If Billy Sunday thought America was on the wrong path in 1929, what would he think now?
How do you think ol’ Billy would respond to the charge that he is a “homophobic cis white male?”
If Billy Sunday thought America was on the wrong path in 1929, what would he think now?
How do you think ol’ Billy would respond to the charge that he is a “homophobic cis white male?”
Ilana Mercer is a libertarian who isn’t stupid about it. Here she takes her fellow libertarians to task for uncritically accepting the PC cry of racism. I’m a little disappointed that Paul Craig Roberts dropped the r word. His point, that different races coming to different conclusions re. the shooting being based on their preconceived biases is unobjectionable, but to label those biases racism only when they belong to whites is unfortunate. If preconceived biases are to be condemned, as PCR seems to indicate, it’s equally objectionable for blacks to presume negatively about the motivations of whites.
Hat Tip: Jack Kerwick
Look, I don’t like the Grammar Nazi any more than the next guy, but that’s the guy who nitpicks other folks’ usages to make himself feel superior. Occasionally, however, grammar intervention is needed to save all that is right and true.
Let’s go back to grade school, shall we? You can add ing to verbs. You can add ing to run and make running. You can add ing to jump and make jumping. You can add ing to rant and make ranting, which is what this article amounts to. You cannot, however, add ing to a noun and magically make it a verb. You cannot, for example, add ing to brain and make it mean thinking, no matter how much you might want to or how clever you might think it would be.
So, to whom is this rant directed? (Catch that? “To whom.” Mrs. White would be so proud.) I listen to a lot of sports talk radio because I can’t listen to the cheerleading for war that characterizes so much of “conservative” talk radio without my blood pressure skyrocketing to dangerously high levels. Listen to me Mr. Sports Talk Radio Guy. This is for you. No you are not efforting your next guest because EFFORTING IS NOT A FREAKIN’ WORD! Effort is a person, place or thing. Therefore, it is a noun. Therefore, no you cannot just add an ing to it to make it a verb. The English language does not work that way. You may be making an effort. You may be attempting to secure your next guest, but no you are not efforting, and the fact that Spell Check lights up when I type that word should tell you this.
I’m all for allowing common usages to become standard over time. For example, I think ain’t is fine when you are deliberately attempting to be informal. But, as the good knee-jerk reactionary that I am, I am opposed to trendy usages and especially dorks who don’t realize that their supposedly trendy usage is actually now passé. What’s next? Are they going to start Rickrolling people?
So KNOCK IT OFF, before I’m forced to march on your studios with pitchfork in hand!
That is all.
Cross posted at Intellectual Conservative.
Prediction: Darren Wilson will not be indicted and once again the PC grandstanders who jumped to conclusions before the facts were in are going to look like fools, not that PC grandstanders need any help looking like fools.
I strongly suspected from the start of this mess that the police officer would be vindicated, and I stand by that. And as the facts continue to pour in, it looks more and more like I will be proven correct. Here’s why I thought this.
As anyone who knows my writings will attest, I am not reflexively pro law enforcement. I was very critical of the post Boston Marathon lockdown for example. But whatever one may think about the police, police excess and brutality, etc., there clearly is not an epidemic of white cops willy-nilly shooting black suspects because they are black, and if you think there is then you need to check your ideology because it is overcoming your good sense.
So from the start, facts unknown, the high probability outcome was that the shooting was justified or at least arguably justified. That the shooting was blatantly unjustified was always a low probability, just based on the nature of such low frequency events. I don’t doubt that law enforcement disproportionately attracts a certain personality type. I don’t doubt that many suspects are roughed up more than necessary during or following apprehension. But that is an order of magnitude different level of offense than suggesting a police officer grossly inappropriately discharged his weapon and that race was a primary motivation for this. Seriously, step back and listen to yourselves. If you believe that is normal police behavior then I don’t know what else to say to you.
So at the very least, whatever your bias may be to believe one way or the other, in a highly emotional situation like this you have to wait until all the facts come in to make an informed and reasonable judgment. The early “facts” that come from an emotionally overwrought crowd and a sinister liberal media always eager to inflame sentiments against evil Whitey, are simply not reliable and to not wait for more balanced information to flow in is irresponsible, and allowing your emotions to overcome your rational judgment.
Have we learned nothing from past incidents? Based on the early info and media spin, Zimmerman should be rotting in jail. But guess what. He isn’t, because a jury said there was insufficient proof, just as the local jurisdiction initially claimed before the PC lynch mob got involved. And for the record, I called that one very early as well.
This rant is of course directed at PC liberals, but it is also directed at PC grandstanding and anti-police libertarians as well. That so many libertarians allowed their anti-police bias and eagerness to PC grandstand to overcome their rational good sense is extremely disappointing. I thought libertarians were supposed to be the hyper rational ones. Mr. Spock would not be proud. To not have at least as much skepticism about our blatantly PC mongering press and media as you do about police, is foolish. And if you think empowering the PC narrative, which is what you do when you accept it uncritically, furthers the cause of liberty then you’re not just foolish, you’re delusional.
As some readers may be aware, a while back the agrarian activist Wendell Berry announced his support for gay “marriage.” At Catholic World Report, one disgruntled former Berry fan critiques Berry’s position thus:
[...] Berry’s insistence upon a wall of separation between church and state reveals a profound confusion inherent to liberalism itself. How can any church possibly be relevant to the world we live in without in some sense being “political”? How can the religion which is abandoned every time one enters a voting booth or assumes the lawmaker’s chair or dons the magistrate’s robes be anything other than a hobby?
The Church & State issue aside, there is something bizarre about the cozy coexistence of the “localist” movement with the sodomy lobby.
Video games have never been my thing. Not even when I was a kid. Video games stress me out. What fun is it to sit there all tense pressing buttons as fast as you can? When I have free time I want to relax, like watching TV, reading a book or surfing the net. So the whole game scene is completely off my radar screen. But one benefit of having Facebook friends from all across the dissident right spectrum, is that you get exposed to all sorts of things you might not otherwise experience. I guess gaming is big in certain parts of the alt right sphere, and who knew gaming was plagued by a bunch of shrill feminist PC police?
Check out this video. I apologize for the language and subject matter, but it’s worth it just to wallow in all the drama. It’s like High School all over again.
A game called Depression Quest? Seriously? Who in their right mind would want to play a game called Depression Quest? I have an idea for a game. It’s called Cathedral Quest. In it, a group of intrepid wrongthinkers explore the Cathedral while overcoming obstacles like loss of career, Free Beacon hit pieces, etc. in search of one honest righthink enforcer who is willing to actually engage in a reasoned and intelligent debate. I toyed with the name Unicorn Quest before settling on Cathedral Quest. One challenge involves having to successfully distinguish a Slate article from an Onion article with at least 50% accuracy. It’s very tough.
Hat Tip: Matt Forney again
Yawn. Another story about the crazed thought police. But if these clowns keep thought policing, we’re gonna keep on exposing their small-minded bullying behavior. This time the alleged victims group is transgendered people, and the alleged offender is Gavin McInnis, who appears on Fox News and writes for Taki Mag. I’m sure those affiliations had nothing to do with the oh-so-sensitive censors’ jihad against him.
Hat Tip: Matt Forney’s blog.
I have not read, and may not ever get to, Patrick Buchanan’s latest book on Nixon, but I am reading the reviews. Jared Taylor reviewed the book, and relays points I am interested in:
Mr. Buchanan agrees with the general assessment that Wallace was badly hurt by his choice of running mate, General Curtis LeMay. LeMay had run the B-29 bombing campaign against the Japanese, and when Wallace first introduced him to the press, a reporter asked if LeMay would use nuclear weapons in Vietnam. LeMay left no doubt that he thought it was a good idea, and Wallace had to step in to stop LeMay going any further. For the rest of the campaign, Wallace had to dodge shots aimed at “Bombs Away” LeMay.
It doesn’t answer my vexing question as to just how LeMay got the spot, and wrecking what might have been a real Beyond Left and Right alliance–particularly in intellectual circles–and it must be noted, that Dr. Fleming seems to believe there is some credence behind the Nixon folks trying to assassinate Wallace in ’72–none of that appears to be addressed.
Still, it is a solid nugget to find.
Apple’s American employees (data excludes foreign employees) are 80% male and 77% white or Asian. 72% of its leadership is male. Like Google, Apple has vowed to change this. Apple’s CEO Tim Cook recently declared (AP quote):
“Let me say up front: As CEO, I’m not satisfied with the numbers on this page,” Cook wrote. “They’re not new to us, and we’ve been working hard for quite some time to improve them.”
Rev. Jesse Jackson, president and founder of the Rainbow PUSH coalition, called Mr. Cook to congratulate him.
My questions are:
Interesting beneficiaries of diversitocracy: Whites who can claim to be [partly] nonwhite [in this case "Hispanic", which includes those descended from Spaniards]. (following quote from same AP article):
As CEO, Cook also promoted Cuban-American Eddy Cue to Apple’s executive team and hired a woman, Angela Ahrendts, to oversee its stores.
Perhaps Apple should outsource tech jobs to where meritocracy is still the norm: Asia and Germany. Not only does the world distrust NSA involvement in American-made technology, but now it will fear American iphones are as poorly made as American cars.
Addendum: AmRen posted an even better report on this same story.
Steven Seagal, who has spoken out before in defense of Russia and Putin, played a gig in Crimea recently that was allegedly pro-separatist.
…Seagal played a weekend concert in the Black Sea peninsula of Crimea, appearing on a stage adorned with the flag of pro-Russian separatists in Ukraine.
The Russia/Ukraine situation is complicated. Ethnic Ukrainians have a reason to be sore at and distrustful of Russia, but the problem is that Ukraine, like so many other countries, is too large and attempts to keep unlike elements together in a political alliance that is unnatural. Separation of the more Russian Eastern parts of Ukraine is probably the most natural outcome.
But whatever you may think about the Russia/Ukraine situation, you have to admit that Seagal has some serious nads. Publicly supporting Putin and Russia is not a popular position, and he is taking a risk by doing so.
Congratulations are in order to our friend Tom Piatak. He is now the Executive Vice President of the Rockford Institute. I first became aware of this via his Facebook page.
The Rockford Institute has taken a bold step forward in its mission to defend traditional conservatism by appointing Thomas Piatak as Executive Vice President. A veteran of the Culture Wars and a tireless advocate of restoring American jobs and economic prosperity, Mr. Piatak is perfectly poised to raise the Institute’s profile among current and new donors, and introduce the Institute’s hard-hitting flagship publication, Chronicles: A Magazine of American Culture, to a new generation of readers and writers.
We are awaiting reaction from mega Piatak fan Rod Dreher.
Anyone with eyes can see the DC Empire has turned a dysfunctional country into a hellhole:
The conservative radio host made the assertion during a “Fox News Sunday” panel debating the impact of President Barack Obama’s decision to make limited strikes in northern Iraq against ultra-violent jihadists from the Islamic State. (RELATED: ISIS Threatens America: ‘We Will Raise The Flag Of Allah In The White House’)
Ingraham contended that military action in the country — even to prevent genocide and oppression — seems to always backfire.
“We try to do all these things in Iraq, now Iraq is worse off,” she said. “I mean, I hate to say that, but Iraq is worse than before we went into Iraq.”
“Christians are gone, there’s no sense of order at all,” she explained. “Saddam Hussein is gone, that’s a good thing. But what’s left? A more emboldened Islamic State, not contained, apparently, even by U.S. airstrikes.”
But that’s the thing about ideologues, from Puritans to today’s antifa – determined to rid the world of all evil, they make things even worse. The Southern tradition is to deal with life as it is rather than forcing the world to conform to some abstract ideal. As Richard Weaver once noted, “The Southerner accepts the irremediability of a certain amount of evil and tries to fence it around instead of trying to stamp it out and thereby spreading it. His is a classical acknowledgment of tragedy and of the limits of power.”
That reminds me of a classic Twilight Zone episode, “The Howling Man.” Thinking he is helping an innocent man cruelly imprisoned by religious fanatics, an American tourist in Europe unwittingly frees the Devil. There’s a lesson here for do-gooders everywhere:
The church affiliation and planting ministry that Mark Driscoll founded, Acts 29, has removed Driscoll’s Mars Hill Church from their network and asked Driscoll to step down. Since I first read about this story, LifeWay Christian Bookstores has announced they are going to stop selling his books. This is all very unfortunate, although some nuance is called for.
As I said below, I do think that some of what Driscoll said and did was indecorous and intemperate, but he has largely admitted as much and apologized. He said in the past that he thought rabble rousing on a forum under a pseudonym was not the right way to go about it, and he apologized. This new brouhaha is largely because those posts which he apologized for and admitted were unwise have surfaced.
But here is the problem. All the above conceded, Driscoll’s fundamental points are correct. The Bible, history and nature do testify to the reality and importance of gender differences and gender roles. And Christian men, and American men in general, have stopped acting like men. And not only is Driscoll correct, but these are issues of utmost importance that desperately need saying if we have any hope of salvaging the Christian Church as we know it.
The feminization of American men, both behaviorally and biologically, has been much commented on in dissident right circles and is largely the impetus, along with the concomitant masculinization of women, behind the growth of the so-called manosphere. (I have a strong hunch that Driscoll is familiar with the manosphere, because he sounds like he is.) But the manosphere is largely amoral and often dismissively refers to those of us who encourage sexual continence as tradcons. Do we really want to cede primary advocacy of gender roles and masculinization to people hostile or indifferent to Christianity? This is why we need Christian voices speaking out on this matter who care about the state of the Church and the country who aren’t just looking for a way to get women in bed.
By booting Driscoll out of the Acts 29 Network, without the appropriate finesse, Acts 29 is empowering the Rachel Held Evans of the world. By not selling his book, without making the action and behavior vs. thought distinction, LifeWay is empowering PC ninnies like Warren Throckmorton. Do they really want to do that? What are Acts 29 and LifeWay objecting to, actions or beliefs? The fact that they took these actions in response to a PC outcry makes it look like they are accepting the PC narrative unless they make it entirely clear that they aren’t, which they haven’t.
So you know that I’m not just cheerleading for Driscoll, I do think Driscoll is somewhat the victim of his own devices. He is closely associated with the emerging church movement, but in my understanding has distanced himself from it and is, as far as I can tell, doctrinally sound on the essentials. Unlike Rob Bell, for example, who has clearly flown the coup. But in the doctrinally conservative wing of the emergent church movement’s efforts to make the Church relevant, they largely adopted “contemporary” modes of worship. I don’t think I’m breaking new ground to suggest that contemporary worship is an arguably feminized form of worship that appeals to female sensibilities. You want to man and woman up your Church? Then wear coats and ties and dresses and stop singing praise songs that sound like “Jesus is My Boyfriend.” Grab a hymnal and sing “There is Power in the Blood.”
For those who didn’t quite get my earlier attempt at humor, by feigning outrage at a minor point, I was primarily dismissing or belittling the larger outrage. But there was a little more method to my madness. In every picture I have ever seen of Driscoll, he is wearing a vest (not sweater) and looks like he needs a shave. I’m not dissing vests or facial hair. In fact, from the standpoint of masculinity, I think there is something to be said for facial hair. But the distinction that Driscoll seems to be making is a tame or lame vs. cutting edge or unconventional distinction, with tame associated with femininity and cutting edge associated with manliness. While there may be some truth to this in the milieu and context Driscoll finds himself in, this is a problem with his milieu. In the grand scheme of things, a traditional combination of loafers, khakis and an oxford cloth button down says man’s man much more so than does a vest and whatever Driscoll’s footwear of choice may be. In fact, the best way to be counter-cultural in our crazy modern world is to be radically traditional, affectionately referred to as rad trad. (For the record, once I
lose weight … err … I mean my wife quits shrinking my clothes … and invest in a new wardrobe, I’m going rad trad all the way!) If Driscoll paired his vest with a suit and a pocket watch and a pair of wingtips, he would be making a much more masculine and traditional statement than he does now. Actions, not words on a forum, speak loudest.
Now that I’ve ticked off every possible element, please discuss.
Li’l Lindsey Graham is once again doing what he does best, and that’s to terrify Americans into supporting yet another war. From Fox News:
SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM sounds the alarm about the growing threat of the Islamic State, the militant group formerly known as ISIS, launching an attack on American soil unless President Obama takes more decisive action to stop terror group’s surge across Iraq and Syria.
And as we all know, by “decisive,” Li’l Lindsey means “doing what Bill Kristol and Bibi Netanyahu want us to do.” So let’s all run around the room screaming, then take DECISIVE action and beg our Congress to do the one thing it’s capable of doing, and that’s to vote money for Israel and the Pentagon. Otherwise the Islamic State armored division will sprout wings and swoop out of the skies and spray Des Moines with 30mm shells.
What will the outcome be? We know that: Armaments industries and AIPAC will shower Li’l Lindsey and his friends with generous campaign contributions. After a decade or so, the guerrillas will out-maneuver the invaders, and we’ll have NO CHOICE but to grant citizenship to the Syrian and Iraqi Muslims who collaborated with US forces.
Ann Coulter sure has a knack for stirring up trouble. Her Ebola column has a caused an interesting division on the right which is chronicled here.
I see both sides, although I have no problem with them bringing the Ebola infected doctor and nurse back to the US which seems to be a lot of people’s issue. The likelihood of Ebola spreading to the US because of those two patients is vanishingly small. Discuss.
Update: links fixed
by Alan Cornett
Ann Coulter, she of blonde and bombast, posted a jaw-dropping column yesterday in which she called Dr. Kent Brantly, who is a real medical hero, “idiotic” for his decision to go to Africa to treat the needy. It was a choice that led to his (and nurse Nancy Writebol’s) infection with the deadly Ebola virus.
Brantly’s apparent idiocy, according to Coulter, has led to Samaritan’s Purse spending more than $2 million to bring him back. “Whatever good Dr. Kent Brantly did,” she writes, “has now been overwhelmed” by that tremendous financial cost. Because making a cost-benefit analysis of helping others is what the Biblical Good Samaritan is best known for.
“Why did Dr. Brantly have to go to Africa?” Coulter asks incredulously. Missionaries like Brantly “slink off to Third World countries…to do good works” when their real need is here in America, “the most consequential nation on Earth.” Brantly should have “served the needy in some deadbeat Texas town” instead of engaging in “Christian narcissism.” This is the Coulter worldview.
I know there are some, many, in fact, who in essence agree with Coulter. I have spoken with Christians who think just this way. We have enough work to do here, why go somewhere else?
But Coulter has presented us with a false choice. For us to complain that Dr. Brantly should have stayed here to do his work is, 1) to presume that we have any right to control what Dr. Brantly should do (I thought that was one of the fears of Obamacare, that doctors would be told where to work), and 2) that Dr. Brantly is the only doctor who can do volunteer and charity work.
I have made ten trips to foreign countries doing missionary work (in a teaching, not a medical, role). I have good friends who have traveled to Sierra Leone where Ebola is now spreading. And I know people who know Dr. Brantly. I understand why people decide to “go.”
When someone decides to go to a foreign field to do needed work, they are not the only ones who are capable of a certain role. Dr. Brantly is not the only doctor from Texas. There are doctors in Texas who have no desire, or ability, to go to Africa like Dr. Brantly did. That’s perfectly fine. But they don’t have to wait for Dr. Brantly to get well, decide to abandon Africa, and return to Ann Coulter’s deadbeat Texas town. No, they could go do that work themselves right now.
There are always more who stay than those who go. To criticize those who go for not staying is to make the false assumption that all our resources are currently being utilized to their fullest capacity. It is to assume that the missionary who goes does not leave behind scores—hundreds—of others perfectly capable of doing the same work here.
Paul of Tarsus spent a couple of decades traveling from city to city in the eastern Roman Empire preaching the gospel. Barnabas found Paul (still Saul at the time) in his hometown of Tarsus, but convinced him to leave to come to Antioch to help out. That began Paul’s journey far afield, a journey that would lead to him being stoned, beaten, shipwrecked, imprisoned, and eventually martyred. Couldn’t Paul have stayed in the deadbeat town of Tarsus and just preached there? Was Paul an idiot to leave, just a Christian narcissist?
Philip the Evangelist spent some early time “going,” traveling to Samaria, encountering the Ethiopian eunuch on the road to Gaza (dangerous places, eh?). But Philip ended up in Caesarea where the account of Acts leaves him. Paul comes through Caesarea in Acts 21 where he stays with Philip, who apparently has been there all this time, probably for twenty years. Philip had decided to “stay.” We have no record of his work, but no doubt he had been busy doing what needed to be done in the deadbeat town of Caesarea.
Neither path was wrong, both Paul’s and Philip’s work were needed. As the body has many parts, and each with its own role, so we do not need to judge the one who goes nor the one who stays.
Sadly, those who often criticize those who choose to go, as Dr. Brantly went, are those who are really afraid that with those workers gone, they themselves might be expected to step into the gap.
So when Ann Coulter criticizes Dr. Brantly, is it because she laments the loss of his help in serving others, or is it because with him gone, she might be afraid someone will expect she do it herself? Ann, there’s a deadbeat Texas town just waiting for you.
Alan Cornett is a former assistant to Russell Kirk. He blogs at PinstripePulpit.com. You can follow him @alancornett. He writes from Lexington, Kentucky.
One of the loudest and least reflective of the armchair generals demanding Obama go back into Iraq calls herself “neo-neocon.” She’s a competent writer but is wedded to the notion that all problems, whether they be Putin in Ukraine, ISIS in Iraq, or Miley Cyrus in concert, can and should be solved by military action. (I might be persuaded about Miley Cyrus.)
Anyway, her latest post chides Obama for not taking more decisive action in Iraq (“decisive,” of course, meaning “doing whatever Bill Kristol and Bibi Netanyahu demand.”). In neo-neocon’s eyes, Obama is an out-of-touch idealist who thinks he can hug and dialogue his way out of every problem instead of having to wage war. Says neo-neocon:
Turns out that America as cowboy wasn’t so bad after all. The worldwide events of the last few years underscore how putting the “can’t we all just get along?” crowd in charge is one of the surest paths toward chaos and war. That is a terrible paradox, one that has been amply demonstrated in the past, particularly in Munich, 1938.
Ah, yes. It’s Munich, I tell you! Because anything other than shock and awe is capitulation.
But the kicker is that neo-neocon cites Rudyard Kipling’s “The Gods of the Copybook Headings” with this comment:
It is a profoundly realistic, resigned, and anti-liberal statement of human nature and its follies, and the futility of “hope and change.” The Gods of the Copybook Headings laugh at Nobel Peace Prizes, recognizing them as temporary illusions.
Talk about unclear on the concept. When Kipling wrote this powerful poem, he had just lost his son in the mindless meatgrinder we today call WWI. The poem is about the empty-headed slogans people let themselves be fooled by. (“Global Democratic Revolution,” anyone?) It’s laughable that the same post that urges Obama to go back into Iraq quotes a poem with this verse:
As it will be in the future, it was at the birth of Man
There are only four things certain since Social Progress began.
That the Dog returns to his Vomit and the Sow returns to her Mire,
And the burnt Fool’s bandaged finger goes wabbling back to the Fire;
Read that last line again about going back to the fire. That’s exactly what neo-neocon and the rest of her ilk want us to do in Iraq.
Neocons. They never learn from their mistakes. Worse, they never admit they make mistakes.
Bob FitzSimmons, the treasurer of the apparently ball-less Virginia Republican Party, is stepping down because some poor PC sensitive babies got their diapers in a bunch over the inconvenient hate facts he posted on his private Facebook page.
Briefly, Obama issued a Ramadan related statement praising the contributions of Muslims to the “fabric of America” and the “core of our democracy.” Mr. FitzSimmons posted a Facebook reply calling the President out for his obvious hyperbolic pandering. The hysteria quickly ensued. Take a look at this HuffPo article, and you’ll see that it wasn’t just Dems and libs wetting their collective pants. Some of his fellow Republicans were wetting theirs as well. I guess cutting off your balls causes problems with continence.
I got in a debate about this with a bunch of PC squishes and Establishment water carriers on a Facebook. (Is there a bigger waste of time?) Here is what I wrote:
Here is what Obama said. “In the United States, Eid also reminds us of the many achievements and contributions of Muslim Americans to building the very fabric of our nation and strengthening the core of our democracy.” This is so obviously hyperbolic and pandering it’s laughable. He didn’t say Muslim have contributed to our economy for example. He said “very fabric of our nation” and “core of our democracy.” Please PC apologists, work that out for me. Fabric of our nation? Core of our democracy? Please explain.
Here is what Fitzsimmons said. “To mark the end of Ramadan, on Sunday, Obama released a statement thanking Muslim Americans “for their many achievements and contributions….to building the very fabric of our nation and strengthening the core of our democracy.”
It is one thing to be gracious on religious holidays, but this is pure nonsense. Exactly what part of our nation’s fabric was woven by Muslims? What about Sikhs, Animists, and Jainists? Should we be thanking them too?”
FitzSimmons is equally obviously correct. Obama’s statement was “pure nonsense.” Perhaps FitzSimmons, knowing the current PC oppressive intellectual climate, could have phrased it differently, but he was speaking truth and calling Obama out for his lies. Before the PC hysteric chorus replies in outrage, take a few deep breaths and just think. That Obama was FOS and FitzSimmons speaking truth is hardly debatable. Truth is under no obligation to conform to modern PC sensibilities.
I wish he hadn’t stepped down. The PC Beast must be resisted, not caved into.
Rachel Held Evans is an ex-evangelical Christian turned liberal “Christian” blogger who whines a lot about traditional Christian gender roles, sexual rules, etc. as she plays the role of ex-conservative (religiously speaking) Christian trying to come to grips with doubt and uncertainty while wholeheartedly embracing modern PC mores. You know the type, of which she is a virtual caricature. To illustrate the kind of insufferable foolishness we are dealing with here, in her blog post accusing Driscoll of a “disturbed mind” she warns her readers that the post contains “crude language, slurs, misogyny, homophobia.” Oh no, not that dreaded homophobia. Get it? If you don’t embrace wholly modern PC norms, then you have a disturbed mind. Meaning, I guess, that every human being that ever lived on the earth prior to 50 years ago +/- had a disturbed mind.
Mark Driscoll is the Pastor of the Mars Hill mega church in Seattle, WA. There is something to be said for decorum, and I believe that Driscoll does at times use indecorous and unwise language. The Church should be clear, for example, that the Bible explicitly condemns all sex outside of marriage, but discussing licit sex within marriage from the pulpit is generally unwise and in popular intended books is questionable at best. It is a subject that is best left to individual counseling and perhaps a specialty book. Some of the stuff Held holds up as evidence of Driscoll’s disturbed mind is intemperate, although for context he was writing anonymously on a blog with the intent of shaking people up. But all that said, his basic underlying premises which are upholding Biblical, historic and natural gender roles and bemoaning the sorry state of the modern American male desperately need saying. What we need is a more gentlemanly and prudish Mark Driscoll to compete against the Rachel Held Evans types and the largely amoral manosphere.
“And the pastel cashmere wearing sensible haircut clean shaven loafer wearing minivan driving suburban sympathizers contend “But they really really love each other.”” ~ Pastor Mark Driscoll
Ok, that does it! Driscoll has done gone and crossed a line! How dare he insinuate that there is something wrong with loafers?! Yeah, pastel cashmere is too much, but loafers, khakis and an oxford cloth button down are about as much of a man uniform as you are going to find. Personally, I’m a wingtip guy, but what kind of un-American freak disparages an American icon like loafers?! Dissing loafers is like dissing apple pie and baseball. What is this guy? Some sort of communist? What’s next? Will he be recommending Extra-Crispy? May the spirit of G. H. Bass haunt him ’till his dying day!?
Addendum: I suppose I should clarify for those who don’t get the context, there is a serious issue here that I’m playing off of that we might call the Rachel Held Evans vs. Mark Driscoll throwdown. I’ll comment on that separately.