Sunday Sundries

I'll say it again – when it comes to our dealings with Israel, or, more precisely, their dealings with us, there are no accidents. Netanyahu did not get blindsided by the recent announcement, during Biden's visit, of new construction in East Jerusalem, and he was not upset yesterday because an unnamed underling pronounced Obama “the greatest disaster for Israel — a strategic disaster”. It's all part of... well, have you ever trained a dog with a choke chain? As threatening as it sounds, a choke chain doesn't really choke the dog... but it does get their attention. Or let's say, when the choke chain is applied, there's not much else they can do but cooperate until it's released. Well, when it comes to Obama & Co., Israel apparently has felt the need of late to apply the choke chain – although heaven knows why, since they are every bit as abject in their servitude of Israel as any previous administration, if not more so. Take an administration where a goodly number of its top-ranking members have dual U.S.-Israeli citizenship, and what else would you expect? And yet they keep acting as if Obama and Biden have wandered off the reservation – or show signs of intending to. But again, it's just a gentle reminder of who's in charge; it really doesn't mean anything, and no one should get upset... unless, of course, you find it upsetting that U.S. foreign policy is being run in the exclusive interests of another country.

And in the meantime, Obama makes a surprise visit to Afghanistan. Well, at least we were spared the large banner reading “Mission Accomplished”. But the fact that he is acting just like any other “war president” down through the ages doesn't surprise me a bit – although it has to be just the latest thorn in the side of the left-liberals who helped get him elected. But as I've said before, all the aggravations that come their way are richly deserved.

And what's this about Sarah Palin campaigning for John McCain? And here I thought there had been all kinds of awkwardness during their joint campaign back in 2008; I guess time has healed that wound. Apparently now the McCain people have developed a strange new respect for Palin, who didn't just slink off the political stage and disappear. On the contrary, she has become some sort of underdog hero – a kind of female political Rocky. But I daresay that at any given level of politics – and that includes states like Arizona – her fan base is more than overmatched by the people who consider her a dangerous airhead. So why McCain wants her “help” is beyond me, unless “sheer desperation” counts as a reason.

I have to admit it, one of my favorite newspaper features is “Steve Newman's Earthweek”, although it is a “bully pulpit” for global warming, since that's what virtually every phenomenon – weather and otherwise – he discusses is attributed to. Except volcanic eruptions – at least so far. In fact, it turns out that if the current volcanic activity in Iceland turns into “the big one” it might actually create conditions for climatic cooling in much of Europe. Which, I guess, would save the EU a lot of money 'cause they really need it to bail out places like Greece. So I guess it's time to say “Hooray for volcanoes”, or “Go, Eyjafjallajokull, go!” (Well, that's the name of the thing, I can't help it.)

It takes a lot to get a rise out of federal workers. I mean, I guess threatened pay cuts will do it, but otherwise... But now, it appears, there's a new strain of paranoia developing among our loyal public servants that they might actually be in physical danger from “right-wing hate groups”, talk radio hosts, tea partiers, and so on. This is based primarily on two recent incidents where lone nuts (I think that's actually the case this time) attacked a building in Texas and the Pentagon. This is being promoted – undoubtedly by the Obama administration – as the tip of the iceberg, and government employees are now, allegedly, in clear and present danger when all they are trying to do is serve the public to the best of their abilities (never mind what sort of limit that sets on things). So, basically, the fact that there was a debate at all – of any kind – about health-care reform is a direct reflection of a growing violent movement among reactionaries – a planned insurrection, in fact! Anyone see the totalitarian vibe in all this? Any debate, any difference of opinion, is now being treated as a terroristic threat, and poor government workers are suddenly finding themselves on the front lines – crouching behind the barricades as the anarchists mount an attack, with Sarah Palin wearing a liberty cap and Glenn Beck hefting cannon balls. And the tea partiers! Well! I mean, doesn't that automatically imply violence and disorder and... wow, look who's in favor of “law and order” all of a sudden! The same gang that was setting fire to everything in sight back in the 1960s and 1970s. Yeah... power really does strange things to people.

Turns out that “diversity” is not a 20th Century invention after all. Scientists are now suggesting that four species of humans lived at the same time, back in the Ice Age/woolly mammoth/caveman days. They are “modern humans”, Neanderthals, the Indonesian “Hobbits”, and the newest entry, a type from southern Siberia. Now – and I hope I'm not toying with heresy here – did you ever wonder, for example, exactly who Cain's wife was? Or who Seth's wife was? Or who the wives of their first few male descendants were? I mean, were they all marrying their sisters, or is there another possible explanation? When the Bible speaks of “man”, could it be speaking – in that context – in an actual biological sense, i.e. referring to “modern man” (or Cro-Magnon, assuming it's the same thing)? So Adam, Eve, Cain, Abel, Seth, et al could have been the first “men” but they might not have been the first “humans” -- if you want to try and harmonize Scripture with paleontology. And assuming that there was cross-fertility between “modern man” and the other types – and there is evidence that there could have been – is it too much of a stretch to propose that these early wives might have been drawn from human, but not “modern human” species – i.e. not from “man” as scripturally defined? Now, this leaves wide open the question of whether they were “men” in the spiritual sense – i.e. did they have souls? And if so, at what point did the “ensoulment” of the human race, or its predecessors, begin? And if not, how, then, are they honored for their essential contribution to the human race and to salvation history? Yeah – it's highly speculative... but this issue has been on my mind for quite a while, and every time this “human species” thing comes up I think about it again. Anyone out there have any ideas, theories, or comments?

I'll tell you the truth – I wouldn't trade these times for the dull, boring 1950s for all the tea in China. At least now the issues – the real issues – are out in the open. No one can any longer plead ignorance. The choices are laid out quite visibly and unambiguously. Of course, there is still the fear factor, which will keep most people running back into burning barns. But for others it's almost like a cafeteria of ideas. Even “conservatism” can no longer be thought of as a single, monolithic thing except by the highly delusional – there is political conservatism, AKA neoconservatism, AKA “conservatism in name only”, and then there is the much more pure item, which itself bifurcates into paleoconservatism and libertarianism. The situation may be confusing, but at least it's dynamic, whereas the situation for liberals is weary, tiresome, repetitive, and very old. All of the red blood in our time runs in conservative veins; liberals all look like Harry Reid.

In fact, you might call these times the "blogger full employment era" -- as evidenced by the fact that this is my 600th post.