Those Who Divide Ignore How Divided We Aren't

Those Who Divide Ignore How Divided We Aren't

I recently engaged in a conversation about religion and politics titled It's time for... "The Religious Left"! - It was begun by blogger Mark Kilmer at RedState.org, a group blog to which I subscribe. I read that it was started up by paid RNC operatives, and I didn't know that when I signed on as a participant quite a while back. I enjoy talking with everyone from all political perspectives, providing that they are respectful. Like anyone else, I always hope I will be treated with respect wherever I go. At Red State, I have not been disappointed. I am respectful, and they are respectful in return. I have had shabby treatment at Little Green Footballs, and they lost their credibility with me a long time ago because of that fact. I'm a nice person. They elect not to give any suspected "moonbat" a fair shake. Problem is, everyone's suspected to be a "moonbat." Any participant who doesn't think in lockstep with the groupview is labeled immediately and unjustly as some kind of imaginary leftist demon instead of a fellow American. Go off the talking-points vocabulary and expect to see the fangs come out. It's an immature kind of place to try to have a good or fair public debate. I cringe every time I see them getting any media attention, because they do not deserve it. I have found them to be a closed-minded little society unto themselves and I certainly do not believe that they reflect our American values of respect, civility, tolerance, freedom, amenability, or truth. RedState.org is far more interesting and inclusive.

To get back to It's time for... "The Religious Left"! - , I was individually pointed out, by a Conservative citizen of whom I have a lot of healthy respect, as a person from an imagined place between Heaven and Earth that many people call "the religious left." I really do consider that to be a divisive and false category, for I am simply a person of faith. With faith, there is no left or right as there is in American politics. Faith is deeply personal. Politics is all-public.

I do understand how the political world works, however, and my faith has put me in some pretty strange and unlikely political corners, some seldom exposed by political liberals' proverbial lamps. Overall, though, I'd have to say that I land where I land on political issues because of my personal faith - and not the opposite. I am faithful first, political second. My faith has made me the "liberal" that others see me as being, and I have to say that, whatever I am, I am proud to be so. If you look at my Political Compass chart, you will see that I don't land all that far from the center, but like Libertarians, I am not trusting of authoritarian institution.



I am not cookie-cutter. I tried to talk to the people who called me to the discussion at RedState,org, but when the conversation got further from the usual talking-points script, people stopped responding to my questions and comments.

I was disappointed. I hope we will see more conversations like this. I think they help us to see how very divided we are NOT. I don't think they want you to discover that dirty little secret.

US Bishops: For Goodness' Sake, It's Time to Get Real

"The great temptation is to try to justify past policies instead of acknowledging where we are and what we need to do."

- John Carr, senior staffer on the Catholic bishops committee

US Bishops: For Goodness' Sake, It's Time to Get Real
Bishops say recent statements by the Bush administration that troop levels would be reduced are not enough.
Story Link: LA Times/Bishops Urge U.S. to Transition Out of Iraq by Larry B. Stammer

______________

It's time to get things morally straight and to see an end to misleading rhetoric and divisive pessimism, according to the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops. A spokesman said the statement was intended to set the stage for what bishops hoped would be a vigorous but civil discussion on what the U.S. must do next.
The practice of cutting off the freedom to debate with shallow threats and handing false choices to the public about the transition required in Iraq have been condemned by U.S. Catholic bishops. They remind us that, over three years ago, Pope John Paul II proclaimed that he was against the war in Iraq, but now that we're there, we must act responsibly and morally. To see American politicians justifying past policies in order to save political face will not help the people of Iraq, who have suffered long enough under conditions of war with which we have elected to beset them.

It's time for Republicans to grow up - to become accountable - to come up with a strategy for a much-needed transition.

"Our nation cannot afford a shrill and shallow debate that distorts reality and reduces the options to 'cut and run' versus 'stay the course,' " Wenski wrote, speaking for the bishops conference.

In an interview Thursday, Wenski said the bishops purposely decided to avoid the word "withdrawal" in favor of "transition" to avoid the impression that bishops were advocating that the U.S. "cut and run."

"No matter what the debate might have been about going into Iraq, now that we are there, our presence gives us a whole set of new moral obligations that we have to try to fulfill in a responsible way," Wenski said.

"Our nation is at a crossroads in Iraq," the statement said. "We must resist a pessimism that might move our nation to abandon the moral responsibilities it accepted in using force, and might tempt us to withdraw prematurely from Iraq without regard for moral and human consequences.

The time for "happy talk" - a phrase coined by frustrated realists that represents the irrational rosy cast that the Bush administration has too long utilized to deny reality - is over.

"We must [also] reject an optimism that fails to acknowledge clearly past mistakes, failed intelligence, and inadequate planning related to Iraq, and minimizes the serious challenges and human costs that lie ahead," it said.

John Carr, a senior staffer on the Catholic bishops committee, said the statement was intended to set the stage for what bishops hoped would be a vigorous but civil discussion on what the U.S. must do next.

If people of faith choose to deem as "evil" any misleading rhetoric that our President or anyone who supports that rhetoric extends while continuing this occupation of Iraq, they will have this UCCB statement to responsibly support their case. I'm not a big fan of crying "evil", but I do believe that each and every man has the propensity to do what my faith informs me is "evil." If it walks like a duck...

The UCCB has said that as the U.S. pursues the war on terrorism and the rebuilding of Iraq, it should not forget pressing concerns at home and abroad, particularly caring for the poor.

This reminds me of the unreasonably rosy picture the President paints while he's sitting atop an obvious humanitarian disaster in his one of his own country's major cities. Who does he think he's kidding? The cameras cannot hide this story as some third-world stories might get buried.

The president ignored questions about the city's new rebuilding plan, introduced Wednesday night to enormous community criticism, and White House officials traveling with Mr. Bush declined to offer opinions. The plan, which depends on nearly $17 billion more from the federal government, gives neighborhoods in low-lying parts of the city from four months to a year to attract sufficient numbers of residents or be bulldozed.

He ignored these citizens' concerns? They already suspect the government of wanting to take their land by eminent domain - and his administration refuses to make comment? What kind of President is this man? Harvey Bender and Caroline Parker of the Lower Ninth Ward want to know. I think I already know. The worst President I've ever seen in all my years.

About A Dog

About a Dog

High up in the courts of Heaven today
A little dog-angel waits,
With the other dogs he will not play,
But he sits alone at the Gates:
"For I know my mistress will come," says he
"And when she comes, she will call for me."

He sees the spirits that pass him by
As they hasten towards the throne,
And he watches them with a wistful eye
As he sits at the gate alone;
"But I know if I just wait patiently
"That someday my Mistress will come," says he.

And his Mistress far down on the earth below,
As she sits in her easy chair
Forgets sometimes, and she whistles low
For the dog that is not there;
And the little dog-angel cocks his ears
And dreams that his Mistress' call he hears.


And I know when at length his Mistress waits
Outside in the dark and cold
For the hand of Death to open the gates
That lead to the Courts of Gold,
The little dog-angel's eager bark
Will comfort her soul while she's still in the dark.

- The Little Dog Angel
--- by Norah M. Holland, c.1870




For my friend Eliot, who we lost this month.

*dedicated to Barbara, Andrew, Blaire, and Olivia

One Hell of a Week in Kirkuk

One Hell of a Week in Kirkuk

January 9 - Since the election of 15 December 2005, al-Mushayiakhi is the fifth assassination of the ethnic groups Committee of the PUK in Kirkuk. They are all of Arab ethnicity.

January 11 - A body of a translator found near Daquq, Kirkuk, the police source told local radio Nawa in Kurdistan on Wednesday. The translator was identified as Ziyad Umed, whose body was found by the police in the 7-Nisan village of Kurdistani Kirkuk, near Daquq.

January 10 - Police found the unidentified bodies of two men in the city of Kirkuk on Tuesday which had been bound at the feet and riddled with bullets, a Kirkuk police source said.


A coffin holding the body of translator Ziyad Hamdi is taken from the main hospital, Thursday, Jan. 12, 2006, in Kirkuk, 200 kilometers (124 miles) north of Baghdad, Iraq. Hamdi, working as a translator for the US military, was shot dead and found south of the city. [source: ABC News]
AP Photo/Mohammed Ibrahim

January 9 - Judge shot dead in Kirkuk

January 6 - A police source said that militants abducted Kirkuk Governorate Council member Ahmad Akkar Nezar while he was visiting a relative in Al-Shaeb area in Baghdad.

The Kurds in Iraq

Kurds want Talabani re-elected Iraqi president

On US relations

The burgeoning alliance between the US and Kurdistan has a more fathomless and more fundamental basis than is commonly appreciated. The amiable bonds between Americans and Kurds in Kurdistan reflect one of the most unusual and of the essence alliances in the Middle East. Contrary to other authoritarian or undemocratic masking elements in the new Iraq, or some combination of the two, Kurds continue to safeguard American dear lives by their momentous intelligence, defense and military cooperation...

...The two nations confront the analogous dissidents and the same allies. They're both in the balance by radical regimes, notably Iran, Syria and Iraq. They both have similar systems as democratic states. [I found this line to be a curiosity:]They're both distinctive in the region because they are not Arab states.

Isn't the Kurish region autononmous - yet still a part of the nation state of Iraq?


Kevin Sites -
The Kurdish "peshmerga" - Rebels Without a Pause:

Many Kurds would like to see an independent Kurdistan, completely separate from Iraq. Pressure from the United States, as well as threats from both Turkey and Iran - who fear independence could create instability among their own Kurdish populations - is keeping the Kurdish territories in Iraq for now. But pesghmerga soldiers at the KDP Brigade all openly voice their desire for separation. "We prefer independence," says Hakim Kadir Tagarny. "We also know the reality, but if there is persecution again we will fight for our independence."

Voice of America:

Kamal Sayid Qadir is a Kurdish writer who has Austrian citizenship. He was reportedly abducted in October 2005 while on a visit to the Kurdish Region of Iraq.

Mr. Qadir was said to have been taken by the Parastin, the security service of the Kurdistan Democratic Party, or K-D-P, one of the two parties holding power in northern Iraq. He is believed to have been seized because of articles he published on The Internet that were critical of the K-D-P, including its leader Massoud Barzani.

Amnesty International, an independent human rights monitoring group, reports that Mr. Qadir was sentenced on December 19th to thirty years imprisonment for "defamation" in connection with two internet articles criticizing the K-D-P leadership.

....U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has said, "The free flow of ideas is the lifeline of liberty." The jailing of people for their political views has no place in Iraq's new democracy. "In the long run," says President George W. Bush, "there is no justice without freedom, and there can be no human rights without human liberty."

I would like to take this opportunity to ask, once again, why the Washington DC lobbyists Barbour, Griffth, and Rogers have been retained by the Kurdistan Democratic Party - the same party that has jailed this journalist? Who are they lobbying (in D.C.) on behalf of the Kurdish political party that the President and his administration are criticizing?

From Kurdish Media: Kurds focus on corruption in Kurdistan administration

From an op-ed in the Kurdish media:

Today, average Kurds are very disappointed with Mr. Sayid Qadir’s arbitrary arrest and imprisonment. The longer this gross injustice continues, the deeper it resides in the subconscious of the Kurds; it will bring their anger closer to threshold levels in any future cases of injustice in South Kurdistan. His arrest and imprisonment is a judicial travesty and an ugly insult to the concept of democracy. It has brought shame on the Kurds and their reputation. Hence, Kurds’ common interests demand that he is released without further delay.

From Uruknet:

Dr Qadir believes that the Kurdish leadership failed, despite the availability of the perfect opportunity, to 'transform Iraqi Kurdistan into a model democracy for Iraq, or even the Middle East, because, instead, the Kurdish parties transformed Iraqi Kurdistan into a fortress for oppression, theft of public funds, and serious abuse of human rights like murder, torture, amputation of ears and noses, and rape. All this was conducted under American protection because the Kurdish parties, and others in the region, know too well that all the privileges and gains achieved since 1991 by the Kurdish parties were impossible without direct American backing and support.

Indeed the Americans, who had established and directly protected the safe heaven in Iraqi Kurdistan in 1991, and after the fall of the former regime in April 2003, were behind the rewarding of the Kurdish parties further privileges in the form of a federal region and a bigger share of Iraqi budget, which no one knows where it went and how it has been spent to this date’. (my emphasis)

I wonder if any Washington DC lobbyists know where the money went?

The Kurds in Iran

IRAN: NEW PARTY SEEKS TO UNITE KURDS

Alito Singalong - All in the Game

Alito Singalong - All in the Game
Parody of the song "It's All in the Game" by Dawes and Sigman
Originally performed by Tommy Edwards



Many a tear has to fall
but it's all
in the game...

All in the wonderful game
That we know as Politics

Ted has words with Spect -
And Sam's future's looking kind of wrecked
But these things
Your heart can rise above

There'll come a day you won't bawl
But it's all in the game
Soon he'll be there in the Court
With a wink, weepy dame.

And he'll find for the Right
And come home to you each night
And our rights will fly away.

Note - In all honesty, I felt sorry for Samual Alito's wife when I saw her crying, which is the way I suppose most people feel. Politics is tough, though. You simply must have a tough skin and a duck's feathers so the water rolls right off your back - and not from your eyes. There are many reasons that people cry - and I'll be curious to hear what Martha-Ann Bomgardner will say if she allows herself to be interviewed about the incident. If she uses it for a dramatic opportunity to criticize our Senators for asking the hard and necessary questions, I would tell her, with all respect, that she should have stayed home if she couldn't take the toughest questions that must be asked. Her husband may be on our Supreme Court for decades.

Peter Daou painfully shows us how a properly functioning "Triangle" could have worked for Democrats on the Alito hearings, if progressive bloggers and the netroots were respected.

From the choreography of Specter and Alito creating the "open mind on abortion" soundbite that media outlets dutifully ran with, to the Sen. Graham/Mrs. Alito tear-fest that should have prompted Dems to slam the Republicans for bringing the Judge's wife to tears but instead turned into another Dem-bashing occasion, to the complete failure of the Democratic leadership to create the appropriate tone of outrage (in soundbite form), the chronic breakdown of the establishment and media sides of the left's triangle is apparent.

This, then, is the reality: progressive bloggers and online activists - positioned on the front lines of a cold civil war - face a thankless and daunting task: battle the Bush administration and its legions of online and offline apologists, battle the so-called “liberal” media and its tireless weaving of pro-GOP narratives, battle the ineffectual Democratic leadership, and battle the demoralization and frustration that comes with a long, steep uphill struggle.

Note - Three major political leaders who do pay healthy respect to the netroots are Senator John Edwards, Gen. Wesley Clark, and the Father of the Netroots Howard Dean.

Sen. John Edwards: Alito is "No Sandra Day O'Connor"

Sen. John Edwards: Alito is "No Sandra Day O'Connor"
Petition - No on Samuel Alito

From the One America Committee:

Samuel Alito's nomination to the Supreme Court represents a grave threat to our fundamental liberties. His record makes it clear that he is a conservative activist who will put his personal ideology above the rule of law.

If Alito replaces Sandra Day O'Connor, a moderate justice who represented the swing vote in many cases, some of our most fundamental rights are at risk. Alito won't stand up to a president's abuse of power. He has said that the Constitution does not protect a woman's right to choose. And he has consistently used the bench as a launching pad for his conservative activism.

Sign the petition below to urge Senate Democrats to stand together and use every means at their disposal to block the nomination of Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court. The results will be shared with Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee.

_______________

A statement made by Senator John Edwards titled No Sandra Day O'Connor is HERE.

You can sign the petition HERE.

Dear Democratic Senators:

Let's stand up and fight for what we believe in as Democrats. Samuel Alito should not be on the Supreme Court.

I urge you all to stand together and use whatever means you have at your disposal to block the nomination of Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court.

Samuel Alito's nomination represents a grave threat to the fundamental liberties of all Americans. He is an activist who has consistently placed his conservative ideology above the rule of law.

If Alito replaces the moderate Sandra Day O'Connor, who often proved to be the swing vote on important cases, the Supreme Court will shift dangerously to the right, undermining our basic freedoms.

In an era when the president of the United States declares himself to be above the law, it is more important than ever that we have a Supreme Court that fulfills its duty as the ultimate guardian of our rights. Alito's nomination puts those rights in danger, and it is vital that you use whatever means possible to block his confirmation.

Jude Nagurney Camwell-------Date Signed: January 12, 2006 01:41 PM

The New York Times has a chronological summary blogs that are covering the Alito Hearings, links included. A very good resource. [NYT Select]

Podcast #7 - John and Elizabeth Edwards December 2005

Podcast #7 - John and Elizabeth Edwards December 2005

PODCAST #7 - DECEMBER 2005
LINK to audio

Elizabeth Edwards assures all she is doing well in the December John and Elizabeth Edwards podcast. Mrs. Edwards' latest CAT-scan results showed her to be cancer-free. She feels great about where she is in the treatment process. She says that Chapel Hill is terrific - tweleve families in their neighborhood have 37 children, so little Jack and Emma Claire are having a great time. Senator Edwards commented that Jack had been looking slimmer, and when he asked Jack about it, Jack told his dad the secret to his success: He has been "running a lot at recess."

This past month, Senator Edwards visited Miami to campaign with Senator Bill Nelson. Senator Edwards also made a trip to India, and he gave a speech in Delhi. When interviewed by the India Times, he told them that he'd seen incredible things in terms of how some of the people live. He saw children on blankets outdoors while they were in school classes. He saw sewage everywhere; flies, etc. It was eye-opening - very moving. The poverty was a sad sight to see. He was changed from having had that experience. He commented that so many problems in life seem "silly" by comparison.

He spoke about his Opportunity Rocks tour of 10 colleges over a 10-day period. He said there'd been an amazing response from young people. Everywhere they went, they were oversold. At the University of Michigan at Ann Arbor, 3000 people showed up - and only 200 were expected. The gathering was held in the courtyard instead of its originally scheduled venue.

A new beta version of the One America blog will soon be featured, where you will be able to start your own diaries and conversations. You'll be able to practice "blogocracy" on the new website. You will be able to vote to see which blog diaries rise to the top. There will be many great new tools for bloggers. The Senator says, if you're already a member of blog community, let's hear from you.

The Bookcast will be next week - watch for it.

Cate's name is on the masthead of Vanity Fair now - and her parents are very proud.

Don't forget to make use of the videoblog - send your questions for teh next podcast in January.

One America blogger NCDem asked a question of Senator Edwards about Iraq - an exit plan - and Rep. John Murtha's position.

Senator Edwards feels strongly about this issue. He felt that he was wrong, in retrospect, about his vote for the Iraq war resolution. He thinks it was a mistake, and his op-ed piece in the Washington Post was written, with much care, by himself. The prewar intelligence was faulty. He made the decision, though, and he took responsibility for it. It was a hard thing for him to say because our military troops who've served this country have not made a mistake. He felt it was important, if the US is going to have moral leadership on the important issues of this world, that the foundation for any decision made by political leadership should be the truth. He told the truth in the Washington Post op-ed. He had to make a judgement. He asked himself, is our presence in Iraq today harmful or helpful? He decided that it was more harmful than helpful. Our military presence is feeding the insugency, as Rep. Murtha has said. We've created an impression that we'll be an occupying force forever, and this causes a cynical view of our nation.

There are several things we'll need to do in the short term:

- We should concentrate on reducing our presence early next year and building Iraq's security capacity.

- We should also get other countries involved - especially others in the immediate region.

- After the Iraqi elections, we should redeploy troops out of Iraq - as early as next year. The numbers could immediately be reduced by 40-50,000 troops, which is the number of National Guard and Reservists.

- There should be more effective training programs for Iraqi forces and serious diplomatic efforts - especially to brring countries in that region in.

Elizabeth says John truly believed he made a mistake in voting Yes for the Iraq War Resolution and she was proud of him for speaking out. When someone says they believe they're wrong, it's good not to slap those people in the face. Inadequacy of information from our government contributed to a system of misinformation. Mrs. Edwards used the example of listening to Donald Rumsfeld saying things that were clearly not true, such as there being 212,000 Iraqi security forces fully trained and equipped when there were not. If that had been true, we could leave Iraq today. We don't have anything close to that number. It feels good we're making some progress. Nobody wants to leave Iraq in chaos - you don't leave the vanquished in disarray if you are an elegant victor. She believes that we need to see Donald Rumsfeld step down from his position as Secretary of State, though. She says that he's a complete disaster and he should be replaced.

Sen Edwards is opposed to Samual Alito's nomination and if George Bush thinks this is HIS supreme Court , he's wrong -- it's OUR Supreme Court. George W. Bush is going to be gone, thank goodness, in a couple of years. and the issue is What's going to be left? This must be a Supreme Court we can believe in.

Elizabeth said that some bloggers have been talking about the memos that have been written by Samuel Alito regarding a woman's right to choose. What Alito said was not that he has a personal right against a woman's right to choose, but he stated it was his legal belief that there is no Constitutional right - which is in direct controversy to standing law in this country.

The Edwards were recently in Charlotte, NC speaking to League of Municipalities. They each spoke separately - to different groups. Senator Edwards said that Elizabeth "rocked the place." He heard, from others at the conference, she was great and he'd read her speech beforehand.

Elizabeth just bought her sister a Christmas present - a plaque that says:

"If there were three wise women, they would have asked for directions, gotten there on time, prepared the stable and helped with the birth, made a casserole, and brought appropriate gifts... (Mrs Edwards jokingly interjected: "What were they supposed to do with myrrh, anyhow?")...and there would be peace on earth."

Senator Edwards wrote a recent NYT op-ed with Jack Kemp - about recent disturbing changes in the US relationship with Russia. Jack Kemp and Senator Edwards have been working together on the Council on Foreign relations - they went to Russia and visited with leaders and activists. The NYT op-ed was about legislation in DUMA keeping NGOs from having offices in Russia suspected of political activities. President Vladmir Putin, through a surrogate in DUMA, is trying to squash political opposition undemocratically. Background: In recent years under Putin, there have been rollbacks in democarcy regulating the eliminating of direct elections of governors, prosecution of oligarchs, and Russian governmentt taking over the mass media - all to squash political opposition. Democratically, Russia is headed in the wrong direction.

Listen to the podcast to hear all the details.

Israel Tourism Ministry Says No to Pat Robertson

Israel Tourism Ministry Says No to Pat Robertson

Forward is reporting that Pat Robertson's most-recent God-gaffe is making him no friends at the Israeli Tourism Ministry. And who can blame them for not wanting to do business with him? The article explains how Rev. Richard Land, president of the Southern Baptist Convention's Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission is separating himself from Robertson's intensely spiteful comments, ensuring that the wider evangelical community will continue to be able to do business with Israel.

I think, if Rev. Pat prays very hard on this, he will see the error of his ways and reconcile himself with something closer to humble faith.

I don't see that Rev. Pat is all that different from Rev. Land or Pastor Ted Haggard regarding their stubborn religious triumphalism when it comes to American politics. If the situation calls for shoring up the "values" wing of the Republican party, these evangelical leaders will push the envelope regarding God's wrath. They'll say just about anything. Pastor Ted has gone along with Pat Robertson's past God-gaffes. Remember the one about Dover, Pennsylvania deserving to be destroyed by God for rejecting intelligent design in the schools? It was just as mean and insane as the comment made about Ariel Sharon - yet Pastor Ted backed Robertson on the creepy statement.

So why is no one coming to Robertson's rescue on this one? The difference is that some of these evangelical leaders have gotten too carried away by their lust for political power and influence. They've left many Christians behind, slapping them out of sight in their race to see how they can garner the most political votes for the most narrow set of "values" that many Christians have ever seen.

It gets more complicated when an evangelical leader says something spiteful about Israel's political leaders because the evangelical supporters of Israel have their own (distictly Republican and divisive) political agenda. As Ralph Reed said,

"The Jewish community has played a strong role in keeping the Democratic party strongly pro-Israel, and Evangelicals have played a similar role among Republicans."

*It's all about false choices for political gain. Reed is saying you can't be Christian and NOT support the Republican agenda. Worse yet, he's insinuating that you can't be Christian and be a Democrat at the same time. Not only does Reed divide Americans on a political line, he divides Christendom. We can't let the evangelical leaders who are tainted with power-lusting political activity continue to get away with these divisive inconsistencies and false choices.

See Joan Bokaer's story on Pastor Ted and his denial of being a man who wields great political influence.


Update: Pat Repents

Bono, Bill & Melinda Gates - Well Done

Bono, Bill & Melinda Gates - Well Done

"For being shrewd about doing good, for rewiring politics and re-engineering justice, for making mercy smarter and hope strategic and then daring the rest of us to follow, Bill and Melinda Gates and Bono are TIME's Persons of the Year."

- TIME magazine, Persons of the Year 2005

I know this is late, but I wanted to publically say that I wish there were more of the kind of high-profile humanitarians that these three people are.

The following are excerpts from the TIME article titled The Good Samaritans by Nancy Gibbs:

As it happens, they have arrived at the right time, as America stirs itself awake from the dreamy indifference with which the world's poor have forever been treated. In ordinary times, we give when it's easy: a gesture, a reflex, a salve to conscience.

....This was already a year that redefined generosity. Americans gave more money to tsunami relief, more than $1.6 billion,than to any overseas mission ever before. The Hurricane Season from Hell brought another outpouring of money and time and water bottles and socks and coats and offers of refuge, some $2.7 billion so far.

The public failure of government to manage disaster became the political story of the year. But the private response of individuals, from every last lemonade stand to every mitten drive, is the human story of 2005.

Katrina created one tragedy and revealed another," Melinda Gates said in a speech after the hurricane. "We have to address the inequities that were not created by the hurricanes but exposed by them. We have to ensure that people have the opportunity to make the most of their lives." That just about captures the larger mission she and her husband have embraced. In the poorest countries, every day is as deadly as a hurricane....

.....[Bono] goes to churches and talks of Christ and the lepers, citing exactly how many passages of Scripture ("2,103") deal with taking care of the poor; he sits in a corporate boardroom and talks about the role of aid in reviving the U.S. brand. He gets Pat Robertson and Susan Sarandon to do a commercial together for his ONE campaign to "Make Poverty History." Then he heads to Washington, where he stops by a meeting of House Democrats to nuzzle them about debt relief before a private lunchwith President George W. Bush, whom he praises for tripling aid to Africa over the past four years.

Everyone from Republican Senator Rick Santorum to Hillary Clinton used Bono's October concert as a fund raiser. "He knows how to get people to follow him," Stonesifer says. "We are probably a good complement. We're more likely to give you four facts about the disease than four ways that you can go do something about it." Bono grasps that politicians don't much like being yelled at by activists who tell them no matter what they do, it's not enough. Bono knows it's never enough, but he also knows how to say so in a way that doesn't leave his audience feeling helpless. He invites everyone into the game, in a way that makes them think they are missing something if they hold back.

"After so many years in Washington," says retired Senator Jesse Helms of North Carolina, whom Bono recruited to his cause, "I had met enough well-known people to quickly figure out who was genuine and who was there for show. I knew as soon as I met Bono that he was genuine. He has absolutely nothing to gain personally as a result of his work. In fact, he has opened himself to criticism because he has been willing to work with anyone to find help for these children who have taken his heart."

This is not about pity. It's more about passion. Pity sees suffering and wants to ease the pain; passion sees injustice andwants to settle the score. Pity implores the powerful to pay attention; passion warns them about what will happen if they don't.

The risk of pity is that it kills with kindness; the promise of passion is that it builds on the hope that the poor are fully capable of helping themselves if given the chance. In 2005 the world's poor needed no more condolences; they needed people to get interested, get mad and then get to work.....

Dow Crosses 11,000 for 1st Time Since 2001

Dow Crosses 11,000 for 1st Time Since 2001

...and the average American doesn't feel a
*!*##!* difference.

For the past 12 months, at least on paper, economic growth was solid: unemployment was relatively low, the housing market strong, and consumer spending firm. Yet a nagging sense of uncertainty just wouldn't go away. Perhaps it was pure logic: after all, consumers spent money they didn't have, companies continued to lay off workers by the thousands, and wage growth was non-existent. Throughout it all, bullish Wall Street economists ignored their instincts to claim all was well. LINK

Recently, two experts on the economy were asked, on Fox News Sunday, for their opinions on the 2006 election fallout from the current economy, and both experts gave dismal predictions for Republicans because the majority of average Americans are not feeling that they are any part of this economic recovery. Interestingly, all records of that exchange on Fox News Sunday have been purged from - or have never been included in any internet record.

Christian Women the Only Hope for Western Survival?!

Christian Women the Only Hope for Western Survival?!
Give me a break!

Pay close attention to what Father Joseph D. Fessio, who is the Provost of Ave Maria University in Naples, Florida has said in a recent interview with Hugh Hewitt:

I don't think Benedict XVI is thinking that we're going to have a new Christendom, in which Christian principles permeate all of society. I think he probably is more, his vision is that we must be faithful to Christ, and He will support us and strengthen us, and we can't predict what our role will be in society. But it's probably going to be as a minority....

...Once there's an Islamic majority...it's going to eliminate religious freedom. However...and therefore, Western civilization as we know it. However, in the United States, we also are not having children. There's abortion. There's contraception....I believe that Christians in the United States are the ones who will be able to save not just Christianity, but Western civilization, if we maintain our fidelity to the scriptures, our fidelity to Christ, our fidelity to family life, and our fidelity to fertility and fruitfulness in marriage.

According to this Jesuit priest, the future of Western civlization is based upon a dependence upon women to submit to oppression for its ideological sake. This would require a great loss of freedom and progress for women. If this was taken seriously, it would mean the West's societal/cultural shift backwards to the illegalization of birth control, education, and equal labor opportunities for the female population, along with a silencing of their ideas in the public square.


Excuse me, but that sounds an awful lot like what we are accusing Islamic theocrats of doing.

Knowing that a Jesuit priest would use the faith to cut into human freedom in worldly panic about the end of Western values - well, my own Bible-based Christian intuition tells me not to trust that line of thinking - and to run from it.


photo by sume

Target Iran?

Target Iran?
Washington Times editor talks tough but offers no international solutions

Washington Times editor Arnaud de Borchgrave is at it again - spinning some genuine international concern into an accusation of naivete and gullibility....which will undoubtedly launch a fear-saturated public discussion about Iran. Call me a fortune-teller - this will generate another unilateralist reason with the hard-liners for the U.S. to go to preemptive war with yet another sovereign nation. "Target Iran?" No one speaks about the destabilization of the Middle East if and when that would happen. As I have recently said, I'm sick and tired of media editors and pundits planning US wars for my son - and yours. Iran's leaders may be "sticking it in our face" with their rhetoric, but we have an impulsive, determined, and reactionary White House administration who we know, from experience, could arrogantly neglect the existence of the UN tools-in-existence and send our troops into Iran for blatant neoconservative wishes. That is an extremely dangerous thought, knowing how our military is already stretched because of the mess in Iraq. Anyone who believes that Middle Eastern destablilization caused by our unilateralism would not be destructive to our nation's economy and security is naive and gullible.

Borchgrave criticizes President Bush for being naive about all of Islam, and in defense of President Bush, this is not true. I have heard the President clearly separate the overwhelming majority of Muslims from those who would use the religion for power and violence. Borchgrave is out of line.

Let's get real. We are a part of the greater world. Ask any modern economist. It's a dangerous world - and we can't go it alone.

I hope that President Bush will start listening to sane voices instead of the neoconservative voices he's let into his head. Power cannot be genuinely won by the level of unilaterlism our President has employed - only hatred and the turning away of the hearts and minds we needed so desperately throughout this world (the very kind that Borchgrave describes in his fear-mongering manifesto with the brave title "Target Iraq" and no further comment about how Iran should be "targeted.")

____________

Tolerance or Terror?

Israpundit tells us of a revealing investment tale about the two faces of one particular Saudi prince. I think it's fair to ask:
What will it be?
Tolerance or terror?

I think that's a fair question to ask.

US troops seize award-winning Iraqi journalist

US troops seize award-winning Iraqi journalist

Journalist as enemy? What the hell are we thinking?

Guardian excerpt:

Dr Fadhil is working with Guardian Films on an investigation for Channel 4's Dispatches programme into claims that tens of millions of dollars worth of Iraqi funds held by the Americans and British have been misused or misappropriated.

Juan Cole's comment:

This is very troubling on all sorts of levels. US troops do not have a Status of Forces agreement with Iraq and do not have a constitutional right to arrest civilians without a warrant. And, the US military should not be harassing journalists reporting on contract fraud.

Jill Carroll and the Raid on a Sunni Mosque

Jill Carroll and the Raid on a Sunni Mosque
Note - I've changed the name of this post since I learned of Jill Carroll's abduction. See Update below.

It should be a foregone conclusion that an American raid upon an influential Sunni civic organization will not convince Sunni Arabs that assimilation into an Iraqi democracy would be an advantageous venture. A raid upon one of its trusted institutions tells the Sunnis: We believe that you are the enemy.

From Reuters (excerpt):

Sunni Arabs are .. angry about a raid by U.S. soldiers this weekend on the offices of the Muslim Clerics' Association, an influential group of Sunni scholars.

Reuters Television footage showed spent shotgun shells and special explosive charges used to blow out door locks lying on the ground following the pre-dawn raid on Sunday.

Many office doors showed signs of forced entry, papers were strewn on the floor and windows smashed.

The U.S. military said the raid was conducted in response to a tip-off of "substantial terrorist activity" in the mosque complex and says its soldiers behaved respectfully.

But the Iraqi Accordance Front, the main Sunni Arab coalition, urged its followers to gather at the Umm al-Qora mosque on Tuesday to protest what it described as the "sinful assault."

"It is a direct and intended act against Sunnis," said Abdul Hadi al Zubeidi, a senior member of another Sunni coalition, the Sunni Gathering. "It is an assault. It will only worsen relations with them (the U.S. military)," he told Reuters.

The raid came at a time when Washington is trying to encourage Sunnis to abandon support for the insurgency.

I am not saying that our military didn't have reason to be on alert. I am saying that this a twisted and tangled cause that will not be straightened by any of the logic that the Pentagon and White House are spinning about. We say that we want the Sunni Arabs to join in the forming of a democracy - and we blow down the doors of their religious institutions, suspecting them of terrorist activity.

Which is it? Are they terrorists or citizens? Who decides?

This brings to mind the pirate's quote from St Augustine's "City of God":

"Because I do it with one small ship, I am called a terrorist. You do it with a whole fleet and are called an emperor."

UPDATE January 10:


Jill Carroll

+ I have found out that this attack was related to the story of the missing (kidnapped) Christian Science Monitor journalist Jill Carroll, whose writings I have found to be extremely valuable to the uncovering of the truth in Iraq. Look at how recently I used the information she was sending. I was not aware of her abduction because there was a weekend news blackout on the abduction of the CS Monitor reporter. [see Editor & Publisher] I'm hoping that the reason she was taken was to inform her - not to hurt her. I am concerned, however, that information is not in the forefront of her captors' minds because her translator was murdered. My heart is with Jill and her family right now. May she return safely.


BBC News:

US spokesman Lieutenant Colonel Barry Johnson said the raid was ordered "as a direct result of a tip by an Iraqi civilian that activities related to the kidnapping were being carried out inside the mosque. Both Iraqi and coalition forces raided the mosque in the early morning hours in order to minimise the impact on worshippers and the surrounding neighbourhood," he added.

It is an inescapable perception. The attack on the Umm al-Qura mosque is seen by some Sunni Arab Muslims as an attack on Muslims and Islam. We may not agree, for we have been informed of the reason for the raid. If any journalist was endangered, I would want her (or him) to be brought to safety at just about any cost. In the real world, wars happen when people can't agree. This war is seeming more senseless by the day. There is no ethical integrity - only a dangerous and deadly neoconservative pipe dream about Western democracy within an Islamic theocracy. You could ask Jill Carroll if she could only be here, and she would tell you that we're negotiating with the same factions that are abducting our journalists. We are abducting their journalists. Our occupation is increasingly making things worse.

I pray for Jill's safety.

UPDATE JANUARY 11

Fellow journalists in Baghdad rally to help find Jill

TIME story by Christopher Allbritton

At Slate, Jack Shafer, emotion about a fellow journalist removed, asks how long is long enough for the media to black out a kidnapping story:

I know it's easy for me to meditate about this topic from the safety of my Washington office while journalists labor under the threat of death every day in Iraq. But the questions remain. If the press should spike news to help a colleague, how long an interval is decent? Should it be 48 hours, as in Carroll's case? Until the local press reports the story? Until the abducted person's employer confirms the news? Until the U.S. Embassy does? Or until the kidnappers make their announcement on the Web? I don't have any easy answers, just easy questions.

The president of Military Reporters and Editors (MRE), Sig Christenson, criticized U.S. media outlets late Tuesday for engaging in a two-day blackout. [Editor and Publisher]Sig Christenson asks:

"Do we really want to put reporters in a special class when we do a story? Is it ethical to do that and is it wise?"

UPDATE JANUARY 12

Editor and Publisher reports that there is no news in the search for abducted journalist Jill Carroll.

Comments regarding an IPS article by Brian Conley and Isam Rashid:

I have to say that something doesn't jibe here, and the journalists are pointing it out. Does it strike you as odd that we would act as we did against this Sunni organization, given the nature of their status as brokers for peace throughout the war?

..there is no known connection between the organisation and such groups, or with the abduction of Jill Carroll. The U.S. forces apparently acted on a tip-off from one Iraqi....It is difficult to understand why the United States would single out the Association of Muslim Scholars as an initial target in the investigation of Jill Carroll's abduction. The organisation has condemned the taking of hostages in Iraq. It has opposed the political process under the occupation, but has continued to call for peace.

Read the following:

Through the raid, the offices of the Association at the mosque were ransacked. Witnesses said they found graffiti by way of stylized crosses drawn with thick markers.

If our soldiers did this, do we think it's something they should be allowed to do? I certainly think it's detracting from the overall mission and giving the appearance of an admission that we are fighting the Holy War so many of the Islamic fundamentalists wish to think they are fighting. How will this serve to better protect Jill Carroll, who freelanced regularly for the Christian Science Monitor?

"If the occupier would leave, Iraqis would live as brothers.

- Dr. Harith Al Ubaidi, Sunni political leader

Brothers who will likely continue to kill one another in warlord turf-battles. When the Grand Ayatollah in Najaf gives his fatwa for US ground troop withdrawal (which will inevitably occur when Iraq thinks it's ready,) we will probably move to the air-war phase and blow up selected militias in the name of the new Iraqi government. Regardless of when we leave, the rage will remain. Thousands of our ground troops could have left 3 years ago with the same result.

What will we have accomplished, when we leave Iraq, knowing that the rage will remain - and that we only inflamed it when our nation decided, with our own brand of noeconservative fundamentalist determination, to break Iraq? How will we be proud of the fact that, regardless of its touches of Western-style democracy (enough to secure capitalist goals, not quite enough to avoid a setback for women) it is a de facto Islamic theocracy? How does any of this compare to our American revolution? Did our forefathers blow each other up in the common after the Declaration of Independence was read? All we wil be able to say is that elections were held for a loose central (theocratic) government in Baghdad that the Kurds will ignore and the Sunnis feel left out of, and we (often unsuccessfully) tried to keep warring factions of the society in Iraq from slicing each other's throats while it happened. And then..........

UPDATE - JANUARY 13

Vigorous efforts are under way on many fronts – by the Monitor, many media organizations, and government forces in Iraq – to locate and secure the release of Jill Carroll, the freelance reporter kidnapped January 7 in Baghdad while on assignment for the Monitor. No one has yet claimed responsibility for her kidnapping.
[CSM]

Reporters in Baghdad Join in Search for Carroll Kidnapper
"...the reporters also have been gathering statements of support from people in Baghdad who know Carroll to "show she is a good reporter and empathetic to Iraqi people."

US Using Economic Pressure to Spurn ICC

US Using Economic Pressure to Spurn ICC

Human rights activists say that Jordan's parliament should firmly reject a "strong-arm attempt by the US to exempt its own citizens from international law." Jordan's parliament has approved a new law that prevents Amman from handing over U.S. citizens accused of war crimes to the international criminal court (ICC).

According to Reuters

Jordanian politicians privately said ratifying the accord was crucial to maintain U.S. military and economic aid which many lawmakers believe was tied to the ratification of the bilateral accord.

Bribing other nations to move away from world cooperation on human rights is a dismal proposition - and apparently a reality.

Generals Split on Iraq

Generals Split on Iraq

There seems to be a split in key ideas about strategy between top military commanders in Iraq. How well will this serve America's mission? Who's pulling the strings? Which opinion will be gagged and muffled? If this public split in philosophy does not die down, who will back down? Is it a civil war in Iraq or not? If it's not a civil war happening in Iraq today (regardless of the US support/presence there) what is it? Why is the President and his administration having such a hard time explaining the "who's who' categories of those who are killing our troops and one another in Iraq? It gets increasingly complicated. The storyline behind the war is cracking. Our emotional strings that have been pulled by the Commander in Chief about the glories of freedom and democracy in Iraq are being met with public discord as those strings begin to fray under the tension of a strikingly different tune. Iraqis aren't only killing us. They're killing each other. On a daily basis.

The current split in the Generals' publically-stated views, along with the knowledge that J. Paul Bremer tried to warn the Secretary of Defense and the President that we strategically had it very wrong from the very beginning of this war in Iraq, causes me to realize that, for whatever reason, one of these Generals isn't being forthcoming enough.

When we decide to pull out of Iraq, what are we going to leave behind? How will we redeploy? There has never been a day of real security in Iraq since we got there. How long can our military stay there and pretend that there is a real goal for success and peace in their sights? What about the ethical aspects - being responsible for what we have done? We broke a nation - and flattened its civil structure - and we are going to let them foot their own bill for reconstruction? This does not make me a proud American.

The Iraq war has not only loosened a regime in a foreign country, it has loosened the glue of unity among citizens at home. We're told, by political leaders like Senator Joe Lieberman, that questioning the credibility of our own President is damaging to our security, but don't we we have the duty to stand up for what we think is right? We've learned important lessons by looking back on world history, when there have been many leaders who should have had their credibility questioned much sooner - before great damage was done. How can we trust in men who employ politics and war as a means to retain power rather than acting cooperatively with the world toward a safer world?


From yesterday's NY Times:

Sectarian rivalries and inefficient Iraqi ministries could turn the Iraqi security forces into "militias or armed gangs," Lt. General John Vines, the senior US operational commander in Iraq, said in an interview....In the weeks leading up to the December election, however, General Vines differed with his boss, Gen. George W. Casey Jr. over how and where to assign troops to ensure a peaceful and successful balloting.

Karen Kwiatkowski [Huffington Post] asks 'What's up with the "he-said/he-said" upon reading the public disagreement this week between Green Zone commander General George Casey and his predecessor, 5th Corps Commander in Germany, Lt General Ricardo Sanchez. Like Lt. Gen John Vines, General Sanchez says that he believes "Iraq is on the verge of civil war." [source: Stars and Stripes] Dr. Kwiatkowski says:

Within hours, Casey, speaking to CNN in Washington, said specifically that Iraq was NOT on the verge of civil war. [CNN]

The confused message reveals a crack in the Bush rhetoric about the "good" we've been doing in Iraq by bringing our war to their land. Dr. Kwiatkowski:

"..the real truth is uglier than simple civil war. The destruction of a sovereign Iraq was the primary objective of this war - and that mission has in fact been accomplished."

When the rubber meets the road of reality, we see that the Bush administration has never believed in any moral cause in Iraq. Dr. Kwiatkowski:

"The cost in human lives, spirit, and hope on all sides, as well as the financial cost may not have been worth it for those "piling on" and going "defeatist" in the reality based world, but who cares? The reality-based world is an ugly place. The Casey-said, Sanchez-said debate prefigures a year ahead that may be remembered as the year the reality-based world rudely intruded on the Potomac, shattering what is left of the façade and completely exploding the myth that Bush-Cheney policies have made either the Middle East more democratic, or America safer."

In a cold and unforgiving world, the neoconservative method of using our military to "spread democracy" is a cruel, ineffective, and dangerous prospect.

The split in the General's ideas about the status of Civil War in Iraq is raising many questions about whether we should stay or go; whether we are leaving Iraq broken and having to fend for its own reconstruction (*"See ya - wouldn't wanna be ya"); whether the world has been made safer for Americans; whether America has been made safer or left with a stronger democracy; whether we have wasted and ruined many lives for a war that was never necessary, in hindsight.

Some defenders of the war may accuse me of using sentimentality to use as ammunition in my writing about the truth of what we have done in Iraq for the past three years.

As a writer and a human being, I think it's cowardly for political pundits to demean a writer's sense of sentimentality and humanity in the hope that avoiding it altogether will facilitate an amoral political goal that is producing immoral results. The discounting of sentimentality reveals itself to be democratically damaging if we fail to ask ourselves if what we are doing in Iraq has been effective - and if it has mattered.

All sentimentality aside, it's important for the American people to understand the reality of what our nation has done in the name of its citizens. The American public's base fears were played like finely-tuned fiddles by fear-mongering Republican propaganda in the 2004 Presidential election campaign. This created an elective result that was an affirmation to continue what we now know was an amoral and, by the nature of the results, an immoral cause.

Our leaders may not have lied to us, but they certainly did not tell us the truth.

Alito Hearings: Grease is The Word

Alito Hearings: Grease is The Word
Abramoff Greased Palms of Republicans; Christian Right Greases Seats for Alito

"We did adequately apply oil to all the seats."

- Rev. Rob Schenck, who identified himself as an evangelical Christian and as president of the National Clergy Council in Washington

From the Wall Street Journal:

Insisting that God "certainly needs to be involved" in the Supreme Court confirmation process, three Christian ministers today blessed the doors of the hearing room where Senate Judiciary Committee members will begin considering the nomination of Judge Samuel Alito on Monday.....[They] let themselves in a day earlier, touching holy oil to the seats where Judge Alito, the senators, witnesses, Senate staffers and the press will sit, and praying for each of the 13 committee members by name....Capitol Hill police said they weren't aware that the three had entered the hearing room earlier, but added that hearing rooms typically aren't locked because "they're not of interest to anyone.

The same Rev Robert Schenk said something extremely judgemental about the families of the miners who lost their lives in West Virginia.

Sunday News - Dean Calls Bush a "Turn-off"

Sunday News - Dean Calls Bush a "Turn-off"

HOWARD DEAN ON CNN:

+ ON JUDGE SAMUEL ALITO: It's a matter of trust.
+ ON SEN. LIEBERMAN: He's insulting Americans who stand up for what's right.
+ ON DONALD RUMSFELD: He should resign now.
+ ON PRESIDENT BUSH: He's turning off Latin America, thus stifling democratic progeress


Questioned by Wolf Blitzer this morning on CNN, Howard Dean said that, in an ethically charged atmosphere in Washington DC, we don't want or need more fears about scandals within our own Supreme Court. There are some disturbing questions about SCOTUS nominee Samuel Alito. Advocating for strip-searches of 10-year old boys and a conflict of interest on a case regarding mutual funds (with a refusal by Alito to recuse himself) are not going to be issues that engender trust in Alito's ability to be the right choice for the position of Supreme Court justice.

*An aside on ALITO: Unrelated to the Dean interview, Fox News Sunday's regular panelist Juan Williams commented this morning that the narrowing of the scope of individual rights indicated by some of the Judge's past legal decisions should be of concern to citizens, especially his dismal record on affirmative action. Williams was so strong in his conviction that fellow panelist reacted (in full knee-jerk mode) by accusing Williams of "smearing" Alito.

Blitzer asked what Dean thought about a filibuster. Dean replied that he had no real vote and therefore he had no comment. It would be up to Senators like Patrick Leahy, Senator Reid, and others who will decide once they've heard answers to their questions. It's their perogative as Senate members and leaders to decide from there.

Dean said he was disgusted and incensed when he read (in the Washington Post) that 80% of torso injuries to troops in Iraq could have been prevented had there been sufficient body armor. Donald Rumsfeld should resign his position as Secretary of Defense.

Regarding Senator Joseph Lieberman's statement

"In matters of war, we undermine presidential credibility at our nation's peril":

Howard Dean said that the President has lacked credibility since he entered office. He isn't interested in consulting others. Dean said that Senator Lieberman is "insulting Americans who wish to stand up for what's right."

As for President Bush, Dean says that Bush has "turned off" Latin American countries and has therefore moved any hope for democracy in the wrong direction. When you 'turn people off,' they'll do things that are not in our nation's best interests.

On the GOP/Jack Abramoff scandal: Dean said that "not one Democrat took money from Abramoff." He claimed that FEC reports will prove that what he's saying is true. Some Democrats received donations from Indian tribes, but Americans are being misled to believe that elected Democrats such as Byron Dorgan received money directly from Abramoff.

UPDATE: Atrios has the transcript.

Crooks and Liars has the video.

BOOKS

Christopher Buckley reviews Ana Marie Cox (Wonkette's) steamy blog novel "Dog Days."




(to be cont'd)

Chris Trapper Performing with Boston's Wolverine Jazz Band

Chris Trapper Performing with Boston's Wolverine Jazz Band


Chris Trapper

If you're in the Boston area, don't miss this great singer who'll be performing tomorrow night at Harpers Ferry in Allston.

See the preview article here.



A solo CD "Gone Again," the second from the talented singer/songwriter, also of Push Stars fame, offers 11 new songs.

See Jonathan Perry's Boston Globe article.

And the Boston Herald interview with Christopher Blagg.

If you're in the Syracuse NY area, Chris will be performing (solo) at the Redhouse on January 24
See All Tour Dates at the Chris Trapper website.

Got a question? Ask Chris.

Pat Robertson's Latest God-Gaffe Likens Him To Iran Leader

"...no matter how profoundly religion influences you, when you make a public argument, you must ground your statements in reason and a language of morality that is accessible to everyone—to people of different religions or no religion at all. In our diverse democracy, Americans need a common political discourse not dominated by exclusivist theology."

- Rabbi Eric H. Yoffie

Pat Robertson's Latest God-Gaffe Likens Him To Iran Leader
Pat Robertson is at it again. Media Matters tells the story of Mullah Pat's latest gaffe-for-God. As "Just to the Left" points out, Robertson now has something in common with the idiotic leader of Iran.

If you take Pat too seriously, you're probably one of those people from the United Hates of America - the place where some call for a united nation - minus anyone who doesn't share their eschatology and world view.

As we know too well, we are all human beings - and everyone eventually dies. All Pat Robertson is doing, by what I consider to be his uber-sick judgement, is setting himself up to be judged likewise (harshly and ignorantly) by his fellow human beings when it's time for God to unloose Pat's mortal coil.

I can just hear the comments now....

"God took Pat because...."

- He arrogantly tried to speak for God instead of teaching others to act for God
- He spun the 700 Club news like chicken rotisserie - until it was unrecognizable to reality.
- He was getting back at Pat for those goofy comments about (Sharon; Chavez; Dover, PA)
- Jerry Falwell was too busy blaming gays and women for natural disasters.

A truly holy man would never say such a thing about PM Sharon. Shame on Pat. The biblical laws of Leviticus, which Jesus said he "came not to destroy but to fulfill," envisioned a community in which everyone was secure in his own home and property, "beneath his vine and fig tree".

Everyone.

Not just one ethnic group.
Not just one race.
Not just one gender.

God's land? You're there - wherever you are, if you have faith, you're there. Ask a Mormon where God's land is - and you know that the answer will be different than what a Muslim's version of where God's land would be - or a Jew - or a Hindu. While the land of the tribes of Israel is prophetically significant, the Nation-State created in the 1940s is a political creation and entity.

Religious triumphalism and politics are a horrible and dangerous mix. After generations of war, Israelis are tired of fighting. They long to sit "every man beneath his vine and fig tree." The people of Israel want peace - just like any civil citizens want peace.

The snarling of Pat Robertson only prods the pro-war hard-liners on. Since when is Jesus or God pro-war? This statement about Sharon is just as devoid of Christian value as Robertson's recommendation (as an alleged holy man) to assasinate another human being. As a Christian, Robertson causes me embarrassment and shame.

Since I'm a generous soul, I won't trash him altogether, because he's done some good things. One positive thing he's done lately is to lend his name to the ONE.org anti-poverty campaign. He's not a bad fellow at heart, he's just a bit confused as to who "wears the God-pants in the family of man." He looks loco in the coco when he speaks as if he was God Himself. Who's feeding his 700 Club kitty? The eschatological spin his crew puts on every bit of their biased political news has turned the 700 Club Christian kitty into a ferocious pro-war savage lion ...the kind that bared its teeth and killed Christians in the Flavian Amphitheater while the Romans cheered!


Because of his God-on-earth complex, Robertson has destroyed his credibility with any Christian who does not share his extreme world view, which is more of a national theology than a Christian theology. Robertson is doing too much "rendering unto Caesar" - who is, in the present case, George W. Bush.

Even Caesar is embarrassed!

Real Christians don't do Caesar.

______________


Max Blumenthal wants to tell you about the Justice Sunday bunch.