|
|
| |
 - Endorsed - Indifferent - Contested
|
| |
| The Nashville Statement
|
| |
|
|
| |
Name:Daniel
Home: Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
About Me: I used to believe that evolution was reasonable, that homosexuality was genetic, and that people became Christians because they couldn't deal with the 'reality' that this life was all there was. I used to believe, that if there was a heaven - I could get there by being good - and I used to think I was more or less a good person. I was wrong on all counts. One day I finally had my eyes opened and I saw that I was not going to go to heaven, but that I was certainly going to suffer the wrath of God for all my sin. I saw myself as a treasonous rebel at heart - I hated God for creating me just to send me to Hell - and I was wretched beyond my own comprehension. Into this spiritual vacuum Jesus Christ came and he opened my understanding - delivering me from God's wrath into God's grace. I was "saved" as an adult, and now my life is hid in Christ. I am by no means sinless, but by God's grace I am a repenting believer - a born again Christian.
My complete profile...
|
| |
Daniel's posts are almost always pastoral and God centered. I appreciate and am challenged by them frequently. He has a great sense of humor as well.
- Marc Heinrich
His posts are either funny or challenging. He is very friendly and nice.
- Rose Cole
[He has] good posts, both the serious like this one, and the humorous like yesterday. [He is] the reason that I have restrained myself from making Canadian jokes in my posts.
- C-Train
This post contains nothing that is of any use to me. What were you thinking? Anyway, it's probably the best I've read all day.
- David Kjos
Daniel, nicely done and much more original than Frank the Turk.
- Jonathan Moorhead
There are some people who are smart, deep, or funny. There are not very many people that are all 3. Daniel is one of those people. His opinion, insight and humor have kept me coming back to his blog since I first visited earlier this year.
- Carla Rolfe
|
| |
|
email
|
|
| I think Obama is going to win it. |
Yeah. I am a Canadian who doesn't really follow 'merican politics; but from my ivory tower of ignorance I feel more than qualified to make an unsubstantiated guess.
It isn't only because Obama is the media darling, though that is certainly an undeniable factor - whatever gets put into the trough, the cattle tend to eat - and while comparing the voting public to unconcerned bovine consumers is probably more than a little simplistic, I feel (again), that my "ivory tower of ignorance" perspective is at least free from that sort of myopia that happens when one is in the thick of it.
The long drawn out Democratic campaign has only helped the democrats, who by hogging the media spotlight for months on end - simultaneously put the republicans in the "who cares about them right now" category. The problem with being left in the ditch like that, is that once the road is paved, people tend to stick to it. I may be wrong, but it does seem that Mr. Obama is tripling Mr. McCain in the media coverage department...
From one outsider's (Canadian) perspective, the presidency seems to represent more than the political office itself, the one who holds the office becomes the person who represents to the world, the nation of America. If that person is soft or hard on an issue, America is soft or hard on an issue. Not to overstate the point - but the presidential image is projected upon the whole national, and the image of the nation upon the president.
If the US buys up the world resources, someone is going to conclude that it does so at the expense of poorer nations. Rather than despise the poverty, they will be galled by those who are are prosperous, and the US will be judged by many as arrogant, uncaring, interfering, and evil - and the president who puts the US first, is going to be considered a great adversary by those who conclude that the failure of one nation is inevitably caused by the success of another.
There is an association therefore between the world-wide opinion of the USA and the image of its president, and that association, I humbly submit, may be local as well as external - that is, shallow thinking is by no means limited to those abroad, but is well and thriving locally too. I speak of a hunch I have that the thirty and under crowd, those who have been pabulum fed celebrity-ism from the cradle, those who judge by whatever image is presented to them by the media - who have no habit in themselves of digging deeper than what is presented to them - the children who are discontent because the media tells them to be that way, and having in their generation an education system that has become the endorser of all things liberal - well, I am just saying that there is likely a programmed mindset - a subconscious predilection to succumb rather uncritically to media programming.
I could be wrong, but if this generation takes its instruction in truth from the media (and I think for a large part that it does), then we need only look to the media darling to see who the next president will be - given my observation - unschooled as it is - that politically speaking, McCain isn't all that conservative; I just don't see McCain being able to really generate a buzz; that is, I expect his platform will be 80% gain-saying, and 20% of "poorly covered by the media" platform - and that may not be enough to move the conservative base to support him "just because he is a republican".
I hope I am really missing the boat here, but honestly, as an outside observer I see a younger, hipper, articulate media darling, someone who knows how to dress "conservative casual" and come across as a family man vs. a strikingly older (but not in a kind and grandfatherly way) guy in a very stiff suit. (When was the last time a guy in a stiff suit won the presidency?). Either way, I shouldn't mind some enlightened opinions on this. I don't count myself as politically astute, and as it isn't my nation, I don't really get how your politics work; it seems like most of your moral laws are created by a hand picked panel of judges who were never elected but were "appointed for life" by the political flavor of their day, that your constitution is subject to more interpretational woes than scripture - and I still don't know if congressmen are the same as senators.Labels: politics |
posted by Daniel @
10:56 AM
 
|
|
| 8 Comments: |
-
David, as the only other regular reader of my blog... I expect you to comment.
-
I'm not David.
But I will comment.
You are absolutely right in my unsubstantiated opinion.
And Dan, the Senators play in Ottawa. I don't think there are any Congressmen in the league.
-
I thought the Senators were sold to some franchise in the states?
-
I'm too depressed to comment.
Obama is the incarnation of Lucifer. I'd let Bill Clinton date my daughter before I'd give Obama the presidency.
McCain isn't much, but there is at least a chance that he would appoint good Supreme Court Justices; and that will always be the most important branch of government. They hold the heart of the Republic in their hands.
There is absolutely no question that Obama's nominees will be the greatest enemies of liberty that the court has ever seen.
We'll be South Canada in no time.
By the way, lots of stiff suits have been President -- but they had to actually campaign for the job.
-
It is depressing. I certainly hope you are wrong, you Canadian. I replied to your email - did you ever get it?
-
Rose I did get your reply - two of them in fact. I replied to the first one. Perhaps your email's spam filter caught it? That really does happen some time (I usually just delete everything the spam filter catches, but I remember once just as I was deleting all that one of the emails looked to be legit - I opened it, and sure enough it was from an elder in a church that I have preached at a few times. Every since then I am a little more careful, but I am also a little more cynical - not taking it for granted that everything I email automatically gets through. I can send my reply again -but it was not anything too eartch shattering - if your spam filter caught it, you were probably spared a few moments of the dulldrum and little more. :).
-
A very depressing election year. Obama is traveling around like he already is the president. Smug face too. Sigh.
-
The vast majority of my relatives in Arkansas are die hard democrats. It wouldn't matter if the candidate running was Satan - I mean literally: red tight pajamas, diamond shaped tail, pitchfork and horns. As long as he is a democrat, they would vote for him.
However, all of them are disgruntled about the whole thing with Hillary. They believe there was some conspiracy to have her snubbed, to fix the elections. None of them are voting for Obama.
The crazy reverend Wright was the clincher. All of them see him as a black man with a chip on his shoulder with a Muslim sounding name. For the first time in their lives, they will be voting for a Republican - McCain.
I venture a guess that this is probably the personal sentiments of pretty much everyone across middle America, even if they are outwardly saying they are voting for him, none of them will in the end. As much as I am uncomfortable saying this, it may be that racist rednecks will save America after all.
|
| |
| << Home |
| |
|
|
|
|
David, as the only other regular reader of my blog... I expect you to comment.