jeffreymark

A NEWT REBUTTAL

Trashing Newt certainly is in vogue among bluebloods this season. All this talk about his lack of credentials as a conservative and his disparaging the Reagan administration are complete nonsense and borderline evil. They certainly confirm the immature character of those seeking to destroy Newt. Therefore, below I wanted to post articles that refute and enlighten the trash talk. These I previously posted on my Facebook.

I know I'm posting lots of stuff on Newt Gingrich. I'll get over it. But, for anyone who passionately cares about our nation and what our children may inherit from us they need to pay attention to those who may set the future direction of the country. 
The Romney camp has posted a legion of distorted facts about Gingrich. One publication that appeared yesterday was Newt supposedly disparaging the Reagan years. I never heard him do this. It seemed out of character. Plus, given Romney's record for waffling I immediately looked for the full interview so as to hear Gingrich's words in their context. And, what do you know? I found it. Follow the link below. 

Riehl World View: Video Of Newt Bashing Reagan Is Bogus

www.riehlworldview.com

There's a short excerpt of a 1988 C-SPAN video purportedly showing Newt Gingrich bashing Reagan when talking about how Bush, Sr. should run. As I suspected, it's edited to give a false impression. What you don't see is immediately after...

____________________________________________________

While Ms.O'Sullivan may not possess the credentials of those previously referred to on this page, she writes a compelling op.ed. piece in favor of Newt Gingrich. Yes, indeed I flooded today's posts with pro Newt articles. Yet, I hate to see the man lose as a result of smear campaigns. One thing I firmly believe-Gingrich is a principled conservative. Those influential pundits like Glenn Beck and Ann Coulter, who deceptively label him a liberal ought to take that one off the table. He has many flaws, but liberalism is not one of them.

Send Us Newt

Melissa O’Sullivan writes on NRO: Last fall, people in Washington told me, “Get over it, Melissa. Newt’s not going to be the nominee.” Later, in New York City over Thanksgiving, I was told, “Get over it, Melissa. It’s going to be Romney. There’s still so much stuff out there on Newt that’s just wait...

_____________________________________________________________________

 

I was quite engaged in politics during the 80s myself. I agree with Limbaugh. I don't remember this stuff. Everything I recall about Newt leaned toward one who was ultra conservative to a fault.

 

 

Coordinated Avalanche Against Newt Doesn't Match My Memory of Reagan Years - The Rush                Limbaugh Show

RUSH: I'm not denying it happened. I'm just telling you, this stuff was a total shock to me last night when I learned that Newt had said this stuff.

______________________________________________________________________

More conservative support for Newt Gingrich. Michael Reagan exclaims: (via Dallas Morning News)

“I am deeply disturbed that supporters of Mitt Romney are claiming that Newt Gingrich is not a true Reaganite and are even claiming that Newt was a strong critic of my father.

“Recently I endorsed Newt Gingrich for president because I believe that Newt is the only Republican candidate who has both consistently backed the conservative policies that my father championed and the only Republican that will continue to implement his vision.

“It surprises me that Mitt Romney and his supporters would raise this issue — when Mitt by his own admission voted for Jimmy Carter and Walter Mondale who opposed my father, and later supported liberal Democrat Paul Tsongas for president. 

“As governor of Massachusetts, Romney’s achievement was the most socialistic healthcare plan in the nation up until that time. 

“Say what you want about Newt Gingrich but when he was Speaker of the House he surrounded himself with Reagan conservatives and implemented a Ronald Reagan program of low taxes and restrained federal spending. 

“Newt’s conservative program created a huge economic boom and balanced the budget for the first time in more than a generation.” 

Mike Reagan concluded: “I would take Newt Gingrich’s record any day over Mitt Romney’s.”

______________________________________________________________________

I have not endorsed Newt Gingrich. I do, however, like his conservatism. The attacks against him are deliberately designed to get Romney nominated. Most of the attacks on Newt grossly misrepresent him and take his rhetoric out of context. For every attack on Newt I can find a counter by "elitists" who support him-people like Nancy Reagan and Michael Reagan. I encourage anyone who runs from Newt because of all the confusing half truths out there to do some investigative work themselves.

Newt Backed Reagan, Romney Opposed Him

www.newsmax.com

A newly surfaced video shows that no less a figure than Nancy Reagan asserted that President Ronald Reagan passed the “torch” of Reagan conservatism to Newt Gingrich — belying efforts by Mitt Romney supporters to cast Gingrich as anti-Reagan.

_____________________________________________________________________

Of course Newt is greatly flawed. Yes, he indeed tosses hand grenades. And, he probably chased a few women in his day. I'm not denying that. But, my favorite historian Victor Davis Hanson offers a provocative look at private morals vs. public political practice.

Fidelity and the Presidency

www.nationalreview.com

Victor Davis Hanson writes on NRO: The news media seem obsessed with the serial affairs of a younger Newt Gingrich back in the last century. The anger of his second of three wives mysteriously became national news on ABC’s Nightline on the eve of the South Carolina primary. Millions watched Mrs. Gin...

 

 

 

 

 

WATCHING THE REPUBLICAN DEBATE

Perhaps we ought to call it the "Let's Run for President" show. Are we kidding? I took debate in college. This is s Hollywood or CNN glitz and glamour production. Each candidate is in a free for all feeling forced to get a word in edgewise. The platform turns everyone of them except Newt Gingrich into robotic statistic spewing machines. Newt, the most idealistic and creative of the bunch (and might I add by far the most brilliant) looks at ease because he has been the center of attention before as Speaker of the House. The man knows history and when he speaks he often makes so  much sense that his is the final word. But, he has one looming shadow that may eternally dog him. He cheats on his wives. 

WHAT'S WRONG WITH AMERICA? (Post 9/11 Thoughts)

On this the tenth anniversary of 9/11 we indelibly remember the heroism; the love for our fellow citizens wee felt that day. For one brief moment we dropped our litigious nature and grew up. The enemy thought he could destroy America by hitting our heartbeat-our financial center. He was wrong. He is dead and capitalism continues to thrive.

We Americans, when attacked, act like one big family. Blood is thicker than water and we are blood kin in a metaphorical sort of way. "We may not like our current elected officials," we exclaim, "but you foreigners keep your stinkin' noses out of our business." Like my little brother, I may pick on him all day long. If you, however, touch him you may have holy hell to pay. 

And we ought to vigorously defend our nation. After all if she sinks we go down with the ship. So, with fists raised, ears perked, and eyes fixed, we passionately scan the American horizon for enemy invasions.

On the other hand, we Americans face an enemy of a different cloth than the one with a table cloth over their heads. This enemy is surreptitious. It unassumingly invades our national character. We know it as selfishness. This disease stands as the root of all evil.The Bible gives it a name-satan (the true great satan). Selfcenteredness ruins families, friendships, and any other relationships we may value. Selfcenteredness hung Jesus (the opposite of selfishness, therefore our salvation) on a cross. It started the great war in Europe, WWII, by incarnating itself in a man and a nation under the name Nazi. Evil does that. It possesses an incarnational nature. This same evil that brought historical empires down, threatens us as well. We witness its presence through our infantile sensitivity, our obsessive litigiousness, and our hypocritical political pejoratives. 

Cartoonist Glenn McCoy captures the symptom of our bane in his latest piece.

PATRIOTIC PICTURES FROM THE PAST

This July 4th reminds me of our great patriotic heritage. Shorpy captures that heritage on his phenomenal web site.  He transforms old photographs into digital like modern pictures. These photos confirm that the past really did exist in color. Imagine that. And I thought 50 years ago black and white covered the world until God said, "Let there be color."

This first photo was taken at a 1942 Memorial Day Parade in Southington, Connecticut.(love those old cars)

The second photo shows folks putting together our Army Air Corps' finest machines at Consolidated Aircraft in Fort Worth, Texas. My grandfather helped construct these babies and finally retired from CA after a lengthy, productive career. My mother worked there as well while in high school and college. She once informed me that the place was so complex and overwhelming her daddy personally walked her to her office each day. (click on pictures to enlarge)  

 

RUSH LIMBAUGH CALLS LIBERALS THIEVES

Although I listen to Rush Limbaugh from time to time I rarely ever feature his orations on this blog. Why-because, like Limbaugh says, he often offers the final word. Today, he hit a home run. Not only did he passionately explain the ruination brought about by idealistic liberals, Limbaugh ripped open their core by declaring that Obama and Dems purposefully desire our chaotic national panic so they can build a new "paradigm." Listen to the piper below and take note, less you drown in the current cesspool of ignorance. 

IS THIS THE END IV

LITERARY FORMS

Proper interpretation of the Bible requires that we understand the vast array of literary forms that comprise the rich message of God’s word.  Faulty interpretation often results from a deficit in knowledge concerning the Bible’s literary forms.  Many good Christians fall into a literalistic interpretation of all scripture.   For instance, literalists believe God created the world in a literal seven days.  Those who espouse this theory run into all kinds of problems especially with empirical scientific data which proves otherwise.  They set themselves at odds with the intellectual community unnecessarily. I’m not talking about evolution here. Many good scientists debunked exclusive evolution long ago.  A sort of peer pressure mentality continues in the academic community to hold on to the old scientific orthodoxy- Darwin was infallible. (Let the reader note: I do believe that God set laws in motion that perhaps possess an evolutionary character such as the lengthy carving out of canyons etc... And whatever the first man and woman looked like physically pales in importance to the Biblical claim that they were created in the spiritual image of God.) Scriptural literalists need to understand that ancient Middle Easterners often used to couch truth in narrative form.  The form was an emotional way of conveying the ethereal.  Hebrews exaggerated numbers to express fullness. 

One recognizable literary form found in the Bible is poetry.  Most students of English Lit. 101 can quickly spot this one-the book of Psalms.  King David wrote many of the Psalms as songs.  Those songs touched people the way music touches people today.  In fact, many of our contemporary worship choruses come from the Psalms.  They move us toward God and establish a worshipful attitude.

Prose narrative is another literary method of conveying truth.  We discover this form primarily in the Gospels.  This is the ordinary way people speak.  Paul used another form called logical literature.  One reading of the book of Romans will confirm this.  Paul wrote argumentative documents often responding to objections concerning the Gospel.  He wrote these in logical, lawyerly type fashion.  My greatest classroom experience came at Asbury Theological Seminary in Dr. Robert Traina’s course on the Epistle to the Romans.  He taught by the Socratic method used in law schools.  He intimidated the bejesus out of me.  Yet, I gained analytical tools from his class that continue to benefit me today in many areas of my life.

The particular literary form we deal with regarding the end is the most complicated of all literary forms. We call it apocalyptic literature.  We discover this literature primarily in Mark 13; Matthew 24; Luke 21; 2Thessalonians 2; and the book of Revelation.  In the Old Testament  we find it in Daniel, Isaiah, and Joel.  Apocalyptic literature serves several purposes: (1) to strengthen faith under trial and in anticipation of God’s intervention in human affairs to bring history to a climax and usher in his rule.  (2) to express a message of consolation and hope in a dual world- this wicked age and the age to come with its triumph and vindication.  This literary form carries the basic theme of redemption and judgment.  Remember,  our authors wrote in their contemporary context.  They did not look ahead to our time.  They delivered a timely message to a perplexed crowd.  Their world was one of chaos, war, persecution, and despair.  People often resurrect apocalyptic literature during wars.  The American Civil War is a case in point.  Many of the cults flourishing today originated immediately following the Civil War. They found their strength in the apocalypse.  Even the flawed contemporary pop culture theology  we call dispensationalism, (more on this later) arose between 1859-1877. The Left Behind series, many independent churches, and television evangelists adhere to  dispensationalism. 

Because we sensationalize this literature we often miss the beauty in the meaning of it.  We focus on the vehicle and lose the true message. Through this unusual literature God declares his sovereignty, rulership,  and love.  Indeed it’s a shame when people distort this poetic type of literature to the point that they might run right past heaven.

(More to come)

 

THE DICK MORRIS TAKE

Former Clinton consultant Dick Morris, a libertarian, traded camps a few years ago. Now he works for Fox News and Republicans. While Morris remains an enigma, I often find his political commentary useful. As a part of his on going analysis Morris releases his own polling data on a regular basis. Below is his latest interpretation of the national political landscape.

My gut, unrelated to empirical data, savors Morris's assessment. Evangelicals remain skeptical of Romney, but less so than the last campaign, because of his Mormonism. Many evangelicals still erroneously view Mormons as wild-eyed Martians seeking to overtake the world. Whatever one thinks of Mormons, they need to do a little homework and recognize that Mormons stand with evangelicals on the social issues. And, isn't that the essence of evangelical litmus tests? My own experience as an active evangelical suggests that Romney's largest hurdle now with conservatives is his apparent left leaning record as governor of Massachusetts. Michele Bachman fares as a conservative's conservative. She's got the right philosophical stuff. Yet, her one hurdle, confirmed in the back alleys of conservatism, remains her gender. Male evangelicals tend to secretly disdain female authority. While that sounds a bit far fetched to our modern libertine culture, it continues to rumble in our collective conservative subconscious.

Exciting days lie ahead as we anticipate the outcomes of these particular prejudices. I, for one, agree with Morris. Conservatives ought to take courage in the fact that they have two potentially excellent candidates.  

MAD AS HELL

The American people seem more emotionally polarized today, except for the during Civil War, than at any point in history. Not that polarization suddenly appeard, but people's dispositions metamorphosized in recent years from goodwill ambassadorship to "kick ass, my way or the highway" egocentricity. This penchant for self absorption, in my opinion, offers nothing more than a total breakdown of our traditionally conservative and Christian traditions. 

Pollster Scott Rassmusen recently coauthored a book which compellingly offers a glimpse into this contemporary character and how it plays out in our political world. Of course he reminds us that Mad As Hell:How the Tea Party Movement is Fundamentally Remaking our Two-Party System is a must read. Publishers offer this synopsis of the work:

The riotous tea parties and angry town hall meetings of last summer seemingly took everyone by surprise. They shouldn’t have: populist movements have always arisen in times of economic hardship and uncertainty. In Mad As Hell, pollsters Scott Rasmussen and Doug Schoen use extensive and original research to explore the mind and heart of the populist uprising that has suddenly thrown American politics into turmoil.

In the past, populist movements have taken root either on the right or on the left. Today’s populist revolt is unusually broad and has two wings: a left wing that wants universal health care and redistributive economic policies, and a right wing that wants to reduce the power of government to interfere in our lives. Both are hostile to the Washington political class, Wall Street, and the mainstream media—all of which they consider out of touch with the concerns of “real” Americans. The key difference is that left populists are effectively represented by Barack Obama and congressional Democrats who are pursuing their agenda, while right populists are chiefly represented by Fox News and Rush Limbaugh— an angrier and potentially more powerful political force.

So-called professionals in politics, business, and media have completely failed to comprehend the new populism and have dismissed it as marginal and extreme. The authors explore the broad-based nature of the new populist movement and explain how it is reshaping American politics—whether politicians and elite journalists like it or not.

The Tea Party movement is not a flash in the pan,as many have assumed. Nor is it a movement of racist rednecks and ignorant boobs, as its detractors have crudely suggested. To the contrary, it is an authentic grassroots movement of concerned American citizens demanding to be heard by an out-of-touch political establishment. Their concerns are real and their issues are legitimate, the authors maintain; moreover, the new populism is here to stay, and it has already changed our politics for the better.

In Mad As Hell, Rasmussen and Schoen have produced an authoritative guide to the new populism, featuring a combination of proprietary polling data, political analysis, results from online focus groups,and interviews with on-the-ground players. It is must-reading for anyone interested in American electoral politics for the remainder of the decade.

 

CHRISTOPHER HITCHEN'S CANDID LOOK AT MORTALITY

Author Christopher Hitchens has cancer. Yes, the same Hitchens who passionately and articulately may I add, argues against God's existence in his best seller God Is Not Good, has cancer. Hitchens recently published a soul wrenching candid look at his vicious ordeal in his home based outlet Vanity Fair. In that article Hitchens painfully pens some profound spiritual/human issues.

I have been taunting the Reaper into taking a free scythe in my direction and have now succumbed to something so predictable and banal that it bores even me. Rage would be beside the point for the same reason. Instead, I am badly oppressed by a gnawing sense of waste. I had real plans for my next decade and felt I’d worked hard enough to earn it. Will I really not live to see my children married? To watch the World Trade Center rise again?

The Old Testament writer opined once about the same matter. He looked at the brevity of life claiming all was vanity. I wonder if he too, felt this same gnawing sense of waste. All humans be they Christian or not often secretly entertain thoughts of life's hollow meaninglessness. Genuine people of faith (I say genuine because many so called Christians are secularists with just enough religion to take the edge off of their guilt) allow negative prognoses to launch them on an honest quest for meaning. Even Jesus said one must ask, seek, and knock before one could know the mysterious secrets of the Kingdom. I applaud Hitchens for revealing his quest although he may not call it a search for God's truth. 

And, indeed I have always applauded Hitchens. He's his own man apparently unfettered by group-think. He calls them as he sees them even if that means offending Christians, liberals, and conservatives alike. Hitchens makes me think-really think. He refuses to accept religious platitudes. I thank him for that. 

Yet, Hitchens as a significant part of his argument against God's existence, implicitly posits Christian's unreasoned, immodest behavior as supporting evidence for his claim. Fair enough. Christian ministers and their families in particular must wrestle with this issue. Parishioners can be such puzzling, nasty people. They can, however, do great good. I finally decided we blame God for far too many human atrocities. Not so perfect people cannot fill a perfect God's shoes. So, instead of asking, seeking, and knocking, they do the easy thing-blame God for their iniquities. The ancient historian Thucydides addressed this issue .  In his account of the Peloponnesian war, Thucydides sought to cut through the unstable mysticism and offer a mortal accounting for the war. He did this so others might learn. Ancient orators who used drama as a means to deliver history must now hold humans accountable for the world's atrocities.   

Finally, Mr. Hitchen's atheist eyes challenged me to cut through the acculturated myth of my faith and seek  eternal truths our New Testament writers passionately put forth. Within the context of mortality I embraced three of them with certainty: (1) Whatever else we can say about death and the after life, the Bible clearly affirms the resurrection. Let the debate continue over the non essential in between state (between death and resurrection) and let more discerning people prophetically offer a resounding voice concerning a resurrection. (2) God offers his Holy Spirit as a comforter during tragic moments. Hitches may unknowingly witness this through the prayers from those he admires. (3) God calls those who profess faith in Christ the body of Christ, implying Christ's presence. God transcends all barriers through his Spirit and seeks to use people in that immortal process. If only we could lay aside all our diffident magical mystery tours in search of God's Kingdom while focusing on selfless service we might win a few more of Hitchens of the world. God knows we need more like him.

By the way, I too pray daily for Mr. Hitchens, not because Im duty bound, but because I genuinely respect the man. 

A FEW WORDS ABOUT FRANKLIN GRAHAM

Most of the world knows by now about the army's regrettable decision to disinvite Franklin Graham from the Pentagon's National Day of Prayer Service. They cite Graham's negative comments toward the Muslim faith as reasons for the move. Sadly the military took a historic step with their verdict.  The National of Prayer has been a traditionally Christian event, established by our  Christian forefathers, encouraged through the years by Christian politicians, and inspired through Billy Graham's, Franklin Graham's famous evangelical father, personal relationship with past Presidents.   

The Pentagon's decision, however, vividly illustrates their fear of Muslims more than their disdain for Graham. In fact, Franklin Graham seemed to graciously accept the decision as though it were a mere political choice and not personal. Yet, the fact remains that our military personnel working in the nation's symbolic icon of strength, acquiesced to the Muslim world. On the other hand, creators of the irreverent South Park cartoon refused to back down from threats of Islamic violence. Seems South Park portrayed an image of Muhammad wearing a bear suit, in a recent episode.  Of course Muslims vehemently remind us that this is an act deserving of decapitation. The whole affair makes our mighty military look like mice. 

And it paints a less than stellar image of Franklin Graham to those who know him not. But, Mr. Graham is a good man. His ministry Operation Christmas Child takes him into predominately Muslim countries where he offers a shoebox of gifts to children less fortunate than ours. Franklin Graham indeed understands the religion of Islam better than most Americans. I'd rather listen to his advice on the issue than some ivory tower pundit out there who thinks they know how the cow ate the cabbage. Listen to Graham as he talks about Muslims and his Christmas ministry:  (vai Atlas Shrugs)