Tuesday, January 20, 2009
Today's the Day
... our long national nightmare is over.But maybe not. Because we still have people like this in our country:
I want Obama to fail because his agenda is 100 percent at odds with God's. Pretending it is not simply makes a mockery of God's straightforward Commandments.
That would be the terminally ridiculous Joseph Farah of the equally ridiculous WingNutDaily.
When the rule of men conflicts with the commands of God, the Bible leaves no doubt about where we should stand.
That's why I do not hesitate today in calling on godly Americans to pray that Barack Hussein Obama fail in his efforts to change our country from one anchored on self-governance and constitutional republicanism to one based on the raw and unlimited power of the central state.
It would be folly to pray for his success in such an evil campaign.
Farah wastes a lot of breath on "showing" why the Bible doesn't inveigh believers to pray for our leaders but strangely neglects to give biblical support for the notion that God has ordered governments anchored on self-governance and constitutional republicanism. He even notes that "render unto Caesar" does not apply because "in America we don't have a Caesar," skipping over the fact that Jesus apparently didn't think a Caesar was such a bad thing.
But the real lunacy is Farah's painting of Obama as "evil." It can't just be that there is a difference in opinion about how government should be run; it has to be a struggle of good versus evil, God against Satan and his minions. And he's not, unfortunately, alone in this. I was no fan of George Bush but I never thought he was evil. Stupid, yes, but not evil. His stupidity resulted in policies that led to evil results but the man, for all his faults, and they were rampant, wanted to do what he thought best for the country. Too many on the left would do as Farah wants to do, though perhaps without the biblical trappings.
It's time that we as a nation learn that our political opponents are not the personification of evil. They are, almost to a person, decent people whose opinions simply differ from our own and who, if we both expend a little effort, we can compromise with on some issues and agree to disagree with on others.
It's time for a change.
_____________________________
Via Primordial Blog
.
But the real lunacy is Farah's painting of Obama as "evil." It can't just be that there is a difference in opinion about how government should be run; it has to be a struggle of good versus evil, God against Satan and his minions. And he's not, unfortunately, alone in this. I was no fan of George Bush but I never thought he was evil. Stupid, yes, but not evil. His stupidity resulted in policies that led to evil results but the man, for all his faults, and they were rampant, wanted to do what he thought best for the country. Too many on the left would do as Farah wants to do, though perhaps without the biblical trappings.
It's time that we as a nation learn that our political opponents are not the personification of evil. They are, almost to a person, decent people whose opinions simply differ from our own and who, if we both expend a little effort, we can compromise with on some issues and agree to disagree with on others.
It's time for a change.
_____________________________
Via Primordial Blog
.
Comments:
<< Home
It is often forgotten that Nebakanezer was God’s choice to be leader of a nation too. I’m pretty sure he wasn’t a Republican.
# posted by 
: 9:55 AM
: 9:55 AM
"our political opponents are not the personification of evil"
You're right of course, but I've learned the hard way that if you want to communicate anything at all to these people, you have to speak in their language. The word "evil" has associations they understand.
You're right of course, but I've learned the hard way that if you want to communicate anything at all to these people, you have to speak in their language. The word "evil" has associations they understand.
# posted by : 5:37 PM
: 5:37 PM
The word "evil" has associations they understand.
I know. And I understand the impulse to try to "fight fire with fire." But, ultimately, I think the best way to deal with such people is to marginalize them. And the best way to do that -- the way Obama has begun on -- is to elevate our own rhetoric. To the majority of people who are not invested in either extreme of the political spectrum, hearing the heated words from both sides implies an equivalence of validity. I don't think that the past 40 years has truly seen the term "liberal" become a word of derision so much as "right wing" has become acceptable -- even praiseworthy -- where once it was reserved for the John Birch Society or the KKK. To return Farah and his ilk to the wingnut status they so richly deserve, the left has to restore the tone of reason and willingness to listen to the opinion of others that it lost, at least in the perception of the majority, in the 60s.
I know. And I understand the impulse to try to "fight fire with fire." But, ultimately, I think the best way to deal with such people is to marginalize them. And the best way to do that -- the way Obama has begun on -- is to elevate our own rhetoric. To the majority of people who are not invested in either extreme of the political spectrum, hearing the heated words from both sides implies an equivalence of validity. I don't think that the past 40 years has truly seen the term "liberal" become a word of derision so much as "right wing" has become acceptable -- even praiseworthy -- where once it was reserved for the John Birch Society or the KKK. To return Farah and his ilk to the wingnut status they so richly deserve, the left has to restore the tone of reason and willingness to listen to the opinion of others that it lost, at least in the perception of the majority, in the 60s.
But, ultimately, I think the best way to deal with such people is to marginalize them.
Or, you can look them straight in the eye and say ***thblpblpblpblpblpblp***
Or, you can look them straight in the eye and say ***thblpblpblpblpblpblp***
# posted by : 11:15 PM
: 11:15 PM
"And the best way to do that -- the way Obama has begun on -- is to elevate our own rhetoric."
Oh, I agree that Obama, as head of state, must communicate that way. But I was referring to one-on-one or dinner table communication. I've noticed that labeling a politician as "corrupt" or "wrong" just doesn't carry any weight with them. But using the word "evil" gets their attention, for some reason.
Post a Comment
Oh, I agree that Obama, as head of state, must communicate that way. But I was referring to one-on-one or dinner table communication. I've noticed that labeling a politician as "corrupt" or "wrong" just doesn't carry any weight with them. But using the word "evil" gets their attention, for some reason.
# posted by : 1:41 PM
: 1:41 PM << Home
