Dennis Prager: What does 'Judeo-Christian' mean?

In another must-read, Dennish Prager defines "Judeo-Christian". The secular Left resoundly criticizes the application of this label on our great Nation, but it's a futile denial. Prager outlines a bit of the history behind it all and then explains exactly why we need to continue to recognize our country as such.

Particularly interesting is his segue from the Pacifists' oft-quoted Isaiah backup for denying us from going to war. He immediately quotes the prophet Joel, who turns the Isaiah quote on its head. Taken together, there is clearly a time for war and a time for peace. Taking on evil around the world surely is not something from which we should hide.

California Insanity

A judge has ordered California to pay a retroactive welfare increase. On its face, this move would just be another insane move by a California court. But it really bears more sinister implications. And the judge does not get a pass from this Blog simply because it relies on existing State law. The judge really should have invalidated this law. An explanation is in order:

In 1998, the irresponsible California legislature passed CalWORKS, promising welfare recipients a pay increase if the car tax is lowered. In the words of the attorneys who won this case, "If the state can't afford $10 million a month for welfare recipients, then (Schwarzenegger) shouldn't have given $4 billion to motorists."

What that attorney (and the judge who agreed with him) really said was: "Citizens' money does not belong to them. It belongs to the State of California. If the State gives taxpayers the gift of a tax break, then equal protection requires the State to give a similar gift to all non-taxpayers." It represents a monumental step toward a type of tyranny that only California could muster.

The question that really should be posed to the judge and the attorneys is: "When Gray Davis illegally raised the car tax, did he cut welfare benefits?" If not, then any left-minded Governor could raise, and then drop, the car tax repeatedly, each time entitling welfare recipients to a pay increase.

On another note, a tax cut is not a gift from the State. It is an implicit recognition of the limits on government our nation has always had. If this wayward judicial decision is not summarily overturned, then California has indeed gotten out of control. And decades of irresponsible legislation now start to reveal their ramifications.
. . .
Thus has Punctilious written.

Admin: Posting Comments

Readers can now post comments to anything on this blog. Comments are, of course, highly encouraged. Any suggestions can always be sent to punctilious@cox.net (request a reply if you want one).

To post a comments, click on the "Comment" link under each post.

Reasons for Terror

Conservative analysis regarding the 9/11 Commission has ranged from muted to outright distaste.

Dennis Prager actually got emotional about it today. He sees the Left as unpatriotic in their insistence on holding the Commission. He rightly pointed out that everyone waited four years to analyze the December 7th attack on Pearl Harbor. I have to agree with him that forcing such analysis during an election looks awfully suspicious. Further, dividing our nation during a time of unprecedented anxiety and fear (The Terrorist Age) does us no good as a People.

Laura Ingraham focused on Richard Clarke's inconsistencies and thirst for attention. I must say his "apology" on behalf of America accomplished very little.

Now, Peggy Noonan saw the Commission as little more than a distraction. It is silly to ask one politician (i.e., Secretary Powell) how another politician (i.e., Former Secretary Albright) performed their job. The brotherhood of Cabinet members very likely has a Thin Blue Line, of sorts. What the esteemed Ms. Noonan missed, in my opinion, was Madame Albright's thinly veiled attempt to slide any possible blame onto President Bush. Actually, she aptly reflected the Left's disdain for Pres. Bush. It goes something like this: the Left has a certain view of the world, in all facets of life. The Left sees their worldview as a beautiful, sophisticated thing. Madame Albright and the Clinton presidency developed this worldview as far as they could go. When terrorism struck, they didn't want to dirty their hands. So they yukked it up with important world leaders (Chirac, Schroeder, dances with Kim Jong-Il) and took brief, non-fatal actions against those who harmed us.

Take a room with 20 toilets, one of them backed up. This toilet has a "Terrorism" sign over it. The Clinton Presidency used one of those weak plungers (where the head sometimes falls off) and would get the toilet working for a moment. And they'd polish up the porcelain till it was shiny. But the next time it was flushed, it overflowed again and a bit more material got caught in the tubing. When Bush came in, all the toilets looked alike. So when it flushed under Bush's watch, it overflowed, spewing material all over the room and into all the other toilets. Bush and his team rolled up their sleeves and stuck their arms into the pipe to pull out the blockage. But the toilet needed to be replaced and the whole room was in shambles.

So maybe the story isn't pretty, but it should be pretty accurate. Clintonian politics were all about friendship and prestige. The Bush White House had to deal with life, and make up for years of neglect. But the Richard Clarkes and Madame Albrights of the world want the sophistication back. It helps them feel better about themselves.

Slippery Slopes

In conversations with more Left-ward thinkers than myself, my friends ridicule the very possibility of any concept giving rise to a slippery slope. In debates on TV and the radio, the speakers similarly treat any slippery slope arguments.

Britain often supplies a good litmus test of where some of America's progressive laws can lead. Take this article about a man who was sentenced for manslaughter today. It turns out this hero took on four armed robbers with a samurai sword. He dispatched the thugs after running one of them through the thorax. The robber dies and the poor homeowner was sentenced for eight years. Such outcomes exactly mirror the Leftist dream for America, where we all roll over to robbers (and thus leave our very lives to the kindness of the robbers themselves). And of course, the State will hunt them down and plop an inhumane 6-month jail sentence for robbing you. Maybe even 5 years if they kill you.

I'll go buy a gun. And hire a good lawyer if I kill an intruder.

Dismissals

Nothing harms a military more than extended peacetime operations. The final step in the last round of peacetime (ending around 9/11/01) were endless self-reflections culminating in "don't ask, don't tell". In fact, shortly before I discharged, I had to sit through a briefing where the Airmen were told in no uncertain terms the new USAF policy. If we caught someone in such a sex act and reported them (per the UCMJ), we would first be investigated for harrassment, extensively, before anyone was looked at for violating the anti-homosexual rules of the UCMJ.

Magically, Drudge is reporting that military dismissals for homosexuality are way down. Well that makes a lot of sense. Because we're busy fighting the bad guys, we don't have time to look around us and see who's doing what in whose bedroom. I'll bet adultery is way down, too, among military folk. Can't adulterate much in the middle of the Iraqi desert.

A Rift in the Left

The Democrat power-base in this country is an amalgamation of various disaffected groups. Whether you believe there is any basis for their allegiance to the Party is best left for a different day. But the African-American lobby is one that has stuck with the Democrat party for quite some time now. How far will the Democrats go in favor of another famed constituency? The gay-rights lobby desperately wants to win the marriage debate.

But now some "black clergy" are standing against gay marriage. If the Democrats aren't careful, African-Americans may soon start realizing we're all better off being blind to skin color. They may even start to like the Republican ideal of pulling the government back so we can pull ourselves up through the financial and societal ranks of life. Then again, this particular lobby may capitulate (again) to the greater designs of the Democrat party. Only time will tell.

A Lone Preacher

(Note: this post is a rare "journal"-istic venture. The author was compelled to write the following despite the departure from the usual format.)
I'm in New Orleans, alone, for a meeting. The group of participants in the meeting all want to go into the French Quarter (Bourbon Street, of course). That visit confirmed my opinion of this city: I am simply amazed at the sorry state of Humanity in this town.

First of all, the whole city is embarrassingly dirty. The city planners should take some funds and commit a staff of 100 to use those high-power sprayers to wash away the grime.

Second, I am entirely too old for the French Quarter at night. Every balcony is packed with ugly people, all trying to convince women ages 15-65 to lift their tops. All for $.99 beads. And the women who don't usually display their breasts first look around furtively, as if they're wondering who's watching them. I just want to scream, "You idiot! Everyone's watching you! You're either gonna do it or you're not, but the longer you wait, the more of us will be watching!" And the whole scene is like a car accident on the side of the freeway: you know you should drive on by, but you can't help but watch the disaster. Invariably, some letch has a video camera getting the whole thing, so the woman will be on the 'Net by morning.

Third, I have been asked for money by no less than 4 different men today. I have the convenient (and true) excuse that I live on plastic (i.e., debit card). Panhandlers are so bold here, it's amazing.

Fourth, I figured out why no one washes this city down. It will just get dirty again that night. Psychologically dirty are the establishments up and down Bourbon Street. There are topless bars, bottomless bars, sex-act bars, men-as-women bars, karaoke bars (only dirty because no one can sing when they're that loaded), voodoo bars, and more. But the place is physically dirty because no one can pay attention to the environment when they lack the wherewithal to pay attention to anyone but themselves.

As I walked through the ruckus, I began to believe that there was nothing *good* in the whole Quarter. And then I see One Lone Preacher, trying to hand out scripture to the completely uninterested drunks stumbling by. Everyone else is so consumed with self-gratification and self-indulgence that they only regress into a pre-Homo sapiens form of life. In other words, they no longer can walk in a straight line, upright, and maintain an intelligible form fo speech. And I mean en masse. I cannot imagine another city in history that can turn a mob into such an ugly sight.

Now I must clarify one thing: when I say that there was nothing good in the whole Quarter, I am including the people. But I separate the people while they're in the Quarter from when they are outside the Quarter. They specifically leave behind their usual decorum, sensibility and morals because everyone else has done the same thing. I would trust many of the folks in my group from this meeting with very much that is important to me. I would not hesitate to call on them in my time of need because I know they would be there for me without a second thought. But once they cross Canal Street into Bourbon Street, their soul leaves them and they douse their systems with drink after drink until their minds leave them as well.

That One Lone Preacher was the only good thing in the French Quarter. This man was hoping against hope that someone would pay attention to what he had to offer. I don't know many men of faith who would have the same cajones. I'm afraid I could only manage to leave the fire, not stand in it.

And now I need a shower.

More on Korea (see below)

Manning shortfall in Iraq? Move the whole operation out of Korea and into Iraq. Only slightly more dangerous and a less hostile populace. No more "Ugly American, Go Home" -- just a few car bombs.

After all, we have about 25,000 troops in Korea, more or less permanent. We could easily put together a new network of bases similar in shape and style to what is in Korea. We wouldn't have to pretend to want to leave, and the infrastructure for future operations would be in place.

Some of the current funding difficulties would be solved as well. Pulling out isn't always expensive -- look at our bases in the Phillippines. We were out in a jiffy and no one was the wiser.

And with modern technology and air refueling, there isn't a single thing we accomplish in Korea that we couldn't do just as well from a remote location. If they cared to remain our ally at all, we could speed back on over there if the Chinese decided they needed a new holiday spot.

Can anyone tell I'm fed up with the RoK's games?

Korean Misfits

It's time to pull every last troop out of South Korea.

Now, look. I spent 16 months of my life studying the Korean language, culture and history at the Defense Language Institute at the Presidio of Monterey, California. I then spent another year in Korea itself at Osan AB. I know very well how much money and blood has been spent on that country. I also know that they were helpful in Vietnam; in fact, they may think they've repaid their blood debt because of it.

No way is it paid. How many thousands of US lives were lost ensuring the integrity of the 38th Parallel? Pusan, Choson Reservoir, Yalu, various Hill Numbers... names that symbolize much spilt American Blood. There's a site on Osan of the last American bayonet charge, for Heaven's sake. Bayonets in the 20th friggin century. (And we won the battle, of course!)

So we now we ask for a little help in Iraq. We even are kind enough to warn them that their 3,600 troops might face attacks by hostile forces. And we want to keep ultimate control over their contingent of troops (South Koreans can get out of control sometimes in the amoutn of force used proportional to the threat they face). Based on that warning and the invitation, what do they say? Our plan doesn't fit their plans to "keep its own independent operational command system and conduct peaceful reconstruction." Translation: they don't want us to run things, and they really don't want to fight anyone if they don't have to.

There are several countries in this world that, quite frankly, owe us. South Korea is one of them. They'd be citing Kim's Little Red Book if it weren't for us. And they'd be eating tree bark for breakfast and their neighbor's children for dinner. Oh yeah: most of them would also be dead. A couple dozen casualties in Vietnam does not make up for the sacrifices in the Korean War or since. Our boys over there have been hacked to death with axes, shot at, shot down and otherwise lost forever to the hazards of day-to-day military operations. $1 trillion dollars later, The RoKs don't want to play our game any more. Well it's time to wise up to theirs. Pull out now, once and for all, and don't leave them anything to plunder. Blow up the buildings and burn the trash. It's time to go home.

Coincidences

See my post below regarding Kerry's Big Lie (foreign leaders) and the scrambling Globe reporter. Now contrast this development with Bush's 2000 pop quiz on world leaders, thrust upon him in a seemingly innocent interview. See how intellectually dishonest is the claim that the media is not leftist. Right.

I'm a Centrist?

Take the World's Shortest Political Quiz. I don't think it's entirely accurate. It has me as 30% centrist (on the border btwn Centrist and Authoritarian). And I'm only 7% Right-Conservative? And over 19% left-liberal?? Right.

A Torn Nation

I'm torn about the effect of the after-bombing vote in Spain. On one hand, there are the slippery-slopers. Take, for example, Powerline which quite reflects my gut feeling of the impact of the Socialists' sweeping return to power directly after the bomb blasts (and David Horowitz reflects echoes that view). On the other hand, Hugh Hewitt feels otherwise. I hope he's right, that it's just a foolish election (he compares it to Churchill's ouster), and not a dangerous one. Although a more comforting diagnosis, I just can't believe he's right. I do believe we'll all have to watch our backs the last week of October.

The French

Although Instapundit is concerned about the French bolstering the Chinese war posturing by sending a naval contingent to participate in war games, I have an explanation for the development. France is joining China just in case Greenpeace tries to stop the military exercise. If they faced any larger enemy, China would have to spend most of the exercise making sure the French weren't surrendering.

"Foreign" = "More" Morons?

Instapundit entirely reflects my beliefs on the retraction by the Globe reporter. Journalist Healy is so obviously going out on a very thin limb to try to save Kerry's reputation. If Kerry didn't say "foreign" I don't see why he wouldn't have corrected it all himself -- a stiff defense immediately after the controversy began could have saved his reputation. Would a leftie reporter go this far to "stand by his man"?

Heart vs. Humanity

Dennis Prager is a man who makes me feel smarter just by listening to his radio show. This week, he has written a column about the worldwide shift from higher principles to emotional decisionmaking. In a nutshell, a majority of the people in the Western world are replacing the Bible with their inner compass. It's silly to rely on something as outdated and "open to interpretation" as Scripture, yet noble to find comfort in your own narcissism. As Mssr. Prager puts it, the result "is self-deification."

As always, he is entirely correct. I have found myself of late frequently in discussion with friends who cannot grasp (or respect) my belief in a definition of marriage that derives from tradition (social and religious). In their minds, reliance on such notions is simplistic, primitive, and possibly dangerous. To wit, my desire to limit abortion to only the most extreme cases (in accordance with my Church's doctrine) is completely ignoring a woman's rights, and is not worthy of discussion. After all, the heart says people want these things; without a religious foundation, no reason can be found to limit any person's wanton desires. Without a religious foundation, it is the absolute epitome of oppression and privacy violation to keep people from doing the things they want, when they want to do them.

People firmly sit on one side or the other with this issue. Either we believe in limiting "freedom" for the public good (i.e., freedom to marry, freedom to procreate, freedom to communicate treasonous transactions on the Internet), or we believe in some all-encompassing right to privacy that trumps all else. I'm sorely afraid that each side may eventually resort to force to dislodge the other.

Blasts of Evil

On 3/11, 911 days after 9/11, evil struck again. At last count, almost 200 dead and about 1400 injured in blasts in Madrid, Spain. Although the perpetrators are not positively identified, there are whispers of ETA, an alleged letter connecting it all to Al-Qaeda, and too many unanswered questions. An act of evil on a key ally in these trying times. Everyone should say a quick prayer for our Spanish compatriots.

Al-Qaeda wants to roll back the Crusades. The Spaniards were a pivotal force in pushing out the last worldwide incursion from a unified Islam. Those 5% of Muslims worldwide who are Wahhabists or sympathetic thereto will long for bygone days of Moorish Spain. I just don't see how blowing it all up will leave them anything to occupy.

Our enemies in the War on Terror don't make sense. But I fear we will not decisively prevail until we understand that they simply want to kill us. Appeasement will only open more avenues for them to succeed. Americans have such a short memory, and it's possible that we will not throw aside some of our reservations until more hidden enemies kill thousands more of us.

Remember: the Clinton Administration treated terrorists as petty criminals. The Bush doctrine changed the global perception into recognizing that they are war enemies. If Kerry wins, it's back to a police movement. Just remember: we have 100,000 troops in Iraq. Every Muslim terrorist organization has representatives there in our gunsights. Were they only criminals, we would have to try to put handcuffs on them before we could try to shoot them. I say we should take them out.

Gibson, Passion and a Libel

Krauthammer's "Gibson's Blood Libel" is as shortsighted as it gets. He is entirely unhappy with Mr. Gibson and his Passion movie. Unlike most of Krauthammer's work, he is blinded by emotion and completely reason-free. It appears the only Jesus movie he'd be happy with is one without Jesus. He attempts to reason that there are gaps in some Gospel accounts that are filled in others, so any attempt at a literalist portrayal on the silver screen is impossible, that Mel is only interpreting, thus destroying any literalism.

The Gospels are written from different perspectives. Yes, Luke left out the scourging. But Luke, the Good Doctor, had certain elements of Christ's life and ministry on which he wanted to focus. No doubt, being a doctor, he could have provided a better play-by-play of the skin curling back after each blow. But being a doctor, no doubt he wanted to avoid such grisly topics. Does that mean it didn't happen?

In the LDS Church, we choose not to focus on the Crucifixion at Christmas or any other time. We have no crosses in our meetinghouses. Do we thus deny the Crucifixion? Absolutely not. We simply choose to focus on His life, not His death.

Krauthammer lavishes praise on the Catholics for denying the Jews' role in the Passion. Well, Gibson does too. (Note: I have not seen the movie yet.) From what I understand, the Jews in this story, especially Caiaphus & co., look nothing like, say, Abe Foxman. There are no stereotypical noses or anything else. And Jesus was clearly a Jew.

Herein lies what could be the fatal flaw in Vatican II, inadvertantly outlined by Krauthammer. By denying the Jews' role completely, Catholics now have an opportunity to forget the story completely. The Jews of 33 A.D., thus pre-Diaspora, were quite different from Jews of the modern day. To assert that no Jew wanted Jesus dead, or that no Jew would have blindly followed the corrupt leadership of the day, is to misunderstand the whole story. Jesus was enticing to some Jews, revolting to others. His story was not to be universally accepted in His life nor is it now. The point is that people then and now have the moral agency to choose whether to accept Him. The divisions of 33 A.D. are indicative of the divisions today. As much as the Jews who sympathized with Jesus are to be honored, the Jews who contributed to His death on the Cross were, as individuals, responsible for their own actions. Today, those individuals who believe in Him are also to be honored; those who reject (and even despise in many cases) Him are responsible for their own actions.

The above, I believe, was adequately echoed by Mel Gibson in his many public defenses of his movie. Mr. Krauthammer, unfortunately, is utterly blinded by his passion against the Passion.

Administrative Note

This blog now only has one poster: Leonard (me). The original vision had several sharp minds working together to create a steady flow of thought and analysis. But life gets in the way, and I had made the egregious error of assembling a group of law students, each with 100 other claims on their time. Thus, though posting will sometimes be sparse, I will be the only mind at work here from now on. The former members' contributions were wonderful, but the new format will exclude all but myself. Happy reading!

California v. Catholics

All of California seems to be positioning itself against all things Catholic. Hollywood (and Hillcrest, for sure) wants to keep everyone from seeing The Passion. Just check out Rotten Tomatoes' roundup. Now, the California Supreme Court seeks to impose its hard-line abortion mandate on Catholics and any other weak-minded simpleton who opposes abortion. No longer can a charity act on principle and exclude certain procedures from their provided services. In this case, the Catholic charity in question must, under the hard gaze of the law, provide abortion on demand for those who use the health care which they provide. This case will go to the Supreme Court -- under the incorporation of the First Amendment? Who knows. One theory or another will get it there.

Next will come mandated euthanasia for anyone over 18. But that possibility is a slippery-slope argument which is too silly to even consider. It's just like the minimal smoking restrictions on the back half of airplanes that never took the slippery slope to the nonexistent, modern-day smoking bans anywhere outside your own home (for now).