AmeriCAN-DO Attitude

Are you an AmeriCAN or an AmeriCAN'T?

Monday Morning Meaningless, Meandering, Mindless Mumblings

* I can’t even express in words how much I miss getting up to go to work on a Monday morning.  I feel so useless.

* I was only able to take a vacation once during the nine years that I held a steady, successful job, because I didn’t have the savings built up to take a vacation and I didn’t have but a few days vacation from work each year as part of my benefits.  But now that I have had the past 8 weeks of no work, I can’t get myself to take a vacation, because I am too stressed out about not working.  And about the realization that I go broke by the end of May and may foreclose on my house then too, if I don’t get another job by then.

* It’s amazing to think that 9 weeks ago, my life looked to be getting back on track this year — with getting out of debt, getting back in shape, getting to make some improvements on my house and looking to improve at my job with more opportunities to learn, grow and expand my talents.  And then WHAM!  Now here I sit, 3 months from going broke and my credit being ruined, losing my house and still unemployed with no prospects in sight.  Life can certainly turn on a dime.

* There was actually a good believer-atheist discussion at HotAir the other day.  Though one thing has stuck with me from the discussion.  AllahPundit mentioned that he had to end a relationship with a former friend over her Christian belief in non-believers going to Hell.  Another commenter had the same thought I did in that it sounded like the Seinfeld episode where Elaine yells at Puddy for his religious belief that Elaine is going to Hell, because she is not religious.  She screams at him that he “should *care* that I am going to Hell, even though I am *not*!”  I got to thinking about this more today and I really don’t know what AllahPundit expected of his friend.  Believers seem to be in a no-win situation with Atheists.   Atheists can make fun of believers for their beliefs, and then criticize believers if they return the favor, saying that they are not being Christian.  Atheists can also claim annoyance with believers when they try to “save” them from Hell, by trying to convert them to being a believer.  The Atheist will ask why the believer cannot just respect the Atheist’s freedom to choose not to believe and leave them the hell alone.  BUT… when the believer decides to do that to respect their Atheist friend’s wishes, the Atheist turns around and admonishes the believer for being content with the belief that the Atheist is going to Hell.  So it’s a no-win situation for believers when it comes to Atheists.  A believer will get grief for trying to “save” an Atheist and be called a Bible-thumping bully who’s trying to shove their beliefs onto others.  But then if they decide not to do that, the Atheist will then turn around and call them unfeeling bastards for being content knowing their Atheist friends are going to Hell.  I can sortof understand AllahPundit’s problem with his former friend’s beliefs, but, honestly, what did he expect her to do?  She can’t win with him.  And, ironically, in the end, he was the one who ended the relationship over religious beliefs.

* The more I go on without a job and without something to keep me busy and keep me feeling useful, the more down and depressed I get.  And the more I keep up with current events and politics, the even *more* down and depressed I get.  It seems like every day there is something coming from government which makes the future seem more and more and more bleak and hopeless.  So much for “hope” and “change”.

* I used to be a person who believed that hard work, a good positive attitude and being a person of honesty and integrity would equal success in this world.  The past 3 months have taught me that I was horribly, horribly wrong.  Liars, cheaters, the corrupt and the well-connected are the ones who succeed.  The last 3 months have taught me that life is not fair.  I should have known this already, but I was naive and an optimist.  No longer.

* Speaking of life not being fair, why are the three grandparents who were the best people, and whom I loved the most, all taken from this life already, while my mean, bigoted grandmother is still alive and kicking years after the others passed on?  To remind me of whom I never want to be?  Why couldn’t God leave a daily reminder of whom I always want to be?  Grandpa Yore, Grandpa Gobat, Grandma Gobat… I miss you.  So much.

* I can’t believe that our society considers Jessica Simpson “fat” or “packing on the pounds”, as I have seen stated on numerous “entertainment/gossip” sites and blogs.  The woman was hot before, but was also ridiculously thin.  Now that she has gained a little weight, she has more curves, looks more healthy and still looks *damn hot*.  It is pretty damn sad when society looks at a woman as good looking — and seemingly a good, decent person — as Jessica Simpson and deems her worthy of ridicule and scorn.

* I have DVRd the Disney movie Ratatouie and I watch it whenever I feel like relaxing and don’t find anything interesting to watch on regular TV.  As a result, I think I have watched that movie about 50 times in the last 2 months.  Great, cute movie.  I enjoy it every time I watch it.

*I miss the comaraderie of my coworkers — at both my former places of employment.  I was so lucky and blessed to have worked with such good people and I don’t think any of them know how much I enjoyed working with them and how much I miss them.

* I miss the comaraderie of the guys on my softball teams.  I can’t wait for it to start up again in May.   I just hope I am able to have the means to play again.  If I don’t have a job by then, I may have played my last games with those great groups of guys.

* I so miss the companionship of a woman.  Just simple things.  Her smile hello.  Hug hello.  Holding hands.  A nice dinner out together, talking and sharing and continuously learning about one another.  I miss kissing.  I *so* miss kissing.  Not just the physical part of it but the emotional connection that comes with the intimacy of the kiss.  The first kiss.   The anticipation leading up to the next kiss.  And then that first passionate makeout session.  And the anticipation leading up to the next makeout session.  Cuddling watching movies.  Holding hands in the car.  Holding hands in the movie theater.  Falling asleep together.  Waking up together.  I miss it all.  And my eyes water, and I sometimes cry, once a day realizing that I may never experience it again.

* I wonder if I would truly go mad if I didn’t have my cats to keep me company and give me someone (er something) to take care of.  They both have their own personalities and they both show their affection for me in their own ways.  It’s not much, and it’s not human contact, but I think it is all that keeps me going sometimes.  To be able to care for them and allow them to care for me in their little cat ways.  Now that I think about it, that’s cute, but really sad and pathetic.

* Purdue plays Michigan State tomorrow night at Mackey Arena.  If they win, they have a shot to win the Big Ten.  If they lose, it’s all over.  I’d like to get excited about the game, but whenever I do that, my teams let me down.  So I’ll probably just skip the game, assume they will lose and then leave myself open to be happily surprised if they win.

Well, that’s enough meaningless, meandering, mindless mumblings for now.

February 16, 2009 , 11:46AM Posted by | Christianity, Life, Relationships, Romance | 4 Comments

If God is Not for Us and Against White People, Then He is a Murderer…

Once again, Don Imus and “nappy headed hos” is deemed worthy of denunciation and calling for his firing, because it is offensive to Barry’s daughters.  But, this Black Liberation Theology is just fine and dandy!  Give me a break.

The peculiar theology of black liberation
By Spengler

Senator Barack Obama is not a Muslim, contrary to invidious rumors. But he belongs to a Christian church whose doctrine casts Jesus Christ as a “black messiah” and blacks as “the chosen people”. At best, this is a radically different kind of Christianity than most Americans acknowledge; at worst it is an ethnocentric heresy.

What played out last week on America’s television screens was a clash of two irreconcilable cultures, the posture of “black liberation theology” and the mainstream American understanding of Christianity. Obama, who presented himself as a unifying figure, now seems rather the living embodiment of the clash…


One of the strangest dialogues in American political history ensued on March 15 when Fox News interviewed Obama’s pastor, the Reverend Jeremiah Wright, of Chicago’s Trinity Church. Wright asserted the authority of the “black liberation” theologians James Cone and Dwight Hopkins:

Wright: How many of Cone’s books have you read? How many of Cone’s book have you read?

Sean Hannity: Reverend, Reverend?


Wright: How many books of Cone’s have you head?

Hannity: I’m going to ask you this question …

Wright: How many books of Dwight Hopkins have you read?

Hannity: You’re very angry and defensive. I’m just trying to ask a question here.

Wright: You haven’t answered – you haven’t answered my question.

Hopkins is a full professor at the University of Chicago’s Divinity School; Cone is now distinguished professor at New York’s Union Theological Seminary. They promote a “black power” reading of Christianity, to which liberal academic establishment condescends.

Obama referred to this when he asserted in a March 14 statement, “I knew Reverend Wright as someone who served this nation with honor as a United States Marine, as a respected biblical scholar, and as someone who taught or lectured at seminaries across the country, from Union Theological Seminary to the University of Chicago.” But the fact the liberal academy condescends to sponsor black liberation theology does not make it less peculiar to mainstream American Christians. Obama wants to talk about what Wright is, rather than what he says. But that way lies apolitical quicksand.

Since Christianity taught the concept of divine election to the Gentiles, every recalcitrant tribe in Christendom has rebelled against Christian universalism, insisting that it is the “Chosen People” of God – French, English, Russian, Germans and even (through the peculiar doctrine of Mormonism) certain Americans. America remains the only really Christian country in the industrial world, precisely because it transcends ethnicity. One finds ethnocentricity only in odd corners of its religious life; one of these is African-American.

During the black-power heyday of the late 1960s, after the murder of the Reverend Martin Luther King Jr, the mentors of Wright decided that blacks were the Chosen People. James Cone, the most prominent theologian in the “black liberation” school, teaches that Jesus Christ himself is black. As he explains:

Christ is black therefore not because of some cultural or psychological need of black people, but because and only because Christ really enters into our world where the poor were despised and the black are, disclosing that he is with them enduring humiliation and pain and transforming oppressed slaves into liberating servants.

Theologically, Cone’s argument is as silly as the “Aryan Christianity” popular in Nazi Germany, which claimed that Jesus was not a Jew at all but an Aryan Galilean, and that the Aryan race was the “chosen people”. Cone, Hopkins and Wright do not propose, of course, to put non-blacks in concentration camps or to conquer the world, but racially-based theology nonetheless is a greased chute to the nether regions.

Biblical theology teaches that even the most terrible events to befall Israel, such as the Babylonian destruction of Jerusalem in 586 BCE, embody the workings of divine justice, even if humankind cannot see God’s purpose. James Cone sees the matter very differently. Either God must do what we want him to do, or we must reject him, Cone maintains:

Black theology refuses to accept a God who is not identified totally with the goals of the black community. If God is not for us and against white people, then he is a murderer, and we had better kill him. The task of black theology is to kill Gods who do not belong to the black community … Black theology will accept only the love of God which participates in the destruction of the white enemy. What we need is the divine love as expressed in Black Power, which is the power of black people to destroy their oppressors here and now by any means at their disposal. Unless God is participating in this holy activity, we must reject his love. [1]

In the black liberation theology taught by Wright, Cone and Hopkins, Jesus Christ is not for all men, but only for the oppressed:

In the New Testament, Jesus is not for all, but for the oppressed, the poor and unwanted of society, and against oppressors … Either God is for black people in their fight for liberation and against the white oppressors, or he is not [Cone].

In this respect black liberation theology is identical in content to all the ethnocentric heresies that preceded it. Christianity has no use for the nations, a “drop of the bucket” and “dust on the scales”, in the words of Isaiah. It requires that individuals turn their back on their ethnicity to be reborn into Israel in the spirit. That is much easier for Americans than for the citizens of other nations, for Americans have no ethnicity. But the tribes of the world do not want to abandon their Gentile nature and as individuals join the New Israel. Instead they demand eternal life in their own Gentile flesh, that is, to be the “Chosen People”.

That is the “biblical scholarship” to which Obama referred in his March 14 defense of Wright and his academic prominence. In his response to Hannity, Wright genuinely seemed to believe that the authority of Cone and Hopkins, who now hold important posts at liberal theological seminaries, was sufficient to make the issue go away. His faith in the white establishment is touching; he honestly cannot understand why the white reporters at Fox News are bothering him when the University of Chicago and the Union Theological Seminary have put their stamp of approval on black liberation theology.

Many things that the liberal academy has adopted, though, will horrify most Americans, and not only “black liberation theology” (Queer Studies comes to mind, among other things). It cannot be in Obama’s best interests to appeal to the authority of Cone, whose unapologetic racism must be repugnant to the great majority of Americans, including the majority of black Americans, who for the most part belong to Christian churches that preach mainstream Christian doctrine. Christianity teaches unconditional love for a God whose love for humankind is absolute; it does not teach the repudiation of a God who does not destroy our enemies on the spot.

Whether Obama takes seriously the doctrines that Wright preaches is another matter. It is possible that Obama does not believe a word of what Wright, Cone and Hopkins teach. Perhaps he merely used the Trinity United Church of Christ as a political stepping-stone. African-American political life is centered around churches, and his election to the Illinois State Senate with the support of Chicago’s black political machine required church membership. Trinity United happens to be Chicago’s largest and most politically active black church.

Obama views Wright rather at arm’s length: as the New York Times reported on April 30, 2007:

Reverend Wright is a child of the 60s, and he often expresses himself in that language of concern with institutional racism and the struggles the African-American community has gone through,” Mr Obama said. “He analyzes public events in the context of race. I tend to look at them through the context of social justice and inequality.

Obama holds his own views close. But it seems unlikely that he would identify with the ideological fits of the black-power movement of the 1960s. Obama does not come to the matter with the perspective of an American black, but of the child of a left-wing anthropologist raised in the Third World, as I wrote elsewhere (Obama’s women reveal his secret , Asia Times Online, February 26, 2008). It is possible that because of the Wright affair Obama will suffer for what he pretended to be, rather than for what he really is.

1. See William R Jones, “Divine Racism: The Unacknowledged Threshold Issue for Black Theology”, in African-American Religious Thought: An Anthology, ed Cornel West and Eddie Glaube (Westminster John Knox Press).

(Copyright 2008 Asia Times Online Ltd. All rights reserved. Please contact us about sales, syndication and republishing.)

March 18, 2008 , 11:25AM Posted by | Barack Obama, Black Liberation Theology, Christianity, Dr James H Cone, Reverend Dr Jeremiah Wright, Trinity United Church of Christ | Comments Off on If God is Not for Us and Against White People, Then He is a Murderer…

Obama’s Christianity is really “Spirituality by Oprah”

Great post by Tim Graham at Newsbusters: Obama’s Faith: ’Complex,’ or Just Calculated?

[ … ]  Arroyo suggested that people read an interview that Obama gave to Cathleen Falsani of the Chicago Sun-Times in 2004. He said what they would find is that Obama really doesn’t believe that Christians have to enter a narrow gate to enter Heaven. He said Obama’s touting “spirituality by Oprah,” which would make sense, since Oprah’s one of his biggest fans.

Obama said “I’m rooted in the Christian tradition,” but immediately added, “I believe that there are many paths to the same place.”  Obama told Falsani doesn’t believe he, or anyone else, will go to Hell. But he wasn’t sure if he’ll be going to Heaven, either. “I don’t presume to have knowledge of what happens after I die.”

Arroyo found that answer disturbing. “There’s no objective truth in the universe, or in my personal belief?” In essence, Obama’s answers suggest political calculation more than a confession of faith. I’m a Christian (that’s where the voters are), but I’m not sure Christianity is the only path to Heaven (since I don’t want to upset voters of any other faith).

But Falsani was delighted, still touting his “complex” faith in 2007, when he would not offer a simple answer to the question whether he was an evangelical. She thought his answer was the opposite of calculating. But if you’re sitting around with a bunch of liberal journalists, isn’t it politically smarter not to have simple, declarative answers on religion, but to announce your doubts and confusions? They certainly loathe the “certitude” of a believer like President Bush.

If Falsani’s name seems familiar, there’s a reason. She also declared in 2007 that she cheered the death of Jerry Falwell:

In fact, my very first thought upon hearing of the Rev. Falwell’s passing was: Good.

And I didn’t mean “good” in a oh-good-he’s-gone-home-to-be-with-the-Lord kind of way. I meant “good” as in “Ding-dong, the witch is dead.”

But that thought — good riddance, I suppose — was not meant to be cruel or malicious. After all, the faith that the Rev. Falwell and I share teaches us that he was, at that moment, in a far better place, with Jesus in heaven, and not roasting on a spit in Hell’s kitchen.

By shrugging off his mortal coil, the Rev. Falwell had ceased to suffer the pain of humanity.

Still, I’m not particularly proud of my knee-jerk reaction. But there it is.

If this person is impressed and delighted by the “deep faith” of Obama, is it really impressive?

This also goes to show that, at their core, Leftists are simply mean, hateful people.  They claim to be “Christian”, but then cheer the deaths of their ideological ’enemies’.  Nice.Also, do you notice that pretty much all of the people who are associated with Barack Obama or admirers of him are all mean, angry, hateful Leftists?  I guess this is what they mean by “hope” and “change”.  They want to change America to a nation of mean, angry, hateful people.  Well, mean, angry and hateful towards their domestic ideological ’enemies’, but nice towards our actual foreign enemies.  Brilliant.

March 16, 2008 , 2:21PM Posted by | Barack Obama, Christianity, Liberalism, Oprah Winfrey, Reverend Jerry Falwell | Comments Off on Obama’s Christianity is really “Spirituality by Oprah”

An Evangelical’s Reason for NOT Supporting Mike Huckabee

Despite the mantra of the mass media, some political pundits and some bloggers, the evangelicals are not a voting bloc which votes blindly to support a certain political party or person. While I don’t support Mike Huckabee at all, I was a bit annoyed by all the “Iowans are idiots” or “Evangelicals are morons” talk coming out of Mike Huckabee’s win in the Iowa caucus and his rise to frontrunner status in the national polls among Republicans. Unfortunately, our society likes to do this: denigrate an entire group of people based on the actions of a few.

There was only a small percentage of Iowans who even bothered to vote in the Iowa Primary, yet people still decided to say that all Iowans were “stupid”, because a few thousand of them voted for Mike Huckabee and Barack Obama? Also, Mike Huckabee did not even get the majority of the evangelical vote in Iowa. He earned a higher percentage than any other candidate, sure, but they all did not vote for him. So the contempt shown by people across the country for certain groups, based on small amounts voting, is purely ridiculous.

In that vain, here is a post by “I Pity the Fool!”, an admitted evangelical, who states his reasons for not supporting Mike Huckabee: An Evangelical’s Explanation of Why He Doesn’t Support Huckabee

An exerpt:

It has come to my attention through various conversations over the past few months that there is a general belief among the Republican (conservative) faithful that in order for someone to beat Hillary/Obama we must be moderate. A truly conservative candidate would be nice, they say, but this is just not reality. My friend told me just last night that former Senator Fred Thompson (R-Tenn) would be nice but in order for the GOP nominee to win he must be closer to “moderate.” The logic here is “be more like them in order to beat them.” This logic is such that I must respectfully disagree. The Republican nominee that goes with the if-you-can’t-beat-’em-join-’em routine will be soundly defeated. Here’s why: If you don’t differentiate yourself from your opponent the American people will have no reason not to vote for your opponent. After all, if many positions are the same then one only has two things to work from: 1. Your personality and 2. Whoever has had this position the longest. Either way is bad.

The former Governor Mike Huckabee is just such a moderate candidate. If nominated, I firmly believe (if his record is exposed) that he will be soundly defeated as the swing voters will just stick with the Democratic nominee. As the title of this blog entry indicated I can be classified as an “evangelical Christian,” one of the more powerful voting blocs in the nation at this point. I am ashamed to say that we have been fooled by Huckabee. [ … ]

Go there to read the rest.

Here are a few comments I left there:

“Finally, I do not support Mike Huckabee due to his attempted manipulation of the American voting bloc known as evangelical Christians. “Vote for me–I’m Baptist” is hardly convincing to me.”

Bingo. Aside from all the policy issues on which I disagree with Mike Huckabee, his identity politics and using religion as a weapon in this race has been the biggest turnoff for me with him.

I’m supporting Fred Thompson as well and have been supporting him for months now, after I determined he was the only conservative in the field other than Duncan Hunter and Ron Paul. Unfortunately, Ron Paul’s white supremacist and isolationist positions eliminate him from consideration for me. He just does not understand foreign policy at all. His latest comments on the Iranian incident clinched it. Apparently he knows about Gulf of Tonkin, but has no memory of the more recent USS Cole incident.

Hopefully, conservatives will come to their senses in the coming weeks and vote how one should vote – on principle – instead of based on “elecatability”. The Left and the Democrats used that tactic in 2004 with John Kerry and were ridiculed by Republicans. Unfortunately, it seems like many Republicans are now using the same tactic. Instead of talking about policies and principles, Republican voters are talking about “electability”. Funny how 3 years has turned Republicans voters into Democrat voters, huh?

Posted by Michael in MI (Thompson ’08) on Sunday, January 13, 2008 at 4:26 PM


” Would he be better than Hilary or Obama? Absolutely.”

One more thing… I disagree with this statement. Mike Huckabee is basically a Democrat who is anti-abortion. I don’t call him pro-life, because he has accepted donations from embryonic stem cell research groups. So he is not very principled. The only thing he really has going for him is his charm. However, Bill Clinton had charm too. That is not what makes a good President.

You allude to Jimmy Carter, which is spot on. The only difference I see between Mike Huckabee and Jimmy Carter is that Jimmy Carter was a Democrat and Mike Huckabee is a Republican. Jimmy Carter made the Democrat Party look bad with his weakness and we then had 12 years of Republicans in the White House. Mike Huckabee would have the same effect, only having people entirely lose faith in the Republican Party. As such, I believe Mike Huckabee would be worse than Hillary or Obama in office. 4 years of them and we might have the country wake up to realize that conservatism is better for America than socialism. But 4 years of Mike Huckabee in office might turn off the entire country to both conservatism and the Republican Party.

Something I hope people think about.

Posted by Michael in MI (Thompson ’08) on Sunday, January 13, 2008 at 4:31 PM

January 13, 2008 , 6:11PM Posted by | 2008 Presidential Election, Christianity, Conservatism, Evangelicals, Fred Thompson, Mike Huckabee | 1 Comment

Are Mike Huckabee’s Supporters Ignorant of his Policy Positions?

I came across Laura’s blog, Pursuing Holiness, after I read a comment of hers left at HotAir, and I am glad that I did.  She has one of the best posts I have seen deconstructing Mike Huckabee and explaining the base of his support.  From the way she lays it out, his base seems to be very ignorant about his policy positions.

Mike Huckabee is getting support despite the fact that he is not a fiscal conservative, supports illegal immigration, is completely ignorant on foreign policy, is weak on the war effort based on his flip flopping on Gitmo and waterboarding, has taken donations from embryonic stem cell research companies and also has a history of commuting criminals, including some who have donated to his Party in Arkansas, only to go on to commit more crimes once they were allowed to go free by Mike Huckabee. 

Knowing all this, why on earth does he have any support whatsoever?  From what Laura explains, it seems that the sad reality is that most of his supporters are simply completely ignorant about his policies and are just supporting him based on his slick talking and his Christianity.

[ … ]  But I have been following the Republican side of the race, and I think this is a good description of how Huckabee won. Rather than look closely at his record and policies, people looked at his faith and personality. He’s the “Christian leader” so his record and policies must be okay, right? After all, he’s a Christian. A former pastor, even. And it’s about time one of our own got some recognition. The GOP is OUR party, and it’s time people accepted that fact. Well, that’s the mindset of an awful lot of people. So they “feel” a certain way about Huckabee and voted accordingly.

I’ve had email exchanges with a friend who I believe is representative of Huckabee supporters. She’s a long-time Christian conservative who homeschooled her daughter. What follows is a summary of those exchanges.

My friend knew about the commutation issue, but thought it was overblown by the drive-bys. After all, wasn’t one about a kid with a BB gun when he was five? I said that wasn’t exactly representative of the controversy, which has actually been going on for some time. Here’s what Arkansans were saying in 2004 about the situation. For example, beyond the BB gun, there was a serial drunk driver whose wife donated $10,000 to Arkansas Republicans just before he got out – and who later re-offended.

Well, the big money is behind Rudy and Romney, right? I said maybe so, but how is that relevant to Huckabee’s merits as a candidate? I understand the desire to root for the underdog, but the underdog isn’t necessarily right.

Still, he’s good on the war, isn’t he? My friend didn’t know that Huckabee flip-flopped on Gitmo. He wanted to keep GITMO open in June 2007, but after hearing from a few ex-Generals a few months later, wanted to shut it down and move the prisoners to Leavenworth. The only benefit to that is the very nebulous “world opinion” – and let’s face it, most of the rest of the world really only likes us when we’re victims. 9/12 syndrome. Moving them to Leavenworth would end up giving them full access to US courts, but these aren’t really prosecutable criminal cases, so many would be set free. Huckabee took the alleged “moral high ground” right alongside the Democratic party on this issue, and to the detriment of our national security. There have been numerous cases of released detainees showing right back up on the battlefield, including Abdullah Mehsood, featured in the Gitmo Cookbook. Speaking of flip-flops on Gitmo, he also flip-flopped on the Cuban embargo.

And don’t even get me started on his “arrogant bunker mentality” Foreign Affairs article, which was fisked here. He’s also clueless about what breeds terrorism – it’s not poverty. Other than staying in a Holiday Inn Express, what conservative foreign policy qualifications does Governor Huckabee have?

But Huckabee is fiscally conservative. Didn’t he cut taxes umpteen million times? Sure, but he raised them fewer times, in higher amounts, for a $500 million increase.

My friend is against illegal immigration. She didn’t know – or forgot – that Huckabee’s soul requires him to spend our tax dollars on incentives to increase it.

“Some people want me to be a lot harsher [on immigration policy],” Huckabee explains. “When I realized that there are kids [children of illegal immigrants] out there who are as good as me and they didn’t have a choice where they were born; they didn’t have a choice to whom they were born; then I have to ask myself do I really want to put my heel in their face no matter how hard they work? My soul won’t let me pander that issue any further than that and I’m not going to,” he says with determination.

Children in Darfur are as good as me, and they didn’t have a choice where they were born. What do we owe them? I have sympathy for children of illegals, but they are the problem of the country they were born in. Rewarding the families of illegal aliens only encourages more people to break our laws. But Huckabee says that my position on this is “un-Christian, un-American, irresponsible and anti-life.” What bible verse or accepted Christian doctrine mandates income redistribution by government? Taxes have no part of Christian charity. Charity is voluntary. Still, Huckabee’s soul evidently had a change of heart, because he cribbed a much stricter illegal immigration policy.

I think what will really impact people like my friend’s support of Huckabee is Rush Limbaugh’s opinion of him. Rush has specifically said that Huckabee is not a conservative, and that’s the kind of thing my friend would take seriously. Rush has also said that Fred Thompson is the “one candidate who did not display any moderateness or liberalism.”

As for me, I truly believe that the GOP is the frog in the pot. We’ve been gradually moving further and further left. At this point, I will even vote Hillary before I vote Huckabee. I’d rather turn the heat up with an unabashed leftist that Congressional Republicans will fight than continue simmering. It’s time to adjust our feelings to the facts. The fact is that people who call themselves conservatives (as opposed to Republicans, which includes a much broader spectrum of people) should not be voting for Huckabee. The question is, how many conservatives are left in the Republican party?

I am wondering that myself.  I am also wondering how many informed, educated people are among the Republican voters out there.  Are people actually informed about the candidates and are simply rejecting Conservatism or are people simply completely uninformed and ignorant on the policy positions and are voting and putting their support behind candidates based on style over substance?

Hopefully it is just a matter of ignorance and being uninformed and not that people are starting to reject conservatism and accept socialism and populism.

January 5, 2008 , 4:49PM Posted by | 2008 Presidential Election, Christianity, Mike Huckabee | 1 Comment