Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘MSM’

Russiagate

Okay, okay, okay. I confess. In the two full years of the Mueller investigation, I’ve written scarcely a single word in this space on the subject.

That’s not an accident. It’s entirely by design. Not anything nefarious, mind you. The truth is, I’m bored by political scandals.

Maybe some of that goes back to my early imprint of Watergate. I remember as a kid constantly hearing about it for, what then, seemed like my whole life. Of course, since I was all of seven or eight years old at the time, the couple of years it was front and center in the news pretty much was my whole life. My understanding of it was roughly that the President had done something bad, and some old guy Senator asked some question about what the President knew and when he knew it. The next thing I knew, we had a new President, oddly, a man named after a car company, whose main attribute seemed to be a penchant for falling down staircases.

Now my boredom with Watergate obviously had a lot to do with my young age. But fast forward forty-five years, and, remarkably, my attitude toward political scandals is not all that much different. For my part, I’d much rather write about ideas than about the Mueller investigation.

That said, with the close of the investigation into President Trump’s alleged Russian collusion, I think a few words on the topic are in order.

(more…)

Read Full Post »

According to a recent article in the Washington Post, if you don’t believe Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg is the very picture of physical health, you’re a nutjob, a wingnut, and an internet conspiracy theorist.

The piece by Eli Rosenberg and Abby Ohlheiser cites WaPo veteran Robert Barnes as being amazed that anyone, ANYONE!, would doubt that RBG is anything other than hale and hearty.

“A falsehood has been spreading in dark corners of the Internet that Ginsburg is dead,” write Rosenberg and Ohlheiser. The article then goes on to take shots are fringe “right wing Internet culture,” the sort of fringe culture that dares to raises doubts about official narratives put forth in the MSM.

The article even attempts to pin on the egregious fake news reports from a few weeks back – fake news reported on CNN and in WaPo itself about how MAGA hat wearing students from Covington Catholic High School were supposedly responsible for harassing a Native American Vietnam Veteran at the Indigenous People’s March in Washington D.C. – on independent journalists on Twitter.

Yes, we’re to believe that the mighty WaPo was taken in by “Two anonymous Twitter accounts,” that it was just following these anonymous accounts’ lead when it wrote about the “racist” actions of the high school students, and that it is in no way responsible for pushing a false narrative by publishing stories with headlines such as this: ” ‘Opposed to the dignity of the human person’: Kentucky Catholic dioceses condemns teens who taunted vet at March for Life.” If that’s true, then WaPo’s an even more pathetic joke of a newspaper than I thought.

But perhaps there’s a method to WaPo’s lame attempt to lay the blame on Twitter for their editorial mistake, they, along with a number of other news organizations and individuals, have been served a legal hold notice by the lawyer representing the students in anticipation of a possible lawsuit.

But what’s really odd about this piece from WaPo is its complete lack of evidence that RBG is, in fact, alive. There are no recent photos of her out in public. There are no videos. There are no quotes of any recent public statement from the judge.

The only “proof” offered to readers is Robert Barnes’ report that he saw RBG at a public performance, where, conveniently, we are told that “Photos were not allowed.”

Once you strip out the article’s rant on independent internet journalists, what you have is a very obvious appeal to authority. The fallacious argument runs thus, You have to believe that RBG is alive and well, because veteran WaPo reporter and editor Robert Barnes said so.

For my part, I don’t pretend to know the status of RBG’s physical health. It may be that she’s hale and hearty. Perhaps she’s alive but is seriously impaired, physically, mentally or both. It may be that she’s shuffled off this mortal coil.

The disappearance of Ruth Bader Ginsburg from the public eye is no small matter. Americans have a right to know whether government officials, elected or appointed, are capable of carrying out the duties of their office. Raising questions about Ginsburg’s physical fitness for office is not conspiracy theory, it’s a matter of national security.

If she’s healthy enough to serve as a judge, this is easy enough to prove. Let her make a public appearance and remove all doubt. If her health prevents her from sitting on the bench to hear arguments, the American people need to know this. Further, if this is the case, judge Ginsburg has an obligation to resign her post and allow the Senate to confirm a new judge in her place.

If judge Ginsburg is dead, then those who are hiding this fact are committing one of the greatest frauds in American political history and need themselves to be held accountable.

But whatever the case may be, WaPo’s readers, and Americans generally, deserve better than condescending reports about the health of a Supreme Court justice that tell them in so many words, just shut up and believe us already.

Read Full Post »

Parkland_02

Mourners look at a memorial for the victims of the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School shooting, in a park in Parkland, Florida on February 16, 2018. A former student, Nikolas Cruz, opened fire at the Florida high school leaving 17 people dead and 15 injured. / AFP PHOTO / RHONA WISE

In light of the well-organized, well-funded, and unprecedented attacks on the Second Amendment and on its supporters in recent days, it seemed good to me to set down a few inconvenient truths relating to the right to bear arms and the causes of mass shootings

First, as the old saying goes, “Guns don’t kill people, people kill people.” An article in the Huffington Post from last fall called this argument tired, logic-deficient, obvious and irrelevant, but it is nothing of the sort.

True, the argument has been around for a while. I remember it being used back in the day when I was a kid, but that doesn’t make it tired. In fact, it may be one of the most important truths to bring up in any discussion about the Second Amendment.

Guns are inanimate objects. They have now will of their own, no moral agency. In themselves, they are neither good nor evil. Guns are tools as are hammers, baseball bats and pickup trucks. And just as hammers, baseball bats and pickup trucks can be used for both good and evil, so too can guns.

Neither good nor evil reside in the gun, they reside in the heart of the person using the gun.

The Huffpo calls this point obvious. But is it? It’s fair to say that it should be obvious, but given the rush to restrict or outright ban gun ownership by certain groups following the school shooting in Parkland, FL, I’m not so sure it is.

If it were obvious, it should be equally obvious that stripping citizens of their right to bear arms is not the proper response to mass shootings. Yet the gun grabbers have never been more shrill in their demands to limit, or completely eliminate, Americans’ Constitutionally guaranteed right to own guns.

“There ought to be a law to banning ‘X’ to ensure that ‘Y’ never happens again,” on the other hand, really is a tired response to tragedy, but that doesn’t stop people from making the argument.

(more…)

Read Full Post »

Read Full Post »

Nashville Statement

Marriage is to be between one man and one woman.

    – The Westminster Confession of Faith, Chapter 24

This isn’t hard, folks. As theological questions go, the definition of marriage is pretty simple. It is a God-ordained, exclusive covenant between one man and one woman, and this the Christians has acknowledged for 2,000 years. In truth, the institution and its definition are much older than that, going all the way back to the creation of the world.

To borrow a turn of phrase from the Author of Hebrews, the biblical definition of marriage is milk, not meat. It’s something every Christian, even children, easily can, and ought to, understand.

And just as the Bible’s definition of marriage is simple and clear, so too is its stance on homosexuality: it’s a sin, and a particularly egregious one at that.

But as is the case with many things in this fallen world, what ought to be often times is not. Ours is a confused age, and truths that were almost taken for granted in earlier times now once again must be restated. One could point to any number of examples of the collapse of Western Civilization, but perhaps none exemplifies it better than the sweeping success of the homosexual agenda over the past 50 years.

Behavior that once was subject to sodomy laws is now celebrated at the highest levels of society. Governments, corporations, academics and the corporate media work diligently not only to promote the acceptance of homosexuality as normal and a thing to be celebrated, but also to cover in shame anyone who stands in their way.

The modern homosexual movement is usually traced back to the Stonewall riots in Greenwich Village that occurred in June 1969. From there, the homosexual agenda has gone from strength to strength, culminating in the Supreme Court’s 2015 discovery that the U.S. Constitution supports the right of homosexuals to marry. The pace of change has been remarkable, and what was, just a few short years ago, considered filthy and shameful is now held up by all respectable people and institutions as the epitome righteousness.

Things have gotten to the point that, not only has it become socially unacceptable to speak out against homosexuality, but to so positively invites vilification from society’s mainstream institutions. Just last week, I wrote in this space about the SPLC’s declaring D. James Kennedy Ministries a hate group due to its opposition to the homosexual agenda. Many other examples of the same can be found

When I wrote that piece, I was unaware that a few days later that The Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood would release the Nashville Statement, a work intended to affirm what the Bible has to say about men and women, marriage and homosexuality.

I first became aware of the Statement this morning while listening to Jason Hutchinson’s sermon during this morning’s church service. His comments were quite good and I will include a link to his sermon once it has become available.

After reading the document for myself, as far as I have been able to determine, the Statement is biblically sound and does a good job of setting forth Scripture’s clear teaching on sexuality. Further, the Statement also effectively refutes from Scripture some of the current arguments advanced in favor of homosexual marriage and transgenderism.

(more…)

Read Full Post »

SPLC-FL

The SPLC’s Hate Map of Florida.

What do D. James Kennedy Ministries and the Nation of Islam have in common? Not much, you say? Well, think again. According to the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), both are hate groups with located in Ft. Lauderdale, FL.

This particular issue came to my attention as a result of a recent story in Christianity Today titled “D. James Kennedy Ministries Sues SPLC over Hate Map,” According to the article, D. James Kennedy Ministries (DJKM) received negative media coverage after the recent Charlottesville riots in which the organization was branded a hate group by the SPLC. The Christianity Today piece also notes that – mirabile dictu – local Florida news reports labeled DJKM as the No.1 hate group in the state.

Per the SPLC’s Hate Map, the Ft. Lauderdale group landed on the list due to its “Anti-LGBT” stance. Notes the SPLC, “Opposition to equal rights for LGBT people has been a central theme of Christian Right organizing and fundraising for the past three decades – a period that parallels the fundamentalist movement’s rise to political power.”

If one were to take the SPLC’s word for it, he’d come away with the distinct impression that opposition to homosexuality was some 1970’s-era novelty hatched by the Moral Majority rather than the teaching espoused by Christians for the past 2000 years. In fact, the Bible’s identification of homosexuality as a sin pre-dates the Christian era, going all the way back to the Book of Genesis, where God himself referred to “the outcry against Sodom and Gomorrah” and their “very grave” sin, a reference to homosexuality. The Law of Moses calls homosexuality “an abomination.” In Romans, Paul teaches that homosexuality is a punishment from God on idolaters, “who did not like to retain God in their knowledge.” There are many other examples of the Bible’s condemnation of homosexuality, and I do not intend to cite them all here so as not to belabor the obvious point the God considers homosexuality a sin, and a particularly heinous one at that.

(more…)

Read Full Post »

%d bloggers like this: