Monday, August 11, 2008

Latin America Needs a Solzhenitsyn Too

One of the most compelling tributes to Alexander Solzhenitsyn that I've read in recent days is one that not only honors how Solzhenitsyn's personal life and writings exposed the unjust barbarism of Communism in Russia, but also hopes that it will set an example to do the same for Latin America. Below are excerpts from Carlos Alberto Montaner's brief commentary in the Miami Herald. Very good stuff.

...Prison cleaned and cured Solzhenitzyn of communism. All his important works revolve around that experience: A Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich, The Cancer Ward, The First Circle, and, of course, his monumental The Gulag Archipelago. Prison turned him into a great man forged by his and other people's pain and into a renowned writer...

Of all the documents written against the Communist madness, the most demolishing is TheGulag Archipelago. It is not a great literary work. Because it is very long, it can even be tedious, but that enormous catalog of atrocities inflicted upon prisoners for so long, written down with notarial cold-bloodedness, wipes out any vestige of sympathy that a sensible and reasonable person might have for Marxism-Leninism.


Some months ago, someone wisely suggested that a group of historians write The Black Book of Latin American Communism. It would be a country-by-country account of the crimes and misdeeds committed in the name of Marxism by the gunmen who were seduced by that ideology. All of us democrats know about and repudiate the monstrous excesses of the right-wing dictatorships on the continent -- Somoza, Pinochet, the Argentine generals and a repugnant etcetera -- but what's needed is an orderly and detailed catalog of the barbarities committed by this frenzied sect of the rabid Left.


All the barbarities: from Trotsky's murder in Mexico, the genocide of the Misquitos in Nicaragua, the Cuban firing squads and the stories about the FARC narcoterrorists' cruelty, to the odious assassinations and kidnappings committed by the ERP in Argentina and the Tupamaros in Uruguay.


When the project was proposed, someone asked to whom the book should be dedicated. No question about it: to Alexander Solzhenitzyn. He pointed the way.

John Edwards: An Incomplete, Unsatisfactory Confession

If you didn't see Nightline's interview with John Edwards, here it is. I think you'll find it, as I did, quite unsatisfactory as a confession. After all, it is incomplete, contradictory, and has plenty of self-serving misdirection as when he brings up John McCain or his several references to that contemptible "supermarket tabloid" that caught him.

His tracing for Bob Woodruff how a sense of invincibility and narcissm was thrust upon him because he was so talented (thank the Lord, he didn't say pretty) was really strange. I can't imagine Americans buying that. And that bit about him telling his entire family "the details" about his "mistake in judgment?" That was a faux pas sure to creep out a lot more viewers than just me.

John Edwards actually managed to make this tragic admission into a bitterly comic event, given the high moral tone he takes in the interview about character, trustworthiness, his love for his wife and family, his cause, even honesty -- all in what is supposed to be a confession (after being caught, of course) about an ongoing course of sexual infidelity, an ongoing course of covering it up with lies and angry denunciations, and an ongoing course of unmitigated hypocrisy.

And that's not even mentioning how little "the cause" must mean to a fellow who is willing to throw it away for a sexual fling.

Edwards must have thought that a muted confession (remember that the words "sex," "sin," "adultery," or "hypocrisy" are never mentioned nor is lying itself ever treated as anything but the most natural, reasonable path to "protect one's family") was the best thing he could do at this stage. But it probably won't be enough. Indeed, even certain players in the MSM, embarrassed at their double standard being so brazenly exposed, will probably keep pursuing the matters of paternity, hush money, the origins of the affair (1 and 2) and even the impact that the coverup had on the election process.

Another issue, the most important for the culture certainly, is the bigger problem of media bias. John Tabin, in his fine commentary for the American Spectator, examines this a bit.

...The mainstream press, shamefully, had totally ignored the story, to the point that this is as much a media scandal as a sex scandal. The New York Times was happy to run vague innuendo about John McCain on its front page in February (the week before Hunter's baby was born) but fastidiously avoided looking into the Edwards affair, which was first reported by the Enquirer in October 2007.

A McCain spokesman declined to comment when I asked him on Friday whether there's a partisan double-standard in how the media handles adultery rumors. Readers can draw their own conclusion...

Barack Obama's Slip Is Showing

Here's a couple of important stories about Barack Obama from someone who knows him well, Illinois pro-life activist and popular blogger, Jill Stanek. Both stories present Obama in a much different light than which has come from the fawning press corps.

The first article reveals Barack Obama as a coldly calculating politician -- one who served the interests of the pro-abortion feminists in an extremely rude and obscurantist way.

The second and most recent article concerns not only Obama's actions against the “Born-Alive Infants Protection Act,” but about his misrepresenting (that's what lying is called in political circles) the reasons why he did such a callous and mean-spirited thing.

Friday, August 08, 2008

Today's Posts

Of Kenny Chesney, Hard Choices and Guys for Life

The Knights: Champions of Life Extraordinaire


College Coaches, Presidents and A.D.s Want Liquor Ads Dropped from College Sports

Obama Gets "Soiled in Oil" -- Attack On McCain Goes Horribly Awry

The Real Woodstock...And What Its "Graduates" Want To Do to the Country

Fears of Muslim Violence Cause Random House to Pull Novel

Bill Clinton: We Must Insist on Marital Faithfulness

Of Kenny Chesney, Hard Choices and Guys for Life

How long has this Kenny Chesney video been around? I've no idea but I'm sure glad I came across it. I found it compelling and beautifully crafted. And if you haven't yet watched and listened to it, I'm pretty sure you will too.

By the way, I found the link to the video at a really unique Christian site, Guys for Life. This cyberspace outreach was created by Kurt Ramspott and is aimed at: 1) men who are facing the unexpected challenge of having a wife or girlfriend say, "I'm pregnant" and 2) men who have already had to deal with that daunting test. Whether those men have chosen abortion, adoption or parenting, Guys for Life has some relevant, truly helpful things to offer them.

It's a great service they provide through various resources -- non-threatening, informational and personal. Way to go, Kurt.

There's actually two sites to check out if you'd like to know more about Guys for Life. There's the official site here and the YouTube video channel that they sponsor right here. It's at the latter site that I found the Chesney clip along with several others well worth attending to. Check 'em out.

The Knights: Champions of Life Extraordinaire

Speaking to the annual convention of the Knights of Columbus earlier this week, Supreme Knight Carl Anderson appealed for an ever-stronger dedication of the organization's members to prayerfully, peacefully and vigorously oppose abortion.

"We have heard a great deal this year about the need for change. But at the same time we are told [by Barack Obama et al] that one thing cannot change - namely, the abortion regime of Roe vs. Wade. It is time that we demand real change, and real change means the end of Roe vs. Wade.

"What political issue could possibly outweigh this human devastation" of nearly 50 million abortion deaths in the US since 1973? The answer, of course, is that there is none. Abortion is different. Abortion is the killing of the innocent on a massive scale. It is time to put away the arguments of political spin masters that only serve to justify abortion killing."

And the members, not surprisingly responded with applause, congratulations and the approval of one of the strongest resolutions of the Knights' history. For instance,

* The resolution opposes "any governmental action or policy that promotes abortion, embryonic stem cell research, human cloning, euthanasia, assisted suicide and other offenses against life."

* The resolution challenges "our fellow Catholics who are elected officials to be true to the faith they claim to profess by acting bravely and publicly in defense of life, affirming with Pope Benedict XVI that 'there can be no room for purely private religion.'"

* The resolution reaffirms the Knights' "commitment to building a culture of life by promoting policies that favor the family."

* The resolution reaffirms the organization's "long standing policy of not inviting to any Knights of Columbus event persons, especially public officials or candidates for public office, who do not support the legal protection of unborn children."

Oh, for an evangelical men's organization that would dedicate itself to these same principles, right?

College Coaches, Presidents and A.D.s Want Liquor Ads Dropped from College Sports

It's not unusual for those who have to deal with the effects of alcoholism, broken families, violent crime, drunk drivers, sexual assault and so on to voice concerns about the ways in which youth are targeted by alcohol advertising.

But when over a hundred college coaches (not to mention 59 college presidents and 239 athletic directors) appeal to NCAA President Myles Brand to eliminate alcohol advertising in telecasts of college sports, then you've got some heavy news.

The coaches wrote that they are “troubled by the prominence of alcohol advertising in televised college sports” and asked Brand to consider phasing out alcohol ads altogether. “We strongly urge you to take actions against all alcohol advertising—including beer advertising—on NCAA sports telecasts.”

Here's more.

Obama Gets "Soiled in Oil" -- Attack On McCain Goes Horribly Awry

Jennifer Rubin, writing over at Commentary Magazine, explains how Barack Obama made a really bad move with his effort to drown John McCain in an oil slick.

“Hoist with his own petard!”–or oil rig, I suppose–is what the McCain camp is crowing about with regard to campaign donations from “oil companies.” Barack Obama, who accused John McCain of receiving big money from big oil companies, it seems has received more money than McCain from the employees of the biggest oil companies. This sound familiar? He did it in the primary. He tried the same game, a lie really, when he accused Hillary Clinton of taking lobbyist and oil company company. That’s illegal of course and it turned out that he took his fair share of money from oil company employees.

Well, it happened again. And plenty of media outlets are calling foul. In fact, Obama had mounted a swift negative attack against McCain (with a cool Exxon logo) because of donations that McCain received from oil company employees. Now it turns out that among employees of big oil companies Obama leads in donations. By a lot. So the Obama team has more headaches in what was already a rotten week. The media always loves a good hypocrisy tale...

So that’s a long way of saying this was a cynical ploy that went awry at a very inopportune time for The One. And aside from the political karma of this specific issue, there is more at work (which explains why the McCain camp is so giddy). This certainly is one more nail in the coffin of the New Politics canard. Obama was going to bring an end to gotcha politics? An end to made-up issues? Not from The One. He appears to be strictly old school. And what’s more, this time around his fan club in the mainstream media is leading the boos.

The Real Woodstock...And What Its "Graduates" Want To Do to the Country

In an op/ed piece published in the Bulletin (Philadelphia), author Michael P. Tremoglie is highly critical of Barack Obama and his ambitious plans to extend the nanny state. It's an interesting piece, especially in his use of 1969's mega-event Woodstock as a parallel. By doing so, Tremoglie creates a satirically persuasive argument while at the same time giving you a few facts I'm sure you won't know about the real, versus the mythical, happening

...It was Woodstock - where a half million people gathered for three days of peace, love, and music.

Well, not quite.


There was certainly music and sex. However, the Woodstock nation was not such a tranquil group - at least they weren't until the controlled-substances kicked in. They almost rioted - which is why it became a free event.


One of the myths about Woodstock is that it was an altruistic affair. Woodstock was about profits. It was also about a jejune generation who needed a bailout, from the very people they despised, because they were incapable of providing for themselves.


John Roberts, the Ivy League heir to the Polident fortune, was one of the financiers. He and his partners called their business "Woodstock Ventures," a strictly profit-making enterprise.


Max Yasgur, whose farm was the location of the event and whose name was immortalized in song, was anything but a simple dairy farmer. He was an NYU graduate and, according to one source, one of the wealthiest farmers in the area. He also walked away with $75,000 or about $300,000 in current dollars. Not bad for the three-day rental of 600 idle acres.


The Who was paid the then unheard of sum of $12,000. Three other acts refused to perform until they were paid upfront. The promoters had to get an advance from a local banker on a Saturday night.


One other thing, Woodstock was not an event for the poor. A ticket was approximately 18 bucks, at a time when the minimum wage was a $1.60. When factoring the travel expenses and, of course, the drugs, attending the concert was at least a week's pay - something the average working class or poor American could not afford to forsake.


"I remember building a fire one morning for breakfast. All we had was hot dogs and spaghetti," a Woodstock alumnus waxed nostalgically in a Woodstock 25th anniversary magazine article several years ago. Yet, a few hundred miles away from the concert lived people who would have loved to have had hot dogs and spaghetti for breakfast. They would have loved breakfast. Over $2 million was spent staging Woodstock (about $10 million today), which would have bought many a breakfast in Appalachia.


The concert exposed the hypocrisy, selfishness, and incompetence of the Left. Half a million people spent money and took food that could have been donated to the poor - just so they could have a good time. Indeed, the only money donated was to Abbie Hoffman's fanatics and only because they extorted it by threatening to disrupt the concert.


Some people want to erect a monument to Woodstock. Hillary Clinton obtained federal funding for it. What is there to venerate? Woodstock was nothing more than kids with no responsibilities acting irresponsibly.


The ineptitude, puerility, indolence, rashness, and hypocrisy of Woodstock was emblematic of their generation - the same generation that is trying desperately to maintain control of America and elect Barack Obama President of the United States and re-elect Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the House.

Fears of Muslim Violence Cause Random House to Pull Novel

Sherry Jones, a correspondent for the Bureau of National Affairs, was all set to receive the first copy of her new book from Random House. Entitled The Jewel of Medina, the novel takes as its protagonist A'isha, the child bride of Mohammad. But Jones insists, the novel is not a "bodice-ripper." Indeed, there are no sex scenes at all. Says, Jones, "I have deliberately and consciously written respectfully about Islam and Mohammad...I envisioned that my book would be a bridge-builder."

But then she learned that her publishers at Random House finally remembered that there's one religious group that no one messes with nowadays. Even "deliberately, consciously, respectfully" messes with.

And they pulled the publication.

Random House deputy publisher Thomas Perry said in a statement the company received "cautionary advice not only that the publication of this book might be offensive to some in the Muslim community, but also that it could incite acts of violence by a small, radical segment. In this instance we decided, after much deliberation, to postpone publication for the safety of the author, employees of Random House, booksellers and anyone else who would be involved in distribution and sale of the novel."


Now unless this is a clever enough publicity stunt (and that's certainly possible -- generate a lot of controversial, but free, publicity and then publish the novel a bit later on), the Random House execs have shown not only an inexcusable naiveté about Muslim intolerance but an unconscionably weak dedication to the freedoms of thought and speech they have always claimed to champion.

Does Sherry Jones' The Jewel of Medina deserve to be published? I don't know. It certainly doesn't sound like anything I'd ever have an interest in reading. In fact, maybe the world of letters will be better off for not having it clutter up the shelves.

But not for this reason.

Bill Clinton: We Must Insist on Marital Faithfulness

I know, I know...it sounds like some kind of Saturday Night Live skit but yes, that's really Bill Clinton arguing that the fight against AIDS must emphasize the necessity of faithful monogamy. Here's a short story in The Independent.

And if you'd like an interesting, comical take on this matter, read James Taranto's comments over on WSJ's Best of the Web.

Thursday, August 07, 2008

Today's Posts

The Alaskan Pipeline: A Safe, Sane Model for America's Energy Needs

Massachusetts Abortionist Indicted -- "Laura's Story" Begins a New Chapter


Barack Obama's Version of Air Force One: The First Presidential Campaign Plane in History to Have All American flags Removed

Professor Calls for "Spelling Amnesty" -- The Latest Round in Dumbing Down our Children

How Has Obama Lost His Big Lead?

Is "Going Green" Going Out of Style?

The Alaskan Pipeline: A Safe, Sane Model for America's Energy Needs

Jack Yoest reminds us that the 800-mile Alaskan pipeline has been an unqualified success in its several decades of operation. And not only has it delivered the much-needed oil for America's energy, security and economy, it has also won several safety and environmental performance awards along the way.

...If the caribou like the pipeline, one would think the liberals would like it too.

But no. No oil, no nukes, no exploration, no civilization. Obama wants ten years to think of something. Like, maybe, inflate our tires to 32 psi...


Jack's post (at Reasoned Audacity, always a good site to visit as both Jack and Charmaine blog there) also includes the suggestion to sign on to the "Drill Here. Drill Now. Pay Less" online petition created by Newt Gingrich's team over at American Solutions. I join him in that suggestion.

Massachusetts Abortionist Indicted -- "Laura's Story" Begins a New Chapter

Even the most encouraging legal advisors didn't hold out much hope for Eileen Smith in her efforts to have abortionist Rapin Osathanondh indicted for his criminal actions in the death of Eileen's daughter, Laura. But the medical board stepped up, an employee of the abortion clinic came forward, and God answered Eileen's prayer.

Justice has a second chance.

Here, in this compelling 8-minute audio interview with Concerned Women for America's Martha Kleder, Eileen tells the whole story, one that she believes has special significance for Christians.

Barack Obama's Version of Air Force One: The First Presidential Campaign Plane in History to Have All American Flags Removed


(From Lucianne.com)

Professor Calls for "Spelling Amnesty" -- The Latest Round in Dumbing Down our Children

It's a classic example of liberalism -- acting as if compassion, understanding and equality are somehow served by a mere lowering of the standards.

Here's a Daily Mail story about a senior lecturer at Buckinghamshire New University calling for a "spelling amnesty."

Dr. Ken Smith says, "Teaching a large first-year course at a British university, I am fed up with correcting my students' atrocious spelling. Aren't we all? But why must we suffer? Instead of complaining about the state of the education system as we correct the same mistakes year after year, I've got a better idea. University teachers should simply accept as variant spellings those words our students most commonly misspell."

Dr. Smith's "better idea" dramatically undercuts the very profession of teaching.

Is it easier to overlook students' mistakes? In the short run, sure. But education must take the long view...even when it takes a longer, more laborious road. Education takes work. For the teacher as well as the learner. But where is the motivation to strive for excellence, the pride of accomplishment, the success in reaching important new levels of expertise, if the profession becomes a matter of shortcuts, paternalism and compromise?

And where does it stop? After all, if we should give a "spelling amnesty" for 20 words, why not 50? Or 250? And why should we stop with only spelling mistakes? Certainly overworked teachers of math and science could stand to correct fewer errors in their student's work too, right? And then there's the history teachers -- who really cares about those dates, those distant battles, and who invented what?

Furthermore, dare we leave out the "amnesty" schemes that might be suggested by other teachers who want a break? The fine arts folks ("What is art anyway?"), the shop teachers ("That's alright, son. We can always call it a paper weight like your other mistakes."), and the driving instructors ("No, don't cry, Sally. You're allowed to run over two pedestrians before we start counting them against you. Start it up again and let's go on.")

You get the idea.

Of course, Dr. Smith's ideas are not really that novel. American teachers have been cutting corners on stuff like this for decades, earning them high marks (in their own minds anyhow) for tolerance and understanding. Though it means that their students earn lower, lower and lower marks for everything else.

How Has Obama Lost His Big Lead?

The MSM has gone ga ga over Barack Obama, resulting in the Democrat's receiving exuberant, protective and embarrassingly worshipful coverage. On the other hand, John McCain has been dismissed by the regular press...and even by many in his own party who think him too dull, too old, too liberal.

So, explains Victor Davis Hanson, "everyone is puzzled why the Democratic candidate isn't at least 10 points ahead. It seems the more Americans get used to Barack Obama, the less they want him as president -- and the more Democrats will soon regret not nominating Hillary Clinton."

Hanson further examines this perplexing matter in this Town Hall column.

Is "Going Green" Going Out of Style?

...But the problem for the green lobby isn't that it has been overrun by “toffs”: it's the chilly economic climate that has frozen the shoots of environmentalism. Espousing the green life, with its misshapen vegetables and non-disposable nappies, is increasingly being seen as a luxury by everyone.

Only a year ago, according to MORI, 15 per cent of those polled put the environment in their top three concerns. That figure has dropped by a third to 10 per cent this month. Now that people are fighting for their own survival rather than their grandchildren's, they put crime, the economy and rising prices at the top of their list.


According to Andrew Cooper, director of the research company, Populus: “There is a direct correlation between how people perceive the economy and the importance they place on the environment. When times are tough people resent paying more to salve their conscience.” This means that fewer people are now buying organic chickens from smart supermarkets when they can pay £3.99 at Lidl. With all food prices rising, the organic market is being credit-crunched. Demand for it grew by 70 per cent from 2002 to 2007; now it has stalled, according to the consultancy Organic Monitor...


Read the rest of this Times (U.K.) guest commentary right here.

Wednesday, August 06, 2008

Today's Posts

Occasionally, Crunch Time Falls in the MIDDLE of the Week

Does God Care About Who You Vote For?

Yet More Tributes to Alexander Solzhenitsyn

Here's the Great News from Iraq that the MSM...Uh...Forgot to Report

Playing the Race Card...Unfairly

Australian Economists Warning: Too Many Babies Being Born

Occasionally, Crunch Time Falls in the MIDDLE of the Week

Does God Care About Who You Vote For?

In an unusually bold and forthright manner (and isn't that a nice change from the timid, parsing, indecisive character which marks most modern conversation?), David Klinghoffer answers the questions of National Review's Kathryn Jean Lopez. Klinghoffer, by the way, is a Senior Fellow of the Discovery Institute and an outspoken advocate of intelligent design. Klinghoffer is the author of several books including The Lord Will Gather Me In: My Journey to Jewish Orthodoxy, Why the Jews Rejected Jesus: The Turning Point in Western History, Shattered Tablets: Why America Ignores the Ten Commandments at Its Peril, and the book he specifically speaks to Lopez about, How Would God Vote?: Why the Bible Commands You to Be a Conservative.

...Kathryn Jean Lopez: So does God get a vote? And how did you get out of him what it would be? Is there Gallup in Heaven? Perhaps a Catholic might next poll the Communion of Saints on the presidential election?

David Klinghoffer
: God gets a vote if citizen Kathryn Lopez gives him one. And I know that in November, you will. It’s like the old pre-women’s suffrage rationale for letting only men vole. The idea was, a husband would vote on behalf of the entire family. If I’m an enlightened husband, I consult my wife and take her views seriously, thereby voting for both of us. In this analogy, my wife is God. When we vote, we have the choice of either consulting God - as it were - or not. No, I don’t have in mind using an Ouija board. (V-O-T-E-F-O-R-M-C-C-A-I-N.) Instead, Christians and Jews used to agree that the Bible conveys a picture of reality, of how the world works, from which practical guidance can be drawn on private and public matters. That would naturally include the 20 hot-button issues that I deal with in my book, from poverty, taxes and health care to climate change, drug legalization and Islamic terror. It turns out that, when read sensitively and holistically, the Bible advocates views that are deeply conservative. Not on every issue but on most.


Lopez: Are you actually arguing that the Bible argues for the election of John McCain over Barack Obama? That voting for Obama is to vote against God?


Klinghoffer:
It would probably violate federal tax laws if I told you the Bible endorses a particular candidate. I work at a think tank, after all, a 501(c)(3) organization. But even if I didn’t, I wrote this book not to inflate anyone’s election chances but to give readers and voters the tools to read the Bible as a guide to thinking about a range of issues. If on that basis, you concluded that a Biblical worldview was at odds with Obama on most issues, or on certain key litmus test issues, yet you went ahead and voted for him anyway, that would be a vote against giving God a voice in our public affairs. It would be a vote to silence God’s influence in that area, as far as it’s in your power to do so. In a real sense it would be a vote against God.


Lopez: So is God a Republican? Did the country vote against God when they elected Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton? And what about JFK?


Klinghoffer: God doesn’t have a party. He has wisdom. A party can reflect that wisdom to a greater or lesser extent. In recent decades, the Republican party has been open to granting some degree of influence to Biblical wisdom, at a time when God’s role in public life has been under attack from secularists. The conflict is more severe than ever. In elections of the past, the clash of worldviews wasn’t as blatant. You could say that of Kennedy versus Nixon. In the years since Roe v. Wade, though, we’ve seen the rise of an ideological grouping that is formed pretty clearly around an opposition to giving God a voice in public affairs. The tragedy of McCain is that while his biography gives evidence of spiritual sensitivity, he’s too allergic to public religious expression to make that clear to voters who long for a leader who “gets” it. Many in Republican leadership seem deaf to this...


Here's the whole article.

Yet More Tributes to Alexander Solzhenitsyn

The Pearcey Report, one of the frequent stops in my cyberspace travels, links to several notable commentaries about Alexander Solzhenitsyn that, in addition to the ones I posted a few days ago, I encourage you to read.

Here's the Great News from Iraq that the MSM...Uh...Forgot to Report

Good news out of Iraq is becoming almost a daily event: In just the past week, we learned that U.S. combat fatalities (five) dropped in July to a low for the war, that key leaders of al Qaeda in Iraq have fled to the Pakistani hinterland, that troop deployments will soon be cut to 12 months from 15, and that Washington and Baghdad are close to concluding a status-of-forces agreement.

Now this: Shiite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr plans to announce Friday that he will disarm his Mahdi Army, which was raining mortars on Baghdad's Green Zone as recently as April. Coupled with the near-total defeat of al Qaeda in Iraq, this means the U.S. no longer faces any significant organized military foe in the country. It also marks a major setback for Iran, which had used the Mahdi Army as one of its primary vehicles for extending its influence in Iraq...


Thus the Wall Street Journal opens up its latest report on the state of the Iraqi war. Lucianne.com, in its lovely, understated way, comments "Story too big to make the New York Times."

Playing the Race Card...Unfairly

Peter Kirsanow, writing over at NRO's The Corner, wonders if anyone in America could find reasons to oppose the presidential candidacy of Barack Obama -- and still not be be branded as a "racist."

Here's just a few of the 25 considerations that made Kirsanow's list:

* If you object to Obama raising your payroll, capital gains and estate taxes you...may be a racist.

* If you're in favor of drilling for oil and building nuclear power plants you...may be a racist.

* If your pastor is nothing like Rev. Wright or Father Pfleger you... may be a racist.

* If you don't want the majority of justices on the Supreme Court to be like Stephen Breyer you...may be a racist.

* If you're not impressed with Obama's 100% NARAL rating you...may be a racist.

* If you think the surge is working and that's a good thing you...may be a racist.

* If you think "we are the change we've been waiting for" is a line from a Monty Python skit you...may be a racist.

* If you're appalled that Obama voted against treating infants born after an abortion attempt the same medically as other infants born alive you...may be a racist.

* If you don't think rural, working class people are bitter and "cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them" you...may be a racist.

Again, read the whole list here.

Australian Economists Warning: Too Many Babies Being Born

Australia seemed to be getting over the fear of children that so affected the Western world in the last few decades. Over 285,000 births were registered last year in the country, the highest level in 25 years. Much of that came from older moms deciding that they wanted to have babies after all -- the joys of the workplace turning out to be a bit less satisfactory than previously thought.

But ideologies die hard. Even when the facts are against them. And so, natural instincts and "biological clocks" aside, the bureaucrats of Australia's "Productivity Commission," seemingly clinging to the bizarre and monumentally discredited theories of Thomas Malthus (and later, Paul Erlich), are trying to put a stop to this "having babies" thing.

Their game? Juggle the figures, ignore the long term consequences, and appeal to the citizenry's immediate selfishness -- anything to keep us from having to share our toys with those new kids.

Here's the opening of the Daily Telegraph story:

Forget those plans to have a third child for the country because further increases in the birth rate could harm the economy, the nation's productivity watchdog has warned.

A major analysis of the nation's increasing fertility rate said it was at its highest level for 25 years - but the Productivity Commission yesterday warned further increases may aggravate rather than solve the problem of the ageing of the population.


This is because it will shift women out of the workforce while they care for babies, depressing labour supply and reducing the taxation base as our population ages, the Daily Telegraph reported.


The small number of extra babies born would make little difference to the rate of population ageing, the commission said.


And the women having the babies would be exacerbating the financial impacts on the government of the ageing of the population because the tax breaks offered to parents to have children occur up front, while the cost savings of a bigger working population and bigger tax base from extra children are deferred until they are of working age...

Tuesday, August 05, 2008

Today's Posts

Vital Signs Pie Social Celebrates Upcoming Haggai Fest in Burkina Faso

Leading Economists Suggest Putting People First, Not Global Warming. MSM Buries the Story.

Pelosi's "No Drill" Arrogance Means Bad News for the Planet

Enraged Abortionist Attacks Photographer

Barack Obama: Our First Postmodern President?


Liberal Lampooner Challenges the MSM's Double Standard -- Where's the Coverage of the John Edwards Scandal?

Vital Signs Pie Social Celebrates Upcoming Haggai Fest in Burkina Faso

Wow!

The scene last night at the annual Vital Signs Ministries pie social was a grand one indeed as the 110 people present not only enjoyed all of the usual delights of the event (great fellowship, delicious desserts, and exciting updates of Vital Signs activities), but they were also treated to some terrific music from Patrice Kabore and his talented team hailing from Burkina Faso and Chad. Patrice handled the keyboard with Linda and Meelom joining him in the vocals while Jonathan played bass and Gerald whipped up on the drums. They were fantastic and the praise songs were joyous, triumphant and especially a blessing when we all joined in -- even the ones sung in different languages!

The music also served as a splendid backdrop to Patrice's brief video and his subsequent comments about the Haggai Fest coming up in Burkina Faso the first part of October, a groundbreaking event to which I have been invited to participate. It will be my second trip to Burkina Faso and this time around my primary duties will be to teach seminars to Christian leaders on the biblical philosophy (as well as specific techniques) of children's ministries. I'm really looking forward to being a part of this wonderful outreach and I'm humbled to be a part of the impressive international team Patrice has assembled.

The attendees of the VSM pie social were deeply moved by Patrice's presentation and I'm sure you will be too if you zip over to the web site of the Haggai Fest and look around a bit. In fact, I'm hoping you might find it so exciting that you'll join in the mission's support by praying for its success and by making a donation to help with the expenses. And those, as you might guess, are not minor. You can donate right there on line and, believe me, every gift will be deeply appreciated.

Again, it was a truly splendid and memorable evening. I'd like to thank everyone who helped with pies and with set up and clean up, especially Allen Nelson, Keith and Carol Moran, Quint and Carol Coppi, and Ron Herrick. Thanks too to our several friends from Faith Bible Church (where I have been teaching) who traveled all that way west to be a part of the evening's happenings. It was a real treat for Claire and I to have you meet some of the Vital Signs team...and vice versa. It made for just one more lovely blessing on an already lovely evening.

Leading Economists Suggest Putting People First, Not Global Warming. MSM Buries the Story.

Matthew Warren, "environment writer" for The Australian, finds the time to report on a major story that everyone else in the MSM is ignoring altogether. How come? After all, it involves several elements that the MSM usually loves: leading European intellectuals (including Nobel Prize winners), the impact of science on culture, and hot-button issues like women's rights and the environment.

Oh, I get it. It seems that the conclusions of the story turn out to be politically-incorrect. That's why it's been ignored. Except by The Australian-- so kudos to them for some fair and responsible reporting.

Expensive strategies to cut greenhouse emissions, such as Australia's proposed trading scheme, will do practically nothing to reduce the impact of climate change, and the money would be better used to address malnutrition, disease and the rights of women in developing countries, according to a review by leading economists.

The Copenhagen Consensus Centre co-ordinated by Danish economist Bjorn Lomborg has ranked the pursuit of deep cuts in emissions by countries such as Australia and Europe as one of the least-effective ways of advancing global welfare.


The findings contradict the analysis by Ross Garnaut and Nicholas Stern, who argue that the high cost of mitigating greenhouse gases now is much less than the risk of inaction on climate change.


In prioritising how best to spend $75billion over the next four years to deliver the greatest good to mankind, a panel of eight economists, including five Nobel laureates, did not feature any climate change spending among their 13 priority projects...

Pelosi's "No Drill" Arrogance Means Bad News for the Planet

Charles Krauthammer explains why Nancy Pelosi's obstinate (and under-handed) actions to prohibit the Congress from even getting a fair vote on changing America's disastrous energy policy is a bad deal -- for democracy, for the economy, for national security, and, yes, even for the environment. Check it out.

Enraged Abortionist Attacks Photographer

It certainly shouldn't surprise anyone that an abortionist, a person who regularly commits the most gruesome barbarities on preborn children, would feel no moral constraints whatsoever about directing his violence towards others. And indeed, this has happened often. Abortionists have been caught abusing their spouses (even murdering them), violating their patients and co-workers, and frequently venting their rage on peaceful pro-lifers.

This story, a case where an abortionist was perhaps motivated by fears of having his illegal activities caught on film, is just the latest example.

Barack Obama: Our First Postmodern President?

Perhaps it is the postmodernist drivel that Barack Obama spouts that makes him so attractive to "liberal evangelicals." After all, the latter group have enthusiastically embraced postmodernism themselves, finding in it various excuses for their intellectual laziness, their "emergent" worldliness, their sloppy theological heterodoxy and, of course, their self-loathing neuroses -- neuroses that drive them to say or do almost anything that might distance them from those hymn-singing, Bible-thumping, creationist, fuddy-duddy fundamentalists who are their oh-so-embarrassing kinfolk.

("Please, Mr. Leno; don't make jokes about us anymore. We're not those judgmental, conservative Christians that picket abortion clinics, take the Bible literally, or wear buckles on their shoes. Not at all. That's so 1980s. In fact, we hate that kind even more than you do. No, please believe us, we're hip now. We're just like you!")

Jonah Goldberg's column, published in this morning's USA Today, provides an insightful examination of Obama's "PoMo" credentials. It will help you to understand where he's coming from about as well as anything you've read.

And, yes, it will also help you better understand the movement that has so compromised the soul of Western evangelicalism nowadays.

Liberal Lampooner Challenges the MSM's Double Standard -- Where's the Coverage of the John Edwards Scandal?

Liberal activist Lee Stranahan, the producer of several videos which ridicule Republicans, has himself come clean about the John Edwards sex scandal. And he's writing about it on the anything-but-conservative Huffington Post. His reasoning is interesting to follow, illustrating as it does the grossly irresponsible double standards of the MSM.

Also very illuminating are the obscurantist, arrogant and mean-spirited reactions that his post is generating from fellow liberals.

I print excerpts of Mr. Stranahan's article below but you can read the whole thing right here.

Before I dive in, let me get the 'objectivity' thing out of the way. As a citizen journalist whose main claim to fame is producing satirical comedy, I can be upfront about my political leanings. I'm a recovering libertarian and currently I'm a registered Democrat who is excited to be voting for Barack Obama in November. I like John Edwards and up until a few days ago, he would have been my first choice for Vice President on an Obama ticket. I'm far from Puritan -- anything two or more consenting adults want to do is fine by me. I also think it's obvious a person's sexual life doesn't keeps them from being an effective politician.

I'm judging this situation using two standards; 1) what's the truth? 2) how's it going to play out in the media?...


Let's go with the assumption that Edwards is innocent for a moment; he didn't have the affair so the baby isn't his. If he didn't do anything wrong then it seems like he'd have good reasons to stop the rumors. A DNA test months ago would have ended all speculation about the paternity of the baby. Isn't that a better, less suspicious move than pulling down all the videos that Rielle Hunter helped produce about him for his campaign? And if there are rumors and you're innocent, WHY go visit the subject of those rumors at a hotel and leave at 2:45 in the morning? Why hide in the bathroom when reporters catch you leaving? These actions don't make any more sense to me than Craig's 'wide stance/dropped my toilet paper' defense did.


How's it going to play out? It seems to me that this is going to be a tsunami-sized scandal for the Democratic Party and right now the coming typhoon of press coverage is close to breaking. We're at the point of calm before the big waves hit but there are signs of the impending deluge. Jay Leno is making jokes about it. Perez Hilton is on the story. The mainstream media is fairly quiet but the most ominous silence right now is from the progressive blogosphere...


Despite what some people are going to say, this is news. A former Senator and Vice Presidential candidate who was running for President less than six months ago and is now on the short list for Vice President has an long affair during the campaign and fathers a child, covers it up, and then is caught at a hotel with the mother of the child. News! Oh -- and his wife made regular appearances on the campaign trail and has been diagnosed with cancer. If it were Mitt Romney, you'd be hearing peels of laughter and the satisfying smacking sound of Merlot and Starbucks fueled high fives coming from the nearest blue state. Would it have made the progressive blogs? C'mon, of course it would...with funny pictures and as many self-satisfied comments as you can shake a Macbook Air at....

"Liberal media bias" - here's the big one. Republicans have had a lot of embarrassing, juicy sex scandals of their own lately and boy, do they want some payback. It doesn't look good that the Los Angeles Times banned bloggers from discussing the story. Where's the Times investigation -- seems like the story is in their backyard. And that silence you hear from the mainstream press right now? The GOP is going to "play the refs" and jump all over the media for not reporting or investigating this story. The media will eventually break down and do what they do - saturate us with the story they missed just to prove how unbiased they really are...


Update: Seems like I've touched a third rail here. I cross-posted this piece at Daily Kos and it got over 400 comments. Unfortunately, a large number of the comments were nothing but insults. One person suggested seriously that all the videos I've made lampooning Republicans (including my Mike Huckabee video that Kos himself called the 'best political parody of 2007) were just a ruse so I could weasel my way into the progressive blogosphere, apparently in anticipation of John Edwards being caught at hotel.

(Oh, by the way, if this matter interests you enough to read further, check out Mickey Kaus's ongoing comments over on Slate. Very, very provocative stuff.)

Monday, August 04, 2008

Tributes to Alexander Solzhenitsyn

I find it hard to believe that there has been so little reaction to the death of Alexander Solzhenitsyn. Aside from some brief comments from world leaders and a few obligatory press reports buried deep in the news, the passing of one of the world's greatest literary figures (not to mention, one of the most significant, inspiring heroes of the Cold War) has hardly made a stir.

But, of course, our modern world cherishes celebrity over character, popularity over principle, and political-correctness over truth. Thus, the MSM will give extensive headline coverage when an actor or reporter dies yet dramatically underplay the life and legacy of one of the most important freedom fighters of our time.

Solzhenitsyn wouldn't have been surprised. Nor would he have much cared. His wasn't a personality that craved attention. He simply, faithfully did his work and left the results up to God.

And, despite the scant attention given to his passing or even the grudging, often griping attention given to his work during his lifetime, the results of Solzhenitsyn's courage, sacrifice, vision and that prodigious, remarkably skilled pen did change the world -- for the better and for ever.

Below I print, as my own tribute to this great writer, a couple of short pieces originally posted on The Book Den in 2006 and 2005. For a few more, simply type in "Solzhenitsyn" in the Search Blog feature of The Book Den, located at the upper left of the opening template.


In 1962 the Soviet literary journal Novyi Mir published Alexander Solzhenitsyn's short novel, One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovitch. The editor, Alexander Tvardovsky, knew he had discovered an astonishing new writing talent with a courageous moral vision, something that hadn't appeared in print in Russia since the days of Dostoevsky and Tolstoy. But then how could Tvardovsky have read such authentic Russian literature? Such writers were not only refused publication under the Communist regime, they were refused the permission to live.

But there was something new in the wind that gave Tvardovsky enough confidence to take this daring manuscript to the authorities and ask for permission to publish it. Stalin was dead, the butcher who in his monomaniac savagery had murdered millions of his own people, and his eventual successor, Nikita Khrushchev, had his hands full trying to wrest control from Stalin's hard-line comrades in the Politburo. Khrushchev had already launched (within the private domains of the Soviet elite) his attack on the "cult of personality," a campaign to present Stalin as a paranoid dictator whose excesses had actually undermined the Glorious Revolution.

In so doing, Khrushchev was anything but the liberated, enlightened soul that liberals in the West originally praised him as being. He was just another Communist thug, anxious to develop his own power. Discrediting Stalin, even it meant exposing some of the ugliness of Soviet history, was his means to get a tighter grip on the Kremlin. And One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovitch with its heart-rending portrayal of the senselessness and brutality of a Stalinist-era forced labor camp in Siberia written by a former zek who experienced it? Well, Khrushchev thought that the novel would make an effective opening move in the next stage of his campaign; namely, taking his attack on Stalin's "cult of personality" to the Soviet public and even to the peering journalists of the West.

But what Khrushchev, in his own spiritual blindness, could not foresee was how powerful a bomb he had set off when he gave Tvardovsky the permission to publish One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovitch. The Stalinists around him proved harder to defeat than he imagined. Indeed, their rage in his allowing just a few of the crimes of the Soviet Union to be published was vicious. Instead of securing power, Khrushchev began to lose it. And, on the other side, even the little scent of freedom that arose from the publication of the novel (and especially Solzhenitsyn's emergence as a respected dissident voice by the West) had an intoxicating effect on the Russian populace. Khrushchev had desired only a little light to shine...just enough to expose Stalin's treachery to the ideals of the Communist Revolution. What he got was a light that grew more brilliant and hot than he ever imagined, a light that revealed the utter wickedness and absurdity of Communism itself.

Khrushchev saw the monumental failure of his tolerance quickly and he tried to reverse it with a complete suppression of Solzhenitsyn's work and reputation. Too late. The comparatively mild light of Ivan Denisovitch would blaze up into the more detailed, more searing revelations of The Gulag Archipelago, Cancer Ward, The First Circle, and more. Published in Western editions, Alexander Solzhenitsyn's work would become the single most reason behind the destruction of the Soviet Union's claims of a moral foundation. And when that began to weaken, other heroes of freedom (Ronald Reagan, Lech Walesa, John Paul II, et al) would follow up to eventually destroy, if not Communism in Russia, the huge threat of the Communist tyranny over Eastern Europe.

Re-reading One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovitch recently (as well as discussing it with the students of the 20th Century Christian Writers course I'm teaching for Grace University this semester) was as thrilling as ever as I contemplated how God had used this small novel as a big voice for freedom.

The soaring of the human spirit represented in that book is inspirational on many levels -- the clever sarcasm the author uses to engage the foolishness of the Soviet schemes is superb; the introduction of Alyosha presented the strongest Christian character that Russian literature had seen for three generations; and the passion for a detailed history of how the camps were run strongly foreshadows the full exposure Solzhenitsyn would produce in his later works. All these elements of One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovitch (and more) show the spiritual genius as well as the bold courage of Alexander Solzhenitsyn -- a zek who quite literally and splendidly, changed the world.


The injustice and cruelty of the Soviet Union’s vast organization of labor camps in the 1930’s and 1940’s are now well known. But that knowledge didn’t have to surface. Indeed, without the grace of God acting through such heroic individuals as Alexander Solzhenitsyn, the truth might well have remained buried by Communist cover-ups. Solzhenitsyn was the foremost voice raised against the grand Soviet machine. Through rare courage and sacrificial efforts, he managed to alert the whole world to what was really happening to countless numbers of innocent human beings.

Solzhenitsyn’s most famous (though not often read) book is the riveting 3-volume, Gulag Archipelago. In that incredible work, the former slave camp worker documents the massive catalog of outrageous lies, violence, and criminal corruption perpetrated by Soviet Communism. In the Gulag (and even in his fiction), Solzhenitsyn serves as an historian. It is enough, he insists, to simply record what happened, to give the truth an open hearing. Truth has amazing power. Solzhenitsyn hoped that when people learned the real story of Soviet tyranny, they would resolve to never again allow the devil an open door to such blasphemy and brutality. It is in this sense that Alexander Solzhenitsyn is hailed as a prophet – not as a fortune teller, but as a “forth teller.” He bravely held up the banner of truth…and simply by performing that service, he helped change the world.

In Solzhenitsyn’s play The Love-Girl and the Innocent, set in a 1945 forced labor camp in Siberia, one of the persecuted men lists just a few of the monstrous crimes performed by Soviet thugs that he has witnessed. The prisoner is beside himself with fury, feeling utterly helpless to do anything about this all-enveloping injustice. But in response, Pavel Gai, an imprisoned ex-soldier who has experienced more than his own share of horrors, answers him with chilling authority. “What can we do? Remember – that’s all.”

Alexander Solzhenitsyn did, in fact, remember. In fact, it was his constant plea to God for help in remembering specific events, people and situations so that he could record the true history of the Soviet Union. Solzhenitsyn desired more than anything else to be a faithful historian in order to effectively honor the victims but, more importantly, so that the preserved truth could set the future free. Ronald Reagan was one who was inspired by those revelations and he acted on the knowledge that Solzhenitsyn had preserved. The Wall fell. The camps are now empty. Truth, just a simple presentation of the truth, can indeed destroy the darkness.

Friday, August 01, 2008

Today's Posts

Another Medical Science Breakthrough -- And It Uses Adult Stem Cells

Government "Trash Bin Police" Pull Secret Raid on Posh Neighborhood

Obama's Costly Flaws: John Hawkins Counts Ten of 'Em

"Saving Danieal Kelly was Just Too Much Trouble."

Why the Faithful Forewent Lambeth

A Swift Smattering of Salient Somethings

Another Medical Science Breakthrough -- And It Uses Adult Stem Cells

Here's news of yet another medical science breakthrough in which nobody is hurt, killed, or morally stained -- because the technique involved uses adult stem cells and not cells from a human embryo.

Roger Highfield, Science Editor for the Telegraph, reports on this significant advance that could substantially help researchers discover treatments for Parkinson’s and numerous other dreaded diseases.

...For the first time a research team has managed to take human skin cells from a patient with a genetic condition and transform them into nerve cells.
It means they will now be able to create limitless numbers of the diseased cells to help them carry out research in the hope of finding a way to treat the illness.

The research has been carried out by an American team.
They took skin cells from two elderly patients with motor neuron disease and turned them into nerve cells so they could study the cause of their nerve degeneration. The cells can now be used to test drugs to treat the condition.

But scientists also hope if they can find a way of altering the cell to make it healthy they will be able to grow a patient’s cells and tissue, free of disease, to transplant back into their body and fight the condition.
Research teams would theoretically be able to use the technique to develop treatments for a range of genetic conditions.

The advance is published in the journal Science by a team led by Prof Kevin Eggan of the Harvard Stem Cell Institute, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
Prof Eggan said. “Now we can make limitless supplies of the cells that die in this awful disease.”...

Here's the rest of the story.

Government "Trash Bin Police" Pull Secret Raid on Posh Neighborhood

And this is what it comes to? The nanny state searching our trash bins to see what recyclable articles we may have missed?

Remember the Vital Signs Blog post from last April which alerted you to the city government of Islington (United Kingdom) fining a fellow and giving him a criminal record because he had overloaded his trash bin by 4 inches? A fellow, by the way, who has to try and store his 6-member family's refuse in the one receptacle the insufferable town fathers allow him?

Well, it turns out that the snobby snoops of Islington have committed even more sinister follies. And, if it can be imagined, actions that are even more intrusive, even more unreasonable, even more weird.

Here's the Daily Mail's story about secret raids conspired over and financed by the local city government of Islington, North London. Trash bins along 53 of Islington's streets were searched, extending into the neighborhoods wherein actors, judges and even London's mayor reside. In all, over a thousand homes had their trash pawed over by the council's rubbish spies. (No, that's not fair. The council refer to them, no joke, as "waste professionals.")

Naturally, people were incensed when they learned of this remarkable invasion of privacy.

For instance, TV star Linda Robson was quoted, "That is terrible. How dare they? I recycle but there may have been private things I was throwing away. It is really intrusive. Is nothing sacred?"

Labour MP for Islington South and Finsbury, Emily Thornberry, expressed worries that serious security issues could have been involved. "High Court judges and High Court appeal judges live in those streets,' she said. "I am sure they are careful but a sheet of paper can easily go amiss, and council officers could have seen them. My concerns are who authorised this and what they do with the stuff. They should have told people what they were going to do."

Su Pollard, another popular British actress lives along one of the raided streets. She was also disturbed by the unwarranted searches. "I am quite incensed. It smacks of Big Brother. One feels like a suspect in some way. There is nothing in my bins that would incriminate me in any way - it's mostly yoghurt pots - but I am terribly uneasy about it."

But the town council snobs? They merely exacerbated the controversy when they affirmed, "No permission was sought from residents as none is required."

Furthermore, it argued, "The operatives involved were waste professionals acting under a strict code of conduct which included the possibility of finding items of a personal nature such as confidential paperwork."

The above sentence is, in itself, so comical that I cant' think of anything with which to further satirize it. But it does leave one with the most vivid word picture, doesn't it?

Liberal Democrat councillor Greg Foxsmith said: 'This is not about snooping into households' bins or invading privacy. It was an investigation into rubbish to see what is being sent to landfill and how much more could be recycled. Rubbish is not looked at individually or records taken - confidentiality is taken very seriously."

Uh huh. What is obviously NOT taken seriously are such archaic ideas as privacy and freedom let alone a responsible philosophy which appreciates both the priorities of political office and the limitation of political powers.

Obama's Costly Flaws: John Hawkins Counts Ten of 'Em

When John McCain makes mistakes, the media tries to portray him as senile. But Obama makes dumber mistakes than George Bush, more mistakes than Dan Quayle, and that's despite the fact that he spends far less time talking to the press than McCain.

So, what's his excuse for thinking that we have more than 57 states, claiming America's "fallen heroes" were in the audience listening to him, and his claim that "'10,000 people died' in the Kansas tornadoes when the death toll was really only 12?" Dan Quayle’s notorious potato(e) error, which was used to forever portray him as a drooling moron, wouldn’t even qualify as one of Obama’s top five mistakes.


The above is just one of John Hawkins' "Top Ten Flaws That Will Cost Him in November." Read the rest right here.

"Saving Danieal Kelly was Just Too Much Trouble."

Pro-life activists, beginning at least 30 years ago, prophesied that legalizing abortion would lead to a complete disintegration of our nation's regard for the sanctity of human life. They insisted that America could not remove protection from the most innocent and defenseless of human beings without severely damaging the respect for human life itself. Thus, abortion would lead to ever-escalating rates of infanticide, euthanasia, street violence, lethal human experimentation, and the most cruel abuses of the young, the elderly and the disabled.

If you remember, those pro-life activists were vilified by the secularists in the press and elsewhere for those predictions. They were said to be naive, biased fear-mongerers.

But the barbarities have turned out be worse than what, even in our grimmest moods, we ever imagined.

And the tragedy of Danieal Kelly is just one terrible example.

Here's the AP story about Danieal, a 14-year-old girl who was suffering from cerebal palsy -- and much worse -- from the brutality of relatives and the City of Philadelphia's Department of Health Services who let the girl die of neglect, malnutrition and mistreatment. Danieal had wasted away to a mere 42 pounds before she expired and her emaciated body was full of maggot-infested bedsores that delved to the bone.

Yesterday 9 people were charged with various crimes surrounding Danieal's death: murder, involuntary manslaughter, perjury, falsifying documents, and child endangerment. Those charged included Danieal's mother and father, three of the mother's friends, and four social workers whose inept, uncaring actions are worsened only by their dedication to cover up their crimes.

District Attorney Lynne Abraham had scathing words for the city's Department of Human Services, calling its handling of the case "callous, indifferent, unconscionable" — and all too familiar...


The report should "outrage the entire Philadelphia community" and bring about "earth-shattering, cataclysmic changes" at the Department of Human Services, Abraham said.


Abraham said that although at least 55 children have died under the agency's watch, it has given only "lip service to halfhearted corrective action."


"You can't continue to bury these children and say things are getting better when they're not," she said.

Why the Faithful Forewent Lambeth

I love the Lord Jesus Christ, and I love the Anglican Communion. So, why did the bishops of the Church of Uganda and I decide not to attend the present Lambeth Conference? Because we love the Lord Jesus Christ and because we love the Anglican Communion...

In this moving Times (U.K.) article, the Archbishop of the Church of Uganda, Henry Luke Orombi, explains the tragic story of how apostasy captured the Anglican Church hierarchy. He pleads with the erring brethren to pursue sincere repentance and spiritual obedience to Holy Scripture. But he knows that faithfulness requires purity -- and that is why those who yet embrace orthodoxy must go it alone.

It is important that our decision not to attend this Lambeth Conference is not misunderstood as withdrawing from the Anglican Communion. On the contrary, our decision reflects the depth of our concern and the sober realisation that the present structures are not capable of addressing the crisis.

How can we go to Holy Communion, sit in Bible study groups, and share meals together, pretending that everything is OK?, that we are still in fellowship with the persistent violators of biblical teaching and of Lambeth resolutions?


The Bible says: “Can two walk together unless they are agreed?” The Archbishop of Canterbury has asked us to “wait for each other”. But how is it possible when we are not travelling in the same direction?


The Church of Uganda takes its Anglican identity and the future hope of the global Anglican Communion very seriously. We love the Lord Jesus Christ, and we love the Anglican Communion. Lord, have mercy upon us.

A Swift Smattering of Salient Somethings

* Roy Spencer celebrates 2o years of Rush Limbaugh in this National Review Online article.

* Linda Chavez suggests that a high regard for President Bush will eventually be secured not only by the success in Iraq but because of his record of "compassionate conservatism" regarding Africa, education and homelessness.

* Investor's Business Daily examines Barack Obama's strange, alarming and definitely Orwellian plan to "force volunteerism" onto the American people.

* One of the leading liberals in the "Emergent Church" movement, Brian McLaren has not only joined the Matthew 25 Network and its campaign to put Barack Obama in the White House, he's found other frightening ways to dis the Lord he claims to serve. Read more here.