The Bosque Boys

Things are so bad for Hillary Clinton right now, even NPR is taking cheap shots.

NPR correspondent David Greene reported yesterday that the Clinton entourage recently descended upon an Iowa restaurant, sucked a heart-wrenching story out of a working-mother waitresses, quickly added it to Hillary's stump speech, and then "stiffed" the waitress.

"No Tip!"

The story was picked up everywhere, and even made it to the top of the Drudge Report (an unusual occurrence for an NPR story, to say the least).

But today David Greene is craw-fishing. Maybe there was a tip. The Clinton Campaign says there was definitely a tip--and a big one, $100. Already Team Clinton has proven some inaccuracies in the NPR story. They have credit card receipts and eyewitnesses who remember a big tip for the entire staff. The plot thickens, and this morning, on air, David Greene admits his lack of due diligence. Maybe he should have done a bit more investigating, he admits. Interesting.

An Aside: Last March I offered a post commenting on NPR coverage of a George Bush event, which began:

"Today, however, Morning Edition's David Greene orchestrated a gratuitously misleading characterization of the President's press conference yesterday that deserves notice."

I went on to detail several noteworthy inaccuracies and disingenuous representations of what transpired. I was the only one, evidently, who pushed back on that story.

My full post here.

One lesson from all this: David Greene seems a bit sloppy in his zeal for a good story.

Another lesson: you can take a shot at the Bushies and get a good laugh out of it without much fear of reprisal. Not so for the Clintons. If you go into battle against Hillary and company, you better be loaded for bear and well-girded.

The Clintons push back.

We Americans are blessed that we inherit the hard-won liberties of the Mother Country. For the story of a step on that road, see this post from Brits At Their Best. Anselm's life and work alone demonstrate that the "Dark Ages" are a misnomer.

Of course, no people's saga is spotless. Ask Wales, Scotland, and especially Ireland about their history with the English. But in terms of our inheritance, we benefit from what our Founding Fathers called their Rights As Englishmen.

In 1962, Richard Nixon organized his autobiography around Six Crises, understanding his life up to that point as the product of six trials during his public life that defined him as a person. Nixon's basic assertion was absolutely right to the extent that all successful public figures must overcome the "slings and arrows of outrageous fortune" (as well the slings and arrows that are justly deserved). This is especially true of American presidents, who must run a political marathon, survive the gauntlet of public inspection, the vagaries of press coverage, and withstand the temptations of accumulated power and celebrity.

A Time of Crisis for Hillary Clinton. For the first time in a long time, Mrs. Clinton finds herself under intense scrutiny from her opponents and the mainstream media. Are they "piling on"? Of course. Is it fair? This is a query unworthy of an answer; it is merely what it is. Welcome to the race to be president of the United States, Mrs. Clinton.

A much more pertinent side question: what took so long for genuine media scrutiny?

For some reason, Hillary Clinton enjoyed extraordinarily positive press coverage for the last eight years. Why? I have no satisfying explanation. Had the left-leaning mainstream media been cultivating her and protecting her as their favored candidate? Not likely. This hypothesis is deliciously inviting, but it seems far too facile and "breathtakingly" conspiratorial. Perhaps the media felt genuine sympathy for the famously humiliated wife of the most celebrated philandering husband in all of American history? Or perhaps the media believed that they went too far during impeachment, and they owed the Clintons a "pay-back call" or two. Maybe. The Beltway press corps is not completely amoral; that is, they conform to their own set of ethics and an esoteric code of fairness. No matter, the facts are more important than the explanation. The undeniable truth is that Mrs. Clinton glided above the fray for a long time.

However, the gravy train now appears to be over--or, at the very least, on hiatus. For most of the day, Matt Drudge featured Hillary stories at the top of the page. Unusual? Not in itself, but, if you followed the links, the reporting agencies were extraordinary (no FOX News, no Washington Times, and no Dick Morris columns). From NPR to Ron Fournier to ABC News, the mainstream media was (and is) in hot pursuit, smelling blood, and moving in for the kill. This qualifies as a full-fledged media feeding frenzy.

An aside: Last week, as I listened to a Sean Hannity tirade on the media, I considered a post entitled: "Who are they and what do they want?" For all those who equate the mainstream press with the Clinton News Networks, this week has been very confusing.

However, there is precedent for this hostile coverage of the Clintons. Think early 1998. In fact, things have not looked this bad for the Clintons since Sam Donaldson, on This Week, predicted Bill was finished as president back in January of that year. Suggesting that the President might resign by the end of the week, Donaldson led a stampede of reporters breathlessly anticipating the complete disintegration of the Clinton presidency as a result of the Monica Lewinsky revelation.

What happened? The Clintons dug in and stone-walled. Defying all the conventional wisdom that cover-ups (rather than misdeeds) kill administrations, the Clintons covered up, shut up, and put 'em up. Miraculously, they fought their way out of an extraordinarily desperate situation. The mainstream media relented. Would the Washington press corps have given up so easily, if they had George Bush or Ronald Reagan in similar circumstances? Probably not. But that is irrelevant. What matters for our discussion here: Team Clinton weathered the storm.

Will Hillary and company fight their way out of this crisis? For a long time, I have referred to the Senator from New York as Clinton-44. Why? She is tough. She is fearless. And she has assembled the best political talent available. They are veterans. They have been to "Hell and Back." Nobody in the Clinton camp is likely to panic over bad press or a bad week. They have been through much worse and survived.

An irony. One great advantage the Clinton machine had during impeachment was the silence of Bill Clinton. He went underground and let his special forces cut throats and blow bridges in the dead of night. In the most counter-intuitive, disciplined act of his lifetime, the President stayed mum for nearly a year. No press conferences. No public comment outside of heavily scripted and insulated state events. No wandering through McDonalds. Absolutely no access.

Evidently, Bill doesn't remember that part of his triumph. In his mind's eye, I am almost certain that he recalls himself as a silver-tongued devil with a mischievous smile who charmed his way out of a tough spot. This is unfortunate for Hillary. Who caused the most problems for Hillary Clinton in the aftermath of a poor performance in last week's debate? Bill Clinton. We are tired of the red-faced finger-wagging. We are tired of Clinton's moralizing and seeming ignorance of his own political history and penchant for skullduggery. We are tired of his ridiculous accusations.

Bill is much more effective as myth. Let him strut and smile and wink--but the truth is that the charming bad boy of politics is not nearly as rakishly seductive as we remember. The stem-winding political sorcerer is not nearly as articulate or mesmerizing as advertised.

What to do? Tell Bill to shush (although he may be more effective with the Democratic base than I think). Dig in. Hand the ball to the Clinton KGB. Stay on message. Keep raking in that cash (money covers a multitude of political sins). Keep on working out (Mrs. Clinton has never looked better--fodder for another post--but very telling). Keep on smiling, shaking hands, and acting like you are president.

Can Hillary survive this inevitable time of troubles?

Nobody Knows Anything--but time will tell.

In an earlier post, I explained one reason I am not a Democrat. "When it comes to Domestic Policy, the core value of the Democratic Party is simple to state, simple to understand, and has predictible policy implications. In a nutshell, the Democratic Party core value is: The Federal Government Is Responsible for the Well-Being of American Citizens." This Core Value, and the policies that result from it, create dependent instead of independent individuals, take responsibilities from families and communities, and starve voluntary organizations of money because of high taxes, and render both families and voluntary societies without significant purpose.

Another reason I am not a Democrat has to do with the core assumptions on Foreign Policy by the party. In a nutshell, the Democratic Party believes that world problems usually are the fault of America, a basically evil country, and the solution to conflict in the world is more international organization.

Regarding the first assumption. I readily admit that we have, and do, cause problems in the world. Our culture does it, spreading immorality and materialism through film and television. Our economic policies do it, market capitalism tending to destroy small farmers and village life. And our political policies have done it, for example supporting tyrants when we feared communism. But, automatically assuming that any world problem is somehow our fault is simplistic and egoistic. We are incapable of influencing everything in the world, for bad or good. And, other nations and peoples can be forces for change in their own right, both good and bad. In addition, the assumption that America is basically an evil country and a force simply for evil is simplistic thinking, reducing everything to black and white. Nations are grey, usually. And nations are not the same shade of grey. In comparative terms, we have done more good than most nations: feeding the hungry, preserving freedom, maintaining some semblence of law and order. (The carnage in the Balkans stopped, for example, only when we acted. When we have refused to act, as in Rwanda or Darfur, the carnage continued/es.)

Regarding the second assumption. International organizations usually cannot accomplish squat (re: the UN) unless we take a leading role, including military force or its threat. And, as I argued in a previous post, most world governments are not legitimate expressions of the will of their people. Why should we regard them as having the same moral status as a freely elected government? International organizations, for example the EU or the UN, tend toward rule by unelected burearcrats, the will of the people be damned. We did not fight a revolution to give up our liberty to international bureaucracies.

Wednesday night little Gardner-Webb college beat the winningest Division 1 basketball program in history, Kentucky. In Rupp Arena. By a wide margin. On paper it never should have happened, but it did. Story here.

In honor of this event, I repeat a post from early in the life of this blog: Life Is Unpredictable.

A couple of weeks ago I had to be out and about in my car for a few evenings. Listening to a geezer rock station I heard a nationally syndicated program hosted by Alice Cooper. What a trip! Rock music, anecdotes, Bible lessons, and occasional libertarian/conservative political commentary. In the 1970s who could have imagined Alice Cooper on the radio explaining the context of a New Testament story? Or warning against the dangers of excessive drinking? Life is totally unpredictable.

For much of my life, from childhood until about fifteen years ago, I had a recurring dream: I was standing in the back yard of my paternal grandparents. I looked to the southwest and saw the top of a nuclear mushroom cloud (the direction of Kansas City), then I looked to the southeast and saw the top of another mushroom cloud (in the direction of St. Louis). I assumed, given the talk of those days, and later given my own analysis of the world's political situation, that nuclear war between the U.S. and the U.S.S.R. was inevitable. (Boy did I feel that in the early 80s). I also recall, growing up in the 60s, having the feeling that America was doomed by enemies without, and by problems within. The same thoughts recurred in the late 70s with oil shortages, strong inflation, and the hostages in Iran. But, the U.S.S.R. is no more, the United States is still here, and my premonitions/predictions did not come to pass. The future is unpredictable.

For me this unpredictability gives me hope. Traditionally Christianity has regarded Despair (not to be equated with depression) as a sin. Despair is the rejection of hope. It is a sin because it is a form of pride, an assumption of omniscience. The person who chooses to despair assumes that he/she knows all the facts of the present, and knows what will happen in the future. We never know enough to declare that life is hopeless.

From the Waco Trib:

"Hank Thompson, Waco native, died Tuesday of lung cancer at his Keller home; he was 82. Thompson shaped country music in the 1950s and 1960s with his “honky tonk swing,” a danceable sound that made his Brazos Valley Boys the No. 1 country music band from 1953 to 1965. He pioneered much that is standard in the music industry, from lighting and sound systems to stereo recording, live albums and Las Vegas concerts."

"Thompson’s death came only days after spokesman…had announced the country star was retiring after more than 60 years as a performer. Fittingly for some Waco friends, his last public performance came Oct. 8 at the Heart O’ Texas Fair & Rodeo, a day proclaimed as Hank Thompson Day by Gov. Rick Perry and Waco Mayor Virginia DuPuy."

I am linking Carl Hoover's excellent obituary here--but I am also adding the tribute in full under the "read more" section, as the Trib does not permanently archive their stories on the internet.

Country Music Hall of Fame link here.

Via YouTube, Thompson's first hit, "Whoa Sailor," and a retrospective montage to the tune of "Six Pack to Go."

Perhaps his most famous lyric (from the "Wild Side of Life") and one that embodies a dominant motif for a generation of country music artists and fans:

I didn't know God made honky tonk angels
I might have known you'd never make a wife
You gave up the only one that ever loved you
And went back to the wild side of life

The glamour of the gay night life has lured you
To the places where the wine and liquor flows
Where you wait to be anybody's baby
And forget the truest love you'll ever know

Perhaps the quintessential "somebody done somebody wrong song."

From the Bosque Boys: Hats off to the leader of the Brazos Valley Boys. Rest in Peace.

For the Trib article in its entirety:

» Read More

As posted here before, the Episcopal church has alienated much of the Anglican Church by actions supporting same-sex practice. The Episcopal Church (the U.S. branch of Anglicanism) essentially gave the rasberry to the call for repentance issued by the Primates of the Global South. These Third-World national Anglican leaders had demanded The Episcopal Church repent by September 30.

Now, at a recent meeting, the Global South Primates have issued another communique, dated October 30. Here are some interesting excerpts:

3. Since the colonial past, no consolidation of the essence of communion has been made on the part of the Mother Church and of the churches in the West. What is at stake is the very nature of Anglicanism – not just about sexuality but also about the nature of Christ, the truth of the Gospel and the authority of the Bible. We reject the religion of accommodation and cultural conformity that offers neither transforming power nor eternal hope.

6. It is clear to us that the House of Bishops of The Episcopal Church (TEC) has not given an unequivocal response to the requests of the Primates at Dar es Salaam. Therefore we affirm the conclusion that the Council of Anglican Provinces in Africa (CAPA) has reached in the communiqué of their meeting in Mauritius in October 2007 that “a change in direction from our current trajectory is urgently needed” because “we want unity but not unity at any expense”.

Can these Anglican Primates save the U.S. Episcopal Church from itself. I am not optimistic.

When Senator Grassley thinks he smells something rotten, there probably is a problem. Grassley is not motivated by any anti-religious bias, and has not been a grand-standing publicity seeker. He currently is leading an investigation into the finances of several televangelists.

Story on Joyce Meyers from the St. Louis Post-Dispatch. I think my favorite detail is the marble-topped commode.

This story depends on the work of the Post-Dispatch, but also carries the list of other evangelists being investigated. These are

Creflo and Taffi Dollar of College Park, Ga., whose "Changing Your World" broadcasts are seen in 150 countries, owns two Rolls-Royces, private jets, a mansion in Atlanta and a $2.5 million apartment in Manhattan.

-Benny Hinn of Grapevine, Texas, whose daily television program, "This is Your Day!" is seen in more than 100 countries.

-Eddie Long of Lithonia, Ga., who preaches anti-gay themes and says God blesses people financially as well as spiritually.

-Kenneth and Gloria Copeland of Newark, Texas. He is a practitioner of the Word of Faith movement which believes that faith will reward people spiritually and financially.

-Randy and Paula White of Tampa, Fla., who founded the Without Walls International Church, and listed as their possessions a $1.9 million jet and $3.5 million condominium in New York. In August, they announced their divorce.
Some days I despair of American Protestantism. One problem, while Protestants traditionally have criticized Roman Catholicism as "man-centered" because of the primacy of the pope, they have been quick to elevate leaders into celebrity status with no oversight. Look at the newspaper ads this Saturday for churches in your community. Notice that the pictures of the pastor appear in the Protestant ads, not the Roman Catholic, or Orthodox.

Pat Robertson has endorsed Rudy Giuliani for president. Here is the transcript of Robertson's statement, from Rudy's website. Neither the 700 Club website, nor Pat Robertson's website have statements yet.

This should help Rudy, and may prevent a massive defection of social conservatives from the Republican Party in a year.

Back in June, when Lionsgate Films released Michael Moore's Sicko, I predicted an "anemic performance." I suppose "anemic" is relative. Fact: Sicko has grossed $24,540,079, which makes it the third highest grossing documentary of all time. It is just ahead of An Inconvenient Truth and tens of millions behind March of the Penguins and Moore's own Fahrenheit 9/11. On the other hand, Sicko did not take the nation by storm like the other three fore-mentioned films.

This week, Sicko hits the DVD racks. We'll see what happens next. Here is my original non-review from June:

"At least one source is already calling the early box office for Sicko "healthy" ($1.3 million in 441 theaters on Friday).

“An aside: these numbers are approximately five-times weaker than the opening for Fahrenheit 9/11--but still very strong for a documentary.

“Considering the pre-opening publicity for the film, which began in earnest a month ago, the high profile of the filmmaker, and the plethora of positive reviews, no one should be surprised at the initial interest in Michael Moore's latest offering.

“Having said that, my hunch is, in the end, Sicko will fall well short of expectations (however, even if my prediction comes to pass and the picture goes South, don't hold your breath for much critical press coverage).

“The feature-length documentary is receiving a big push from the studio and a first-class ride from the film-reviewing fraternity, many of whom are big fans of Michael Moore's politics and like-minded in their basic assumptions about America, big business and evil Republicans.

“However, my prediction is that Sicko will not have legs. Once the usual suspects see the film (and go back and watch it again a few times for the team), who else is really going to care about this film?

“In general, American filmgoers are not fans of the documentary genre. In terms of style, if you have seen one Michael Moore film, you have seen them all. Why would Joe Sixpack and family spend thirty-some dollars to go see a serially angry and malcontented demagogue deliver a heavy-handed and patronizing harangue dripping with sarcasm and a depressingly redundant deep-seated cynicism?

“In the bluntest terms, it is unlikely that the work will ever appeal to anyone other than the axis of American liberalism (Hollywood, the mainstream media and academia). One great irony is that the biggest fans of this film will be an elite echelon of Americans who actually enjoy the best health care in the world. Even more ironic, there are actually very few of these ostensibly compassionate humanitarians who will be willing to give up their own premium personal care to stand in line in some national health system so that the "unfortunate" might have more access. In the most practical sense, they are as much against "leveling" as William F. Buckley.

“In the end, the hype around Sicko will prove to be another self-indulgent exercise of the American Left. Without seeing the picture, I can already tell you that it is a frontrunner for an Academy Award. Barring a late entry from Al Gore, Michael Moore should have a clear path to another statuette. On the other hand, Moore, who too often listens to his own press and the retinue of fools who encourage his antics, is still not a major player in American politics. He is a major player in Hollywood--but he carries very little weight (no pun intended) in fly-over country.”

Orignal post here.