And people should not be afraid to vote for the candidate they choose to. So far the Democrats seem to be railing at everyone, Bush and Nader voters alike. The fact that the irony is lost upon them shows us just dense they are.

“For decades, I used to hear ‘never again.’ I didn’t know then what I know now: that many meant ‘Never again, unless a Republican is President’ or ‘Never again, unless it would mean crediting a Republican with liberating millions of oppressed Iraqis’ or ‘Never again, unless it cost a couple of thousand lives in the US military.’”

“One of the more incredible stories in Manchester’s 2d Churchill biography is that even after war was declared in 1939, the British government was afraid to make Hitler angry by putting Churchill in the cabinet. Today, some people are more worried that the US is being too aggressive, rather than not aggressive enough.”

The Left and Left/Dems, the hard and the softer Left, continue with their vitriol and militant offensives and defensive strategems, for them it’s an all out political war, nothing less than that. David Horowitz’s latest, Unholy Alliance, Radical Islam and the American Left, is perhaps his magnum opus as it unremittingly and forensically dissects the oft-virulent anti-American and anti-Western allegiances formed, de facto and de jure, between the Left’s and the Islamicist’s initiatives. Ideologically our own contemporary Left represents a willfully self-blinded, head in the sand attitude at best; at worst they represent conscious, premeditated allegiances with fundamental and formidable aspects of the Islamicists’ strategies.

As Ms. Anonymous quotes Hillel, “If I am not for myself, who will be for me? But if I am only for myself, what am I? And if not now, when?” There’s nothing much more basic than that.

“Reading Hillel would probably help them a great deal in separating eisegesis from exegesis when making their pronouncements.”

Yes, there does need to be a seperation pertaining to eisegesis and exegesis. But that can only come when people are taught how to do critical studies of the scriptures themselves. Only then can they seperate commonly held notions and opinions from what the scriptures actually say and mean.

About the commentary: Well, we have a different way of doing it, but the end result is the same. We’ve always adopted a strict biblical hermeneutic, and ascribe to the principle that the best guide to “The Book” is the book itself, respecting relevant contexts. We don’t usually refer to 3rd party commentaries, and when questions do arise we tend to go back to the original languages (to the best of our abilities) and determine what it originally meant when written. And then we stick to that. Again, the end result is the same, for an honest, unbiased commentator will have done the same thing. By doing it our way, we assure ourselves that we are not unwittingly thrown off by a potentially biased commentator.

Hence, I find that I use the scriptures themselves (literal translations only), Strong’s Concordance, and the Interlinear Bible that is in my copy of PC Study Bible, and that’s about it. Just about everything else is someone’s opinion on it, and I try to avoid that.

“A very little knowledge can be a very, very dangerous thing in the pulpit.”

Roger That!

You have a good point, I’d say that is part of the reason they are so solidly red. From what I’ve seen of them (and that’s a lot), they aren’t hiding, they’ve always been prominent in the polls, they’ve always felt it their duty to vote their faith. So I rather suspect that the 4 mil missing figure may be rather inflated. Or, well, maybe not. That 4 mil figure is what percentage of the total number of Evangelical voters? Not all that much, there’s a lot of Evangelicals here in the Bible Belt. Meaning, that 4 mil figure implies that the percentage of Evangelicals that actually vote is already quite a bit higher than that of the voting populance at large. I wouldn’t expect a much higher percentage to vote this time around, hence I think you’ll still see some 4 or so mil not vote for whatever reason.

He’s working on his Bronx accent.

great post !

better check your car insurance for driving in a danger zone.

Now you return to the thrust of my statement concerning evangelicals, there are lots of flavors. One might devoutly hope that some of them would even read Hillel’s commentaries as noted in the essay that Judith posted to the Command Post. Reading Hillel would probably help them a great deal in separating eisegesis from exegesis when making their pronouncements. A very little knowledge can be a very, very dangerous thing in the pulpit.

Bruce W.,

“BC/04 (don’t tell)”

might work too.

Agreed. But there are many — especially in the “Evangelical” camp, who would differ. They typically cite the old Proverb (Pro 13:34): “Righteousness exalts a nation, but sin is a reproach to any people. (NKJV)” as authority to force morality. I say that the nation is only exalted when the people are voluntarily moral, and voluntarily refrain from sin. In other words, this still isn’t a license to legislate morality. Besides, it is OT, and that is supposed to be viewed as a “history lesson” for the Christian — interesting, insightful, but not authoritative. Those aren’t our marching orders.

Sorta like Americans studying British law. It gives great insight to our own. And was once applicable to us. But no longer.

Other than being a male, Ms. Anonymous and I share all the same demographics mentioned in her piece.

Just this morning, before visiting Roger’s site and reading the essay, I designed and printed for myself a bumper sticker for the “on the fence” liberals that reads:

“OK, so Vote for Bush,

and DON’T tell your Friends”

(the “DONT” should be underlined)

I reverse commute to NJ from New York City, driving through the infamously liberal Upper West Side twice each working day, so it will certainly get some pinpoint exposure to the target market. Anyone want a copy, let me know…and I’ll gladly take suggestions for tweaks or reformulations of the message.

Bruce

(P.S. This will be my very first political bumper sticker. If New York goes “red” by a handful of votes, what do I win?)