Posts
There are a number of blogs that I go to regularly. I've become a fan of their abilities to ferret out news and information. Many of them are the "new journalists" and reading them is similar to reading a favorite columnist or reporter if operating in a print media context.
One such writer/blogger is David Neiwert of the blog, Orcinus. Neiwert also guest blogs over at The American Street. His most recent article has to do with our old friend Ahnuld.
Apparently, The Governator has set his sights on Native peoples and has become sort of the spokesperson for the campaign to end tribal sovereignty. (link)
Neiwert references an article by Alan Murray of CNBC in which Murray champions Schwarzeneggar's attempts to "shake down the tribes for all they are worth". According to the article by Murray, “the anti-Indian movement is shopping for a national voice and face,” and seems to conclude that the leading candidate so far is Schwarzenegger.
Monday, November 22, 2004
Sunday, November 21, 2004
Prayer for presidents
Tony Campolo proudly calls himself an evangelical, yet there are serious differences from the manner he practices his version of the term than many so-called evangelicals that voted for President Bush’s re-election.
Campolo, a Baptist and self-described bible-believing xian has been criticized by many who resent his more broadminded approach to the teachings of Christ. Interestingly, Campolo’s fiery benediction at the opening of the William Jefferson Clinton Presidential Library raised some eyebrows, particularly those of George and Barbara Bush and their son, the president.
Watching a rebroadcast of the event today on C-Span, the camera caught Campolo’s fiery prayer in which he asked God to bless Clinton and specifically prayed for the current leadership. His prayer spoke about tolerance towards gays and lesbians, for our country to embrace peace over war, to care for the impoverished and for our leaders to hear the voices of their prophets.
The cameras caught the lack of respect that the Bush family had for Rev. Campolo. While the Clintons and Carters had heads bowed in reverence for the prayer and the preacher. It was a moment that spoke volumes for the differences between those gathered on the podium. Son George had the same look of condescension on his face that he wore during the first debate with Kerry, when the Senator upbraided him on his policies, particularly in Iraq.
Interestingly, Google searches and other means have yielded nothing about this. It amazes me how the right can continually bitch about the liberal bias of the media, while basking in its adulation and free pass given to them.
There is an interview worth reading with Campolo at BeliefNet about the hijacking of evangelical xianity by the left.
Campolo, a Baptist and self-described bible-believing xian has been criticized by many who resent his more broadminded approach to the teachings of Christ. Interestingly, Campolo’s fiery benediction at the opening of the William Jefferson Clinton Presidential Library raised some eyebrows, particularly those of George and Barbara Bush and their son, the president.
Watching a rebroadcast of the event today on C-Span, the camera caught Campolo’s fiery prayer in which he asked God to bless Clinton and specifically prayed for the current leadership. His prayer spoke about tolerance towards gays and lesbians, for our country to embrace peace over war, to care for the impoverished and for our leaders to hear the voices of their prophets.
The cameras caught the lack of respect that the Bush family had for Rev. Campolo. While the Clintons and Carters had heads bowed in reverence for the prayer and the preacher. It was a moment that spoke volumes for the differences between those gathered on the podium. Son George had the same look of condescension on his face that he wore during the first debate with Kerry, when the Senator upbraided him on his policies, particularly in Iraq.
Interestingly, Google searches and other means have yielded nothing about this. It amazes me how the right can continually bitch about the liberal bias of the media, while basking in its adulation and free pass given to them.
There is an interview worth reading with Campolo at BeliefNet about the hijacking of evangelical xianity by the left.
Progressive Values
Whenever a new topic is seized upon by the media, the ensuing fallout can be mind-numbing, as well as stifling to critical thought. The current hysterical bleating about “morality” and “moral values” illustrate the phenomenon.
If you’ve been living anywhere other than a cave, it’s been hard to insulate yourself from the barrage of commentary regarding this subject matter.
Personally, I resent having morality or moral values defined for me. I am confident at my advancing age, that I’m capable of determining what is moral and right for me. I am particularly galled when others, lacking an ethical and moral core themselves, preach that my morality is somehow foreign, or “un-American”.
George Lakoff has an excellent article in The Nation about the differences in values between people like myself—considered progressive—and those morals championed on the right—considered traditional, American, or family in nature.
In his article, Lakoff clearly contrasts two sets of values, delineating the differences between them. (link)
He uses the labels, “moral values” to speak to common values that all of us hold; care and responsibility, fairness and equality, freedom and courage, fulfillment in life, opportunity and community, cooperation and trust, honesty and openness.
He contrasts these with “idealized family values” held by many who voted for President Bush and who might be characterized as right-of-center; he characterizes these as being part of a “strict-father family model” that determines what’s “right” from a values set.
I encourage you to read Lakoff’s article as it thoughtfully looks at the issue in a less shrill, histrionic way than much of the current commentary about important differences in our country.
If you’ve been living anywhere other than a cave, it’s been hard to insulate yourself from the barrage of commentary regarding this subject matter.
Personally, I resent having morality or moral values defined for me. I am confident at my advancing age, that I’m capable of determining what is moral and right for me. I am particularly galled when others, lacking an ethical and moral core themselves, preach that my morality is somehow foreign, or “un-American”.
George Lakoff has an excellent article in The Nation about the differences in values between people like myself—considered progressive—and those morals championed on the right—considered traditional, American, or family in nature.
In his article, Lakoff clearly contrasts two sets of values, delineating the differences between them. (link)
He uses the labels, “moral values” to speak to common values that all of us hold; care and responsibility, fairness and equality, freedom and courage, fulfillment in life, opportunity and community, cooperation and trust, honesty and openness.
He contrasts these with “idealized family values” held by many who voted for President Bush and who might be characterized as right-of-center; he characterizes these as being part of a “strict-father family model” that determines what’s “right” from a values set.
I encourage you to read Lakoff’s article as it thoughtfully looks at the issue in a less shrill, histrionic way than much of the current commentary about important differences in our country.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)