We may have our likes and dislikes of the person holding the Presidency, but we do great disservice to our country when we disrespect the office that the President occupies, as so many did with the previous President. We don’t have to believe in every doctrine of the new President; as a matter of fact, we don’t have to believe in any of them. But we need to respect the office and not automatically come against all of his or her policies without giving some of these policies a chance to work. If we block something just because we don’t like the President or his or her party, we stop the synergy and possibility of these policies ever working, and some of them just might work and bring improvement.
We also block the possibility of a President learning from his or her mistakes and finding out that the policies do not work and adjusting them by coming up with a new and better policy. By interfering as soon as the policy is given, the President will never know if it was the blockage of the policy or the policy itself that did not work. Just because there are thousands of people screaming as soon as this new President signs an Executive Order does not mean that the Executive Order is not going to work. Only time can tell that. Most of these screaming individuals did not vote for the President in the first place, and, as with the previous President, in these times, drastic measures need to be taken in many areas due to the state of the planet.
Our country has now elected 45 Presidents. And I’m sure each time around, a large portion of people, maybe even half, thought our country was going to fall from the policies of the incoming President. By the mere fact of us having a two-party system, we are divided right off the bat.
We have been able as a nation to peacefully turn over the former reigns of administrative authority to an incoming administration throughout the two-hundred-year history of our country, which is one of the reasons why we have become known as a great nation. This was the vision of George Washington, who said it was not as important that he was the first President, but more so that there would be a second, and a third President, and so on, with the peaceful stepping down of the preceding President to make room for the new President’s administration.
So each President needs to stand or fall on his or her own merits and not because his or her hands are tied by political adversaries. Our system needs change in many ways to allow the President to responsibly rule or fall. Usually there are some people ready to impeach a President a few weeks after he or she comes into office. If the citizens of the United States do not respect the office of the President, neither will the citizens of the world, nor their leaders.
An example of another office that needs to be respected is the office of the Pope. A conclave of 115 cardinals elected the current Pope Francis. In the history of the Catholic Church there have been additional papal coronations and inaugurations after the election of the Pope, which represented an even further recognition and honor of the office of the Pope by more cardinals, at times over 100 more cardinals.
In the past, further recognition and power was given to the Pope by the College of Cardinals through various symbolic rituals in which the cardinals actually came up and kissed the red shoes or ring of The Fisherman, which represents the office of Saint Peter that the Pope holds (within Catholic Church understanding).
For centuries, non-recognition has been a tool of the opposition to a political or spiritual office. This actually began 200,000 years ago by Lucifer in the Lucifer Rebellion against God the Universal Father and Michael the Creator Son of the universe of Nebadon, who is known by us on earth as Jesus Christ. Lucifer did not recognize the office of Michael, who is not to be confused with those archangels called Michael (who are named after the Creator Son).
Non-recognition is very painful to anybody who is trying to succeed in their career, office, or talent of any kind and is a very ugly reality on a fallen world such as this one. Non-recognition exists particularly in the Hollywood film and music industry as well as, of course, in the political realm in Washington, D.C.
Our Constitutional right of free speech has become greatly distorted to mean that anything can be said about anybody in order to assassinate their character and even discredit their family, all in the name of free speech. The Internet is rampant with lies and innuendos and gossip. So much so that you can’t figure out the truth from the lies, and the graphics are so good that everything looks real. So we live in a time of audio and visual deception.
There definitely needs to be regulation of what can be said about a public person, particularly the President of the United States and other Ministers of State in office, as well as teachers, spiritual leaders, and even sports heroes. I was very upset when even Payton Manning was demonized for taking steroids. Once something is said to millions of people, the damage is done. There needs to be swift and heavy adjudication, in fines of some kind, for people who misrepresent others over the Internet or any other form of media.
There is much injustice in this country to begin with, and many judges (who are basically just people themselves) believe the sensationalism, unfortunately, of the often sophisticated media attacks against individuals who may come in front of them in court cases. I personally have suffered in a judicial situation when I have tried to seek justice from individuals assassinating my character. I have been misrepresented by a major media network, on NBC Dateline, by unscrupulous reporters and producers. It seems like a public person is fair game to any person who has a vendetta against them, or is in competition with them, or is just outright jealous of another person’s success, or trying to make money on the coattails of popular and decent people.
It used to be that a person who felt jealous of another person, or had some other kind of silly squabble with someone, would at least have to spend some money and take the other person to court, often under false accusations. So they would have to dig into their pocketbook. But today all they have to do is sit down at their computer and lambast the character of someone, and don’t spend a penny in doing it, and reach millions of people.
Weak people can hide behind electronic devices, whereas at one time they would have to at least challenge a person to a duel or even a good old fist fight. But today they don’t have to do either. They can destroy someone thousands of miles away and call themselves a decent human being.
I think we need to come up with a whole new definition of free speech, particularly on the Internet. Media misinterprets free speech, and through sensationalized journalism in radio, television, and the Internet many lives are destroyed—the lives of many people who are true voices of change for the betterment of humankind, who are true change agents.
Recently, by accident, I came across a video clip on the Internet of a young woman on Dr. Phil’s show. This 13-year-old teenager had the mouth and attitude of a street prostitute, to the dismay of her mother, who tried to correct her. This young woman challenged her mother, and even challenged Dr. Phil to go outside and settle it. What she needed was to be taken to a disciplinary rehabilitation center that is designed to redirect anti-social, disrespectful behavior into socially acceptable and respectful behavior. This young woman probably was not raised with a strong and loving father figure and is part of a generation that watches teenage disregard for authority on television all the time.
Disrespect for the authority of the Office of the President of the United States begins in the home. The breakdown of the family is the breakdown of the respect of authority of any kind, and our country suffers, from the top down and bottom up. This disrespect is observed everywhere—with our policemen to our teachers. I had a friend who became a teacher and was assaulted many times. Eventually some students threw a chair at him and seriously hurt his back, causing him to retire early.
The problems of the breakdown of authority actually began 200,000 years ago when Lucifer disrespected the rightful authority of God the Father, as was referred to previously in this article. This affected our world and thirty-six other worlds in our local system. It began with the breakdown of eldership and each person being told by Lucifer that they are their own gods, that there is no Universal Father, and that the only person that individuals need to listen to is themselves.
Today this doctrine of self-assertion and unbridled liberty is spread all over the planet, particularly in the more financially prosperous nations of Western civilization. The Third World countries, although materially poor, still have some semblance of respect for eldership and following wise leaders and sages. In the past, grandfathers and grandmothers were actually listened to by the younger generation. Today many of our grandparents are scorned, and people who are our elders are ignored and forgotten.
People without virtue do indeed become dirty old men and women. But people who do have faith in God, and have tried to live good and kind virtuous lives, usually do gain wisdom as they age and have much knowledge and insights to share—particularly older souls who have been around the wheel (as the Native Americans say) many times—and they should not be just thrown away, like an old shoe, or disregarded as useless. I think that anyone over fifty today is considered old with many of the newer generation. With those particular young people, Presidents who are up there in the seventies are considered Mr. Magoos—not hip enough, not computer-literate enough. I think it’s to any President’s credit if he or she can use social media like Twitter.
The word wisdom is a forgotten word for many, used only in fantasy movies and not in real life. There have been many forgotten words that used to mean something, like honor and loyalty, and even commitment. But now the first time a leader, like a President, makes a mistake or does something that somebody else disagrees with, they are ostracized.
No, maybe a President may not get the majority of votes of the American people, but they may get the votes that legally count, and the states that count, with the electoral votes that count. That would mean they ran a smart campaign that netted those key states to win the election. (If we don’t agree with the Electoral College process, we should methodically and legally work to get rid of it, so that the next time the majority of popular vote is the legal way to win the election.)
Agree with him or not, let’s respect the President’s office and pray that he will grow to make the best decisions for the good of the most people and for our earth, and let’s work in an honest and legal manner to express opposition to those policies we think are not good for our country, because violent opposition was not the way of Gandhi, Martin Luther King, Jr. or Jesus Christ.