"All for Jesus!"

the "Here come the Christianists!" freak-out over the Brownback address tells us way more about how alienated from ordinary American experience the unnerved are than it tells us about Sam Brownback.

Considering how many people have reservations about this, it may not be the "unnerved" that are alienated from "ordinary American experience," unless, that is, you intend to imply that ordinary Americans cannot be concerned about divided loyalties and imposition of religious dogma from the bully pulpit of the POTUS.

Rod,

I am curious why you are so emphatically not a Brownback supporter.

I am curious why you are so emphatically not a Brownback supporter.

His support of Opus Dei is enough for me. Can't tell you why Rod wouldn't like him.

You're welcome, Mark. Somehow supporting the right of someone to make their own medical decisions is a good reason to vote for someone else, but support of a secretive and abusive cultish organization isn't?

To each his own.

I think the Brownback thing is harmless and I don't fret much about theocracies, but do you see any irony in being snarkily dismissive on hand and being "pee-in-the pants" hysterical about Muslims and their threat to the Dallas metroplex in another? Do you really believe the threat of Sharia law is any greater threat than the possibility Christian theocracy?

Do you really think that what concerns me is the possibility of shariah courts at Dallas City Hall? Really?

Your handwringing over Islam is perplexing and often fairly hysterical, so I actually have to say I can't quite figure out what you are worried about. You seem awfully worried about Sharia law and you seem to look for the absolute worst spin possible on anything a Muslim person says or does, so it is hard to tell.

My sense is that most people who fret about "theocracies" are speaking in hyperbole the same way you fret about sharia law and jihad. They are exaggerating to make a point, as I sense (I hope) you are.

Your handwringing over Islam is perplexing and often fairly hysterical, so I actually have to say I can't quite figure out what you are worried about. You seem awfully worried about Sharia law and you seem to look for the absolute worst spin possible on anything a Muslim person says or does, so it is hard to tell.

It's not Islam; it's Islamism. It's the belief that we ought to be ruled by an Islamic theocracy, and the acceptance, indeed the propagation, of Islamic extremist ideology in a time when Islamic extremists are making war on the United States. I have no fear that we will ever see Islamic theocracy in the United States. But I worry a great deal that these ideas stand to radicalize young people who may take it upon themselves, like their counterparts in the UK and elsewhere in Europe, to commit terrorists acts.

I really do believe that many on the American left would have their throats cut by an Islamist scimitar, and go to their deaths blaming George W. Bush and Jerry Falwell.

Context is all important. What Brownback says, immediately after the four "All for Jesus"es, is this: "It was faith that powered her to help millions." Not faith that powered her to get legislation enacted, or faith that got her elected to political office, because that's not what Mother Teresa was about.

This is a politician pointing out that faith powered a person who is renowned for her acts of mercy. Brownback is way down my list of favorite candidates, because I disagree with him about the role of the state in trying to bring about the good society, but I sure don't see much basis for freaking out about this.

have no fear that we will ever see Islamic theocracy in the United States. But I worry a great deal that these ideas stand to radicalize young people who may take it upon themselves, like their counterparts in the UK and elsewhere in Europe, to commit terrorists acts.

Yet you speak about Islam as if it's the problem, when the problem is these young men have nothing more in their lives to look forward to than death by extremist jihad.

'Matthey' should, of course, be 'Matthew'.

I guess it's obvious. If a "Christian" theocracy happened in this country, the Christians, of course, would not be upset about that -- at least until they started the in-fighting over "which" Christianity would actually rule. However, if the "theocracy" were Muslim, it would be every Christian's nightmare come true. (and maybe the Scientologists would articulate disapproval, too!)

Senator Brownback is enthusiastic proponents of Open Borders, ie distraction of the USA as it existed for 200+ years.

Such person has disqualified himself from being the POTUS.

Rod wrote:

"It's not Islam; it's Islamism."

And the difference is? Perhaps some citations from Koran or Haditha that show the difference?

"It's the belief that we ought to be ruled by an Islamic theocracy"
Actually there no such belief. Every good Mussulman believes that the world must live under Allah given rules, Sharia.

In practical terms it is rulers who apply Sharia rules and it is Mullahs who issue verdicts.

"the acceptance, indeed the propagation, of Islamic extremist ideology in a time when Islamic extremists are making war on the United States."

What you call Islamic extremist ideology is a plain meaning of the Koran. Either you ignore the plain meaning and live life as a bad Mussulman. Or you believe in it and support those who try to curry their obligations out and live your life as a good Mussulman.

John E.,

I think his friends called him Matthey.