The Many Ways We Disobey

Map of Canaan
Image via Wikipedia

Let’s recap the history in 1 Samuel so far and then continue reading in 1 Samuel 13-15. Today we’re going to focus on Saul, appointed by God and a man who gives every appearance to fear and obey the Lord, yet the Lord is displeased with him. Saul gives only the appearance of being obedient, yet we’re going to see how instead he is disobedient.

Last week, Fred taught us how the people of Israel asked Samuel to appoint a king over them; the elders wanted Israel to have a king just like their neighbors had. By appointing a king, the elders felt they felt that this would eliminate the organizational advantage their enemies had. Samuel warned them that the absolute power of a king held dangers, but the people wanted a king anyway. The Lord gave the people what they asked for, but considered this request just another of their rebellious choices. Samuel appointed Saul as the first king who had been hiding in baggage claim for some reason. The people of Israel eventually had to seize him and force him to be king.

When the Ammonites attacked, Saul finally acted, mobilizing an Israeli army and winning a decisive victory. During a national celebration at Gilgal, we see a transfer of political leadership. What used to be part of the judgeship and priesthood of Samuel now belongs to the monarchy of Saul. There is a division between Samuel and Saul that reflects their individual goals. Samuel is responsible to listening to the Lord and advising Saul what to do, and Saul is responsible for obeying the commands of the Lord and protecting the people. The prophet would receive instructions from God and relay them to the king; the king’s role was to protect the people from external enemies.

The Philistines mostly ignored the happenings within Israel, but the formation of a monarchy is about to renew the conflict with the Philistines. The Philistines totally controlled Israel from strategically placed garrisons. Saul divided his army and put his son Jonathon over one division. Jonathan was a devoted follower of the Lord and he faced a decision; the Lord had long commanded that the people of Israel occupy the land of Canaan, but the Philistines were intent in controlling the Israeli territory. And Jonathan displays fearless devotion to God and immediately attacks a Philistine outpost in 1 Samuel 13:5. While the victory was small, the confusion was great, and in the panic, the Philistines began to attack one another and the Philistine army was routed.

Israel has been repeatedly defeated in small battles against the Philistines, so a victory here over the Philistines is significant. Losing this garrison was not only humiliating to the Philistines, it also threatened the Philistine’s control of the region. While before small skirmishes erupted from time to time, this time the Philistines decide to eradicate the people of Israel. Now it’s war.

The Philistine outmatched the Israelis in numbers, strategy, organization, and weaponry. Let’s look at the Philistine army in 1 Samuel 13:5 –

The Philistines assembled to fight Israel, with three thousand chariots, six thousand charioteers, and soldiers as numerous as the sand on the seashore.

Some manuscripts say 30,000 chariots. Either way, this is the largest chariot force mentioned anywhere in the Old Testament. 1 Samuel 13:5-6 –

The Philistines assembled to fight Israel, with three thousand chariots, six thousand charioteers, and soldiers as numerous as the sand on the seashore. They went up and camped at Micmash, east of Beth Aven. When the men of Israel saw that their situation was critical and that their army was hard pressed, they hid in caves and thickets, among the rocks, and in pits and cisterns.

Whew. Israel expected some sort of punishment or military retaliation for their raid on the outpost, but this is a full-scale invasion that appears intent on eradicating Israel forever.

The Philistines had iron weapons and chariots; the Fighting Farmers had bronze pitchforks. Worse, Israel was dependent on Philistine blacksmiths for making and repairing tools they needed to farm. This was a strategic decision by the Philistines; it says in verse 19 there was not a blacksmith to be found in Israel to prevent them from making swords and spears. So the Philistines arrive in overwhelming numbers and defeat seems inevitable.

What are the Lord’s instructions? Let’s back up to last week’s lesson in 1 Samuel 10:5a,8; Samuel takes a flask of oil, anointing Saul in the name of the Lord, and then says –

After that you will go to Gibeah of God, where there is a Philistine outpost… “Go down ahead of me to Gilgal. I will surely come down to you to sacrifice burnt offerings and fellowship offerings, but you must wait seven days until I come to you and tell you what you are to do.”

But what does Saul actually do? 1 Samuel 13:7b-13 –

Saul remained at Gilgal, and all the troops with him were quaking with fear. He waited seven days, the time set by Samuel; but Samuel did not come to Gilgal, and Saul’s men began to scatter. So he said, “Bring me the burnt offering and the fellowship offerings. ” And Saul offered up the burnt offering. Just as he finished making the offering, Samuel arrived, and Saul went out to greet him.

“What have you done?” asked Samuel.

Saul replied, “When I saw that the men were scattering, and that you did not come at the set time, and that the Philistines were assembling at Micmash, I thought, ‘Now the Philistines will come down against me at Gilgal, and I have not sought the LORD’s favor.’ So I felt compelled to offer the burnt offering.”

“You acted foolishly,” Samuel said. “You have not kept the command the LORD your God gave you; if you had, he would have established your kingdom over Israel for all time.

God’s instructions through Samuel told Saul to Gilgal and wait seven days for Samuel to sacrifice burnt offerings. Faced with overwhelming odds from the Philistine army, Saul acts by assuming the role of the priest and offering a sacrifice. Saul foolishly disobeys God’s command out of fear, and his disobedience reveals that Saul has no comprehension of his responsibility to God. Saul feared the loss of his soldiers and he feared losing the battle. And what’s more, sacrificing a burnt offering indicated absolute dedication to God, so Saul’s offering had absolutely no meaning. If Saul was truly dedicated to God, he would have obeyed and waited on God.

FEAR

After Saul has completed his sacrifice, Samuel arrives and asks, “What have you done?” It’s not like Samuel didn’t know, the aroma of burned meat was still in the air. Ever come home at the end of the day and your neighbors are barbecuing? Samuel knows, but he asks Saul anyway to get the disobedient king to think about what he’s done.

But instead, Saul comes up with excuses, justifications for his disobedience. The 7th day was not over, yet Saul didn’t wait until the evening for Samuel to arrive; therefore, it must have been Samuel’s fault. Saul was forced to do what he did. When scholars write of Saul’s disobedience, they discuss failures ranging from taking on the role of the priest to failing to wait the full amount of time. But the real reason is Saul’s character. He didn’t trust the Lord to do what he was supposed to do. He feared the consequences of failing to sacrifice more than he trusted in the Lord to whom he was offering the sacrifice.

Proverbs 29:25 says that fear of man will prove to be a snare, but whover trusts in the Lord will be kept safe. Saul was afraid of the battle, afraid of the enemy, afraid his own men were not up to the task. And so out of fear, Saul was attempting to summon the Lord’s power with his sacrifice, to pull a miracle out of a hat. But one cannot conjure up a miracle from the Lord. One commentary called this “theological blackmail.” The Lord will save His people, not because He has been summoned through our actions, but because it is in His nature to do so. We cannot compel God. God acts because He loves us.

We still do this today, don’t we? How often out of fear, out of panic, out of lack of trust do we go to the Lord in prayer? Hurricane Ike bearing down on Houston; how many people went to the Lord in prayer for the first time in weeks or months or even years? Yet to seek the Lord’s favor only in times of panic is futile. God wants us to seek Him always. Fred also taught us last week that God does not want us to live in fear; 2 Timothy 1:7 says –

For God did not give us a spirit of timidity, but a spirit of power, of love and of self-discipline.

Samuel tells Saul that if he had obeyed, the Lord would have established Saul’s kingdom over Israel for all time, but because of his disobedience, Saul’s kingdom will not endure. Unfortunately, Saul doesn’t learn from his disobedience; I think Saul is in denial about his disobedience, especially since we’re about to see this disobedience continue.

REDEFINE OBEDIENCE

Let’s turn to 1 Samuel 15; the Lord has put Saul in charge of punishing the Amelekites; you have to go all the way back to Exodus 17; Moses, leading the Israelites out of Egypt in the Desert of Sinai, are attacked from the rear by the Amelekites who are picking off women and children that are straggling. You may recall Joshua led a battle against them while Moses held his hand in the air, held up by Aaron and Hur. Joshua wins that battle, but our God of infinite mercy is also a God of perfect justice. Exodus 17:14-16,

Then the LORD said to Moses, “Write this on a scroll as something to be remembered and make sure that Joshua hears it, because I will completely blot out the memory of Amalek from under heaven.”

Moses built an altar and called it The LORD is my Banner. He said, “For hands were lifted up to the throne of the LORD. The LORD will be at war against the Amalekites from generation to generation.”

Now is the time God has chosen for Saul to wipe out the Amelekites; 1 Samuel 15:1-3,

Samuel said to Saul, “I am the one the LORD sent to anoint you king over his people Israel; so listen now to the message from the LORD. This is what the LORD Almighty says: ‘I will punish the Amalekites for what they did to Israel when they waylaid them as they came up from Egypt. Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy everything that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.’ “

The time for justice to be delivered to the Amalekites has come, but listen to how Saul carried out these instructions in 1 Samuel 15:7-9 –

Then Saul attacked the Amalekites all the way from Havilah to Shur, to the east of Egypt. He took Agag king of the Amalekites alive, and all his people he totally destroyed with the sword. But Saul and the army spared Agag and the best of the sheep and cattle, the fat calves and lambs—everything that was good. These they were unwilling to destroy completely, but everything that was despised and weak they totally destroyed.

Of course Saul obeyed the Lord, *if* you redefine what obedience means. In 1100 BC, capturing the king during a war meant riches for the winner. The king could be ransomed off for a handsome profit. And it would be a shame to kill all the animals, too, when there were so much better uses for them.

DENIAL

In verse 10, the Lord tells Samuel that He is grieved because Saul didn’t carry out His commands, so Samuel goes to see Saul, who is verse 12 is told that Saul is building a monument in his own honor. And Saul says in verse 13-15 –

When Samuel reached him, Saul said, “The LORD bless you! I have carried out the LORD’s instructions.”

But Samuel said, “What then is this bleating of sheep in my ears? What is this lowing of cattle that I hear?”

Saul answered, “The soldiers brought them from the Amalekites; they spared the best of the sheep and cattle to sacrifice to the LORD your God, but we totally destroyed the rest.”

It’s like Saul is saying, “Hey, not only did I obey, but I improved upon the Lord’s instructions! I did so good, I awarded myself a trophy!”

But did Saul obey? Saul is in denial about his obedience. “The Lord bless you, I have carried out the Lord’s instructions,” he says. As Christians today, we have specific instructions, too. “Forgive one another, up to seventy times seven.” And our response? Oh, I forgive him, I don’t hold any grudges. I just want to talk to him or ever see his face again. Sacrifice for our wives, submit to our husbands, love one another as Christ loves us. Are we really being obedient? Or are we in denial, too, redefining what it means to be obedient?

PARTIAL OBEDIENCE

One method of denial, a method of disobedience, is to be partially obedient. Samuel’s question – if you obeyed, why do I hear cows? – is a telling one. First in denial, Saul then explains that partial obedience is more than enough. Look at verse 20 –

“But I did obey the LORD,” Saul said. “I went on the mission the LORD assigned me. I completely destroyed the Amalekites and brought back Agag their king.

The Lord said to destroy the Amalekites; Saul said he destroyed them except their king.

Colossians 3:5-6 says –

Put to death, therefore, whatever belongs to your earthly nature: sexual immorality, impurity, lust, evil desires and greed, which is idolatry. Because of these, the wrath of God is coming.

Those are the Lord’s instructions to us, these are the Amalekites of sin to us. Yet, too often, we believe that we can pick and choose among God’s instructions, and then we act as though God should be appreciative of the bits and pieces that we do. God defines obedience as total obedience. We obey most of this, but leave kingdoms of sin in our lives.

Let me offer a question for you to ponder – rather than asking yourself how you obey God, ask God to show you where you do not obey. Husbands and wives treating each other the way God commands? Holding captive every thought so that we do not sin? Impure or critical thoughts about another? Being slow to speak so our tongue does not cause us to sin? We cannot think ourselves as obedient to God when we redefine to ourselves what it means to be obedient. If we’re partially obedient, we’re still disobedient.

BLAME OTHERS

Another way we are disobedient to is to blame our disobedience, our partial obedience, on somebody else. I could forgive him if he wasn’t such a jerk. It would be easier for me to be faithful if she wasn’t always, you know, that way toward me. Of course I respect and submit to my husband as long as he does what I tell him to. Verse 21, Saul says, “But I did obey the Lord” –

The soldiers took sheep and cattle from the plunder, the best of what was devoted to God, in order to sacrifice them to the LORD your God at Gilgal.”

… but the soldiers didn’t do right. I had a great plan to obey the Lord, but somebody else messed it up. Of course I made a covenant with my spouse for better or worse, but I didn’t mean that. You don’t know my spouse. Sometimes we even blame God. I lost my temper, sure, but God made me that way.

This disobedience is literally the oldest trick in the book. Adam blamed his disobedience on Eve. Eve blamed it on the serpent. But we cannot blame our own disobedience on somebody else. God will see through that every time.

RELY ON RITUALS INSTEAD

And finally, we disobey because, well, that’s the way we’ve always done it. There’s no need to change if nobody’s complaining. Besides, as a Christian, I attend church, I go to bible study, I tithe, I serve, I pray, I teach. So those things cover up what little disobedience remains, right?

Verse 22-23, Samuel answers that question.

But Samuel replied:
“Does the LORD delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices
as much as in obeying the voice of the LORD ?
To obey is better than sacrifice,
and to heed is better than the fat of rams.

For rebellion is like the sin of divination,
and arrogance like the evil of idolatry.
Because you have rejected the word of the LORD,
he has rejected you as king.”

The Lord expects and receives sacrifices, but He does not delight in them. Sacrifices in the Old Testament atoned for sins. Sacrifices in the New Testament further the Kingdom of God. Those things are good, but God does not delight in them. God delights in obedience. God delights in the righteous who seek after Him. Jesus tells us that if we bring a sacrifice to the temple but we have something against our brother, we are to leave that sacrifice there and make amends with our brother. Only then are we to return and offer our sacrifice.

Look, making it up to somebody when you’ve wronged them is a good thing. But wouldn’t obedience in not wronging them in the first place be better? Sacrifices are payments for disobedience, sacrifices are accepted by God, but it’s not what He wants most. He doesn’t want this for His benefit, because the Lord needs nothing from us. He wants us to obey for our benefit.

A man wanted to help his son understand the importance of making right choices. He put a post up in the back yard, and when his son made a bad choice, he’d give him a nail and have him put a nail in the post. When he made a good choice, he’d get to remove a nail. As the boy grew, there were always a couple of nails in the post, but as he grew and matured, one day he pulled the last nail out of the post. He felt pretty good about it, too. But his dad asked him to take a good look at the post. The nails were gone, but the post was full of holes.

We’re forgiven of our bad choices. But the effects of our sins leave scars.

Six ways we disobey. Fear, redefine, denial, partial obedience, blame others, rely on rituals. Saul performs a perfect hat-trick in verse 15; denial, partial obedience, *and* blaming others all in one sentence, so we’re not limited to disobedience in one category.

Discussion time. What are some examples of disobedience in a Christian’s life, and which category does it fall in?

The Lord calls us to obedience, and sometimes we’re own own worst enemy when we try to obey. We act out of fear instead of trusting in the Lord. We deny our disobedience or try to redefine it. We make excuses, or we try to make up for it afterword. Don’t ask yourself in what ways you’re being obedient to the Lord; in some small ways, everybody is partially obedient. Ask yourself instead how you’re not obeying the Lord. Are you following God’s commands? Are you living a life of partial obedience to God’s commands? Do you find it easier to be obedient when you know people are looking? Have you been struggling with some area of your life that you know needs to be surrendered to God?

Don’t try to answer the question by listing all the things you do. I go to church, I sing in the choir or play in the band. I teach a class. I serve God most of the time. That is not the standard God wants for us. Partial obedience doesn’t cut it. God wants us to trust Him and follow Him with all of our heart, our soul, our mind and strength. Don’t settle for less.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Overturning Roe v. Wade

South Dakota has wasted no time challenging the federal government’s mandate to allow abortion. They have approved a ban on abortion specifically to challenge Roe v. Wade.

PIERRE, S.D. – South Dakota lawmakers approved a ban on nearly all abortions Friday, setting up a deliberate frontal assault on Roe v. Wade at a time when some activists see the U.S. Supreme Court as more willing than ever to overturn the 33-year-old decision.

Republican Gov. Mike Rounds said he was inclined to sign the bill, which would make it a crime for doctors to perform an abortion unless it was necessary to save the woman’s life. The measure would make no exception in cases of rape or incest.

A judge is likely to suspend the abortion ban during the legal challenge, which means it would never take effect unless the state gets the case all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court and wins.

Under the measure, doctors could get up to five years in prison for performing an illegal abortion. The House passed the bill 50-18 on Friday, and the Senate approved it 23-12 earlier this week. If signed, it would become law July 1.

Money for the anticipated legal fight is already pouring in. Lawmakers were told during the debate that an anonymous donor has pledged $1 million to defend the ban, and the Legislature is setting up a special account to accept donations.

Houston's Socialist Towing Program

Houston recently mandated the “Safe Clear” towing program. It wasn’t interesting enough to talk about at the time, but it gets more and more interesting.

The original idea was to get motorists off the road when they break down to prevent additional accidents. You must accept the tow; you must get in the tow truck; you must pay $75 for the tow.

What’s the first problem? Right – many motorists don’t have $75, and certainly don’t want to pay that kind of money for a flat tire or because they’re out of gas which are the two most common problems for stranded motorists.

Solution #1: Free towing! If you’re stranded because of a flat or because you’re out of gas, free tows to the nearest gas station! The tow trucks will bill the city of Houston, and the city will pay for it. Socialized towing has finally arrived.

The tow truck drivers are selected by the city. What happens if you’re a tow truck driver and suddenly find you’re not selected? Why, you head to the state capital to protest. (subscription link, sorry about that.)

Then the news reported a death due to the Safe Clear program. Well, ok, so Safe Clear doesn’t kill stranded motorists (yet – more on that in a minute), but the man walked to a gas station to get a gallon of gas, and tried to run back when the Safe Clear wrecker appeared. He was struck by several cars.

Since the city is mandating that motorists accept rides from these selected tow truck drivers, the city promised they would do background checks. Apparently that doesn’t mean criminals can’t be tow truck drivers, just that the city would check. “Yup, he’s a criminal. Sign him up.”

Local 2 decided to do its own background checks on all 252 drivers licensed for Safe Clear.

The Trouble Shooters found a third of them, 82, are convicted criminals. The crimes range from misdemeanor drug possession and drunken driving to aggravated robbery, aggravated assault, indecent exposure, auto theft and murder. Some spent years in prison.

Mandatory rides with criminals, paid for by the city. Sort of like a socialist murder-for-hire service. At some point during this fiasco, somebody’s going to come to the conclusion that this whole program is not a good idea. Eventually.

Crazy Democrat Hijinks

Those crazy Democrats! Besides 10,000 lawyers ready to sue over the election and the vandalism they’re doing to GOP campaign headquarters, now they’re committing aggravated assault against Republican U.S. Representatives. Ha ha! What will those crazy Democrats think up next?

MIAMI (Reuters) – A Florida motorist was arrested on Wednesday on charges of trying to run down U.S. Rep. Katherine Harris at an intersection where the controversial former state elections chief was campaigning for re-election to Congress.

The Republican lawmaker and several supporters were campaigning alongside a street corner in her hometown of Sarasota Tuesday evening. A silver Cadillac sped toward them, drove up onto the sidewalk where Harris stood, and then swerved away at the last minute, the Sarasota police report said.

No one was hurt. Witnesses noted the car’s license tag number and police tracked the owner, Barry Seltzer, 46, of Sarasota, who was jailed early Wednesday on a charge of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon. He said he was annoyed because some of Harris’ supporters were blocking traffic, the arrest report said.

“I was exercising my political expression,” it quoted him as saying.

Update: More here, including the police report.

On a more serious note, I’ve decided to vote a straight Republican ticket this year.

Kerry Criticizes Bush for Not Doing Kerry's Job

John Kerry criticized George Bush today for not extending the assault-weapons ban.

George Bush had said if the US Congress passed an extention, he would sign it. Congress didn’t.

But the President can only sign legislation, not introduce it. So why didn’t John Kerry introduce legislation to extend the weapons ban if he felt so strongly about it?

Could it be that maybe he doesn’t know how? After 20 years in the Senate, very few bills bear his name. Or could it be that he’s missed 90% of the votes this year and isn’t actively a part of the Senate?

I think Kerry ought to launch a stinging attack on himself for failing to do his own job. And wasn’t it just last week John Kerry was touting how much he was in favor of preserving Second Amendment rights to bear arms?

Democratic National Convention

This just in: John Kerry plans to accept the nomination. *zzzzz*

I’ve barely discussed the Democratic National Convention. And do you know why?

That’s right. It’s B-O-R-I-N-G. The only thing remotely interesting was Teresa Heinz telling a reporter to shove it. I was hoping for something interesting to happen:

  • John Kerry announces a new “Principles for Money” campaign. If you feel strongly about an issues, John Kerry will espouse your view for significant campaign contribution.
  • John Edwards calls the Democrats the “Party of Hope.” Why? “Because I hope we win, you idiot,” Edwards replies.
  • John Kerry announces a key platform of his campaign, “Clowns Need Love, Too.” Kerry blames the small clown cars on a failed Bush policy of “No Clown Left Behind” even though spending on clowns have increased 60% under George Bush. Kerry promises to replace the itty bitty clown cars with larger cars from Renault with safety airbags.
  • Barnum and Baily Circus announce they’re now a 527 corporation. Renault, too.
  • Teresa Heinz takes offense at being called “a safety airbag”.
  • Kerry says he’ll never cross a picket line. A reporter asks, “What about the Boston police officers picket line outside?” Kerry claims, “That’s not really a picket line. It’s more of a, um… congo line.”
  • The Secret Service surround the buffet and ask Michael Moore to step away for safety of the delegates.
  • Kerry declares France to be the 51st US state and promises new goverment-subsidized caviar. “But not the good stuff,” Teresa corrects.
  • Kofi Anan agrees to find Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq if the Democrats win.
  • The “Oil-for-Food” program becomes the 52nd US state.
  • Teresa Heinz agrees to stop calling the Democrats “putrid.” “That was before I knew I might become First Lady,” she explains.
  • Due to pressure from disparate liberal groups, the Democratic Party Changes their name to the Gay & Lesbian Communist & Socialist House of Waffles. The new party will oppose gay marriages until a court says otherwise, will oppose any war a year after the war starts, will turn all mansions into homeless shelters unless you’re a Kerry or Edwards any of their friends (who are *not* rich, by the way, not like those nasty Republicans), and promise to appoint judges that reflect American family values as long as they only favor abortion and gay marriages.
  • A parade of people that have lost their jobs under the Bush Adminstration give speeches: Whoopi Goldberg, Linda Ronstadt, Al Gore and the Dixie Chicks.
  • It is revealed that John Kerry never actually served in Vietnam, that all of the war footage was actually filmed by a young collegiate Steven Spielberg for an “Earnest Goes to War” movie.
  • Hillary Clinton addresses the convention delegates and says, “I don’t understand what women see in Bill. He has a tiny Presidential weenie.” Stunned, delegates look for Bill’s reaction, but both Bill Clinton and John Kerry’s daughter are nowhere to be found.
  • John Kerry and John Edwards announce that they’re getting married since it’s legal in Boston and vow to wage an assault against narrow-minded homophobic monogomists.
  • John Kerry admits that at least one of his purple hearts was for a hangnail. “But it was a really bad hangnail,” Kerry says.
  • After serious discussions with PETA, John Kerry and John Edwards agree to marry their dogs, too.

Sadly, none of these events happened, and it’s difficult to get excited about vague “Make America stronger” and “Let’s Bring America Together” speeches. What’s that supposed to mean? I dunno. *zzzzzz*

My Lunchtime Leisure Reading for Today

Right Wing News gives us a sample of Michael Moore quote to help us know him and love him:

“If someone did this [9/11] to get back at Bush, then they did so by killing thousands of people who DID NOT VOTE for him! Boston, New York, D.C., and the planes’ destination of California — these were places that voted AGAINST Bush!” — Michael Moore On 9/12/2001

“There is no terrorist threat in this country. This is a lie. This is the biggest lie we’ve been told.” — Michael Moore, October 2003

Buzz Machine is a relatively liberal site, but one I enjoy reading because Jeff spends more time thinking than the other liberals I’ve read, explains why Michael Moore’s film is trash.

As I walked out of the theater on the opening day of Michael Moore’s Fahrenheit 9/11, I thought (read: hoped) that even here, in the East Village of Manhattan, true Moore country, where the flick was already sold out all night, surely even here they wouldn’t fall for all his obvious, visual/rhetorical tricks, his propaganda too unsubtle for the cheapest tin-horn demagog.

Indepundit brings some American flags to hand out to anti-war protestors. Their reactions are hysterical. “Er, no thanks. I have one. At home I mean. Are you one of us?” type of thing.

Right Thinking Girl explains why she wants nothing to do with Clinton.

ex Prez, who said that he was afraid that if he admitted the truth about Monica, it would have been the end of his presidency.

Well now I’m really mad. If Clinton knew that what he had done was bad enough to end his presidency, then why is he still whining over Kenneth Starr?

Little Miss Attila gives us a link to as much liberalism as we can stand in a single paragraph:

Let us never forget that the Pax Americana of the future brings forth this calamity brought to us by a horrific onslaught, known as Shock and Awe. So far, the American state, with its unelected president, venal Supreme Court, silent Congress, gutted Bill of Rights and compliant media belies justifications given by the world’s leading apologists for the final subjugation of the Middle East, beginning with the $90bn invasion of Iraq. For one thing, the 15-minute speech delivered Monday night by President Bush leads our attention to the essential Western imperial interests. As Norman Mailer pointed out, the pro-Sharon neoconservative cabal brings about the theocrat Ashcroft’s suspension of our civil rights.

And finally, Wizbang has excellent captures from today’s headlines:

Democrats, including Terry McAuliffe, Tom Harkin and Senate minority leader Tom Daschle, are lining up to see the anti-Bush Michael Moore movie which is long on hatred for Bush, but short on truth.

Democrat John Kerry criticizes Ronald Reagan for saving us from Jimmy Carter’s economic policies.

Democrats want to burn someone in the administration for Abu Ghraib.

Democrat John Kerry tells a group of scientists that George Bush has cut spending on science but this story explains that Bush has increased science spending dramatically.

Democrat Nancy Pelosi says bush has not done enough to stop the killings in Sudan. [Funny she did not give a shit about the killing in Iraq. -ed]

Democrats working in the entertainment industry raise money for Kerry because, “The sentiment against (President) George W. Bush is so strong.”

Democrats don’t want to pass an intelligence appropriations bill. They say Republicans are not funding counter terrorism enough, even though the bill funds counter-terrorism at the highest level in history.

Democrat Bill Clinton say that asking him hard questions is “helping the far Right”

Democrat John Kerry says Bush “puts ideology over science” because Bush does not want to allow scientists to kill babies.

Democrat John Kerry criticized Bush for being appealing to conservative voters. [Damn Him! -ed]

Democrats are hiring convicted felons including people convicted of crimes such as burglary, forgery, drug dealing, assault and sex offenses to register more Democratic voters… When they get caught, they blame it on George Bush.

Democrat Al Gore recently told an audience that “the [Bush] administration did not hesitate to heighten and distort public fear of terrorism after September 11th, to create a political case for attacking Iraq.”

Democrat John Kerry claims the American middle class has been faring miserably under President Bush’s stewardship of the economy. A lie so egregious that even the USA Today calls him on it on the editorial pages.

followed by a Kerry quote that proves he doesn’t read the news:

Kerry blames Bush for partisanship in Washington

SAN FRANCISCO, California (AP) — Democrat John Kerry criticized Republicans on Wednesday […] blaming a partisan culture created by President Bush and calling his rival “the greatest divider as a president in the modern history of this country.”

Wizbang links to all the headlines quoted for those that like to follow up.