News

Bobby Jindal wins the Fox Business undercard #GOPDebate, Christie takes second

Leave a comment
Bobby Jindal got the most interest in the GOP undercard debate
Bobby Jindal got the most interest in the GOP undercard debate

This was the best and most substantive debate so far. There was one silly question, and Jindal took the lead in dismissing it, the other candidates followed and talked about the issues.  Great job, Fox Business channel!

Centrist The Hill reports:

Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal ripped his Republican presidential rivals at Tuesday night’s GOP debate, saying that no one but him is committed to cutting government spending.

He singled out former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee after he defended his record, ticking off statistics that he said showed government spending increased during Huckabee’s tenure in Arkansas.

“During your time as governor spending in Arkansas went up 65 percent, the number of state workers went up 25 percent, the taxes on citizens went up 47 percent,” Jindal responded. “That’s not a record of cutting….wanting to cut is one thing, actually cutting is different, facts don’t lie.”
Huckabe tried to respond but the moderator shut him down.

The exchange began when Jindal touted himself as the only GOP governor in race who had actually cut government spending.

“Everyone else talks about it, if they haven’t done it at their state capitols what makes us think they’ll do it if we send them to D.C.?…if Republicans want to win national elections, let’s be conservatives, let’s not be a second version of the liberal party, let’s cut government spending.

Huckabee argued Jindal’s comments were inaccurate.

“Ninety-one percent of our state budget was three things – educate, medicate and incarcerate – and we ended up cutting 11 percent out of the budget so we didn’t have to go in and raise a bunch of taxes,” Huckabee said. “So it’s just not accurate to say nobody else up here has cut.”

The next question went to New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, who won big applause for playing the uniter.

“For the people who are out there right now, I want to guarantee you one thing,” Christie said. “If you think that Mike Huckabee won’t be a president who will cut spending, or Chris Christie or John Kasich, wait until you see what Hillary Clinton will do to this country and how she will drive us into debt. She is the real adversary and we need to stay focused as Republicans on her.”

Jindal on Tuesday also criticized the Republican senators who are running for president.

“We’ve got four senators running, they’ve never cut anything in D.C.,” he said. “They give these long speeches called filibusters. They pat themselves on the back. Nothing changes, when they go to relieve themselves, their calls and the toilets get flushed at the same time and the American people lose.”

Here’s Bobby Jindal talking on Chris Christie for being a big spender:

Notice how Jindal came at Christie with facts and figures, and Christie replied with deflections and opinions.

The leftist Washington Post had more on Jindal’s strong performance:

Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal – now in his fourth undercard debate – went on the offensive Tuesday night, attacking both higher-performing rivals and the other low-performers standing on the stage next to him.

At various points, Jindal called out Sen. Ted Cruz (Tex.) – though not by name – as all talk and no action. He called out former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee, newly dropped to the early-evening debate, for being a big spender. And he zinged New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, who had been the dominant figure in the debate’s first half, for doing too little to cut state spending.

“Let’s not be a second liberal party,” Jindal said, talking about Christie. “Let’s just not beat Hillary. Let’s elect a conservative to the White House, not just any Republican.”

Later, he seemed to taunt Christie for trying – but not succeeding, in Jindal’s view – to run New Jersey as a conservative state. “I’ll give you a ribbon for participation. And a juice box,” Jindal said.

Jindal, who rose in politics as a mild-mannered wonk, seems to believe his path to the nomination is to run as a conservative hard-liner, and a bit of a jerk. “I want to fire everybody in D.C.,” he said.

The radically leftist Los Angeles Times had more of Jindal’s attacks on Christie’s record as governor of New Jersey:

“I will give you a ribbon for participation and a juice box,” Jindal said of Christie’s record in New Jersey, as he sought to make the case that he’s accomplished more than the others on stage. Jindal attacked his rivals relentlessly. He accused Christie and former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee of allowing spending to continue to rise in their states unchecked. “Just sending any Republican [to Washington] is not enough,” Jindal said. “Under your leadership in New Jersey, your budget has gone up 15%. You’ve had nine credit downgrades.”

think the people who are giving the win to Christie are neglecting his big government record in New Jersey. Yes, Christie has charisma, but no, he is not a conservative. He does not have a conservative record. He is the epitome of RINO, and he did nothing to defend his record against Jindal’s attacks, which were all about Christie’s performance on the merits as governor of New Jersey. He had no defense, so he turned the conversation to someone slightly to the left of him – Hillary Clinton.

Please follow me on Twitter for #GOPDebate related tweets.

News

Where the action is: Frank Turek speaks to U of M college students

11 Comments

So, Bible-believing Christians are doing lots of things in the world these days, and some are more useful than others. In my opinion, the most significant thing that a Christian can do is produce original research that leads to the development or improvement of arguments for the truth of Christianity. So, Douglas Axe’s work showing that protein sequences that have biological function was significant. However, that kind of contribution going to be out of reach for most of us, because who has 6 years to waste on a PhD? But there is a next best thing, and that’s sending scholars to the universities to speak to the college students.

Here’s an account of Frank Turek speaking at the prestigious University of Michigan from The College Fix.

Excerpt:

It’s rare that college students are told on a university campus by someone holding a PhD that the universe is no accident, but rather designed by a loving creator.

Perhaps that is why a visit to the University of Michigan by popular Christian apologist Dr. Frank Turek drew a standing room only crowd of about 500 students, filling the school’s largest ballroom to capacity.

Turek, a former aviator in the U.S. Navy who holds a master’s degree from the George Washington University and doctorate from Southern Evangelical Seminary, offered students his blunt reasoning on why he believes Christianity is supported by science, not just faith, but the event last Thursday also delved into subjects such as radical Islam and homosexuality as well.

Turek gave straight answers to touchy questions that flew in the face of political correctness and the academe. On the topic of homosexuality – which he says is the biggest question he gets – he maintained homosexual acts are sinful, per the Bible. On the topic of evolution, he denied “macro-evolution” in support of intelligent design.

“You can breed all kinds of dogs from dogs,” he said, “but can you can’t get something that isn’t a dog from a dog.”

In case you’re wondering about his being a naval aviator, what I heard is that he used to fly navigator and bombardier on the P-3C Orion. I use those to hunt Russian subs in the military simulator I play. Anyway, I digress.

More:

The bedrock of Turek’s lecture was one that many religious people can appreciate, that people must hold themselves to God’s moral law. Turek attacked the materialistic determinism (the belief that there is no higher meaning to life) of scientists like Francis Crick. He attacked the way scientists deny there are such things as miracles.

“People don’t want morality and accountability,” he said. “I was in college, too.”

“The greatest miracle in the Bible has already occurred and there’s scientific evidence for it,” he said, referring to the creation of the heavens and the Earth. “God is the unmoved mover, the one who is contingent for all his creation.”

It’s very important for Christians to be familiar with scientific arguments for God’s existence. Here is a list for those who have not looked into it, so you can get a bird’s eye view:

Turek also nails what the problem is with students abandoning their faith and having no curiosity about ultimate questions:

Turek also asked students if they thought religion was being marginalized on campus, to which a senior named Alexander answered that “university culture has become more hostile to religion and to the idea of faith.”

After the speech, Turek was asked by The College Fix about why the younger generation is leaving religion. As of two years ago, the largest religious denomination on campus is now the “nones” – people who do not identify with any religion at all.

“It’s the church’s fault,” Truck said bluntly. “If the church doesn’t know how to defend itself, then people will leave.”

“Sex,” he added, “is the new religion.”

Right. No atheist in college is examining the claims of theism against the evidence rationally. The college students are seeking their own pleasure first and foremost, and to use others for that end. They adopt the lifestyle and worldview that allows them to feel good about pursuing fun and thrills above all. But I do think that confronting them with the evidence for God’s existence and character is the right move. At least then when they find out that pure selfish hedonism is a dead end, they will remember that there was another truth-focused approach that they never looked into.

In the meantime, we can help them along by writing and speaking about the harm caused by the Sexual Revolution. It never hurts to be familiar with studies that show what happens when people dump the Bible’s approach to sex, and go their own way. On this blog, I try to post lots of studies about the perils of premarital sex, rapid relationship tempo, cohabitation, no-fault divorce, abortion, etc. It’s important to share this research with young people so they can detect the threat before they walk blindly into it.

News

On the issues: assessing the 2016 Republican presidential candidates

1 Comment
Latest Republican presidential primary polls
Latest Republican presidential primary polls (click for larger image)

The PDF is here. (50 pages, but you only have to read about the candidates you might consider voting for)

Unfortunately, radically leftist Politico is the only one with a write-up on it, so here goes:

The hard-line conservative arm of the Heritage Foundation has tough criticism for much of the 2016 field, but high praise for the Texas senator.

The political arm of The Heritage Foundation has released a detailed assessment of the 2016 Republican presidential field — and it offers harsh words for many candidates. But not for Sen. Ted Cruz.

Cruz receives almost exclusively praise for his stances in the 50-page 2016 presidential policy scorecard, the first of its kind produced by Heritage Action. The report grades the candidates across six categories: growth, opportunity, civil society, limited government, favoritism and national security.

Many of the lines in the scorecard appear destined for future attack ads.

Jeb Bush, for instance, is accused of having “kowtowed to the state’s environmental lobby” in Florida. Chris Christie “has shown favoritism toward well-connected real estate developers.” Rand Paul’s “views at times veer outside the conservative mainstream.” And Donald Trump backs “massive tariffs that would damage the American economy.”

Cruz, by contrast, manages to emerge with barely a blemish, receiving only softly worded critiques of his adopting “sound policies advanced by others” rather than crafting his own.

[…]“Cruz has been willing to pay a political price for taking on government favoritism,” the report reads.

The group even forgives Cruz for one of the few trespasses he has made against its positions, voting for a bill that served “as a bargaining chip for [Export-Import Bank] allies to secure reauthorization.” The report credits him for later switching his vote and then publicly attacking Republican Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell for allegedly lying about his plans.

Bobby Jindal, who is running hard to the right in Iowa, receives among the more glowing reviews. So does Marco Rubio, who angered the right with his pursuit of a comprehensive immigration plan after first being elected with tea party support.

The two current front-runners in the polls, Ben Carson and Trump, were dinged for their lack of a record on conservative causes and a lack of specifics in their visions. “His unconventional foreign policy prescriptions raise more questions of significant consequence than they answer,” Heritage writes of Trump.

Bush was singled out for some of the most biting critiques. “Has shown favoritism toward Florida special interests and supports amnesty” for undocumented immigrants, reads one bullet point.

In its 2016 assessment, Heritage dings Bush for not supporting recent efforts to defund Planned Parenthood this fall because he said he opposed precipitating a government shutdown. The report accuses him of “playing to President [Barack] Obama’s talking points rather than reinforcing conservatives.”

No, everyone knows that my list of candidates favors governors who have a history of putting in place actual policies that actually affected real people in the real world and got real conservative results. So on that score, Cruz and Rubio way down the list because they have achieved very little:

  1. Scott Walker
  2. Bobby Jindal
  3. Rick Perry
  4. Ted Cruz
  5. Marco Rubio

Ted Cruz’s Twitter feed and his overall feel to me is that all he does is talk, talk, talk. He just doesn’t have the record of Bobby Jindal at putting policies into place. For example, as governor, Jindal actually cut spending. He actually put in place pro-life measures that actually saved lives. He actually put in place a school choice program that helped low-income students get out of failing schools. He actually cut off funding for Planned Parenthood. He actually defended religious liberty. Cruz is just a senator, so he hasn’t got that proven record. I believe he would be conservative, but I feel safer trusting someone with experience.

Having said that, the more I read reports like this Heritage Action Scorecard report, I am finding out that Cruz has been willing to at least pay a price politically for doing the right thing at various times. So, although he does not have the accomplishments that the governors have, he has been willing to push conservative values when it was not to his advantage, politically. I have to admit, there is some value to this in one sense – we know that he would do what he says no matter what. But there is a problem with Cruz. We don’t know whether he is able to create clever policies that will draw the votes of independents and even moderate Democrats. That’s what Walker and Jindal were able to do. So, although I respect what the Heritage Action team have written, I am not changing my rankings.

Tonight’s debate

Be sure and tune in to both debates tonight on Fox Business, as I am expecting Jindal and Cruz to outperform their competitors in their respective debates:

Republican debate – Fox Business/Wall Street Journal

Time – Primary: 9 p.m. ET. Secondary: 7 p.m. ET

Location – Milwaukee Theater, Milwaukee, Wisconsin

Moderators – Gerard Baker, Neil Cavuto, Maria Bartiromo

Primary: All candidates averaging at least 2.5 percent in four most recent national polls by Nov. 4.

Secondary: Remaining candidates averaging at least 1 percent in one of the four most recent polls.

Primary: Donald Trump, Ben Carson, Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz, Jeb Bush, Carly Fiorina, John Kasich, Rand Paul.

Secondary: Chris Christie, Mike Huckabee, Bobby Jindal, Rick Santorum.

Candidates on my list are in bold. The debate will be live-streamed, so you have no excuses for missing it. This one promises to be a good one. The moderators will not be amateurs as with the Democrat-biased CNBC debate.