Huckabee’s Cross: A Vision Of Delusion
By: Lee Kent Hempfling
On ABC’s ‘The View’, debating the Huckabee ‘cross’ commercial (where wishing a Merry Christmas because it is Jesus’ birthday, has erupted into a visual confusion), Joy Behar summed the whole thing up with this: “Fine! But let’s just call it what it is. If it looks like a duck, and it quacks like a duck, it’s a duck. It’s an appeal to the Christian right base of the Republican party. The end. That’s it.”
That would be a nice thing to say if it was true. Apparently Behar doesn’t know a duck.
If you look at the commercial, the one liberals are screaming ‘cross’ about, you’ll notice one thing they have not noticed. There is no cross in the video. How can I tell?
A cross looks like a lower case ‘t’ (without the sweeping tail), while the thing that shines white behind Mike Huckabee, (besides being a book shelf) is a ‘plus’ sign. It looks like ‘+’, not ‘t’. So how could a plus be turned into a cross?
Better yet, how could a real cross symbol be completely ignored by ‘The View’? John McCain’s Christmas ad depicts the story of one of his Christmas’ as a prisoner of war. In it, he speaks about a Vietnamese jailer who drew a cross for him on the ground. And gasp: the video shows a real cross symbol being drawn, right there on the screen. But ‘The View’ doesn’t go for the throat on that one. Why not? It really is a cross. There is nothing to impose. Nothing to interpret.
Huckabee’s ad, on the other hand, presents a ‘white’ bookshelf, nicely lit, with Christmas ornaments in a corner of one cubby that is visually impossible to change in shape, but that does not matter to liberal thinking.
Liberals do not ‘see’ what is, they ‘see’ what should be, to match their own realities. A shape that is ‘white’, that is associated with a ‘preacher’, and that is shown while the dreaded ‘Christmas’ discussion includes the name ‘Jesus’ results in that thing that represents Jesus and the religious Christmas. That thing and the Soul Christmas is all about are to be driven from society by secular non-belief. That ‘thing’ just HAS to be a cross.
Oh, if it were so. If you actually look at the Huckabee ad you will see a near equidistance between the center joint of that ‘thing’. A cross is more like the outstretched arms of a person standing upright, with a short head and neck above the arms and a long standing pole beneath it. The sheer fact that anyone sees a ‘cross’ in that commercial tells only of what the observer assumes, not of what is being observed. It is a bookshelf and if it has to be rendered into a shape that is something else, it is a ‘+’, not a ‘t’.
When I met Huckabee in his office in Little Rock, some years ago, to discuss a scientific issue I was not aware he was an ordained preacher. Never once in the discussion could it have been discerned. In the Christmas ad, it cannot be discerned either. If you did not know that he was a preacher, you could not conjure it up from what he said, or from what the ad looks like.
Speaking of delusionist characters: Will Thomas at Huffington Post asked Ron Paul about the ad. Paul said, “It reminds me of what Sinclair Lewis once said. He says, ‘when fascism comes to this country, it will be wrapped in the flag, carrying a cross.’ Now I don’t know whether that’s a fair assessment or not, but you wonder about using a cross, like he is the only Christian or implying that subtly. So, I don’t think I would ever use anything like that.” Neither did Huckabee. Paul had invoked Lewis on Fox News earlier.
Sinclair Lewis also said, “It is, I think, an error to believe that there is any need of religion to make life seem worth living,” as quoted by Will Durant in On the Meaning of Life (1932).
The word ‘fascism’ is tossed around a lot these days, mostly by emotionally dominant, fear-controlled liberal apologists with a need to find the boogeyman responsible for anything they can’t accept personal responsibility for. ‘Fascism’ means “a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition,” (according to Webster.) It is the inductive thinker’s greatest crutch.
Liberals live inductively. The fringe of the Democratic party, grown up in age only; to become the progressive movement having started in the 60′s, is mostly based on inductive reasoning. Inductive reasoning is not logical. Having seen only red cars, a person determines all cars are red. There is no logic in that at all. As with Astrology, the weak accept a single occurrence of accuracy as proof of the movement’s validity. The next car the person sees turns out to be red, convinces the person all cars are indeed red. The next horoscope that turns out to be accurate defines Astrology as accurate. The next white plus sign the person sees behind a preacher convinces the person the thing is really a cross and all sorts of inductive absurdity follows.
There was a time when the lunatic fringe actually had their place in the fringe. They smoked their weed, listened to rock music, hated everything remotely resembling authority, didn’t trust anyone over 30 years of age, and tuned out before they dropped out. That was 1969. At the time, the big deal for peace-niks was embracing the euphoric utopia of socialism while burning their draft cards, bras, and brains. Then, a giant group hug happened in a rain drenched, farm field where rules were ignored, order was useless and the media was captivated with the ‘hippies’ at Woodstock.
Here we are, 38 years later. Those hippies are holding public office, running 527′s and trying to take over the country without anyone knowing about it. They now trust over 30′s, are still convinced socialism is not the mark it has worn through history, they believe tuning in, requires taking over, they carry i-pods to remember the ‘good ol days’, work the ‘Internet’ for all it can be, have completely accepted the notion that nothing goes on in the country without their side being right, and most of all, they are now smack in the middle of the nation’s conversation: the fringe, having grown old without ever growing up.
The single most important thing they have not changed is their loyalty. It has always been to ‘self’. There is no reason in logic at all for a person to refuse to adhere to a society’s norms unless it is for ‘self’. Being all about ‘self’, the old hippies have convinced themselves that Patriotism is about the self, complaining about the country and declaring the thought of a greater whole to be facist. They have convinced themselves that they are a majority of the nation. They have convinced themselves no one is the wiser. They are wrong.
They have always been wrong. But to hear them type today, they were always right. HuffingtonPost.Com is one such pathetic play ground of the fringe. Arianna Huffington leads the pack: In “Midnight in America: the Mainstreaming of the GOP’s Lunatic Fringe” published 10/23/07 she says; “…the right wing lunatics are running the Republican asylum. These days, the only thing that separates the RNC and Rush Limbaugh is a prescription for OxyContin.” A statement from the patient. There is never a mentally ill person who knows they are, and they almost always say the doctors and staff are nuts. Huffington is just a poster child for alternative reality. Democrats pimp a child to pass their socialized medicine back-door bill and then cry foul when deductively logical thinking persons question their doing so, they refuse to rebuke a lunatic congressman for personally attacking the President, then blame Republicans for questioning why. Anything that remotely disagrees with them, is not addressed, it is inductively connected to something else. Strawmen argue strawmen in search for liberal hearts. The most aggretious example of hippy politics (they now call themselves Progressives) is in the way they use and abuse people to reach their own political end.
America’s African heritige citizens were slaves in the 1700′s & 1800′s by force. They broke out of the force through a Republican President’s pen. In the 1900′s they were slaves by rejection. They broke out of the rejection through the voices of strong and fearless leaders and Republican congress. In the 2000′s they are slaves by deception. The N.A.A.C.P. is no friend of blacks. It uses them to push a socialist agenda. Being used is what people are when the elite are in control.
The brave warriors of America’s military are a prime example. Back when Woodstock was the banner of the progressives, the soldier was reviled, hated and spit-upon. The warrior was rejected for having fought in Viet-Nam. The war then was brought to a close through the rejection of the soldiers by the militant socialists with long hair and loud voices, and the cowardice of politicians. Today, those progressives have not changed their goals one bit, but they have changed their method. Instead of demonizing the individual soldier, they claim to support the individual soldier, and demonize the Commander in Chief. There is no difference in the real world.
Just as the A.C.L.U. (American Civil Liberties Union) is named to be what it is not, the deception is easy to see by knowing the motive.
A people that views its nation as something greater than the sum of its parts is deemed a ‘fascist’ movement by people who cannot fathom the meaning of a whole greater than the sum of its parts. It is why those who cannot; claim to be Patriots, while doing all they can, to not be. Luckily this nation is not a true democracy, as Democrats would have it be. As a Constitutional Republic, where E pluribus unum (out of many, one) dictates the greater whole the dictatorial leader is not possible. The autocratic government is not possible, unless it is imposed without the people’s knowing. The instilling of the use of the word ‘fascism’ to capitalize upon the ignorance of people is what makes Democrats thrive. If the race baiters heading up the N.A.A.C.P., the Jessie Jacksons and Al Sharptons of the country can be counted on to cry racism at any opportunity, if only to further their own wealth and power; then the Democrats can continue to do what they do so well: accuse others of doing what they do. Just listen to John Edwards’ screams of corruption in Washington, as if his party is not involved.
Where Lewis undoubtedly meant to convey that the religious would be the demon, religion teaches the demon would pretend to be religious. Inductive thinking is required to confuse the two.
As Deacon Keith Fournier describes in Catholic Online, “Huckabee finds himself in a maelstrom of controversy having to defend this video Christmas card against accusations that it had mixed “religion and politics” in an inappropriate manner. Some have even suggested that it was an intentional act of sending a coded message of sorts to evangelical Protestant voters.”
So let me ask. Is there such a thing as mxing ‘religion and politics’? Let alone in an inappropriate manner? What about that ‘separation of church and state’ thing? What about the ‘freedom from religion’ thing? Well, there is no freedom from religion, anymore than there is freedom from speech. Huckabee’s right to say whatever he wants, in anyway he deems fit with his own money (donated or not) is free speech. Viewers are not granted protection from being offended anymore than listeners are granted protection from being offended for anyone else’s freedom of speech. Religion and politics has been with this nation since it began and it will never cease. The only objections are coming from those who want a freedom FROM religion and that is just plain tuff.
Fournier relates more: “Bill Donahue, the President of the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Liberties, in an interview airing on Fox News Network’s “Fox and Friends” morning program suggested the ad had an ulterior political motive. Donahue stated ‘You know what, sell yourself on your issues, not on what your religion is.’ Some reports have alleged that there is a floating white cross in the ad. The candidate says it is simply the outline of a bookshelf. Donahue suggested it was some form of subliminal message to evangelicals in Iowa.”
That would lead one to question the “Catholic League for Religious and Civil Liberties”. It states its purpose on its website, “When slanderous assaults are made against the Catholic Church, the Catholic League hits the newspapers, television, and radio talk shows defending the right of the Church to promote its teachings with as much verve as any other institution in society.” But Huckabee is not Catholic. Does that mean that the Catholic League is not about freedom OF religion, but rather freedom FOR a specific religion?
It further states, “When the religious freedom rights of any American are threatened, the Catholic League stands ready to fight for justice in the courts.” But apparently NOT when it involves a Baptist, especially a Baptist preacher running for President.
Even if Huckabee’s ad DID contain a cross, (as McCain’s ad does), Bill Donahue’s admonition of Huckabee’s speech disagrees with his own organization’s policy. In “Religious Expression at Christmastime: ‘Guidelines of the Catholic League’, Christmas 2003″ the organization says, “The display of religious Christmas symbols in the public arena certainly involves a greater understanding and tolerance for different religious traditions within the United States. It is also an opportunity to see that First Amendment rights of religious expression and free speech be guaranteed to all on an equal basis. Openness to religious expression, recognition, and speech in forums that are traditionally open to secular speech is not a violation of separation of church and state, or government seal of approval for any particular religious sect.” There is no more ‘secular speech’ event than a candidate running for office.
In a scathing attack piece by Media Matters For America, Donahue’s bio is depicted as, “Prior to leading the Catholic League, Donahue was a sociology professor at La Roche College, a Catholic college in Pittsburgh. He was also an adjunct scholar at the conservative Heritage Foundation. He has authored several books, including Twilight of Liberty: The Legacy of the ACLU (Transaction, 2001) and On the Front Line of the Culture War: Recent Attacks on the Boy Scouts of America (Claremont Institute, 1996).”
Rawstory.Com has declared Donahue’s attack on Huckabee to be an ‘unlikely critic’. Bill Berkowitz writing in Dissident Voice, in 2004 quoted Donahue from MSNBC as saying, “Hollywood is controlled by secular Jews who hate Christianity in general and Catholicism in particular. It’s not a secret, OK?” As much as I support the individual right of every American to think and praise whomever or whatever they choose, I find it quite absurd that the President of the Catholic League will fight for his religion but not choose to fight for any other religion or other religion’s person, for that matter.
The attacks on Huckabee from progressives, The View and The Catholic League share one thing: a complete imposition of self imposed reality on what is nothing at all like they claim it to be.
Huckabee’s Christmas ad and McCain’s Christmas ad both share one thing. Christmas. To hear the Christmas story from a completely different perspective, visit http://www.countryaboveself.com and click the ‘Hear The Heartbeat’ link. And for a lesson in the humility it takes to be a true Patriot, visit John McCain’s ‘A Cause Greater’ at http://www.johnmccain.com .