Threat Highlights Hypocrisy and Constitutional Dilemma

Mexico has just legalized abortion up to 12 weeks (for the record, I'm Pro-Life and opposed to legalization). Mexico's law is still far more restrictive than U.S. law which allows abortions essentially until birth. Human Events' blogger, Nathanael Blake, is already calling for the excommunication of any politician who has supported the new law. He also calls for this tactic to be used with U.S. judges and elected officials.

I've covered this before. It is dangerous when the response to a Constitutional issue is not by appeal to the Constitution itself (or even to the will of the electorate) but rather by an appeal for ecclesiastical threats. This is dangerous and thoroughly anti-American.

We are a representative republic... but that means that politicians are to represent their constituents, not the leftist, freedom-hating heads of a foreign body with a history of anti-Americanism.

In America we believe that the government should rule at the consent of the governed, not at the behest of the priest.

We Need Better Representatives of Conservatism on Fox News 

Fortunately, there is at least one cable news source that allows conservatives to have a voice. Unfortunately, that source, the Fox News Channel, is populated by too many no-talent hacks and conservatives who are unable to properly make the case for conservatism.

Conservatives like Sean Hannity rarely make the logical or constitutional case for conservatism; rather they resort to the leftist tactic of emotionalism and sound-bite argumentation. Sean’s also been charged with plagiarism by Debbie Schlussel; a charge with merit. That should surprise no one as Hannity’s SOP is listen to Rush, mark down three bullet points and then spout them as often and as annoyingly as possible.

I don’t care how many times Cindy Sheehan calls Bush “Hitler,” I don't need to hear everyday for six months that John Kerry voted differently on funding bills and I surely don’t care to see that stupid red/blue (statistically meaningless, but emotionally powerful) county map. But all of these are standard Hannity “arguments” for people to become conservatives. I know, it makes no sense to me either. I'll only watch Hannity & Colmes if Rich Lowry is guest-hosting for Sean. 

Two of the highlights from hannity.com today are an ancient video clip of John Edwards primping before a television appearance and a hard-hitting poll asking which Democratic candidate could be trusted with babysitting duties.  Powerful stuff there, Sean. I'm sure thousands will thus be persuaded to support a Constitutionally-limited federal government.

Sean Hannity represents everything that is wrong with the conservative movement today.

FNC appears as an amateur version of CNN. Of course, the mere fact that we’re going to actually hear a conservative viewpoint, however badly presented, makes many of us FNC devotees. But is FNC creating conservatives or just playing to an audience that will excuse the mediocrity because they are delivering any message that is remotely conservative? Is FNC the Contemporary Christian Music of cable news (pathetic and weak, but all we have)?

The idea is to convert Americans to conservatism, not entertain the "base" (and I mean "base").

Quick takes on a few FNC personalities:

• Sean Hannity - a time-slot radio hit following Rush on WABC (the Kenny Bania of talk radio)… prefers the sound bite ahead of the Constitution… repeats the same three sensationalist points ad nauseum throughout four different segments, weeks to months on end.

• Brian Kilmeade – delights in his own ignorance… I think he may be slightly retarded.

• E.D. Hill – call on line two, your after-school cable channel D show needs you back… “I mean… like… no way” all Hill favorite phrases.

• Bill O’Reilly – self-proclaimed expert on everything who FEATURES Geraldo and a body language expert as regulars… a BODY LANGUAGE EXPERT! … takes pet leftist positions to kiss up to his lefty guests… anyone who goes on his show is automatically a “stand-up guy”… refuse to go on and be analyzed by body language experts and you’re “hiding under your desk.”

• Kimbery Guilfoyle – call on line three, E.D. needs you to cover the big “Nerds-Jocks” controversy and follow-up on the “mystery meat” scandal in the cafeteria.

• Bo Dietl – makes Brian Kilmeade look smart.

FNC isn’t completely devoid of professionals. Here are some FNC highlights:

• Greta Van Susteren – the best interviewer in cable news.

• Neil Cavuto – covers relevant topics with relevant guests and relevant questions.

• Judge Napolitano – entertaining, Constitutional, intelligent and interesting.

• John Gibson – adequate and competent.

Special note should be made for Brit Hume’s Special Report program. It is by far the best show on FNC and features the finest guests and the best regular commentators. Fred Barnes, Mort Kondracke and Charles Krauthammer are well-spoken and insightful professionals.

Ronald Reagan moved millions into the Republican column by making the case for conservatism. Many of us still fight for and are able to make the case for “supply-side economics,” “free trade,” “small government,” “low taxes,” “strict constructionism” and “peace through strength.”

All we get from the likes of Hannity are gotcha sound bites, appeals to emotion and bumper-sticker arguments. This anti-intellectual, People Magazine approach is what’s killing the conservative movement. This nonsense is what led to the nomination of a sound-bite nitwit from Texas, the loss of the both chambers of Congress and Mitt Romney pretending that he embraces the Reaganism he’s been rejecting for the better part of 15 years.

Let's not settle for amateurs merely because they're conservatives. I'd like to see our "Fair and Balance" balanced by intellectual Constitutionalists. The left is marching forward and must be opposed with vigor and soberness; "zany" conservatives like Hannity are not up to the task. 

I like a good joke and I like a quick wit... but these are serious times.


UPDATE: Debbie Schlussel points out yet another Hannity disaster.

Delving Into What Appears to be Divine Apathy 

"What mind is competent to grasp the sum of all this great world's misery, heaped up day after day, year after year, century after century? Human hearts may plan, and human hands achieve, some little to alleviate it, and the strong and ready arm of human law may accomplish much in the protection of the weak and the punishment of the wicked. But as for God - the light of moon and stars is not more cold and pitiless than He appears to be!" –Sir Robert Anderson, The Silence of God

My next blog entry was to be a short commentary on the charlatans from the Pentecostal movement who enrich themselves by making merchandise of their ignorant listeners. These are men and woman who believe God is their bellhop. They twist the words of scripture, rip verses from their contexts and make promises that should bring down the hammer of the law for false advertising ("a $1000 gift will unleash 1000 miracles into your life!").

These foul creatures play on the scriptural ignorance of their all-to-willing-to-be-fleeced flocks. However, just as we don’t live in a day when it is necessary to refrain from certain fruits or to build arks, we also do not live in a day in which God acts definitively in the lives of men.

Just as these false teachers fail to understand the day in which we live, so too do many who will question God for allowing a madman to wreak such destruction upon those who did him no wrong. However, it is not God's apathy that should be understood, but His grace.

A silent Heaven is a part of the mystery of God; but Holy Writ declares that a day is fixed in the Divine chronology when "the mystery of God shall be finished." And when that day breaks… then at last He will assume the power that even now is His by right, and openly reward the good and put down the evil. In a word, He will do then what men think He ought to do now and always. And if He delays to do this, it is not that He is "slack concerning His promise." God's own "apology" for His inaction is that He is "longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance." - ibid

In this hour God acts as He will and answers prayers as He desires for we live in "the day of Man" and in "the age of grace." Man is ruling as he sees fit and God is dealing with the eternal fates of individuals in longsuffering grace. Man is an untrustworthy ruler. The Founders knew this and created a three-branch system of government based on the idea that any powers granted to men must be kept in check. John Adams knew well the depravity of man.

The violence at Virginia Tech was perpetrated by a man. It is the wickedness of man that was on display. God is silent in our day graciously waiting to end the Day of Man. As man abuses man he often wants to blame God, but such accusations are illogical and foolish.

No one may limit what God will do in response to individual faith. But we may confidently assert that, in view of His supreme revelation in Christ, God will yield nothing to the petulant demands of unbelief. And that revelation supplies the key to the dual mystery of a silent heaven and the trials of the life of faith on earth. - ibid

Next on the divine schedule is the Day of the Lord and the Day of Vengeance, but until then, we must understand the age in which we live. We don’t build arks, we don’t live communally and we don’t experience the promises given to another people in another age. Today, God is gracious and God is silent. And although silent, He is neither absent nor unfeeling. His silence towards some is also the manifestation of His grace to many more.

A SILENT Heaven! Yes, but it is not the silence of callous indifference or helpless weakness; it is the silence of a great sabbatic rest, the silence of a peace which is absolute and profound -a silence which is the public pledge and proof that the way is open for the guiltiest of mankind to draw near to God. When faith murmurs, and unbelief revolts, and men challenge the Supreme to break that silence and declare Himself, how little do they realise what the challenge means! It means the withdrawal of the amnesty; it means the end of the reign of grace; it means the closing of the day of mercy and the dawning of the day of wrath. -ibid

A Very Large Issue to Be Understood Not Trivialized

The space here is woefully inadequate to fully tackle this issue (and the writer woefully inadequate to explain the mind of God), but we must try and understand the record given us in His word concerning the age in which we live and the different ways in which He works in the lives of men.

To plead that the idea of Divine intervention in human affairs is unreasonable or absurd is only to afford a proof how easily the mind becomes enslaved by the ordinary facts of experience.The believer recognises that such intervention was common in ancient times, and the unbeliever most fairly argues that if there really existed a God, all-good and almighty, such intervention would be common at all times. The taunt would be easily met if the Christian could make answer that this world is a scene of probation where God in His infinite wisdom has thought fit to leave men absolutely to themselves. -ibid 

We pray for the living victims of man’s sin in Virginia; the wounded and the families touched. We find comfort in knowing that a Living God has all within His sight and can use man’s wickedness to many to bring a sense of Himself to the individual.

But mostly our comfort is found in the fact that the Day of Man will not last forever. Our rebelion and mismanagement of this current age will give way to rule of God. It will be in that day that justice will fall rightly on man; some to destruction and some to an inheritance of grace.

To grace, therefore, we look to explain the silence. Christianity is the supreme and final revelation of the Divine "kindness and love toward man." Therefore when God again declares Himself it can only be in wrath, and wrath must await "the day of wrath." Not that human government has lost its Divine sanction, for "the powers that be are ordained of God." Nor yet that the moral government of the world is in abeyance: the laws of nature are relentlessly enforced, But in this higher sphere there is neither court nor constable empowered to deal with the sins of men; for He to whom alone belongs the high prerogative of judgment is now enthroned as SAVIOUR. God is no longer "imputing their trespasses" to men.' From the throne of the Divine Majesty there has gone forth the proclamation of pardon and peace, and this without condition or reserve. And now a silent Heaven gives continuing proof that this great amnesty is still in force, and that the guiltiest of men may turn to God and find forgiveness of sins and eternal life. God is silent because He has spoken His last word of mercy and love, and judgment must await the "day of judgment "- there can be no place for it in this "day of grace." -ibid


Sir Robert Anderson saw the vileness of man as head of Scotland Yard, yet he also understood the importance of the silence of God in our age. The illogical will blame God. The fool with question God. But the wise will seek to understand God's silence and rejoice in His grace as we mourn the fruits of wickedness from our fallen race.


EDIT: It appears as though Cho did not have a relationship with the first victim, si I removed the reference.

UPDATE: Franklin Graham was on E.D. Hill's Fox News program today (4/18) and was asked the "where was God?" question. Graham's answer was OK, but the true answer concerns God's grace. Those who question God's "failure" to act do not know what they are asking. If God were to wipe out sin and sinners (which He will do some day), it wouldn't just be Cho that would have to be stopped... we'd all have to be stopped. We live in an age of grace. Blame man for his sin and thank God for his longsuffering grace. As Job said, "Though He slay me, still I will trust in Him."
 

Pope is Anti-Catholic! Quotes Council!

The Pope says for the one millionth time that Catholic Church is the "only true church" (repeating Catholic teaching for centuries)... and I'm the one who continues to get the hate-mail and hate-posts from Evangelicals whose faith is formally and officially condemned by Popes and Councils...?

Representative example: I AM SORRY THAT [bleechers] feels as he does toward another Christian church I have never, and do not hold to the statement you gave that the Pope said "the only true church is the Catholic church."

All I did was quote the Pope. He said what he said. Why get angry at me?

It's not only a recent quote of this Pope, the doctrine referenced is clearly stated and repeated so many times by so many Popes and Councils that to deny it is pure willful ignorance.

They can teach or believe whatever they wish, but it is folly to just pretend that they don't believe what they clearly state. I'm amazed that I even have to write a sentence like that.

In purely political terms, the CC is a essentially a leftist organization. Why not any criticism for that on the right?

Refers to Iranian Madmen as "Men of Good Will"

The Vatican, trying to score some points, released a statement on April 8 touting the Pope's "appeal" to the Ayatollah Ali Khamenei (i.e. a man of good will) requesting the release of the 15 Brits.

Lovely.

Of course, the appeal came just hours before they were on planes to London. Thanks for nothing.

Good thing those Iranians weren't guilty of printing Bibles in English without the Pope's permission. That's the kind of thing that really ticks off the Vatican. For that crime, you get another kind of letter from the Pope.

 What Do "Theistic Evolutionists" Celebrate?

Claims Christians Must Heed What He and His Deputies Say
 
Actually it was the Pope (again), but I thought I'd give it some context for effect.

Apparently he's the only one who is allowed to say these things with no fear of a backlash.

I'd quote him, but every time I quote a Pope or a Council condemning me I get nasty emails accusing me of being an "anti-Catholic bigot." Please email me if you can figure out that one.

The Sedevacantists are a group that condemns my faith six ways till Wednesday, but I respect them for doing so. They’ve read the Popes and Councils. They know the Church has "from antiquity" taught that non-Catholics are all "heretics" (as are all Catholics who don't call non-Catholics heretics or who pray with said heretics, etc... but I'm dangerously close to quoting Popes, so I'll stop).

More: Here and Here.

 Says Israeli-Controlled Palestinian Territories Are “Prisons”

Catholic Latin-rite patriarch Michel Sabbah has called Israel’s control of some of the Palestinian territories “evil.” He goes on to say “Jericho is a small prison city, like all the other Palestinian cities.”

Catholic.org adds: “[Michel] pointed to the Israeli occupation and its restrictions on Palestinian freedoms, the conflict between Palestinian factions within the occupied West Bank and Gaza Strip and the ‘non-response or the inability’ of the international community to respond to the voices of the region begging for peace. “

Nothing new here… Rome has been siding with the terrorists for decades.

But the most ironic part has to be his call for Catholics to be the “leaven” that will “put an end to the evil of occupation, with all of its oppression.”

This reminds me of a warning from the lips of the Lord Jesus “Beware the leaven of the Pharisees which is hypocrisy.” It is also apropos that these statements come during the Passover… when all leaven is removed from the house.

“Seven days shall there be no leaven found in your houses: for whosoever eateth that which is leavened, even that soul shall be cut off from the congregation of Israel, whether he be a stranger, or born in the land.” - Exodus 12:19