I am an Angry White Man.

This is not the blog post I intended to write tonight. It isn't even my original idea.

 

I have been working on a book review that isn't going the way I wanted. I was planning on posting that tonight. If I just couldn't get that written, I thought I might write about Nancy Pelosi's failure to pass a FISA bill. A 500 word post is always easy if you think about Nancy Pelosi for about a minute and a half.

 

However, Fate had a different idea. Today at work I was catching up on my Rush Limbaugh podcasts. I was listening to his show from last Tuesday when he began talking about an article from Gary Hubbell in The Aspen Times. In his article, Mr. Hubbell sets about to discuss the group that will most likely decide this election: The Angry White Man. As Rush began to read the article, a tuning fork was struck for me. I believe there are events or messages we receive that resonate deep within us. These messages I call tuning forks. I know it isn't very original, but it is the only way I know to talk about it. As Rush read Mr. Hubbell's description of the Angry White Man, I thought more and more that he was describing me.

 

I am not going to tell you that I match every single category on the list. However, I do recognize a lot of the traits in myself, and I admire the people who have the traits I don't have from this list. I encourage everyone who is reading this to go read Mr. Hubbell's article. I know at least 5 or 6 regular readers from this site that fit this list as well. I am sure there are more, and I suspect a few of the lady readers even identify with this message.

 

Those of you who think Hillary Clinton should get elected because she will take care of our Health care needs should read the article. If you believe Obama is the coming Messiah, please read the article. Sit back for a minute and think about the person Mr. Hubbell is describing. As of the posting of this blog, there were 933 comments to the article. Some of them were angry, some were not. I decided to add number 934 to the list with a very simple response:

 

"Amen, Brother."

 

 

Conservatives to McCain: Told You So!

The New York Times ran a story in their print edition this morning that has been in the works since at least November of last year. The writers for the New York Times hint that McCain may have had an affair eight years ago. They never come out and say it directly, and they never discuss any evidence (unless you count unnamed sources). Even worse, the not-really-alleged affair was with a lobbyist. The article is a very long one, and dredges back up many of the embarrassing moments McCain has had in his Senate career going back to the Keating Five Scandal. The article has done two very important things: embarrass the Times, and send a shot across McCain's bow.

 

McCain has said he is very disappointed with the article. I have to agree with him. Even given the low standard I hold the Times to, it reads more like an article you would expect in one of the supermarket tabloids. There is gossip that is confirmed by "two unnamed sources", and hints of a sex scandal in McCain's camp. Of course, the Times never actually says there was anything improper, thereby carefully avoiding a lawsuit. If you have the endurance to read the entire article, you will find there is very little meat to this story. Other news agencies are now attacking the Times for running the story at all. The New Republic says that the most incredible thing about the article is, "…that it appeared in the paper at all." There seems to be a small firefight going on between a few news agencies on this. I can only hope that this firefight grows and consumes as many of these publications as it can.

 

The second lesson was for McCain and is something conservatives have been warning him about for a long time. Simply put, no matter how liberal I think McCain is, the mainstream media still sees that (R) by his name. They will talk about his "maverick" tendencies, his positions on global warming, Gitmo, torture, and free speech. At the end of the day, he is still running as a Republican, and to most of the media, that means he is one of the bad guys. Conservatives and most Republicans know what that means. It is only a matter of time before the media he has been buddies with for so long starts turning on him. Today appears to be the first shot. Even with Hillary and Obama at each other's throats, McCain can expect more of these attacks. Heaven help him if any of it turns out to be true.

 

Of course, I don't think there would have been any articles about extramarital affairs with a Romney candidacy.

Keep Earmarks from Berkeley

"I've been working with Code Pink, and I believe in their cause and I believe that what they're doing is the right thing, they are bringing maximum pressure to bear on the whole question of the Marines being in Berkeley, they don't belong here, they shouldn't have come here and they should leave."

 

If you read this quote from Berkeley Mayor Tom Bates, you might be under the impression that Karl Rove took over the military and has ordered the military to capture this poor, defenseless town. You might even believe that Mayor Bates would be open and honest about his feelings towards the military.

 

You would be wrong on both counts.

 

It seems that the City Council of Berkeley, California recently passed a resolution that has many outraged. In it, they call on the Marine Corps to leave their recruiting office in town. If the Marines refuse to listen to the City Council, they will be considered, "…uninvited and unwelcome intruders."

 

Just in case the Marine Corp didn't catch the hint, the City Council next gave a parking spot to Code Pink in front of the recruiting station, a matching noise permit, and the thanks of the Council for Code Pink's work to, "…impede, passively or actively," the activity of the Marines. While the Marines have a long history of fighting and dying for the United States, Code Pink has a history of donating aide to the families of Islamic terrorist (to the tune of an estimated $600,000). My wife points out that the Marine Corps probably doesn't want a recruiting station where they aren't wanted. If the City of Berkeley truly wants the Marines gone, maybe they should just buy out their lease on the property she suggests. Sanity appears to be in short supply in Berkeley.

 

As these resolutions gained press coverage and outrage (and the City Council claimed they were misunderstood) some began taking matters into their own hands. Sen. DeMint (R-SC) has purposed withdrawing recent federal money from Berkeley. He points out, "I do not believe a city that has turned its back on our country's finest deserves $2 million worth of pork-barrel projects." A portion of the $2 million was originally to go to Chez Panisse restaurant to design school meals that promote "environmental harmony". (My wife asks where the "environmental harmony" appears when insulting the military.) Instead of the standard school lunches, students would get "Comte cheese soufflé with mache salad". Perhaps the Marines could leave their MRE's for the students…

 

A California Assemblyman is pushing to withhold state transportation funds from the city. Others have sent emails to the city council blasting their decision. Move America Forward is collecting signatures condemning the actions of Berkeley's City Council.

 

Catherine Moy reports that the "anti-war anarchists" have shown themselves to be as reprehensible as the city council. At protest last week by pro-troop and pro-Marine groups, the anarchists tried to provoke people into fights. One person reported that the anti-war groups were made up of "…an assortment of old hippies dressed in pink," and high school kids dressed in orange and black. The high school students were brought to the protest by their teachers.

 

The City of Berkeley is within its rights to criticize anyone, including the Honorable men and women of the Marine Corps. However, my tax money shouldn't go to fund their arrogance. In the words of Jim DeMint:

 

"Actions have consequences. When the Berkeley City Council decided to insult the Marines in a time of war, it was a $2 million decision. Especially in a time of war, we cannot allow cities to just play insulting games at our troops' expense while continuing to shower those cities with congressional favors."

Quick Notes – Presidential Politics and Others…

Welcome to another edition of Quick Notes. I am enjoying the "Quick Notes" part of this blog more and more. I find many of you like to comment on the items I probably wouldn't have written a full post about. Keeping that in mind, here are three more topics for your review:

Mitt Romney. Mitt has released his delegates and now endorses McCain. I hate to hear this for a few reasons. First, I am still undecided with regards to McCain. Romney is trying to do the best thing for his party, and what he believes is the best thing for his country. Second, I just started Hugh Hewitt's A Mormon in the White House, and I am pretty sure that Romney won't be our nominee even at a brokered convention this time around. However, keep an eye on him. If he takes the right job between now and 2012, he might be a very strong candidate in the next race. I will be watching him…

The Clintons. While discussing politics the other day with my wife, an odd thought occurred to me. Chelsea Clinton is 29 years old. If her mom should win this election, and become a two term president, guess who is constitutionally eligible to run in the election after that. You got it. We could have 24 years of Clintons instead of 16.

In Other News… The Washington Post has reported that a "long range Russian bomber" buzzed the U.S.S Nimitz. A second bomber circled 50 miles away. The Nimitz scrambled fighters to intercept the Russian bombers. This is one more thing to keep in mind when picking a presidential candidate this season. One more thing to remind us that the Presidential Race isn't the only thing going on in the world.

A New “Quick Notes”

Welcome to a new edition of "Quick Notes". Once again I thought I would share a few stray thoughts.

 

The Presidential Race. There have been many developments on the Presidential front this week. With Romney dropping out (but not releasing his delegates), I am in the position of not supporting any of the candidates seeking the Presidency at this time. This is going to force me to really look at all of the candidates. I don't like many of the policies from McCain, Obama, or Clinton. I also don't like the thought of not voting for President. I will be doing some real soul searching on here over the coming months. I encourage you to help me discuss these candidates. Maybe we can figure out who the best President is together.

 

Georgia vs. Tennessee. I resist talking about state politics on here because I don't believe it will have any appeal to most of my audience. However, this story may give everyone a small smile after following the Presidential Race. It seems Georgia wants to redraw its boundary with Tennessee to get access to some of the water in the "demilitarized zone". While many in the Tennessee House got a good laugh out of this, I must admit I was a little embarrassed. Didn't my home state look bad enough going to Huckabee last week?

 

Iran and Iraq. Both countries are still in the news, though many haven't noticed while Obama, Clinton, McCain, Romney, Huckabee, and Edwards have been going at it. Things continue to improve in both Iraq and Afghanistan (though we still have a way to go). Iran is continuing to pursue nuclear technology. These three countries will continue to be issues into the next Presidents term. I hope to explore how each of these candidates looks at these foreign nations.

 

My Book List. On a personal note, I am trying an experiment this year. I am tracking what books I read over the course of the year. At this point, I am up to five. Three of them have been from the reading list I posted a few weeks back. I finished The Great Bridge, Iron Kissed, and Showdown. I posted a link to the Amazon.com entry for each of them in the original post. I am not sure the books would make a good post for this site. However, if you are interested in any of them, I would be happy to give you my take on them.

 

That completes this issue of "Quick Notes". I hope you enjoyed it!

 

 

Super Tuesday: Lessons Learned

I apologize ahead of time is this post becomes a little disjointed. I am writing this a little after 12 AM after watching as much Super Tuesday coverage as I can take. However, I think a few important points can be taken from today:

1. Things are as confusing in both parties now as they were on Monday. On the Democratic side, Obama has picked up four or five more states than Hillary. This is huge for Obama, but in the long run, it means they are still neck and neck. On the Republican side, things aren't as clear cut as the media seems to think it is (at least it isn't at 12 AM). As of right now, McCain has had eight states called for him, Romney has had six called for him, and Huckabee has had five called for him. This will look a little different in the morning (California is still up in the air, and there is a chance Romney may pick up one or two more states). Both Huckabee and Romeny have already said they are still in it. There is very little chance that either of these two will drop out until some time after Thursday and CPAC.
2. McCain supporters should stop saying that their man has character. While it looks like the back room tricks from West Virginia were entirely legal, it has left a bad taste in many peoples mouth. It shows that McCain and Huckabee are more interested in teaming up on Romney. It also shows that McCain has no intention of changing the way things run in Washington. Buy throwing his supporters over to Huckabee after Romney won the first vote, McCain shows that he is a skilled politician, and fits the stereotype of the back room, cigar smoking politician many people in both parties associate with Washington.
3. Voters in states that haven't voted, are still going to influence the election. With all the jockeying of positions of different primaries, and will both parties penalizing states for moving their primaries, many thought the candidate would be set after tonight. In my opinion, we are still a long ways away from either party having a clear cut candidate. What doest that mean for my readers in states that haven't voted yet? Get out an vote!

My Political Information

In preparation for Super Tuesday, and the rest of the Presidential race, I thought I would share some of the places I get my political news and commentary from. I don't get my opinion from these places, but I consider them when I am examining any issue. As you follow the race, I would recommend these sources if you want to stay up to date on what is happening in the races. Some of my sources are from places that you may not know about, so I hope everyone tries at least one of these out.

The first place I go for political information is always Real Clear Politics. This site post links to the best editorials every day. During the race, they have been tracking the delegate counts for both parties, and have been tracking the latest polls. One note on the poll numbers, the RCP polling represents an average of all of the big polls. This tends to weed out some of the polls that may be just flat wrong for some reason. I also like the site because they have the best commentary from both sides of the argument.

I am a subscriber to both The Weekly Standard and Human Events. Both of these are conservative publications. Both are well researched and have very interesting articles. Some of the editorials get reprinted in other locations. Both publications carry book reviews. With the shear number of political books released every year, it is nice to have a few sources that help to weed out some of the books that I might have otherwise considered reading.

I have mentioned on this site before that I am a fan of both Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter. You may disagree with each of these, but both are quoted and talked about on both sides of the aisle. Rush has a three hour show each day that is worth listening too. Ann has a weekly column that is updated on Wednesdays.

There are other sources (like the Drudge Report) that I occasionally use for political information. However, the sources that I have listed above, along with numerous books, give me the majority of my political information. That information helps shape some of the opinion you have come to know and love.

John McCain, Democrat, Part Deux

"The bright side of the Florida debacle is that I no longer fear Hillary Clinton. (I mean in terms of her becoming president -- on a personal level, she's still a little creepy.) I'd rather deal with President Hillary than with President McCain. With Hillary, we'll get the same ruinous liberal policies with none of the responsibility.


Also, McCain lies a lot, which is really more a specialty of the Democrats."

This is an exert from the latest post from Ann Coulter. She is pretty honest about her feelings on McCain in this post and in her previous one. And she's not alone. Rush has been quoted many times over the last week attacking McCain's so-called "conservative credentials". He goes so far as to say that for the first time in his career he can understand not voting for the Republican candidate. He is very careful in his choice of words. He stresses that he isn't encouraging it, but he can understand it.

McCain shares many of the same policy positions as Hillary and Obama. If he were elected, it is likely that taxes would increase, there would be more laws passed prohibiting free speech, he would nominate more "main stream" judges, he would allow terrorist civil trials within the United States, and would probably close Guantanamo. This is all before he gets to addressing illegal immigration. Can the President sign an executive order outlawing the word "illegal immigrant"? It would attack free speech and pander to the left in the same bold move. I think President McCain (or Vice President Lindsey Graham) might go for it .

When icons of the modern conservative movement like Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter, and Michelle Malkin all believe McCain to be a Democrat, and when these same people start talking about pulling any lever but the Republican one, I think we are in trouble. What does it say about the potential Republican nominee?

There is still a lot of time between now and November. I for one plan on writing a check to Romney's campaign (yes even in the current economic crisis). I am truly worried about the Republican Party. I believe the only people who will defend McCain at this point are either Republicans who want the party to win above all else, or Democrats.

John McCain, Democrat

With all of the election coverage right now, it might be easy to think that the Presidential race is almost over. By listening to the media, and reading the newspapers, it might be easy to believe that McCain has already won the Republican nomination. This would be impressive, since he isn't winning the delegate race (actually he is running third) and he hasn't won the most states up until now (Romney is at three, followed by McCain at two). However, it is also easy to understand why the news media likes him so much: he is a Democrat.

With the exception of Ron Paul, there is very little difference between the Republican candidates when it comes to the war on terror. After that, McCain starts sounding more and more like he should have a (D) beside his name and not an (R). For example: McCain is a big believer in the man-made global warming myth. McCain is a cosponsor of the Lieberman-McCain Climate Stewardship Act. This would impose many of the Kyoto type regulations on the United States without the U.S. ever signing on to to Kyoto. You may believe that climate change is happening, but the impact of a law like this on U.S. companies could be devastating. Democrats typically favor this type of global legislation, not Republicans.

McCain not only supports a higher tax burden on American citizens, he also believes in the same class warfare the Democrats resort to when they discuss taxes. McCain originally voted against the Bush tax cuts. On the campaign trail, he is saying he did this because the tax cuts weren't coupled with spending cuts. I can understand this point of view. However, originally he didn't vote for the tax cuts because they helped out "rich Americans" at the expense of the "working class". Which party does that sound like?

Most people who follow politics remember the recent "comprehensive immigration reform debate". Senator McCain was a very vocal supporter of the bill, and a supporter of the lack of debate that went along with it. Senator McCain is on the record supporting amnesty. He is also on the record attacking those who want to build a fence on our borders. Remember, comprehensive immigration reform was never suppose to be debated. It was suppose to be brought up, voted on, and passed before the American people even knew it was being discussed. But considering another piece of the Senators work, why should we be surprised by this?

Most conservatives and many Republicans hold the Bill of Rights as sacred. Not Senator McCain. To me, the position that prevents him from being considered for my vote is his position on the First Amendment. The Freedom of Speech clause in the First Amendment is suppose to protect political debate. We can and should debate if it pertains to the New York Times or not, but we can all agree that a citizens right to criticize his government is protected. The McCain-Feingold Bill, as Robert Tracinski says, "...has the evil distinction of being the nation's first direct attack on the freedom of political speech during an election campaign, precisely when such speech is most important." If you arn't familiar with this bill, look it up, it's law now, so you should know about it. In a nut shell, it prevents candidates who are trying to defeat an incumbent in an election from running adds on TV. It is still legal for the incumbent to make any number of press conferences, thus getting air time. I can not vote for a Presidential candidate who limits the freedoms outlined in the Bill of Rights.

You may be sitting at home reading this and thinking that you agree with Sen. McCain. By all means vote for him. But don't for one minute think he is a conservative or a Republican. His past record shows that on domestic issues, and some foreign ones, he will vote and think the same way Mrs. Clinton or Mr. Obama. McCain may be the chosen candidate for the media. He should run in the party that most closely represents them.

"Make Me Lose Control..."

Once again, it is time for a post that has nothing at all to do with politics. I hope you enjoy, and tune in again soon for some fresh political debate. I have written from time to time that I am a member of the Blog Ninjas. This group formed from the "Mystery Topic Challenge". I have met a lot of very good bloggers in the Blog Ninjas forum. I hope this submission is up to their level of writing.

The latest challenge from the Blog Ninjas is this: You know how you can be driving along, just minding your own business and suddenly a song will come on the radio that transports you through space and time so clearly and throughly that you miss your exit or rear end the car in front of you?

Here's your topic: What song transports you through space and time, and where do you go?

"I run a comb through my hair
And step out in the street
And the city's the color of flame
In the mid-summer heat..."

Eric Carmen's "Make me Lose Control" is one of those songs that really transports me through time and space. When this song came out, my Stepfather really liked it. He bought a copy of the single and would play it over and over and over and over (you get the idea) in our house as loud as we could stand it.

"Jennifers got her daddy's car,
Shes playing uptown on the stereo
We go cruisin' so close,
The way they did long ago
My darlin..."

I didn't always get along with my Stepfather. More times than not, he and I simply didn't see things the same way. He pushed me a lot, and there is no doubt that I am the person I am today because of his influence (good or bad). Most of my memories are not pleasant of him. However, listening to this song for the fifth or sixth time in a row on a Saturday is one of my best memories of him. Whenever I hear it on the radio, I can't help but smile.

"(turn) turn the radio up for that sweet sound
Hold me close never let me go
(keep) keep this feelin alive
Make me lose control
Baby, baby..."

My stepfather has been dead since 1995. I hadn't heard this song in many, many years. Then one day, after work, I had my four year old daughter in my lap driving around our block. She had her hands on the wheels, I had my foot on the gas (or break). I wasn't paying attention to the radio, until I heard the first two or three notes to this song. Then I think I sang the entire thing while we drove around the block. I don't know if I had more fun singing it, or my daughter had more fun laughing at me singing it. After the first chorus, she started singing along as well. I hope when she is older, if she hears this song, she thinks of me driving around in the car with her and both of us singing as loud as we could.

"(when) when I look in your eyes, I go crazy
Fevers high with the lights down low
(so take) take me over the edge
Make me lose control"

I hope you enjoyed my entry into the challenge. If you decide to vote for me on the Mystery Topic Challenge, I am listed as andycivil. Thanks and go check out the other post as well.

Please visit the Mystery Topic Challenge Blog to view all of the other entries. Once you've read them all, please be sure to vote HERE in the Sidebar for your favorite.

My Reading List

I saw a post on A Light in the Dark a few days back that I really enjoyed. It was Jayne's reading list. She got the idea from Laura Williams's Musings, so consider this full disclosure. Here is my reading list in no particular order. Some of these I plan on reviewing for this site, some of these I just enjoy.

Currently Reading:

1) The Great Bridge: The Epic Story of the Building of the Brooklyn Bridge by David McCullough
2) The Bible. This one is taking some time.

My stack of books includes:

1) An Inconvenient Book: Real Solutions to the World's Biggest Problems by Glenn Beck. You really have to love the title.
2) The Race by Richard North Patterson.
3) John Adams by David McCullough.
4) Iron Kissed (Mercy Thompson Series, Book 3) by Patricia Briggs
5) Lone Survivor: The Eyewitness Account of Operation Redwing and the Lost Heroes of SEAL Team 10 by Marcus Luttrell
6) Blacklisted by History: The Untold Story of Senator Joe McCarthy and His Fight Against America's Enemies by M. Stanton Evans. I believe this one will generate some really good debates around here.
7) America: The Last Best Hope (Volume I): From the Age of Discovery to a World at War by William "Bill" Bennett. I have read and reviewed Vol II for this site already.
8) The Reagan Diaries Diaries by Ronald Reagan.
9) An assortment of Kathy Reichs Novels.
10) Showdown by Ted Dekker


This is only a partial list. A full list of the books sitting in one corner of my bedroom would be far too embarrassing. If you see anything on here you have any comments on, let me know. If you see something you would really like to see a review on, let me know too.

What's on your list?

Man Kills Daughter, Wants Son : Women's Rights Groups Silent

If you have been reading this site for a while, you probably know I am not a fan of the Women’s rights movement here in the United States. I target specifically the movement here because it seems like the National Organization for Women and other similar groups have lost their way. Don’t get me wrong: I support women having the same rights as men. However, I think NOW tends to forget why they are around in the first place. I found a good example of this today. Check out the following article from Fox News:

WINTER HAVEN, Fla. — A Polk County man is facing a first-degree murder charge in the death of his baby daughter.

According to a Polk County Sheriff's Office report, Marcos Gomez-Romero told investigators he beat Ariana Rodriguez Romero to death because he wanted a son, not a daughter.

Investigators say he told them the beatings had gone on for months.

Romero is charged with first-degree murder and aggravated child abuse. His daughter died Christmas morning.

I saw this and was outraged. This article was on the Fox News front page. At the same time, I made a bet with myself that this article wasn’t even on the radar for the women’s rights groups. So, I did a quick google search and found myself on the NOW website. Here is a quick rundown of articles on NOW listed as “Hot Topics” as of the writing of this post:

The first is a notice that the National NOW Family Law Advisory Committee has been compiling information for women that face divorce or child custody suits. Important, but really a hot topic?

Next is an article entitled “Engaging Women Project Effectively Makes Connections between Voter Participation and Policy Change”. Um, you think?

The third “hot topic” from NOW: Hilary Clinton is the first women to win the New Hampshire Primary.

I have a wife and a daughter I love very much. Because of that, I am very frustrated when I see these supposed women’s rights groups sound more like political action committees and less like real Women’s rights groups. If I can get outraged and appalled by this article, an organization claiming to want equal rights for women should recognize that a man killing his daughter because he wants a son is a problem. And if they can't, then I can recognize a problem with the women's rights movement.

Romney is Winning!

I am a little confused by the coverage of the primaries so far. If you have been following the Republican Primaries, then you know that Huckabee won the Iowa Primary, and McCain won the New Hampshire primary. Many political commentators are saying Romney must win Michigan, or pull out of the race. Some have even said it is time for him to pull out of the race now.

An important point to remember: the Republican Presidential nominee may not be decided by the number of states he wins. Most states split their delegates in proportion to how the primary goes in that state. For example, while Huckabee won Iowa, he doesn't get all 40 Iowa delegates. Instead, Iowa has assigned its delegates as follows: Huckabee gets 17, Romney gets 12, McCain and Thompson both get 3, and Paul gets 2. I believe the remainder are "unpledged delegates". These delegates can vote for whichever candidate they wish too.

New Hampshire's primary was won by McCain, but once again, the winner doesn't get all of the votes. And here is one more piece of information you may not have heard: Wyoming has already had it's primary. Guess who won it: Romney. If you are keeping score at home, the current delegate count (including unpledged) is as follows: Romney (30), Huckabee (21), McCain (10), Thompson (6), Paul (2), Giuliani (1). So currently Romney is actually winning the Republican race!

There are still a lot of states left to vote. Some of them divide out their delegates and some don't. In order to win the Republican nomination, a candidate has to get 1,191 delegates. Things can change between now and September when the Republicans will actually nominate their candidate, but keep the points in mind as you watch the coverage this election season. I have no idea why the points aren't talked about more often. However, feel free to return here periodically to see what the current score is.

Quick Notes

I wanted to share two quick things with everyone..


First, in the coming weeks, I plan on participating in the Mystery Topic Challenge more frequently this year. Some of these posts may or may not pertain to politics. I hope you enjoy them. If you want to find out more about the Challenge, or even participate, stop by Blog Ninjas and learn more.


Second, I have written about Ayaan Hirsi Ali a few times on here. Some of my readers have emailed me asking for more information and the latest news on her. I saw an article in the New York Times from her today and thought I would share it.

The Politically Incorrect Guide to the Bible

Writers Warning: The following post will be very “pro-Bible” and “pro-Christian”. Being the understanding author I am, I recognize this will cause some in today’s society to launch into hysterics. As such, I ask those hysteric prone individuals to skip this post. I will have a new one in a few days, and will be happy to debate less hysterical issues with you then.

There is an old argument that rears its head between Christians and Atheist from time to time. It goes along this line: If the Atheist is right, when the Christian dies, he (or she) will have had a good life, but will simply cease to exist. If the Christian is right, the Atheist will be totally unprepared for what they find. Think about that as you read this post.

I just finished the The Politically Incorrect Guide to the Bible (Politically Incorrect Guides) . This is the latest in the P.I.G series to come across my reading list. It has also been the most fascinating, and the easiest to read. It is very difficult to come away from this book thinking the Bible is wrong. Robert Hutchinson writes the following in the first chapter:

It wouldn’t be so bad if these attacks on the Bible represented something genuinely new…but instead they are merely repetitions of allegations made for about 1,800 years. They are as original as dirt – and about as interesting. The problem is, many of these new champions of enlightened reason, standing on high from the pinnacles of academia, don’t appear to be aware that their ideas are literally millennia old.

This thought is something Mr. Hutchinson comes back to time and time again through the course of the book. Some of the topics are likely to really inflame those who equate Christianity and Judaism with fanatical evil. There is a chapter devoted to Sodom and Gomorrah as well as the freedoms that have been inspired by the Bible. And while many of the arguments found in this book could be ripped from today’s headlines, yet they are often cited from sources that are 100’s of years old or more.

Back to the argument from the beginning: if the Atheist is wrong, what happens? If you fall into this boat, are you really willing to gamble without putting a little homework in? If many of today’s arguments have been around for hundreds of years, shouldn’t you look at a few of the answers?

Why I am Optimistic in 2008

A happy new year to you! I am pretty excited about the coming year. 2007 had it's highs and lows, and I am sure 2008 will as well. However, there are a few things I am very excited about with the coming year:

1. Global Warming: I wrote last year that I thought global warming had hit its high point. I don't mean the temperatures, I mean the fanatical discussion surrounding it. While there are still many many faithful believers, I think many people have had their eyes opened during the last year. I see more and more articles by Fox News, CNN, and the mainstream media discussing the other side of the argument. I think in the years to come, 2008 may be looked at as the time global warming stopped being considered a serious subject.
2. The Election: No matter what your political belief system, 2008 is going to be an exciting Presidential election. Neither the sitting President nor Vice President are running for office. While Mrs. Clinton could get elected, I believe it will be someone else. I had always assumed that Mrs. Clinton would have a lot of support in the Democratic Party. However, my dental hygienist told me something I had never considered before a few months back. She said that while she would vote Democrat, there was no chance she would vote for Hillary. I asked her why, and she said that after having a Bush or a Clinton in the White House for the last 20 years, it was time for a change. I agree with her, and I think there are a lot of people who see the race the same way.
3. The War in Iraq: The news coming out of Iraq seems to be increasingly could. Violence is down, Al-Queda is in trouble, and Iran seems to be trying to stay out of Iraq. While there are still challenges ahead, could this be the year we start to come home?

No matter what, I think the next year is going to be an exciting time. Have a great New Year!

Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays!

Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays from our family to yours. I hope everyone has a good holiday. Even if you believe in global warming, I hope Santa brings you something nice this year!

Book Review: The Case for a Creator

Lee Strobel was an award winning journalist with the Chicago Tribune. Both he and his wife were atheist. That changed when his wife announced that she had accepted Jesus Christ as her personal savoir. Strobel set out to examine the evidence and prove she was wrong. He found out that the evidence actually pointed towards Christianity, and Strobel himself became a Christian. His experiences trying to prove Christianity wrong were set down in his first book, The Case for Christ. This book is his third in the series. In it, he examines the latest scientific evidence to see if science supports the theory of a personal Creator, or rejects it in favor of other theories such as the one purposed by Charles Darwin.

The Case for a Creator: A Journalist Investigates Scientific Evidence That Points Toward God is broken into a series of interviews with an assortment experts in various scientific fields. I am constantly challenged to discuss my positions on global warming with scientist and academics. Mr. Strobel has done just that with this book. He examines some of the latest discoveries in biochemistry, DNA, astronomy, cosmology, physics, and the consciousness. His discussions are with current professors and research scientist in each of the fields. At the end of each chapter, Mr. Strobel includes a list of other works if the reader wishes to dig deeper.

Two of the arguments I was most impressed with in this book involve fossils and cellular biology. When Darwin purposed his original theory of evolution, he knew that the fossil record didn’t support his argument. He was aware of the explosion of life recorded through fossils during the Cambrian period. Darwin believed that discoveries made in later years would reveal fossils that showed intermediate stages leading up to this period. Instead, discoveries made since Darwin have shown there was a much greater explosion of life than Darwin thought, and the intermediate stages he predicted have still not been discovered. If the theory of evolution is correct, we should have seen a progressive series of fossils leading up to the Cambrian period. Instead, a wide range of life simply appears with no prior fossil record.

Darwin also provided his own test that would refute his theory. Darwin stated, “If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down.” Unfortunately for Darwin and his present day supporters, that is exactly what has happened. In his book, Mr. Strobel discusses this with Dr. Michael J. Behe. Dr. Behe shows that microscopic entities such as the moving cilium and the bacterial flagellum cannot possibly be formed from, “…numerous, successive, slight modifications.”

If Darwin’s theory of evolution can’t account for life on Earth today, then what can? After reading The Case for a Creator, the latest scientific evidence points towards a unique, timeless, personal Creator. Far from faith and science clashing in our society today, they actually complement each other.

I would recommend this book to all of my readers who believe there is no God in the Universe. While faith can never be scientifically proven, it can’t be disproven either. And if we are to practice legitimate science, we have to look for conclusions that fit all of the scientific evidence. In today’s scientific world, that evidence fits the Creator.

Quick Notes, Issue Two

Welcome back to another issue of the critically acclaimed Quick Notes. Once again, here are a few bullet points for your general information, enjoyment, and to spur your mind:

Approval Ratings – Bush 34.3 %, Congress 25.0 %.

Waterboarding—A retired CIA agent has spoken publically about the waterboarding of Abu Zubaydah. Zubaydah was the first “high level” Al – Qaeda terrorist captured after September 11^th. During the interrogation, the CIA decided that Abu Zubaydah was not going to cooperate with conventional interrogation methods. The interrogators asked and received permission to waterboard him. According to the retired agent, Mr. Kiriakou, Abu Zubaydah broke in about 35 seconds. From that moment on he was described as cooperative. Mr. Kiriakou said that the intelligence gained from this terrorist directly lead to the saving of American lives.

This is as close as we (hopefully) get to a real world example of the “ticking time bomb scenario”. In this case, I think the CIA did the right thing. And while we are speaking of waterboarding…

What did she know, and when? It turns out that Democratic and Republican law makers were briefed in 2002 on waterboarding. The list of those present include current Speaker Nancy Pelosi. The Washington Post article that broke this story said that the reaction of Mrs. Pelosi was not recorded. However, the reaction of those briefed ranged from muted acceptance to encouragement to go further. This sounds like a far cry from the indignant outrage the Speaker uses in today’s world to discuss this same topic.

Omaha. The shooter who killed eight last week before killing himself said he was going to be famous. To date, it seems the media is willing to go along with his plans. Just as the Virginia Tech shooter wanted fame, so to did this disturbed individual. The media needs to stop releasing the names and photos of these people. While it may not stop all of them, taking the “famous” incentive away from these murders seems an easy step to take.

"Our Nations Symphony of Faith"

Having just introduced everyone to a new format future post, I am going right back to the original format for this post. Mitt Romney gave a speech last week that I feel is worth devoting an entire post to. There has been a lot of coverage in the media regarding Gov. Romney’s faith. Last week, Gov. Romney decided to answer some of those concerns with this speech. Much of the coverage surrounding this speech has compared Mitt Romney to John F. Kennedy. President Kennedy gave a similar speech to a group of Protestant Preachers the month before the election that would see him become the nation’s first Catholic President. Many in the media compared Gov. Romney’s speech to that speech even before the speech was delivered.

The speech itself is one of the best speeches I have heard in a long time. Michael Medved called it the best speech of this election cycle. I would encourage everyone to read this speech not just to examine Gov. Romney as a Presidential candidate, but also because it argues religion’s place in today’s America. I think Gov. Romney’s argument is entirely correct. Gov. Romney’s speech is currently called “Faith in America”, but I think future classes will study it as the “Symphony of Faith” speech.

Early in the Speech, Gov. Romney says the following:

Freedom requires religion just as religion requires freedom. Freedom opens the windows of the soul so that man can discover his most profound beliefs and commune with God. Freedom and religion endure together, or perish alone.

This is a statement that has evidence in today’s world, and a warning for future generations. The United States is the symbol of freedom to the rest of the world. As such, we allow our citizens to worship as they choose. If we start to exercise religion from our country, then we start down the path the Soviet Union took generations ago. Gov. Romney also makes the point that many people of faith have tried to make regarding the First Amendment:

No religion should dictate to the state nor should the state interfere with the free practice of religion. But in recent years, the notion of the separation of church and state has been taken by some well beyond its original meaning. They seek to remove from public domain any acknowledgment of God…as if they are intent on establishing a new religion in America – the religion of secularism.

And also:

The founders…did not countenance the elimination of religion from the public square.

Today’s society has taken the separation of Church and State and turned it into something our Founding Fathers would never have recognized. The founders knew that faith was an important part of society. Far from trying to ban it, they wanted to encourage every citizen to practice their own beliefs as they saw fit, without meddling from the government.

To me, the most powerful part of this speech is towards the very end. In this last section, Gov. Romney stresses that we should be thankful and take strength from the diversity of religions in our country. I can think of no more fitting way to end this post than with the paragraph that I believe will later rename this speech.

In such a world, we can be deeply thankful that we live in a land where reason and religion are friends and allies in the cause of liberty, joined against the evils and dangers of the day. And you can be certain of this: Any believer in religious freedom, any person who has knelt in prayer to the Almighty, has a friend and ally in me. And so it is for hundreds of millions of our countrymen: we do not insist on a single strain of religion – rather, we welcome our nation’s symphony of faith.