Archive for 05/17/2010

Can a Christian Kill for His Government?

Posted: 05/17/2010 by Lynn Dartez in Christian

by Laurence M. Vance
by Laurence M. Vance
Recently by Laurence M. Vance: The Marines Are Looking for a Few Good High School Students

This is a serious and controversial question to ask anytime, but especially in the midst of a war. But that is exactly what Bennie Lee Fudge did – in 1943.

I only know two things about Mr. Fudge: he was from Alabama and he wrote a book in 1943 called Can a Christian Kill for His Government? I suspect that he was a Church of Christ minister, but I don’t know for certain.

Fudge doesn’t claim to be adding anything new to the subject of the Christian’s relationship to civil government and his participation in government wars, but says that his work “is an effort to collect in logical, systematic form, the principal arguments that have been presented by those who affirm the right of the Christian to participate in these activities, and to study these arguments in the light of the Scriptures.” Following each of these arguments, Fudge presents his “reasons for holding to the opposite view.”

There are no gray areas in Fudge’s thinking. He considers the question of Christians killing for the government in combat to be a black or white issue:

Either I am wrong in advising Christian boys against accepting combatant service, and will be held responsible before God for encouraging them to shirk their duty, not only to their country, but to God; or those are wrong who teach these young men to go willingly into combatant service, and will be held responsible in the judgment for encouraging them to violate one of the most sacred commands of God in shedding the blood of their fellow man.

Fudge condemns preachers who, under the pressure of public opinion, encourage their young men to enlist in the business of bloodshed and then later, when cooler heads prevail, change their position when some of the young men who enlisted with their blessing will never come back alive and have a chance to change their position. He astutely recognizes that wars must be sold to the public with a tremendous national propaganda campaign. He has no use for those who try to cloak wars under the banner of defense:

It is impossible for a man to judge between offensive and defensive wars while the war is in progress and he is involved in it. Napoleon declared in his last days that he had never waged an offensive war. The people of Germany believed in World War I and also in this present war that they were defending their fatherland. It is axiomatic in war that the best defense is a good offensive.

The plan of book is straightforward. Fudge presents two propositions:

The Bible authorizes the Christian’s acting as a punitive agent of the civil government, either as a law enforcement officer or as a soldier in the army.

The Bible forbids the Christian’s acting as a punitive agent of the civil government, either as a law enforcement officer or as a soldier in the army.

He spends the first part of the book refuting the first proposition and the second part of the book affirming the second.

In the first part of the book, Fudge introduces a subject (15 in all), presents supporting evidence, and provides a summary in the form of three statements. This is all followed by his reply. The subjects covered are: Spiritual and Material Realms, Jewish and Roman Practice, The Instinct of Self-Preservation, Innocence and Guilt, Servants of the Kingdoms of This World, They That Take the Sword Perish with the Sword, Moral and Penal Law, Cleansing the Temple, Civil Government Ordained of God, Paul’s Use of Armed Defense, Cornelius the Soldier, The Philippian Jailor, Combatant and Non-Combatant Service, The Hebrew Words for “Kill,” and Historical Evidence.

Here is his section on Romans 13.


Read Romans 13:1–7. The civil government is ordained of God. Christians must be subject to it and support it for conscience’ sake, which places civil government as an institution in the realm of that which is morally right. Conscience has to do with matters morally right and wrong. The God-ordained purpose of the divinely approved institution of civil government is to bear the sword, punish evil-doers, and praise the righteous. But civil government works through its citizens and subjects.

  1. It is right for a citizen of the civil government, acting as an agent of the government, to bear the sword in punishment of evildoers.
  2. Christians are citizens of the civil government, and Christians may do anything that is right.
  3. Therefore Christians, as citizens of the civil government and acting as agents of the government, may bear the sword in punishment of evil-doers.


The first premise is defective. Logically to draw the above conclusion, the first premise must be construed to mean, “It is right for any citizen of the civil government, acting as an agent of the government, to bear the sword and punish evil-doers.” It is assumed that “the powers that be” of Romans 13:1 includes the civil government with all its citizens and subjects. Since this assumption would include Christians, the first premise is in reality begging the question.

A study of Romans 13 will show that Paul considers the Christian as entirely separate from “the powers that be.” “Let every soul be in subjection to the higher powers.” Paul is considering the government as one party, the Christian as another, the Christian subject to the government. This applied to every soul among the Christians. “He (the power, the administrator of civil government) is a minister of God to thee for good.” Not that the Christian is the minister of God in this capacity, but that another party – he, third person, automatically excluding the Christian who is addressed in the second person – is such a minister. Notice the same distinction in the following verses, “But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he (not thou) beareth not the sword in vain: for he (not thou) is a minister of God, an avenger for wrath to him that doeth evil.”

Now comes the Christian’s part in this order of things – “Wherefore ye must needs be in subjection, not only because of the wrath, but also for conscience’ sake. For for this cause ye pay tribute also; For they (not ye, now) are ministers of God’s service, attending continually upon this very thing. Render to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honor to whom honor.” It is strikingly noticeable that in listing the services “due” the devil government by the Christian, Paul did not include “defense to whom defense is due” or “vengeance to whom vengeance is due.” Those two duties have always been expected of their subjects by the civil governments, yet inspiration nowhere names them as due by the Christian. It is similarly outstanding that while he mentions that ye (Christians) should pay tribute, custom, honor, fear, be subject, it is always he or they when bearing the sword is mentioned. So far as Romans 13 goes, the Christian’s relationship to political government is wholly passive. This is the teaching of the entire New Testament on the matter. There is not one example, command, or necessary inference of the Christian by divine sanction taking an active part in civil or military government.

Since it is clear that in Romans 13 Paul considers the sword-bearer and the Christian as separate and distinct individuals, our premise, to represent correctly the teaching of the passage, would read, “It is right for some citizens of the civil government, acting as agents of the government, to bear the sword and punish evil-doers.” In this case it remains to be proved that Christians fall in that class qualified to bear the sword and punish evildoers. This is the point to be proved in the beginning, so this argument is begging the question, and there no logical argument at all.

In the second part of the book, Fudge follows basically the same format as the first. He introduces a subject (6 in all), presents supporting evidence, and provides a summary in the form of three statements. There is no reply here because Fudge is affirming his proposition that “The Bible forbids the Christian’s acting as a punitive agent of the civil government, either as a law enforcement officer or as a soldier in the army.” The topics in this part of the book are: God’s Penal Law, International Nature of the Church, God’s Use of a Prepared People, For What May a Christian Fight?, Is It a Good Work?, and Historical Evidence.

In this last section, Fudge relies heavily on the Church Father Tertullian, such as this quote from his work De Corona:

Shall it be held lawful to make an occupation of the sword, when the Lord proclaims that he who uses the sword shall perish by the sword? And shall the son of peace take part in the battle when it does not become him even to sue at law? And shall he apply the chain, and the prison, and the torture, and the punishment, who is not the avenger even of his own wrongs? Shall he, forsooth, either keep watch-service for others more than for Christ, or shall he do it on the Lord’s day, when he does not even do it for Christ Himself? And shall he keep guard before the temples which he has renounced?

He also refers to modern historians who name aversion to the imperial military service, disregard for politics, and lack of patriotism as reasons the Romans persecuted the early Christians.

Fudge concludes:

I can do anything for the government that I can do for an individual or a corporation: and, outside the things due the government by God’s decree, I can do nothing for the government that I cannot do for an individual or a corporation.

Can a Christian Kill for His Government? appears to have been privately printed and distributed by the author in limited quantities. It has no doubt been out of print for decades. I only recently discovered this valuable 64-page book and reprinted it as part of my Classic Reprints series. Fudge’s book is an important addition to the genre of antiwar literature from a biblical perspective.

If you are aware of any other long-forgotten antiwar books or articles that you feel are worthy of being reprinted, please contact me about including them in my Classic Reprints series.

May 17, 2010

Laurence M. Vance [send him mail] writes from Pensacola, FL. He is the author of Christianity and War and Other Essays Against the Warfare State and The Revolution that Wasn’t. His newest book is Rethinking the Good War. Visit his website.

Copyright © 2010 by Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit is given.


Armed Citizens

Posted: 05/17/2010 by Lynn Dartez in Land of The Free

While taking groceries to her car, a man approached an 82-year-old woman and said something horrible to her: “This is your day. You are too old to be alive anyway.” According to police, he then grabbed the woman’s cane and beat her. Despite the savage assault, the elderly woman managed to reach into her purse, draw her gun and fire a shot. The man fled and, upon hearing the shot, store employees quickly came to the woman’s aid. The self-proclaimed “stubborn, old broad” is badly bruised but will fully recover. “If I go naturally or to a sickness or something, fine,” she said. “I’m ready to go, but I’m not ready to let some idiot like that take me out.” (KVOA-TV, Tucson, AZ, 03/15/10)

Daniel Kaplan was parked in front of his business when two men sprinted toward his vehicle. One of them reached inside, punched Kaplan three times in the face and stuck a gun to Kaplan’s head. Then Kaplan’s instincts kicked in. Police say he grabbed the suspect’s gun with his left hand and kicked open the car door into his assailant. Kaplan then reached under the seat and grabbed his .45-cal. Glock pistol. “I got five shots off as quickly as I could,” he recalls. “I was fighting for my life.” At least one of the suspects was shot. Both fled the scene and are being sought by police. “I’m happy to be here,” said a relieved Kaplan. (Columbus Ledger-Enquirer, Columbus, GA, 03/04/10)

A crazed, knife-wielding man attempted to stab people at random in a convenience store parking lot. Police said he’d already chased a delivery driver and others when he ran down a car leaving the lot. He lunged at the car’s driver with the knife, wounding him. That’s when the driver, whose two young stepdaughters were in the vehicle, produced a handgun and fired about six shots, killing the attacker. The driver will recover from his injuries.“You’ve got to protect yourself,” said witness Byron Cook.“He had his two kids in the car and they were terrified.” (WREG-TV, Memphis, TN, 03/05/10)

Maureen Cassidy awoke to a loud noise and got up to investigate. To her horror, a man with a knife had forced his way into her home. She hurried back to the bedroom and woke her husband, who got his Smith & Wesson 9 mm handgun. The husband stood in the doorway and yelled to the intruder that he had a gun. Inexplicably undeterred, the intruder advanced toward the husband, who fired a shot. The wounded intruder fled the home. Police found him hiding in the bushes next door. A second person was also arrested in connection with the invasion. (The Palm Beach Post, West Palm Beach, FL, 03/13/10)

Police said that early one morning an armed suspect burst into a home office in an area described by one resident as “a quiet neighborhood.” Hearing the burglar, the resident quickly armed himself with a firearm. When the burglar approached, the resident feared for his life and shot the suspect, killing him. “I’m not for someone being shot,” said Nora Dietz, a concerned neighbor, “but you have to protect yourself.” (The Baltimore Sun, Baltimore, MD, 03/29/10)

Raymond Michel and his wife, Dawn, returned home with their grandson when the 9-year-old noticed a suspicious light in a downstairs bedroom. Dawn investigated and found a few items in disarray. Then she found a garbage bag outside with money and jewelry in it, and a window screen was damaged. She ran to tell her husband that someone had been – or still was – in the house. Michel got his handgun and walked upstairs. Items were strewn about the floor and a bathroom door was shut that the Michels always keep open. Michel kicked the door open and it struck the intruder. The suspect began to aim a rifle at the homeowner, who quickly fired his handgun, shattering the door and narrowly missing the intruder. The suspect laid on the ground as everyone waited for police. (The Bakersfield Californian, Bakersfield, CA, 03/04/10)

A man wasn’t home when an alarm indicated a possible break-in. He quickly called his neighbor, Gaylon Crawford, and asked him to check on the house. The neighbor noticed a door was forced open and the lights were on. Once inside he found two men wearing dark clothing. Police said the men claimed they were retrieving their tools, but Crawford didn’t buy it. He drew his handgun and told the men to put their hands up and wait for police. Instead, one of the men charged Crawford, who shot him. The suspects fled. The wounded man was arrested when he sought treatment for a gunshot wound at the hospital. His accomplice is still at large. (White Mountain Independent, Show Low, AZ, 03/09/10)

When he was awakened by his home security system, NRA Endowment member Steve Bason prepared for the worst – he got his Benelli M1 12-ga. shotgun, while his wife, Beth, an NRA Life member, grabbed her Glock 9 mm pistol.“At first we figured it was just another false alarm,” Bason told the editor of the “Armed Citizen.”“Then a light came on in our barn and I thought, ‘My goodness, this is real!’” Police say the couple cautiously approached the barn. They peered inside and found a man standing next to Bason’s truck with the door open. “There was some yelling and we probably said some words that aren’t fit for print,” Bason recalled. The suspect quickly found himself staring down the barrels of two different guns and waited patiently for police. (The Express, Lock Haven, PA, 02/02/10)

The incessant ringing of her doorbell woke a woman from her sleep. She looked through the front door peephole and saw someone in a hooded sweatshirt outside continuing to ring the bell. Police say the woman ran to the bedroom, got her handgun and dialed 9-1-1. As she returned to the front door, a second hooded suspect emerged, sprinted to the door and kicked it. His foot busted a hole in the door, knocking down the woman. She looked through the hole and saw the suspect preparing to run and kick the door again, so she stuck the barrel of her handgun out of the hole and fired two shots. The suspects fled the scene and are being sought by police. (KNXV-TV, Phoenix, AZ, 02/11/10)

Some twisted individual broke into a rural home, tied up a woman and her mother and sexually assaulted the younger woman, according to police. The older woman managed to send a cell phone text message to her neighbor. The neighbor’s boyfriend, Sonny Osborn, ran to the scene, saw what was occurring and ran to get his gun. He returned and shot the attacker three times. The suspect was treated at a hospital and taken to jail. Incredibly, the police and the attacker agree Osborn did the right thing. “[The suspect] even looked at Sonny and said, ‘I have no hard feelings man. You done what you were supposed to do’,” said Sheriff’s Department Sgt. Bill Snead. “He said, ‘You just protected these people’.” (WTHR-13, Indianapolis, IN, 02/24/10)

Richard Evans didn’t feel safe in his own home the day after four teens broke into the house and stole guns and electronics. Unfortunately for all concerned, the teens returned. Police believe they were intent on stealing Evans’ four-wheel drive vehicle, for which they’d stolen the keys in the prior burglary. The teens wore masks and climbed Evans’ fence. He shouted at them to get off his property, but they did not comply. Fearing the teens were carrying guns, Evans grabbed his shotgun and opened fire. All four teens were wounded and taken to the hospital. Police plan to charge them with armed burglary and grand theft. (Florida Today, Melbourne, FL, 02/02/10)

Michael Hommes’ German shepherd was strangely upset in the middle of the night, running frantically to various windows in the home. Trusting his dog’s intuition, Hommes released it outside. The German shepherd likely saw the prowler in the yard. The next thing Hommes heard was his dog being shot. He ran back into the home and grabbed a pistol. By the time he returned to the front door, the prowler had already forced his way inside. Hommes shot at the armed intruder, causing him to flee the home. Hommes’ loyal dog was treated by a veterinarian for its injuries and will survive. An investigation is under way. (Star-Beacon, Ashtabula, OH, 02/16/10)

A group of armed men allegedly concocted an elaborate robbery ploy. The first step in their scheme was to break into an unoccupied home. Then they used a phone book to call electricians to the house so they could rob them. According to police, when the first electrician arrived, the robbers ambushed him. One of the robbers shot him in the leg and tied him up in another room. Shortly thereafter a second electrician arrived, who was also promptly shot in the leg. This electrician, however, turned out to be an armed citizen with a concealed-carry permit, and he was in no mood to become a victim. He drew a handgun and shot one of the robbers, likely saving his own life and that of his fellow electrician. The wounded robber was taken to the hospital. His accomplices fled and are still being sought. (The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Atlanta, GA, 02/12/10)

NRA member Robert Cole and his wife, Pam, had just started to doze off one evening when they heard breaking glass and their motion detector alarm as it went off. Then Cole heard someone in the living room. “I woke my wife up and told her we had someone in the house, and she told me to grab the shotgun,” he remembered. Police said he peered out the bedroom door and saw a man in the living room holding a fire extinguisher. “I was worried he was going to hurt me or my wife so I [fired] one round of No. 6 shot,” Cole said. Police arrested the wounded suspect and an alleged accomplice nearby. This wasn’t Cole’s first act of armed citizenry. He was involved in an incident that appeared in this column in December 2004. (North Channel Sentinel, Pasadena, TX, 01/07/10)

A man allegedly burglarized a vending machine and fled from police in his vehicle. The suspect cracked his axle but continued to drive away. He stashed the car near an elementary school, which was placed on lockdown as police scoured the area. “As they were searching the area, they heard a pop,” said Phoenix Police Sgt. Tommy Thompson. The sound they heard was the report of a nearby homeowner’s shotgun. The suspect entered the home and demanded money and car keys. In fear of his life, the homeowner fired his shotgun, killing the suspect. (The Arizona Republic, Phoenix, AZ, 01/27/10)

Police said that shortly after midnight three men broke into a home seeking money and drugs. There were no drugs in the home, but there was a .22-cal. rifle – and an 11-year-old boy trained in its use. The boy leapt to the defense of his mother and sister. One of the intruders shot the boy, slightly injuring him. The boy returned fire, seriously wounding a suspect and causing the men to flee the home. Police found all three intruders nearby. The wounded man was airlifted to a hospital and will be charged after his release. (San Antonio Express-News, San Antonio, TX, 01/20/10)

Early one morning, a Ventura, Calif., man dialed 9-1-1 after spotting two alleged prowlers in his backyard. Unfortunately for the homeowner – but perhaps more unfortunately for the prowlers – the suspects forced open a locked door and entered the home before police arrived. The homeowner, armed with a handgun, fired upon the suspects. They fled the home. Police apprehended one of the suspects in the driveway suffering from multiple gunshot wounds. The other suspect, also believed to be wounded, was still being sought at press time. (Associated Press, 01/26/10)

When a neighbor knocked on Lawrence Sanderson’s door and informed him someone was trying to steal Sanderson’s privately owned fire truck, he phoned police, grabbed his handgun and went to the scene. Meanwhile, police said the intoxicated suspect started the truck, put it in reverse and slammed into the back of the garage, causing an estimated $300 in damage. The truck stalled and the suspect tried to restart it as Sanderson approached. Sanderson ordered the man at gunpoint to get out of the vehicle and lie on the ground. Police arrived and arrested the suspect shortly thereafter. “[Sanderson] holstered his gun as soon as our guys got there,” said Montrose, Colo., Police Cdr. Gene Lillard. (The Grand Junction Daily Sentinel, Grand Junction, CO, 01/26/10)

Michelle Cornelsen was working at her coffee shop when a teenager approached, drew a gun and demanded money. Cornelsen, a 31-year-old firearm enthusiast who’s been hunting since she was a young girl, was confident in her ability to defend herself. When another customer approached, the suspect hid his gun. Cornelsen took advantage of the opening, drawing a 9 mm Kel-Tec. She aimed it at the suspect and said, “You leave now!” He quickly complied. Cornelsen phoned police, and a deputy who’d coincidentally just bought coffee from her made a quick U-turn and arrested the suspect. (Coeur d’Alene Press, Coeur d’Alene, ID, 12/30/09)

Two or three men forced their way inside a home. The intruders were wearing ski masks and gloves, leaving little doubt as to their malicious intent. To protect his wife, cousin and 1-year-old daughter, the homeowner quickly retrieved his handgun and opened fire on the intruders, who returned fire. One intruder died after being shot multiple times. At least one accomplice fled the scene and is still being sought. The homeowner was slightly injured in the assault, but will recover. (Corpus Christi Caller-Times, Corpus Christi, TX, 12/31/09)

By Dr. Tim Ball  Monday, May 17, 2010

imageThe Kerry – Lieberman American Power Act (APA) is a disastrous, unnecessary solution for a non-existent problem. Worse, it’s a problem that exists only in a grossly inadequate computer model whose projections have never been correct. It is predicated on the false assumption that an increase in CO2 causes a temperature increase. Every record of any duration for any period in Earth’s history shows temperature increases before CO2 increases.  The false assumption is the basis of all global warming and climate change used in the corrupted research and models of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). It is impossible to imagine such an unjustified basis for any action, except to undermine the US economy for political gain. It will make the US economy uncompetitive, dramatically increase the cost of living and give more power to the government. This is already proven in the failure of countries that have pursued similar alternative energies and green economies.

The name of the Act is in the deceptive tradition of climate-based energy policy. It was carbon credits, then carbon tax, cap and trade, and now the APA but they are all the same and completely unnecessary.  Carbon credits were designed as a global equalization of wealth. Developed nations had to pay for the sin of making their money by using fossil fuels and producing the planet destroying global warming. Cap and Trade appeared virtuous by capping the planet-destroying CO2 while creating trade and business opportunity. It is actually the same old tax grab with more government control. The APA invokes patriotism and implies energy independence, especially from oil. The spill in the Gulf is unfortunate but has reinforced the push. As Rahm Emmanuel, White House Chief of Staff said, “Never let a serious crisis go to waste.”

The IPCC Provide Corrupt Scientific Basis

It provides the leverage to achieve the stated Obama administration goal of energy independence and a shift to alternative energy. However, it is much more than that because as Richard Lindzen said “Controlling carbon is a bureaucrats dream. If you control carbon you control life.”

The IPCC Reports and especially the Summary for Policymakers (SPM) are used to demonize CO2. Ironically, they provide evidence of how inadequate they are for taking such dramatic, drastic and unnecessary political action.

In the Reports what is initially included and then excluded tells the story. For example, a graph (Figure 1) showing the Medieval Warm Period (MWP) was included in the 1990 IPCC Report. It was a problem for Michael Mann and the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) so it disappeared in later reports and then was replaced in the 2001 Report by the corrupted ‘hockey stick’ graph, as they rewrote history.

Figure 1: Temperatures of Europe for last 1000 years.
Source: IPCC 1990 (Fig; 7c) Report

Figure 2 shows a table from the 2001 Report. It identifies estimates of some factors causing changes in radiative forcing because of human activities. Why do they then include “solar irradiance” as the only “natural” forcing. The column “LOSU” on the right side is critical and amusing. It stands for “Level of Scientific Understanding” so by their own measure only two are considered high and that is very debatable. Four of nine variables are low yet they are only the ones they chose. Even more bizarre they claimed solar irradiance explained at least 50% of temperature change up to 50 years ago, they were 90% certain that since then it was all attributable to human increases in CO2.

Figure 2: 2001 IPCC Radiative Forcing Table

Figure 3 shows the same table in the 2007 Report and mysteriously the LOSU column, estimated forcing values and spatial scale disappear.

Figure 3: 2007 IPCC Radiative forcing table.

A few years ago Environmental Scientists at Rutgers University listed processes that must be included in any computer model. They include, a) Wind, b) Radiation, c) Clouds, d) Precipitation, e) Air-sea exchanges of moisture, energy, and momentum, f) Air-land exchanges of moisture, energy and momentum, g) Soil moisture, h) Ground water, i) Chemistry of greenhouse gases, j) Aerosols, k) Ocean temperature, salinity, currents, l) Sea ice, m) Snow, n) Glaciers, o) Vegetation p) and Ocean biota. We have virtually no measures and only crude estimates of most of these variables. The models are inadequate scientifically in a multitude of ways. Consider the following comment about underlying mathematical issues.

“A number of recent papers analyzing the nature of climate models have yielded a stunning result little known outside of mathematical circles—climate models like the ones relied on by the IPCC contain “irreducible imprecision.” According to one researcher, all interesting solutions for atmospheric and oceanic simulation (AOS) models are chaotic, hence almost certainly structurally unstable. Furthermore, this instability is an intrinsic mathematical property of the models which can not be eliminated. Analysis suggests that models should only be used to study processes and phenomena, not for precise comparisons with nature.”

Three reasons for Kerry – Lieberman; a massive tax grab, crippling of the US economy, and offer of salvation through total government control

So the science is wrong and the computer models don’t work. Even if all human produced CO2 was eliminated tomorrow we would not be able to detect the difference in the amount in the atmosphere. The total humans produce is within the error of the estimate of at least three natural sources. For example, with the recent recession human production has decreased with no effect on global measurements. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) treats CO2 as a pollutant based on an ignorant ruling by the US Supreme Court. Kerry – Lieberman proposes to improve the environment by reducing CO2 when an increase is beneficial to the planet’s plants. Too bad the plants don’t get a vote.

There is no scientific justification for claims CO2 is causing global warming. It is a non-existent problem. Reducing the amount is harmful not helpful to the economy or plants and not necessary. It will cripple industry with draconian rules and taxation to make the entire economy expensive and uncompetitive. Alternate energies will not provide adequate power replacement and increase costs through the subsidies necessary to make them even remotely viable. Green jobs will cost regular jobs as Spain and other jurisdictions have discovered. Energy independence is easily achieved with conventional sources and a transition to nuclear power and coal for home and industry, natural gas for vehicle power and the oil industry for petrochemical needs. There are only three reasons for Kerry – Lieberman; a massive tax grab, crippling of the US economy, and offer of salvation through total government control.