FRAMING THE DISCUSSION

One of the dynamics in discussions about things that people have different opinions about is how the topic is framed. 

There are many ways that this can be done. It’s important to recognize when someone is framing the discussion, because it is in their interest & is an advantage for their point of view that the framing not be noticed.

Questions reflect the unspoken assumptions of the questioner. They are sometimes more of a statement than a question.

This video clip is a textbook example of someone using such a strategy. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tk4mTfWXeiA

What do you think are the unspoken assumptions behind Harris' questions? Those assumptions are the basis for her questions, which are really more statements than questions.

Here are a few things to remember (at least from my perspective as someone who has not worked in law enforcement) about the job of any law enforcement agency:

Their primary purpose is not to concern themselves about perceptions, but to enforce the law.

Any perceptions that they do generate should include be positive among those they are tasked to protect, which in the case of ICE is American citizens.

The people whom ICE deals with in fulfilling their task are those who are or may be breaking the law. Any perception among this group is correctly based on the fear of being caught. But this perception is incidental to the actual work they do.

The unspoken assumption of Harris’ questions is that ICE officers are to be concerned primarily with giving a positive, non-threatening perception to those who are in the US illegally. According to this legislator, ICE agents are to be PR people, not law enforcement professionals.

By the way, the nominee for ICE has no doubt conducted many interrogations/interviews with suspected violators & is probably amused by the “serious demeanor” being projected by Harris.  

Incidentally Harris may also be positioning herself for a 2020 Democrat run for president.

Just be aware of what's happening here.

A PRAYER FOR OUR COUNTRY

Psalm 144 reveals the heart of David. Although he was flawed & far from perfect, he was still a godly leader who in his heart longed to be pleasing to God.

Verses 1-2 show David's realization that it is God who in His sovereignty has placed him there & enabled him to fulfill his responsibilities as the leaders of his nation.

Verses 3-4 reflect David's wonder at how God would even take notice of him & of the people he rules over.

Verses 5-8 are a prayer requesting God’s help in dealing with people & situations that threaten the kingdom.

Verses 9-11 are a celebration & expression of confidence that God will continue to sustain him & his kingdom.

But today as I read this Psalm, the last part (verses 12-15) really grabbed my attention:

Let our sons in their youth be as grown-up plants,

And our daughters as corner pillars fashioned as for a palace;

Let our garners be full, furnishing every kind of produce,

And our flocks bring forth thousands and ten thousands in our fields;

Let our cattle bear without mishap and without loss,

Let there be no outcry in our streets!

How blessed are the people who are so situated;

How blessed are the people whose God is the Lord!

In many sectors of our country, we are experiencing material blessings. Our garners are full; just as healthy & productive herds represented great riches, we are in many ways experiencing God’s material blessings.

But for many of us, our children & the emerging generation have lost their way. In many areas of the country there is an outcry in the streets & even violence & lawlessness.

Would you join me in praying that God will bring back & restore the lost of the coming generation? 

Will you also pray that our nation will once again experience the peace & unity that come with God’s blessing?

THE ADOLESCENT ELECTORATE

After the 2016 election, some commentators referred to its results as a temper tantrum. So, fair is fair & I would like to compare some of the results of this year’s midterm election to adolescence. Let me say up front that this is probably going to come across as snarky, but that is not my intention.

Adolescence is very much a creation of 20^th century American culture. It is the awkward time between childhood & adulthood. In the American context, the idea is that the teenager will by trial & error, based hopefully on the lessons learned during childhood, learn to make the right decisions.

In the process of learning, the adolescent will make a lot of mistakes & will eventually come to realize that the adults really did know what they were talking about. Hopefully those mistakes are expensive enough to motivate learning, but so expensive as to cause long-term damage.

When I refer to the adolescent electorate, I’m talking in terms of moral/social issues & economics that they have voted about.

The electorate in my home state of Michigan has decided that recreational marijuana is a good thing. A lot of adolescents have made the same short-sighted mistake. Apparently, if you can generate tax money from something that debilitates people in tasks that they should do unimpeded, it’s OK.

A local ballot initiative in Albuquerque overturning a 20-week limit on abortion also passed. Isn’t it nice to be given additional time to sweep “problems” under the rug, never to be bothered by them again? Ask women who spend decades regretting the exercise of their “right to choose” if it really stays invisible under the rug.

A number of victories by Democrat Socialists have been won. Let’s see if this generation of people who in many cases have no real-world experience understanding of how economics works are able to FINALLY get Utopia to somehow stick its head up over the distant horizon.

The so-called temper tantrum of 2016 (were those who came up with this looking in the mirror after the began protesting the election?) had what an unbiased observer would see as positive results in many categories. It remains to be seen if the adolescent electorate will learn anything from their short-sighted choices in this year’s midterm election.

Unfortunately, not every adult is willing to learn the lessons of adolescence. My generation is full of such people. May God be merciful to us as the results play out. Because whatever comes out of Pandora’s box will not be...

THE NEED FOR LABELS

Every few years an interesting group of people that calls itself something like “No Labels” raises its head & demands to be heard. Since it is probably made up of progressives posing as unbiased observers & quasi-conservatives who want to sound smart, I always find it mildly entertaining & get a very small chuckle out of it. 

That is especially so, since the same people don't seem to have any inhibitions about labeling me & others whose ideas don’t fit into what they think is right.

I also chuckle because they are the kind of people who seem to think that there should be warning labels on just about everything under the sun.

One of the irritating things about political ads, at least in our area, is that you often need to dig deep to find out what a candidate’s party affiliation is. What motivates that? Fear? Somebody’s idea of good campaign strategy? I dunno.

Maybe its just me, but it seems like the best strategy is honesty, conciseness, & being straightforward about what we believe. If a candidate or party feels the need to be anything less about that, I automatically begin to suspect they aren’t being honest with the electorate.

WHY I’M NOT INTO THE IMMIGRANT FAD

I need to start out by saying thank you to some of my progressive friends for motivating me to write this. I’ve generally avoided this subject. It’s possible that because we are beginning a ministry to the International Community (aka immigrants) that a lot of people assume we buy into the idea that anyone who wants to come into the US should have the right to do so.

Just to be clear, we don’t believe that.

Here are a number of reasons we don’t buy into what I call the “Immigrant Fad.”

First, to do so would be intellectually dishonest. If someone does something that violates law, they are doing something illegal. It makes no difference how they view existing laws. Existing laws may or may not reflect someone’s view of morality. But if someone doesn’t believe the laws reflect his view, those laws don’t magically cease to exist. They are still in force, & he is still subject to them. In other words, illegal immigrants are still illegal immigrants because they violate existing laws.

Second, to do so is intellectually lazy. I’ve heard or read people saying things like they would be glad to have an illegal alien come & live with them. The analogy fails. In saying this, they agree with the idea that permission needs to be given to someone before that person can come into a place that is not theirs. It is one thing to extend hospitality to someone; it’s entirely different for them to knowingly & sometimes forcefully enter where they are not allowed to go.

Third, to do so betrays either an ignorance of history or the hope that others are ignorant of it. If you google the name of most any recognized Democrat leader to find out what they were saying about illegal immigration a few years ago, they took a similar policy stance as the current administration does. That kinda makes one wonder about the motives of those same leaders today.

Those are just a few reasons I don’t buy into the fad.