I’m working on a book called How to Think. It is in rough draft form right now (set to release 2010), but I have to give you a sneak peak on a chapter where I attempt to expose one of the biggest frauds in our modern times. Considering late-breaking news, you’ll catch on to what it is. Enjoy.

Academic policy debate students freely use the term “status quo” as if it is a common table-talk term. It isn’t any longer, but the meaning of the term is quite fascinating. Debaters are tasked to run cases that challenge the status quo and promote a change to its policies. Negative teams are tasked with attacking the affirmative’s propositions and, essentially, defend the status quo. All in all, the activity teaches students to never presume that the way things are done currently–or what is necessarily believed to be truth–is actually the best policy.

So engrained in our media today is, what I believe, to be a huge hoax, one that millions of people (many whom are in control of our world governments) believe without one shred of doubt. It is an all-out fraud, nearly cult-like, and challengers to this status quo form of thinking are branded “deniers” of what appears so obviously clear.

Global warming is this fraud, and it resembles a religious frenzy more than a scientific theory it claims to be. Several readers of this book may frown on my choice of what to call a fraud (couldn’t I pick on Wall Street greed or the years of the Bush administration?). Please, hear me out. It usually doesn’t take me long to put a Global Warming activist on the defensive, and if these folks are serious with themselves, they typically start doubting what they have always been told was the truth.

I remember being taught in the 7th grade that the world, in fact, was cooling. Come to think of it, I was taught that glaciers were on their way to overcoming the northern hemisphere and would greatly impact my way of life. The earth was on its way to freezing over.

This wasn’t the only farce that came through disguised as educated science. I was also told that the lakes of the Upper Midwest and Canada were all acidifying due to the irresponsible pollution of industries. The claims were profound, too, making sure my small preschool brain was fearful of the harmful effects of pollution. Today, Minnesota and Canada have the best bass fishing in the world.

Every decade seems to go through their scary doom-and-gloom tactics. In the 90s, the tropical rain forests were on the course for destruction, and the entire West was to be obliterated into desert wasteland as a result. Today the jungles of Brazil are just as thick as ever. Who can forget the evils of Y2K? Be honest, some of you still have wax candles in the basement leftover from your stockpiling preparation of certain disaster. For the past several years, every flu outbreak has a predicted course of wiping out one-fifth of the world’s population. It never does.

The thinker should push against any theory, idea, or even apparent scientific finding that struts its arrogance around posing as fearmonger. This is the element consistent with all of these doom-and-gloom scenarios: fear. Fear and change, that is, usually change that involves money to invest, lives to change, and a change in power. Fear is a tool to control the masses, and it is precisely what is evident in the Global Warming movement.

Remember, these are the “scientific community” that Al Gore touts is in consensus! One of the most revealing comments about the Global Warming movement came from Al Gore when he was promoting his 2004 movie, An Inconvient Truth. In response to some who were doubting his findings in the movie, he responded, “There is no debate.”

There is no debate? You mean, there is no room for discussion or questioning or doubting? That is exactly what he meant, and most of the Global Warming advocates are taking this stance a bit further. There is concerted effort to mock those scientists who have questions Gore’s claims as “deniers” failing to honestly accept the “fact” that global warming exists. They’re made to look like crazy Chicken Little, when Chicken Little resembles these scientists more accurately.

Even when these Global Warming activists choose to debate, their reasoning is squirrelly. There is an uneasy umbrella of reasons–anything, really, that goes on in the climate–is now explained away with a simple word change. Instead of Global Warming occuring (they’re slowly admitting that such showings are infitesmal and, perhaps, non-existant), they are claiming “Climate Change.” How convenient of a position. Just a few years ago we were at most certain doom of rising ocean levels and heatstroke, but today we are faced with global cooling patterns that are just as bad.

This isn’t science.

Looks like a good book, eh? I had tried to publish this in ‘09, but time got sucked up with all sorts of other projects. I hope to wrap this up early in ‘10.

Other great reading on ClimateGate, being touted as the largest scientific cover-up in modern times. If you haven’t heard about it, it is likely because major news stations are sitting on the story. The news is incredible.

• Do Smoking Guns Cause Global Warming, Too?
• Science Is Dying
• Blue Book Report covers the story that the rest of the media doesn’t

From Yahoo! News: “House Democrats propose $410B spending bill.” Yet another spending bill, our leaders’ handout to its loyal subjects. Democrats claim this is desperately needed too “make up” for the Bush administration’s lack of spending.

Uh-huh. Sure.

A student of our debate camps sent me a link to a great website, Right.org. The splash page lists the woes of the current $trillion spending bill being blasted through Congress. If you press “Still not sure?” on their front page, you’ll be taken to a page that puts this spending bill into perspective. (Click here for the main page.) It is quite informative, and apparently, as more and more people become aware of this bill, Capitol Hill is being bombarded with phone calls urging the bill’s defeat.

Irony of ironies, Training Minds Ministry is hosting a Foundation for Economics Education seminar here in Monument tomorrow. Two economics speakers will be speaking to high schoolers about basic free-market economic thinking. If you are in Colorado tomorrow, you’ll definitely want to make it to this event. Click here for event and registration information.

Our president is on the campaign trail trying to convince people that this economic “stimulus” bill is needed for our nation to survive. While America has been through recessions before, fear mongering is being delivered by those who want to hastily speed through America’s largest spending bill in history. (For those of you who own our book, re-read Chapter 2.) While the administration is claiming economists are on its side, the exact opposite is true. The CATO Institute put out a full-page ad in the Wall Street Journal with 250 economists signing their name on the ad. Click here to read the ad, and watch CATO’s latest video:

It is true! Businesses are downsizing. Ordinarily wealthy parents are looking for ways to cut back. Families are being wiser with their money. The secrets we reveal in Cheaper by the Baker’s Dozen are being widely adopted. Several families are looking to spend money like the Jeubs have for years.

Wendy and I went on our yearly retreat to Estes Park two weeks ago. To prepare, I stopped at Cost Cutters to get my haircut. Our small talk revealed that Cost Cutters was doing quite well despite the economy. I told the hairdresser about Wendy and my trip to Estes. “Are you staying at the Stanley?” she asked. No, I answered, we’re staying at the YMCA. She was unimpressed.

Really, the YMCA of the Rockies is an incredible place. Mountains surround the facility. In all practicality, Wendy and I could be shacked up in a desert lodge for all we cared. We take this “retreat” to catch up on writing, plan our year’s schedule, talk and pray over each of our children. “I hope you have time to be romantic,” my hairdresser said. She somehow thought Jack Nicholson in The Shining was romantic? (The Stephen King classic was filmed at the Stanley Hotel.)

The YMCA offers a “Pastor’s Getaway” deal, and being that I am the president of a nonprofit organization, I qualify for 2 nights lodging with 6 meals in their cafeteria for only $48/night. I ran into one of the coordinators, someone I have gotten to know as we’ve utilized their facility for events, Arlen the Group Sales Manager.

I asked Arlen if business was slowing down because of the economy. “Surprisingly, no,” he returned. “The phone has been ringing off the hook! Many corporations and nonprofits who usually go to fancy resorts are downgrading to more reasonable accommodations, like ours.”

Let’s face it: the economy is depressing. But why should this be the end of the world? Whatever the state of the economy, those who understand the fundamentals of economics are destined to survive the worst of times. The Stanley thrives when the economy sores, but the YMCA thrives when the economy tanks.

Cost Cutters and the YMCA are experiencing what I call the McDonald’s Effect. Folks are replacing steak houses for the Dollar Menu, salons for Cost Cutters, the Stanley for the YMCA. Likewise, stores like Wal-Mart have posted comfortable profits, while Macy’s-like upper-class stores are tanking. If anything is true about trickle-down economics it is this: when the economy shrinks, the rich start trickling down to more modest living. Frugal thinking replaces loose living.

Given our current political grounding of Keynesian spending to revive the economy (Note: this economic theory has yet to succeed in its nearly-100 years of trying), history is bound to repeat itself and will inevitably bring harder times. The highest unemployment rate in 30 years (hmm, who was president 30 years ago?) should give us pause. Growth is just not happening, and, if history serves as a good example (and it always does), growth will not be coming anytime soon.

But, children still need to be fed and family life must continue.

Life. Human beings are still the backbone of the economy. It isn’t spending–or savings, or gold, or business, or even money. The economy is organically alive with human beings making it run. As long as there are people, there will be ingenuity and invention and ideas. Demand for ingenuity will go up as finances get tighter.

I’m locking in printing costs and facility needs now with the expectation that inflation will hit hard. Nonprofits like Training Minds Ministry will feel the crunch in the coming years. Tough decisions will need to be made to adjust to the coming economic hardships. If we have to tighten up our frugality, this isn’t new for the Jeubs. Wendy and I have always been on the edge of finances, but this has never kept us from walking in confidence with God.

We had some family friends over for an elk and venison barbecue on Sunday. Jeff is a contractor, and though he personally has had business lately, he sees the contracting business getting hit hard. Jeff has nine children. “Yeash,” you may be thinking. “Families like Jeff’s are really going to suffer.”

No, the complete opposite is true. If the economy totally tanked–I mean totally and utterly tanked, complete poverty and turmoil everywhere–Jeff’s family would continue to thrive. He has a small crew of workers, and so do we. Our two families last Sunday night were not only eating like kings with grilled steaks from successful hunts, we had 24 human beings between the two couples. All 24 need to eat, sure, but they all are contributors to the economy of their families.

We Jeubs have responded to economic hard times and have always come out stronger in the end. We produce, we create, and we grow. We don’t take the predictions of doom and gloom seriously, for even if the economy did do as poorly as our leaders say, the Jeubs would thrive just like other families would thrive.

Wendy made a note yesterday as results poured in: “This reminds me when Jesse Ventura was elected governor of Minnesota.” We were living in Minnesota at the time and cast our vote for then-Governor-elect Norm Coleman. Neither Republican or Democrat won that race when over 50% of the votes cast went for pro-wrestler-turned-politician Jesse Ventura.

Within a year Minnesotans hated Ventura. He ran on a platform “anti-Special Interests” and “change.” Once in office, he didn’t listen to anyone but himself. His political speeches were anything short of embarrassing. He trumpeted no reform at all and left with no changing legacy. Today, Jesse Ventura is considered a nut case. He rants on radio of how assassins are out to get him and that 9-11 was an inside job, if that gives you an idea of his mental sanity.

So now America elected Barack Obama, another so-called reformer out to “change the world.” He ran on the promises to raise taxes, keep abortion legal, and increase government programs. The mainstream media became the propaganda bloodhounds for Obama, ignoring any negative news about his past associations or questionable policy proposals while viciously attacking any threat to his candidacy (e.g. Sarah Palin’s family and Joe the Plumber). Obama ran on “hope” and “change,” and people cast their vote with the sincere hope, I believe, that Obama will change things for the better.

Wendy and I spoke last night to a group of homeschoolers in Colorado Springs. Having nothing to do with the election, we spoke on family traditions, and we thoroughly enjoyed the evening. On the way home we listened to the disappointing news that Americans voted for a more social agenda than a conservative one. Social policies do not work whenever they are tried, and the “hope” of an Obama campaign will be the hope that they do this time.

We are hoping for a rebirth of conservative principles that have brought prosperity and growth to America. We are a unique nation, and though there are those who desire to look more like Europe, I don’t believe these are the next generation of leaders. Our alumni state of Minnesota put Norm Coleman in office last night by a mere 728 votes (.0003% difference), keeping America from a socialist super majority Senate. America was spared a true “revolution” to socialism, with conservatives able to filibuster the most radical changes Congress will attempt to make.

Within a year people will see the policy proposals of an Obama administration come to fruition, and the 2012 campaign will pick up steam. From now until then, we will attempt to rebuild conservative principles in our friends and family who were convinced into believing in socialist ones. Dispite the defeat yesterday, I see hope in our future.

You might think we’re crazy for saying so, but Wendy and I believe Tuesday will be one of history’s largest election upsets. There are several reasons we think so. Consider…

1. The media is in the tank for Obama, but the truth is still getting out.

The impression is blatant and intentional: Obama is “so far ahead” that the election is practically over. Really? Zogby reports today a mere 5 point spread between the two, where Obama has not yet secured a majority of the electorate (i.e. above 50%). Still, Obama is planning victory parties and predicting success reminiscent of Reagan (Reagan won 49/50 states in his race against Mondale). Nothing of the kind. TIPP polls show over 10% undecided (TIPP was the most accurate poll in the ‘04 election) and McCain is the one gaining with undecideds. Don’t listen to the pundits who say this election is over. It is an extremely close race.

The alternative media (and you can consider this blog a part of it) is uncovering the reality of an Obama administration. The phenomenon of Joe the Plumber has rocked the news. An amateur cameraman captured Obama reprimanding a plumber about small business administration: “I just want to spread the wealth around.” The mainstream media immediately began rummaging through Joe’s past to discover any morsel of dirty laundry to bring Joe down. It was reported he didn’t have a plumber’s license (you can still operate as a contractor without a specific plumbing license) and he owed back taxes (but he still files honestly).

Did the media ever think of researching Barack Obama’s comments? Maybe dig a little deeper? For those who know the philosophies of Karl Marx, Obama’s financial picture of tax policy would be very similar. The YouTube video of Joe the Plumber’s simple question spread like wild fire, but the mainstream media largely ignored it. On Friday, one brave news anchor drilled Joe Biden about this. “Are you kidding?” Biden responded when asked if the Obama administration was Marxist. No Joe, not kidding. Biden was clearly upset and the Obama campaign canceled all appearances with the local news agency.

Notice Biden’s flat-out denial of the meaning of “spread the wealth around.” He denied the notion that it was Marxist or even socialist. Now, this is a denial that the mainstream media should investigate. But, once again, the alternative media uncovers the reality of the Obama administration. In 2001, Sen. Barack Obama literally calls for a “redistribution of wealth.” Posted on YouTube and Drudge Report this morning…

If you watch CNN or NBC or any of the more left-leaning mainstream media outlets, you will be oblivious to such news. Can you call this anything other than a cover-up? Why is it that Matt Drudge and amateur YouTube video enthusiasts doing the truth-seeking that journalists should do

In a previous post, I said this was 1992 all over again, where the media took active part in covering up Clinton’s shady past. But this isn’t 1992. In 2008, we have the Internet, Fox News and talk radio. Alternatives are rampant. Still, much of America rely on the mainstream media as their primary news source. Encourage your loved ones to be free from such propaganda. Even the mainstream media elites are crying foul; the following articles were written by Democrat journalists:

“Would the last honest reporter please turn on the lights?”
“Media’s presidential bias and decline”

2. Several misleading factors with the polls

There are several factors that are making the pre-election polls wobbly. First, the polls are polling TV watchers. Most cable shows are bundled with DSL packages, and those with cable or DSL likely have landlines. Those who are dependent on Internet news (the source of alternative media) rely on cell phones, not television. Internet-savvy folks are much more educated as to the issues of this election, and because of this they are more apt to vote for McCain/Palin.

There is the Bradley Effect, too. While some debunk this theory, I beg to differ. In 1982 Tom Bradley (a black man) lost the governorship of California to a white opponent even though Bradley was ahead in the polls. Some attributed this to racism, but I attribute it to the tendency toward political correctness. When a pollster calls today, the polled voter will be more apt to be for Obama. He’s the more politically correct choice, and the constituent will–especially if he or she is undecided–lean toward Obama on the phone. However, when entering the voting booth, people vote free from the fear of being labeled politically incorrect. Chances are good that a good portion of these voters will vote for McCain/Palin.

Finally, there is the fact that Obama has not secured a majority vote despite the media’s full-fledged Obama campaign. TIPP reports Obama 46.5%, McCain 43.4%, undecided 10.1%. Not only is this within the margin or error, but those that lean undecided is huge. If McCain gains the majority of this number, he will win this election.

These may be petty points, but with an election within single-digits of each other (and some polls within the margin of error), this election can clearly go either way. Call us wishful thinkers, but we’re convinced that McCain/Palin will pull through.

Cut and paste this email in its entirety and email it to someone you think it will convince. You have my permission.

Are we popular enough to endorse a presidental candidate? Who knows. While we’re far from Oprah Inc., we figured we would give our reasons why we’re voting for McCain/Palin on Nov. 4. Here goes…

1. Economics

We post quite a bit about economics on this site, and those of you with a sound sense of what makes our economy tick should get excited over McCain/Palin’s plans–and extremely frightened over Obama’s. It is no doubt that our economy is in dire straights right now, and raising taxes is a sure-fire way to depress it even more. Not since 1933 has a president successfully raised taxes as an answer to a slowing economy, and it then led to the Great Depression (Herbert Hoover was president). It isn’t all that complicated. Taxes take money out of the marketplace and puts it into government bureaucracy. The idea that government will spend the marketplace’s money better than regular people is economically ignorant.

Now, Obama/Biden’s drumbeat response to this is the claim that only 5% of businesses will be taxed: “95% of the people will not get a tax increase.” Again, economically ignorant. The top 5% (the so-called “rich”) employ virtually all of employed people in the nation and purchase most of the commodities of our economy. Raising taxes will most assuredly increase unemployment, increase prices, and shrink our economy as a whole. Why people think these “rich” people will naturally take the financial hit of raised taxes is beyond me.

When it comes down to it, Obama is pandering to class envy and the human desire of covetousness. It stems from the Democratic playbook: punish the rich by taxing them hard and use the tax dollars for social programs for the poor. This was tried by Hoover, Johnson and Carter in the 20th century and look how it turned out. All three led to recessions that crippled everyone in America, and Obama’s attempt to “spread the wealth around” will be no different.

As hard as I have tried to reason with some people, I have not been able convince some that trickle-down economics works. Fine. Let me appeal to you this way: the reason we are in economic hardships today is not because of “Bush’s failed economic policies,” but because of the Democratically-controlled congress’s inaction. The housing meltdown was flagged by Republicans in 2004 and 2006 (lead by John McCain, no doubt), but Democrats refused to listen to prudent economists and their very own appointed regulators. In fact, Obama is the second largest recipient of Freddie/Fannie contributions, a whopping $2 million. The media totally ignored the story, but here it is with documented footage. Notice the vitriol toward the regulators who attempted to fix the problem we’re now neck-deep in:

2. Life

We are surprised at how many pro-lifers we meet who are voting for Obama. With this election, the stakes have never been higher. Nearly 50 million babies have been aborted since 1973 when Supreme Court justices on a 5-4 decision read in the Constitution that women had the right to an abortion. The same Constitution that begins by securing “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” allows for sucking unborn children out of wombs. Legal scholars have argued for 35 years the foolishness of Roe v Wade, and it all comes down to judicial activism.

Obama believes judges should legislate from the bench, and McCain believes strict constitutionalists should interpret the Constitution. The former will make decisions by making the Constitution say whatever he/she wants it to say (like the justices that wanted to make abortion legal in America). The latter takes the Constitution for what it says and interprets it from the bench.

Of the nine justices that currently sit on the highest court of the land, at least three will retire after the election. The next president will most certainly shape the court that will impact the next 30-50 years of American law. If Obama wins, not only will Roe be cemented in our land, but who knows what other wacky interpretations will come about.

McCain, especially with Palin’s fundamental pro-life backbone, is a pro-lifer’s only choice. McCain and Palin bring both judicial sense and compassion to the issue of abortion. The McCains are adoptive parents, and the Palins went ahead with a pregnancy they knew would result in a Downs syndrome birth. Not since Reagan has the executive office been filled with such conviction on the Life Issue. They walk the walk, not just talk the talk. We have never been closer to overturning Roe v Wade since its reckless decision 35 years ago, but all this ground will be lost with an Obama presidency. When you think about it, millions of babies’ lives hang on the thread of this election outcome.

If you are unconvinced, watch this video…

3. Media

The popular media is 100% behind an Obama presidency as they refuse to broadcast his weaknesses while hammering the slightest gaffe of McCain/Palin. Just last week, Joe the Plumber became a central talking point in the debates, and because Joe turned into a benefit to the McCain campaign, the press camped out on his lawn and have been raking they guy over the coals. Meanwhile, no one in the media is banging on the doors of ACORN or Bill Ayers to expose Obama of his past associations with voter fraud and unrepentant terrorists.

It’s 1992 all over again. The press then totally ignored Bill Clinton’s history as a draft dodger and reputation as a womanizer. Instead, headline after headline reminded the electorate of Bush Senior’s “No New Taxes” broken promise and any attempt to bring up Clinton’s past was brushed aside or ridiculed as petty. No expose has been shown on the radicalism of Obama or the incompetence of Biden, while NBC can’t wait to expose Joe the Plumber’s weaknesses or attack Sarah Palin for daring to serve her country as the first mother vice president. The media elites are unabashedly using their privilege of speech to sway the electorate by hiding the harmful truth of their candidate while viciously attacking McCain/Palin.

So this is our third reason to vote McCain/Palin: stick it to the media. Those who still cling to the popular media (NYT, NBC, CNN, AP, etc.) are the ignorant ones who are obediently following their orders. But subscriptions of newspapers have dwindled in the past decade. My hope and prayer is that the electorate turns on the popular media pro-Obama campaign. This would serve as an extra benefit: a final nail in the coffin of brainwashing propaganda of the popular media.

Read: Michelle Malkin “The Left Declares War on Joe the Plumber”

For what it’s worth, the Jeubs strongly endorse McCain/Palin for the presidential race. Click here to register to vote and view the candidates other positions. Get involved, families, and help ensure a better future for our children.

Biden focuses on “past 8 years” as if Bush is running for a third term. He also starts focusing on “fundamental disagreements” between tickets, which he repeats several times through the debate. Palin speaks directly into the camera, while Biden speaks to the moderator. This is a great debate tactic: remember always who you’re trying to persuade. It isn’t the moderator or your opponent, it is the judge, and in this case it is the American people. “We’re tired of politics as usual” really rings with the American people, I believe, which leads to another debate strategy: take the opponent’s strongest point and turn it to your advantage. Obama/Biden is all about “change.” Palin runs with this when she refers to Biden’s “long record”…”With all due respect, Senator, I don’t believe the American people want the same old Washington.”

Read the rest of this entry »

Tonight Republican VP candidate Sarah Palin will be debating Democrat Joe Biden. The dramatic anticipation couldn’t be scripted any better. The popular media can’t stop trying to find “gaffes” in Palin; they keep trying, but have only resorted to the “possibility” of such gaffes. Here’s how an AFP article worded it: “Concerns about Palin’s readiness to take the national stage have mounted in recent days following interviews in which the first-time Alaska governor has sometimes been lost for words when faced with tough questioning.” Any specifics? None.

Meanwhile, VP candidate Joe Biden can’t seem to keep his leather shoe in his mouth. The Boston Globe ran a piece outlining his several missteps here. It’s funny, for Biden is known for having to stick his foot in his mouth, yet the press seldom hits him with reminders of his blunders. If you listen to the media, the gaffer appears to be Gov. Palin.

Well, the kids are doing their after dinner chores and we have the AM radio blaring. The debates are on, and I’ll be posting question with responses with my quick analysis. I’ll try to post some more thoughts tomorrow. Remember, I’m a debate coach and a publisher of some of the bestselling debate material in the nation, so I’ll be focused on both form and substance. Refresh this page as the debate goes on, and I’d love to see your comments…

Read the rest of this entry »

Wendy and I have spoken on frugal living, and we’ve been emailed asking our opinion on the top news of the $700bln bailout. Since we are the parents of 14 children (soon to be 15), a most natural question is “how can you afford it?” Our lengthy response is in our product “Cheaper by the Baker’s Dozen” where we outlined strategies to frugal living. Really, it stems from a basic understanding of economics, basics I learned getting my MBA and we both have learned as small business owners.

The current Wall Street Bailout that is struggling to pass the House of Representatives is being touted as needed, claiming the current situation in the markets is the worst since the Great Depression. Correction: it is the scariest SOLUTION to economic hard times since the Great Depression, but it is not the Great Depression. Read the rest of this entry »

A month ago the Democrats held the winning hand for history, that with the hopes of the first black president, Barack Obama. Now, with the appointment of Sarah Palin as the vice presidential running mate, history is on the Republican ticket, too. It has been assumed for too long that the first woman chief executive of the nation would be a liberal Democrat. Instead, we have a conservative Alaskan who has five children and hunts moose.

“Ah, but she’s a woman,” some say. While some may see power in Palin’s femininity (so-called “Palin Power”), I see the power of family. She has not been defined by what is thought to be the “perfect” politician’s family. You know the image. Husband, wife, two kids. Her family walking on the Republican Convention stage looked unique and different, but more truly American. Rough on the edges and most perfect in many ways. Consider:

• Todd, Palin’s husband. Tremendously confident in his masculinity. Hunter and snowmobile racing champion. He broke his arm in the last race he was in, but he refused to give up. Tough Alaskan, one who would say, “Yeah, I stay home and she goes to work. Got somethin’ with that?” I identify. Early in our marriage, Wendy worked while I finished up school. That’s family working together, not some imagined misalignment of biblical hierarchy. Todd is someone I hope to have the privilege someday to gut an elk out together in the mountains of Colorado…with our daughters.
• Track, first born son. He went to war for our country on 9/11/08. Nineteen years old and devoted to serving his country. He may pay the Ultimate Price, God only knows. He has been raised well within the strong values of this Christian family. These are the values I struggle to teach my children: love of God, love of country, life beyond self. If I were in battle, I’d like to have Track at my side. He seems to be the kind of guy who wouldn’t blink before jumping on a grenade to save those around him.
• Bristol, pregnant out of wedlock at 17. How should Christian parents respond? Exactly how the Palins responded, loving and forgiving, believing in her daughter despite her foolish choices. While the media foamed at the mouth at the hope that the conservative Christians would throw Palin under the bus, Christians warmly sighed at how the Palins handled the news. Peggy Noonan got it right: “Modern American evangelicals are among the last people who’d judge her harshly. It is the left that is about to go crazy with Puritan judgments; it is the right that is about to show what mellow looks like.” Their family will make it through, because families are powerful.
• Trig, Palin’s baby. She had Trig while in office, knowing full well that he would most likely be born with Down syndrome. She refused to compromise either her service as governor or her ministry as mother. Instead, she brought Trig to work—often excusing herself to nurse her son—making sure it all worked out. Families make things work. What a testimony for choosing life even when all worldly persuasion says otherwise.

The pundits are asking Sarah Palin if she can accomplish the executive duties while raising a family. Gee, do they really need to ask? Charlie Gibson from ABC stared down his nose like a cynical professor when he asked a leading question about sexism. Watch this…

I’m glad she didn’t agree with Charlie’s red herring, “Is it sexist to question your ability?” It was a loaded question, one that he would have pounced on if she answered yes. “See, she plays the victim and is not ready to be Vice President,” the pundits would have replied. Instead, Palin pretty much said, “Who cares?” Palin’s femininity is not defined by the media or her naysayers. Instead, it appears that Palin is defined by her strong values and conservative principles, those I would argue are founded in her Christian faith and upbringing.

Sounds like my kind of Vice President.

The Jeub family so identifies with the Palins. Her family embodies something that we believe is a refreshing calling for families: families are powerful. Other life choices don’t compare to the power of family. Not government, not money, not personal career ambitions, not feminism. Family. And family was not and is not being sacrificed by Palin, even when called to public service and high office.

Boy, what a contrast from the typical Washington politician! In every sense of the word, Palin is exceptional. She had been called to politics for all the reasons people should be called to politics: to shake up the “good old boys” and make a change for families. Also unlike Washington elitists, her promises didn’t fall to the wayside after election. She shook up her hometown as mayor and took on the special interests as Alaskan governor.

Some people believe that her being a woman is a violation of a scriptural mandate forbidding women from serving in public office. Two quick notes on that. First, if you’re being persuaded by someone who appears well versed in scripture that the Bible “clearly” invalidates a Palin vote, look up the verses. I have, and scripture does not invalidate a Palin vice presidency. Quite the contrary, God has called women into positions of influence, power and humble service throughout scripture (e.g. Miriam, Esther, Deborah, Mary, Phoebe, Priscilla). People with these archaic opinions have lengthy rebuttals that usually (and ironically) lead you away from scripture. When you read the few verses touted by your friend, ask yourself, “Is it really that clear that God forbids women to be public servants?”

Second, don’t forget who else is running for president. Folks who say, “Don’t vote for Palin because she’s a woman” usually refuse to be reminded how bad the opposing candidate is. Barack Obama promotes several complete opposite principles Sarah Palin is standing on. No matter how strongly anyone believes Sarah Palin shouldn’t be running the country, the bottom line is still this: a refusal to vote is a vote for her opponent. Some have gone so far as to say it would be unbiblical to vote for McCain/Palin. I sure hope they wise up before November 5.

This sounds like a campaign ad, I know, but you know what? Wendy and I have never been this excited over the Republican ticket. McCain has his shortcomings, and while I most likely would have voted for him, I wouldn’t put a bumper sticker on my car. I may just do that this year. I have my eye on this one: “I’m voting for the pit bull with lipstick.”

Most Americans believe that the US is in a depression and that the economy is tanking. The recent bank bailouts and mortgage financing companies are truly disturbing. I sort of wish I wasn’t eye-deep in researching the NCFCA team-debate topic for release of our bestselling Blue Book for homeschool debaters. I’d be writing a lot about the economy, a topic I find intriguing. There is a lot of fear mongering going on, and though I don’t like $4/gal. at the pump anymore than anyone else, I am hesitant to agree with the alarmists out there. Follow me here…

I believe we’re going to be just fine.

I know, I know. The headlines on every news channel and every website is posting doom for America. I, too, see our political horizon as a bit scary. Congress, instead of drilling offshore and in ANWR, is debating bringing back the 55mph speed limit. Obama, who could be our next president, claims that because drilling won’t reduce gas prices for at least six years, we shouldn’t drill. Note: in 2002, President Bush was defeated by Congress to advance drilling in ANWR…yes, six years ago. John McCain at least promotes offshore drilling, something that Congress is digging its heals in about. Also note: John McCain led the charge of moderate Republicans to kill the ANWR bill. I’m not too hopeful that our politicians will come up with helpful solutions.

We can learn several lessons from India. Homeschoolers participating in the NCFCA will be debating changes to the US’s policy toward India, the league’s debate resolution. In my research of the topic, I am learning tons about the recent history of this remarkable nation. After India attained its independence from Britain in 1950, she struggled through 40 years of socialist economics. Though India has a rich history of some of the smartest scientists and businessmen in the world, she was known in the 20th century as one of the poorest nations on earth. It wasn’t until 1990 that India started reforming its License Raj, a series of beaurocratic red tape that made it virtually impossible to innovate and do business in the largest democracy in the world. The lifting of its restrictions have been a boon to India’s economy. Now India is in negotiations with the US to open up its nuclear power development to meet the energy demands of its growing middle class. World economists have predicted that India is on course to surpass China and America’s economies by 2045. No kidding.

It’s difficult to make sense of the bank and mortgage crisis, but what’s going on now is simply responsible taxpayers paying for irresponsible loans. India recognizes that the only way to solve its poverty problem is to devert its policies from socialist safety nets to solving its economic infrastructure. President Bush has lifted the executive moratorium on offshore drilling, and now Congress needs to do the same. It is basic supply-and-demand economics that needs to be addressed: if we Americans demand more oil, and we have it, let’s get it and ease the demand (and our dependence on foreign oil while we’re at it). If government wants to be proactive in energy alternatives, pour money into nuclear development rather than bailing out mortgages. Again, India is onto this, and America should be, too.

We may see our government making foolish fiscal choices, but families should find themselves doing just fine through this shaky economy. Seriously, I am not getting too nervous, and I’m the guy with a 14 mouths to feed! Times will be tight for the next few years, sure, but that shouldn’t depress you. I’m hearing a lot of our friends complain of their scaling back and having to make frugal choices, but I know better. They’re simply starting to live life like the Jeubs, and frugal living has never robbed our family of joy and growth.

If I weren’t so busy with Blue Book I’d write a bestseller and make a million: “Frugal and Fruitful.” Much of our Cheaper by the Baker’s Dozen CD has rich ideas to live frugally, but the main point is this: don’t let anyone rob you of the life God has in store for you. In fact, the coming hardships should return Americans back to what matters most: faith, family, love. The second home or the SUV ain’t it.

I have a lot of respect for Mahatma Gandhi, the spiritual revolutionary who took on the British Empire through peaceful means. He had some daring ideas on economics, too. Though his lineage became socialist powers of the new India, I do not believe Gandhi was a socialist. He had a profound understanding of the economic challenges of India as well as discerning views of the West’s problems. An article I discovered in my research paraphrases a recent discovery of one of Gandhi’s audios, recorded weeks before his assassination in 1948:

Gandhi’s self-denial and tour of rural poverty was rooted in political philosophy. The central reason people turn to violence, Gandhi believed, was that they were afraid: of others, the unknown, of loving one’s possessions and fortunes, of death. Fear was the root cause of corruption and greed. The way to destroy fear, Gandhi argued, was to give up the things that people held precious in the first place. When you have no possessions, you fear no theives.

Wendy and I want so much to get this point across to young couples, which is why we wrote Love in the House. A life centered on building wealth is a life centered on fear, and we believe God wants us free from fear. Now, I’m all for working hard to make a good living, and I’m caught many times wishing I had more than I do now. But in my heart of hearts, I know that desire alone is worth nothing. My heart wants to walk with God and raise a family to do the same.

Okay, one last thing and then I have to get back to writing Blue Book. Wendy received an incredible email from a young lady about a week ago after our “Kids by the Dozen” episode was shown on The Learning Channel. Her story speaks volumes. What a testimony:

I’m writing to tell you what an inspiration your family has been to me. My husband and I have been married for 6 years and have three children (6, 5, 2) but decided after our third that [my husband] should get a vasectomy. I was a lost Christian and he was an atheist and we were consumed with worldly goods and keeping up with our friends–more children would be an inconvenience.

Since then, Jesus has grabbed ahold of our lives–we have a great encouraging church and [my husband] became a Christian one year ago. We could not imagine the changes that the Lord had in store for our hearts and our family. My husband came to me about 2 weeks ago and told me that he had really been struggling with our past sins and our vasectomy and really felt the Lord calling him to have a reversal and let go of worldly things and focus on what really matters. I was, to say the least, reluctant. We have a nice life now, three beautiful children, nice clothes, house and things. We do not make a lot of money and I didn’t want to stretch things too much. I am a stay at home mom and always assumed that 3 children is just right–any more and I might lose it. I didn’t feel it was in the interests of the other children, but I told him I would think about it–but really just wanted to put the idea out of my mind.

Well, God had other plans. I have struggled inwardly for the past two weeks about having more children and have prayed that God would show me what He wanted for our family and not what I want. That God would take away my sinful desire for things of this world and instead allow me to focus only on the eternal. Then, just last night, while washing dishes I heard a quiet voice–we were meant to have more children. I still tried to push that thought away, put the kids to bed and get ready for bed myself.

That is when I started flipping through the channels and saw “Kids by the Dozen.” I was in tears by the time my husband got home from work at 10:30. You come across as so genuine. I love your budgeting techniques, and the way you love and care for your children is evident, as is your love for the Lord. I am not an overly emotional person, so my husband knew something was up [when he saw me crying]. He watched the rest of the show with me and was in tears as well. We knew our calling was to continue to parent. We stayed up most the night talking and this morning we called to make our first appointment on the way to a vasectomy reversal.

I cannot wait to hold baby number 4 in my arms and watch my husband do what he does best–be a dad. God is a loving God, a worker of miracles. In just a short two weeks he has allowed me a glimpse of eternity through the eyes of my children and our children to come. Thank you for telling your story and being an inspiration to those like me.

God will bless his people when his people open their hearts to him. What a testimony from this young couple, how God moved them to follow his lead, to follow the love written on their hearts. Wendy and I are humbled that our meek lives helped encourage them. This family is stepping out in faith, fearlessness and, most importantly, a love for God’s will in their life that surpasses all understanding. A lagging economy won’t hold this family down. They will overcome any obstacle that tries to get in their way. May God bless them abundantly!

On the way into the office this morning, I heard a news broadcast complain about the record broken today in oil ($126 a barrel, the highest ever). My ears perked up but was let down when this reporter said, “One of the causes is supply and demand.”

One cause? What other cause is there that makes oil go up in price?

There are some economically-ignorant people out there–some in high political places–who spend a lot of time and energy (no pun intended) trying to point to other reasons other than supply and demand that raises the price of oil. Hillary Clinton recently lashed out at OPEC cartel for fixing prices, and her opponent Barack Obama chose to lash out at oil companies. The reasoning is simple in their minds: surely gas prices would come down if those oil companies would let go of some of their record profits. Try telling that to their shareholders. Read the rest of this entry »

As Wendy and I prepare for another presentation of “Cheaper by the Baker’s Dozen,” we are tempted to rename the presentation “Hurry Up and Stock Up the Pantry.” News item after news item is validating what we have been saying ever since oil began its rapid increase of prices. Add the minimum wage increase, growing demand in Asia, and government environmental policies for biofuels, you’ve got a recipe for expensive food!

The Wall Street Journal came out with an incredibly persuasive article on stocking up the pantry. Columnist Brett Arends lists the reasons with logical analysis in his article “Load up the pantry“:

• Food is a global economy, so economic food prices in Asia does effect us in America.
• Inflation in 2007: Flour up 13%; dairy up 10%; eggs up 30%; poultry up 5.4%. Compare that to the average money market fund (2.5%).
• Food companies are no longer absorbing costs for raw materials (e.g. wheat has tripled in three years).
• There aren’t “starving children in China” anymore, as a rising middle class is demanding more food (same in India).

Now, I just want to note that I was NOT one of those alarmists freaking out about Y2K. Back then I thought the claims of food shortages and riots were greatly inflated. You remember, computers would all collapse and ships would stop shipping food and chaos would consume. I remember thinking, “If that happens, I’m going hunting,” and I let others stock up on food and candle wax.

Also note, however, that the Y2K fears were not based on economics: they were based on technological opinions that no one fully understood. As I claim in Cheaper by the Baker’s Dozen, “Economics is as sure as gravity.” You can always count on it to work out, for the better or for the worse.

What should you do? Our third Principle of Frugal Living listed in the presentation states, “Frugal living requires creative solutions to economic realities.” Notice we didn’t say “economic problems” or “catastrophes.” There is really no such thing. Economics is amoral and simply a “reality” that we must deal with. The ideas Wendy and I come up with are simply ways we have dealt with the reality for 17 years of our marriage raising 14 kids.

Wendy’s Love in the Kitchen cookbook has a section in it called “Stock your shelves.” No kidding: nearly the exact same title as today’s Wall Street Journal article. She explains how she frugally keeps a tight reign on our family budget and how you can too. It isn’t computer engineering; much of it is simply understanding the family economic unit. Really, the advice she gives is worth much more than the price of the cookbook.

Could you do us a favor? Cut-and-paste the content of this post and send it to your friends. We’re onto something here, and you can help. Spread the word, for I believe our cookbook and CD ROM are rightly timed to serve a growing need out there. Thanks!

Wendy and I were shocked to hear that Wal-Mart and Sam’s Club has put a restriction on the number of bags of rice customers can buy (see “Wal-Mart limits rice purchases“). I used to work for Sam’s Club (many moons ago) and they are very capitalistic in their strategies, so for them to place a restriction on demand is unprecedented.

We were even more surprised because of how apparently prophetic the news was! In our presentation last Friday at the Minnesota Association of Christian Home Educators conference in Duluth we specifically said that we bought 100 pounds of rice from Sam’s Club. “And you should too,” Wendy said. It was when we were explaining the spike in food prices worldwide. (You can order the CD ROM here.)

Wendy and I are giving the same “Cheaper by the Baker’s Dozen” presentation tomorrow in Colorado Springs. It is supposed to be an encouragement to home schoolers to keep on home schooling. We believe that no matter how bad the economy gets, God will still provide to keep families doing what God is calling them to do. That’s the purpose of our frugal resources like our CD ROM and Wendy’s cookbook.

We kid you not. A recent decision by a judge in a controversial juvenile court published a decision a week ago that states:

“It is clear to us that enrollment and attendance in a public full-time day school is required by California law for minor children unless (1) the child is enrolled in a private full-time day school and actually attends that private school, (2) the child is tutored by a person holding a valid state teaching credential for the grad being taught, or (3) one of the few statutory exemptions to compulsory public school attendance applies to the child.”

So, essentially, thousands of homeschool parents in the state of California are in violation of the law. The Home School Legal Defense Association plans to appeal this to the California Supreme Court. It amazes me how, when it comes to educating children, folks like this judge rely on government’s flawed system over that of families. The Jeubs will be keeping HSLDA in our prayers as they fight this ignorant decision.

To read up on this, visit the Christian Examiner here or a San Diego paper here. A petition is also being taken by HSLDA that they will use as leverage in their arguments (click here to sign the HSLDA petition).

Last night’s State of the Union Address brought a thunderous applause from the Jeubs. President Bush laid out early in his speech,

My administration reached agreement with Speaker Pelosi and Republican Leader Boehner on a robust growth package that includes tax relief for individuals and families and incentives for business investment.

This stimulus package is a rebate based on 2007 tax returns. Based on our 2007 income (about 20% higher than 2006), Wendy and I will receive $1200 plus $300 per child filed. We had 12 children living at home last year. Here’s a summary from the White House website:

Working Americans who have earned income of $3,000 or more will be eligible for a minimum rebate of $300 for an individual or $600 for a couple filing jointly. Based on the amount of federal income taxes paid, that rebate rises as high as $600 for an individual and $1,200 for a couple filing jointly.

In addition to the individual rebate, families will receive an additional $300 per child credit. The individual rebate and the child credit phase out starting at $75,000 in income for individuals or $150,000 in family income.

These provisions apply to 2008 only. We anticipate that the IRS will be able to begin sending rebate checks, based on 2007 tax returns, approximately 60 days after the legislation is enacted.

That’s $3,600 plus the $1,200 we already are receiving as a joint couple. The Jeubs will receive $4,800 from the U.S. Government! Wendy and I can really use this money, especially in May/June when the checks will be issued. Our publishing company is our sole income, and the spring is the slowest time of the year. This provision is nicely timed.

Count your kids and see the White House website for details.

I posted a few weeks about the ridiculousness of the overpopulation crowd claiming human beings were bad for the environment (“Are children bad for the environment”). I basically made fun of the idea that CO2 is all-of-a-sudden some sort of poison to the fragile earth.

Apparently there are serious folks out there who believe human beings are, indeed, bad for us. Well, bad for the planet, that is. WSJ Opinion Journal’s James Toronto makes the case that this is “creepy thinking” and lists several modern claims that the human race is “a virus” to the planet. With tongue in cheek, he quotes someone from Planned Parenthood, “The best thing we can do for our grandchildren is not have any children.” Logical, ain’t it?

You can listen to Toronto here. I’d love to hear what you think…

I sort of knew this was coming. The growing interest in large families is starting to create concerns by people who have, for quite some time, viewed people as expenditures to the environment.

John Guillebaud, an academic professor at University College London, claims that families should limit their family size by one child. As The Australian says in a recent article “Children ‘bad for planet‘”, “Having large families should be frowned upon as an environment misdemeanour.” Professor Guillebaud is co-chairman of the Optimum Population Trust, a “Green Planet” organization in the UK. He makes quite a profound statement: “The greatest thing anyone in Britain could do to help the future of the planet would be to have one less child.”

Okay, let me think about this rationally. We have 13 children. What should I do with the 13th? To be fair, Prof. Guillebaud is merely talking to those who are “planning” their family size. I guess that doesn’t include me. However, our 14th is on his/her way. What would he recommend we do? Hmmm, let me think hard here…right now I plan to have 14, but now I should now have only 13? I’ve got it: I’ll “plan” to have 15 so that I meet Prof. Guillebaud’s calculations. Does this work on Guillebaud’s calculator?

The OPT’s calculator is quite something. Guillebaud claims that having “one less child” would cut carbon dioxide output by “the equivalent of 620 return flights a year between London and New York.” (Notice the subtle put down on America…”return” flights back to America.) Come to think of it, when did carbon dioxide become poisonous? For someone who believes in a “bright green planet,” I wonder if he knows that plants consume carbon dioxide like we consume oxygen. I think I learned that in 3rd grade science class. By promoting the limitation of one child, Guillebaud will essentially choke off the breath of vegetation at the equivalence of (oh my gosh!) 620 return flights a year between New York and London!

Our book Love in the House opens with two chapters dealing specifically with the topic of “fear.” Statements from population experts like Guillebaud (he’s Professor of Family Planning, meaning he promotes freedom to abort as many children as possible) are attempts to work up a hysteria of fear. The claim that removing one child per couple would miraculously help the planet is quite ridiculous. Guillebaud references the UN’s Climate Report of 2007 that claims the world’s population will increase 2.5 billion by 2050. (I’m sure the United Nations strikes as much fear in you as it does in Iran’s leaders, but I digress.) What does this figure mean?

To some, particularly the green planet types, this means there will be more pollution and more hunger. I don’t want these either, but increased population doesn’t reduce any of these. I’d argue that decreased population will increase pollution and hunger. I know, quite profound, but at least not ridiculous. Our book takes a logical walk through the idea that human population increase is actually a good thing for the world. Don’t worry, we don’t resort to scare tactics that try to shock you into hypersexual behaviors. The OPT, in contrast, is hosting Live Earth together with Kanye West, Fergie and Madonna at Al Gore’s anti-global warming concerts (talk about hypersexual behaviors). Here is what we are saying in a nutshell: people are assets, not liabilities. People contribute more to the environment and to society than take from it. Guillebaud and his ilk see human beings as pillagers of the land; we see human beings as good stewards who help it prosper.

America is a good example. I’ve been hearing about overpopulation since I was in grade school. Despite the increased population of this country, our GNP (which is large enough to feed the world) is higher than it ever has been. Naturally, we aren’t able to distribute it to all corners of the world that need it (there aren’t enough people to do so), but we are very capable of doing it if we had the human resources.

“Human resources” is based on the premise that humans are a resources, and we believe they are. Guillebaud hasn’t scared me into thinking that my children and their generation (future tax-paying physicists, doctors, missionaries, politicians, and better professors) will be a hindrance to the planet. Rest assured, Wendy and I are teaching our kids to be good stewards of the earth. Hopefully, they will avoid flights between London and New York.