Showing posts with label Tony Norman. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Tony Norman. Show all posts

Tuesday, August 16, 2011

More On Dominionism

I take Tony Norman's column as a start - this specifically:
The first time I ever heard of the Christian Reconstruction movement, now known as Dominionism, I thought it was a gag.



Who in their right mind wanted to live in a world where the Old Testament civil and ceremonial laws would become the template for local and national politics? It was a profoundly dark theology even by the standards of the dour Calvinism I considered reasonable at the time.



According to the tenets of Christian Reconstruction, it was up to Christians to bring the whole world into submission to Jesus Christ. Once that was accomplished (with God's help, of course), the Old Testament laws that guided ancient Israel would be dusted off and applied to civil societies across the globe, including America.
He then goes on to outline some of the scarier parts of this scary stuff and ends not with a whimper but with a bang:
Today, two of the leading Republican presidential candidates, Texas Gov. Rick Perry and Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachmann, reportedly have ties to the Dominionist movement. The press has got to get up to speed on the movement's ideas before either a President Bachmann or a President Perry are in a position to drag Jesus feet first out of heaven, again.
Allow me to do my part.



Michelle Goldberg over at The Daily Beast has more on Dominionism:
Dominionism derives from a small fringe sect called Christian Reconstructionism, founded by a Calvinist theologian named R. J. Rushdoony in the 1960s. Christian Reconstructionism openly advocates replacing American law with the strictures of the Old Testament, replete with the death penalty for homosexuality, abortion, and even apostasy. The appeal of Christian Reconstructionism is, obviously, limited, and mainstream Christian right figures like Ralph Reed have denounced it.
Rushdoony was a piece of work. As Frank Schaefer points out:
Rushdoony (whom I met and talked with several times) believed that interracial marriage, which he referred to as "unequal yoking," should be made illegal. He also opposed "enforced integration," referred to Southern slavery as "benevolent," and said that "some people are by nature slaves." Rushdoony was also a Holocaust denier.



And yet his home school materials are a mainstay of the right-wing evangelical home school movement to this day. In Rushdoony's 1973 book, The Institutes of Biblical Law, he says that fundamentalist Christians must "take control of governments and impose strict biblical law" on America and then the world.
Back to Goldberg with more on Michele Bachmann:
For believers in Dominionism, rule by non-Christians is a sort of sacrilege—which explains, in part, the theological fury that has accompanied the election of our last two Democratic presidents. “Christians have an obligation, a mandate, a commission, a holy responsibility to reclaim the land for Jesus Christ—to have dominion in civil structures, just as in every other aspect of life and godliness,” wrote George Grant, the former executive director of Coral Ridge Ministries, which has since changed its name to Truth in Action Ministries. “But it is dominion we are after. Not just a voice ... It is dominion we are after. Not just equal time ... World conquest.”



Bachmann is close to Truth in Action Ministries; last year, she appeared in one of its documentaries, Socialism: A Clear and Present Danger. In it, she espoused the idea, common in Reconstructionist circles, that the government has no right to collect taxes in excess of 10 percent, the amount that believers are called to tithe to the church. On her state-senate-campaign website, she recommended a book co-authored by Grant titled Call of Duty: The Sterling Nobility of Robert E. Lee, which, as Lizza reported, depicted the civil war as a battle between the devout Christian South and the Godless North, and lauded slavery as a benevolent institution. “The unity and companionship that existed between the races in the South prior to the war was the fruit of a common faith,” the book said.
We wrote about the Lee biography here.



Does Goldberg have more on Rick Perry? She certainly does:
In elaborating Bachmann’s Dominionist history, though, it’s important to point out that she is not unique. Perry tends to be regarded as marginally more reasonable than Bachmann, but he is as closely associated with Dominionism as she is, though his links are to a different strain of the ideology.
How? She cites this piece in the Texas Observer by Forrest Wilder. Goldberg continues:
The Christian Reconstructionists tend to be skeptical of Pentecostalism, with its magic, prophesies, speaking in tongues, and wild ecstasies. Certainly, there are overlaps between the traditions—Oral Roberts, where Bachmann studied with Eidsmoe, was a Pentecostal school. But it’s only recently that one group of Pentecostals, the New Apostolic Reformation, has created its own distinct Dominionist movement. And members see Perry as their ticket to power.



“The New Apostles talk about taking dominion over American society in pastoral terms,” wrote Wilder in the Texas Observer. “They refer to the ‘Seven Mountains’ of society: family, religion, arts and entertainment, media, government, education, and business. These are the nerve centers of society that God (or his people) must control.” He quotes a sermon from Tom Schlueter, New Apostolic pastor close to Perry. “We’re going to infiltrate [the government], not run from it. I know why God’s doing what he’s doing ... He’s just simply saying, ‘Tom I’ve given you authority in a governmental authority, and I need you to infiltrate the governmental mountain.”



According to Wilder, members of the New Apostolic Reformation see Perry as their vehicle to claim the “mountain” of government. Some have told Perry that Texas is a “prophet state,” destined, with his leadership, to bring America back to God. The movement was deeply involved in The Response, the massive prayer rally that Perry hosted in Houston earlier this month. “Eight members of The Response ‘leadership team’ are affiliated with the New Apostolic Reformation movement,” wrote Wilder. “The long list of The Response’s official endorses—posted on the event’s website—reads like a Who’s Who of the apostolic-prophetic crowd, including movement founder C. Peter Wagner.”
While it's the Republican Party that's otherwise up in arms about Islamic Sharia law taking over the Constitution, isn't it funny (just SOO FUNNY) how they're not so upset about the Christians who want to do the same?

Monday, April 25, 2011

Welcome To The World, Cormac!

From this Early Returns piece from Friday, we read:
And mazel tov to new dad Chris Potter and wife Melanie for the birth today of son Cormac.
Potter's been a good friend and on occasion (but only when he thinks it's warranted, of course) an annoyingly passive-aggressive critic to this blog for a long long time. Except for the stubborn defamation lawsuits that our attorneys assure us have direct links to something Potter suggested to us, his insights are, for the most part, not so damaging as to force us to shut down the blog and move to Toronto to avoid Homeland Security.

Usually.

But I fear I've said too much. I do want to take a moment to congratulate Mr Potter on his great good fortune!

And in his defense, I'd like to point out something to Tim McNulty, P-G writer who included this in his piece:
Pittsburgh City Paper's cover story this week is on the Corey O'Connor/Chris Zurawsky race to replace Doug Shields as the Democrat in council district 5. (We're frankly shocked that Potter* didn't go with a "hair apparent" headline.)
Tim, have you seen Potter's "hair line" these days? It's farther back than mine! If there's a reason he didn't make up some cheap coiffure drollery to describe a full head of hair, it's probably because he is, like me and Tony Norman, unfairly hair-free up top.

Life's hell for the follicularly challenged, you know. Cormac will understand this in about 45 years.

Tuesday, March 8, 2011

Who Said It?

Tony Norman's got a good column posted today (go read it). It's about Congressman Peter King's upcoming hearings on Radical Islam and there's some broad brush satire of anti-Islamic rhetoric in it.

Satire - look it up.

But I wanted to see how, as satire, it stood up to the real anti-Islamic rhetoric floating in the toilet bowl that's the right wing media.

First, here's Tony:
With their hard-to-pronounce names, aversion to pork ("the other white meat") and inscrutable "foreign" ways, the Muslim presence on these shores makes a mockery of one of our most sacred mantras:

"I pledge allegiance to the flag / of the United States of America / and to the republic for which it stands / one nation / under [a Judeo-Christian] God / indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."

How can we be "indivisible" when so many so-called Americans of the Islamic persuasion go out of their way to be different?
Not bad. Just tongue in cheek enough to know he's kidding.

But here's Michelle Malkin:
If it’s Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, Friday, Saturday, or Sunday, it’s just another day in the life of a true believer in violent jihad.

Yes: Violent jihad. Two words the current occupant of the White House won’t say together and about which he remains in stubborn denial.

Violent jihad. A fundamental tenet of legions and legions of Muslims worldwide — and untold numbers of homegrown and immigrant practitioners of the Religion of Perpetual Outrage here on American soil.
And now Ann Coulter:
The Middle East is on fire again, and crazy Muslims with funny names aren't helping things -- Mahmoud, ElBaradei, al-Banna, Barack...
And Peter King himself:
I would say, you could say that 80-85 percent of mosques in this country are controlled by Islamic fundamentalists. Those who are in control. The average Muslim, no, they are loyal, but they don't work, they don't come forward, they don't tell the police … .
That last one's a two-fer as it comes from the World Net Daily.

As good a writer as he is, if the above quotations show anything they show that Tony's satire of teh crazie pales in comparison to the real crazie.

Friday, February 11, 2011

What In The World Is Going On??

Get a gander from this paragraph from the Trib's Op-Ed page:
To Major League Baseball's arbitration process. Pirates right-handed pitcher Ross Ohlendorf was paid $439,000 last year. He was plagued by injuries and posted a record of 1-11. Even with that, the Bucs offered him $1.4 million for this season. Mr. Ohlendorf took the matter to arbitration. On Tuesday, arbiters awarded Ohlendorf $2.025 million. Good work if you can get it, we suppose, but it shows what's wrong with baseball economics.
And then there's this from Tony Norman's column today:
I'm not a baseball fan, but I am an American. This alone gives me some insight into what it means to fail and to be rewarded for it.

This week, arbitrators in Major League Baseball ruled that the annual salary of Pittsburgh Pirates pitcher Ross Ohlendorf deserved a bump from $439,000.

Despite one win and 11 losses in 2010, not to mention two stints on the disabled list during what turned out to be yet another miserable Pirates season, Mr. Ohlendorf just knew he was entitled to a large salary hike.

Mr. Ohlendorf, a Princeton University grad who majored in something called Operations Research and Financial Engineering, knows that there is an inverse relationship between reward and failure in this country.

The Pirates made a more-than-generous offer to him of $1.4 million. After researching the salaries of MLB starting pitchers he considered "comparable," Mr. Ohlendorf argued that $1.4 million didn't account for his true value to the Pirates.

After pressing on with the kind of dogged determination the Pirates would love to see on the field for once, Mr. Ohlendorf was awarded a substantial raise to $2,025,000 by the arbitration panel. The panel obviously felt Mr. Ohlendorf's pain and gave him financial parity with his rivals, regardless of whether it represented a fair value to the team.

"I looked at the marketplace the past two years, but more specifically last year, and felt that was a fair number," Mr. Ohlendorf said afterward.

I didn't see PG sportswriter Colin Dunlap's reaction after getting that quote, but knowing him, I'm sure his face registered something akin to bemused resignation.
When Tony and Scaife's braintrust find common ground on something (ANYTHING), something is very very wrong in the universe.