The president spoke at the annual prayer breakfast this week and had some "interesting" things to say about tax policy, New Testament theology, and the role a Christian should play (and pay) in society.

I wrote about the whole thing over at AEI's "Values and Capitalism" blog.  Here's an excerpt:

Most of the verses that sound like the president’s reference have nothing to do with charity and speak to the need a true believer has to be utterly dependent and subservient to the Spirit and Word of God. Matthew 25:29, which reads, “For to everyone who has will more be given, and he will have an abundance,” is a call to Christians to use their God-given abilities and advantages wisely and productively. This is seen as a non-negotiable aspect of being a disciple of Christ. The reward for such behavior is additional opportunities to serve God “faithfully and fruitfully,” as one commentator puts it.

And here is where “faith and politics” smash right up against one another. As I said before, nearly every American is on-board with the notion that people should pay their taxes. We all (correctly) praise those who give their time and money to those in need. We’re all for helping and fairness and puppy dogs.

The problem, simply put, is this: If another self-proclaimed Christian is using scripture and doctrine to promote things that I know to be detrimental to an economy and society, I can’t support that Christian merely because he brings up “Christian stuff” in convoluted ways. I can pray for that Christian. I can be cordial and kind. If that Christian is willing, I can use the Matthew 18 model of coming to that “brother” in hopes of admonishing and correcting him. But if he persists, if entire swaths of our society persist, then I am duty-bound to oppose the ill-fated plans. Regardless of intentions—something only God can assess anyway—I must apply the advantages I’ve been gifted. In this instance, President Obama unfortunately learned at the feet of people who believe in economic policies that can’t work.

Please read the entire thing right here.

By: R.J. Moeller

--------------

We're roughly a year away from the next Inauguration Day.  At this time next year, one of three men will be sworn in as our president for the following 4 years.  For all intents and purposes, it's between Mitt and Newt for the Republicans, and then obviously between Barack Obama and the winner of the GOP family feud.

It's a frustrating and nervous time for many voters - especially conservatives.  Many people who share my worldview are disheartened by the prospect of having to vote in the primaries for someone they aren't thrilled about, followed by 6 months or more of wall-to-wall partisan quarreling.  Added to this is the fact that all Americans are frustrated and nervous about things like the economy, education, and foreign policy time-bombs that appear on the verge of massive explosion.

The hard, bitter truth is this: all of those worries are legitimate and justified.  No sense in denying it.  Acceptance is the first step to recovery.

But alas, all is not lost.  Not yet, anyway.  I stumbled upon one of my all-time favorite YouTube clips this evening and it reminded me of something very important: This is a special place, our country.

The ideas, ideals, and values we have built our society and government on are different.  They are special.  We aren't individually special or better than the people of other countries.  We're all God's children.  We're all fallen men and women, no different than Americans of any other age.  The times in which the Founders or Abraham Lincoln or Ronald Reagan lived in weren't special.

The beliefs those men lived by, governed by, were special.

It's easy to grow nostalgic when you watch a clip like this one above.  It's easy to grow discouraged when you step back and take an honest assessment of the political and cultural landscape of our time.

But I still believe that this is a special place, made so by our ideas, ideals, and values.  The capstone of the American experiment in self-government - one which the progressive builders of a secular welfare state have rejected - is simply this: "endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights."  That's it.  That's everything.  With it we may still fall, should it be God's will.  Without it, we cannot help but fail.

Americans still claim a faith in God, however weak the beating pulse of true religion in this country may be.  We still acknowledge the importance of family, even to the point where we have contentious on-going debates about how "family" (and its precursor "marriage") will be defined.  We even still have huge swaths of young men and women who volunteer their lives to serve and protect their fellow citizens. (Thanks Brent and Matt!)

God, family, country: and in that order.

It may be a different time, but it's still the same place. We don't need another Reagan.  We need an intellectual and spiritual revival - a moral resuscitation.

We need 300 million "Reagan's" who share in the vision articulated above.  Or - and this is in closing - at the very least can agree on the moving words from a WWI soldier's diary that The Gipper quoted that cold, blustery Inauguration Day 21 years ago:

We are told that on Martin Treptow's body was found a diary. On the flyleaf under the heading, "My Pledge," he had written these words: "America must win this war. Therefore, I will work, I will save, I will sacrifice, I will endure, I will fight cheerfully and do my utmost, as if the issue of the whole struggle depended on me alone."

The favorite line of an increasing number of Center-Right politicians and pundits goes something like this: "This election is all about the economy, and so social issues - issues of morality - are going to have to take a back-seat."  To put it in terms everyone can understand: Mitt, not Rick (Santorum or Perry).

Seems reasonable, right?  I mean, the economy is, shall we say, lackluster, and it seems as if the #1 topic on peoples' minds is - to quote the previous Madame Speaker of the House - "jobs, jobs, jobs!"

But are we setting up a false dichotomy, one in which "morality" and "economics" are needlessly (and some might say "foolishly") separated?  Are we recklessly forgetting that neither Party ever wins national elections without an animated and motivated base, and that the bases of each are animated and motivated by "social issues" more than anything else?

I am fine with Mitt Romney being our nominee in 2012, and my concern is not simply that Republicans will fail to meet the seemingly mandatory quota of "Pro-Life" and "Traditional Marriage" references in stump speeches.  What troubles me is the thought that many on the Center-Right don't see the inseparable connection between morality and economics.  We're in a "long war" against the irreconcilable wing of Islam externally, but here at home we're in an intellectual - nearly spiritual - battle for the hearts and minds of millions of people who typically vote liberal/Democrat and who have become convinced that the federal government is their caretaker and friend.

Writing in his Break Point commentary today, Chuck Colson drives home this very point in a clear and articulate way:

Doesn’t anybody get the connection between the social issues and economics issues?

One candidate who does, Rick Santorum had the courage to link the two in a recent Iowa town hall meeting. (And before I go on, please, folks, I’m not endorsing him or anyone. I never do.)

Here’s what Senator Santorum said:

“Yes, [the election is] about growth and the economy, [but] it’s also about what is at the core of our country . . . faith and family. You can’t have a strong economy, you can’t have limited government if the family is breaking down and we don’t live good, moral, and decent lives.”

Precisely right. And what does he get for his remarks? Backhanded compliments for his showing in Iowa and a stern warning from, among others, the conservative National Review:

Here’s what the National Review wrote online: “In a general election…where the focus is almost certainly going to be on economic issues, it is questionable whether Santorum’s relentless focus on social issues will play well with independent voters, especially in the crucial suburbs.”

Hogwash. If the nation’s current economic crisis has taught us anything, it’s that a healthy economy cannot thrive in the midst of moral breakdown. Ethical failures on Wall Street, Main Street, and Capitol Hill put us into this mess we’re in today, as I’ve said many times before.

Again, I don't care if Rick Santorum isn't the GOP's primary victor.  As an evangelical conservative I honestly don't.  Politicians matter, but ideas, ideals, and values matter more.  We should be diligent in selecting the candidate we will end up voting for in the primary and general election, but we should be ever-vigilant for opportunities to make the moral case for free enterprise and, as the good folks at The Acton Institute put it, the "Free and Virtuous Society."

Colson continues:

But how about some facts? I’ll have the citations for you at BreakPoint.org: Take incarceration rates: something Santorum has alluded to and I’ve seen with my own eyes: “Young men who grow up in homes without fathers are twice as likely to end up in jail as those who come from traditional two-parent families.” And “70% of juveniles in state-operated institutions come from fatherless homes.”

How about education? 71% of all high school dropouts come from fatherless homes. And children from low-income, two-parent families outperform students from high-income, single-parent homes.

I could go on and on.

Do you think that crime rates, incarceration, low educational achievement, out of wedlock births, affect the economy and government spending? Of course they do and the statistics prove this!

If you want a healthy, thriving economy you’ve got to have a strong moral societal foundation. And any so-called “conservatives” who think otherwise are simply deluding themselves; the two issues simply can’t be separated.

I couldn't agree more.

What say you?  Is Colson over-stating his case?

If you're on the Right, you need to familiarize yourself with the work of columnist James Delingpole.  He is British and writes for The Daily Telegraph in London.  I'll let Uncommon Knowledge's Peter Robinson fill you in on the rest.

Watch this:

Fascinating guy. We should be paying attention to what's happening in England and Europe. Seriously.

If you're not familiar with Daniel Hannan, you should be.  He is a journalist.  He is an author. He is a British politician, and currently serving as a member of the European Union's Parliament.  Mr. Hannan loves liberty, and is one of the most articulate (and witty) defenders of limited government and freer economic markets in the "Old World."

His new book, The New Road to Serfdom, is excellent and I highly recommend it.  Great gift for Christmas!

Here the first two parts of a three-part clip of Hannan speaking to a group of American conservatives in Colorado earlier this year.  Well worth your time!

Part 1:

Part 2:

Follow Daniel Hannan at @DanHannanMEP

In a day and age when it often feels like we have very little to be thankful for when it comes to politics, it's important we remember just how lucky - how blessed and free - we truly are.

God, family, country: and in that order.  A thankful people are a happy people.  They are a brave and confident people, one ready to help the helpless and fight for causes and ideals that appear all but lost.

Americans aren't special: but our ideas, ideals, and values are.

Here to remind us of a few things we ought to be thankful for this Thanksgiving Weekend are two clips from President Ronald Reagan.

From 1985:

And this one, The Gipper's farewell address to the nation in 1989:

God bless you and your families. God bless America.

Recent guest of The R.J. Moeller Show podcast Professor Paul Rahe was interviewed by friend-of-the-show Peter Robinson for Uncommon Knowledge last week.  Below is Part 1:

We love us some Paul Rahe here at AVITW, and so will you!

Larry Arnn, president of Hillsdale College, discusses the Declaration of Independence, the founders, Woodrow Wilson, and the founders of modern liberalism and how they gave more power to government.  Not knowing history, especially the history of our nation, is, in my opinion, a large part of the problem in a quickly-declining America.  It's hard to make decisions about what we should do when we're not certain what has worked, what hasn't, and in each case, why?

Newt Gingrich wrote this short piece for National Review today to honor our veterans and the men and women in uniform who have kept this country safe for more than 230 years.

An excerpt:

What makes this Veteran’s Day so different is that, earlier this year, our last surviving veteran of World War I passed away and now rests with his comrades at Arlington.

Army Cpl. Frank W. Buckles died on Feb. 27, 2011, at the age of 110. He was the last of the 4.7 million Americans who fought in the Great War nearly a century ago.

Having joined the ranks of American doughboys at the age of 16 — after being turned down by the Marine Corps for being too small, and rejected by the Navy for having flat feet — Buckles finally convinced an Army captain that he was old enough to enlist. He was so eager to join the conflict that he volunteered to serve as an ambulance driver, having heard that this would place him on a fast track to the front lines in France, where he did indeed come face to face with the ghastly toll of war as he transported the broken bodies of his comrades.

But even after the Armistice, this did not end Buckles’s experience of war. Over two decades later, during World War II, while serving as a civilian shipping contractor in the Philippines, Buckles was captured by the Japanese and became a prisoner of war for more than three years.

He lost over 50 pounds during his imprisonment, surviving on a daily diet of only a small amount of mush served in a tin cup the size of a coffee mug that he kept the rest of his life.

And now that Buckles is no longer with us, our last link with his generation of warriors has quietly slipped away.

As a boy, I attended the parades in their honor, men still young in their 40s and 50s. The young veterans who once marched beside them — now remembered as our “Greatest Generation” — were in their 20s, having returned not long before from Iwo Jima, Bastogne, and the flak-torn skies over Berlin and Tokyo.

Of the nearly 15 million who served during the Second World War, little more than a million remain with us, and approximately 1,000 of these pass away with each day. Today, the younger vets who march beside them are those of more recent eras: Korea, Vietnam, the Cold War, the Persian Gulf War, and the ongoing conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan — a total of more than 21 million veterans living among us.

Always remember folks: We are free because they are brave.

I'm not alone when I say in reference to Chairman of the House Budget Committee Paul Ryan (R-WI): "I have seen the future (of the conservative movement), and it works."  If this guy is emblematic of a new crop of conservative politicians, we on the Right have reason for (cautious) optimism.  Here is Rep. Ryan speaking at The Heritage Foundation just a few days ago in Washington D.C.:

It will take much, much more than one man, but Paul Ryan is a very, very good start.

For more with Paul Ryan, check out Peter Robinson's interview with the congressman last month on the web-show Uncommon Knowledge.