I think I've come back around to voting for Huckabee in the Texas primary, instead of strategically voting for one of the Democrats. I like Huckabee, and I can vote for him in good conscience. Ain't gonna win, and it's mathematically impossible for him to become the GOP nominee. But I like him, and I can feel good about my vote. I'd feel that way if I were a Paul supporter too.
Stuart Buck sends along this unintentionally funny bit from a Slate story about the search for the hidden Huckabee tapes. This is one reason why writer Hanna Rosin is troubled by Huck:
4. The Queasy Factor—In the one tape I did manage to get—bought on eBay from an enterprising Arkansan—Huckabee preaches on "The Practice of Patience." What could be more pleasant and innocuous, right? Not exactly. Huckabee is his trademark jovial self. He tells a couple of good stories, one about some urban farmers who mistook a watermelon for a mule egg, another about the time his father gave him his first bike—and it was a girl's bike. But all this is building up to a serious point. "How many times do we find ourselves on the surgery table of the Almighty God, who is trying to work His surgery to make us more like Christ, and we say 'God, let me out of here! Lord, don't touch me!' " he thunders towards the end. "It's not that we can't be Christians. The sad fact is most of us don't want to be enough to try our faith to the point of patience and perseverance."It's one thing to know a presidential candidate was a pastor; that sounds worthy and leaderlike. But it's quite another to actually hear him work himself up into a lather about committing to Christ and not back it up with a joke.
Stuart remarks:
What does she think Christian pastors (especially Southern Baptists) do, if not try to get their congregations to be devoted to Christ?
Indeed. It's remarkable that a veteran religion reporter is made queasy by the fact that Huckabee takes the faith seriously. Or maybe it isn't so remarkable.
Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to Newsvine
Add to Facebook
Add to StumbleUpon
Subscribe
I see our MythBuster friend is up to his usual blather. Not much imagination there though, "God is a myth" blah blah blah.
Whatever.
"giah" always reminds me of this by Chestert (from Orthodoxy):
"The madman's explanation of a thing is always complete, and often
in a purely rational sense satisfactory. Or, to speak more strictly,
the insane explanation, if not conclusive, is at least unanswerable;
this may be observed specially in the two or three commonest kinds
of madness. If a man says (for instance) that men have a conspiracy
against him, you cannot dispute it except by saying that all the men
deny that they are conspirators; which is exactly what conspirators
would do. His explanation covers the facts as much as yours.
Or if a man says that he is the rightful King of England, it is no
complete answer to say that the existing authorities call him mad;
for if he were King of England that might be the wisest thing for the
existing authorities to do. Or if a man says that he is Jesus Christ,
it is no answer to tell him that the world denies his divinity;
for the world denied Christ's.
[clip]
"Nevertheless he is wrong. But if we attempt to trace his error
in exact terms, we shall not find it quite so easy as we had supposed.
Perhaps the nearest we can get to expressing it is to say this:
that his mind moves in a perfect but narrow circle. A small circle
is quite as infinite as a large circle; but, though it is quite
as infinite, it is not so large. In the same way the insane explanation
is quite as complete as the sane one, but it is not so large.
A bullet is quite as round as the world, but it is not the world.
There is such a thing as a narrow universality; there is such
a thing as a small and cramped eternity; you may see it in many
modern religions. Now, speaking quite externally and empirically,
we may say that the strongest and most unmistakable MARK of madness
is this combination between a logical completeness and a spiritual
contraction. The lunatic's theory explains a large number of things,
but it does not explain them in a large way. I mean that if you
or I were dealing with a mind that was growing morbid, we should be
chiefly concerned not so much to give it arguments as to give it air,
to convince it that there was something cleaner and cooler outside
the suffocation of a single argument.
[clip]
"Such is the madman of experience; he is commonly a reasoner,
frequently a successful reasoner. Doubtless he could be vanquished
in mere reason, and the case against him put logically. But it can
be put much more precisely in more general and even aesthetic terms.
He is in the clean and well-lit prison of one idea: he is
sharpened to one painful point."
"... the discovery of chariots and human bones on the sea floor..."
wow... that proves that some ancient humans drowned there...
and some of their chariots were swamped there...
come on... you should be able to do better than that...
where's the "substantial proof" that Almighty God was leading them in pillars of cloud and fire?
that's quite the stretch from the reality of chariots and bones to the Myth of Pillars of Cloud and Fire...
and... back to the topic...
it seems likely that Huck would agree with that kind of supernatural explanation for submerged chariots and bones...
it's that kind of magical thinking that makes Huck unqualified to be president...
faith hope love joy peace to all...
Impeach God...
thanks, Max...
I'm always well pleased with responses that contain no content whatsoever about my analysis of the current topic... blah blah blah... ;-)
but hey... let's give Huck a pass, shall we?
I mean...
he makes people queasy with his mythological thinking about changing our Constitution to make it conform with the Bible...
it seems that should make many persons question his intellectual qualifications for being president...
but because this is a presidential election...
let's not bring in a discussion of the supernatural Myths of superstitious ancient men...
not even when the candidate himself brings up the topic...
yes... when Huck talks about those ancient Myths, let's just pretend that they are real...
and not discuss what it means to be a superstitious candidate...
faith hope love joy peace to all...
Impeach God...
Give Huck a pass? Who's Huck? I don't give him the time of day, let alone a pass.
"Analysis" of current topic? ROFL! Hahahahaha...
Yeah, your infinite circle of one idea is very small indeed, but then your resonse shows the applicability of the Chesterton passage, especially as regards having a rational conversation with your ilk.
"Analysis"; hahahahaha...
thanks, Max... like I said:
I thoroughly enjoy responses that contain no content whatsoever about the topic...
it's surrender...
thanks again... by the way...
here's a hint about the current topic: "queasy"...
so you don't give him the time of day... good for you...
I don't give him much because of his superstition...
that analysis doesn't work for most of the candidates...
but it fits Huck perfectly...
your view? oh right...
your posts lack any content that explains your position...
surrender faith hope love joy peace to all...
Impeach God...
Post a Comment
By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.