January 1, 2014

Sometimes you have to wonder if race hustlers like Jesse Jackson are just mailing it in these days

For instance, to those who watch “Duck Dynasty,” the very idea Phil Robertson — whose son and company CEO Willy has an adopted black son, and not just as a moral showpiece and lifestyle window dressing, having adopted him before the family’s widespread celebrity — is racist must seem surreal; and to hear people like Reverend Shakedown try to excoriate people for their racism when, to any sentient human no longer afraid of the PC bullying of the leftists’ ethnic front mob, it is clear that it is Jackson himself who is the opportunistic, hateful racist, not only with respect to whites (and of course, the denizens of Hymietown), but also when it comes to those he presumes to represent, whom he keeps locked away in liberal chains as he plays Samuel L Jackson to any would-be Djangos expressing the uppityness of those working to flee the plantation for the “right wing” world of individual liberty, autonomy, self-reliance, and opportunity.

Saddest, though, is that our own media continues to try to press hoary memes of inveterate redneck racism — even as a disinterested media from across the pond remains far more dubious:

He is the tough take no nonsense Duck Commander on his hit show, but at heart Willie Robertson is a big softy.

The Duck Dynasty star opened up about his pride at being able to promote adoption and about providing a loving home to his large family.

The 41-year-old and his wife Korie, 40, have five children running around their Lousina home.

Making things a bit more interesting, of the Robertson’s children, three are biological – John Luke, Sadie, and Bella – while Willie Junior, who goes by Lil Will, was adopted as a baby and their oldest Rebecca was a exchange student who later became their foster child.

Willie Jr? Bi-racial. Rebecca? Not an Aryan uberwoman.

But, you know. The family is white, from the south, and they hunt. So, really. Why should the Reverend Jackson not have made the assumption that they are racist hillbilly haters, right?

[...]

‘We are not currently in the process of adoption, but I always keep an open mind and heart to it.’

The couple adopted their 11-year-old son Will when he was just five weeks old and then Korie fell pregnant with their daughter, Sadie, just a month after they bought their new son home.

While raising him from a baby, the family was always open about their son’s adoption.

‘It’s never been a secret. For one thing, he’s biracial, so it was obvious.

‘But here’s the thing: when we look at him, we don’t see an adopted kid. It doesn’t even cross our minds.

‘He’s as much ours as our biological children.’

With their reality show’s popularity continuing to be on the rise Willie is passionate about being open about his family in order to encourage others to help children in need of loving homes.

‘If we’re able to make even one family consider adoption, we’ll do it.

‘I don’t know where his life would have been – I won’t say it would have been bad – but he probably wouldn’t have been with a father if we hadn’t adopted him. There are so many kids out there who need help, and it doesn’t matter what age, color, sex they are.’

With the extended family all but becoming overnight celebrities thanks to the A&E show, as well as Willie’s brothers and father all working for their hunting business, the Duck Commander, there has been a few fights here and there, Willie told People.

But they will always be family: ‘At the end of the day, we’re always fine. We are a strong family.

Which is precisely why the media, the race-industry, and the LGBT pressure groups won’t break them.

Add to that that the joy of watching such a strong and confident family has galvanized millions around them, and it’s easy to see that the “right” hasn’t lost the culture wars. They simply have spent the last couple decades being told they have, even by many cowards on their “own” side — only to have it dawn on them that this was just another of the left’s Big Lies.

Pressure a world built out of the manipulation of language and you find that a facade of rhetoric is easily punctured, made up as it is of a simulacrum of reality, not reality itself. It just takes the guts to storm that particular castle.

Posted by Jeff G. @ 2:11pm
173 comments | Trackback

Comments (173)

  1. Between being adopted by rednecks and being dismembered by a vacuum in utero, which is worse?

    C’mon you guys, seriously. Those beards?

    I rest my case.

  2. Those beards?

    There’s a new leftist attack on ‘those beards’ being fake; because the Robertsons were once preppy, and only became ‘redneck’ to promote their show.

    But those same photos were posted on A&E a year ago. As I tried to point out, before ‘comment moderation’.

  3. That ad on the Mark Levin feed?

    The one about kids witnessing bullying every day and wanting to help but not knowing how?

    I don’t remember wanting to help.

    I just remember having no concept whatsoever of how bad it hurt to be teased like that, and also finding it kinda amusing, even though I didn’t technically join in.

    Here’s a clue, adults in the room: the only kid who can stop a bully is someone who outranks the bully socially or physically. And it’s usually the high-ranking kids who are doing the bullying.

    Average kids can’t do jack. Adult intervention just makes it worse.

  4. they explored expanding their brand into a GQ sort of audience place for so they wouldn’t have to be so Walmart / truck stop / Cracker Barrel -centric but it didn’t go very well first time out cause of they met with controversy

    but it was a smart idea. For now daddy duck has to re-earn the trust of people who might want to give him endorsement / licensing monies. He’s kind of in the same boat as the Tiger Woods. But whether he succeeds or fails is not the most important thing.

    The more important thing is for momo people to stop spending their monies on cable and satellite subscriptions I think.

  5. >That ad on the Mark Levin feed?<

    it is so annoying. instant off.

  6. I don’t know what the big deal is with the beards. They just look like hippies. Camo wearin’ duck shootin’ hippies. But, Hey! (as Si would say)

    I was shopping at the local WalMarts the other day and there are many DD tees in stock. One says “Release the Quacken”. Pretty clever, I thought.

  7. For now daddy duck has to re-earn the trust of people who might want to give him endorsement / licensing monies.

    Bullshit. He can pick and choose from a long line of clients who could benefit from his endorsements.

    But I’m guessing curtain hangers, hairdressers, and cupcakeries aren’t asking.

  8. Cupquackeries, maybe.

  9. they explored expanding their brand into a GQ sort of audience place for so they wouldn’t have to be so Walmart / truck stop / Cracker Barrel -centric …[4 more lines of drivel]

    Once again, Snapperhead, you are 180 degrees out from reality. Unlike you, they are not so deluded that they would expand their market by pandering to the fey few.

  10. “Re-earn the trust” What? All the Rainbow Reich didn’t even know the Robertson’s existed until the GQ article, on account of them being so insular in their viewing habits or lying and saying they don’t watch teevee.

  11. the only kid who can stop a bully is someone who outranks the bully socially or physically.

    Or the victim, if he (or she) has parents who will back him (or her) up in the face of consequences from other adults who don’t know the first thing about the specifics of the problem facing their child — let alone about bullying in general.

    Most adults in positions where they’re expected to deal with kids being bullied, or instructing the adults who are, have never been bullied themselves.

  12. As for the beards, I’ve grown ‘em and cut them off more times than I can say. I had one when I moved to Alaska, but I didn’t know when I started growing it that I was going to move there.

    My avatar was taken three years ago. I had a beard then.

    I’m growing one out now, and it does look kind of DD’ish, but I’m not growing it because of the Robertsons or a show I can’t bring myself to watch. I’m just too lazy to shave.

    Eventually I may find that washing it and combing it out is more trouble than shaving. For now, I’m wanting to see how long it’ll get.

    Someday I’ll even update my avatar and show y’all.

    Then we’ll see who looks like a hippie.

  13. ZZ Top are not hippies.

    Thatisall.

  14. I had one when I moved to Alaska, but I didn’t know when I started growing it that I was going to move there.

    Hubs used to grow a beard when he lived in Alaska, too. I thought it was a law or something. He grows a pretty sparse beard and doesn’t carry on that tradition here in the Lower 48.

    Y’all still look like hippies. ; )

  15. ZZ Top are not hippies.

    Neither are the Robertsons. Or McGehee.

  16. thank you very much for the thoughtful cupquacks

    cable tv stars are so fun!

    who’s your favorite?

  17. Greetings:

    Stop with this goofball attempt to reconstruct this issue as “baby daddy” versus “real daddy”. It’s not going to work. Just because the Reverended has more children in jail than have died in all the nuclear power plants in America, is no reason to question his progressively progressing parenting skills. Did you think for a moment that this may all be the village’s fault and not his ???

    Same-same with the idea that God “freeze faced” that scowl permanently on the Reverend’s face. This man has spent most of his life taking a cause, turning it first into a business and, more recently, a racket. So, let’s just give the guy a handout not a hand up.

  18. You have to put in a lot of time on a beard if you don’t have Viking genes.

  19. they explored expanding their brand into a GQ sort of audience place for so they wouldn’t have to be so Walmart / truck stop / Cracker Barrel -centric but it didn’t go very well first time out cause of they met with controversy
    but it was a smart idea. For now daddy duck has to re-earn the trust of people who might want to give him endorsement / licensing monies. He’s kind of in the same boat as the Tiger Woods. But whether he succeeds or fails is not the most important thing.

    That was so obviously tendentious, quarellsome, and false that even hellomynamewassteve winced a little.

  20. >who’s your favorite?<

    anderson 'cause he tells us his mom like licking

  21. These guys know marketing. I wonder if they could tap into the GLAAD demographic with mauve camo gear.

  22. I wonder if they could tap into the GLAAD demographic with mauve camo gear.

    Could be.

  23. My FIL has a beard … though it has lengthened, like his hair, during retirement

    since he doesn’t have to do dress codes anymore, why not?

    Oh, his engineering degree is from Berkeley

  24. “For now daddy duck has to re-earn the trust of people who might want to give him endorsement / licensing monie ”

    Nahh. GLAAD got their little slap reverse and the they just got ignored so the curse broke. The bad fairy waves the wand again and again and nothing happens. Nobody has to bake cakes they don’t want to for a while.

  25. GLAAD and their Frankfurt School ilk don’t care about minor setbacks. They will be back in a few months with more tales of OUTRAGE!

  26. mock them everywhere

  27. - You can’t mock souless zombies, all you can do is drop them in besser mills of molton iron, or alternatly you can shape them into Dodge Ram towing bumpers, complete with trailor hitch, in a 9I drop press, ala the terminator.

    - You gotta take the time to plan your defenses carefully.

  28. Bessemer converters?

  29. convertoring

    link

  30. My FIL has a beard … though it has lengthened, like his hair, during retirement

    since he doesn’t have to do dress codes anymore, why not?

    Clearly, he’s not actually your FIL. Facial hair changes everything.

  31. Of COURSE the “Reverennnnd Jacksonnnn” (apologies; typography doen’t lend itself to the cadence that Limbaugh puts into that name) is just phoning it in. He’s been phoning it in for years, and the Lickspittle Media has been letting him get away with phoning it in. He’s a freaking “CIVIL RIGHTS LEADER*,” donchaknow!

    *If by “CIVIL RIGHTS LEADER” you mean extortionist.

  32. Side note: Limbaugh’s intonation on the REVrund Jesse Jacksnnnn, Junior is actually an imitation of WFB.

  33. Yes, it is.

    I enjoyed all the guest hosts last week. I love Rush, but I’ve heard it all before since I’ve been listening to him since he went national in ’88.

    I think it was his complete misunderstanding of the Pope’s encyclical that was the last straw. He spent several days bagging on the Catholic Church when he clearly doesn’t have the background to understand the doctrine. He also took as gospel (ha ha) the interview that was concocted by the atheist in an Italian newspaper (from memory, with no notes) wherein the claim is made that the Holy Father “did away” with sin. Uh, no.

    Rush should stick to his knitting and let the theologians take care of teh God Squad stuff.

  34. If a lot of well meaning people, including Limbaugh, fail to understand the Pope’s message on the economy, that’s because the message itself is garbled. Or confused. Or both.

    (I assume what we’re talking about here is Limbaugh criticizing the Pope for being critical of “Capitalism”)

  35. (I assume what we’re talking about here is Limbaugh criticizing the Pope for being critical of “Capitalism”)

    Yes. He was really in full-throat about the Pope being a “Marxist”. I was also speaking to the Holy Father’s remarks regarding homosexuals and the guiding principle of “hate the sin, love the sinner” as a tacit endorsement of gay relationships when, in reality, the Pope and Phil Robertson are on teh same page about homosexuals, adulterers, et alia.

    It is the translation (by the press, not the Vatican) of the Pope’s encyclical that has caused the confusion. Not that newspapers have an agenda or anything.

  36. This is for Leigh:

    Top Ten Reasons Why Rush Limbaugh Is Right: The Pope’s Statement IS Marxist

    Just to stir the pot a little…

  37. The Pope’s not a Marxist.

    A Peronist, on the other hand….

  38. No, the Pope is not a Marxist. I’d also venture that growing up in Argentina, he has had plenty of experience with actual real Marxists.

    He has a strong bent toward Liberation Theology that I hope he grows out of while in office.

  39. I Callahan, this is a long read, but is a terrific commentary on losing our religion.

  40. The Pope should maybe stick to his knitting and let capitalists worry about economics.

  41. I said as much to my priest when he, like Rush, misinterpreted the Encyclical.

  42. I Callahan, that Forbes piece just sounds like an atheist that lumps religion together with communism and condemns it all, as if serving God equals serving the state.

    Made the guy sound kinda stupid.

  43. There is not one Judaism today. Nor is there one Christianity. These are plain sorts of things. But a moment’s reflection suggests that perhaps at one time (and that even in this time there ought to be) there was one Judaism, and one Christianity — indeed, that there should be. Yet it is not so. Why? Why fracture?

    Humans.

    Politics enters in. Humans everywhere and always political — and fractious. So it can’t be surprising that the Pope of the Roman Catholic Church — a human after all — would be political, try though he might to escape his human (and therefore earthbound) qualities. Nor that the various persons holding that august office would be of various political dispositions.

  44. You keep saying Rush misinterpreted the Encyclical like Rush is at fault here. How do you NOT misinterpret something where the meaning is as garbled as it is here?

  45. Leigh,

    Just read the article. I took exactly one class in philosophy in college, and hated it. But I got a “B”, so that’s all that mattered. However, the whole “consciousness” think is something I’ve often thought about (even then, and we didn’t really expound on it in class), and find it fascinating that someone else thinks about it as well.

    That said – I’m not sure how this responds to the link I left for you. Are you talking about the Pope’s consciousness, and why he thinks as he does? If so, that just excuses his beliefs (Disclaimer – I am a Catholic myself). If, as you said, he has had plenty of experience with real marxists, then he has no excuse for his beliefs.

    I may be missing something from your link; if so, please point it out.

  46. Pablo… Benelli hardest hit.

    Mossberg just became the go-to shotgun in the hunt. A shame, because Benelli outruns them on a level playing field,

  47. Made the guy sound kinda stupid.

    Lee,

    I’m not so sure. To be honest, the similarities between “collectivism” and “supernaturalism” are pretty stark. I’d love to hear your take.

  48. What you call “supernaturalism” I would call spirituality, which is (or should be) the focus of religious faith, Collectivism may try and imitate* religion, but in not acknowledging the spiritual side of the human experience, their final product is much different8. Serving God IS an individual endeavor and religion encourages you to approach it as such, and uplifts man toward God. Serving the state is a collective effort, and only reaches as high as the human leader of the moment.

    In other words, there are similarities because collectivism is an imitation of religion, but I think it the differences that are stark.

    *The difference between a skilled pianist playing a baby grand, and a deranged monkey banging away on the keys in imitation of hearing the master play. Same instrument, totally different outcome.

  49. Ernst, I said this:

    It is the translation (by the press, not the Vatican) of the Pope’s encyclical that has caused the confusion.

    about the confusion in translation leading to all this confusion. As if theology itself weren’t confusing enough.

  50. That whole chosen people thing looks to be outside a mere individual endeavor, if a people is somehow to be distinguished from an individual as an individual. And the prophets weren’t remiss in indicting entire cities, or entire nations for failure to follow the right relation to the diety, though they could also be brought to focus their imprecations on a particular king now and again — here bearing in mind that as a king his task is to lead a people. Still, perhaps this idea of the individual says something about a necessarily democratic aspect of Christianity, or perhaps something much darker — the origins of that faith in lands dominated by eastern despotism.

  51. In other news:

    Magpul pulling up stakes, heading out of Colorado

    Magpul Industries threatened to leave Colorado after the legislature passed a measure banning weapons magazines with more than 15 rounds.

    And now that is official.

    The Erie-based ammunition magazine manufacturer said on Thursday that it is relocating its operations to Cheyenne and Texas.

    “Moving operations to states that support our culture of individual liberties nad personal responsibility is important,” CEO Richard Fitzpatrick said in a press release. “This relocation will also improve business operations and logistics as we utilize the strengths of Texas and Wyoming in our expansion.

    The move is expected to happen within the next 12 to 16 months, the company said.

    And, after Obamacare and Governor Moonbeam Junior likely puts my employer out of business, I suspect I’ll be leaving Coloweedo by this summer as well…

  52. I Callahan, it is my take on the Pope’s words that he is calling us to reject avarice. As you know, a lot of ecclesiastical language is flowery and is often times better read six or eight or twenty times to get the gist of what the author is driving at.

    Pope Francis, by choosing the name of St. Francis of Assisi for his own, has laid down a marker on extravagance in the Church. He does not live in the Papal apartments and drives his own old car. (This is my interpretation of his writing so feel free to tell me I’m all wet) The Lord spoke to Francis of Assisi when he was a layman and a son of a wealthy merchant. Francis had taken shelter in an old wreck of a church and the Lord said to him “Heal My Church.” Francis was filled with the spirit and following the example of the disciples, cast aside all his worldly possessions and began his ministry.

    Pope Francis is carrying this message forward in the now. He is not saying that we are to embrace Marxism. He is saying we are to embrace the Spirit of God and that it is our responsibility as Christians to be good men and women who care for those who are less fortunate. He doesn’t suggest a collective or redistribution of wealth. He asks that we look into our hearts and that we be generous.

    Marx was rather clever in the borrowing of some ecclesiastic language (his father was a rabbi) in the writing of his texts. The fact that his own works were obsolete by the time of his death should have lead to a deathbed conversion or recantation. It is the similarity of the language of the church coupled with the twisted words of Marxism that is confusing the words of the Pope as an endorsement when they are anything but.

    Our corporeal lives are the “blinking of an eye” while our souls live eternally. Faith and works have always been doctrine.

  53. Ernst, I said this:

    It is the translation (by the press, not the Vatican) of the Pope’s encyclical that has caused the confusion.

    about the confusion in translation leading to all this confusion. As if theology itself weren’t confusing enough.

    This is social teaching, not Theology. And the Press is relying on the Vatican’s English translation. And finally, the economic section, all three (?) paragraphs of it, is so vague as to lend itself to mischief.

    So I think Limbaugh is right. Not only for defending free market economics, but also for criticizing the Pope for not understanding economics in the first place.

    That said, if there’s a pastoral point about showing gratitude to God for our good fortune through charity, which I think there is, and I guess you do as well, I can only wish it had been more clearly made.

  54. It’s been my experience that clerics seldom understand economics. I agree with you that the Pope shouldn’t have used that argument when clearly, it is not his strong suite.

    Perhaps he will clarify his remarks in the future or just stick to pumping life back into the Church. A task for which he is much better suited.

  55. Sdferr, I’m not really sure where you’re going , but if I’m not mistaken, the “chosen people” are the decedents of the individual named Abraham, chosen for his individual willingness to sacrifice his only son to God. What they were chosen for is to produce the individual Christ, the only son of god, to be sacrificed for man. For to defeat Lucifer who deceived Eve and caused the spiritual death of man. Now, through the sacrifice of Jesus, we can all be reborn spiritually alive, ie eternally alive, through faith in that sacrifice.

    All men are not collectively born good and then are cast into hell because they sinned. All men are born spiritually dead and are already going to hell. Only those individuals that believe in Christ and ask for forgiveness through the blood of Christ will be saved from hell.

    Christianity is all about the individual and his choices and their consequences.

  56. From the point of view of the chosen people, the messiah has not come. What else can we say about this? To insist that they are mistaken? Because their steadfast adherence to their law is mistaken? That looks like error, to me.

  57. To insist that they are mistaken?

    Such insistence leads to the Inquisition, Pograms and the Holocaust. None of which is very Christian.

  58. “From the point of view of the chosen people, the messiah has not come”

    All of them? No. Many individual Israelis converted.

    I don’t know what to say about those that didn’t. From my point of view they are screwed either way, since the law of Moses says there is no forgiveness without the sheading of blood, and there aren’t any birds, bulls, or lambs being toasted on alters anymore that I know about. I confess I don’t know the history of how that came about.

  59. All of them? No. Many individual Israelis converted.

    This appears merely to recapitulate the distinction we have already drawn — but, to what end, we might ask? To suggest that there simply are no Jews as adherents to Judaism any longer? Or are we even more simply confounded that we must admit that indeed there are many Jews who stand adherent to their Judaism, much as aforetime?

  60. I’ve wondered idly in recent days what the doctrinal basis is for Judaism to hold that the Messiah has not yet come. What do the Scriptures say that persuades them Jesus of Nazareth doesn’t qualify?

  61. I do not know how that goes, McG. But with great trepidation, I’ll venture to suggest that it may be possible to consider whether the idea of the messiah is subordinated to the perfection of creation, or superior to it? If the meaning of the messiah is understood to restore the perfection of creation, to mark a return to that perfect creation, then perhaps this alone indicates that messianism is subordinated to creation, and at the minimum indicated by the restoration of a circumstance we do not witness?

  62. McGehee, I don’t know that there is a doctrinal basis so much as a prophetic basis for Judaism rejecting Jesus as the Messiah.

    I believe Isaiah, Zechariah and Psalms all discuss this issue at some point.

  63. During the time of Jesus, there was the belief among the more influential that the Messiah would be a literal king and conquer the oppressors of Israel in real physical terms. Like what Christians believe the second coming will be like.

    I can see where to someone with such expectations a poor tradesman’s son, wandering around with nothing to his name but a staff and preaching of a spiritual kingdom in parables might leave one wanting.

    But to the great unwashed masses that Jesus preached to…

  64. Only — about that restoration: John Kerry is in Israel even on this day, healing the great rift in the world. What wonders we do witness! The instruction of the wise, who discern their situation, by the ignorant, who do not!

  65. This is why I’m glad to live in the Mountain West during the winter.

    Any of y’all caught in the storm? Got electricity?

  66. So I think Limbaugh is right. Not only for defending free market economics, but also for criticizing the Pope for not understanding economics in the first place.

    I heard Limbaugh’s critique when it ran live and my impression was that Rush thoroughly and fundamentally misunderstood the message.

    It’s not the Pope’s job to preach economic theory: it’s to concern himself with the state of the soul. Avarice and the pursuit of material things, as well as Marxist/Darwinian materialism, are spiritually debilitating.

    If you’re not used to listening to sermons qua sermons — and if it’s your job to spend 15 hours a week talking up the free market and railing against statism — you just may read the wrong message into another’s words.

  67. From the point of view of the chosen people, the messiah has not come.

    The chosen people comprise all 12 tribes, not just Judah. Judah is to be admired for retaining its tribal identity throughout the ages, but Judah is also known for its stiff-neckedness in stoning the prophets and going apostate over and over and over. Isaiah prophesied that the Jews would reject their own Messiah, because that’s just how they roll.

    The New Testament consists of Jews testifying that Jesus of Nazareth was indeed the waited-for Messiah, but they were not in the majority by any means.

    Those who recognize goodness never are.

  68. It also didn’t help people like Saul were running around rounding up Jesus’ followers for imprisonment and/or death. A lot of people have trouble believing in a God that lets bad things happen to good people.

  69. Those people need to read Viktor Frankl.

  70. I once knew a guy who’s last name was “Levi.” At one point, I asked if he was descended from the Levitical priests, which he affirmed that he was.

    It was amusing to have a person of “Jewish” extraction, though he was technically a Levite, look surprised that a gentile knew a bit about his heritage.

  71. Here now Jews, understand that the Christians alone can determine your make-up. And that will be a blessing for you, toward your future (progress!). Only cease to be, and all will be well. Or, was it written?: assimilate.

  72. If you’re not used to listening to sermons qua sermons — and if it’s your job to spend 15 hours a week talking up the free market and railing against statism — you just may read the wrong message into another’s words.

    Rush isn’t the only one reading the wrong message. Rush is railing, the liberal media is hailing, The “Spirit of Vatican II” crowd is exulting, “Traditionalists” are sulking,

    I sound like Dr. Suess,

    and Catholic defenders of the free market are left trying to explain what Francis really meant.

    Obviously, what he meant wasn’t all that clear.

  73. poponomics can’t be any worse than this shit we got now

  74. Ernst, according to Miss Barnhardt, the Pope very well didn’t know what he meant, either.

  75. The New Testament consists of Jews testifying that Jesus of Nazareth was indeed the waited-for Messiah, but they were not in the majority by any means.

    Speaking from a strictly textual-critical point of view, the only (former) Jew we’re sure of is Paul.

  76. I am of the opinion that since the Messiah was described as being of the “line of David” on both sides, and since the Jews were being actively oppressed at the time by Rome (with their own religious leaders active approval*), they were looking for the kind of leader David was.

    Military, in other words.

    * – Jesus was basically crucified for preaching without a license, after all, and had a condemned revolutionary released in his place…

  77. Sloppy thinking leads to sloppy writing Blake.

  78. From the point of view of the chosen people, the messiah has not come. What else can we say about this? To insist that they are mistaken? Because their steadfast adherence to their law is mistaken? That looks like error, to me.

    Christianity commits the believer to some very hard http://www.the-american-interest.com/wrm/2013/12/31/meaning-in-3-d/>truths (truth claims, if we’re trying to appear disinterested & scholarly,) and it would also be an error to pretend otherwise.

  79. Speaking from a strictly textual-critical point of view, the only (former) Jew we’re sure of is Paul.

    Pretty sure the 12 apostles weren’t Ethiopian.

  80. Dead link, Ernst.

  81. No, but Moses’ wife was Ethiopian.

  82. Pretty sure the Apostles weren’t scribes.

    Again, strictly textual-critically speaking.

  83. Zechariah 13:6 is said to prophesy of the resurrected Christ returning and showing his stigmata to the Jews.

  84. hard truths

    & Moses’s wife was a vampire.

  85. Pretty sure the Apostles weren’t scribes.

    Luke, being a physician, was the most educated of the group, but given textual clues, it is likely that he wasn’t the one who actually wrote any of the books, and that they were actually written by a scribe who traveled with Luke in the years post-crucifixion.

  86. It wasn’t like any of them kept diaries like Samuel Pepys.

    Ernst, I had no idea that the Holy Trinity pissed people off.

  87. leigh, I heard, second hand a story Scott Hahn told about trying to work out the terms for a joint appearance with some leading Muslim scholar for an interfaith dialog, only to have the whole thing fall apart because the Muslim would not appear on stage with a “blasphemer” who wouldn’t stop referring to Jesus as the “Son of God.”

    I’ve personally been lectured, in the well meaning yet annoying sort of way that one associates with Jehovah’s Witnesses, by a Muslim about God being one and how one can’t be one and three.

    He didn’t care for my “God can be whatever God wills or else God isn’t God” reply.

  88. Muslims really aren’t very good about listening to other people’s theology, saying “Huh. Interesting” and then filing it away under “Whatevs.”

    My experience is that they have to assert their theology such that it’s the only one in the room.

    Which, lousy conversion technique.

    Just sayin’

  89. “The Religion of the Perpetually Aggrieved,” AKA Islam, isn’t likely to care much for the Trinity. Of course, “The Religion of the Perpetually Aggrieved” doesn’t care for much of anything, other than young boys and goats.

  90. People who want to share their religious views with you almost never want you to share yours with them.

    “We must respect the other fellow’s religion, but only in the same way we respect his theories that his wife is beautiful and his children smart.” — H.L. Mencken

  91. I went to Catholic universities, Drum. You had to listen to people’s religious views whether you want to or not.

  92. And did they want to hear the (diverging) religious beliefs of the students instead? I imagine they would have frowned upon a meeting of the Pastafarians on school time.

    I went to a religious school, too, and they were STRONGLY against anything that hinted at opposing views (such as dancing or listening to modern music – although, this being during the age of disco, I can’t really blame them).

  93. In undergrad, theology classes were mandatory and the best ones were taught by the priests who, while they focused on the Catholic church, also spent plenty of classtime encouraging discussion. We had quite a few kids who were Evangelicals and at least one girl who was a Muslim (non-practicing). I can’t recall any Jews there, although I had gone to grade school with quite a few Jews and Mormons. My mom and dad’s running buddies were a Jewish couple. They mostly talked about playing poker and going out for dinner, not shul.

    The kids in college who were obnoxious were the shirt-tail Protestants. This was right at the cusp of the Born Again movement and televangelism. It ate some of my friends for a few years. I’m open to listening to people’s views on just about anything as long as you aren’t being a jackass about them.

  94. “Here now Jews, understand that the Christians alone can determine your make-up. And that will be a blessing for you, toward your future (progress!). Only cease to be, and all will be well. Or, was it written?: assimilate.”

    Sdferr, was that meant to be hostile, or am I taking it wrong?

    Also, did you mean “Hear” rather than “Here”?

    If Jews don’t by your premise of your projection of the attitude of Christians, Christians will start blowing up airplanes and Israeli buses or something?

    Or to approach it another way, where did that come from and what the hell are you talking about?

  95. Blake,
    I once knew a fellow in high school named Asher Levi.
    I asked him if his middle name was Nephtali.
    He looked at me like I had 4 heads and said,”… But I thought you a goyim.”
    “We’ll yes I am”, I responded. “Somebody has to pay retail.”
    We became good friends for that year.

  96. I don’t intend hostility Lee, although I can quite readily discern where the Jews have often encountered it, what with the twists and turns of the Jewish question over time — being what they are.

    As to your hear-here question, I meant it as written.

    I don’t believe that Christians are likely to be blowing up airplanes, buses, or the like — though we might say that accidentally (in the Aristotelian sense of accident, kata sumbebekos: incidentally), Christians have blown up (and will blow up) many an airplane and other thing while making war in one context or another, whether against their co-religionists or against counter-religionists. But that is neither here nor there in a discussion of a question of pieties.

    On the other hand, I don’t think it an easy or simple matter for Christians to look on the piety of a Jewish faithful, or of any other faithfully pious man or woman, and see through that view what is what (nor, vice versa, for the Jew) — hence, expect no particular meeting of pious minds — not even merely on account of a wish of mine that it should be so.

  97. I am concerned about our posture on Israel and the Palestinians. John Forbes Kerry is over there trying to broker a(nother) peace deal. I don’t like all the footsie we are playing under the table with the Muzzies at the expense of our ally, Israel.

    I don’t see the problem as a Jewish one, but rather one of an Islamic nature.

    (Yes, this isn’t what you two are talking about, but still. . . )

  98. Leigh, if you read together Michael Ledeen’s piece from today, and Caroline Glick’s piece from today, our ClownDisasterSecOState’s mission may come into a chilling focus — leastwise, I thought so to myself.

  99. Sdferr,
    English please.
    Nothing counts before the “but”… Or the though and although and the other hand. U

  100. It’s probable, steph, I’ll always fail to please requests for English, even if I were somehow to try, since English is my native tongue and the only language I can speak with any facility. And to the extent I fail, I lay it on myself — I suck, and beside that, suck as an oldster who’ll surely die sucking.

  101. I don’t think it an easy or simple matter for Christians to look on the piety of a Jewish faithful, or of any other faithfully pious man or woman, and see through that view what is what (nor, vice versa, for the Jew) — hence, expect no particular meeting of pious minds

    Tell Dennis Prager.

    I’m fascinated by theological worldviews that are not my own. Jews bring an awful lot to the table vis-à-vis the Old Testament. The Hebrew method of signification is very different from our Greek method, and so I really value hearing what the rabbis and commenters have hashed out over the ages.

    For example, this reading of the Tower of Babel, via Glenn Beck and Rabbi Lapin, is the tale of a benevolent God who confounds the language to save the people from a utopian collectivist delusion — in contrast to the casual reading that sees an angry God punishing people for having aspirations.

    Arguing over theology is ultimately pointless: there’s no way to prove jack squat, because the verses that I produce to support my version are different from the ones that support yours, or we have different readings of the same verses, or we have different books altogether. God is not available for dissection, nor does the afterlife have a Facebook page, nor can we go interview St. Peter or Jesus or Moses or Muhammad.

    I can learn what your cosmos assumes and from there understand how you’re likely to arrive at conclusion X — without accepting it as true — and that’s the best we’re going to do in this life.

  102. No, not at all Sefer.
    You pack a lot of information into all of your posts, and for a stupid public school educated Schumacher such as I, and a slow typist besides since by the time this posts I am surely way behind…
    Oh fuck it, my fat stubby neuropathic fingers can’t keep up.
    Schmuchler. My battles with auto correct near an end.
    The END

  103. I’ll ask more plainly. Please explain what you meant by “Here now Jews, understand that the Christians alone can determine your make-up”

    ‘Cuz on it’s face, it sounds like hogwash laced with sarcasm.

  104. We’ll Yes

  105. Certainly. Don’t think of it as a sketch of history.

  106. How the heck does well become yes?

  107. Ah, that clears everything up then. Thanks.

  108. who also can determine your make-up is Kirsten Dunst

  109. sdferr, those articles sum up a lot of what I have been thinking lately. Thanks.

  110. use only dunce™ make up and pine tar too and feathers like a boa

  111. * – Jesus was basically crucified for preaching without a license, after all, and had a condemned revolutionary released in his place…

    Correction, drum: Jesus was crucified for claiming to be God. Yeah, the whole itinerant preacher calling the establishment “whitewashed tombs” didn’t go over well, but it wasn’t until he said “Before Abraham was, I am” that they tried to stone him.

  112. Just remember that when people ask, “What Would Jesus Do?”, that turning over tables and chasing people with a whip is among the options.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_and_the_money_changers

  113. i chase you with my whip!

  114. have you tried a duck call?

  115. He would just try and stuff it up his bum.

  116. oh my blowing smoke

  117. Oh, they were pissed off long before that blasphemy.

    He had the temerity to heal people on the Sabbath, right there in the synagogue, right under their noses. (Matthew 10, Mark 3)

    The people were rejecting the authority of the Pharisees and the scribes in favor of this nobody from Nazareth, and they wouldn’t stand for it.

    That and all the other cited reasons, real and imagined: he declared himself King of the Jews (threat to Herod and Pilate), ransacked the temple (Essene radical), committed all manner of blasphemy, broke the Sabbath over and over…

    Of course, the root of the problem was that the Pharisees and scribes were in a state of total apostasy and corruption, and a righteous man need only exist for the wicked to want him destroyed.

    Maybe someday we’ll all live to see that phenomenon for ourselves.

  118. It is important to note that it is not possible to see the sacrificial Lamb of God as in the position of a K in Men in Black, insisting, pleading to the bug as the bug slouches away in disinterest at the puny humans — “EAT ME”; or in the Lamb’s case, Crucify Me. That whole preordained business just doesn’t work without the proper cooperation of the ruling class — taking an interest of their own free will, locating the threat, seizing him, vying with one another to do their murderous duty, all without too much overtly revealing external provocation. There simply were no stage directions.

  119. I think we see that now over and over again.

  120. * – Jesus was basically crucified for preaching without a license, after all, and had a condemned revolutionary released in his place…

    Correction, drum: Jesus was crucified for claiming to be God. [I]t wasn’t until he said “Before Abraham was, I am” that they tried to stone him.

    Oh, they were pissed off long before that blasphemy.
    He had the temerity to heal people on the Sabbath, right there in the synagogue, right under their noses. (Matthew 10, Mark 3)
    The people were rejecting the authority of the Pharisees and the scribes in favor of this nobody from Nazareth, and they wouldn’t stand for it.
    That and all the other cited reasons, real and imagined: he declared himself King of the Jews (threat to Herod and Pilate), ransacked the temple (Essene radical), committed all manner of blasphemy, broke the Sabbath over and over…
    Of course, the root of the problem was that the Pharisees and scribes were in a state of total apostasy and corruption, and a righteous man need only exist for the wicked to want him destroyed.

    The bolded bit was what got him crucified, a Roman method of execution.

  121. @ havel 104

    >What must become fundamental for us is initiation, not
    dissidence. That is, we should consider ourselves first and foremost
    as initiators of future possibilities and not as subversives, drop-outs
    or rebels who are anti-a, anti-b, or anti-c. We should leave resistance
    and repression to the ruling powers and transform our opposition
    into an increasingly clear position! Charter 77 represents the position
    of an independent citizens’ initiative that understands human
    rights as something given not de lege but defacto, And in that sense
    the initiators of a new position must be able not only to formulate
    but also to bring to life the notion of a harmonious relationship
    between individuals and society.<

  122. {H}e declared himself King of the Jews (threat to Herod and Pilate)

    Even though He never actually did so. Pilate couldn’t find him guilty of that charge, and tried to get him released, finally washing his hands of the matter. It is the response of the crowd that has justified much anti-Semitism over the ensuing centuries:

    Then answered all the people, and said, ‘His blood be on us, and on our children.’ (Matt. 27:25, KJV)

  123. @ wiki

    >Pontius Pilatus (Greek: ??????? ???????, Pontios P?l?tos), known in the English-speaking world as Pontius Pilate (/?p?n(t)??s ?pa?l?t/ or /?p?nti.?s ?pa?l?t/[1][2][3]), was the fifth Prefect of the Roman province of Judaea, from AD 26–36.[4][5] He is best known as the judge at the trial of Jesus and the man who authorized the crucifixion of Jesus. As prefect, he served under Emperor Tiberius.

    The sources for Pilate’s life are the four canonical gospels, Philo of Alexandria, Josephus, a brief mention by Tacitus, and an inscription known as the Pilate Stone, which confirms his historicity and establishes his title as prefect. Based on these sources, it appears that Pilate was an equestrian of the Pontii family, and succeeded Valerius Gratus as prefect of Judaea in AD 26. Once in his post he offended the religious sensibilities of his subjects, leading to harsh criticism from Philo and Josephus. According to Josephus,[6] he was ordered back to Rome after harshly suppressing a Samaritan uprising, arriving just after the death of Tiberius, which occurred on 16 March in 37 AD. He was replaced by Marcellus.

    In all four gospel accounts, Pilate avoids responsibility for the death of Jesus. In the Gospel of Matthew, Pilate washes his hands to show that he was not responsible for the execution of Jesus and reluctantly sends him to his death.[7] The Gospel of Mark, depicting Jesus as innocent of plotting against the Roman Empire, portrays Pilate as reluctant to execute Jesus.[7] In the Gospel of Luke, Pilate not only agrees that Jesus did not conspire against Rome, but Herod Antipas, the Tetrarch of Galilee, also finds nothing treasonable in Jesus’ actions.[7] In the Gospel of John, Pilate states “I find no guilt in him [Jesus]” and he asks the Jews if Jesus should be released from custody.[8]<

  124. It may be more accurate to say that He was hailed as the King of the Jews during his entry into Jerusalem for his final Passover.

    Pilate comes of better in the Gospel of Matthew than he probably deserves.

  125. What? Everyone run of to make sure their liquor cabinets were politically correct?

  126. I saw no single malt scotch on that chart. Then again, you need a whole chart to chart them out.

  127. And it also neglects us teetotalers harumph harumph

  128. You people and your maintaining a sober approach to life.

  129. Sort of what the mob did to the Teamsters pension fund but at least Vegas was successful for the mob.

  130. The Glenlivet was on there.

  131. I thought that by definition low-income housing was geared towards people who cannot afford to pay rent.

    That does not sound like a smart investment.

  132. I did not see The Glenlivet on there. but there it was.

    It happens to be my go-to single malt.

  133. I tried to post links to the other posts by Walter Russell Mead after Ernst above posted one at 3:07 pm, but got stuck in moderation so I’m going to try again in html. First links.

    Christmas-gift

    Rolling-the-credits

    Born-of-a-what

    The-hinge-of-fate

    The-meaning-of-christmas

  134. Second set.

    Personal-meaning

    How-real-is-the-meaning

    Meaning-in-3-d

    One-for-all

    Gods-dilemma

    There should be a few more coming in the days ahead.

  135. A little music for this fine clear Midwestern night.

  136. - Looking back the most important event for the year 2013 has to have been the passing of Tom Laughlin at the ripe age of 82 on December 12th.

    - Although I’m conversant with the mans bio Jeff can fill you in on who Tom was.

  137. I’m disappointed that Au Jus is not listed among the other potentially addictive intoxicating beverages that cloud the judgement and rot the gut. It must be an apolitical beverage common to all of humanity. It makes French Dips possible. And there are certainly a lot of French dips in the world lately.

  138. sdferr says January 2, 2014 at 12:39 pm – Because their steadfast adherence to their law is mistaken?

    Steadfast adherence to their law is impossible. They have lost the genealogies of their priests, and they can no longer make the offerings required under Mosaic law.

    That said, there is plenty of missing “steadfast adherence” in modern religion to go around.

  139. Leftist love, in utopia.

  140. No, but Moses’ wife was Ethiopian.

    - Leigh, that sounds like the punchline to that old joke:

    “Hey wait a minute, what are you getting mad about, you’re not black……”

    “Ahhh know, but mah wife is”.

  141. Heh, BBH.

    I feel kind of sorry for Moses. He gets the Jews out of Egypt and about three days in they start kvetching about the heat and this and that.

    No gratitude in that bunch.

  142. That news story is sickening, geoffb.

    Like gramps like father like son.

  143. Did he, or didn’t he?

    Inquiring minds (and hungry dogs) want to know!

  144. As the first comment on the site points out: Try and find 120 dogs in North Korea.

  145. They do use dogs to guard prisoners in the camps just like the Chinese, Soviets, and Nazis did.

  146. He’s a dictator, yeah? He could have hundreds of dogs if he wanted to. They could be pets or weapons of canine destruction.

    It’s not like anyone has a clue what’s really going on over there.

  147. Try and find 120 dogs in North Korea.

    Grr. “Try to find 120 dogs in North Korea.”

    Why the *bleep* do people use “and” instead of “to”?

  148. To quote jugears, sorta, I know mondamay didn’t write that.

  149. Richard, it’s the same reason teh Wahn says “gotta” all of the time. Laziness.

    During the OJ trial (the first one for whacking his wife), Judge Ito was always saying “try and . . .” I’d yell at the teevee “try TO, you moron!” but I don’t think he heard me.

  150. I don’t have any answer. I don’t usually write that way. It may have been an unconscious thing for emphasis or humor, like using “ain’t”.

    All I have in my defense is a short scene from “Murder by Death”:

    Sidney Wang: What meaning of this, Mr. Twain?

    Lionel Twain: I will tell you, Mr. Wang, if YOU can tell ME why a man who possesses one of the most brilliant minds of this century can’t say his *prepositions* or *articles!* “What IS THE,” Mr. Wang! “What IS THE meaning of this?”

    Sidney Wang: That what I said! “What meaning of this?”

  151. It’s not like anyone has a clue what’s really going on over there.

    I wonder how many people knew that the half-million tons of food and the half-million barrels of fuel oil per year we were sending them during Clinton’s terms were described in DPRK radio as “tribute” (for us having lost the Korean War, donchaknow)?

    And it slowed their nuke program down not a whit…

  152. Why the *bleep* do people use “and” instead of “to”?

    The physiology of phonetics. “Try and” is pronounced “try’n,” which is phonetically easier than “try to.”

    Which, frankly, sounds gay. NTTAWWT.

  153. I could see “trying to” morphing to “tryin’ ta”. “Try and” is a jarring note in the otherwise great QuakeII intro. Well, engine noise in space too.

  154. Yer all a buncha nerds…

  155. ? hipsters to the left of me
    nerds to the left
    here I am

    stuck in the middle again ?

  156. Pretend those are notes, not question marks…

  157. Also, nerds to the right.

    I shoulda just sat quietly I think…

  158. If you like single malt but don’t like single malt prices, try Tomatin. We found some for just a hair above $20 a fifth in Indiana. It’s a fair piece more tasty then Glenlivet/fiddich, and cheaper as well.

  159. More tasty could mean a lot of things when you are talking about scotch. Is Tomatin one of the peatey scotches? I don’t care for those.

  160. Tomatin is a Highland Scotch, which means that it lacks the earthy flavor of an Islay scotch.

  161. I’ll see if I can find some the next time I’m buying scotch.

  162. Cranky, I know it’s not single malt, but rather triple malt. Monkey Shoulder is good bang for the buck, and probably won’t kill you. My boys got me a bottle last Christmas, and it goes pretty well with a short Brazilian. Ahem.

  163. I have no problem with blended scotches, provided that each malt is aged at least 8 and preferably 10-12 years.

  164. Slart, I can’t say what the age of the 3 single malts in Monkey Shoulder is. I can’t believe any are under 8 years old.

Leave a Reply