Generally, I do not like to talk about politics on Sunday. But while catching up on reading, deleting, or saving the 430 emails currently sitting in my mailbox, two articles caught my attention this morning.
The first was from Real Clear Politics about the bickering going on between Romney and McCain.
Second, was this article about Mike Huckabee, written by Doug Giles from TownHall. Giles has his own opinion about Huckabee and a fierce battle between those who agree and disagree with his assertions can be found in the comments!
I know. This happens every year. But for some reason, the verbal assaults and attacks seem much more virulent and vile this year. Does this election cycle seem more bitter, hostile and malicious to any of you out there reading this blog?
I hate this. I really hate the attack ads and bickering and spinning and accusations and misrepresentations that people throw out there because they don't like a particular candidate. How are we to find out the real truth about each candidate's record when there is so much misinformation being spewed out there?
Answer: We must do our own homework. We must cut through the spin and discover the real truth. Can these answers be found by reading each candidate's website? Perhaps there isn't as much BS (a.k.a. bickering and spinning) there?
Ugh. It has only just started and I'm sick of it all already!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
17 comments:
I know what you mean re. this kind of bickering. It also makes it difficult for those of us who are trying to help people see the growing amount of crud coming into the Aerican Christian Church.
And thank you for the new link. If we can be of further service you know where we are. The Lord be praised!
Pastor Ken Silva
President
Apprising Ministries
http://apprising.org/
Ezekiel 3:7-14
General Editor
Christian Research Net
http://christianresearchnetwork.com
2 Corinthians 11:12-15
A great resource is:
ontheissues.org
Objective collection of statements/voting record on all the issues.
I think the population in general is tired of the bickering, that is one reason why I find Ron Paul so refreshing and I think part of the reason he continues to rise in the polls win supporters among the previously apathetic population.
I don't know why it bugs me so much, but tonight I'm bugged. If you're mud slinging, then you're saying something that isn't true. Everything in those 'attack' adds up in Iowa is something Huckabee actually did as Governor. The adds are not smearing his character. Mitt Romney is not going after Huck on the easy stuff like accepting double his governor's salary worth in gifts while in office. He's sticking to the issues.
Mike Huckabee - did you grant 1033 commutations and pardons during your time as governor? If not, what is the actual number of commutations and pardons?
Mike Huckabee - did the Arkansas budget go from 6 billion dollars to 16 billion dollars during your time as governor? If not, what is that actual dollar amount your budget increased during your time as governor?
Mike Huckabee - did you lessen the mandatory sentences for meth dealers, or increase the sentences for meth dealers? Give me some specifics.
Calling Mitt dishonest is a personal attack on Mitt, and doesn't address any of the facts.
And of course I'm referring to Huckabee. I'm not accusing anyone at this blog of making a personal attack on Romney.
While I agree that the "attack ads" and dialog do seem to be more vile so far this year, especially regarding religion, I do think that it is a necessary evil. Attacks simply point out inaccuracies in voting records vs the statements a candidate makes. On the other hand, false statements made in the ads (often the case) merely hurt the candidate playing the ad.
I also think it makes this little game we play more interesting. Makes me miss the childish behavior we could get away with in grade school ;-)
Dear Pastor Ken,
Thanks for coming to my blog and posting your comment. I went to the Christian Research site yesterday afternoon and noticed that there is a post about the ReThink Conference. Wanted to comment there, but I could not find any comment box. Perhaps the site's purpose doesn't include allowing comments?
[Note: The following is off topic (just to alert readers here) for this particular blog post, but I wanted to share the following with Pastor Ken.]
When I saw your post of concern about the ReThink Conference, I wanted to write that I have become so disappointed in the direction that our last church is going in (e.g. the pastor met with Joel Osteen!!!).
Our family moved on from that church. We had, occasionally, been visiting The Rock Church. However, when I recently found out that Pastor Miles MacPherson is participating in that ReThink conference, I was VERY upset.
We had been visiting his new church a few times since it opened. To be honest, I think it has lost something. The concert/theatre atmosphere takes away from the intimacy of worship.
My son and I visited a local church (where I have attended Bible studies in the past) just last evening and the service was warm, worshipful, intimate, inviting, and most important of all, Jesus and redemption- through-the-cross centered. It was like slipping into a warm bath...spiritually speaking, of course. We both felt that we want our entire family to make this church our new church home.
Our former church home (where we attended and served for over 10 years!) went astray (IMHO) shortly after the movie "The Passion of the Christ" came out. The main culprit (IMHO) was that our pastor slipped into the emergent church movement of Rick Warren after we did a study of The Purpose Driven Life book. If you have time, you can read about my experience with that in the first link here:
1. More Rick Warren Bad News
The other blog post links listed below demonstrate how, as time went on, I realized why the Holy Spirit "woke me up" at that first PDL leaders meeting when Warren's prayer to "accept Jesus" didn't include the need to confess sin and repent. More and more I see his "movement" as headed towards a cross-less gospel.
2. Many Now Recognizing the Heresy of Warren
3. The Most Important Question Answered
4. The Cain Method
5. Make Your Own Jesus
I am looking forward to visiting the Apprising Ministries site that you posted in your comment.
Thanks again!
In Christ,
Christine
Hi David,
Thanks so much for that link! I read through Huckabee's record there, glanced at McCain's and plan to read the others when I get some extra time.
The big reason why I can't agree with you that Ron Paul would make the best GOP candidate is because of his very negative attitude about the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan. His "it's all the United States fault" that we are battling the culprits in the global War on Terror is one of his most disagreeable traits. He seems to be quite uninformed, naive, and unaware of the dangerous reality of the situation.
I would suggest viewing the documentary film Obsession: Radical Islam's War Against the West. I would also suggest visiting Jihad Watch.
It is quite naive (IMO) to believe that if we "just left them alone" and didn't "meddle with the Middle East problems and conflicts" that the terrorists would pack up their weapons and take off their suicide bomb belts and leave us alone.
Now, with the crisis in Pakistan after the assassination of Bhutto, the threat of Al Qaeda getting their hands on the nuclear weapons in that country should be a deep concern.
I haven't read what Paul thinks about the situation (yet), however, he still made the ignorant statement that hints "it's all Bush's fault." He appears to have much more in common with the anti-war Democrats than the GOP.
Hi Big Jay,
Can you share links to show evidence of your accusations against Huckabee? Also, the budget increase may have been necessary for the state. Wasn't Arkansas suffering after Clinton left it in a shambles?
What was the former mandatory sentence time for meth dealers before it was changed? Are there any other details that we need to be made aware of?
Hi DB,
I was thinking the same thing! It all seems so childish!!
I'm embarrassed by my fellow "Boomer" generation candidates who have chosen to run for the highest office in the land...if not the world!!
I just wish it could all be much more dignified.
Big Jay,
Be sure to read The Profession of Death over at Jihad Watch.
Another very important site to see is War on Jihad.
christinewjc-
Yes, I think it's a great resource.
We're both entitled to our opinions of course about the candidates but in defense of Mr. Paul- his stance on the war is not quite as you related it. He does believe the war in Iraq was wrong (and he believed it from the beginning) but he does not believe it is as simple as 'leaving them alone hoping they will put down their weapons'.
It is nearly impossible to disagree with him that our occupation of Iraq has created more terrorists and fueled the fire above and beyond if we continued to simply pursue the isolated cells of jihadists who really have it out for the West. I think anyone who is informed about the middle east, including the Jihadists themselves, will also agree with Mr. Paul that a lot of the tension is rooted in the U.S. foreign policy regarding Israel and Palestine. I find it insightful that so many of our returned servicemen support Ron Paul. I have also seen a number of blog posts by Muslims in the middle east who are very much in favor of Ron Paul. He is for diplomacy and trade and cooperation not invasion, occupation, and empire building. Being an international studies guy myself I think Mr. Paul might be the most informed in terms of how the people actually think, understanding root causes and not focused simply on policy bandaids.
As far as being anti-war, I am always surprised how strongly conservative Christians appear to be pro-war. I cannot imagine Christ endorsing a strong military-industrial complex. We have the render under Caesar and throwing the money changers out but in terms of dealing with hostile individuals Christ's example and teaching was the furtherest thing from returning eye for eye and being the aggressor. When it turns the corner from defending our families and our liberties to aggressive warmongering I believe we have left the ground of morally justified war. Whether people believe we have turned that corner is debatable but considering Bush's approval rating and national polls about the war, I don't think it's valid to say Mr. Paul is exclusively in the camp anti-war democrats.
There are better more creative ways of creating a secure and peaceful world than invading and occupying hostile countries.
David,
Oops...that last comment that I mistakenly addressed to "Big Jay" was meant for you! (Sorry!)
Anyway, did you view the Obsession film trailer at the link I gave? Did you read anything at Jihad Watch? Did you read the article "The Profession of Death" or see the website called "War on Jihad?"
They may not change your mind about things; but perhaps you will understand why I see what Paul professes regarding the war against terrorism as naive. He may not be considered by you as bad as the Dems, but I think that he suffers from a similar "peace is the way" fantasy world worldview.
Here is an excerpt from the article "The Profession of Death" that I think supports my views while revealing Paul's inadequacy in foreign policy issues:
This is a true story. Back in 1946, an American diplomat asked an Iranian editor why his newspaper angrily criticized the United States but never the Soviet Union. The Iranian said that it was obvious. "The Russians," he said, "they kill people."
A dozen years earlier, in 1933, the Iraqi official Sami Shawkat, gave a talk which became one of the most famous texts of Arab nationalism. "There is something more important than money and learning for preserving the honor of a nation and for keeping humiliation at bay," he stated. "That is strength....Strength, as I use the word here, means to excel in the Profession of Death."
What, you might ask, was Shawkat's own profession? He was director-general of Iraq's ministry of education. This was how young people were to be taught and directed; this is where Saddam Hussein came from. Seventy-five years later the subsequent history of Iraq and the rest of the Arab world show just how well Shawkat did his job.
September 11 in the United States; the Bali bombing for Australia; the tube bombing for Britain; the commuter train bombing for Spain, these were all merely byproducts of this pathology. The pathology in question is not Western policy toward the Middle East but rather Middle Eastern policy toward the Middle East.
Ever since I read Shawkat's words as a student, the phrase, "Profession of Death," which gave his article its title, struck me as a pun. On one hand, the word "profession" meant "career."
To be a killer--note well that Shawkat was not talking specifically about soldiers, those who fight, but rather those who murder--was the highest calling of all. It was more important than being a teacher, who forms character; more important than a businessperson, who enriches his country; more important than a doctor who preserves the life of fellow citizens. Destruction was a higher calling than construction. And for sure in the Arabic-speaking world what has been reaped is what has been sowed.
But also the word "profession" here reminds me of "to profess," "to preach." What is of greatest value is for an educator to preach and glorify death. What kind of ideology, what kind of society, what kind of values, does such a priority produce? Look and see.
Like children playing with dynamite, Western intellectuals, journalists, and diplomats fantasize that they are achieving results in the Middle East with their words, promises, apologies, money, and concessions. Yet how can such innocents cope despite--or perhaps because of--all their good intentions with polities and societies whose basic ruling ethos is that of the serial killer?
We can see the naivete' of Paul (and, of course, the Dems) when we read the following:
Don't you get it? The radical forces in the region are not expecting to retain or gain power by negotiating, compromising, or being better understood. They believe they are going to shoot their way into power or, just as good, accept the surrender of those they have intimidated.
That is why so much of the Western analysis and strategies for dealing with the region are a bad joke. Usama bin Ladin understands that, as he once said, people are going to back the strongest horse in the race.
According to all too many people in the Western elites, the way to win is to be the nicest horse.
But doesn't this assessment sound terribly depressing and hopeless? Well, yes and no.
Radical Islamists like to proclaim that they will triumph because they love death while their enemies--that is, soon-to-be-victims--love life.
Be careful what you wish for, though, because you probably will get it. For those who love death the reward is...death.
For those who love life, the outcomes include decent educational systems, living standards, individual rights, and strong economic systems.
All these things, and others that go along with them, are what really produce strength. And isn't it interesting that, contrary to Shawkat, the nations that put the priority on these things enjoy far more honor and suffer far less humiliation than happens with his model.
The profession of death has wrecked most Middle Eastern societies. But it has never succeeded in defeating a free society. It is not an effective tactic for destroying others but only for devastating one's own people.
I almost copied the whole article. But the important point (above, in bold) is what I think that Paul is missing in his analysis regarding the war on terror.
No matter what anyone thinks of the war in Iraq, the truth is that it, like many Muslim countries under dictatorship rule, will not be reformed until they are free people! This takes time and hard work. The current success in Iraq is being downplayed by the media because they hate Bush so much.
Yes, thank you for the links. I personally do not find them reputable or balanced reporting. I believe they are just an inflammatory as the U.S. media out to get Bush. The Jihadists threat is real and dangerous. Many of the countries are ruled by dangerous dictators who do not act in the best interest of their countrymen. It is not the role of the U.S. to be the playground cop. Their are ways to inspire and support change outside of foreign military occupation that also do not translate into being the 'nicest horse' in the race.
David,
The "Obsession" movie is actual video footage of radical Muslim clerics spewing hate and jihad against all infidels; especially the U.S. and Israel.
I shows actual video footage (and connections) between Hitler and the Mufti back in the 40's. It shows the connection between Nazi ideology and the radical Muslim terrorist agenda.
It shows actual video footage of young children being brainwashed (more like brain-dirtied in madrassas and schools. They are shown propaganda films to send them into a state of jihadist frenzy! The video of a 7 year old girl screaming and crying "jihadi" while shaking her fist over and over again is absolutely bone chilling.
I haven't even touched upon the awfulness of what the terrorists have been videotaped doing and saying.
If actual video footage of this sort doesn't count as "reputable or balanced reporting" to you, then NOTHING that I or anyone else could say would EVER change your mind about your political ideology. It appears that your mind is set in stone. How unfortunate for you.
I am not denying the threat of these radical extremists or the urgency of response. I simply believe the U.S. foreign policy over the last five years has only increased the attendance at the rallies so depicted. I believe the editing of the video and the language of the websites show typical propaganda patterns to inspire fear not knowledge.
So, yes, while a movie like Obsession is real, I think viewing it alongside other materials such as the film Paradise Now, or Three Cups of Tea, and even Jesus Camp, puts the film in a broader context that will lead to a fuller understanding and ultimately better policy decisions.
The Jesus Camp documentary? What in the world would that movie have to do with radical Islam? Apples and Oranges, my friend.
Anyway, if you can afford the $5.00fee at the "Obsession" website, then you could view the film. I think that you would then have a much better understanding about what the movie is about. It's not meant as propaganda. It is an honest film that depicts the history, methods, leaders intentions and the true radicalism that drives militant Islam. The movie insists that this issue is separate from moderate Muslims.
To whom it may concern:
I see here that many agree on the fact that we need to research the people who are running for this important office of President of the USA, and this is very good.
However; I met with some bitter anxst as I sent info to my friends that was very important concerning Mike Huckabee. It came from valid sources and was in the form of links that you can read for yourself rather than my interpretation of what they said.
I got what for after sending them. Some people seem to say one thing and yet do another. At any rate what was said and how it was said really did hurt though I had done it innocently.
What we do with our votes this year is more important than in past years. We can gain or lose America.
Post a Comment