The Foreignist

Here’s part of the problem I have with the way the rapture is taught (to be accurate, let’s call it the “rapture theory”).

This is not one of those church signs you can make up online. I obfuscated the name of this house of worship because I don’t know the people there, and they might be great people. BUT state employees and politicians better watch out. You’re gonna get yours!

I just don’t like how focusing on the rapture brings out the tendency towards an us versus them mentality. It’s definitely not something we want to advertise to passersby. Even “A dusty Bible makes for a dirty life” would communicate something a little less belligerent.

It’s a different way of expressing us versus them-style Christianity, but this was WEHTJS Part 1.

“For God so loved U.S. Americans that he…..”

Somewhere, Lee Greenwood sighs deeply.

“So-called ‘global warming’ is just a secret ploy by wacko tree-huggers to make America energy independent, clean our air and water, improve the fuel efficiency of our vehicles, kick-start 21st-century industries,and make our cities safer and more livable. Don’t let them get away with it!”–Chip Giller, Founder of Grist.org

I’ve said it before, but I think the most interesting scenario that could happen in the 2008 presidential election is to have Mike Huckabee running against Barack Obama - two guys who are good communicators and both bringing something to the table. At least one of the parties has laid a stinkbomb in every election since the ‘92. In the last two elections, both parties have succeeded in alienating the electorate by nominating very wooden or bumbling candidates.

If the voting public can pull off a coup in both sides of the nomination process, we can avoid the matchup the media and the party leaderships want - New York vs. New York (a.k.a. Hillary vs. Rudy).

However, I won’t be watching Huck or Obama. I’m much more interested in the war of attrition that will be waged between their biggest supporters - Chuck Norris vs. Oprah Winfrey. This could be a battle of epic proportions, similar to Return of the Dragon. Oprah has destroyed lesser men (see the smoldering remains of Tom Cruise’s career), but it remains to be seen if she can take on the master.

I really enjoyed “The Lexus and the Olive Tree” and “The World is Flat”, although I think Friedman is a bit too kind to big business. Here’s an excerpt of one of my favorite Friedman articles:

In the world of ideas, to name something is to own it. If you can name an issue, you can own the issue. One thing that always struck me about the term “green” was the degree to which, for so many years, it was defined by its opponents — by the people who wanted to disparage it. And they defined it as “liberal,” “tree-hugging,” “sissy,” “girlie-man,” “unpatriotic,” “vaguely French.”

Well, I want to rename “green.” I want to rename it geostrategic, geoeconomic, capitalistic and patriotic. I want to do that because I think that living, working, designing, manufacturing and projecting America in a green way can be the basis of a new unifying political movement for the 21st century.

Near the end of “The World is Flat” he explains how energy independence could be this generation’s moonshot. Just like Kennedy was able to focus the scientific and engineering expertise of the nation on getting a man on the moon, the time has come to do the same with energy independence. Bush is obviously not the right guy for that job, but who is? Is that person out there? Does it have to be a president? Could it be Al Go.., who are we kidding? I don’t think it’s Google, although I think the private sector will play a huge role. I still think it has to be the president that spearheads this effort. I’m not hopeful that any of the candidates for either party have the political will to tackle such a huge issue. But it is the defining geopolitical issue of our time.

The rest of the Thomas Friedman article can be found here: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/15/magazine/

I knew this had to be out there, but it’s better than I could have imagined.  Is Dr. Travis Tokar running Huckabee’s campaign?

Here are a few examples of the things Hugo says that I find entertaining. I don’t think he’s insane, just eccentric. I do think he has some compelling reasons to be distrustful of the US if you read our own government reports about what we did in Latin American during the Reagan/Bush I years. But he’s gone from distrustful to completely paranoid. Above all, he is very flambouyant AND he’s recently started learning Arabic and using it in his speeches. My favorite quote is the one where he’s talking about Condi Rice. There have been world leaders who make snide comments about America before, but few have had the creativity and boldness to go to the lengths that Hugo goes to. He’s not just Castro with oil. He’s Castro with oil and a flair for the dramatic. He loves making it in to the news in the US and knows how to get attention for himself.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7090600.stm

Just remember that every time you fill up at a Citgo station you’re helping to fund Hugo’s traveling comedy routine… at least until Pat Robertsen has him assasinated … or CNN.

Get ready for Huckabee mania. He’s close enough to Mitt Romney in a recent poll that it’s a virtual tie (once you throw in your margin of error). Hope, Arkansas — birthplace of presidents.

I don’t agree with Huckabee on some things, but I think he’s the most interesting candidate on the Republican side. But the biggest positive for him is something that I found at http://deancirelli.com. The venerable Chuck Norris is endorsing Huckabee. I hope that Huckabee can incorporate Chuck into his cabinet as Director of Homeland Security. We would have nothing to worry about because Chuck’s mere presence in the White House would intimidate all terrorists and possibly all of our allies as well.

In all honesty, I’m not that interested in the primaries or the candidates. I just want another Arkansan as president because our state gets a lot more appropriations for some reason when we have a president. I also enjoy how having a hillbilly in the White House confounds ivory tower/silver spoon east coast politicians.

Politics always aims at some kind of a harmony or balance of interest, and such a harmony cannot be regarded as directly related to the final harmony of love of the Kingdom of God. All men are naturally inclined to obscure the morally ambiguous element in their political cause by investing it with religious sanctity. This is why religion is more frequently a source of confusion than of light in the political realm. The tendency to equate our political views with our Christian convictions causes politics to generate idolatry.