Republicans have excitedly approach this election referring to it as a “wave” or even “tidal wave” election; not so fast.  Conservatives have always know that the measure of change required to turn things around in the country would require 85, 90 or 95% of the incumbents to be defeated and replaced with conservatives.  I have never thought that to be possible and, more importantly, have feared that despite seeing a few seats here and there switch into the Republican column, the change would occur with razor thin margins.

What that means is that the country is evenly divided between those steadfastly holding to Constitutional principles and those willing to abandon the founder’s visions and cling instead to that Marxist precept that those willing to do nothing are deserving of the reward of those who work.  Strangling the gold egg laying goose has grown in popularity and since that perspective was not resoundingly defeated tells me that we are in far deeper trouble than the media will ever tell you.

Despite the fact that control will pass from one big government party to a different big government party, I am doubtful that we have experienced some sort of a political epiphany.  It seems very likely to me that this will result in two profoundly damaging results.  First, absent a clear mandate to return to the Constitution, the ruling party in Congress will feel compelled to compromise on principle in order to achieve some measurable activity (the pundits are already promoting “cooperation”).  Secondly, the more-of-the-same mentality will continue the “lost decade” and provide political fodder for the Democrats in 2012.

In the final analysis, we are very likely to remain moving toward the cliff.  I expect we will see increasing unrest, dissatisfaction, higher taxes and greater division.  Obamacare will not be repealed and healthcare will not be reformed.  Administrative agencies like the EPA, IRS and HHS will not be reined in and cap and tax will become a reality.  The IRS will employ 16,500 new age “brown shirts” to keep all in line, and the Judiciary will discover “legitimacy” for them doing so.

Alphonse Karr’s proverb, “the more things change, the more they stay the same,” seems appropriate here.  Some will say that God wills it, or at the very least, ordains it.  But is the explanation of divine providence and free will really so simple.  I submit to you that God is not unaware of our circumstances; despite allowing Israel to pick a king, it was neither what He would have done, or who He would have chose.  He also assured Israel that they would suffer as a result of their desire for a king.  I doubt few political leader since King Saul have been selected with the benefit of divine intervention, and it is far more likely that tyrants have emerged over the years by the inactions of Christians confident that since God is in charge, they were free to do nothing.