Quoting a very fundy Calvinist to illustrate what Calvinism is about is like quoting Ward Churchill to illustrate liberal thought.

In the U.S., Presbyterians are Calvinists. The main line Presby church is quite liberal -- witness their opposition to the Iraq war and their consideration of boycotting Israeli stocks and products because of their concern for the status of the Palestinians (I'm not sure whether they've decided on the latter, or not). However, there is a fundamentalist Presby church -- it is small but VERY conservative, and I think are "6 day creationists". Then there are all the Reformed Calvinists -- the more liberal are the Reformed Church in America (they allow the ordination of women, for example), whereas the Christian Reformed Church is more conservative (altho not nearly so conservative as the fundy Presbyterians). The Reformed churches (and there are many more split-offs than the two I mentioned, but they are the main denominations in the U.S.) were basically Dutch, and the two churches have had a hard time spreading out from their Dutch bases in NJ/NY, Michigan, and nw Washington State. Oddly enough, even tho the Christian Reformed Church is more conservative, their college -- Calvin College in Michigan -- has a wonderful liberal arts program and the faculty tend to be quite liberal. Whereas the RCA's college -- Hope College in Holland Michigan -- is more conservative.

The Calvinist doctrine that is the most well-known and the least understood is the doctrine of pre-destination (which Calvin picked up and expanded from St. Augustine). Basically, the idea is (and theologians out there will probably cringe at my explanation) that God already knows who "the saved" will be, so that the actions of Man (or an individual man or woman) do not affect whether or not any individual is "saved" or not. Only God's grace can "save" and only God knows who those "elect" saved ones are.

Not to stir the pot, but what "cult" are you accusing me of being a stupid member of? The Calvinist "cult"? Please explain.

And perhaps I misunderstood you, but I thought you were "explaining" Calvinism to GC by pointing him to a very conservative interpretor of same. If that's not what you were doing, I apologize. I'm not a Calvinsit, but I do like and respect a lot of Calvinists and felt they were being portrayed unfairly. Again, if that wasn't your intent, I apologize for taking it that way. However, I don't think calling me stupid is a way to win me over to your side.

This comments section is starting to feel like the Palestinian/Israeli fight. And my reaction is the same -- it doesn't matter anymore who started it, all of y'all, just stop it.

And when your host very politely asks you to stop with the Kir Royales and start drinking seltzer, and instead you start downing Jello Shots and puking all over the carpet, don't you feel just a wee bit ill-mannered?

It's boring and rude. Get over yourselves.

... On the other hand the Lebanon situation is a good excercise [sic] of what can happen when we don't interfere in national politics.

That's a good one. You truly think we're not interfering in Lebanon? Ha ha ha. There's this bridge not too far from where you live, Shooter. It's real cheap.....

But, Shooter, you did interest me strangely when you said you would vote for Obama instead of mcCain. Truly? Why?

The revisionists also blame the Khmer Rouge genocide on the hippies. The fact that our bombing of Cambodia and war next door destabilized the Cambodian government had nothing to do with the massacre. It was only because the DFHs caused the U.S. to lose its will that the "killing fields" happened.

So, yeah, what happened when we "cut and ran" from Viet Nam? Millions were killed. Who caused it? Lie-bruls.

Ergo, what will happen if we "cut and run" from Iraq? And whose fault will it be? It's so easy to fill in the dots, anyone can do it!

That pretty much sums up the neo-con view of reality, doesn't it?

Just like this blog is but one small sliver of the antiwar overall media management effort, which in turn is but one small sliver of the left's general efforts to manipulate public opinion.

-- shooter242

There are no facts, it's all just competing P.R.

Robert Malley, who was an adviser to the Obama camp and an old Middle East hand, was forced to resign from the campaign because he admitted to talking to Hamas people during his research on the problems in the ME:

http://www.suntimes.com/news/sweet/943467,CST-NWS-Sweet11.article

It really has become McCarthyism now.

Thanks for going there, Glenn.

Personally, as a Swedish-Alsatian-American, I am beginning to feel slighted. WHEN are the candidates going to be asked about their stance on Swedish/Norwegian fishing rights? And they better answer right, or else... I'm also not sure that Obama measures up on Alsatian issues.

That's how your III update makes me feel, anyway, Glenn.

We're really in Looking Glass territory.

Just got an e-mail from PFAW:

Word from Capitol Hill is that a "compromise" is in the works to get a new FISA modernization bill in front of the House and Senate as early as this week.

The president and his congressional Republican allies are still demanding telecom immunity and the ability to spy on Americans without individualized warrants. Some Democrats at the table seem poised to capitulate.

Don't let your representative compromise away YOUR constitutional rights.

Call your member of Congress now and urge a vote of NO on any FISA modernization bill that allows the government to spy without individualized warrants and grants telecom companies retroactive immunity.

Let's get those calls going on, people. We've stopped them before -- let's stop them again.