Dr. Charles Krauthammer

Charles Krauthammer (born March 13, 1950) is an American Pulitzer Prize-winning syndicated columnist and political commentator. His weekly column appears in the The Washington Post and is syndicated in more than 200 newspapers and media outlets.[1] He is a contributing editor to the Weekly Standard and The New Republic. He is a Fox News contributor, a regular panelist on Fox’s evening news programSpecial Report with Bret Baier and a weekly panelist on Inside Washington.[2]                                                   Dr. Krauthammer is on Fox News . He is an M.D. and a lawyer and is paralyzed from the neck down.  A friend went to hear Charles Krauthammer. He listened with 25 others in a closed room. What he says here, is NOT 2nd-hand but 1st. The ramifications are staggering for us, our children and their children.   Last Monday was a profound evening, Dr. Charles Krauthammer spoke to the Center for the American Experiment. He is a brilliant intellectual, seasoned & articulate. He is forthright and careful in his analysis, and never resorts to emotions or personal insults. He is NOT a fear monger nor an extremist in his comments and views . He is a fiscal conservative, and has received a Pulitzer Prize for writing. He is a frequent contributor to Fox News and writes weekly for the Washington Post. The entire room was held spellbound during his talk. I have summarized his comments, as we are living in uncharted waters economically and internationally.  Even 2 Dems at my table agreed with everything he said! If you feel like forwarding this to those who are open minded and have not drunk the Kool-Aid, feel free.                                         Summary of his comments:                      1. Mr. Obama is a very intellectual, charming individual. He is not to be underestimated. He is a cool customer who doesn't show his emotions. It's very hard to know what's behind the mask.The taking down of the Clinton dynasty was an amazing accomplishment. The Clintons still do not understand what hit them. Obama was in the perfect place at the perfect time.                       2. Obama has political skills comparable to Reagan and Clinton . He has a way of making you think he's on your side, agreeing with your position, while doing the opposite. Pay no attention to what he SAYS; rather, watch what he DOES!                       3. Obama has a ruthless quest for power. He did not come to Washington to make something out of himself, but rather to change everything, including dismantling capitalism. He can't be straightforward on his ambitions, as the public would not go along. He has a heavy hand, and wants to level the playing field with income redistribution and punishment to the achievers of society. He would like to model the USA to Great Britain or Canada .                       4. His three main goals are to control ENERGY, PUBLIC EDUCATION, and NATIONAL HEALTHCARE by the Federal government. He doesn't care about the auto or financial services industries, but got them as an early bonus. The cap and trade will add costs to everything and stifle growth. Paying for FREE college education is his goal. Most scary is his healthcare program, because if you make it FREE and add 46,000,000 people to a Medicare-type single-payer system, the costs will go through the roof. The only way to control costs is with massive RATIONING of services, like in Canada . God forbid!                       5. He has surrounded himself with mostly far-left academic types. No one around him has ever even run a candy store. But they are going to try and run the auto, financial, banking and other industries. This obviously can't work in the long run. Obama is not a socialist; rather he's a far-left secular progressive bent on nothing short of revolution. He ran as a moderate, but will govern from the hard left. Again, watch what he does, not what he says.                      6. Obama doesn't really see himself as President of the United States , but more as a ruler over the world. He sees himself above it all, trying to orchestrate & coordinate various countries and their agendas. He sees moral equivalency in all cultures. His apology tour in Germany and England was a prime example of how he sees America , as an imperialist nation that has been arrogant, rather than a great noble nation that has at times made errors. This is the first President ever who has chastised our allies and appeased our enemies!                      7. He is now handing out goodies. He hopes that the bill (and pain) will not come due until after he is reelected in 2012. He would like to blame all problems on Bush from the past, and hopefully his successor in the future. He has a huge ego, and Dr. Krauthammer believes he is a narcissist.                      8. Republicans are in the wilderness for a while, but will emerge strong. Republicans are pining for another Reagan, but there will never be another like him. Krauthammer believes Mitt Romney, Tim Pawlenty & Bobby Jindahl (except for his terrible speech in February) are the future of the party. Newt Gingrich is brilliant, but has baggage. Sarah Palin is sincere and intelligent, but needs to really be seriously boning up on facts and info if she is to be a serious candidate in the future. We need to return to the party of lower taxes, smaller government, personal responsibility, strong national defense, and state's rights.                      9. The current level of spending is irresponsible and outrageous. We are spending trillions that we don't have. This could lead to hyperinflation, depression or worse. No country has ever spent themselves into prosperity. The media is giving Obama, Reid and Pelosi a pass because they love their agenda. But eventually the bill will come due and people will realize the huge bailouts didn't work, nor will the stimulus package.These were trillion-dollar payoffs to Obama's allies, unions and the Congress to placate the left, so he can get support for #4 above.                      10. The election was over in mid-September when Lehman brothers failed, fear and panic swept in, we had an unpopular President, and the war was grinding on indefinitely without a clear outcome. The people are in pain, and the mantra of change caused people to act emotionally. Any Dem would have won this election; it was surprising it was as close as it was.                      11. In 2012, if the unemployment rate is over 10%, Republicans will be swept back into power. If it's under 8%, the Dems continue to roll. If it's between 8-10%, it will be a dogfight. It will all be about the economy. I hope this gets you really thinking about what's happening in Washington and Congress. There is a left-wing revolution going  on, according to Krauthammer, and he encourages us to keep the faith and join the loyal resistance. The work will be hard, but we're right on most issues and can reclaim our country, before it's far too late.                      Do yourself a long term favor, send this to all who will listen to an intelligent assessment of the big picture. All our futures and children's futures depend on our good understanding of what is really going on in DC, and our action pursuant to that understanding!! It really IS up to each of us to take individual action!! Start with educating your friends and neighbors!!!

Don't take shopping money out of town because all our jobs may soon follow it

By KIP BURKE news editor

It's November now, and the Christmas season is near upon us. In our community, as it is all across America, thi s recession we're in means most folks are not going to be spending near as much this year. Unemployment is way up, and those of us with jobs are holding our breath and praying that we'll keep them. For that reason, I'm begging you not to take your Christmas shopping money out of town, because the next job that's lost might be yours.

Already, Americans' demand for cheap products from the big chain stores has destroyed millions of American factory jobs, and hundreds of factory jobs just in our county. Cheap and often unsafe products manufactured in China fill those stores simply because we've foolishly demanded the lowest price at the expense of quality. We've spent years refusing to pay a dollar more, and now we've chased all those good manufacturing jobs overseas. We did that, and we need to quit it.

I know we're all cutting back this year. What money you do spend, though, I'm begging you to spend with the local shops and stores who employ our families, who make donations to all our schools, our youth, and our community. It's the local merchants and factories who buy tickets to barbecues and car washes, who support our cancer patients, our civic groups and our churches.

The stores in Augusta, Thomson, and Athens don't do this. They don't care at all about you or your children. But our business owners, our friends and neighbors, they do care and they support our community with everything from ads for football programs and yearbooks, to radio spots and newspaper ads, even when they're on the edge of bankruptcy themselves.

You can find what you want here. You've probably noticed that smart shoppers from all over the state come to shop in Washington. They come from miles around, turning up their noses at big malls, Walmart, and all their local stores to come and wander around The Square and shop in our stores. That tells me that we do have great places to shop, that we can buy our Christmas gifts here, and only here.

It's been seven years since I darkened the door of a Walmart, so I know it can be done. I shop here first.

Now, we're still blessed to have many good jobs here. Agriculture is still king in Wilkes County, and manufacturing is still vital to our workforce, but it's undeniable that the retail and service economy here is an important source of Friday paychecks, especially for a family's second or third job.

Where we spend every dollar does make a difference. Every dollar taken out of town comes out of a Wilkes County pocket forever. Every dime and dollar could mean jobs lost here. What you do does make a difference.

Spend smart, spend with your heart, and shop at home. Please.

Remarks from today’s Ft. Hood press conference November 6th, 2009

Home >> Army News >>
Remarks from today’s Ft. Hood press conference

U.S. Army photo by Eric Martinez, 13th Public Affairs Detachment

I’m Army Secretary John McHugh. I want to make a few comments and then turn the microphones over to the Chief of Staff of the Army General George Casey.

All morning, the Chief of Staff, Mrs. Casey, myself, and other representatives from the Army Staff, from the Pentagon, have been here at Fort Hood – have had the opportunity to tour with General Cone and Mrs. Cone and his command staff. We have had the chance to go to the processing center, the site of the incident, and received a full brief from a variety of law enforcement agencies who have been involved in this situation – DES, CID, FBI, local police, Texas Rangers and others who are working seamlessly together and we so deeply deeply appreciate that. After that, our party traveled to Darnell (Army Medical Center), to hear from the medical staff as to the condition of those who have been wounded and those who are still in treatment . The Chief and I and Mrs. Casey had the chance to visit those both still in the intensive care unit and on the general ward, and thereafter, go visit with a grouping of those who were processing the Soldiers through the processing center at the time of this very very tragic incident. We thereafter went to one of the post chapels, had a chance to meet with the 36th Engineer Brigade, with the Soldiers who had an extraordinarily tough day amongst so many Soldiers who had a tough day – yesterday, 4 killed, 11 wounded, and tried to do our best to talk about how the Army Family will stand with them.

Obviously our thoughts, our prayers, are particularly with those of the fallen – the Families of the Soldiers who were killed, the Soldiers and the Families of those who were wounded in action. These are Soldiers who were preparing to do what they love, for the country that they love. And we wanted them to know, and we want America to know, that the United States Army, the United States Government writ large, stands ready to provide them every possible assistance not just today, not just through the weekend, but will undoubtedly be very troubling, very challenging times ahead.

I want to give a special thanks and a word of admiration to the first responders. Those who came when the call went out, within minutes of the shots being fired in the center. And those Soldiers who utilized their battlefield lifesaving training in the building, as the situation was still unfolding, to save lives. And we were told that those actions did indeed save lives.

A thanks to the medical personnel and professionals at Darnell, those who work at Scott & White (Memorial Hospital) and Metroplex (Adventist Hospital) and others, who have done just an incredible job pitching in and helping the Fort Hood community to respond to those challenges as well.

I want to say thank you to the President of the United States, the Vice President, the Secretary of Defense, all of whom have been personally involved with this situation from the first minute we were made aware of what was happening here in Texas and at Ft. Hood. And as the Secretary of Defense told the Chief and myself – every possible resource, every possible form of support will be made available to the Soldiers, the Famil(ies), the command staff here at Ft. Hood.

The Army Family is strong. But a great source of that strength is what we derive from each other. In times of crisis and challenge how we hold each other straight and how we make a difference. And we’re going to provide every necessary resource to ensure that those in need have what they need, that those in need are taken care of.

The full force of the Army stands behind General Cone. His command staff, I have to tell you, from my perspective they have done an incredible job responding to an incredibly difficult challenge. Most of all, we want the Soldiers and the Families here at Fort Hood and across every Army facility everywhere in the world to know this is a time for the Army Family to stand together. This is a time for “Army Strong” to mean what it says. And this is a time, to know that we are working, every moment, to ensure that their safety and security is met to the highest possible degree.

And with that I yield the microphones to the Chief of Staff of the Army.

Thank you Mr. Secretary. It’s been frankly an honor to accompany the Secretary to talk to the victims, their Families, and the care providers all around Fort Hood. I’ll tell you candidly this was a kick in the gut. Not only for the Fort Hood community but also for our entire Army. And the Secretary and I are here to ensure that Fort Hood has the resources they need to mount a sustained response. Because this is going to take awhile. And we want everyone here to know that the full resources of the Army and the Department of Defense are behind the men and women of the Fort Hood community.

I will tell you that across the Army in the last 24 hours, I’ve asked our leaders to come together behind the victims, their Families, and the Fort Hood community. I’ve asked them to examine their Force Protection measures, and to take appropriate action. I’ve asked them to keep their Soldiers informed, and not rush to judgment until the investigation is completed. And I’ve asked them to stay focused on their mission.

As I said, I have full confidence in the team here given the response that I’ve seen. And I have full confidence in the local community and the state and federal agencies that have fallen in here to help General Cone and to help the men and women here at Fort Hood.

Unfortunately over the past eight years, our Army has been no stranger to tragedy. But we are an Army that draws strength from adversity. And hearing the stories of courage and heroism that I heard today makes me proud to be a leader of this great Army.

I heard stories about medics, who were sitting in a graduation in a building next door, hearing the gunfire, and running to the sounds of the guns because they knew there would be wounded – in their caps and gowns.

I talked to a young private who was sitting in his pickup truck in the parking lot, who heard gunshots, went back after his buddies. And with the help of others, dragged four individuals – badly wounded individuals – into his pickup truck and drove them to the emergency room, saving their lives.

And I talked to numerous Soldiers who were wounded – giving First Aid to their fellow Soldiers. I’m very proud, not only of the men and women here at Fort Hood but of our whole Army. We take care of our own, we will grieve as a family, and we will maintain our focus on our missions around the world. And the Secretary and I would be happy to take your questions. I will tell you upfront that because of the on-going investigation, we will not be able to give particulars on the suspect or on the crime scene. So with that, (with) Mr. Secretary, we’ll take your questions.

Posted bylindykyzerinArmy NewsFort Hood, Fort Hood shooting, U.S. Army

The Marriage Index — A Revealing Look at the Nation

[This post is from Albert Mohler's blog.]


The Marriage Index — A Revealing Look at the Nation

Posted: Monday, November 02, 2009 at 2:14 pm ET
     Subscribe

Why hasn't this been done before? That question comes immediately to mind in light of the release of "The Marriage Index," a project undertaken by the Institute for American Values in cooperation with the National Center for African American Marriages and Parenting. The Marriage Index is an instrument that, for the first time, offers a comprehensive view of the state of marriage in the nation.

Throughout most of the 20th century, economic policy has been informed by the "Leading Economic Index" calculated by The Conference Board. That index, designed to track economic trends and to warn of impending recession, utilizes ten components of data, ranging from the average weekly hours worked by manufacturing workers to the amount of new building permits for housing. Just about everyone -- including both government and the private sector -- utilizes the Leading Economic Index as an essential tool for evaluating the health of the economy and its future prospects.

Now, for the first time, The Marriage Index does for the health of marriage what the Leading Economic Index does for the health of the economy -- it provides essential data we ignore at our own peril.

The Marriage Index is a project of the Institute for American Values and the National Center on African American Marriages and Parenting. As their recently released report asks: "Why do we so carefully measure and widely publicize our leading economic indicators, and do everything we can to improve them, while rarely bothering to measure our leading marriage indicators, or try to do anything as a society to improve them?"

The availability of The Marriage Index as a means of assessing the health of marriage is a most welcome development.  As Maggie Gallagher, president of the National Organization for Marriage, comments, "It's a brilliant conceptual idea, long overdue. This is a GDP for marriage, a way to statistically sum up complex trends in a way that allows us to capture a core truth: Is marriage getting weaker or stronger?"

The Marriage Index is based on solid data and includes five major components: the percentage of adults ages 20-54 who were married, the percentage of married persons who are "very happy" with their marriage, the percentage of first marriages that are in tact, the percentage of births to married parents, and the percentage of children living with their own married parents.

The percentage of adults who are married is an obvious indicator of the health of marriage in society. The report considers this percentage among the population of adults who are most likely to be coupling and least likely to be widowed. This indicator is not encouraging. As the report reveals, "The trend in the last four decades suggests that many adults are less likely to find marriage an attractive choice. In 1970, 78.6 percent of adults age 20-54 were married. In 2008, it dropped to 57.2 percent."

"People still form relationships and still have children, but they are more likely to do so without marriage," the report summarizes. This trend is especially common among younger adults. These young adults have experienced a disillusionment about marriage due to the divorce rates of their own parents. They now "show a much more favorable attitude toward cohabitation than earlier generations."

The second indicator considers how many married persons report themselves to be "very happy" in their marriages. This measure of marital quality can be tracked through available data, and the trend is not positive. Though a clear majority of married Americans report their unions to be very happy, that figure has dropped from 67 percent to 62 percent in 40 years.

The marriage quality indicator is also important for children. As the report affirms, "when parents' marital relationship suffers, children also tend to suffer." The report also cites University of Texas sociologist Norval Glenn, who argues that the decline in marital happiness can be directly traced to the undermining of marital permanence by the availability of divorce.

The third indicator is the percentage of first marriages that are intact. In 1970, 77.4 percent of first marriages were intact, but only 61.2 percent were intact in 2007. There are signs that the percentage of intact first marriages may have actually increased in the last decade of this period, indicating that the divorce statistics are not inevitable. In other words, marital commitment can increase over time.

The percentage of births to married persons is the fourth major indicator. There has been a stunning increase in the percentage of children born to single parents or cohabiting couples. Today, only 60.3 percent of all babies were born to married couples, compared to 89.3 percent in 1970. Few statistics in social science reveal such a massive shift in the way human beings act and organize their lives. Marriage is the unique context in which children are most likely to flourish. Just one fact to keep in mind: Half of all children born to cohabiting couples see those unions end by age five.

The fifth indicator is the percentage of children living with their own married parents. "Marriage not only ensures that children are born into a stable family," the report argues, "it also intends that children are raised with their own biological or adoptive mother and father." The report cites family scholar David Popenoe, who stated, "Few propositions have more empirical support in the social sciences than this one: Compared to all other family forms, families headed by married, biological parents are best for children."

In contrast, children from divorced or single-parent families are more likely to drop out of school, to be unemployed, and to become teen mothers. Interestingly, recent research indicates that children raised in stepfamilies "look more like children of single parents and children being raised by their own married parents." In 1970, 68.7 percent of all children lived with their own mother and father. In 2007, that percentage had dropped to 61.0.

Taken as a composite, these leading marriage indicators reveal a score of 60.3 percent in 2008 -- a devastating drop from 76.2 percent in 1970. Clearly, the nation's marital health is in a free fall. This raises a frightening question: How low can these indicators fall and the society continue to survive?

The index of Leading Economic Indicators is understood to be a vital measure of America's health and future prospects. If anything, The Marriage Index should be understood to be even more important to the health and welfare of our society. How low can these indicators go and the nation survive? Let's pray we do not learn that answer the hard way.

________________________

Posted: Monday, November 02, 2009 at 2:14 pm ET
     Subscribe

Wilkes County's woods are full of hunters, but many deer are hiding in city backyards

[This post is from the News-Reporter.]


By KIP BURKE news editor

With all the deer hunters in the woods right now, I think I've found what they're looking for - I know where a bunch of the deer went.

They're in my yard. With more than a million whitetail deer in Georgia, and more than
million public acres on which to hunt in the state, how come a dozen deer - make that 14
are browsing my back yard right now? I mean, my garden's done for the season, so they have to settle for the usual fall buffet of acorns and grass. But it's hunting season, and I guess that makes my little in-town acre suddenly a deer magnet.

Now, we've had a good-sized deer herd living in the Grove for generations, and about half the deer I'm seeing today grew up right here. I recognize two young eight-point bucks as the fawns I've watched grow from two years ago, and their mama, plus two yearlings and another doe that have been around forever.

But the other six or eight deer seem to be strangers. I can tell them from the usual family group because they're a lot more twitchy. They don't ignore our smell and presence like the deer who have grown up seeing and smelling us since birth.

I'm not saying these Grove deer are tame by any means, they're just accustomed to us. When I walk out the door, they give me a wary glance and may shy back a few feet if I make a sudden noise, but they've figured out I'm not a threat and they don't run away. When I'm working in the garden, I've had them quietly wander up behind me, browsing within 30 feet, aware of me but not concerned.

Hunters come from all over to hunt Wilkes County's woods every year, and that drives some deer into the relative safety of the city, where they seem to know they can't be shot at. They can, however, be hit by cars and trucks, and that happens a lot this time of year. It seems like a dozen deer-car wrecks have happened this week alone all around the county, and in the city. That's one reason I appreciate hunters who come from all over the South to try to harvest our abundant deer - each one taken is one we don't have to dodge on the highway.

So far, I haven't hit a deer in my 12 years here, but I can't brag. Soon after we moved here, I nailed a loose 1,200-pound Angus bull with my wife's minivan, and terminally tenderizing a love-struck young bull makes up for dodging a lot of deer. And I have recently come way too close to hitting a buck with my motorcycle, a collision that would have been pretty unpleasant for both of us.

For that reason, I wish all you deer hunters, local and visiting, good luck and good hunting. Despite my back yard full, there's plenty to go around, and you know that monster buck is out there just waiting for y'all. Harvest all you can, because we sure don't want to thump any more of them with our vehicles.

Around here, whether it's bow, muzzle-loader, or rifle season, it's always chrome bumper season, and I'm pretty sure they can't all hide in my yard.

Rules for Presidents

By JAMES TARANTO

Blogger Donald Sensing has a fascinating analysis of President Obama's war against Fox News. He describes the effort as "directly out of the Saul Alinsky playbook." Alinsky was the author of "Rules for Radicals," bible of left-wing community organizers. One of his rules, or "power tactics": "Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it." Sensing analyzes how Obama is carrying out this advice:

Pick the target. Do not make the mistake of thinking that FoxNews Channel is the actual target. The bullseye target of this campaign is all the public media. FNC's role in this much broader attack is the next two precepts.
Freeze it. This does not mean to shock the target into inactivity, but to fix a certain perception about the target in the minds of the broader community, in this case the media figures in general and the minds of the community (in this case, the whole nation is the community) as a whole.
The White House strategy here is twofold. First, to freeze FNC away from being thought of as just one of the universe of media outlets. White House Communications Director Anita Dunn opened this volley by declaring that FNC is not really a news organization, but the propaganda arm of the Republican party. . . .
Personalize it. Attacking FNC puts a face, a personal identity on the White House's enemy, but also serves to obscure the larger identity of the enemy. FNC is separated from the rest of the "real" media and personalized as a partisan, ideological arm of the president's political opposition. The White House wants the other media to think that its fight is with FoxNews exclusively, hoping they won't see that the real fight is with all media.
The other media may expect to be flattered as "real" reporters and news organizations who are actually the ones being "fair and balanced." The more a [sic] White House reporters and editors toe the White House line, the greater access they will be granted, especially to power figures such as Rahm Emmanuel, David Axelrod and, ultimately, Barack Obama himself, whom we may expect to give a one-on-one interview with the biggest suckup reporter gaining Dunn's favor. Reporters who don't fall into place will discover they are being frozen out of access and will have to rely exclusively on press briefer Robert Gibbs, which is the kiss of death to a White House reporter.
Polarize it. The White House wants to set up an us-v-them dynamic among the White House press pool. Hence, "White House Urges Other Networks to Disregard Fox News."
Sensing, who wrote this on Tuesday, observed, "So far, though, it's thankfully not working." That same day, as the New York Times reports, the White House escalated its effort--and the other networks sided with Fox:

In a sign of discomfort with the White House stance, Fox's television news competitors refused to go along with a Treasury Department effort on Tuesday to exclude Fox from a round of interviews with the executive-pay czar Kenneth R. Feinberg that was to be conducted with a "pool" camera crew shared by all the networks.
The Hill reports that in an interview aired yesterday, NBC's Savannah Guthrie asked the president, "Do you think it's appropriate for the White House to say what is and what is not a news organization?"

Obama dodged the question: "I think the American people are a lot more interested in what we're doing to create jobs and how we're handling the situation in Afghanistan."

"Fair enough," Guthrie replied, "but your advisers raised this issue."

Obama: "We no, the--I think that what our advisers have simply said is that we are going to take media as it comes, and if media is operating basically as a talk-radio format, then that's one thing, and if it's operating as a--as a news outlet, then that's another. But it's not something I'm losing a lot of sleep over."

The quality of the president's slumber is no one's business but his and Mrs. Obama's, but the president's protestations of disinterest in this question are belied by this detail from the Times:

Speaking privately at the White House on Monday with a group of mostly liberal columnists and commentators, including Rachel Maddow and Keith Olbermann of MSNBC and Maureen Dowd, Frank Rich and Bob Herbert of The New York Times, Mr. Obama himself gave vent to sentiments about the network, according to people briefed on the conversation.
MediaBistro has a complete list of attendees at the meeting, and it includes nonpartisan journalists such as Jerry Seib of The Wall Street Journal and Gwen Ifill of PBS. If Obama thinks they belong in the same category as MSNBC ranter Keith Olbermann, one cannot take seriously his drawing a distinction between talk radio and news outlets.

It's hard to see any way in which the White House's war on Fox makes sense. The aim of the effort seems to be to contain the political damage from stories like the Van Jones and Acorn scandals, which Fox reported well ahead of most media outlets, by encouraging journalists at those outlets to think of Fox as illegitimate.

But that is their natural inclination anyway; it is the reason Fox was out in front on those stories. Other news organizations were embarrassed to be so badly scooped--and rightly so, because it exposed them as, at best, lacking a nose for news and, at worst, being in the tank for the Obama White House. The role of Obama courtier may suit Keith Olbermann and Rachel Maddow just fine, but for any real journalist, being blessed as "legitimate" by a powerful politician is a challenge to prove one's independence.

Further, it diminishes the president for him to act as media critic. As Obama himself suggested in trying to dodge Savannah Guthrie's question, why isn't he concentrating on the economy, Afghanistan and other matters that are actually part of his job? Eric Burns of MediaMutters.org makes the point, hilariously if unwittingly, in a Puffington Host post:

The issue is not whether it was a good idea politically for the White House to say that the emperor has no clothes. The issue is that the emperor actually has no clothes. In other words, the administration's comments about Fox News aren't the story. Fox News is the story.
In Burns's rendition of "The Emperor's New Clothes," the president of the United States is cast in the role of the innocent child who isn't afraid to observe that the emperor is naked. That seems to get the fable exactly backward. Of course, for a professional ankle-biter like Burns, Fox News is the emperor--i.e., a vastly more powerful and important institution than MediaMutters. But it doesn't seem to occur to Burns that he diminishes the president by bringing him down to his own level--perhaps because the president has been so busy diminishing himself of late.

Which brings us back to Alinsky, and this quote from the "Rules for Radicals" prologue:

What follows is for those who want to change the world from what it is to what they believe it should be. The Prince was written by Machiavelli for the Haves on how to hold power. Rules for Radicals is written for the Have-Nots on how to take it away.
For an example of how the Have-Nots are capitalizing on Alinsky's insights, read our Weekend Interview with Andrew Breitbart, the Internet entrepreneur who masterminded the publicity campaign that made the Acorn scandal into a story the media couldn't ignore.

But Alinskyite tactics are of no use to Obama. As president of the United States, he is the ultimate Have. Maybe he is wearing an exquisite suit of clothes, but Obama doesn't seem to have a clue that he is the emperor.

Two Rival Religions?

[This post is from Albert Mohler's blog.]

Posted: Monday, July 13, 2009 at 5:06 am ET
Subscribe
On November 3, 1921, J. Gresham Machen presented an address entitled, "Liberalism or Christianity?" In that famous address, later expanded into the book, Christianity & Liberalism, Machen argued that evangelical Christianity and its liberal rival were, in effect, two very different religions.

Machen's argument became one of the issues of controversy in the Fundamentalist/Modernist controversies of the 1920s and beyond. By any measure, Machen was absolutely right--the movement that styled itself as liberal Christianity was eviscerating the central doctrines of the Christian faith while continuing to claim Christianity as "a way of life" and a system of meaning.

"The chief modern rival of Christianity is 'liberalism,'" Machen asserted. "Modern liberalism, then, has lost sight of the two great presuppositions of the Christian message--the living God and the fact of sin," he argued. "The liberal doctrine of God and the liberal doctrine of man are both diametrically opposite to the Christian view. But the divergence concerns not only the presuppositions of the message, but also the message itself."

Howard P. Kainz, Professor Emeritus of Philosophy at Marquette University, offers a similar argument--warning that it is now modern secular liberalism which poses as the great rival to orthodox Christianity.

Observing the basic divide in the American culture, Kainz notes: "Most of the heat of battle occurs where traditional religious believers clash with certain liberals who are religiously committed to secular liberalism."

Kainz offers a crucial insight here, suggesting that one of the most important factors in the nation's cultural divide is that persons on both sides are deeply committed to their own creeds and worldviews--even if on one side those creeds are secular.

"This explains why talking about abortion or same-sex 'marriage,' for example, with certain liberals is usually futile. It is like trying to persuade a committed Muslim to accept Christ. Because his religion forbids it, he can only do so by converting from Islam to Christianity; he cannot accept Christ as long as he remains firmly committed to Islam. So it is with firmly committed liberals: Their 'religion' forbids any concessions to the 'conservative' agenda, and as long as they remain committed to their secular ideology, it is futile to hope for such concessions from them."

Kainz's argument bears similarities not only to J. Gresham Machen's observations about the theological scene, but also to Thomas Sowell's understanding of the larger culture. As Sowell argued in A Conflict of Visions, the basic ideological divide of our times is between those who hold a "constrained vision" over those who hold an "unconstrained vision." Both worldviews are, in the actual operations of life, reduced to certain "gut feelings" that operate much like religious convictions.

Kainz concedes that some will resist his designation of secularism as a religion. "Religion in the most common and usual sense connotes dedication to a supreme being or beings," he acknowledges. Nevertheless, "especially in the last few centuries, 'religion' has taken on the additional connotations of dedication to abstract principles or ideals rather than a personal being," he insists. Kainz dates the rise of this secular religion to the French Enlightenment and its idolatrous worship of Reason.

Looking back over the last century, Kainz argues that Marxism and ideological Liberalism have functioned as religious systems for millions of individuals. Looking specifically at Marxism, Kainz argues that the Marxist religion had dogmas, canonical scriptures, priests, theologians, ritualistic observances, parochial congregations, heresies, hagiography, and even an eschatology. Marxism's dogmas were its core teachings, including economic determinism and the "dictatorship of the proletariat." Its canonical scriptures included the writings of Marx, Lenin, and Mao Tse Tung. Its priests were those guardians of Marxist purity who functioned as the ideological theorists of the movement. Its ritualistic observances included actions ranging from workers' strikes to mass rallies. The eschatology of Marxism was to be realized in the appearance of "Communist man" and the new age of Marxist utopia.

Similarly, Kainz argues that modern secular liberalism includes its own dogmas. Among these are the beliefs "that mankind must overcome religious superstition by means of Reason; that empirical science can and will eventually answer all the questions about the world and human values that were formerly referred to traditional religion or theology; and that the human race, by constantly invalidating and disregarding hampering traditions, can and will achieve perfectibility."

Kainz also argues that contemporary liberalism has borrowed selectively from the New Testament, turning Jesus' admonition to "render unto Caesar what is Caesar's, and to God what is God's," as a foundation for "absolute secularism," enshrined in the language of a wall separating church and state. Thus, "religion [is] reduced to something purely private."

Secular liberalism also identifies certain sins such as "homophobia" and sexism. As Kainz sees it, the secular scriptures fall into two broad categories: "Darwinist and scientistic writings championing materialist and naturalistic explanations for everything, including morals; and feminist writings exposing the 'evil' of patriarchy and tracing male exploitation of females throughout history up to the present."

The priests and priestesses of secular liberalism constitute its "sacerdotal elite" and tend to be intellectuals who can present liberal values in the public square. Congregations where secular liberals gather include organizations such as Planned Parenthood, the ACLU, the National Organization of Women, and similar bodies. These groups "help supply a sense of affiliation and commonality for the religiously liberal."

The rites and rituals of secular liberalism include "gay pride" parades and pro-abortion rallies. Interestingly, the eschatology of this movement is, Kainz argues, the distillation of pragmatism. "In the estimation of the religiously liberal," Kainz asserts, "all lifestyles and all moralities can approximate this goal, as long as the proscribed illiberal 'sins' are avoided."

Kainz readily admits that not all liberals are committed to this religious vision of liberalism. As he sees it, "There are many people working for social justice, human rights, international solidarity, and other causes commonly regarded as liberal without a deep ideological commitment." His point is that conservatives may find common cause and common ground with these non-religiously committed liberals.

"For many 'moderate' liberals, liberalism is a political perspective, not a core ideology," he observes. "In the culture war it is important for Christians to distinguish between the religiously committed liberal and the moderate liberal. For one thing, Christians should not be surprised when they find no common ground with the former. They may form occasional, even if temporary, alliances with the latter."

Kainz's article "Liberalism as Religion: The Culture War Is Between Religious Believer on Both Sides," appears in the May 2006 edition of Touchstone magazine. His analysis is genuinely helpful in understanding the clash of positions, policies, convictions, and visions that mark our contemporary scene.

Though Kainz does not develop this point, all persons are, in their own way, deeply committed to their own worldview. There is no intellectual possibility of absolute value neutrality--not among human beings, anyway.

The conception of our current cultural conflict as a struggle between two rival religions is instructive and humbling. At the political level, this assessment should serve as a warning that our current ideological divides are not likely to disappear anytime soon. At the far deeper level of theological analysis, this argument serves to remind Christians that evangelism remains central to our mission and purpose. Those who aim at the merely political are missing the forest for the trees, and confusing the temporal for the eternal.

_______________________________

This article was first published May 26, 2006. During the month of July, I will be posting new articles and also featuring some articles from the archives I hope you will find helpful. This month requires a different schedule as I spend time with family and do groundwork on upcoming articles, messages, books, and projects. My normal schedule for new articles will resume as August begins.



© 2009, All rights reserved, www.AlbertMohler.com

The B25 Bomber and the Doolittle Raid

This morning I receved an email containing an autobiographical sketch
of the life of the late Edgar McElroy, some of which I've quoted below.
This is the only first-person account of the Doolittle I've read and I
found it very interesting. I've also included information about the B25
from Wikipedia and elsewhere.

"I was raised in Ennis, Texas the youngest of five children, son of Harry
and Jennie McElroy. Folks say that I was the quiet one. We lived
at 609 North Dallas Street attended the Presbyterian Church. ...

I graduated on July 11, 1941. I was now a real, honest-to-goodnesssome of
Army Air Corps pilot. Two days later, I married "Aggie" in Reno ,
Nevada . We were starting a new life together and were very happy.
I received my orders tog report to Pendleton , Oregon and join the
17th Bomb Group. Neither of us had traveled much before, and the
drive north through the Cascade Range of the Sierra Nevada 's was
interesting and beautiful. ....

After we got settled in Columbus [Columbia, SC], my squadron commander called us
all together. He told us that an awfully hazardous mission was
being planned, and then he asked for volunteers. There were some
of the guys that did not step forward, but I was one of the ones
that did. My co-pilot was shocked. He said "You can't volunteer,
Mac! You're married, and you and Aggie are expecting a baby soon.
Don't do it!" I told him that "I got into the Air Force to do what
I can, and Aggie understands how I feel. The war won't be easy for
any of us." ....

Within a few days of returning to our base in Florida we were
abruptly told to pack our things. After just three weeks of
practice, we were on our way. This was it. It was time to go. It
was the middle of March 1942, and I was 30 years old....


After having our plane serviced, we flew on to Alameda Naval Air
Station in Oakland . As I came in for final approach, we saw it! I
excitedly called the rest of the crew to take a look. There below
us was a huge aircraft carrier. It was the USS Hornet, and it
looked so gigantic! Man, I had never even seen a carrier until
this moment. There were already two B-25s parked on the flight
deck. Now we knew! My heart was racing, and I thought about how
puny my plane would look on board this mighty ship. As soon as we
landed and taxied off the runway, a jeep pulled in front of me
with a big "Follow Me" sign on the back. We followed it straight
up to the wharf, alongside the towering Hornet. All five of us
were looking up and just in awe, scarcely believing the size of
this thing. As we left the plane, there was already a Navy work
crew swarming around attaching cables to the lifting rings on top
of the wings and the fuselage. ...

I was reading through the April 18th day plan of the
Hornet, and there was a message in it which said, "From the Hornet
to the Army - Good luck, good hunting, and God bless you." I still
had a large lump in my throat from reading this, when all of a
sudden, the intercom blared, "General Quarters, General Quarters,
All hands man your battle stations! Army pilots, man your
planes!!!" There was instant reaction from everyone in the room
and food trays went crashing to the floor. I ran down to my room
jumping through the hatches along the way, grabbed my bag, and ran
as fast as I could go to the flight deck. I met with my crew at
the plane, my heart was pounding. Someone said, "What's going
on?" The word was that the Enterprise had spotted an enemy
trawler. It had been sunk, but it had transmitted radio messages.
We had been found out! ...

We continued inching forward, careful to keep my left main wheel and
my nose wheel on the white guidelines that had been painted on the
deck for us. Get off a little bit too far left and we go off the
edge of the deck. A little too far to the right and our wing-tip
will smack the island of the ship. With the best seat on the
ship, we watched Lt. Bower take off in plane number 12, and I
taxied up to the starting line, put on my the brakes and looked
down to my left. My main wheel was right on the line. Applied
more power to the engines, and I turned my complete attention to
the deck officer on my left, who was circling his paddles. Now my
adrenaline was really pumping! We went to full power, and the
noise and vibration inside the plane went way up. He circled the
paddles furiously while watching forward for the pitch of the
deck. Then he dropped them, and I said, "Here We Go!" I released
the brakes and we started rolling forward, and as I looked down
the flight-deck you could see straight down into the angry
churning water. As we slowly gained speed, the deck gradually
began to pitch back up. I pulled up and our plane slowly strained
up and away from the ship. There was a big cheer and whoops from
the crew, but I just felt relieved and muttered to myself, "Boy,
that was short!"....

When we were close enough, I pulled up to 1300 feet and opened the
bomb doors. There were furious black bursts of anti-aircraft fire
all around us, but I flew straight on through them, spotting our
target, the torpedo works and the dry-docks. I saw a big ship in
the dry-dock just as we flew over it. Those flak bursts were
really getting close and bouncing us around, when I heard
Bourgeois shouting, "Bombs Away!" I couldn't see it, but Williams
had a bird's eye view from the back and he shouted jubilantly, "We
got an aircraft carrier! The whole dock is burning!" I started
turning to the south and strained my neck to look back and at
that moment saw a large crane blow up and start falling over!...
Take that! There was loud yelling and clapping each other on the
back. We were all just ecstatic, and still alive! But there wasn't
much time to celebrate. We had to get out of here and fast! When
we were some thirty miles out to sea, we took one last look back
at our target, and could still see huge billows of black smoke.
Up until now, we had been flying for Uncle Sam, but now we were
flying for ourselves. ....

Looking for my flashlight, I groped through my bag with my right
hand, finally pulled it out and shined it down toward the ground,
which I still could not see. Finally I picked up a glimmer of
water and thought I was landing in a lake. We're too far inland
for this to be ocean. I hope! I relaxed my legs a little, thinking
I was about to splash into water and would have to swim out, and
then bang. I jolted suddenly and crashed over onto my side. Lying
there in just a few inches of water, I raised my head and put my
hands down into thick mud. It was rice paddy! There was a burning
pain, as if someone had stuck a knife in my stomach. I must have
torn a muscle or broke something...

Well, the five of us eventually made it out of China with the help
of the local Chinese people and the Catholic missions along the
way. They were all very good to us, and later they were made to
pay terribly for it, so we found out afterwards. For a couple of
weeks we traveled across country. Strafed a couple of times by
enemy planes, we kept on moving, by foot, by pony, by car, by
train, and by airplane. But we finally made it to India...
.
[ Edgar "Mac" Mc Elroy, Lt. Col., U.S.A.F. (Ret.) passed away at
his residence in Lubbock , Texas early on the morning of Friday,
April 4, 2003.]

The B-25 first gained fame as the bomber used in the 18 April 1942 Doolittle Raid, in which sixteen B-25Bs led by the legendary Lieutenant Colonel Jimmy Doolittle, attacked mainland Japan four months after the bombing of Pearl Harbor. The mission gave a much-needed lift in spirits to the Americans, and alarmed the Japanese who believed their home islands were inviolable by enemy troops. While the amount of actual damage done was relatively minor, it forced the Japanese to divert troops for the home defense for the remainder of the war. The raiders took off from the carrier USS Hornet and successfully bombed Tokyo and four other Japanese cities without loss. However, 15 subsequently crash-landed en route to recovery fields in Eastern China. These losses were the result of the task force being spotted by Japanese fishing vessels forcing the bombers to take off 170 mi (270 km) early, fuel exhaustion, stormy nighttime conditions with zero visibility, and lack of electronic homing aids at the recovery bases. Only one landed intact; it came down in the Soviet Union, where its five-man crew was interned and the aircraft confiscated. Of the 80 aircrew, 69 survived their historic mission and eventually made it back to American lines.

Not Wanting to Let Go

I recently came across the above picture (which I am sure many of you have seen already) of Paige Bennethum standing in formation with her father, pleading with him not to leave. Her father, Army Reserve Staff Sgt. Brett Bennethum was preparing to leave on a year -long deployment to Iraq.

Last week I attended the Association of the United States Army (AUSA) Annual Meeting and Exposition and had the opportunity to sit in on the Military Family Forums. On the final day, the topic for the forum focused on the effects of extended deployments on Soldiers, families and especially the children.

The Army psychiatrist, Col. Kris Peterson discussed with Army Spouses and support groups the seriousness of repeated, lengthy deployments and the effects they are having on children.

For example, he noted that yearly mental health visits for children under the age of 15 have increased from 800,000 in 2003 to 1.6 million in 2008. One out of three school-age children are at risk for psychological problems and about 30 percent of children have significantly increased anxiety.

In an effort to deal with that trend and provide a central place for Army children to get mental and physical help, Peterson and other experts at Madigan developed the Military Child and Adolescent Center of Excellence in Fort Lewis, Washington.

The team consists of pediatricians, psychologists, social workers and child and adolescent psychiatrists whom are looking at the latest research and strategically planning the way forward for caring for Army children in addition to sifting through existing programs to find what actually works.

Many times when we think about the U.S. Army we tend to focus just on the Soldiers. We must remember that there are children all over the country like Paige Bennethum whose father or mother is/will be deployed overseas for months at a time. These deployments obviously have a great effect on the children and that is why the U.S. Army is working hard to create and development programs and centers that will assist families through those difficult times.

Military families, we want to hear from you. Let us know what you think can be done to assist families in times of deployments. Children; share your stories of how you deal with a loved one being deployed.

Posted byashmccallinAUSA, Army Family, Army NewsAUSA, Col. Kris Peterson, Military Child and Adolescent Center of Excellence, Military Families, Paige Bennethum, Staff Sgt. Brett Bennethum

Mel Blackaby: from pioneer missions to megachurch pastor

[This post is from the Christian Index.]

By J. Gerald Harris, Editor
Published September 24, 2009

JONESBORO —

“I never envisioned myself living in Georgia or becoming pastor of First Baptist Church of Jonesboro. All I could see was the vast need for pastors and church leaders in Canada,” proclaimed Mel Blackaby.

Even though Blackaby did not anticipate coming to the Bible Belt to pastor a megachurch he is now firmly entrenched in his role as pastor of the Clayton County church.

The Jonesboro pastor continued, “

When I went to Bow Valley Baptist Church in Cochrane, Alberta, Canada they had one resume. I had one church in the states that contacted me that had 400 resumes.

“I was happy serving the church in Cochrane and planned to spend my life in a pioneer missions area, but God began speaking to me about coming to the South. God seemed to bless the prayer conferences and the revivals I preached in the South, but no one was asking me to come pastor their church.

“However, during that time God was preparing me to come to pastor a church somewhere in the southern states. He was teaching me to walk by faith and shaping my pastor’s heart. Eight large churches contacted me during that time, but my impression of a megachurch was mostly negative and I perceived that the pastor of such a church was mostly a corporate executive. I could never see myself as a CEO, but as only a pastor.”

Gerald Harris/Index:
Pastor Mel Blackaby, left, and Minister of Music Rick Stone take delight in serving together at First Baptist Church, Jonesboro. Blackaby joined the church as pastor in June 2008.
First Baptist Jonesboro extended a call to Blackaby in June of 2008 and he officially began serving as pastor on Aug. 1.

Blackaby admitted, “

I had to move from a pioneer mission mindset to a megachurch mindset. I have always believed that Christ was the head of the church and wanted to find out His plan for our church rather than just launch my own agenda. I wanted to find out what He was doing and just partner with Him in His divine plan.”

Mel is the son of Henry and Marilyn Blackaby and one of five grown children, all of whom are engaged in a full-time ministry. The Jonesboro pastor was born in California while his father was a student at Golden Gate Seminary. He became a Christian at age nine during the time his father was pastor of a church in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada.

Blackaby recalled, “

As a child I didn’t know any other Christians in school and when I visited my friends’ homes I noticed the difference in their homes and my home. There was cursing and drinking and I realized the difference Christ can make in one’s home. That, more than anything else, prompted me to put my faith and trust in the Lord.

“As a teenager I never saw myself as a leader and struggled with how God could use my life,” Blackaby admitted. “At the same time I sensed God was calling me to serve Him, but I had some personal dreams I wanted to pursue. Since our family was involved in pioneer missions we were poor. I wanted to get out, make some money, travel, and see the world.

“It got to the place that every time I read my Bible I felt guilty, so I quit reading the Bible. I also didn’t feel like praying, so I quit that as well.

“I had started my studies as a physical education major in the university, but dropped out of school to go to northern Alberta to work in a lumber camp. I was making a lot of money, but the work I was doing was very dangerous.

“One day I was in the process of cutting down a large tree. When the tree fell, the bottom of this tree swung around and crushed my leg. As I lay there in that snow bank with a shattered femur, the Lord spoke to my heart and said, ‘If you are not going to be of any use to me on this earth, then you have no reason to live and I can take your life any time I wish.’

“In three months the Lord took away my entire identity. I lost my ability to play sports. I lost my girlfriend. I lost my job and my ability to make money. I even lost my driver’s license, because the police came and took it away due to my reckless driving record. So at 20 years of age I didn’t know who I was. I knew I needed to change.”

From that moment Mel Blackaby resolved to die to self and follow the Lord.

After recuperating from his accident Blackaby decided to leave Canada, move to Abilene, Texas, and enroll in Hardin-Simmons University. Upon graduating with a major in history he married the former Gina Merriam, a young lady he had met in Canada. Gina had served on a mission team in Vancouver for six months as a part of the Home Mission Board’s ministry during the 1986 Exposition.

After her mission endeavor in British Columbia Gina moved back to her home state of California where she and Mel maintained a long-distance relationship.

Blackaby explained, “Gina was being taught “Experiencing God” at the same time Dad was writing it. I met her as I was leaving Canada to go to Texas. The longer I was in Texas the more I realized the girl I had met in Canada before I left for college was the girl I was destined to marry.

“She called me every Wednesday night and I called her every Saturday night. I would run the guys out of my dorm room, cut down the lights, light a candle, and we would have our date over the phone.

“Gina took a train from California to Vancouver to spend Christmas with our family in 1987. One evening I took her to the top of a tall building where they had a revolving restaurant. You could see the whole city from that vantage point and there I proposed marriage to her. We were both 22 years old and had no idea what we were doing, but we believed it was of the Lord.”

Upon graduating from Hardin-Simmons Mel and Gina were married and moved to Fort Worth, Texas for the purpose of furthering his education at Southwestern Seminary.

Today the Blackabys have three children: Christa, 15; Stephen, 13; and Sarah, 11. They keep a busy schedule, but love traveling, sports, and riding horses. Mel also has a Harley Davidson and enjoys riding his ‘bike’ with Bubba Cathy, fellow church member and senior vice president of Chick-fil-A.

Since arriving in Jonesboro Blackaby has been slow to make dramatic changes, but wanted to involve all the church in having a time of significant prayer. He remarked,

“We typically schedule people out of prayer meeting. Many churches have a prayer meeting on Wednesday night, but most of the church family is engaged in other activities during the prayer time.”

To remedy that problem Blackaby has turned the Sunday evening worship service into a Fresh Encounter Prayer Service. As a result the people involved in corporate prayer has grown from 100 to 1,000.

Blackaby testified, “This is unifying the church. All ages are coming and praying together. I have heard parents say that their children’s prayer lives are much improved. We are also seeing a lot of prayers answered.

“There is also a didactic element to this prayer time because people are learning to pray. We are also crying out to God each week for revival. We know that God is up to something.

“I think people here in the South are beginning to become desperate for God. We can no longer be comfortable in our faith here in the Bible Belt. We must cry out to God for His intervention.

God will give us a measure of success here when we can see that our people are having a growing hunger to know Christ. Then they will have a desire to obey Him; and He can use them in greater service.”

Mel Blackaby is a prolific writer and has several books to his credit. He has also partnered with his dad in writing several books including the 2009 publication “Experiencing the Spirit: The Power of Pentecost Everyday.” You can hear Mel Blackaby in the Speechless Conference in Toccoa in October.

The younger Blackaby recently told his father, who is also a member at Jonesboro’s First Baptist Church, “

Dad, you ought to give me more respect now that I am your pastor.”