I have been puzzled by the extent of the media coverage of some crank’s prediction that the world would come to an end today. People are always predicting the end of the world. So far they have always been wrong. Was there something about this particular prediction that was newsworthy? Did any significant number of people expect to wake up this morning and see graves opening and people ascending into Heaven? This morning, there were news stories to the effect that the world still exists. Really! Did reporters expect their readers to be surprised? Why, in short, was this silliness a major media event?
I wish reporters would pay as much attention to a more important failed prediction: the Obama administration’s assurance that its policies, including the “stimulus,” would foster job creation and prevent unemployment from reaching 8 percent.
And here are some charts from John’s post.
Community organizer Obama predicted that his $800 billion dollar stimulus program would keep unemployment below 8%:
Stimulus Job Creation Prediction
Ooops! Never send a community organizer to do an economist’s job.
How about all that spending? Surely ALL the spending must have created more jobs?
This should be the end of the belief that government spending creates jobs, but it won’t be, because the university is not committed to teaching what gets results, but what produces feelings of superiority. The secular elites feel that they should be allowed to redistribute the wealth created by businesses and workers. This feeling of entitlement to control and distribute is best put into practice with large-scale taxation, spending and redistribution of wealth. The professors think that their good feelings (subjective) will somehow, mysteriously, cause good effects in the real world (objective). The chart proves their mysticism wrong, but the university is insulated from feedback from the real world.
That is why we need to elect business owners like Michele Bachmann or Herman Cain.
Did their youth pastors drop the ball on preparing them adequately to withstand the attacks on their faith they would experience when they went off to college? Yes. But the buck stops with Dad. I failed and I admit I’m embarrassed because, of all people, the children of an apologist should know the evidence.
Let’s take a moment and look at the situation in which our children find themselves. This will help us to see why it’s important to equip them with both evidences and answers to the difficult questions. University campuses are growing increasingly hostile toward evangelical students. A 2007 report by two Jewish researchers found a strong bias against evangelical students at secular universities.[1] More than 1,200 faculty members from 712 colleges and universities were interviewed pertaining to their feelings toward various religious followers. The results were alarming. Three percent of American faculty members admitted having negative or unfavorable feelings toward Jews while 33 percent admitted having them toward Muslims. But 53 percent admitted having negative or unfavorable feelings toward evangelical Christians. The researchers concluded, “Conservative Christians have for some time been concerned about their children’s campus environment. These data certainly legitimize their concerns.”
But it didn’t stop there. To their shock, these Jewish researches likewise discovered that a significant number of American faculty members want Muslims to play a greater role in the American political process while wanting evangelicals to stay out of it. But why? After all, generally speaking, most Muslims are pro-life, against homosexual marriage and women’s rights, at least as they are enjoyed by American women. To me, this suggests we are in much more than a cultural war between political conservatives and liberals. It goes beyond secularism and the religious. On many of our college campuses, it is a war against evangelical Christianity.
I personally have had numerous students from all over North America inform me that professors, on the first day of class, said their objective was to rid Christian students of their faith by the end of the semester. That’s right. The professor openly stated in class that his or her objective was to rid Christian students of their faith within the next hundred days. Can you imagine what would happen if those same professors had instead asked how many of his or her students were Muslims … or Jews? They would have been labeled “Islamaphobe” or “anti-Semite” and would soon have joined a number of others in the job market. But faculty members often get a pass if they’re a “Christophobe.”
I’ve been fussing a lot lately about making good decisions about sex before marriage, and the importance of children growing up with two biological parents. But another thing to prepare for is what happens when your children get into the schools. If you just abandon them to be influenced by their peers, by the culture, and by liberal educators, then you can’t expect your children to have an accurate worldview. Very rarely will you find that their peers, their pop culture influences, and their educators, have any sort of knowledge about what the Christian worldview really says, what the evidence is for it, and what the defenses are to arguments and evidence against it. You have to take the initiative to know this stuff. And if you aren’t married yet, then you need to be picking someone who has looked into the arguments and evidence for the Christian worldview. Economics, social science, education, marriage, parenting are all important things to study, but people already know a lot about that just by being aware of politics and such. That stuff is on the bottom shelf – apologetics is on the top shelf. You have to reach up high to get it – not everyone has it. And you can’t outsource it, either. You have to know it yourself.
4 Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one.
5 Love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength.
6 These commandments that I give you today are to be on your hearts.
7 Impress them on your children. Talk about them when you sit at home and when you walk along the road, when you lie down and when you get up.
8 Tie them as symbols on your hands and bind them on your foreheads.
9 Write them on the doorframes of your houses and on your gates.
If you want an example of how far teachers will go to indoctrinate your children in university, check out this story from Neil Simpson. His daughter got a homework assignment that was designed to cause her to think that heterosexuality was ABNORMAL. Basically, it was a questionnaire with a lot of ridiculously offensive questions. She was supposed to give it to someone to fill out, so she gave it to her Dad. But her Dad is Neil Simpson – apologetics blogger and super-Dad. He’s posted the questions with his answers, as well as the outcome of the story. It’s worth reading if you want to see a good example of parenting.
President Obama will announce this week that Elizabeth Warren, the Harvard Law School professor who first proposed the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, will be named to a special position reporting to both him and to the Treasury Department and tasked with heading the effort to get the new federal agency standing, a knowledgeable Democrat told ABC News.
Warren currently chairs the Congressional Oversight Panel of the Troubled Assets Relief Program and has been seen by many on the Left as a force for greater accountability and transparency, and a check against the forces in the Obama administration more closely allied with the financial sector. Many officials in that sector eye her warily as too anti-business…
Naming Warren as an assistant or counselor to both the president and Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner would allow the president to bypass a Senate confirmation process that could prove lengthy and contentious.
Morgen writes:
The official White House announcement tomorrow will no doubt emphasize Warren’s role in originating the idea for this agency, and her impressive academic credentials. (Credential number one – she’s a “dear friend” of Obama’s dating back to law school.)
But expect there to be major fireworks over this appointment. Just how anti-business is Warren? Here is only a preview, from her blog on TPM in 2005 (emphasis added):
The middle class is being carved up as the main dish in a corporate feast. Strugging with flat incomes and rising costs for housing, health care, transportation, child care and taxes (yes, taxes), these folks are under a lot of financial strain. And big corporate interests, led by the consumer finance industry, are devouring families and spitting out the bones.
Well, I think it’s safe to say she isn’t a fan of this particular industry, if not corporations in general. But with the Consumer Financial Protection Agency charged with regulating everything from mortgages to credit cards, and the companies who market them, you would think it would be helpful to have someone with at least a semblance of impartiality heading it up.
Apparently the White House disagrees.
This is why corporations aren’t hiring. They’re waiting for anti-business Obama to get voted out in 2012.
WINTERY KNIGHT 