbents, only the most liberal Democrats tend to get more money from labor unions than from business groups. Democratic newcomers, on the other hand, typically get strong labor support if they're considered to have a good chance of winning election in the fall. (Open Secrets)
HILLARY AND THE SAUDIS
According
to the
Democratic Underground,
Hillary’s biggest contributor is the Saudi
Royal family. Naturally, their Sunni interest in terminating their
arch-rival and Shiite nemesis (as well as Israel’s headache, and ipso facto,
the American neocon archfiend) is no small secret—tolerating an
ever-increasing Shiite Empire to the Saudi north will not happen if the
Saudi’s have their way with Hillary (and, I might hasten to add,
eschatology is on Hillary’s side in that it is Sheba and Dedan—ancient names
found in the Saudi Arabian Peninsula—who inquire, along with the Latter-Day
commercial Empire of the New American World Order System—the infamous “Ships
of Tarshish”—that ever-elusive Western Trading Empire—see
Ezekiel 38:5-14)
if Persia et al have come down to a latter-day Israel for a spOIL?
Clinton emerged from the 2006 midterm elections as the candidate to beat in the money race. She fell into second place among all candidates in terms of fundraising after the 2nd Quarter, but with 100,000 new donors, the 3rd Quarter propelled her ahead of her competitors, Democrats and Republicans alike. Clinton has already raised more than $90 million (though $10 million comes from her Senate campaign), which exceeds her original goal of collecting $75 million in 2007 alone. She has asked her top tier of supporters, the "HillRaisers," to raise at least $1 million each from other donors-10 times the amount that George W. Bush's "Pioneers" were asked to raise in 2000. (Opensecrets)
One has to dig a little bit to discover which business interests are conspicuously giving to Hillary—but, alas, out of her nearly $100M campaign contributions, here are the biggies—biggies whose interest in Hillary winning (if she does) guarantees that Iran will get the short end of the stick (i.e., “dip stick” as in “oil”) –
There
are just too many intractable problems in the way of that goal, obstacles that
were readily apparent before the 2003 invasion. Turkey won't accept an
independent, oil-rich Kurdistan on its border. The Saudis fear the Sunni
population will become what the Palestinians became for Jordan, a radicalized
ungovernable mass. Persia knows that if it simply waits for the smoke to
clear, it will be reunited with the Shi'a in what becomes Iran's new western
province, and emerge as the regional superpower, an outcome that Israel (along
with the Saudis) will do (almost) anything to preempt. It's that last caveat
that makes the threat of war seem so implausible that Iran won't be baited
into doing what the U.S. wants them to.
Hillary says, as President, she'll reconcile all the above parties and
"convince Iraq's neighbors to refrain from getting involved in the civil war."
http://www.hillaryclinton.com/news/release...
Uh huh. What are the incentives to compromise? What are the costs if they
refuse to come to terms of our liking? At the same time, Clinton is shaking
sticks at Iran. "No option", even preemptive war to stop its nascent nuclear
program "can be taken off the table". (Democratic
Underground)
Indeed, what a strange triumvirate have we here: The Saudis, the Israelis and the American Neocons, all in bed together to stop Iran’s Caliphate—the long-promised spreading of the Moslem version of Shi’a Empire.
The Saudis will do everything in their power to keep the U.S. tied up in Iraq to force a better settlement of the division of Iraq than the one they would get now. The Saudis recall the lesson of what happened to the Hashemite regime when Jordan was stuck with hundreds of thousands of Palestinian refugees after the 1967 and 1973 wars. The Saudi Royal Family sees the Sunni Iraqis and an empowered Shi'a allied with Iran as probably the greatest long term threat to their continued rule. (Ibid.)
Hillary has promised she’s all for negotiations with Iran and ending the Iraq “occupation” within one year or less – but, then again, into just what does her brilliant, but untested role as mediator of peace and prosperity in the Middle East by pacifying the Iranians, translate? Pacification of the Iranians would dearly please her present contributor base and keep the oil spigot in the Straits of Hormuz open. In turn, this would greatly satisfy 10,000 happy sheiks in control of their own prosperity from interference (i.e., keeping the Saudi Royals entrenched, along with the gleeful sheikdoms throughout the region as the oil revenues keep pouring in.
The corporate stranglehold on Hillary’s campaign pursuits is astounding—forbid we implicate through guilt by association; however, the company one keeps does tend to darken one’s public doorstep.
Then there are Clinton’s campaign donors. Any major candidate has some dubious supporters, but Clinton’s gotten money from particularly noxious sources. Start with her donation from Rupert Murdoch, who’s given to no other Democrat. Add in massive amounts of money from Washington lobbyists and from industries like defense, banking, health care, and oil and energy providers (though Obama’s also gotten a lot from some of these industries). Then there’s Norman Hsu, who brought in over $850,000 to Hillary’s campaign after returning to the US following his flight to evade a fraud conviction (Hsu was subsequently rearrested, sentenced to three years, and is facing further federal charges). There’s the Nebraska data processing company InfoUSA, whose CEO, Vin Gupta, used private corporate jets to fly the Clintons on business, personal, and campaign trips, gave Bill Clinton a $3.3 million consulting contract, and is now being investigated by the Securities and Exchange Commission for allegedly diverting company money to his own personal uses. Mississippi attorney Dickie Scruggs recently canceled a major December 15 Hillary fundraiser (with Bill Clinton headlining) after being indicted for trying to bribe a judge. Major international sweatshop owners, the Saipan-based Tan family, have given Clinton $26,000, complementing their previous massive support for Jack Abramoff and Tom Delay. That doesn’t even count dubious supporters from the past, like Peter Paul, the convicted con-artist turned event producer who coordinated a massive Hollywood Clinton fundraiser during the 2,000 election. Taken together, it’s a pretty tainted constellation of backers. (Paul Rogat Loeb, Hillary Clinton’s Sleaze Parade, CommonDreams.org, News Center, January 18, 2008)
CORPTOCRACY
BY BARAK OBAMA
Now that Obama has trounced Hillary in the South Carolina primary (i.e., the politics of race have just backfired – January 26, 2008) one would think that the corporate interests simply cannot lose.
Mother always taught me: Remember your friends—friends who stand by you through thick and think (especially “thick”).
Obama’s charge that Hillary receives corporate contributions, especially from the insurance industry, was a bit disingenuous, to say the least.
Hillary, not to be out-distanced, shot back at Obama by implicating him as a “slum landlord” operating in the inner city of Chicago.
Obama, when an attorney practicing law, did represent a political contributor of his, Tony Rezko. Again, a coy political ploy is “guilt by association.” Here we have Obama defending Rezko who was accused of fraud. “Obama’s campaign has given to charity campaign contributions from donors linked to Rezko.” (Clinton and Obama clash in Debate).
Obviously, odd man out in all of this is one, John Edwards, whose “class warfare” pronouncements against the Corptocracy (esp. drug companies, HMOs, tobacco, and certain municipals) is altogether too well know; so, away with Edwards!
Finally, one-time Democratic strategist for President Bill Clinton, Dick Morris (notwithstanding his unseemly public moral failures), has some rather sharp words for the “mad-as-hell at Bill” Hillary Clinton during the Monica affair:
As American banks go hat in hand to foreign financial institutions and governments, begging for capital to help them get out of the mess into which their sub prime loans have landed them, the question arises as to whether the United States should permit nations like China, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and the banks they control to acquire part ownership of our leading banks.
The
presidential candidates discussed this issue in their Nevada debate and
Hillary was asked about it in an interview with Neil Cavuto on the FOX
Business Network yesterday. She replied that she would not “stand in the way”
of such investments, but said that they needed to be vetted and called for
more disclosure and “transparency.”
The fact is that Hillary Clinton is totally unable to be objective on this key question of our national financial sovereignty because she and her husband have been so compromised by their financial dealings with the very countries at issue in the decision.
Should the Saudi monarchy be permitted to purchase an important equity position in some of America’s leading banks? How can Hillary be objective when the very same monarchy donated $10 million to the Clinton Library and Foundation?
Should the UAE be allowed in? How can Hillary decide fairly when Bill — and therefore herself — have been getting a reported $10 million per year from a fund that administers the investments of the Emir of Dubai, the largest component state in the UAE? (FOXNews.com)
REPUBLICAN STYLE
CORPTOCRACY
Rule by the few and/or rule by foreign interests (especially, today in a world of Globalization) was not the original intent of the founding fathers (sort of). So, to get around this old-fashion notion of elitist rule or foreign intervention, we’ve formed this maze of interlocking directorates (a.k.a. “Groups” as in the Carlyle Group) and a host of complicated subterfuges which allow de facto rule by the elite of the earth. Alas! Rule by political party is the safest way to assure that an oligarchy, or in today’s case, the insidious strains of American National Socialism (not racial, per se, but Corptocracy—where government and big business conspire) . . . carries the day.
The
founding fathers knew that factions would naturally develop. See federalist
paper #10. Madison describes faction as "...a number of citizens, whether
amounting to a majority or a minority of the whole, who are united and
actuated by some common impulse of passion, or of interest, adverse to the
rights of other citizens, or to the permanent and aggregate interests of the
community."
Madison also said, "There are again two methods of removing the causes of faction: the one, by destroying the liberty which is essential to its existence; the other, by giving to every citizen the same opinions, the same passions, and the same interests." Because neither of these are (sic) possible factions must exist. However, the way to maintain a balance of power is through a "multiplicity of faction." If they are all fighting for the same power, factions will give a little to gain a little.
If the founding fathers established political parties, they would grow in power too rapidly to control and before you knew it the government would become an oligarchy - rule of the few, and/or tyrannical. (WikiAnswers – Why Didn’t the Founding Fathers initially form Political Parties?)
The practice is so ubiquitous (i.e., corporate lobbyists and buying influence) that it has become part and parcel of the American experiment—a sort of voting by proxy by the alienated American electorate:
What one must come to terms with, when it comes to political parties, is their symbiotic relationship with corporations (i.e., political parties and corporate interests are joined at the hip). This attachment is predictable, unavoidable and conspiratorial. The establishment of such “interest groups” leads inevitably to the massive disenfranchisement of the vast America electorate who think their vote actually counts and that the “patriotic” thing to do is to keep supporting these special interests, thereby providing vast majority of American citizens with, at least, the lesser of two evils. The SYSTEM is fundamentally flawed and justified as the only means whereby the average Joe or Sally can have a “voice” in government. The charade is all the more absurd when one investigates just how far this SYSTEM has come over the course of American history.
When
it comes to Republicans – good grief . . . and notwithstanding all the hype
about credible conservative social credentials . . . their race toward
corporate influence peddling staggers the imagination. Now, where this shows
up most prominently is not only in the race to the White House, but in those
national convention blow-outs . . . we await BOTH Dems. and Reps. on their
“Corporate Festivals” and “sidebars” (no pun intended) at their 2008
mega-political parties (Dems. in Denver and Reps. in Minneapolis-St. Paul):
“The Republican National Convention hasn’t missed a beat. The extravagant spectacle is expected to cost upwards of $160 million, easily making it the most expensive political convention in history. It will dwarf the record $95 million spent by Democrats on their 2004 convention. In fact, the Republicans will be spending quite a bit more than the $130 million raised by Al Gore and Joe Lieberman for their entire 2000 campaign.
“We're talking about vast sums of money, all of it spent with the goal of gaining access. Money paves the way for the lobbyists to come and do their work," says Steve Weiss, communications director of the Center for Responsive Politics. "The conventions are the last bastion of soft-money giving at the federal level." The Center filed a petition with the FEC protesting that the convention host committees were actually soft money conduits for the political parties, but despite the fact that their combined take will be over $250 million the FEC failed to act.” (CorpWatch)
Now,
the fascinating relationship of the
Bush Administration with the Saudi Royals
is so well-known, that to belabor this entanglement (and thereby justify the
current quest for a two-state solution in the Middle East and the creation of
a Palestinian State in the heart of Israel) is a bit perfunctory, hardly
insightful. But, the growing contributions to Republican candidates involved
in the race for the White House, through the labyrinth of Globalization—the
New American World Order System—is altogether another story. . . i.e., you’d
be shocked and surprised who is sponsoring this year’s Republican candidates,
while in the wings awaiting that 2008 shindig in Minneapolis-St. Paul, thereby
filling the coffers in the traditional “corporate sponsorship” of festivities
during the Republican Convention.
A brief overview of the Republican 2008 contributors from CNBC/OpenSecrets.org tells the tale of Corporate interest persisting in Republican politics; although McCain and Huckabee are not all that popular with the elites, at least at this time of the “festivities”. . .
|
Rudi Giuliani Top Industries: |
|
|
Mitt Romney Top Industries:
|
|
But, the remarkable thing going on here is the veritable coronation of Hillary by corporate donors, mingled with the interlocking Saudi globalists in all these spurious efforts to influence political outcome in American politics.
Political bosses, coupled with organized labor, once controlled the Democratic Party – now, guess who? You’re sitting there thinking that “special interests” politics rule the day . . . get a life!
The “age of innocence” is over – the day that the gay lobby or the pro-life lobby held political clout in American body politics is so overly rated that proponents of these inane cultural wars (caught up as they are by their myopic sense of political propriety) and how they play out by truly influencing elections is, in a word, ABSURD!
Money talks big time—and whoever funds the run, wins the race!
Follow the money trail—whoever looks like “they’re pulling this thing off” for the Reps. or the Dems. are bound to garner tons of money from the new Globalists. American Corporations are so infiltrated by corporate bail outs and globalization that the day that Americans thought they had real and genuine influence in electing their officials is altogether lost in the dreamland of political myth and the ethereal government and civic classes in BOTH secondary and post-secondary educational systems in the USA (public and private, I might add).
JUST FOR THE RECORD – MY TWO-CENTS WORTH
Not that it matters – but I frequently get e-mails on “who do you think will win the Democratic or Republican nominations?” Frankly, I don’t care—we’re headed for a major upheaval. Economically (bail-outs notwithstanding), along with Middle Eastern political decision currently being made by this Administration, are about to erupt in a “major shift in the force” that “conspiratorially speaking” (and given a Jihadist reaction to a two-state inevitability in the Middle East between Israel and Palestine) will most likely result in some form of Marshal Law in the USA. The horrid thought of perpetuating the status quo will result in Alec Baldwin actually moving to Europe—and he may as well invite Barbara Streisand and Michael Moore to his villa in Italy while he’s at it. Likewise, moving to Canada might not be a joke after all.
Given what’s left of my conspiratorial brain in these inane projections—count on Hillary for the Dems. (and Obama for VP which I called over a year ago) and Giuliani and Huckabee for the Reps. Why? Because Hillary’s been bought and sold so many times and Giuliani is the only one who can beat Hillary in a New York minute, along with carrying the South using Huckabee as cannon fodder. Likewise, don’t you think that Giuliani has enough corporate gusto saved up in the Capital of Babylon on the Hudson to last a lifetime? You better believe it; and, actually, the Saudi Royals just might figure that Giuliani could be the next best thing to Hillary in stopping Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s Shiite Mahdi hoards from blasting the daylights out of the Saudi Royals and their fellow Sheiks throughout their elaborate network of fiefdoms.
Yep—politics
is down and dirty—but that’s the name of the game when it comes to playing the
charade.
That said, let me disabuse those who still have altruistic faith in the system and its preposterous abilities to correct itself—it has no intentions of doing so! Jack Hook is right: BABYLON THE GREAT IS FALLING, and falling badly. Our propensity to reinvent ourselves into this “city set on a hill” is more like watching the current deluge pounding Los Angeles and watching those Laodicean mansions cascading over the cliffs of Malibu!
We’re so close to the edge—because we like the view—that one day will become one with the view! And, that day is upon us as the storms batter our flimsy democratic system to smithereens. All the McCain-Feingold finance reform this side of heaven and hell can’t put Humpty Dumpty back together again, because this earth dweller built his house, not on sinking sand, but in Malibu overlooking paradise, only to find that he’s living in paradise lost!
The “social elusion” – here a breakthrough, there a breakthrough in equity, fairness, education, hunger, disease, and all the social justice the true believer can conjecture – may, from time to time, lift its battered head, but “the system is set and the order must be maintained!” What does that mean? I think you know—but to become self-absorbed, isolated and paranoid is not the solution to this terminal illness gripping the nation and the world.
On the one hand, what Jesus encountered when He walked among humanity was oppressive and tyrannical political power steeped in idolatry and superstition, motivated by raw greed and class superiority – and, on the other hand, this pathetic outrage was matched by rank religious hypocrisy so stifling to the human spirit in its rejection of the gospel of the grace of God that it made common cause with its political persecutors and hung the Lord of Glory upon the Cross of Calvary. But, God’s plan foresaw the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world (Revelation 13:8) and knew full well that the salvation and destiny of fallen humanity could only be redeemed through the undying love of God.
Thus, nigh these 2,000 years since His presence among us, He has called out a remnant to bear His Testimony of a higher and better calling; to wit:
“He (Abraham) waited for the city which has foundations, whose builder and maker is God . . . these all died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off were assured of them, embraced them and confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth . . . for those who say such things declare plainly that they seek a homeland . . . and truly if they had called to mind that country from which they had come out, they would have had opportunity to return . . . but now they desire a better, that is, a heavenly country. Therefore God is not ashamed to be called their God, for He has prepared a city for them” (Hebrews 11:10, 13-16).
“To vote or not to vote?” is not the question – “I was not disobedient to the heavenly vision” (Acts 26:19) is what’s at stake in this election and the present distress which grips the human heart, both here in the USA and elsewhere. We do not embrace an earthly fatalism, nor the despair of them who have no hope – but we who follow the Lamb are enjoined to “look up for our redemption draws near” – and to rejoice, “For it is the God who commanded light to shine out of darkness, who has shone in our hearts to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ” (II Corinthians 4:6).
Many of you shall despair of this political process—exhausting yourselves over this apparent and ever-despondent and “out of your control” phenomenon which you unwittingly and vacuously term “democracy in action”—ever justifying its deficiencies, while demanding its reformation as the panacea for humankind. Deep down, however, inside the belly of this beast you know full-well that our ability to control “this thing” has long passed from your/our grasp . . . the age has turned, and done so a long time ago. Soon, very soon, the revelation of the Man of Sin shall abide our times and shatter our confidence in all but God Himself . . . meanwhile, those who hang onto this “present evil age” shall succumb to his vast deception, giving accolades and ultimate worship to the one perceived who “understands dark sentences” – rivaling the Christ in His character as “Revealer of secret things.”
“We
are nearing the time when Satan will repeat the tactics of a pristine age, and
again offer to the world deadly gifts from his own stores of wisdom and
knowledge; first, through the instrumentality of countless teachers, but
finally, with supreme fullness of power, through the mouth of his coming
hierophant,
the Antichrist. Then, if it were possible, the very elect should be deceived;
but it will not be possible, because God Himself will keep them” (G. H. Pember,
Great Prophecies, pp. 125-127).
G. H. Pember’s prophetic announcement comes at America’s, and humanity’s, most pivotal moment of truth. I strongly urge you to consider the claims of the real Messiah to liberate you from any false hope or indifference in this earthly journey. You and I have a better calling if we will but turn to the One greater than ourselves! Therein lies the ultimate resistance within you . . . giving it up once and for all in complete abandonment and faith in the Son of God, Who loves you and gave Himself for you. There’s everything to lose if you’re still holding on to this charade, this passing fancy of political platitudes and unfilled promises—while “wars and rumors of wars” continue unabated. But, there’s everything to gain if you, like Paul, fall at His Cross and accept that greater reward . . .
“But what things were gain to me, these I have counted loss for Christ. Yet indeed I also count all things loss for the excellence of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord, for who I have suffered the loss of all things, and count them as rubbish, that I may gain Christ and be found in Him, not having my own righteousness, which is from the law, but that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness which is from God by faith” (Philippians 3:7-9).