I have nothing to add here beyond telling you to click on the image to enlarge so as to get the full glory of a Leftist view of Christ’s birth.
Hat tip: Wolf Howling
Last year was a better year than I could have dreamed and I hope that, for Christmas, we get the promise of an even better New Year.
I was delighted with Wolf Howling’s caroling contribution to Christmas. I know you’ll enjoy all of the videos he posted, but I especially urge you to watch the Daily Caller’s 12 Days of Trump. I couldn’t stop grinning as I listened.
But here’s a fact of life for me here at Bookworm Room: It’s not Christmas without Josh Groban’s gorgeous rendition of O Holy Night. Every year, I get chills all over again listening to it:
Last year at this time, we were looking ahead and hoping for the best in a Trumpian, post-Obama era. This year, we’re looking back upon a spectacular Trump year and optimistically thinking it might get even better in the year to come.
Just think: Despite the hysterical “resistance” (which rose to sedition when it came from inside the government), Donald Trump has accomplished political miracles. He’s entirely erased every single affirmative act Obama put into play, from open borders, to Obamacare, to DACA, to the Paris Accord, to the Iran Agreement. [Read more…]
Whether it’s CNN telling Christians or the NYT telling progs, the message is the same: Christians have to get with the program; socialism trumps principles.
CNN is at the vanguard of a progressive jihad to drive Christian voters away from Trump. CNN’s two openly gay (one married) hosts, Don Lemon and Anderson Cooper, are taking part in lecturing Christians that they have no business voting for or supporting Trump. On Lemon’s panel, one panelist accused all Christians who support Trump as having “made a deal with the devil.” On Cooper, Charlie Sykes called it “stunning” and “remarkable” that Christians would support Trump, apparently preferring that they would have simply wasted their vote.
As to Cooper and Lemon, I wonder if either of these two have ever opened a Bible, let alone spent more than a two minute block of time with a Christian? If so, they might learn that average Christians see their religion and their freedom of conscience as under an existential assault not seen since the time of the birth of socialism in the French Revolution. And none of that is coming from Trump or the right.
Most recently was Anthony Kennedy’s torrid, unconscionable. and blatantly unconstitutional act judicially amending our Constitution to proclaim a constitutional right to gay marriage. Before that was the Obama DOJ decision to unconscionably and unconstitutionally rewrite the Civil Rights Act of 1964, establishing new laws that create “gay rights” and that allow for the prosecution of Christians in the public square who do not acquiesce. At the same time was the extra-constitutional act by HHS to establish as law that all Christians purchasing health insurance must not merely purchase, but also effectively underwrite birth control and abortifacients. And then of course there is the prog effort, ongoing for well over a century, to act in loco parentis, beginning in kindergarten, to promote ethics and morality free normalization of sex, abortion and abnormal sex in America.
As to Sykes, what he is arguing for is Christians to act so dogmatically that they could not pull the lever for anyone other than one of the twelve disciples, thus handing political power to the Christian’s persecutors. He wants to transfer his personal animus towards Trump onto Christians generally. [Read more…]
Without Western Civilization, we veer dangerously close to reverting to our pagan roots — roots watered with the blood of human sacrifice.
For millennia, Jews have forbidden human sacrifice. Although there are myriad more sophisticated interpretations examining the Biblical narrative about the Binding of Isaac, the most basic interpretation was that God created this dramatic scenario to impress upon Jews that he did not crave human flesh and blood. This is hardly unexpected, given that man is made in God’s image. One doesn’t deliberately despoil His creation.
When Jews took this principled, doctrinal stand against human sacrifice, they were outliers. The book of Genesis, in which the Binding of Isaac appears, probably dates back to around the latter half of the 15th century BC (that is, about 1450-1410 BC). Everywhere else in the known world human sacrifice was normative. In a world controlled completely by animistic polytheism, the notion of mere animal sacrifice, which kept from the Gods the tastiest, most important offerings, was ludicrous.
Eventually, both Greece and Rome turned against human sacrifice, but they still remained dedicated to animal sacrifices. These rituals often involved slitting an animal’s belly open and “reading” its entrails while the animal still lived.
Moreover, when it came to humans, neither Greece nor Rome was known for its humanist impulses towards life. Indeed, both Greece and Rome heartily approved of infanticide, rape, torture, and blood sports. Meanwhile, outside of these nations and their first, dainty steps towards modern Western Civilization, the Celts and the Germanic tribes continued with gusto to placate capricious gods with human blood and flesh.
The genius of Christianity was that, over the centuries, it successfully convinced pagans, from Rome to Britain to Norway, that Christ was the ultimate human sacrifice. Through the ritual of transubstantiation, worshipers would receive the eternal benefit of that voluntary sacrifice without having to destroy another human being to placate the Gods. Throughout Europe, these newly created Christians joined with Jews in their understand that man is unique in that he is created in God’s image; one doesn’t mutilate that image and throw it back in God’s face.
The fact that both the Jews and the Christians eschewed human sacrifice didn’t instantly turn them into vegans. In Biblical times, the Jews continued to wage bloody war long after the binding of Isaac and the Christians did the same long after the crucifixion. The Christians also maintained torture and blood sports. Nevertheless, this humanist seed, once planted and cultivated, burst forth in the Enlightenment with all sorts of interesting ideas:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.
Those words, and the ideas and practical consequences behind them, changed the world. War did not end, but it lessened. Men did not eschew violence, but societies under the umbrella of Western Civilization continued the long slow process of becoming less violent. (For more on the genetic reality that Westerners are less violent, I recommend Nicholas Wade’s A Troublesome Inheritance: Genes, Race and Human History, an honest science book that got its author banned from the New York Times.)
These revolutionary ideas about mankind’s worth would have been incomprehensible to pre-Christian pagans. To them, man was a plaything of the gods, and the gods were the embodiment of the cruel, irrational, omnipresent natural world surrounding the pagans. These hungry, angry, capricious figures needed to be placated and human blood was their favorite food. [Read more…]
Hurricanes are normal, but Trump Derangement Syndrome obscures that fact. Of course, those subject to TDS are deranged in other ways as well. Just look….
Before I get to the meat of this post — or, because it’s a round-up, the various meats of this post — I want to remind everyone that America has always been subject to ferocious hurricanes. They just seem worse today because we have more population in a hurricane’s path, especially when it’s an Irma-like hurricane, and because we have a 24 hour media that makes everything seem local.
In other ways, though, we’re better off when faced with hurricanes because we can prepare. In 1900, Galveston, Texas, residents did not see their Cat 4 hurricane coming. It killed 6,000 – 12,000 people, making it the deadliest natural disaster in American history. For a list of other major hurricanes in the last 400 years, the bulk of which predate “climate change” and struck out-of-the-blue, go here. You’ll see that America was especially hard hit in the 1700s, long before CO2 was an issue.
Obviously, I don’t mean to downplay our two latest hurricanes, Harvey and Irma, both of which are or will be responsible for staggering property damage and, always, the loss of too many lives. I just want to amp down the usual climate change hysteria that’s accompanying this latest display of Nature’s normal.
And with that, let me turn my attention to all the other interesting things I’ve gathered, many of which reflect poorly on those most deeply lost to TDS.
Hillary admits her incompetence. Hillary has been on the warpath with her new book, blaming everything and everybody for her loss. She’s also admitted that she was incapable of speech on election eve because she was so devastated and that it was male advisers who caused her to react less strongly to both Trump and Bernie than she thinks in retrospect that she ought to have done. (Oh, and Trump “creeped” her out.)
So Hillary has just admitted that she’s incompetent in a crisis and incapable of standing up to men. Most of Hillary’s opponents at home and abroad would have been men, men like Putin, Xi Jinping, Kim Jong-un, or Bashir al-Assad. Her latest book is just another reminder that we dodged a serious bullet when Trump won.
Europe’s Muslim future. Guy Millière, a professor at the University of Paris, sees which way the wind is blowing and he understands that, not only is Eurabia fast approaching, but that Western Europe leaders are hastening its inevitability:
Europe’s leaders seem to have neither the will nor the means to oppose the incoming waves of millions of Muslim migrants from Africa and the Middle East. They know that terrorists are hiding among the migrants, but still do not vet them. Instead, they resort to subterfuges and lies. They create “deradicalization” programs that do not work: the “radicals,” it seems, do not want to be “deradicalized.”
Europe’s leaders try to define “radicalization” as a symptom of “mental illness”; they consider asking psychiatrists to solve the mess. Then, they talk about creating a “European Islam“, totally different from the Islam elsewhere on Earth. They take on haughty postures to create the illusion of moral superiority, as Ada Colau and Carles Puigdemont did in Barcelona: they say they have high principles; that Barcelona will remain “open” to immigrants. Angela Merkel refuses to face the consequences of her policy to import countless migrants. She chastises countries in Central Europe that refuse to adopt her policies.
European leaders can see that a demographic disaster is taking place. They know that in two or three decades, Europe will be ruled by Islam. They try to anesthetize non-Muslim populations with dreams about an idyllic future that will never exist. They say that Europe will have to learn to live with terrorism, that there is nothing anyone can do about it.
Pat Condell is another prophet who is being ignored:
Meanwhile, Britain prepares its citizens for dhimmitude. Several of my gay Leftist Facebook friends proudly posted a WaPo op-ed announcing that all the grim prophecies preceding legalizing gay marriage failed to come true. It is true that heterosexual marriage is cratering at pretty much the same rate as before, so one can’t say that same-sex marriage killed it. The article also essentially claims that America is better than ever because Christian bakers are being put out of business.
It’s that last point, of course, that’s the giveaway about the real target of gay marriage. Gay marriage, as I’ve said over and over, was never about competing with straight marriage and it was unlikely to affect straight marriage. What it was about was undercutting traditional values, especially if those values came from the church. Kill the traditional church (and the synagogue) and you kill the West. It’s heart goes out of it.
(Before I go further, let me say again, that I have no trouble whatsoever with same-sex civil unions. If states want to legalize same sex partnerships, that’s fine with me. I support people who enter into stable relationships. It’s the way the whole issue was framed as gay “marriage” that disturbs me deeply. Doing that made these unions the basis for a concerted attack against traditional Western values as a whole.)
If you really want to see where gay marriage leads, check out this Australian Spectator article detailing the way in which gay marriage has been used to attack core Western values, not to mention to destroy the integrity of our biological selves. I’ll focus on the gender and children sections, but you should read the whole thing: [Read more…]
Rather than demanding that politicians and white people fix a broken culture, American blacks need a Great Awakening that repairs them from the inside out.
A year after requesting Ron Chernow’s Alexander Hamilton from my local library, my copy arrived this morning, and I’ve been reading away. I’ve just reached the point at which Hamilton leaves the West Indies behind for America, so I don’t have any insights on the subject of Hamilton. The book got me thinking, though, about the plight of black Americans, too many of whom suffer from a spiritual sickness that sees them not only dependent on the government for aid but also crudely demanding that “white America” solve the black community’s dysfunction.
I don’t think I’m being racist when I point to problems plaguing American blacks. According to Nate Silver:
From 2010 through 2012, the annual rate of homicide deaths among non-Hispanic white Americans was 2.5 per 100,000 persons, meaning that about one in every 40,000 white Americans is a homicide victim each year. By comparison, the rate of homicide deaths among non-Hispanic black Americans is 19.4 per 100,000 persons, or about 1 in 5,000 people per year.
Black Americans are almost eight times as likely as white ones to be homicide victims, in other words.
Take away black homicides, and America’s homicide rate is in line with Western Europe’s (at least, in line with Western Europe’s before the refugee influx). Moreover, it’s not whites or police who are killing blacks. It’s blacks who are killing blacks.
If you want a real-time sense of these deeply troubling statistics, just look at a weekend in Chicago:
More people were shot in Chicago over the weekend than on any other this year, except for the long July Fourth holiday that stretched four days, according to police and data kept by the Chicago Tribune.
At least 63 people were shot and eight of them were killed, police said. More than half were wounded over 13 hours from Saturday to early Sunday. At least 16 more were shot through the day Sunday, including the four on Madison in South Austin.
While the shootings occurred across the city, two police districts bore the brunt: Calumet on the south, with 12 shootings, and Austin on the west with 11, according to police.
The level of violence exceeded the 52 shot during the three-day Memorial Day weekend, but it fell short of the 102 hit by gunfire over the Fourth of July weekend, according to Tribune data. Despite the bad weekend, fewer people have been shot in Chicago this year than at this time last year: 2,435 compared with 2,710.
Other black statistics in America are equally depressing. For example, in addition to homicide, blacks are committing violent crimes at a rate much higher than other people in America:
Blacks commit violent crimes at 7 to 10 times the rate that whites do. The fact that their victims tend to be of the same race suggests that young black men in the ghetto live in danger of being shot by each other, not cops. Nor is this a function of “over-policing” certain neighborhoods to juice black arrest rates. Research has long shown that the rate at which blacks are arrested is nearly identical to the rate at which crime victims identify blacks as their assailants.
Blacks in America’s inner cities make up a community in crisis, one that sees too many of its members disconnected from a necessary morality that allows communities to grow and thrive.
Reading Chernow’s description of life in the West Indies when Hamilton was a child made me think of these self-destructive black pathologies. My thoughts weren’t actually about the blacks themselves, but about the white behavior towards the blacks. Those Africans shipped into the West Indies were victims, pure and simple, and anything they did in response to the cruelty heaped upon them was justified. It was the whites, were products of our Western culture and living in the century and shadow of the Enlightenment, who committed unspeakable acts of brutality in order to maintain their dominance over blacks: [Read more…]
A roll up for today to fill the void of Ms. BWR’s absence. The picture comes from People’s Cube and their latest magazine offering
Comey, Trump, the Justice Dept. and Special Counsel
Victor Davis Hanson, writing at American Greatness, gives an excellent summation of the progressive jihad aimed at toppling President Trump:
In every single week of the Trump presidency, the investigators and attorneys of FBI Director James Comey or, subsequently, of special counsel Robert Mueller, have leaked information that President Donald Trump was under investigation for either colluding with the Russians or obstructing justice—allegations so far without any substantiating evidence.
In the case of Comey, we now know that his office or sympathetic third-parties leaked to the press false stories that Trump was under FBI investigation at precisely the time that the careerist Comey was privately reassuring the president himself that he was in fact not being investigated.The appointment of Mueller was a concession to opposition demands that Trump appoint a Lawrence Walsh-type Special Prosecutor. The Comey-Mueller investigations and leaks occur simultaneously with House Intelligence member Adam Schiff’s passive-aggressive and often pompous announcements of evidence of Russian collusion—including raising the specter of a Grand Jury investigation—that are never followed by any evidence.
Since January 2017, the Congress ceased being a legislative body. It is now a Star-chamber court determined to decapitate the presidency.
Never in the history of the republic have there been so many legislative and political simultaneous efforts to 1) sabotage the Electoral College, 2) sue to overturn the presidential vote in key swing states, 3) boycott the Inauguration, 4) systematically block presidential appointments, 5) surveille, unmask, and leak classified or privileged information about the elected president, 6) nullify federal law at the state and local level, 7) sue to remove the president by invoking the Emoluments Clause, 8) declare Trump unfit under the 25th Amendments, 9) demand recusals from his top aides, 10) cherry-pick sympathetic judges to block presidential executive orders, 11) have a prior administration’s residual appointees subvert their successor, and 12) promise impending impeachment.And that is only the political effort to remove the president. . . .
Today, for the first time, I noticed striking differences between the Islamic and Judeo-Christian traditions involving both happiness and predestination.
Daniel Greenfield wrote about the interview Chelsea Handler did with Kumail Nanjiani, the Muslim star of HBO’s “Silicon Valley.” He complained that popular culture fails to focus on what fun Islam is and Muslims are. Handler, much struck by this observation, agreed.
The problem, Greenfield said, is that Islam is not about fun or even happiness. Nor are these missing attributes limited to the reverence associated with direct worship. For example, when we’re in a house of worship we don’t make fart jokes. Instead, the whole point of Islam, at least according to the Ayatollah Khomeni, is to vacuum any possibility of joy out of life:
Allah did not create man so that he could have fun. The aim of creation was for mankind to be put to the test through hardship and prayer. An Islamic regime must be serious in every field. There are no jokes in Islam. There is no humor in Islam. There is no fun in Islam. There can be no fun and joy in whatever is serious.
No wonder that the Islamic clerics and their mobs routinely deliver death to people who dare to dance or sing in a sharia-controlled world.
Contrast this Islamic world view with Dennis Prager’s take on happiness. When his radio show played in my area, I frequently heard him say that, because God gave us the capacity to be happy, we have a moral obligation to be so. He also wrote that true faith should in itself inspire happiness:
I once asked a deeply religious man if he considered himself a truly pious person. He responded that while he aspired to be one, he felt that he fell short in two areas. One of those areas, he said, was his not being a happy enough person to be considered truly pious.
His point was that unhappy religious people reflect poorly on their religion and on their Creator. He was right; in fact, unhappy religious people pose a real challenge to faith. If their faith is so impressive, why aren’t these devoted adherents happy? There are only two possible reasons: either they are not practicing their faith correctly, or they are practicing their faith correctly and the religion itself is not conducive to happiness. (Prager, Dennis, Happiness is a Serious Problem, paperback edition, p. 4.)
For me, Prager’s message has been eye-opening. I accept that he is correct that I have a moral obligation, both for myself and for those in my world, to be happy. To that end, I try to view things through a humor prism, I count my blessings daily (hourly, on a hard day), I’m open in expressing gratitude for all the good things in my life, and I look for true joy wherever I can. I can do this because I am human and, if I were religious, I would add because I am made in God’s image. [Read more…]
If one takes Progressives at their word about Jesus and politics, it is Progressives who are working to turn America into a Christian theocracy.
If you go to Amazon’s Kindle bestseller list, you will see that the current bestseller is Margaret Atwood’s The Handmaid’s Tale (see image, left).
Atwood wrote The Handmaid’s Tale in 1986, during the Reagan presidency. Back then, Democrats (as Progressives still called themselves) were terrified that Reagan and his supporters in the Christian Coalition were about to turn America into a Christian theocracy, comparable in all respects to Iran under the Ayatollah Khomeni. I, being a young, yuppified, NPR-style Democrat, naturally read the book. At the time, it seemed soooo significant; now it just seems over-heated, paranoid, and quite silly.
For those who haven’t read The Handmaid’s Tale (or those who did read it and are trying their damndest to forget it), the plot is a simple one: America is a Christian theocracy run by old white men with sterile wives. To prevent population collapse, the men and their wives basically imprison nubile young women and force them to have three-way sex (in a bizarre Christian fashion) in order to get the young women pregnant. The lead character eventually escapes to freedom where she can make her own choices about her body. In other words, it’s a pro-abortion novel contending that it’s inevitable that, if Christians are politically ascendant, we will have an American theocracy complete with women subordinated, barefoot, pregnant, and in weird ménage à trois relationships with reptilian old men and women.
As Atwood’s return to the bestseller lists shows, today’s Progressives are terrified that we’re again heading for a Christian theocracy, never mind that even Trump’s most committed supporters would not characterize him as a devout Christian. After all, it was Trump who creatively referred to “Two Corinthians,” which sounds more like a hipster bar than Paul’s second letter to the Corinthians. Progressive hysteria also has it that Trump, who championed gay marriage long before the winds of change overtook Obama and Hillary, is going to copy Muslim Chechnya and kill gays.
To prove that ascendant Christians aren’t just scary, but are also very, very wrong, one of my Progressive friends posted to Facebook a link to a lengthy Progressive post from a couple of Easters ago. The post’s author, Elisabeth Parker, made the usual argument that Jesus is really a Leftist and would bitterly oppose all Republican political initiatives. It’s an endless post, but I’ll quote just a little bit, along with my comments, so that you can get the flavor:
Fifty years of mis-education in American schools culminates when a lawyer provides a laundry list of myths to justify claiming the existence of a Christian ISIS.
A couple of days ago, the internet was abuzz with excitement because Qasim Rashid (Twitter name @MuslimIQ), an attorney and Muslim, claiming to have received a Direct Message from a “white supremacist” about the absence of a “Christian ISIS,” gave him a purported laundry list of Christian sins. It’s an impressive list of sins . . . if, as to many of the claims, one is ignorant about history and can be bamboozled with sophistry. Otherwise, well, not so much.
Because Rashid is not alone in his ignorance and, indeed, comes by it quite honestly considering the misinformation floating about, I thought it would be useful to go through the list of his accusations against Christians to correct out-and-out errors and to put factual statements in their proper context. One of the most important contextual points is that ISIS defiantly makes clear that Islam drives its conduct. That is, we’re not talking about bad actors who happen to be Muslim. Instead, we’re talking about Muslims who march under the banner of their faith to justify their bad acts.
Given the ISIS context, for Rashid to have properly rebutted the question about a “Christian ISIS,” he should have returned with examples of Christians who use their faith directly to justify their acts. It’s cheating to identify bad actors who happen to be Christian but whose conduct is not justified by, or in fealty to, their faith.
I’m not trying here to attack Rashid personally. I’m sure he’s a perfectly nice man and a good lawyer. It’s just that he summed up in a small space so many misrepresentations and misunderstandings about Christianity that he provides a perfect framework within which to challenge those errors. Also, I’m not trying to defend horrible things such as the world’s slave trade, the deaths of aboriginal populations around the world, white supremacy, or anything else. I’m just saying that, subject to a few exceptions that can be roughly analogized to Christian versions of ISIS, most of Rashid’s comparisons are inapt.
Having said that, here’s Rashid’s Twitter list, which I’ve broken into segments so as to address each assertion separately. First, to give context, here is Rashid’s own introduction to his DM conversation:
And here’s the subject-by-subject breakdown:
The progressive movement is totalitarian. It took a huge hit in November right on the eve of permanent victory. Obama, by his unconstitutional Executive actions and his weaponization of the regulatory bureaucracies — and supported between John Roberts and the activist progressive wing of the Supreme Court — had taken this nation past the brink of a Constitutional crisis. All that remained was for Hillary to push it to the point of no return. And going forward, if Trump fails, the progs well know that they will still have that opportunity.
As an originalist law professor opined today, “I can’t help but wonder whether the many millions who voted for President-elect Trump also understood what the legal academy had all but forgotten, that what was at stake in the past election was nothing less than the rule of law and self-government itself.” He’s dead on point.
Had Hildabeast been elected, all of Obama’s acts would have been validated. Progressives would have attained dominance in America that would outlast our lifetimes, given the changes they would have de facto made to our laws and what little remains of our Constitutional system of checks and balances. Congress would have been an afterthought, with progressives ruling through the bureaucracy, by Executive Orders and through the Courts. Ever more taxpayer money would have been funneled to cronies, laundered through Democrat organizations such as public sector unions and Planned Parenthood, and sent to the EU for “global warming,” the biggest socialist gambit / theft ever conceived. The Supreme Court, once in solid control of the progressive left for decades to come, would have reliably rendered political decisions to advance progressive goals. Conservatives and the religious would have been fully pushed out of the public square, their voices effectively silenced. So to say that we dodged a bullet a little over a week ago is the mother of all understatements.
When it comes to Progressives, even if they’ve been forced to back down on all other issues, they will take their stand and die on the hill of unlimited, legal abortion. As Nancy Pelosi said of late-term abortions — the ones done on a viable, sentient fetus — the fact that she is a practicing Catholic gives her the right to say that such abortions are “sacred ground.” On the Left, unlimited abortion is a right so inviolable that nothing should derail its legality — including God.
One priest, the Very Rev. John Lankeit, has had the courage to stand up and say what all faithful Catholics know intuitively: abortion is inconsistent with Catholic doctrine and morally wrong. Furthermore, once you accept this doctrinal truth, you have to accept that you cannot vote for the political party and the presidential candidate who will not only preserve abortion but will expand it and make taxpayers fund it.
Father Lankeit does more than just invoke God’s Word. This is important because it means he reaches out to those who are not Catholic, or Christian, or even believers. He tackles the arguments that pro-abortion people routinely raise against those who oppose abortion and shows how hypocritical and shallow their arguments are. These are words that everyone should hear. And once having heard them, people (Catholic or not) need to decide whether they accept that Father Lankeit is speaking the truth. And if they decide he is speaking the truth, they need to ask themselves whether they can still support the Democrat party and the Democrat candidate:
The strong symbolism behind Trump’s Les Deplorables appearance. Back in the mid- to late-ish 1980s, I saw the San Francisco premiere of Les Misérables. I am sorry to report that it was entirely wasted on me. I’d never read Hugo’s book (still haven’t) and I’d actually never even heard of the musical. I went only because a friend invited me and I was then saddened to find myself listening to an opera. A pop opera, admittedly, but still an opera. I am a cultural Luddite, and don’t like operas. Operettas and musicals (i.e., lighthearted fare with songs interspersed with dialogue) delight me, but I’m a total fail at the whole opera thing.
I think, though, that I might have to make an exception to my pop-opera aversion or at least an exception to one song. I am lost in delight for the way in which Trump and his supporters have taken Hillary’s “Basket of Deplorables” insult and turned it into the identifier for a political revolution. By now, you all know that Trump appeared at a maximum capacity rally in Miami with a giant “Les Deplorables” image behind him and with “Do you hear the people sing?” from Les Misérables blaring on the sound system. Genius, sheer genius. This is what political judo is supposed to look like.
Moreover, when I went to investigate the song, I discovered, barring the unnerving reference to some deaths in the second verse, that the song’s lyrics are remarkably apropos for a man intent upon turning upside down the current Leftist, elitist, corrupt, dysfunctional political system. Though there is no guarantee Trump can actually make good on that promise, at least he’s making the promise (Hillary promises more of the same, only worse).
The American people, in increasing numbers, are singing their hope that Trump’s out-of-the-box thinking and practical experience might be all that’s left to bring about systemic change and reinvigorate American individualism and exceptionalism. In that spirit, here’s the song, with lyrics:
Incidentally, this is one of those occasions when one hopes that the same creative energy shown in challenging the media and the Democrat/Progressive party shows itself again if/when Trump is in the White House. America is safest when she’s a strong horse. She is no longer either safe or strong.
Over the past eight years, Obama has wasted our economy, weakened our military, led us from behind into retreat and failure, and has been determined and resolute only about turning America into coyote chum. Change needs to come swiftly or it may be too late. Trump’s creativity, energy, and ability to feed off of hurdles and losses, bodes well for a lugubrious, wounded country that needs to be up and lively very quickly.
The New York Times‘ Nicholas Kristof thinks that were Jesus’s Second Coming to happen any time soon he’d be upset that those religious people most closely associated with him (aka Christians) are rejecting the Democrat party platform. John Ellis does a good job of explaining that Jesus was not a bearded Progressive but was, instead, the incarnate intermediary between man and God. Indeed, Ellis’s article goes much deeper than that, by pointing out that Kristof’s “expert” is, in the classic sense of the word, a “heretic.”
Because I lack Ellis’s depth of knowledge about core Christianity and about heresy, I thought I’d amuse myself by going a different route. I haven’t read the New Testament since 1980, when I took a “Bible as Literature” class at Cal. (Can you imagine a time when a state-funded school could still teach that kind of thing? And yes, even at Cal they still offered traditional learning classes back in the day.)
I’ve placed lessons from Jesus’s Sermon on the Mount (from the Book of Matthew) in one column and, in the other column, I’ve set out my opinion as to whether those statements mesh with modern Progressive preaching and acts. Please note that, because I am not a religious scholar — especially not a Christian religious scholar — I am taking Jesus’s words at face value when deciding whether Progressives are in sync with his teachings or not.
I apologize if this post runs too long. The fact is, though, that I rediscovered what I first learned in my class at Cal: The Sermon on the Mount is vivid, thought-provoking, intensely humanist and, in the King James Version, exquisitely beautiful. In addition to appreciating the philosophy, I enjoy recognizing all the phrases that have worked their way into the English language (although today’s generation has probably abandoned most of them).
Now that we’re the Banana Republic of America, I think it’s time for the #NeverTrump crowd to have a little “Come To Jesus” talk to determine whether they want Hillary the Untouchable, and her entire Leftist panoply of friends and goals, in the White House, or whether they’re willing to gamble on Trump, who at least gives lip service to a strong foreign policy that recognizes the problems with Islamists; supporting Israel; supporting the troops; supporting the Second Amendment; and supporting the pro-Life agenda.
This is not the time for holier (or “politically purer”) than thou. This is where the rubber meets the road. This is the time for imperfect emergency surgery to keep the patient alive, rather than an exquisitely rendered surgery while the patient bleeds out on the operating table.
And now on to the links:
No, Trump is not an antisemite. Trump’s Jewish son-in-law says stop listening to Leftist garbage — Trump is not an antisemite (or a racist) and he strongly supports Israel. Trump is being slimed by the Left and it behooves us to remember two things: First, the Left, from Marx to Hitler to Stalin and on forward to the present day, is the party of antisemitism in Europe and in America. Second, this sliming is coming from a presidential candidate who greatly admires Max Blumenthal, one of the most vile antisemites in America. The Left’s outrage is a con.