Wednesday, August 31, 2011

Disasters, God, And Politics

"A God that can be understood is no God. Who can explain the Infinite in words?" ~ W. Somerset Maugham

OK, so it's been a while since I published a blog entry, but it's not because Hurricane Irene swept us out to sea or anything like that. It's just that nothing out of the ordinary has inspired me to write something.

For the record, we are fine here in Virginia. We suffered no damage to speak of in either the earthquake or the storm, other than a somewhat uncomfortable period of about 13 hours (total) of a power outage.

There is no shortage of subjects on which I could expound of course, but just nothing much that creates such passion in me that I feel compelled to express an opinion.

I will say this, however:

What the heck was Michele Bachmann thinking when she joked about the earthquake and the hurricane being some sort of judgment from God? Is she not aware that the Democrat attack machine (otherwise known as the Media) would be waiting with bated breath for any opportunity to ambush her? She had to know the attack would be inevitable if she made any mention at all of God in conjunction with the two natural disasters.

It's not her statement in itself that will end up haunting her. It's the fact that she even made the statement in the first place that will cast doubt upon her judgment.

I like Bachmann. I think she'd make a good President, but it's missteps like this that could cost her the nomination and/or the Presidency.

The deck is stacked against her already. She is a Conservative with outspoken views against all of the left's pet causes. That's more than enough for the Liberals in America to hate her.

Even after the Liberal media have admitted they realize her statement was a joke, there are still leftists out there pointing to that statement as proof of her fundamental nuttiness.

Perception becomes reality, especially when compounded by the tendency of the media to blow every little thing out of proportion (except where Obama is concerned).

Ms Bachmann would do well to learn from what others have endured from the Democrat attack machine.

Take Sarah Palin for example. The media and the Liberals have tried with all their might to besmirch Palin's reputation. They have, among other things, pored through all her e-mails, both private and public, searching for any and every morsel of malfeasance or immorality to use against her, to take her down, to destroy her reputation.

They found nothing. They filed multiple frivolous lawsuits, made multiple unfounded accusations against her, to no avail.

She is squeaky clean.

There are no skeletons in Sarah Palin's closet.

But there is this:

She quit.

It makes no difference why she quit. she could have been forced to resign under threat of her entire family being held at gunpoint. If the Libs had threatened to nuke Alaska, killing the entire population off if she didn't quit, the Liberal Democratic attack machine would still use the fact that she quit as evidence that she can't be trusted to handle the stress of a Presidency.

As far as these natural disasters being some kind of judgment or statement from God almighty:

If God wants to send a warning to America, I assure you, it will be far less subtle than these two little events. The idea that these two minor weather events could be a sign from God almighty is preposterous. If it's God sending a message, believe me, we will get the message in no uncertain terms. There will be no doubt of it's origin.

And, while I'm on the subject, why only America?

Why do Americans seem to assume the United States of America is somehow more important to God than--say--Israel? Or any other country for that matter?

Or, more blessed?

Or, more cursed?

How often have we heard, in an eschatological scenario, speculation that the Anti-Christ will be an American?

Are we not all His children? Are we not all His creation?

God is God of all Creation. Not just the U.S.A. If He decides to send us a message of warning in the form of great "earthquakes... in divers places, and famines, and pestilences", it will effect the entire world, not only a relatively small area of the United States.

And, politicians shouldn't attribute such minor inconveniences to God, even as a joke.

Well, Democrats should, so Republicans can attack them.

OK, so I do have some passion left, after all.


Jim said...

"Why do Americans seem to assume the United States of America is somehow more important to God than--say--Israel? Or any other country for that matter? "

American exceptionalism?

Z said...

Gad, your post almost freaked me out because I've been getting that message about not understanding God in about 239847239847 ways only in the last few days. geeeez...from things I'm reading, devotionals, talks on TV...yikes, and you did it, too!

As for Bachmann, she should have known how the media'd treat that like they did...did you see my blog on it?
Amazingly, a trio of CNN news readers said they'd kind of had the same thought about God and the disasters themselves and that she was JOKING, and that was clear.....and that CNN video got replaced next time I clicked on the link so I could post something about it...the replacement was an msnbc JERK totally slamming her......cutting out the people who were laughing WITH her when she said it! Same article,different video.
I SWEAR, Mark...come take a look at my post. You won't believe it.

By the way, considering our history and how blessed we HAVE been while we honored God in every way in our society, I do believe America's exceptional in this way.
But, I also can't stand it when someone says "Harry got a new house..he is so blessed!" We are ALL BLESSED in one way or the other; it's our biggest blessing that we can do what we want with those blessings; and that the more we realize we're blessed, the more the blessings come. :-)
End of sermon. SAY HALLEUJAH! (Smile) I'll just trip off my soapbox now!

Marshall Art said...

Well. While I'd agree that candidates are by force in need of discretion in the words they choose and the things they say. On the other hand, I don't want any of the to have to walk on egg shells for the sake of not arousing the lunatics of the left. They're lefties. They can't help themselves.

It's those people on the fence, the ones of whom it is said any candidate needs to woo. Are they lunatics? Can they take a joke? Even a bad one? The media is in the pocket of the loons because most of the media are loons themselves. Let 'em say what they want. The trick is to make them support what they say. Put the burden on them to prove that there's something wrong with a Michele Bachmann or a Rick Perry. What did they say that was so wrong? Why do you believe it means that and not this? How can you prove that or back it up?

The left, as we know from our own experiences with them, are far more likely to cave, run away or pretend they weren't asked such questions. They stake their whole argument in demonizing the person rather than speaking about what the person is really saying, what the person stands for and against.

If a lefty wants to accuse a right-winger of nastiness based on a speech or part of one, respond with the entire context and demand that they explain why they are commenting on only a portion out of context.

I was just recently a victim of such tactics by a troll that keeps returning to my blog like a herpes. He quoted me to indict me. The quote he used? "We hate" Pretty thorough, isn't it? What do we hate? He didn't say, but only wanted to use as an admission that we, the right wing, are haters. The context might have said, "We hate being shot in the face", but he used only "We hate" in order to smear. Typical. (As it happened, the entire context was along the lines of "We hate what they do..." or words to that effect.

THAT'S the kind of crap Bachmann must ignore or address directly, not to defend what she said, but to force the accusers to defend their accusation.

Trader Rick said...

Now that Perry is in the race, it's inconsequential what the other candidates do or say.

Jim said...

I actually thought that what Bachmann said was kind of funny in a lame sort of way. It was timely. Although the so-called liberal media made a bit about her "joke", I didn't think it was made to be a big deal.

Mark said...

Jim, America is exceptional. There is no doubt about that, but, the statement should be taken in context.
I said, what makes American's think America is more important to God?

Do you think God considers America to be exceptional? More important than Israel?

Art, the leftist media don't have to be right. They depend on the average Democrat voter being ignorant of the full story. That's why we constantly hear Democrats repeating the same out of context talking points ad nauseum. All they need to do is put their own unique spin on their reporting of events and the majority of the American public swallows it whole, hook, line, and sinker. And that's why Ms. Bachmann and others need to watch what they say very carefully. Not because of informed voters, but because of uniformed voters, who are, sadly, in the majority.

Rick, I hope you're right, but there is so much about Perry we still don't know. There may be a few skeletons in his closet as well, and as I said Perception is reality to most voters.

Jim said...

"America is exceptional. There is no doubt about that."

Just curious, seriously. I hear this all the time from all quarters, but it is unclear to me what SOME people mean by it.

So in the spirit of sharing, could you please state what "American Exceptionalism" is and why "there is no doubt" that America is exceptional. And then explain your question about whether America is more "important" than Israel.

This is a serious request. Thanks.

Marshall Art said...


That's why I think the Dems and their media lapdogs should be ignored, but if not ignored, made to support their version of events. Notice Ed Schultz as the extreme example he is. He purposely used a quote of Rick Perry's out of context to smear him with the goo of racism. He was made to admit his purposeful deception, even if he didn't withdraw the accusation of racism.

Another example is the accusations of racial epithets being hurled at members of Congress who purposely strolled through a group of Tea Party people for the purpose of arousing them. Andrew Breitbart offered big bucks for anyone who could produce proof of the charge and the accusers crawled back into their hole.

Conservative politicians are targets by virtue of the fact that those reporting want to target them. Those who do swallow their version of events don't need the media because their of the same lunatic mindset. Lunatics don't get to dictate how the sane should act.

Jim said...

"members of Congress who purposely strolled through a group of Tea Party people for the purpose of arousing them."

Weren't they in fact strolling up the Capitol steps, you know, the place where they work? They should have to be concerned about arousing them what?

"Andrew Breitbart offered big bucks for anyone who could produce proof of the charge."

Well since the only "proof" was the word of black man, that was a really safe offer.

"the accusers crawled back into their hole."

I don't believe Congressman Lewis has crawled back into any hole.

Marshall Art said...

"Well since the only "proof" was the word of black man, that was a really safe offer."

The "proof" should have been in the video cameras of the staffers that wielded them as they walked through a mostly white crowd as a group of black people hoping to incite the very verbal attacks of which they accuse innocent people. I say innocent because in this country, that's what they are until proven otherwise. None of the "victims" cared to confront the hurlers of epithets, videos of the events don't even show any heads among the caucus members snapping in the direction whence came the supposed epithets (kinda curious, I'd say). The "word of a black man" is as good as the black man whose word is given. Personally, I'm far more suspicious of someone with (D) following their name regardless of their race or sex.

The hole Lewis crawled back into was the one where race-baiters reside---a hole where you can also find race-baiters like Ed Schultz, Jeanine Garafalo and others who accuse all day long without proof.

Jim said...

Your previous post defies logic. Black and white congressman should enter the Capitol via the "back door" so as not to incite the "mostly white crowd"? What does this say about the crowd?

Are you thinking that the Congressmen should have bolted into the crowd to go after the first person who used a racial epithet? Ah yes, the angry black man.

And yes Congressman Clever (not Lewis; my bad) does react immediately to being spat upon.

So you won't change your mind and I won't change mine on this. Which is fine with me.

Jim said...

Now, back to American exceptionalism...

In your words, how is America exceptional, why, and why is there no doubt about it?

Marshall Art said...

Sorry, Jim. Not buying it. Cleaver lets the spit run down his face so he can bitch the guy out, and then later remembers to wipe it off? I think he was wiping off his own drool from flapping his gums at the dude. It doesn't make sense. It looked like he was swattin' flies at first. Now, it's possible that some saliva was expelled as the guy was yelling "Kill the bill!", but that doesn't mean his intention was to spit upon anyone. And that's the real issue, isn't it? Not that Cleaver caught some spit, but that it was launched on purpose.

As to why they walked as a group of black men at that moment, yes, I believe they did it with the hopes of inciting those they already labeled as racists. Sure, they have a right to walk together at any time anywhere in this country through a public area. But a group of lefties don't do what these guys did without purpose beyond getting to point B.

What's more, a group of black men comprised of Allen West, Thomas Sowell, Walter Williams, Clarence Thomas...they'd be cheered by this crowd. The dudes in the video were yelled at for their policies and leftist ideologies, not their color.

Mark said...

I believe I read somewhere that there is an underground passage between the two buildings, and, usually the Congress people use that to avoid any possible confrontations like that. To intentionally walk through an angry crowd like that when they could have easily avoided it...well, what other reason could they have had, other than to incite controversy? Cause I can't think of any.

Jim said...

Yada yada yada.

Now, about American exceptionalism?