Monthly Archives: September 2011

2012 Presidential Republican Primary Debate In Iowa pt.8

2012 Presidential Republican Primary Debate In Iowa pt.8

Iowa debate turns Minnesota nasty
By: Alexander Burns
August 11, 2011 10:14 PM EDT
AMES, Iowa — The simmering rivalry between Tim Pawlenty and Michele Bachmannerupted at Thursday night’s Republican primary debate here, transforming Iowa’s first 2012 forum into a full-blown slugfest.The Minnesota duo have been in a low-grade tug of war for months over the affections of Iowa conservatives. With a crucial test looming for both at the Ames Straw Pollthis Saturday, the Pawlenty-Bachmann rivalry turned so intense that it threatened to crowd out the other candidates completely.The charges were familiar: Pawlenty once again called Bachmann’s accomplishments “nonexistent.” Bachmann wielded well-worn attacks on Pawlenty’s tenure as governor.But this was their most ferocious exchange to date — with more than a hint of desperation visible for both.

“She speaks of leading these [conservative] efforts in Washington and Minnesota,” Pawlenty lashed out. “Leading and failing is not the objective.”

Bachmann assailed Pawlenty with a litany of alleged deviations from conservative orthodoxy, blasting: “When you were governor, you implemented cap-and-trade in our state and you praised the unconstitutional individual mandate.

“You said the era of small government is over. That sounds a lot more like Barack Obama if you ask me,” Bachmann said.

The caustic exchanges were no accident: A defeat on Saturday could snap Bachmann’s momentum in the race, or seal Pawlenty’s fate as a 2012 also-ran.

For the race beyond the straw poll, however, neither the candidates nor the moderators did much to draw blood from national front-runner Mitt Romney, who sauntered unscathed through his second consecutive debate.

The questions from Fox News and the Washington Examiner lobbed potentially difficult questions at Romney, asking him to defend his record on taxes in Massachusetts and his near-absence from the recent debate over whether to raise the federal debt ceiling.

On both issues, Romney stuck to narrow talking points, declaring that his support for the conservative Cut, Cap and Balance pledge told voters all they needed to know about his views on the debt ceiling.

Asked about a presentation his administration once gave to Standard & Poor’s, saying that Massachusetts deserved a credit rating upgrade in part because it raised taxes, Romney sidestepped the issue entirely.

Romney was barely challenged on his carefully parsed answers. With Pawlenty and Bachmann focused on each other, and several of the other candidates flailing in their attempts to stand out from the crowd, Romney took little heat from his fellow Republicans.

Indeed, virtually all of the candidates helped confirm — in one form or another — that Romney will likely face a tougher political challenge from a late-announcing candidate like Texas Gov. Rick Perry than from any of his currently declared rivals.

 

With the exception of raucous back-and-forths between Rick Santorum and Ron Paul on Iran and marriage, they did little to capture the spotlight.

Jon Huntsman, who was making his first performance in a 2012 presidential debate, fell short of his campaign’s recent promises that he would take a more aggressive approach to delivering his message to draw contrasts with his rivals. On Thursday night, the former Utah governor delivered only the softest and most implicit of criticism of his opponents, alluding to candidates who want to “run from their record,” in an apparent reference to Mitt Romney.

For the most part, Huntsman spoke softly and carried an exceedingly well-mannered set of talking points reminiscent of the civil campaign he promised when he launched last month.

None of the other candidates seemed to have a moment on stage to give them an extra head of steam going into the straw poll, though Paul drew repeated rounds of applause from his enthusiastic fans as he delivered his distinctive libertarian message.

Perhaps the most memorable moment of the night — outside the Bachmann-Pawlenty blowups — wasn’t instigated by a candidate at all, but rather by Byron York.

The Washington Examiner columnist queried Bachmann about a story she once told, relating how she decided to become a tax lawyer at her husband’s urging, out of a belief that wives should be “submissive” to their spouses.

Would Bachmann, York asked, be submissive to her husband if she were president?

Bachmann paused as a murmur ran through the crowd, and then began her answer: “Thank you for that question, Byron.”

“Marcus and I will have been married for 33 years this Sept. 10,” Bachmann said, explaining that to her and her husband, being submissive “means respect.”

“I respect my husband,” she said. “And he respects me as his wife. That’s how we operate our marriage. We respect each other. We love each other.”

Gingrich, too, won a moment of applause by pushing back at the moderators, in a blunter way than Bachmann.

Asked for the umpteenth time to explain the mass exodus of campaign staffers in June by Fox’s Chris Wallace, the former House speaker fumed: “I took seriously [Fox anchor] Bret [Baier]’s injunction to put aside the talking points. I wish you would put aside the gotcha questions.”

At times, Gingrich displayed the kind of fluency with issues that earned him a reputation as the GOP’s ideas man. He cut the professorial, wonky profile he cultivated for years before deciding to seek the White House, seeming closer to finding a comfortable role for himself in the 2012 field.

Still, overshadowing the whole debate was anticipation of a new strong candidate — Perry — entering the 2012 field Saturday.

And as the moderators noted, at least two other prominent Republicans, Sarah Palin and Rudy Giuliani, have not ruled out campaigns of their own. Palin is scheduled to visit the Iowa State Fair on Friday.

The candidates professed indifference at the prospect of new competition.

“Welcome to the contest,” Herman Cain said when he was asked about a potential Perry campaign. “From my perspective, it doesn’t bother us or my campaign. That’s just one more politician and that makes this business problem solver stand out that much more.”

The Sixty Six who resisted “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal (Part 29)

 Sixty Six who resisted “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal (Part 29)

This post today is a part of a series I am doing on the 66 Republican Tea Party favorites that resisted eating the “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal. Actually that name did not originate from a representative who agrees with the Tea Party, but from a liberal.

Rep. Emanuel Clever (D-Mo.) called the newly agreed-upon bipartisan compromise deal to raise the  debt limit “a sugar-coated satan sandwich.”

“This deal is a sugar-coated satan sandwich. If you lift the bun, you will not like what you see,” Clever tweeted on August 1, 2011.

King Holds the Line Against Debt Limit Increase

Attention: open in a new window. PDFPrint

Congressman King: “The debt limit deal forfeits the mandate House Republicans received last November to ‘hold the line’ on the nation’s debt and spending.”

Washington D.C.- Congressman Steve King (R-IA) released the following statement after voting against legislation considered by the House this afternoon that provides for an increase in the nation’s debt limit. The legislation, S. 365, represents the terms of a deal negotiated between Speaker John Boehner (R-OH), Senator Harry Reid (D-NV), Senator Mitch McConnell (R-KY), and President Barack Obama (D-IL) to increase the nation’s debt limit.

“Because S.365 represents a retreat from fiscal discipline and from the Balanced Budget Amendment, I voted against it,” said King. “S.365’s proposed spending cuts are far too small, and the fact that they are far into the future calls into question whether they will ever actually occur. The bill increases the nation’s debt burden while placing the responsibility of dealing with Washington’s addiction to debt and deficit spending on yet another commission, and on future Congresses and future Presidents.”

“As part of the final deal, S.365 also makes it more difficult for Congress to send a strong Balanced Budget Amendment to the states for ratification. It waters down the strong and specific Balanced Budget Amendment language contained in the ‘Cut, Cap and Balance’ bill. This debt limit deal forfeits the mandate that House Republicans received last November to ‘hold the line’ on the nation’s debt and spending, and I could not support it.

2012 Presidential Republican Primary Debate In Iowa pt.7

2012 Presidential Republican Primary Debate In Iowa pt.7

MAGGIE HABERMAN comments on debate below: 

Bachmann looks past Perry

By MAGGIE HABERMAN | 8/12/11 7:37 AM EDT

Molly Ball reports:

If Michele Bachmann is feeling threatened by Rick Perry’s imminent entry into the presidential race, she didn’t show it in a Friday morning interview on the “Today” show. Asked about the Texas governor, she skated right by the question and didn’t even say Perry’s name.

“Well, I’ve been in Washington, DC, now going on 5 years, and I’ve been a very consistent challenger to the unconstitutional policies of President Obama and Speaker Pelosi,” Bachmann said, going on to tick off her business and legal credentials.

“I’ve also stood up against my own party. I stood up on principle rather than party,” she added. “I’ve been bringing this voice, this movement into the halls of Congress very successfully.”

It was even less of a Perry-specific answer than she gave in last night’s debate. Unlike some of the other candidates who sought to draw a contrast with the soon-to-be-candidate, Bachmann merely joked, “I think there is room in the race for Governor Perry, Sarah Palin or even, Bret, you too.”

On “Today,” Bachmann also took — and deflected — a question about that now-infamous picture of her on the cover of Newsweek.

She listed all the recent bad news — the stock market, the credit downgrade, casualties in Afghanistan — and said, “That’s not a good week. A magazine photo is not even a factor in all that.”

As for whether she is, in fact, the “Queen of Rage”: “No, not at all. I’m a very happy person, a very optimistic person. … I love people. I really care about where people are at right now with the economy. So I want to focus on making their lives better.”

Part 3 of Tribute to and interview of Rev. Dr. John R. W. Stott (April 27, 1921 – July 27, 2011)

John Stott, world renowned Bible Scholar and theologian passed away on July 28th, 2011. In 2000, he attended Amsterdam 2000, an evangelists conference where he was interviewed by Karl Faase

Back in the 1970’s I read the book “Basic Christianity” by John Stott. While in London in 1979 I had the opportunity to attend a Tuesday evening prayer meeting where there were about 40 people and I got to hear John Stott speak. I was so thrilled to get to hear him speak in person.

I have included several clips on him because I wanted to honor him after the wonderful godly 90 years he lived.

Uploaded by  on Aug 19, 2008

John Stott’s classic book has introduced generations to Christianity with wisdom and clarity. This video celebrates the 50th Anniversary Edition of this important book by one of the world’s most important Christian voices.

__________-

[The

John Stott Funeral (edited version)

Uploaded by  on Aug 11, 2011

John Stott died on 27 July 2011 aged 90 years. This video contains highlights of his Funeral at All Souls Langham Place in London on Monday 8 August 2011. Produced and displayed with permission from John Stott’s family.
Music clips used by permission of All Souls musicians and Jubilate Hymns (www.jubilate.co.uk)

_______________

Al Molher interviewed John Stott several years ago and here is a portion of that interview:

The funeral for John R. W. Stott, one of the most famous evangelical preachers of the last century, will be held today in London at All Souls Church, Langham Place, where he served with distinction for so many decades of ministry. In honor of John Stott, I here republish an interview I conducted with the great preacher in 1987. The interview was first published in Preaching magazine, for which I was then Associate Editor.]

John R. W. Stott has emerged in the last half of the twentieth century as one of the leading evangelical preachers in the world. His ministry has spanned decades and continents, combining his missionary zeal with the timeless message of the Gospel.

For many years the Rector of All Souls Church, Langham Place, in London, Stott is also the founder and director of the London Institute for Contemporary Christianity. His preaching ministry stands as a model of the effective communication of biblical truth to secular men and women

The author of several worthy books, Stott is perhaps best known in the United States through his involvement with the URBANA conferences. His voice and pen have been among the most determinative forces in the development of the contemporary evangelical movement in the Church of England and throughout the world.

Preaching Associate Editor R. Albert Mohler interviewed Stott during one of the British preacher’s frequent visits to the United States.

I Began with a Very Strong Commitment to Scripture

Mohler: Your service over many years at All Souls Church in London had a tremendous impact throughout much of the world. There, in the midst of London’s busiest retail area, you presented the gospel with great effectiveness and power. Did your preaching change at all during your ministry at All Souls?

Stott: I began with a very strong commitment to Scripture, a very high view of its authority and inspiration. I have always loved the Word of God — ever since I was converted. Therefore, I have always sought to exercise an expository or exegetical ministry.

In my early days I used to think that my business was to expound and exegete the text; I am afraid I left the application to the Holy Spirit. It is amazing how you can conceal your laziness with a little pious phraseology! The Holy Spirit certainly can and does apply the Word for the people. But it is wrong to deny our own responsibility in the application of the Word.

All great preachers understand this. They focus on the conclusion, on the application of the text. This is what the Puritans called “preaching through to the heart.” This is how my own preaching has changed. I have learned to add application to exposition — and this is the bridge-building across the chasm.

Mohler: You have recently published a major volume on the cross [The Cross of Christ, InterVarsity Press, 1986]. This has always been central to your preaching — and all genuinely Christian preaching. Do you perceive an inadequate focus on the cross in the pulpit today?

Stott: Indeed, so far as I can see, it is inadequate. I think we need to get back to the fact that the cross is the center of biblical Christianity. We must not allow those on the one hand to put the incarnation as primary, nor can we allow those on the other hand to put the primary focus on the resurrection.

Of course, the cross, the incarnation, and the resurrection belong together. There could have been no atonement without the incarnation or without the resurrection. The incarnation prepares for the atonement and the resurrection endorses the atonement, so they belong always together.

Yet the New Testament is very clear that the cross stands at the center. It worries me that some evangelicals do not focus on Christ crucified as the center. Of course, we preach the whole of biblical religion, but with the cross as central.

One of the surprises which came as a product of the research for the book was the discovery that most books on the cross focus only on the atonement. There is much the New Testament has to say about the cross which is not focused on the atonement.

We are told, for example, to take up our cross and follow Christ. Communion is a cross-centered festival. There is the whole question of balance in the modern world. The problems of suffering and self-image are addressed by the cross. These issues appear quite differently when our world-view is dominated by the cross.