Choosing Between Republicans And Democrats Is Like Choosing Between Pharisees and Sadducees

Chuck Baldwin Live ^ | May 28, 2003 | Chuck Baldwin

[xyggyx]

Food For Thought From The Chuck Wagon May 28, 2003

When our Lord walked this earth, there were two major "parties" leading the Jewish people: the Pharisees and the Sadducees. Both of these groups posed major problems for Christ. Furthermore, though each group opposed the other, neither of them represented the truth. We have a very similar situation today in the United States with the two major political parties. In fact, the two major parties are eerily similar to those two problem-groups of Jesus' day.

Pharisees were the "conservatives" of their day. They believed in God and in personal morality. On the other hand, Sadducees were the "liberals" of their day. They were blatantly secular in philosophy and conduct. If they were yet with us today, Pharisees would doubtless feel right at home in the Republican Party, while Sadducees would fit right in with the Democratic Party.

While the Pharisees and Sadducees fiercely fought each other, they were both the enemies of Christ. When it came to supporting error and opposing truth, they were united. The same is true today with the Republican and Democratic parties.

Republicans and Democrats only argue about things that have to do with enriching each party's power and influence. On matters of substance, however, they are mostly united.

For example, neither party gives a flip about what the U.S. Constitution says. The only time they refer to it is when they seek an advantage over the other party. On the whole, elected public officials from both parties take their oath of office about as seriously as a lion takes the hissing of an opossum.

Beyond that, neither party believes in the principle of limited government. The size and scope of the federal government continues to skyrocket regardless of which party is in power. Republicans increase government by incurring debt; Democrats increase government by raising taxes. The result is the same: government gets bigger and bigger, while freedom gets smaller and smaller.

Furthermore, Pharisees and Sadducees alike supported Caesar. In fact, this was one of the central charges against Christ: He was seen as a rebel who refused to acknowledge the divine authority of Caesar. Because of this, Jesus was branded "unpatriotic." This ultimately led to His crucifixion. Conservatives today are doing the same thing.

Anyone who refuses to acknowledge that President Bush has been given divine authority to act outside the U.S. Constitution is branded as unpatriotic or worse. Several conservatives have even gone so far as to call G. W. Bush, "America's King." To them, Bush is Caesar, and America is an empire.

In the meantime, both parties continue to ignore or expunge the principles of truth and righteousness upon which our country was founded. Therefore, choosing between Republicans and Democrats is like choosing between Pharisees and Sadducees.

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

Change Republican to Democrat and vice versa. It's still the same sentence.
The diference is you that you think that cat poop is steak.

[RockyMtnMan]

As long as you vote for the lesser of two evils you deserve what you get. I'm going to start voting for the candidate that most closely represents my views. Whether or not they win is not important, just that I have the peace of mind that I did the right thing and not the popular thing.

[xrp]

Republicans strongly support the War on Drugs, which is an attack on someone's morals (who cares if they smoke pot in the privacy of their own home?) and also results in the wonderful DEA raids. Hey, sometimes these DEA agents actually raid the correct house, but sometimes they ransack some old guy's house...OOPS, wrong address. There's no redress for the old man. Or...when they get the right house, they go in with guns blazing and end up blowing away 14 year old girls.

Another innocent dead American, courtesy of the valiant war on drugs

[Digger]

As I call it - "The Two-Party Cartel". If we only had 2 auto, golf, toothpaste manufacturers every person would be hollering to break that monopoly. This is where competition is most needed (gov) but you will NEVER get it under this charade. See how these civil servants squeel when a 3rd party candidate comes in & disrupts their fiefdom. How can 80% of Americans want the borders secured & NOTHING happens to do such? How can Sen. Dodd not be called before the senate for his role in the Chi-Com money to Dems? Because there is no checks in this cartel.

[azhenfud]

This situation is really Sadducee.

[Reagan Man]

I agree, Republicans aren't cutting government spending and the federal bureacracy continues to grow unchecked. But the analogy that takes todays political environment and loosely compares it to the time of Jesus Christ is way over the top. Especially the following statement.

>>>Anyone who refuses to acknowledge that President Bush has been given divine authority to act outside the U.S. Constitution is branded as unpatriotic or worse.

This is pure hogwash. If you don't like the policies of PresBush, fine, but there's no need to revert to outrageous rhetoric, verging on hyperbole, to express an opposing political viewpoint.

PresBush has shown himself to be a remarkable leader in a very unique time in US and world history. Concentrating his fiscal policy on annual tax cuts since taking office, has been a positive move welcomed by most conservatives. However, Bushes efforts to hold the line on spending has been very poor. Even if you take out the cost of the war on terrorism, the federal budget has increased every year since Bush took office. But the GOP has also been part of the problem and not stood its ground on spending.

Beginning a serious fight against waste, fraud and abuse in the federal budget, would be a good start. Couple that with real tax reform and the American people might start to see the federal governemnt become more responsible in its dealings and thereby, more responsive to the Constitution.

Let's also remember that PresBush didn't create the current set of circumstances that exist in "beltway". He also isn't king of the US, he's an elected official who must deal in the political arena with the forces of the loyal opposition. Real change won't happen overnight and those that expect everything to turn rosey without hard work, are either ignorant of how politics work or are impractical idealists with pie in the sky expectations.

[rcofdayton]

The Republican party of George Bush pushes a genteel socialism. It also favors a strong defense. It does not play on class envy or racial hatred. Nevertheless, it does not give a flip about the Constitution or limited government. This new Republican party is neither all good or all bad. We have to be honest with ourselves. Of course, the American people want socialism light.

[Joe Hadenuf]

See how these civil servants squeel when a 3rd party candidate comes in & disrupts their fiefdom. How can 80% of Americans want the borders secured & NOTHING happens to do such?

You bet. And speaking of "civil servants", they make huge salarys, and are given hugh pensions, while most middle class American's are lucky to be able to afford heath insurance. These civil servant "celebrites" ride in limos, with armed security, going from talk show to talk show, telling us how bad the "other" party is. It's absolutely pathetic how they avoid the most dangerous issues facing this country. Bring up a third party, that would put American's and America first, and they both start doing the chicken, telling us we will be doomed.

[50sDad]

The third-party ethic got us Bill Clinton. It is possible to so love a losing ideology that you get what is worst for your country. I will admit that before I became a serious conservative, I was enough of an idiot to vote for Perot (before I came to my senses and became a neoconservative.) The idea that because the GOP is against abortion and against pot will turn too many votes that we need to ensure the security of America. If Libertarians had voted for W because he was the best realistic choice, we might have had a decisive 2000 vote rather than the (completely legal but thorn in our side) arguable victory that today allows Teddy-Bill-Hill to whine about "selected not elected."

[50sDad]

Republicans now control all three branches of government. Yet, you still cannot cut the size of government, seal the borders, and promote REAL tax reform.

Check back after we smash the 60% barrier in the Senate.

[Dead Corpse]

How many votes do they need to remove that requirement for bringing things up for considerationon the floor? It was a simple rules change that the Dims did. Why aren't the Pubbies trying hard to get it switched back?

Lame excuses all around. We aren't looking for a Constitutional amendment here.

[50sDad]

The Dems have controled the arguement for a generation by forcing a Liberal Supreme Court. Issues that could not be put into action through the Legislative Branch, could be forced into law by activist judges. The real battle begins when the Court is returned to our hands.

[50sDad]

And I still maintain that Judas was logically a Libertarian. He functioned in a complete freedom of choice…he could acted in his own complete self-interest to meet what he thought were his own needs, and gained 30 piece of silver by betraying a cause whose true nature he misunderstood. Where the Laws of God and/or the universe conflicted with his own desires, he rejected them. When he had completed his own fate through his own choices, he discovered that there might be a larger plan that he could not entirely understand through his human wisdom. And God took what in the end seemed to be a defeat and turned it into a Glory. Seems to be an open-and-shut argument to me.

[jimt]

Yet, you still cannot cut the size of government, seal the borders, and promote REAL tax reform.

Check back after we smash the 60% barrier in the Senate.

Care to make a little wager that

1) the amount of money spent on goobermint, including the hidden items, will go down, or
2) the borders will be sealed to illegal aliens, and no more than 1000 per year will get in?

Any amount you name, I don't care if the R's have 100% of the Senate.

[steve50]

My problem with the neoconservatives isn't abortion or pot, it's that they promote the same big central government, big spending, Constitution destroying principles as the liberals do. Face it, the republican party doesn't stand for what it used to, it has gone authoritarian/left. I refuse to go left with it.

[Jefferson Adams]

Excellent article. And I agree with you that he's right on.

[Joe Hadenuf]

Huh? What the Sam h*ll are you talking about?

[xrp]

If Libertarians had voted for W because he was the best realistic choice

Libertarians didn't vote for Bush because he didn't represent their ideals. How hard is that for Republicans to understand?

[Jefferson Adams]

Republicans now control all three branches of government. Yet, you still cannot cut the size of government, seal the borders, and promote REAL tax reform

You certainly are extremely extreme. Me too. Kinda like the founding fathers were...

[lasereye]

Republicans now control all three branches of government. Yet, you still cannot cut the size of government, seal the borders, and promote REAL tax reform

Bush would have gotten a much bigger cut including permanent elimination of dividend taxes if there were a couple more conservative Republicans in the Senate. The house was backing the full tax cut. The RINO's hold the balance of power in the Senate. This just proves the need for more Republicans, especially in the Senate.