Ok, I know I promised no more political posts for a while, but this is simply too good to not comment on. Here in Minnesota, we're still in the middle of figuring out who won the senate race between Norm Coleman and Al Franken.
I'm on Coleman's e-mail list and tonight he sent out a mailing with images of some of the ballots Franken is challenging. After looking at these it's obvious the Franken campaign has ever (a) lost its mind, (b) become very desperate or (c) lost all respect for the voters of Minnesota. My money's on (d) all of the above.
You can click on any of these images to see at full resolution
This first one has Coleman clearly marked as the vote. However, there's a miniscule dot next the Libertarian candidate, which according to Franken means the voter's intent is unclear. Don't feel bad if you don't see it at first, the dot really is that small.
The second one's the same story. There's a line that's kinda, sorta, not really by Dean Barkley but Coleman's bubble is clearly filled in. You'd have to be on hard drugs to think voter intent isn't clear here.
The last one I'll print here (there are several others like the two above) shows Franken's extreme double standard. On this ballot both the Dean Barkely and Al Franken circles are completely filled in. However, Franken claims the voter intent is obviously for him. So let me get this straight, a small dot next to Charles Aldrich's name is enough to cancel out a vote for Coleman but an entirely filled in Dean Barkely circle means nothing so long as Franken's circle is filled in as well. Despicable.
I'm all for having a recount when the vote is this close but what Franken is doing here is an abuse of the democratic process and insult to voters. It's shameful and an embarrassment to Minnesota. If this is what we can expect from Franken during the recount he ought to concede right now and spare the rest of us this pathetic and petty behavior. Shame on you Al Franken; you have no business representing my state.
Ok, I promise this will be the last political post for a while but this is an important enough issue that I'm going to ask you to bear with me through one more post. I want to talk now about the Freedom of Choice Act. This is a pro abortion piece of legislation that will be reintroduced in Congress next year. Among the things it would accomplish would be to:
-Strike down bans on partial birth abortion -Strike down parental notification laws -Create a federal law guaranteeing a right to abortion
If you don't think this is a serious threat than you need to watch this video of Barak Obama speaking to Planned Parenthood
Two of the main quotes from Obama in the video:
"On this fundamental issue [abortion], I will not yield."
"The first thing I'd do as President is sign the Freedom of Choice Act"
I know that not everyone is as conservative as I am or as worried about the Obama Administration. But this is an issue we need to unite around. Please visit fightfoca.com (thanks to John C. Wright for the link), sign the petition and consider donating to help fight this evil piece of legislation.
But more important than that let's pray. We've got over two months until Obama takes office and we can do a lot of fighting in the spiritual realm long before this bill gets to Congress. Let's pray passionately and fiercely. Lives are depending on it.
Here's how I intend to be praying.
I'm going to pray that God will soften the hearts of President Obama and of the pro choice members of Congress. We know from the story of the Exodus and elsewhere in Scripture that God can both soften and harden the hearts of rulers. Let's pray that we see that happen again.
I'm going to pray to bring the Kingdom of God against the kingdom of darkness in this country. At His ascension, Christ gave believers spiritual authority to bring the Kingdom. As citizens of this country, we have authority in Heaven and on Earth over what goes on here. We can bring the Kingdom, and the full work of Christ, against this legislation and against the powers of darkness in our nation. Remember the story of Daniel and the prince of Persia. There is more going on than we can see and we have authority to fight it.
I'm going to pray that the hearts and minds of individuals in this country will be opened and that they will see the truth about abortion and the horror of this legislation.
I'm going to pray for The Church in America. We as a church need to stand against abortion and that's more important now than ever.
Pray as the Spirit leads you but please pray and pray often. Lives are depending on it.
By now it's become pretty obvious that this year's presidential election is not going to end the way that I had hoped and prayed for. Here are a few of the thoughts going through my head as I brace myself for the most liberal administration in American history.
-The legal front of the pro-life movement has been set way, way back. Ginsberg and Stevens will be replaced on the Supreme Court by younger, equally liberal justices and that will prolong Roe vs. Wade for a long time. However, the legal front, though extremely important, is not the only front in the abortion battle. We need to keep praying, keep spreading the message of Christ's healing and grace to those who have had abortions and keep spreading the message of life and redemption to those consider abortions. Make no mistake, this country needs to see abortion outlawed but there's a lot we can do between now and when that happens.
-That said, may God have mercy on us for extending the legal life span of this evil, evil process that much further. It's time for Christians to go back, reread and relisten to what Francis Schaeffer had to say about abortion. It's time to draw a line in the sand. This must be a no compromise issue going forward.
-I believe who we choose as our leaders matters enormously but we need to remember we live in a larger story. Our story began way before any nation and it will still be going long after all nations have passed away.
-Prayer changes things and it is more powerful than any legislature or president. As citizens of this country we have spiritual authority over what goes on in it. Let's use it.
-A lot can happen in four years. Conservatism is far from dead and it will be back.
-America is still the greatest country on Earth and even with a socialist president I'm still enormously proud to be an American.
I want to preface this post with two quick items. The first is an excerpt from John Eldredge's blog last Friday. The second is a video from CatholicVote.com. It's addressed to Catholics but the message is applicable to everyone.
From John Eldredge:
There is a sort of “moral equivalency” that has crept into our thinking. We’ve come to believe that one issue is just as weighty as another. Or that one set of issues balances out another. That we are free therefore to pick and choose according to those things which “matter to us.” But as believers, we know that some moral questions are far weightier than others. For example, issues of life and death are far more significant than economic reforms we might like to see.
Jesus speaks about “the weightier matters of the law” (Matt 23:23). Some things are more important than others. The Scripture does not teach a level moral playing field where all issues are the same.
The messages in the blog and video above are enough to decide this election for me. Even if I agreed with Obama on everything else (which I do not) I could not vote for him. Abortion matters. Life matters. Whether or not our leaders believe it is ok to partially deliver a baby and then kill it in a way more barbaric than I will describe here matters.
Barak Obama is more liberal than any major presidential candidate has ever been on the issue of abortion. I've heard various excuses from him and his campaign as to why he voted against the Born Alive Infant Protection Act but his excuses are empty and hollow. This bill would have prevented babies who survived an abortion from being thrown into the trash simply because they were unwanted. There is NO EXCUSE good enough for voting against that bill. There is NO EXCUSE for supporting partial birth abortion. It is evil. There is no other word to describe it. And the fact that Barak Obama's judgment is so impaired that he can't see that disqualifies him in my mind. I'll wear the single issue voter label with pride if the issue is this issue.
But there are other issues too and I want to touch on those briefly.
I'm voting for McCain because I believe in victory in Iraq. Whether we should have gone there in the first place is a great question for historical debate but we're there, thanks to the surge we're winning and we need to finish the job.
I'm voting for McCain because I believe in federalism, in the value of doing as little as possible at the federal level and leaving the rest to state and local governments. The federal government is too big. It's time to shrink it.
I'm voting for McCain because I don't think anyone should have their taxes raised no matter how rich they are.
I'm voting for McCain because I believe it is immoral for government to "spread the wealth around."
I'm voting for McCain because I believe in the second ammendment and in the defense of private gun ownership.
I'm voting for McCain because I oppose activist judges and believe we need a constructionist philosophy in our courts.
I'm voting for McCain because he understands what it means to sacrifice for his country.
I'm voting for McCain because I'm sickened by Barak Obama's messiah complex. The man's arrogance is astounding and horrifying.
I'm voting for McCain because he's capable of admitting when he's wrong. I've never once hear Obama admit he's wrong. All I ever hear from him is spin, excuses and half truths.
I'm voting for McCain because the thought of Joe Biden one breath from the presidency is almost as scary as the thought of Barak Obama in the presidency.
I'm voting for McCain because I don't think it's the federal government's job to give me health insurance.
But mostly I'm voting for McCain because he values human life. Excuse me if I sound like a broken record but I can't restate this enough. Millions of babies are being murdered every year. With Ginsburg and Stevens set to retire on the Supreme Court we have a chance to overturn Roe vs. Wade. Let's take it and begin building a culture of life in this country. Abortion matters. More than anything.
These are two of the best videos I've ever seen on abortion and the 2008 Presidential Election. The first one is on abortion specifically. The second is on the election and conservative values. Thanks to John C. Wright's blog for linking to these.
Point for point, this guy is 100% right on the money. Together these are two of the best arguments I've heard in a long time for the pro life movement and conservative values.
Yes, we can! Make it to the Promised Land! Yes, we can! I know we can! Yes, we can
The above excerpt is taken from the chorus of a recently written song. Based on the overt religious imagery in the lyrics, you might think thatI heard it in church or on Christian radio. And you would be wrong. The lyrics above are from a song released a couple of weeks ago by Boy George about Barak Obama. This is just one of the more recent examples in what is quickly becoming one of the most troubling aspects of the Obama campaign: the candidate's messianic status among many of his followers.
This isn't confined to a few goofy songs or fawning celebrities. In a recent column on Townhall.com, Michael Medved goes into detail on the cult like aspects of some parts of the Obama campaign. Obamaphiles are changing their middle names to Hussein to match their leader. Actor Eric Christian Olsen is quoted as saying, “Nothing is more fundamentally powerful than how I felt when I met [Obama].” Obama is described by a columnist for a major newspaper as a "lightworker." And that's not even going into the secular aspects of the media bias surrounding this candidate (remember Chris Matthews crying on air after Obama lost one of the primaries?)
The obvious objection to this is, "So what? Every campaign has a few nutjobs surrounding it. You can't blame Obama for other people's actions." And I would agree with that were it not for the fact that the Obama campaign is blatantly encouraging this type of behavior and this level of devotion.
Driving home last night, Annie and I passed a car with a bumper sticker that said "Got Hope?" At first, both of us thought it was a Christian sticker with the obvious message being that faith in Jesus is the way to get hope. Not so. As we got closer I saw the official Obama campaign logo and the Obama website in small type at the bottom of the sticker. After a little research at home I found out that these bumper stickers, and matching t-shirts, are being sold on the official Obama website.
There is only one way to interpret that slogan: without Obama we don't have hope. That message is frightening in its implications. My hope is not in Barak Obama or John McCain. My hope is not in politics at all. My hope is in Christ and Christ alone. Obama is a man and nothing more. Even if he is elected and turns out to be a great president, he still will not be the source of hope. I had hope long before he came along and I'll have hope long after he's passed into history.
One of Obama's most famous lines throughout this campaign has been, "We are the ones we've been waiting for." My response is, "I certainly hope not." Here again we are confronted by staggering implications. Anytime throughout history that a political figure has made this sort of statement disaster has followed. I hesitate to give examples because I do not want to give the false impression that I'm equating Obama to any of these men but Napoleon, Stalin and Hitler all came with a similar message. Again, I am not saying Obama, his policies or his campagin are any way representative of the evil of Communism or Nazism. Anyone who does equate Obama with Hitler or Stalin is a fool and has no business commenting on politics. But what I am saying is that history provides us with several examples of leaders who came with similar messages and the results are never good.
[Talking about himself] is a subject upon which he can dilate effortlessly. In his victory speech upon winning the nomination, Obama declared it a great turning point in history -- "generations from now we will be able to look back and tell our children that this was the moment" -- when, among other wonders, "the rise of the oceans began to slow." As economist Irwin Stelzer noted in his London Daily Telegraph column, "Moses made the waters recede, but he had help." Obama apparently works alone.
I am stunned by the arrogance in that statement. But it goes on from there. Obama tells us we need to teach our children to speak Spanish but neglects to mention that he himself does not speak the language. Obama expects us to believe that he is a deeply commited Christian but that he so rarely attended his church that until a few months ago he was completely clueless that his pastor was spewing anti American venom from the pulpit. Michelle Obama claims that the Obama campaign marks the first time she's ever been proud of America, as though it alone can redeem the sins of slavery and segregation.
Finally, I would blame the rise of the Obama cult on contemporary liberalism. I am not now discussing the virtues and vices of government social programs but after 75 years of liberals sending the message that we ought to depend on government, not as a last resort but as a first, for all our material needs, is it really surprising that a cult like following has sprung up around the most liberal man ever to run for the presidency?
Obama talks a lot about bringing people together but if this is what we are uniting around, count me out. Obama talks about change but if this is what we are changing to I cannot be a part of it. He talks about hope but when I see the effects of his campaign I feel fear. I do not wish to paint with too broad a brush. I am sure that most Obama supporters do not buy into the cult side of the campaign. But I'm not convinced Obama is among that majority. I believe he has bought into himself. He believes he is the answer, the source of hope and the one we've all been waiting for. I find that terrifying. That is change I cannot and will not believe in.
I found this online this morning. If you love political satire or just need a break from following the real world exploits of this year's campaign you'll get a big kick out of this.
Brace yourself Minnesota, the most infamous politician in our state's history is back. That's right, Jesse Ventura went on NPR this morning and announced he is running for senate. And what is his great appeal this time around? Is it a dynamic vision for the country? A desire to make a real difference? Nope. Nothing so frivolous. As he explained this morning, "All you Minnesotans take a good hard look at all three of us. And you decide: if you were in a dark alley which one of the three of us would you want with you?"
Now that logic is tough to disagree with. I'm sure not going in any dark alleys with Al Franken and though I like Norm Coleman, when it comes to dark alley protection I'll take a Navy Seal and wrestler any day of the week.
But then again, last time I checked we weren't voting for a body guard.
Now, I don't think Jesse was the worst governor in the world. He certainly had his moments and the entertainment value was great. But the man was a joke. He never took the office seriously. Add to that that he's a 9/11 "truther" and he's about the last person our state or country needs representing us in the senate.
So now in this race we've got a conspiracy theory obsessed wrestler and a perverted, unfunny comedian who makes Michael Moore seem unbiased. Norm Coleman ought to win this thing be default.
Update:
Now Jesse has come out and said he didn't really mean it when he said he was running. Apparently he wants to keep us all in suspense until next Tuesday's filing deadline. Translation: Jesse is loving the publicity but is afraid he might actually win and doesn't like the idea of committing to a six year senate term.
One of the best and worst aspects of the McCain campaign so far has been the way he's handled his personal life and history. He rarely speaks about such things as his decorated war record or the fact that he has two sons serving in Iraq. In an age where politicians will use just about anything to get elected, I count this as a good thing, an honorable choice. Unfortunately, that choice leaves many people in the dark about his personal character and background.
That's why articles, such as this one in the Jerusalem Post, are so important. It's well worth a read if you have a few moments. A few of the highlights covered in the article:
The McCain's have a teenage daughter with sever medical issues. They adopted her from Bengladesh after Mother Thersa handed Cindy McCain the child.
McCain, whose father was the commander of the US fleet in Vietnam, refused to be sent home early from his POW service. He also refused special treatment throughout his imprisonment
McCain has consistently refused to use any of his children to help his career, even when not doing so has cost him politically
The other reason I find this article so worthwhile is that in modern politics we're almost always told why we should vote against the other guy. There's certainly a place for negative campaigning but it can't be the whole story. Articles like this take the higher ground and give you reasons to support a candidate.
A brief add on to the last post. As I've thought about the issue I think it's important to also point out there are some forms of bias and of expressing bias that are always unacceptable. The most common modern example is comparing people we disagree with to the Nazis.
Just the other day I was reading reviews on a Hitler biography and saw several references, irrelevant to the material, comparing Christians, Republicans and George Bush to the Third Reich. Thanks to the moveon.org crowd, these comparisons have become nearly mainstream in the last several years.
This type of bias does nothing but detract from debate. It ought to be possible to believe George Bush is wrong on everything and still recognize he is not Hitler. You should be able to be a card carrying atheist who believes the church a terrible institution and recognize the difference between the church down the street and the Nazi death camps.
I don't limit this criticism to the extreme left. More than once I've heard Hilary Clinton called Hitlery Clinton. For as much as I dislike the woman and am thankful she won't be president, that's wrong and inappropriate.
Hitler and his thugs are enjoying their just rewards in the afterlife. Let's leave them there, where they belong, and recognize that no matter what role bias has in history or public debate, this sort is NEVER ok.
This week I've been reading The Rise of Theodore Roosevelt by Edmund Morris. For the most part the book is excellent, engrossing and more than a little tough to put down. However, every now and then Morris, whose voice usually fades into the background as he tells the story, will pipe in with his own opinions on some of TR's choices. For example, when discussing TR's opposition to a minimum wage he spends a couple of paragraphs making it clear he doesn't agree with TR and treating his subject as unenlightened (never mind that it's still a legitimate debate with good arguments on both sides). The same thing occurs when he's discussing TR's hunting exploits. He makes it clear he doesn't approve of how high the body counts were.
As I'm reading the book I've found these incidents to be distracting. But as I thought about it I began to wonder if what was bugging me was that Morris is occasionally commenting or that he's commenting negatively on a man I greatly admire.
I am not someone who considers bias to be a dirty word, especially when it comes to current events and contemporary politics. Actually, I think respectful bias is important and has a long tradition in the American system. A political system without bias scares me far more than one with. However, I do think it's important to be upfront about bias. From that perspective I think my annoyance at Morris is legitimate. This isn't a book making an argument one way or another about TR. It's simply telling the story of his life. To me that makes even occasional bias inappropriate.
I'd gotten this far in my thought process when I began to then wonder what my reaction would be if the historical subject in question was someone I didn't admire as much. If, for example, something similar happened while I was reading a biography of TR's distant cousin Franklin Delano (a great leader to be sure but one who, in my opinion, is more flawed) would I be upset by similar occasional criticism but from a conservative perspective?
The truth is, I don't know.
Intellectually I would say that if you're writing a book that is not agenda driven, you have a duty to keep your opinions out of it. Realistically I'd say I'm not sure that's completely possible and in this case I would say I was probably bothered more by the nature of the criticism than by the criticism in and of itself. Even more to the point, does a highly opinionated/biased guy like myself have any cause to complain about bias no matter what the context is?
And now for the anticlimactic ending of this post: I don't have a good answer to these questions at this point. It's an issue that's very interesting to me both intellectually and personally. I'm still thinking through this one (as you well know after reading through my jumbled thoughts!). If I come up with a more concrete answer on this I'll let you know.
Note: I want to briefly restate that anything I've said in this post isn't meant to take away from Morris's work. The Rise of Theodore Roosevelt is a great book. Any small qualms I have do nothing to detract from that.
The latest from the now infamous Trinity United Church of Christ:
I do want to say I'm glad Barack Obama has finally done the right thing and resigned from this church (though I still have to wonder why it took him 20+ years to realize what most of us managed to grasp after five minutes of video footage).
That said, I'm not posting this to talk about the election. You can find good analysis on that all over the net and you don't need me to regurgitate it for you. I'm posting this video because I believe it's extremely sad to watch this happening from any pulpit. I don't care where you are on the political spectrum, this is NOT what the Gospel is about. I say that not because I think politics are unimportant but because God is after something so much deeper than what's being preached here. And His message is being buried under a heap of bitterness and anger. I'd feel the same way even if the "sermon" was about tax cuts and limited government.
Finally, I think we could all agree that we'd be better off if pastors would avoid nearly giving themselves heart attacks while on stage. What Michael Pfleger is doing is about performance and himself. Even if he was preaching a real message, the Gospel will to some degree get buried if it's presented in such an egotistical fashion. No matter the topic, tone down the screeching and make room for God to speak
