God's plan just fell apart, I guess

RealClearReligion - A Divine Call Won't Get You Votes

Michele Bachmann explained at the beginning of her campaign why she was running, "It means I have a sense of assurance about the direction I think that God is speaking into my heart that I should go."

And she is not the only one "called by God" to discover that apparently God didn't help her follow the call very well.

There is a certain way of speaking among evangelical Christians (not all, necessarily, but as a demographic) that uses divine call or revelation as a crutch to prop up what the speaker wants to do or persuade others to do.

Examples:

When I was a landlord, my last tenant told me that God had revealed to them that I was to allow them to break their lease early and with no penalty. My reminder to them that they had also told me when signing the lease that God had led them to rent my house was of no import. It's easy for God to change his mind when you change yours, yes?

A Baptist church member whom I have know for decades told me that one day the Sunday School superintendent walked up to him and said, "God has told me that you are going to teach our youth class!" To which the member replied, "God didn't send me that memo."

Which brings me back to presidential politics. The linked article also includes this nugget:

Herman Cain explained his call this way: "Whether that is ultimately to become the President of the United States or not, I don't know. I just know at this point I am following God's plan."

So Cain's campaign was a divine plan that apparently included public humiliation? (Actually, since the Lord "has scattered those who are proud in their inmost thoughts," maybe so. The question for Cain is just where is he with the Lord now? And that's a question for all of us, too.)

There are three things I have learned about God's call:

1. I am not a messiah, only God is a redeemer, deliverer or savior. So I view very suspectly people who claim to be called by God to save the rest of us, whether religiously, politically or socially. The people whom I would say really are doing that, however slightly or greatly, have all been mortified that it they are God's instrument. Which leads to ...

2. The object God's call is to make more apparent the glory of God among people, not to exalt the hearer of the call. That means ...

3. God's call almost never corresponds, even remotely, with what you want to do. Hence, any specific desire that exists, however slightly, in your heart that a subsequent divine call seems so wonderfully to endorse is almost absolutely not the voice of God but of the Deceiver. God's will is rarely appealing, at first.

And so, at the cusp of this New Year, to be reminded of the Wesleyan Covenant of Commitment:

Commit yourselves to Christ as his servants. Give yourselves to him that you may belong to him. Christ has many services to be done. Some are more easy and honorable; others are more difficult and disgraceful. Some are suitable to our inclinations and interests, others are contrary to both.

In some we may please Christ and please ourselves. But then there are other works where we cannot please Christ except by denying ourselves. It is necessary, therefore, that we consider what it means to be a servant of Christ. Let us, therefore, go to Christ, and pray:

I am no longer my own but yours, O God.
Put me to what you will, rank me with whom you will;
put me to doing, put me to suffering;
let me be employed for you, or laid aside for you,
exalted for you or trodden underfoot for you;
let me be full, let me be empty,
let me have all things, let me have nothing.
I freely and with a willing heart
yield all things to your pleasure and disposal.
And now, glorious and blessed God,
Father, Son and Holy Spirit,
you are mine and I am yours.
So be it. And let this covenant renewed on earth be fulfilled in heaven. Amen.

Why does Obama do the things he does?

Victor Davis Hanson on Barack Obama:

For Obama the great tragedy of a Solyndra was not the corruption of old-style fast-buck artists masking their greed through insider green lobbying with members of his administration, but rather that such scandals (along with Climategate and the implosion of Al Gore) have sidetracked the entire green philosophy that mandated more government unionized employees, government technocrats, and government tax collectors to reorder society itself.

The result of all this is a sort of unending but rarely expressed war. The business man does not know what his taxes are, only that they should go up, given his privilege. He is judged not by the good that he does but by the excessive money he makes. The corporation does not know what the rules of the game are, whether his energy is too polluting, his workers not unionized enough, or his product not regulated enough. None believe Obamacare, as promised, will reduce costs. None believe that government borrowing and massive new entitlements are reducing unemployment and raising GDP. None believe that wealth can be created by record deficits and aggregate debt. None believe that printing ever more money will not lead to inflation.

What we have, then, is a war on two ends: the better off are hesitant to work more, given their fears that additional profits will either be more difficult to come by or not remain their own; the poor are hesitant to work more, given their expectations that entitlements will be extended and will be easier to come by. They both expect more government and they both as a result are not so eager to take risks and seek greater income in the private sector.

The result of Obama’s war is the current three-year slowdown. Obama in response counts on two strategies to nevertheless be reelected: either at some point the private sector will conclude that it is not going to get any better, and thus it is preferable to shrug, take its medicine, and get back to work, and so the economy picks up a little in 2012; or, to the degree that Obama can blame the lengthy pause solely on the minority of the undeserving rich, he believes that an angry and fearful bare majority may agree.

The question is truly begged: If we stipulate that the effective destruction of America's economy is not an actual objective of a president whose political orientation is the most radically leftist of any figure to occupy the office (or most any office in Washington, for that matter), then: what would he be doing differently if that really was his objective? He would be doing hardly anything differently.

This administration is not so baffling perhaps, when viewed through this lens:



Bill Whittle explains in detail:

Obama v. Clinton for "first black president" title

Which is the real "first black president?" Douglas Wilder ponders the question.

L. Douglas Wilder was governor of Virginia from 1990 to 1994. He was America's first elected African-American governor. On Politico he asks whether Obama is better for blacks (politically) than Clinton was. And Wilder doesn't think so.

I asked back in August, "Is Barack Obama a black president?"

I trust the reader will see that the question posed by this post's title is unrelated to President Obama's ancestry, but, rather, with his American ethnic identification.

That Obama is an African-American is not the question. The question is, Is Barack Obama a black American? And to this question, I think the answer is at best open.

Consider the president's biography. He has no ancestor who was part of the historic black experience in America. His mother was white and his father was Kenyan. What do I mean by the "black experience?" I'll let black Americans answer that.

And I quoted some prominent black Americans on what it meant to live the black experience in America. This is an experience that Obama never lived.

The black American "two-cultures" environment, which was (and still very much is) so central to their lives, was absent from Obama's upbringing. He lived in Hawaii from birth to high school graduation, where the racial friction has always been between Hawaii natives and whites rather than between whites and blacks. Second, he spent ages 6-10 in Indonesia. This is not the childhood the the black experience in America, in which blacks grow up in and spend adulthood in a black culture that "is heavily southern American," even for northern blacks.

The experience of being raised in a distinct black culture, surrounded by whites and significantly controlled by them, is to be immersed in a culture with its own historic baggage of slavery and subsequent racism and Jim Crow, a culture with its own music and coded jargon and Southern Gospel religious heritage. This is a culture that has never been part of Barack Obama's experience. It is literally alien to him.

Even in 2007, this disparity led Time Magazine to ask, "Is Obama Black Enough?"

And so Gov. Wilder now ponders,

Yet here we sit, more than three years after Obama’s win, and too many people are pulling me aside in private to ask why his standing in the African-American community has softened since his Inauguration. They also question whether the reduced excitement among young and new voters — with that lack of enthusiasm from African-Americans — might hinder Obama’s 2012 campaign. ...

Obama was elected in a flourish of promise that many in the African-American community believed would help not only to symbolize African-American progress since the Civil War and Civil Rights Acts but that his presidency would result in doors opening in the halls of power as had never been seen before by black America.

Has that happened? I am forced to say, “No” — especially when comparing Morrison’s metaphorical first black president to the actual first black president.

Obama was elected in a flourish of promise that many in the African-American community believed would help not only to symbolize African-American progress since the Civil War and Civil Rights Acts but that his presidency would result in doors opening in the halls of power as had never been seen before by black America.
Has that happened? I am forced to say, “No” — especially when comparing Morrison’s metaphorical first black president to the actual first black president.

Like I did in my post, Wilder cites Toni Morison's claim that Bill Clinton was America's "first black president." But Wilder, while understanding her point, does not embrace it. Nonetheless,

By birth and life experience, Clinton cannot lay claim to the title of first black president — as Morrison knighted him. But Obama needs to work harder to make it less obvious that Clinton, in governing deed, actually deserves it more that the 44th president does.

A lot of whites voted for Barack Obama in 2008 because he would be the first black American president. But as Gov. Wilder implicitly acknowledges, he's not in any respect except skin tone, and this has done nothing to improve the lives of black Americans economically or politically. Will this make a difference in 2012? I think it will, and not only among whites.

Newt Gingrich takes third no-adultery pledge

Angel Michael - not running for president

An Iowa social conservative group called The Family Leader asked presidential candidates to sign a "sweeping pledge on marriage and abortion over the summer." At the time, Newt Gingrich declined to sign it. However,

Now, Gingrich has answered the pledge with a lengthy written response, vowing to support a federal marriage amendment, reinstate the Mexico City policy -- and, per the stipulations of The Family Leader pledge, to be faithful to his wife:

I also pledge to uphold the institution of marriage through personal fidelity to my spouse and respect for the marital bonds of others.

This is the third such pledge Newt has taken. The first two went like this:

Officiant: Name, will you have Name to be your wife, to live together in holy marriage? Will you love her, comfort her, honor and keep her, in sickness and in health, and forsaking all others, be faithful to her as long as you both shall live?

Newt: I will.

Obviously, I do not know Newt's marriage vows exactly, but this excerpt is very mainline. So this is his third no adultery vow, the first two having been during his two wedding services.

However much infidelity repulses, though, I have to echo Milton Friedman's question, "Where do we find the angels" we would all like to hold the offices of our land? They ain't running.

Update: Okay, it's really his fourth pledge.

President Nowhere

Does he even know who is looking back?

Works and Days » The President Who Never Was:

What are we left with in the end? Empty soaring rhetoric of the day, as the president without an identity desperately searches for one about every three months. In the old days the masks were a Bill Ayers for revolutionary fervor, or a Rev. Wright for black fides. Now they are dead presidents.

Where does this lead? Nowhere. ...

The next year will be nothing but more teenage petulance. The world has disappointed Barack Obama. Like any adolescent, he will keep reinventing himself, endlessly trying on new presidential masks and blasting “them” who were not so charmed. What else can a man without an identity do, a president who never really was?

Read the whole thing.

Did Romney fact flub attacking Obama?

The question has two answers, of course, one political and the other factual. GOP candidate Mitt Romney laid into President Obama for his prospective departure for Hawaii on Dec. 17 for a 17-day vacation. The vacation plans were splashed across The Drudge Report on Dec. 2. Here is a grab of the photo Drudge ran:

And the text accompanying:

THE WHITE HOUSE TRAVEL OFFICE

Trip of the President

to

Honolulu, Hawaii

December 17th, 2011 to January 2nd, 2012

Trip Overview

On Saturday, December 17th, 2011, the President will travel to Honolulu, Hawaii. He will return to Washington, DC on Monday, January 2nd, 2012. ...

...no public events are scheduled during the trip. ...

This would seem to attribute the vacation information directly to the White House. That became the occasion for Romney's rip:

"I have to feel that this President has been a failure," the White House hopeful said during a tele-townhall Monday evening with potential Iowa voters.

"I just think it's time to have a President whose idea of being ‘hands on’ doesn't mean getting a better grip on the golf club," Romney zinged. ...

Obama, Romney argued, "told Congress that they need to stay in session and pass his tax breaks for the payroll tax and that they shouldn't leave for vacation until they did. And yet he's going off for 17 days and for golf in the sun."

But things are not always what they seem even on Drudge, according to ABC News.

Despite what Romney may be saying, a 17-day Hawaiian vacation for the Obama’s isn’t actually on the books. ...

Additionally, President Obama has said publicly that if Congress isn’t in recess by the Christmas holiday everyone — himself included — will be in Washington, D.C.

“We’re going to keep pushing Congress to make this happen. Now is not the time to slam the brakes on the recovery… Right now it’s time to step on the gas. We need to get this done. And I expect that it’s going to get done before Congress leaves. Otherwise, Congress may not be leaving, and we can all spend Christmas here together,” said Obama.

Now, it needs be noted that the president and his family vacationed in Hawaii over Christmastime last year and, I am pretty sure, the year before that. So ABC News' insistence that such a vay-cay this year "isn’t actually on the books" seems somewhat overstated.

So did Romney flub it with his rip? Not politically. The Dems will howl and deride, but they'd do that no matter what Romney said. As for Romney's supporters and the Republican base generally, they will think that even if Obama is not flying off for 17 days in Hawaii while issues go unresolved, it's exactly the sort of thing he would do.

Herman Cain: Fork. Stick. Done

Roger L. Simon » The Mystery of Herman Cain

This man's record shows he can't be trusted with the highest office in the land. His campaign and personal reputation are both on life support. It's time for him to pull the plug.

Michele Bachmann's ding-dong moment redux

Having already pointed out that Michele Bachman is a ding-dong, further evidence of her basic cluelessness is her commentary on the Iranian protesters government seizure of the English British embassy.

ABC News reports,

In light of the British Foreign Ministry pulling all U.K. nationals out of the British embassy in Tehran after students stormed the building in protest, GOP presidential candidate Michelle Bachmann told a crowd in Waverly, Iowa, today that she would close the U.S. embassy in Iran.

One small, tiny note: The U.S. hasn’t had an embassy in Tehran since 1980. Following the Iranian Hostage Crisis, where 52 Americans were held for 444 days, the United States cut all diplomatic ties.

According to reports, Bachmann applauded the U.K.’s move, adding, “That’s exactly what I would do [if I were president]. We wouldn’t have an embassy in Iran. I wouldn’t allow that to be there.”

The campaign tried to backtrack today, but it ain't selling. You can bet, though, that this is being much more widely reported than President Obama condemning Tuesday the takeover of the "English embassy" in Iran. Well, just as there is no American embassy in the country, neither is there an English embassy there - or anywhere else in the world. The embassy is the British embassy, encompassing more than only England.

Yes, Michele Bachmann is a ding-dong

"Look at me! Please! Look at me!
I'll say anything!"

It's sad to see a would-be national political figure flailing about mindlessly in vain, thoughtless (literally) attempts to get attention. But that is what forlorn Republican presidential candidate Michele Bachmann is doing, and doing it harder every day.

First up: "Bachmann: Media, Not Voters, Picking Winners"

Michele Bachmann just weighed in on "Debategate," telling Whispers that the media is trying to pick the Republican presidential winner, cutting voters out of the process.

"There's always a suspicion of maybe a bias and I guess this just confirmed it," she said of a CBS memo before Saturday's debate, which suggested that the Minnesota Republican congresswoman would be ignored during the foreign policy chatfest.

The memo, she said, "demonstrates that the media wants to choose who our nominee will be and who the next president of the United States will be."

Well, you know how it is.

Okay, you have to say that aloud to get it, I guess.

Yes, Michele, the media are going to do everything they can to sway the election the way they want it to go. It's called the First Amendment to the US Constitution. Get used to it. And it's been going on since, oh, John Adam's administration.

Exhibit 2: Bachmann wants to make Iraq pay "millions of dollars" for each American life lost toppling Saddam and stabilizing the country.

"I believe that Iraq should reimburse the United States fully for the amount of money that we have spent to liberate these people. They're not a poor country. They're a wealthy country."

That comes to more than $700 billion, plus, she said, "millions of dollars" for each life lost (troops who were merely gravely wounded apparently get no consideration from her). This is just nitwittery. I mean, I think Great Britain should pay us for burning the White House in the War of 1812 and Japan should pay us for the hundreds of thousands of Americans killed and wounded kicking their Shinto government out.

And pray, Ms. Michele, just how do you propose to make the Iraqis do that? Her answer? Click here (but come back!).

There is no way to do it. She has proposed a solution to a problem that doesn't exist, offered an answer to a question no one is asking. This isn't policy, it's not analysis, it's certainly not political conviction. It's just straw grasping on national TV trying to get campaign traction from a headline - and failing.

Good night, Rep. Bachmann. You are the only Republican woman I can think of in the national media who makes Sarah Palin look good. It's lights-out time for your campaign now. And it was lights out for your potential for national leadership quite a long time ago.

Drudge sticks it to Cain

Exactly what is Matt Drudge trying to communicate here?

Fork. Perry. Done.

» Most Brutal Debate Video and Tweets Ever - Le·gal In·sur·rec·tion

Here's the video:



Comment from the Youtube site:

"At approx. 0:05 in the clip, you can see where Ron Paul is using the Jedi Mind Trick.

"These are not the agencies you are looking for..."

You have just witnessed the death of the Perry campaign, although the funeral will not be held for some time yet. Meanwhile, Newt's star is rising.

Remembering not to care

Sums it up rather well, I think:

Labor secretary sexually harasses protesters

Labor Secretary Hilda Solis personally called conservative protesters a sexually derogatory term at Florida Democratic Convention over the weekend. But the media will be exclusively concerned with what Herman Cain is said to have done about 15 years ago, with no attribution or confirming evidence. Of course. As we learned during the Clinton administration, only conservatives can commit sexual misdeeds or crimes.

The scariest Halloween photo ever!

The scariest Halloween photo ever: a scene from January 20, 2013:

The electorate reacts!

"Herman Cain's amazingly bad ad"

Michael Silence has the straight skinny - and yeah, it really is a bad ad.

Republicans want you to die redux

Joe Biden doubles down:

Vice President Joe Biden now says he didn’t make a reference to rape, and got testy with HUMAN EVENTS when we asked if he would like to retract his comments that the number of sexual assaults would increase if Republicans don’t sign on to Barack Obama’s latest “jobs” proposal.

“I didn’t use, no no no…Let’s get it straight, guy. Don’t screw around with me,” Biden lashed out at HUMAN EVENTS. Then Biden confirmed that he indeed did talk about rape in terms of the President’s spending measure. “Murder will continue to rise, rape will continue to rise, all crimes will continue to rise,” if the Democrats agenda isn’t passed, he added.

Previous installment here.

As I have said, though, the only deaths Republicans thirst for is their own.

Republicans: They Thirst for Death

The most perceptive summary of last night's Las Vegas fiasco was a call to Mark Steyn this afternoon: "The winner of the Republican debate was Barack Obama."

The three leading candidates, Romney, Perry and Cain, spent almost all their time shredding one another, forgetting that they are running against the present Oval Office occupant. By halfway into the debate, I had learned that Cain thinks the rest of the field is stupid ("they just don't understand my plan, so I will pedantically explain it again," or words to that effect) and that Romney has no integrity and his conservatism is just for political convenience (according to Perry).

Whomever winds the Republican nomination will have been so slashed and trashed by his own party that Obama's sound and film bites for his campaign will be written by Republicans.

What does it all evidence but this?

Pollster misses his own point

POLLSTER DOUG SCHOEN: In interviews, protesters show that they are leftists out of step with most American voters. Yet Democrats are embracing them anyway. [link]

"Yet?" Schoen misses the point. The sentence should not read, "Yet Democrats are embracing them anyway."

It should say, "That's why Democrats are embracing them."

Osama bin Laden still lives!

At least in the fondest hopes of campaign 2012. David Axelrod already has let the cat out of the bag: Obama will ride Osama's demise for all its worth and then some.

"Get used to him"

The American Spectator : The Woman on the Plane:

Ben Stein:

On the way home from the doctor today, though, on the radio news, I heard President Obama dropping the "g" sound at the end of his sentences the way he does when he thinks he's addressing working people. When he thinks he's addressing business people, he keeps in the "g" sound. That's politics. He could be a lot worse.

Just so you know, we don't have anyone who can beat him. Get used to him.

Thanks for the cheerfulness, Ben!