P.Z. Myers has never been one to shy away from controversy or confrontation, especially when it comes to his favorite target – religion. In his latest step of escalation, Myers published a picture on his blog which contained a communion wafer with a rusty nail through it as well as pages riped from a Qur’an.
OMG, The Onion has published a hilarious article mocking the fawning of the MSM over Obama:
The article, which follows Obama for 12 days during his campaign, was
written by reporter Chris Sherwood, and is relentless in its attempt to
capture the candidate at his most poised and polished. Sherwood said
the profile easily trumps all other fluff pieces in its effort to
expose the presidential candidate for who he really is: "an awesome
That rather colorful description comes from Boston University sociologist Peter Berger, who is working to challenge those stereotypes in a new study. At this point in my life, I’m very grateful for his work seeing how I am an evangelical living in "Tobacco Road" who is blogging barefoot at this very moment.
A recent Op-Ed in the Washington Post carries the same idea – the media and academia should pay more serious attention to actual evangelicals and less time to reinforcing their stereotypes of the group. The authors point out the successful and important history of the evangelical movement in America.
Discussions here revolving around politics have become less than fruitful and most involve accusations and insinuations. Much of that is because of the atmosphere in which the discussions take place. We read the stereotypes of liberals and conservatives, Republicans and Democrats on to those with whom we are discussing and ascribe motivations and assume the worst on many occasions.
It does absolutely no good to attempt to determine the origin of the toxic political atmosphere because either side will, no doubt, blame the other.
With all of the negatives swirling around political blogging, you may ask, "Then why do you engage in it?" I must confess that in a large part, it is due to laziness of some sort of another.
It seems that late night comedians and others are having a hard time actually making fun of Obama. Mike Barry, who has went after every major political figure from his days writing for Johnny Carson until his time with David Letterman, told the New York Times, the reasons why Obama wasn’t a good target for laughs.
He first says, "The thing is, he’s not buffoonish in any way. He’s not a comical figure." Really? I think the better answer comes with Barry’s later rationalization of their lack of lampooning the current Democratic nominee, "I think some of us were maybe too quick to caricature Al Gore and
John Kerry and there’s maybe some reluctance to do the same thing to
him." (Hmm, no mention of being too quick to caricature either Pres. Bush, Dan Quayle, Bob Dole or any other Republican. I wonder why?)
Either way – Obama is too godlike to be funny or they don’t want to aid the Republicans in creating a caricature – many have taken to helping the writers in their attempts to create some acceptable Obama comedy. Here are some of the favorites I have read.
We have had much debate recently over whether Obama has flip-flopped on key issues. I have admitted that McCain has flipped on some issues. As the price of oil and gas continue to rise or remain high, I hope McCain sees the political climate and the worth of drilling in ANWR – something he has opposed to this point.
Recently, Obama’s positions on Iraq have seemingly become more nuanced with many discussions over whether they were actual position changes. Hopefully this will get through to even the most ardent Obama supporter that he has indeed changed his position and statements – for good reason.
Cost of air time given by the MSM to discuss your disagreement with Obama on blacks needing to take responsibility for siring children –
Not realizing the microphone is on when whispering
"I’d like to cut his n*ts off"
This past July 4, Jesse Alexander Helms, Jr. died. Helms is another conservative icon whom liberals love to hate and ridicule, not only for his longstanding outspoken positions against abortion, affirmative action, government arts funding, gay rights and AIDS research funding, but for his sometimes rude and racial remarks, thick southern drawl and less than pretty face (he’s no Ronald Reagan). Jesse on abortion and the 9/11 attack:
This is indeed another kind of
holocaust, by another name. At last count, more than 40 million unborn
children have been deliberately, intentionally destroyed. What word
adequately defines the scope of such slaughter? [After 9/11]
the American people responded with shock, sadness and a deep and
righteous anger — and rightly so. Yet let us not forget that every
passing day in our country, more than three thousand innocent Americans
are killed [through abortion].
Hopefully, this is as much of a given as was my earlier statement about our political advisories, but sometimes those of us on either aisle are hesitant to point out the wrong doings by someone who shares our political affiliation. Many of the accusations of error are politically motivated and are only judge to be mistakes by those who disagree with the supposed sinner. However, there are occasions where the mistakes are real and should not be judged as political attacks, but rather as blatant and intentional errors which involve character defects.
I don’t want to share in the hypocrisy of those that group all errors into the politically motivated territory. This is one which should be investigated and all those involved, no matter who they are, should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Principles matter more than party.
McCain has promised to set up a new governmental spy agency to deal with terrorism which would be unencumbered by much of the bureaucratic malaise that hampers the CIA and FBI. I just have one request – don’t saddle Jack Bauer with an office job. Our country needs him out on the field doing what he does best.
This comes from an admittedly biased news source, but all the basic facts seem to check out. A Michigan man is suing two publishers of Bibles for violating his constitutional rights and contributing to his physical and emotional distress because they publish versions of the Bible which proclaim homosexual acts as sinful.
Should he be able to sue the publishers? If so, what does that say about religious freedom guaranteed under the Constitution or does his desire for freedom from persecution trump their rights of the publishers and editors, not to mention the readers, of the Bibles?
In the primary fight between Clinton and Obama, the Illinois senator somehow managed to do two contradictory things at once. He ran to the left of Clinton on virtually every issue, all the while maintaining his candidacy as the hope of "post-partisanship."
The hard left fawned on Obama as he embraced all of their issues, while the middle swooned over his talk of hope and change. He was the ethical crusader. One who would fight for all the issues that those on the left had been pressing for, while doing it in a nice, principled way that would bring the nation together.
Then a funny thing happened, Obama become the Democratic nominee, no longer had Clinton as his foil and had to appeal to voters beyond the Democratic party. Suddenly the paradigm of principles has become the poster boy for pragmatism.
If ever a man did everything he could with what he was given, it was Sir John Templeton. Today, he died at the age of 95.
He will be remembered for his hard work ethic – working his way from poverty in Tennessee to go through Yale and Oxford and then becoming one of the wealthiest men in the world; his brilliant investment mind – becoming one of the first to invest in post World War II Japan, grabbing undervalued stocks and riding them until they became worthwhile investments, heading a growth fund that was the top performing one of the second half of the twentieth century; and his desire to reconcile deeply held religious faith with everyday life, especially science.
Sir John Templeton will be missed, but he does not miss this world. Today, he has come into his ultimate reward and the wisest investment he ever made is paying off beyond his wildest dreams.
We are all aware that Thomas Jefferson was one of the more skeptical founding fathers when it came to Christianity and religion. However, many might find it surprising to see that Jefferson found it inconceivable to think that there is no design or designer in nature (of course, he was pre-Darwin ;):
I hold (without appeal to revelation) that when we take a view of the Universe, in its parts general or particular, it
is impossible for the human mind not to perceive and feel a conviction
of design, consummate skill, and indefinite power in every atom of its
composition. (emphasis added)
movements of the heavenly bodies, so exactly held in their course by
the balance of centrifugal and centripetal forces, the structure of our
earth itself, with its distribution of lands, waters and atmosphere,
animal and vegetable bodies, examined in all their minutest particles,
insects mere atoms of life, yet as perfectly organised as man or
mammoth, the mineral substances, their generation and uses, it is
impossible, I say, for the human mind not to believe that there is, in
all this, design, cause and effect, up to an ultimate cause, a
fabricator of all things from matter and motion, their preserver and
regulator while permitted to exist in their present forms, and their
regenerator into new and other forms.