13/06: A Higher Law?
Over the past few weeks, we have discussed the tension between Christianity and citizenship, sometimes obliquely (the same-sex marriage threads) and sometimes directly (Okie Gardener's brief essay: Christianity and Patriotism).
Rod Dreher speaks to the same question in one of his posts today (although he uses it as a vehicle to go in another direction). Feel free to follow his thread, but I want to pursue the question more directly in this post.
Before I pose the question, another hat tip to Rod D. for resurrecting a great ten-year-old thread (recommended reading) from First Things: The End of Democracy?
Concluding that thread is this collection of "Thoughts" (required reading) on the question of primary loyalty, from primary sources Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Martin Luther King and William Lloyd Garrison.
The question: Can American Christians submit to a secular consensus that promotes the profane over the sacred?
Quoting Rod D. quoting Ross Douthat (in full here):
"To oversimplify egregiously but not, I think, inaccurately, the modern Anglo-American political tradition came into being because Christians were willing to accept the Christianity-lite political settlement offered by social-contract liberalism - and they were willing to accept it because its major premise, that man was endowed with natural and inalienable rights by Nature's God, was broadly congruent with Christian tradition. In a Lockean-liberal society, the law might not do everything that some Christians would like it to do - compel belief, for instance - but neither would it directly violate basic Christian principles."
Summarizing Douthat: Because secularists have abandoned the common ground of Lockean theory (natural rights conferred by Nature's God), the compromise is seriously threatened (see issues like abortion--or our thread on same-sex marriage).
Summarizing Dreher: Liberal Democracy is in its last throes in America.
Any thoughts?
Rod Dreher speaks to the same question in one of his posts today (although he uses it as a vehicle to go in another direction). Feel free to follow his thread, but I want to pursue the question more directly in this post.
Before I pose the question, another hat tip to Rod D. for resurrecting a great ten-year-old thread (recommended reading) from First Things: The End of Democracy?
Concluding that thread is this collection of "Thoughts" (required reading) on the question of primary loyalty, from primary sources Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Martin Luther King and William Lloyd Garrison.
The question: Can American Christians submit to a secular consensus that promotes the profane over the sacred?
Quoting Rod D. quoting Ross Douthat (in full here):
"To oversimplify egregiously but not, I think, inaccurately, the modern Anglo-American political tradition came into being because Christians were willing to accept the Christianity-lite political settlement offered by social-contract liberalism - and they were willing to accept it because its major premise, that man was endowed with natural and inalienable rights by Nature's God, was broadly congruent with Christian tradition. In a Lockean-liberal society, the law might not do everything that some Christians would like it to do - compel belief, for instance - but neither would it directly violate basic Christian principles."
Summarizing Douthat: Because secularists have abandoned the common ground of Lockean theory (natural rights conferred by Nature's God), the compromise is seriously threatened (see issues like abortion--or our thread on same-sex marriage).
Summarizing Dreher: Liberal Democracy is in its last throes in America.
Any thoughts?
12/06: In Praise of Modesty
NPR's Weekend Edition interviewed Bosque Boys favorite, Bill McClay, on Saturday. The interview with Scott Simon (who struck me as a bit sillier than necessary in this particular segment) explored McClay's essay from a recent issue of In Character, which was dedicated entirely to extolling the virtue of modesty. Listen here to the audio archive.
The article (in full here), "Idol Smashing and Immodesty in the Groves of Academe," offers a study of the meaning of modesty and the lost art of practicing modesty. In the end, McClay indicts the academy for steamrolling modesty in favor of iconoclasm. Here are some highlights (although I encourage you to read the entire essay):
McClay argues that true modesty emanates "from a certain depth of self-knowledge, from an awareness of how far we fall short of what we ought to be. In short, a modesty that arises out of an awareness of precisely who we are, and how much we have to be modest about."
He reminds us: "it is always appropriate to conjoin manners with morals. There is always a philosophy of human nature, however hidden or implicit, lurking behind our manners."
And: "[M]odesty means having a mature perspective on one’s ultimate insignificance and limitations, grounded in a sense of mystery about the vastness and incomprehensibility of the world, and skepticism about the limits of human nature and human capabilities. This is the meaning of the word that ought to attach to the “modest” achievement of even the greatest scholars. Whatever we do is, in the end, pretty puny.
"This is also the kind of modesty that remembers the embarrassing contrast between human aspiration and human frailty."
"It remembers the painful contrast between the youthful Cassius Clay’s arrogant and scornful cry, “I am the greatest!” and the pathetic figure that the elder Muhammad Ali has cut, his mind and body ravaged by his career in boxing and by the steady advance of Parkinson’s disease. It remembers that nearly every human glory and every human boast ends in the same sad and humiliating way."
On the academy and its cottage industry of inconoclasm (which McClay offers as the "polar opposite of modesty"): They "have made the liberation from social convention into a new social convention all its own. Of course, this ideology rests upon a veiled form of class snobbery, since there must always be those unnamed “others,” the suburbanites and functionaries and breeders and Babbitts who are thought to sustain and uphold the conventions from which “we” perpetually need to be liberated. But those “others” are increasingly shadowy and hard to locate. The new convention has been triumphant beyond its wildest dreams, and is now entirely pervasive, suffusing our popular culture and our advertising and assimilated into the mainstream in the most remarkable and incongruous ways."
The article (in full here).
The article (in full here), "Idol Smashing and Immodesty in the Groves of Academe," offers a study of the meaning of modesty and the lost art of practicing modesty. In the end, McClay indicts the academy for steamrolling modesty in favor of iconoclasm. Here are some highlights (although I encourage you to read the entire essay):
McClay argues that true modesty emanates "from a certain depth of self-knowledge, from an awareness of how far we fall short of what we ought to be. In short, a modesty that arises out of an awareness of precisely who we are, and how much we have to be modest about."
He reminds us: "it is always appropriate to conjoin manners with morals. There is always a philosophy of human nature, however hidden or implicit, lurking behind our manners."
And: "[M]odesty means having a mature perspective on one’s ultimate insignificance and limitations, grounded in a sense of mystery about the vastness and incomprehensibility of the world, and skepticism about the limits of human nature and human capabilities. This is the meaning of the word that ought to attach to the “modest” achievement of even the greatest scholars. Whatever we do is, in the end, pretty puny.
"This is also the kind of modesty that remembers the embarrassing contrast between human aspiration and human frailty."
"It remembers the painful contrast between the youthful Cassius Clay’s arrogant and scornful cry, “I am the greatest!” and the pathetic figure that the elder Muhammad Ali has cut, his mind and body ravaged by his career in boxing and by the steady advance of Parkinson’s disease. It remembers that nearly every human glory and every human boast ends in the same sad and humiliating way."
On the academy and its cottage industry of inconoclasm (which McClay offers as the "polar opposite of modesty"): They "have made the liberation from social convention into a new social convention all its own. Of course, this ideology rests upon a veiled form of class snobbery, since there must always be those unnamed “others,” the suburbanites and functionaries and breeders and Babbitts who are thought to sustain and uphold the conventions from which “we” perpetually need to be liberated. But those “others” are increasingly shadowy and hard to locate. The new convention has been triumphant beyond its wildest dreams, and is now entirely pervasive, suffusing our popular culture and our advertising and assimilated into the mainstream in the most remarkable and incongruous ways."
The article (in full here).
12/06: Cars: the Road Less Traveled
Is the brain trust at Pixar surreptitiously transmitting conservative social messages encoded within its otherwise innocuously entertaining product? In 2004, The Incredibles told the story of Bob and Helen Parr, two superheroes forced unjustly into suburban conformity and banality at the hands of a litigious society run amok. Locked in a straight-jacket existence, Bob tilted at his profit-obsessed employer, railed against social-leveling and longed for his halcyon days as "Mr. Incredible." Stretched in all directions, Helen attempted to maintain stability, instill a firm sense of morality in her three children and keep her family intact.
In the end, the Parr’s reclaimed their exceptional status, discovered new-found strength in one another and defeated a diabolically heartless global terrorist network. As we watched The Incredibles come together as a family, we came to understand the beauty of family synergy over individual self-fulfillment and the value of encouraging excellence over societal-enforced equality.
Pixar rolled out Cars on Friday, which immediately roared away from the weekend competition at the box-office. The film features qualities that we have come to expect from this brand: funny lines, endearing characters, memorable voice performances and artistry that is simply stunning and unparalleled. And, once again, Pixar offers an entertaining story with some serious overtones. The tale of Interstate 40 and Route 66, in which America carved an interstate highway through the landscape and left a severed community in its wake, serves as a backdrop to the story of success-oriented Lightening McQueen and his personal search for meaning.
Traveling to his all-important rendezvous with ultimate “success,” McQueen, a self-absorbed young race car in a hurry, falls off the edge of the world (in this case the interstate) and lands someplace in the Great Southwest. As he tries in vain to merge back into the fast lane, the “every car” learns that there is more to life than getting where you think you want to go.
Somehow he finds the “true, the good, and the beautiful” along the way in a world he never knew existed. We learn that sacrificing tradition, community and respect for human ecology, while tempting in the short term, has a price: spiritual emptiness. The lesson is clear: effeciency over community is a recipe for moral bankruptcy.
Post Script
Allow me a curious coupling and personal disclosure: I have a recurring nightmare that the MSM will expose C-SPAN, another one of my favorites, and Pixar as agents of the vast rightwing conspiracy. The forces of apathy and decadence will realize that the folks at C-SPAN and Pixar are industriously and insidiously embedding traditionalism in mainstream culture, and the offenders “will be dealt with” accordingly. Some of the reviews of Cars make me wonder if the word is not getting out.
I reassure myself with this comforting thought: Brian Lamb and John Lasseter continue to be welcomed into our homes as inoffensive figures working toward positive change and in alliance with us (no matter who we are). Isn’t that a wonderful thought? Perhaps there is hope for the soul of America. Maybe we are a people united in our desperate search for virtue, community and values bigger than ourselves.
In the end, the Parr’s reclaimed their exceptional status, discovered new-found strength in one another and defeated a diabolically heartless global terrorist network. As we watched The Incredibles come together as a family, we came to understand the beauty of family synergy over individual self-fulfillment and the value of encouraging excellence over societal-enforced equality.
Pixar rolled out Cars on Friday, which immediately roared away from the weekend competition at the box-office. The film features qualities that we have come to expect from this brand: funny lines, endearing characters, memorable voice performances and artistry that is simply stunning and unparalleled. And, once again, Pixar offers an entertaining story with some serious overtones. The tale of Interstate 40 and Route 66, in which America carved an interstate highway through the landscape and left a severed community in its wake, serves as a backdrop to the story of success-oriented Lightening McQueen and his personal search for meaning.
Traveling to his all-important rendezvous with ultimate “success,” McQueen, a self-absorbed young race car in a hurry, falls off the edge of the world (in this case the interstate) and lands someplace in the Great Southwest. As he tries in vain to merge back into the fast lane, the “every car” learns that there is more to life than getting where you think you want to go.
Somehow he finds the “true, the good, and the beautiful” along the way in a world he never knew existed. We learn that sacrificing tradition, community and respect for human ecology, while tempting in the short term, has a price: spiritual emptiness. The lesson is clear: effeciency over community is a recipe for moral bankruptcy.
Post Script
Allow me a curious coupling and personal disclosure: I have a recurring nightmare that the MSM will expose C-SPAN, another one of my favorites, and Pixar as agents of the vast rightwing conspiracy. The forces of apathy and decadence will realize that the folks at C-SPAN and Pixar are industriously and insidiously embedding traditionalism in mainstream culture, and the offenders “will be dealt with” accordingly. Some of the reviews of Cars make me wonder if the word is not getting out.
I reassure myself with this comforting thought: Brian Lamb and John Lasseter continue to be welcomed into our homes as inoffensive figures working toward positive change and in alliance with us (no matter who we are). Isn’t that a wonderful thought? Perhaps there is hope for the soul of America. Maybe we are a people united in our desperate search for virtue, community and values bigger than ourselves.
Category: America and the World
Posted by: an okie gardener
Ealier I noted in this post that my denomination, the Reformed Church in America, would consider at this summer's General Synod (big meeting) an overture from Queens in support of Taiwan that would urge the US government to recognize Taiwan as an independent nation, not part of "One China." Our denomination has a strong history of support for Taiwan, and has several congregations made up of Taiwanese immigrants.
Yesterday an advisory committee looked at the overture and recommended that we refer the overture to the executive committee to be brought back next year after reflection and rewriting. The reasons given mostly boiled down to one reason: the committee did not want to jeopardize our relationship with Christian churches in China. The arguments on the floor made by our Taiwanese immigrant delegates were heartbreaking in their passion. They do not consider themselves Chinese, but Taiwanese, members of a free, democratic land that has finally thrown off Chinese dictatorship with the demise of the Nationalist Chinese regime that fled the mainland after the loss to the communists. They spoke of the missles aimed at their nation by China. I argued on the floor that we might not have a year; Taiwan needs statements of support now. But, all to no avail: the body voted to follow the committee's advice and to refer the overture. My consolation is that it was clear the denomination as a whole supports a free Taiwan. My distress is that I fear we are making a deal with the devil to maintain our access (very limited as it is) to China.
Yesterday an advisory committee looked at the overture and recommended that we refer the overture to the executive committee to be brought back next year after reflection and rewriting. The reasons given mostly boiled down to one reason: the committee did not want to jeopardize our relationship with Christian churches in China. The arguments on the floor made by our Taiwanese immigrant delegates were heartbreaking in their passion. They do not consider themselves Chinese, but Taiwanese, members of a free, democratic land that has finally thrown off Chinese dictatorship with the demise of the Nationalist Chinese regime that fled the mainland after the loss to the communists. They spoke of the missles aimed at their nation by China. I argued on the floor that we might not have a year; Taiwan needs statements of support now. But, all to no avail: the body voted to follow the committee's advice and to refer the overture. My consolation is that it was clear the denomination as a whole supports a free Taiwan. My distress is that I fear we are making a deal with the devil to maintain our access (very limited as it is) to China.
10/06: Praying for the Enemy
Category: From the Heart
Posted by: an okie gardener
Sometimes Jesus keeps me awake nights. Yesterday morning at General Synod* a person leading prayer prayed for our troops in harm's way, and then added "and we pray for our enemies." Boom. Right between the eyes with a 2x4, which is the way the Lord sometimes must get my attention. Jesus did tell us Christians to pray for our enemies. So, I don't have a choice. If I want to be faithful, I must pray for Osama bin Laden, Saddam Hussein, and the whole miserable rabble of terrorists. I don't remember a word of the rest of the prayer that morning, I was trying to recover from the bomb that had just gone off in my head. (cont.)
09/06: American Islamic Dysfunction
I am a pastor and teacher by vocation and training. While I am not a trained and licensed counselor (pastors such as myself are jacks-of-all-trades), I have learned how to spot people who need help. One of the surest signs of a dysfunctional person or relationship or family or institution is an inability to see and/or acknowledge the truth. "He fired me because he just had it in for me," he said at the end of his fourth job in five years. "Daddy slept on the couch last night because he was tired," she explained to the children the next morning after her husband drank himself into oblivion, again, the night before. "I am not angry at anybody," she asserted, her body a signpost of tension.
Many Americans, and almost all American media have a problem that I am going to call American Islamic Dysfunction. They cannot or will not see and/or acknowledge the truth about Islam today. Two recent examples. From an AP story on the death of al Zarqawi, linked by Drudge
For three years, al-Zarqawi orchestrated horrific acts of violence guided by his extremist vision of jihad, or holy war _ first against the U.S. soldiers he considered occupiers of Arab lands, then against the Shiites he considered infidels.
Notice how violent jihad is described--"his extremist vision"--ignoring both the history of conquest in the name of Islam which has occurred from its very beginnings, and the teachings of authoritative Islamic scholars.
And this example from Jihadwatch, in which the words of a leading feminist were edited by USA today in order to omit her references to Islam. (cont.)
Many Americans, and almost all American media have a problem that I am going to call American Islamic Dysfunction. They cannot or will not see and/or acknowledge the truth about Islam today. Two recent examples. From an AP story on the death of al Zarqawi, linked by Drudge
For three years, al-Zarqawi orchestrated horrific acts of violence guided by his extremist vision of jihad, or holy war _ first against the U.S. soldiers he considered occupiers of Arab lands, then against the Shiites he considered infidels.
Notice how violent jihad is described--"his extremist vision"--ignoring both the history of conquest in the name of Islam which has occurred from its very beginnings, and the teachings of authoritative Islamic scholars.
And this example from Jihadwatch, in which the words of a leading feminist were edited by USA today in order to omit her references to Islam. (cont.)
09/06: Alvin Sams: An American Life
Category: American Lives
Posted by: A Waco Farmer
Note: This essay is the second installment in a series entitled, "American Lives," which spotlights great Americans, famous and anonymous, who have lived exemplary American Lives.
These notes on the passing of a friend were penned a few years ago. Alvin was not a public official, but he embodied service to his community.
“Alvin Sams, 63, died at his home in Lorena on Monday,” read Tuesday’s newspaper. “Services pending at Wilkirson-Hatch-Bailey.” Although I had received the news for the first time via the telephone the evening before (and cried), the stark reality of the newsprint jarred me again. The death of Alvin Sams was a shock. True, Alvin was relatively young—but it was much more than just his age that defied acceptance. He was vigorous. He was full of life. He was Alvin. Of course, death comes to us all at some point. For those of us with a connection to the funeral business, our experience confirms an immutable truth: the circumstances and timing of our demise are as unpredictable as the ultimate outcome is certain. Nevertheless, the loss of Alvin found all of us who knew him unprepared. We assumed (oblivious to the laws of nature) that Alvin would go on forever.
Alvin was a Waco institution. He had a generosity of spirit that came through in every conversation, and people naturally responded to him. Sometimes it seemed as if he knew everyone in town. His roots and worldview were working class. Raised on Bell’s Hill in South Waco, Alvin graduated from University High. Alvin threw the local paper as a youth, worked at a gas station on the Circle as a young man and drove an ambulance during the mid-1960s. He went to work for Wilkirson-Hatch Funeral Home in 1969, and he never left. Over the next thirty-three years, Alvin personified consummate professionalism, but he never lost his common touch. While quite comfortable with (and beloved by) bankers and executives, he reflexively comprehended truck drivers and mechanics. The diversity of mourners, the enormous turnout, and the outpouring of emotion at his own service matched his ample and authentic love for his community.
These notes on the passing of a friend were penned a few years ago. Alvin was not a public official, but he embodied service to his community.
“Alvin Sams, 63, died at his home in Lorena on Monday,” read Tuesday’s newspaper. “Services pending at Wilkirson-Hatch-Bailey.” Although I had received the news for the first time via the telephone the evening before (and cried), the stark reality of the newsprint jarred me again. The death of Alvin Sams was a shock. True, Alvin was relatively young—but it was much more than just his age that defied acceptance. He was vigorous. He was full of life. He was Alvin. Of course, death comes to us all at some point. For those of us with a connection to the funeral business, our experience confirms an immutable truth: the circumstances and timing of our demise are as unpredictable as the ultimate outcome is certain. Nevertheless, the loss of Alvin found all of us who knew him unprepared. We assumed (oblivious to the laws of nature) that Alvin would go on forever.
Alvin was a Waco institution. He had a generosity of spirit that came through in every conversation, and people naturally responded to him. Sometimes it seemed as if he knew everyone in town. His roots and worldview were working class. Raised on Bell’s Hill in South Waco, Alvin graduated from University High. Alvin threw the local paper as a youth, worked at a gas station on the Circle as a young man and drove an ambulance during the mid-1960s. He went to work for Wilkirson-Hatch Funeral Home in 1969, and he never left. Over the next thirty-three years, Alvin personified consummate professionalism, but he never lost his common touch. While quite comfortable with (and beloved by) bankers and executives, he reflexively comprehended truck drivers and mechanics. The diversity of mourners, the enormous turnout, and the outpouring of emotion at his own service matched his ample and authentic love for his community.
09/06: Islamic Tolerance
Category: America and the World
Posted by: an okie gardener
From Jihadwatch this morning, another example of that famous Islamic tolerance toward other religions. Hindu shrines in Malasia, even 100 year-old ones built during British times, are being demolished by official government action as "illegal structures". Commenting on these actions, jihadwatch noted
It says that it [Islamic tolerance] doesn't exist. It says that Muslim authorities are still operating according to the classic provision of the dhimmi laws, that non-Muslims must not build new houses of worship or repair old ones. If they can't get away with that outright because of Constitutional window dressing about freedom of worship, put in no doubt to befuddle easily befuddled Western human rights watchers, then they drag their feet interminably about issuing permits.
"Islamic tolerance," what a crock. If you believe in it I want to talk to you about the Easter Bunny, Santa Claus, and the chaste behavior of Madonna.
It says that it [Islamic tolerance] doesn't exist. It says that Muslim authorities are still operating according to the classic provision of the dhimmi laws, that non-Muslims must not build new houses of worship or repair old ones. If they can't get away with that outright because of Constitutional window dressing about freedom of worship, put in no doubt to befuddle easily befuddled Western human rights watchers, then they drag their feet interminably about issuing permits.
"Islamic tolerance," what a crock. If you believe in it I want to talk to you about the Easter Bunny, Santa Claus, and the chaste behavior of Madonna.
08/06: Christianity and Patriotism
I just came from the opening convocation of the General Synod of the Reformed Church in America. Our worship this evening begin when a small boy carried a lit candle to the front of First Reformed Church, Pella, Iowa, a congregation founded by Dutch immigrants 150 years ago. The candle is a gift to my denomination from the Uniting Refomed Church in South Africa. As the candle, a small flame in a large building, was carried to the front, a little girl sang "This Little Light of Mine." In the telling this story can sound hokey, overly sentimental. I don't think any of us in the crowded sanctuary felt that way. We have had an eventful relationship with our sister Reformed Churches in South Africa; finally, several years ago we confronted as erring brethren those which affirmed apartheid in the name of Christ. Along the way there were those in the Reformed Churches in South Africa who rejected apartheid. Now, the churches in that land are working toward healing themselves and their land, a long and difficult process. The name "Uniting" was chosen intentionally. God is good. While South Africa has experienced turmoil and bloodshed, and continues to have difficulties including criminal violence, apartheid did not come to the end I had assumed that it would--bloody massacre. Instead, the people are moving forward, gradually, coming together. God is good. The light shines.
I love my homeland, the United States of America. I am a patriot. But tonight was a blessed reminder to me that I have higher loyalties--to God and to Christ's Church. My fellow Christians in South Africa and around the world, of whatever race or language, are family. I am closer to them than I am to my non-Christian American neighbors. God is good. The light shines.
I love my homeland, the United States of America. I am a patriot. But tonight was a blessed reminder to me that I have higher loyalties--to God and to Christ's Church. My fellow Christians in South Africa and around the world, of whatever race or language, are family. I am closer to them than I am to my non-Christian American neighbors. God is good. The light shines.
08/06: Today in Iraq
Zarqawi killed; Iraqi government completed:
From the Washington Post:
"BAGHDAD, June 8 --Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the mastermind behind hundreds of bombings, kidnappings and beheadings in Iraq, was killed early Wednesday by an air strike -north of Baghdad, U.S. and Iraqi officials said Thursday."
(The Post story in full.)
And, the Post also reports:
"BAGHDAD, June 8 -- The Iraqi parliament agreed upon candidates to lead the country's three top security ministries Thursday, ending a weeks-long stalemate among the country's largest political factions.
"The selection of an interior minister, a defense minister and a national security adviser gives Iraq a complete government for the first time since elections in December 2005 and it provides a key opportunity to promote political reconciliation between members of the country's Sunni Muslim minority and the Shiite-dominated government."
(The Post story in full.)
What Does it Mean?
The fight continues. Today's confluence of these two major storylines in Iraq reminds us that the resolution of the Iraq struggle is incredibly complex and multi-faceted.
The death of Zarqawi will not precipitate sanguine predictions that the end of the battle is at hand, as the deaths of Uday and Qusay and the capture of Saddam evinced. We are much more hardened by reality now than we were then.
The progress in the formation of civil government will not elicit buoyant claims that the opposition to a peaceful, pluralistic and self-determining Iraqi state is in its "last throes."
Rumsfeld had it right years ago when he said, "we are in for a long hard slog." Our mission in Iraq has been a long and exhausting journey, and we are clearly no where near the end of our campaign.
What today means is that we are relentless. It means that as long as George Bush is President of the United States terrorists are in mortal danger. As long as George Bush is President of the United States our nation is committed to supporting a transformative government in Iraq.
We cannot say for certain today that the projection of US power is an irresistible force, but we can say for certain that the person of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi is not an immovable object.
May God Bless the United States and the people of Iraq.
From the Washington Post:
"BAGHDAD, June 8 --Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the mastermind behind hundreds of bombings, kidnappings and beheadings in Iraq, was killed early Wednesday by an air strike -north of Baghdad, U.S. and Iraqi officials said Thursday."
(The Post story in full.)
And, the Post also reports:
"BAGHDAD, June 8 -- The Iraqi parliament agreed upon candidates to lead the country's three top security ministries Thursday, ending a weeks-long stalemate among the country's largest political factions.
"The selection of an interior minister, a defense minister and a national security adviser gives Iraq a complete government for the first time since elections in December 2005 and it provides a key opportunity to promote political reconciliation between members of the country's Sunni Muslim minority and the Shiite-dominated government."
(The Post story in full.)
What Does it Mean?
The fight continues. Today's confluence of these two major storylines in Iraq reminds us that the resolution of the Iraq struggle is incredibly complex and multi-faceted.
The death of Zarqawi will not precipitate sanguine predictions that the end of the battle is at hand, as the deaths of Uday and Qusay and the capture of Saddam evinced. We are much more hardened by reality now than we were then.
The progress in the formation of civil government will not elicit buoyant claims that the opposition to a peaceful, pluralistic and self-determining Iraqi state is in its "last throes."
Rumsfeld had it right years ago when he said, "we are in for a long hard slog." Our mission in Iraq has been a long and exhausting journey, and we are clearly no where near the end of our campaign.
What today means is that we are relentless. It means that as long as George Bush is President of the United States terrorists are in mortal danger. As long as George Bush is President of the United States our nation is committed to supporting a transformative government in Iraq.
We cannot say for certain today that the projection of US power is an irresistible force, but we can say for certain that the person of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi is not an immovable object.
May God Bless the United States and the people of Iraq.
