Culture War


Culture War08 Jun 2007 12:18 pm

Hahahahahahahaha! Paris Hilton went screaming and crying out of an L.A. courtroom today, on her way back to jail:

LOS ANGELES (AP) — Paris Hilton was taken from a courtroom screaming and crying Friday seconds after a judge ordered her returned to jail to serve out her entire 45-day sentence for a parole violation in a reckless driving case.

“It’s not right!” shouted the weeping Hilton. “Mom!” she called out to her mother in the audience.

She had been brought to court in sheriff’s custody today for a court hearing on her early release from jail after back-and-forth decisions on whether she could participate by telephone from her home.

Hilarious…read the full article from the Associated Press…

Culture War07 Jun 2007 02:11 pm

I usually don’t really care about dumb Paris Hilton or her craziness, but this just down right pissed me off:

Due to an undisclosed “medical condition,” Paris Hilton has been reassigned from jail to her home, where she will wear an electronic monitoring device.

“She was not released, she was reassigned,” Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Dept. spokesperson Steve Whitmore said at a press conference Thursday.

Reassigned my butt. So now instead of paying for her crimes, she can now sit in a comfortable mansion being tended to with all the luxuries money can buy. To me, this is not only absurd, but offensive. It PISSES me off that those with money can just buy their freedom. I usually don’t have a problem with rich people, but this just makes me mad. What the hell has the justice system come to in this country?

Everybody knows a regular, middle class person would have to do the time, or at least most of it. Hell, Paris only stayed in jail for five days. What a crock.

2008 Election& Culture War29 May 2007 04:31 pm

So Hillary Clinton finally came out and admitted she’d rather have a country based on socialism, instead of one based on personal responsibility:

Presidential hopeful Hillary Rodham Clinton outlined a broad economic vision Tuesday, saying it’s time to replace an “on your own” society with one based on shared responsibility and prosperity.

I never knew it was my responsibility to provide for the welfare of others, especially in some socialist wealth distribution scheme. I don’t think the Constitution of the United States says anything about distributing the wealth of some for the “welfare” of others in terms of government programs and nanny-state handouts.

“There is no greater force for economic growth than free markets. But markets work best with rules that promote our values, protect our workers and give all people a chance to succeed,” she said. “Fairness doesn’t just happen. It requires the right government policies.”

So it’s the government’s responsibility to create more red tape and regulation for business? I don’t think so. History has shown that the free market works for the betterment of society if left to fend for itself; that the interest of the one will necessarily work for the interest of the whole. It’s time to get the government out of the market, to free business from the red tape and absurd regulations that keep the government in our lives. The market works best when people are allowed to run things - not government officials who want more and more of the people’s freedoms and money for control of an increasingly dependent populace.

Read the whole thing…

Everyone should be reminded of this Hillary quote from 2004:

“We’re saying that for America to get back on track, we’re probably going to cut that short and not give it to you. We’re going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good.”

Her statements do not deny what conservatives have known for a long time; Hillary Clinton wants socialism in this country. If elected President, I believe she will stop at nothing to transform this country into something resembling the typical European economy.

Culture War24 May 2007 12:43 pm

Linkin Park is one of my favorite bands. Recently, the group came out with their new album, “Minutes to Midnight.” The album includes some great songs and a different style than I’m used to. I was especially intrigued by the album’s number seven song, called “Hands Held High.” If anyone has ever heard this song or read the lyrics, you’d find that this song is basically blasting the Bush Administration about the Iraq War. More specifically, the lyrics promote the idea that the Iraq War is a poor man’s war; that it’s only the poor who fight and die for the rich elites:

Cause I’m sick of being treated like I had before
Like the stupid standing for what I’m standing for

Like this war’s really just a different brand of war
Like it doesn’t cater the rich and abandon poor

Like they understand you in the back of the jet
When you can’t put gas in your tank

These fuckers are laughing the way to the bank and cashing the check
Asking you to have the passion and have some respect

For a leader so nervous in an obvious way
Stuttering and mumbling for nightly news to replay

And the rest of the world watching at the end of the day
In their living room laughing like “what did he say?”

-Snip-

It’s ironic at times like this you pray
But a bomb blew up the mosque yesterday

There’s bombs in the buses, bikes, roads
Inside your market, your shops, your clothes

My dad he’s got a lot of fear I know
But enough pride inside not to let that show

My brother had a book he would hold with pride
A little red cover with a broken spine

On the back, he hand wrote a quote inside
When the rich wage war it’s the poor who die

Meanwhile, the leader just talks away
Stuttering and mumbling for nightly news to replay

As one who came from a well-to-do middle class family and has actually been deployed to Iraq, I say the lyrics and the idea behind the lyrics in this song are total crap and the artist has no clue what he’s talking about. As an Air Force member, I continue to serve with people from all walks of life, and the idea that the Iraq War is a poor man’s fight is simply inaccurate and undeniably flawed. Actually, it’s more or less insulting, the idea that somehow all my brothers-in-arms are all poor boys dying for a worthless cause. This is not a poor man’s war with the “rich” somehow cashing in on the death’s of American soldiers.

Recently, the Heritage Foundation actually put out a study that disproves that American military forces are disproportionately poor:

This paper reviews the demographic status of the all-volunteer military and refutes the claim that enlisted troops are underprivileged and come from underprivileged areas. In terms of education, household income, race, and home origin, the troops are more similar than dissimilar to the gen­eral population.

Put simply, the current makeup of the all-vol­untary military looks like America. Where they are different, the data show that the average sol­dier is slightly better educated and comes from a slightly wealthier, more rural area. We found that the military (and Army specifically) included a higher proportion of blacks and lower propor­tions of other minorities but a proportionate num­ber of whites. More important, we found that recruiting was not drawing disproportionately from racially concentrated areas.

Read the whole thing…

Culture War14 May 2007 04:12 pm

In today’s modern society, we all hear about the clashes in Kansas and elsewhere regarding the ongoing battle between evolution and creationism. Unfortunately, those on any one side often seem unable to compromise when it comes to answering the question about where humanity came from or how the universe actually began - it’s always either evolution or creationism, nothing else. To many, evolution is not compatible with creationism, nor is creationism compatible with evolution. Personally, I wonder, why not…why aren’t these beliefs compatible? Why can’t evolution be a natural process of God’s creation? Why can’t evolution be just another law of nature God placed into existence when he created the world? Why would God limit the ability of his creatures to adapt and change depending on their environments or other genetic factors?

I found a post on Wizbang that addresses this question and I totally agree with its author:

I’ve always been a believer in science. It doesn’t always come up with the answers right away, but it has a consistent record of finding the right answers — eventually — that no other approach comes close to. It’s tangible, it’s logical (if often counterintuitive), and it’s verifiable.

Some have taken science to be their substitute for religion. They sink all their faith and belief in science, and hold the devout (and their beliefs) in contempt. It’s mysticism, it’s self-delusion, it’s fantasy.

On the other side, there are those to whom their faith is all they need. Scientists are godless heretics, meddling in matters Man was not to trifle with and playing God.

Then there’s the middle, where the vast majority of Americans live.

At its core, I don’t think there is anything fundamentally incompatible with Christianity and science, between the Bible and natural history. All it takes is a little application of common sense and logic.

-Snip-

Science, to the devout, is not about disproving God or replacing Him. It’s about seeing how He did what He did, discovering the laws and rules that He set down and then followed. It’s about learning the laws of God that He didn’t spell out in the Bible, but had it written down by Newton and Einstein and Edison and Galileo and Copernicus and Brahe and Tesla and Watson and Crick and Hawking and Ptolemy and Archimedes and uncounted other seekers of truth.

But back to the original point: is there anything heretical in believing in evolution? No. It, like pretty much every other scientific theory or principle, is simply a study of how God works, learning the rules that He set up for His creation. Or it’s simply the way things developed, because it was the most efficient way.

Personally, I believe that evolution or simple adaptation (genetic or environmental) is just another natural law God put into place for the governance of nature and the sustainment of his creation. But that’s not the point. The point is that people should educate themselves and not limit themselves when it comes to exploring our origin. I think people have forgotten that God has put into place universal laws that are easily confirmed through scientific exploration. These laws at one time, were thought of as blasphemy and simply discarded, like when it was first discovered that Earth actually revolved around the Sun. We must not limit ourselves to “popular” understandings, but decide and interpret the data for ourselves and decide for ourselves what the truth is. Frankly, we’ll never know where we came from until we die. But until then, we can always try to understand our creator and the laws he put forth for the governance of his creation.

*Hat tip to Wizbang

2008 Election& Culture War14 May 2007 09:36 am

These videos are enough to get people thinking about two GOP front-runners, Mitt Romney and Rudy Giuliani.

Mitt Romney

Rudy Giuliani


For conservatives, these views are troubling. If these two GOP front-runners have more in common with Democrats than Republicans when it comes to social issues, then the GOP is in trouble in 2008 when it comes to restoring traditional conservatism to Washington.

Culture War14 Jan 2007 10:53 am

While I was trolling around the blogosphere today, I came across an interesting article on Townhall.com. In the article, author Kevin McCullough describes where the “Christian Left” has gone wrong. I’ve included an excerpt that I think explains the entire “Christian Left” mindset:

All three men shun the thought of biblically based Christians from standing firm against the creeping peril of evil in our culture. “Be more tolerant,” they would advise. “Reach out with love and understanding, not judgment and division.”

The ‘Christian Left’ is rife with such belief.

Unity, forgiveness, mercy, and constant appeasement are to be more highly favored than righteousness, holiness, faithfulness, and obedience.

The so-called “Christian Left” obviously do not have a handle on the very fabric of Christianity or everything Christ stood for while on earth. There is a HUGE difference between tolerance of personal diversity and allowing relativism to be the standard for human morality in general.

The “Christian Left” supposedly teaches to be tolerant of others and love each other. However, even non-believers can love and be non-judgemental. I wonder if those on the left have read what Jesus actually said about division in Matthew 10:34 - 36:

Do not think that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I have not come to bring peace but a sword. For I have come to set a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law, and a man’s enemies will be the members of his household.

John the Baptist further explains that Jesus will divide those who have truly followed him and believed in him from those who have rejected him (Matthew 3:12):

His winnowing fork is in his hand, and he will clear his threshing floor, gathering his wheat into the barn and burning up the chaff with unquenchable fire.

Jesus further gave some advice to his disciples in Matthew 7:13:

Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it.

The principle of tolerance and allowing unmoral behaviors happen unquestioned are completely different things and should be treated as such. Jesus Christ loves all of us, but I really doubt he doesn’t care about moral relativism. Afterall, he has promised to judge each and every one of us after death. I wish the “Christian Left” could understand this. For them however, even the principle of right and wrong is, unfortunately, irrelevent.

Read more: Jesus and Politics