09/10: American Greatness
Joseph Aaron has a touching essay on being Jewish and being American at Jewish World Review.
Here are is an excerpt:
This country continues to amaze me.
The Jewish people continue to amaze me.
Let's start with the United States of America, land that I love.
The constitution of the United States of America says the new term of the Supreme Court is to begin on the first Monday of October each year.
Only problem with that is that, this year, the first Monday of October was Yom Kippur.
And so, a conflict between the holiest day of the year for about five million or so Americans out of a population of about 300 million, and convening the opening session of the highest court in the land on the day the constitution calls for.
How was that conflict resolved? By postponing the beginning of the Supreme Court's new term.
What a country.
Now, admittedly the decision wasn't just made for philosophical reasons. There was something very practical going on. Namely that two members of the Supreme Court are Jews and so wouldn't have been there.
Two out of nine members of this country's highest court are Jews.
What a country.
It's good every now and then to stop a minute to recognize how wonderful this country is for Jews and to both appreciate and take pleasure in that.
Especially in light of how we have been treated in other places during our long history.
One of the most radical breaks with the past made by the new United States was religious liberty. Not merely toleration of select other faiths by an official faith, but actual religious liberty. Our nation has been blessed by people from a wide variety of faith-traditions as a result. Saturday I was looking through the church listings for the area around Lawton, Oklahoma. Weekend services at Ft. Sill, a large Army base, were listed also. In addition to the various Protestant services and Roman Catholic masses, there were Buddhist, Jewish, Islamic, and LDS meetings.
As a Christian, I pray for the conversion of these folks, and my political and social thought are based on my Christian understanding. That understanding includes seeking conversion peacefully, not coercively; and, loving my neighbor, of whatever religion or none, as myself. (more below)
Here are is an excerpt:
This country continues to amaze me.
The Jewish people continue to amaze me.
Let's start with the United States of America, land that I love.
The constitution of the United States of America says the new term of the Supreme Court is to begin on the first Monday of October each year.
Only problem with that is that, this year, the first Monday of October was Yom Kippur.
And so, a conflict between the holiest day of the year for about five million or so Americans out of a population of about 300 million, and convening the opening session of the highest court in the land on the day the constitution calls for.
How was that conflict resolved? By postponing the beginning of the Supreme Court's new term.
What a country.
Now, admittedly the decision wasn't just made for philosophical reasons. There was something very practical going on. Namely that two members of the Supreme Court are Jews and so wouldn't have been there.
Two out of nine members of this country's highest court are Jews.
What a country.
It's good every now and then to stop a minute to recognize how wonderful this country is for Jews and to both appreciate and take pleasure in that.
Especially in light of how we have been treated in other places during our long history.
One of the most radical breaks with the past made by the new United States was religious liberty. Not merely toleration of select other faiths by an official faith, but actual religious liberty. Our nation has been blessed by people from a wide variety of faith-traditions as a result. Saturday I was looking through the church listings for the area around Lawton, Oklahoma. Weekend services at Ft. Sill, a large Army base, were listed also. In addition to the various Protestant services and Roman Catholic masses, there were Buddhist, Jewish, Islamic, and LDS meetings.
As a Christian, I pray for the conversion of these folks, and my political and social thought are based on my Christian understanding. That understanding includes seeking conversion peacefully, not coercively; and, loving my neighbor, of whatever religion or none, as myself. (more below)
Katie Couric arrived at CBS News a few weeks ago in a big way, making news as well as reading it. Her ratings initially spiked, then dived, then leveled and now may be inching up. We will continue to watch as the story unfolds, but the decision to hand over the CBS Evening News franchise to Couric exists within a larger framework of the Feminization of American News Culture.
I suppose I embody a problem demographic. I do not generally watch the network newscasts anymore. For the most part, I know the news of the day from C-SPAN, the internet, conservative talk radio and NPR. In Waco, the national network news broadcasts begin at 5:30, which is a busy family time for me. Having said that, if something really interesting is going on, I will generally try to catch a few bites of The Newshour with Jim Leher. The Newshour generally offers more depth and an expert (or newsmaker) opinion on the topic of the day.
Some positive observations on Katie Couric (although, admittedly, I have not watched her newscast much):
1. The voice over of Cronkite. I am thrilled every time I hear Walter Cronkite say: "the CBS Evening News..."
2. The "Free Speech" segment. It is innovative. At least it is something new in the way that everything old is new again. The commentary at the end of the newscast hearkens back to the days of Eric Sevareid adding his perspective to Cronkite's newscast. Of course, the segment is designed to be light and popular; thus far, it certainly lacks the erudition and penetrating analysis of Sevareid.
3. The leg shot at the end of the show. One of these days, undoubtedly, we will look back and all agree that Mary Hart was a great pioneer in broadcast journalism. Although I am distressed that Couric seems to be wearing more pant-suits.
Some cranky (crankier) observations:
1. Couric contorts her face into an uncomfortable and unattractive mask when she segues into serious news.
2. The good news in that regard is that serious news is not nearly as prevalent as you might think on a network evening news broadcast. There is a lot of time for good-natured banter and teasing of colleagues and cute cajoling of newsmakers. In an interview with New Jersey gubernatorial candidate Tom Kean, in the midst of Democratic scandals in the state, Couric focused on Kean and whether he wanted President Bush to visit him. "Come on now," she giggled, persisting in several humorous attempts to portray Kean as running away from the President in a blue state. It was all very cute--but not very Cronkite-ish.
3. Some of the copy seems better suited for a satire of a bad news program. For example: After watching a four-year-old drum phenom on You Tube, Katie intones: "drums not your bag? [cue film of a bagpiper] Maybe these are. More after we pay the piper."
Serious question: Why not just cut to the chase and offer Oprah Winfrey the franchise?
I suppose I embody a problem demographic. I do not generally watch the network newscasts anymore. For the most part, I know the news of the day from C-SPAN, the internet, conservative talk radio and NPR. In Waco, the national network news broadcasts begin at 5:30, which is a busy family time for me. Having said that, if something really interesting is going on, I will generally try to catch a few bites of The Newshour with Jim Leher. The Newshour generally offers more depth and an expert (or newsmaker) opinion on the topic of the day.
Some positive observations on Katie Couric (although, admittedly, I have not watched her newscast much):
1. The voice over of Cronkite. I am thrilled every time I hear Walter Cronkite say: "the CBS Evening News..."
2. The "Free Speech" segment. It is innovative. At least it is something new in the way that everything old is new again. The commentary at the end of the newscast hearkens back to the days of Eric Sevareid adding his perspective to Cronkite's newscast. Of course, the segment is designed to be light and popular; thus far, it certainly lacks the erudition and penetrating analysis of Sevareid.
3. The leg shot at the end of the show. One of these days, undoubtedly, we will look back and all agree that Mary Hart was a great pioneer in broadcast journalism. Although I am distressed that Couric seems to be wearing more pant-suits.
Some cranky (crankier) observations:
1. Couric contorts her face into an uncomfortable and unattractive mask when she segues into serious news.
2. The good news in that regard is that serious news is not nearly as prevalent as you might think on a network evening news broadcast. There is a lot of time for good-natured banter and teasing of colleagues and cute cajoling of newsmakers. In an interview with New Jersey gubernatorial candidate Tom Kean, in the midst of Democratic scandals in the state, Couric focused on Kean and whether he wanted President Bush to visit him. "Come on now," she giggled, persisting in several humorous attempts to portray Kean as running away from the President in a blue state. It was all very cute--but not very Cronkite-ish.
3. Some of the copy seems better suited for a satire of a bad news program. For example: After watching a four-year-old drum phenom on You Tube, Katie intones: "drums not your bag? [cue film of a bagpiper] Maybe these are. More after we pay the piper."
Serious question: Why not just cut to the chase and offer Oprah Winfrey the franchise?
08/10: Weekend Debates
A lot of debating went on this weekend. I caught the Texas 17 in full and some snippets of some others. Here are some quick impressions:
Texas 17. Incumbent Democrat Chet Edwards and Republican challenger Van Taylor: Not much substance to argue over. Mostly petty exchanges. Edwards is a Democrat who votes Republican, which is very frustrating for the Republican challenger. However, standing toe-to-toe with a long-term incumbent raises the status of the challenger. Taylor did not disqualify himself. He raised his visibility. Tie goes to the Republican challenger in a Republican-dominated district, but the advantage still lies with the incumbent Edwards.
Texas Gubernatorial: It is a funny race. I have long believed that the much-maligned Rick Perry holds an almost impregnable position in this campaign. The Democratic nominee, Chris Bell, is virtually unknown--even today. The novelty candidate, comedian Kinky Friedman has not caught fire. Carole Strayhorn, the articulate erstwhile-Republican Comptroller and independent challenger, may be the best candidate all things being equal--but all things are not equal.
Perry is the incumbent Republican in a rock-solid Republican state (last cycle no Democrat won a state office). He has all the money. He has all the connections and corporate support. And he looks marvelous. Perry is a tall former rancher with movie-star good looks. Physically towering over his independent but charismatic competition, and outshining his dull Democratic challenger, Perry seems well-positioned to win his second term as governor of Texas.
Missouri Senate: I saw only seconds of the Talent and McCaskill debate on Meet the Press, but Talent seemed so in control of the facts and the stage, I am going to go ahead and call Missouri for Talent on gut feeling alone (although some of the latest polls say different).
California Governor: I caught quite a bit of the debate between Arnold Schwarzenegger and some guy who wasn't Arnold Schwarzenegger. The Governator is that good. I agree with all the polls that predict Arnold with enjoy a double-digit win. So much for the polls and pundits this time last year that eulogized Schwarzenegger.
Review of former picks:
Pennsylvania: Casey
Virginia: Allen
Texas 17. Incumbent Democrat Chet Edwards and Republican challenger Van Taylor: Not much substance to argue over. Mostly petty exchanges. Edwards is a Democrat who votes Republican, which is very frustrating for the Republican challenger. However, standing toe-to-toe with a long-term incumbent raises the status of the challenger. Taylor did not disqualify himself. He raised his visibility. Tie goes to the Republican challenger in a Republican-dominated district, but the advantage still lies with the incumbent Edwards.
Texas Gubernatorial: It is a funny race. I have long believed that the much-maligned Rick Perry holds an almost impregnable position in this campaign. The Democratic nominee, Chris Bell, is virtually unknown--even today. The novelty candidate, comedian Kinky Friedman has not caught fire. Carole Strayhorn, the articulate erstwhile-Republican Comptroller and independent challenger, may be the best candidate all things being equal--but all things are not equal.
Perry is the incumbent Republican in a rock-solid Republican state (last cycle no Democrat won a state office). He has all the money. He has all the connections and corporate support. And he looks marvelous. Perry is a tall former rancher with movie-star good looks. Physically towering over his independent but charismatic competition, and outshining his dull Democratic challenger, Perry seems well-positioned to win his second term as governor of Texas.
Missouri Senate: I saw only seconds of the Talent and McCaskill debate on Meet the Press, but Talent seemed so in control of the facts and the stage, I am going to go ahead and call Missouri for Talent on gut feeling alone (although some of the latest polls say different).
California Governor: I caught quite a bit of the debate between Arnold Schwarzenegger and some guy who wasn't Arnold Schwarzenegger. The Governator is that good. I agree with all the polls that predict Arnold with enjoy a double-digit win. So much for the polls and pundits this time last year that eulogized Schwarzenegger.
Review of former picks:
Pennsylvania: Casey
Virginia: Allen
Category: American Culture
Posted by: an okie gardener
Here is a link to an extremely provocative essay on the fortunes of traditional family life, and associated politics, in Industrial America. I will be so bold as to label this essay must reading for informed discussion of traditional family issues. I probably will respond to some of the points raised in the future, but for now want to mull over things.
Read this. From Touchstone: A Journal of Mere Christianity. Hat tip The Layman.
Read this. From Touchstone: A Journal of Mere Christianity. Hat tip The Layman.
06/10: Emerging from the Foley Fog
Some things that are probably true:
1. Republicans are going to lose the House. If not for Foley, the GOP might have dodged the bullet, but this should do it. In truth, the Republican House deserves to go.
George Will had the quote of the day yesterday:
"If, after the Foley episode -- a maraschino cherry atop the Democrats' delectable sundae of Republican miseries -- the Democrats cannot gain 13 seats, they should go into another line of work."
Losing is probably what we need the most; it will facilitate repentance and revival.
2. The long history of the Republican Party (that goes back even to its Whig roots) as the "moral party" is well deserved; the label is a two-edged sword, but well deserved nonetheless.
The GOP rank-and-file are unique in their standards of conduct. While some pundits and leaders are attempting to blame a well-timed opposition leak for this story (which may be accurate in part), the real truth is that genuine horror and disgust from the Republican masses fired this scandal.
I have a certain sense of pride in my party in regard to our outrage. Regardless of the mistakes of leadership, it is clear to any observer that the party is exacting in its demands for moral conduct.
Are we open to charges of hypocrisy? Yes. Aren't we all? But there is little room for quibbling over the vehemence with which we have pursued this series of indiscretions and violations of our trust.
It amazes me that one month out from a crucial election the GOP faithful are willing to call for the heads of their leaders over a matter of principle. Good for us.
Today I am not ashamed to be a Republican; I am prouder than ever to be associated with the party of Lincoln, Roosevelt and Reagan.
3. The silver lining: We now have a new standard of conduct for Congress. We will look back on Speaker Pelosi's passionate condemnations of immorality on the part of Republican leadership and replay those sound bites for the next twenty years, holding all parties to the same yardstick.
Barney Frank's next sex scandal will be his last.
1. Republicans are going to lose the House. If not for Foley, the GOP might have dodged the bullet, but this should do it. In truth, the Republican House deserves to go.
George Will had the quote of the day yesterday:
"If, after the Foley episode -- a maraschino cherry atop the Democrats' delectable sundae of Republican miseries -- the Democrats cannot gain 13 seats, they should go into another line of work."
Losing is probably what we need the most; it will facilitate repentance and revival.
2. The long history of the Republican Party (that goes back even to its Whig roots) as the "moral party" is well deserved; the label is a two-edged sword, but well deserved nonetheless.
The GOP rank-and-file are unique in their standards of conduct. While some pundits and leaders are attempting to blame a well-timed opposition leak for this story (which may be accurate in part), the real truth is that genuine horror and disgust from the Republican masses fired this scandal.
I have a certain sense of pride in my party in regard to our outrage. Regardless of the mistakes of leadership, it is clear to any observer that the party is exacting in its demands for moral conduct.
Are we open to charges of hypocrisy? Yes. Aren't we all? But there is little room for quibbling over the vehemence with which we have pursued this series of indiscretions and violations of our trust.
It amazes me that one month out from a crucial election the GOP faithful are willing to call for the heads of their leaders over a matter of principle. Good for us.
Today I am not ashamed to be a Republican; I am prouder than ever to be associated with the party of Lincoln, Roosevelt and Reagan.
3. The silver lining: We now have a new standard of conduct for Congress. We will look back on Speaker Pelosi's passionate condemnations of immorality on the part of Republican leadership and replay those sound bites for the next twenty years, holding all parties to the same yardstick.
Barney Frank's next sex scandal will be his last.
05/10: God, Reason, and Science
Category: Thinking Out Loud
Posted by: an okie gardener
I think we need to take a mental shower (or, to use another image, flush ourselves with brain bleach), after this week's sordid political news.
Let's think about God, and reason, and science.
In an earlier post I tried to explain Pope Benedict XVI's remarks that drew so much fire. Here. (includes link to Pope's speech in English) [As a footnote, I should have been more precise and spoken of mainstream Sunni Islam. Shia Islam has tended to view Allah as adhering to justice (by which Shiites usually mean the bloody vindication of their faith against others, especially Sunnis)].
Cardinal George Pell summarizes Benedict's point within this address. The relevant paragraphs are:
Pope John Paul wrote magnificently on faith and reason and on the essential relationship of truth and freedom and I want to say a few words on the equally essential link between love and reason or rationality.
Recently Pope Benedict has been in the news for his academic address at Regensburg his old university and once the seat of the Holy Roman Emperors. His passing references to Islam dominated the media, but most of the speech was about the importance of God for every society, and especially Western societies like ours and to emphasise that rationality, reason is an attribute of God. God is not cranky, or capricious. God is truthful.
The Pope quoted the beginning of John’s gospel. “In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God,” pointing out that the Greek word “Logos” means both word and reason.
The Holy Father acknowledges that this reverence for reason was taken into Revelation, into John’s gospel from Greek philosophy and this was a providential conjunction. Here lies one of the secrets of European and Western civilization. Here lives the reason for our Catholic schools, for our reverence for education, why Catholics should never be fundamentalists and can never be post moderns who reject the idea of truth.
Here is an address from two months ago by Cardinal George Pell on Christianity and science. Below is a thought-provoking excerpt.
(more below)
Let's think about God, and reason, and science.
In an earlier post I tried to explain Pope Benedict XVI's remarks that drew so much fire. Here. (includes link to Pope's speech in English) [As a footnote, I should have been more precise and spoken of mainstream Sunni Islam. Shia Islam has tended to view Allah as adhering to justice (by which Shiites usually mean the bloody vindication of their faith against others, especially Sunnis)].
Cardinal George Pell summarizes Benedict's point within this address. The relevant paragraphs are:
Pope John Paul wrote magnificently on faith and reason and on the essential relationship of truth and freedom and I want to say a few words on the equally essential link between love and reason or rationality.
Recently Pope Benedict has been in the news for his academic address at Regensburg his old university and once the seat of the Holy Roman Emperors. His passing references to Islam dominated the media, but most of the speech was about the importance of God for every society, and especially Western societies like ours and to emphasise that rationality, reason is an attribute of God. God is not cranky, or capricious. God is truthful.
The Pope quoted the beginning of John’s gospel. “In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God,” pointing out that the Greek word “Logos” means both word and reason.
The Holy Father acknowledges that this reverence for reason was taken into Revelation, into John’s gospel from Greek philosophy and this was a providential conjunction. Here lies one of the secrets of European and Western civilization. Here lives the reason for our Catholic schools, for our reverence for education, why Catholics should never be fundamentalists and can never be post moderns who reject the idea of truth.
Here is an address from two months ago by Cardinal George Pell on Christianity and science. Below is a thought-provoking excerpt.
(more below)
05/10: Foley and the Boy Scouts
Perhaps in the light of Foley's habit of cultivating relationships with teenage boys, then moving into sexualized relationships, the Boy Scout position barring homosexual Scout leaders will look more rational to some people.
05/10: French Intifada?
Category: America and the World
Posted by: an okie gardener
From Telegraph. Hat tip Jihadwatch.
Muslims are waging civil war against us, claims police union
By David Rennie, Europe Correspondent
(Filed: 05/10/2006)
Radical Muslims in France's housing estates are waging an undeclared "intifada" against the police, with violent clashes injuring an average of 14 officers each day.
Interior minister Nicolas Sarkozy was warned of an 'intifada'
As the interior ministry said that nearly 2,500 officers had been wounded this year, a police union declared that its members were "in a state of civil war" with Muslims in the most depressed "banlieue" estates which are heavily populated by unemployed youths of north African origin.
It said the situation was so grave that it had asked the government to provide police with armoured cars to protect officers in the estates, which are becoming no-go zones.
And later in the article, after refering to politicians and others advocating economic and criminal enterprise explanations
However, not all officers on the ground accept that essentially secular interpretation. Michel Thoomis, the secretary general of the hardline Action Police trade union, has written to Mr Sarkozy warning of an "intifada" on the estates and demanding that officers be given armoured cars in the most dangerous areas.
He said yesterday: "We are in a state of civil war, orchestrated by radical Islamists. This is not a question of urban violence any more, it is an intifada, with stones and Molotov cocktails. You no longer see two or three youths confronting police, you see whole tower blocks emptying into the streets to set their 'comrades' free when they are arrested."
(read more)
Muslims are waging civil war against us, claims police union
By David Rennie, Europe Correspondent
(Filed: 05/10/2006)
Radical Muslims in France's housing estates are waging an undeclared "intifada" against the police, with violent clashes injuring an average of 14 officers each day.
Interior minister Nicolas Sarkozy was warned of an 'intifada'
As the interior ministry said that nearly 2,500 officers had been wounded this year, a police union declared that its members were "in a state of civil war" with Muslims in the most depressed "banlieue" estates which are heavily populated by unemployed youths of north African origin.
It said the situation was so grave that it had asked the government to provide police with armoured cars to protect officers in the estates, which are becoming no-go zones.
And later in the article, after refering to politicians and others advocating economic and criminal enterprise explanations
However, not all officers on the ground accept that essentially secular interpretation. Michel Thoomis, the secretary general of the hardline Action Police trade union, has written to Mr Sarkozy warning of an "intifada" on the estates and demanding that officers be given armoured cars in the most dangerous areas.
He said yesterday: "We are in a state of civil war, orchestrated by radical Islamists. This is not a question of urban violence any more, it is an intifada, with stones and Molotov cocktails. You no longer see two or three youths confronting police, you see whole tower blocks emptying into the streets to set their 'comrades' free when they are arrested."
(read more)
I have not seen this in print yet, but I get the feeling that there is a rationale building in GOP circles for not taking action on sexual predator Mark Foley:
We could not take action against Foley because he is a homosexual, and the rules of political correctness precluded further investigation. That is, imagine the angry recriminations and accusations of Republican homophobia that would have emerged if we had pushed Foley on scant evidence.
Unacceptable! Anyone who follows current politics understands that there is truth in that assertion. Quite frankly, the Foley case was a no-win situation politically. Nevertheless, it was a no-brainer morally and ethically. GOP leadership should have done the right thing and taken the heat for the breach in political correctness decorum.
We could not take action against Foley because he is a homosexual, and the rules of political correctness precluded further investigation. That is, imagine the angry recriminations and accusations of Republican homophobia that would have emerged if we had pushed Foley on scant evidence.
Unacceptable! Anyone who follows current politics understands that there is truth in that assertion. Quite frankly, the Foley case was a no-win situation politically. Nevertheless, it was a no-brainer morally and ethically. GOP leadership should have done the right thing and taken the heat for the breach in political correctness decorum.
Category: American History and Politics
Posted by: an okie gardener
Newsmax has the big nail to drive into the coffin of Clinton's legacy on terrorism. Michael Scheuer, former CIA head of the bin Laden unit during the Clinton administration, and no friend of the Bush administration, points out the lies of Clinton.
In his role as CBS News terrorism analyst, Scheuer appeared on the "Early Show” and said this about Clinton’s claim that the CIA could not verify bin Laden’s responsibility for the attack on the USS Cole: "The former president seems able to deny facts with impunity."
Read the whole article.
In his role as CBS News terrorism analyst, Scheuer appeared on the "Early Show” and said this about Clinton’s claim that the CIA could not verify bin Laden’s responsibility for the attack on the USS Cole: "The former president seems able to deny facts with impunity."
Read the whole article.
