I became aware last night, via a rare ad hominem comment (summarily deleted) that some view the picture I’ve been painting here the last few months as motivated by my being (take your pick), 1) a die-hard Republican stalwart groupie of John McCain, 2) a silver-tongued Nazi-skinhead racist (a near-exact quote… my, my, my…), and/or, 3) a delusional religious ideologue.

I plead no contest only to part of the last one. Time will tell if the doctrines that inform the ravings are true or not, and with it, the accusation.

That’s one of the many neat things about Christianity. Not only is it experientially relevant, like nearly all faith systems (including odd, new and downright perverse ones) but it is demonstrably, historically, physically, archaeologically, socially, geographically and psychologically true – and only more so with time, thought and study. If the law of non-contradiction holds, one of us is most assuredly wrong.

As to the other two ‘thoughts’ if I dare call them that, I am, for the record, not registered with any political party (nor have I been for some time). Nor have I thought more than once a week, if that often (and only in passing) about Mr. McCain since last fall. Ironically for the drop-in commenter, it is an utter revulsion to Nazism and racism and all of their siblings and cousins, as well as to the doctrines of the often-unknowing supporters behind their modern strains that has motivated much of my writing here recently. Oh, and I still have some hair on my head. Not much but enough.  

Which is a nice lead in to this long but essential piece from Ali Sina (‘Understanding Obama, The Making of a Fuehrer’ – H/T: AOW). It came out last September but is still highly relevant, making good use of, but going well beyond this tight, clinical piece by Dr. Sam Vaknin that I linked in a comment Monday.

Yeah, yeah, I know. Hitler comparisons are so… tired and over-used and fantastic as to be almost meaningless — a fact which contains an important boy-cries-wolf danger and which Sina addresses at length in another piece here.

As with any hastily edited and self-published work, there are a few points in the ‘Fuehrer’ piece which made me wince and slowed the momentum of his argument. A few. Given the sweep and power of it though, they are like mice on a train track. As with anything written in the heat of a campaign, there are also some things which seem even more relevant today but which are intermixed with passing news-cycle items that seem quaint and peripheral, though still, it seems, true.

In the former category (stuff that takes on greater meaning in context and with reflection) is a probably-familiar celebrity-studded paean to raw power and moral relativism (‘American Prayer’) played at the self-aggrandizing, Greek-revival Democratic National Transfiguration Convention and used by the Obama campaign. I don’t know why I didn’t listen to it more closely earlier. In an apocalyptic, false-messiah context, it is pretty creepy. Lyrics include, [links and emphasis added]:

This is the time to finish what you started… [who? what? when?]

Remember that what you see depends on where you stand. [it doesn't change the nature of reality, however...]

And how you jump will tell you where you’re gonna land… [truer than they can possibly have imagined]

Let’s not kick at the darkness… [i.e., let's not oppose or identify evil?]

This is a church you can’t see. [one that, apparently should be put in quotes and which worships the 'god' of whatever; she's much more tolerant than the Real One, doncha know]

The song title, ‘An American Prayer’ is not new, I discovered. The almost-back-from-the-dead Doors (except for their suicidal, pill-popping and likely demon-possessed lead singer, who’s still very dead and buried in Paris) came out with an album with that name in 1978 (interesting year given the current economic climate.)

The song titles on it are revealing all by themselves (e.g., ‘World on Fire’); the lyrics of the title song even more so (see below; a tiny sample; the rest are unfit for a family blog). [Links and emphasis added]

Let’s reinvent the gods, all the myths of the ages
Celebrate symbols from deep elder forests…
We need great golden copulations
The fathers are cackling in trees of the forest
Our mother is dead in the sea
Do you know we are being led to slaughters by placid admirals and that fat slow generals are getting obscene on young blood
Do you know we are ruled by T.V.
The moon is dry blood beast…
The moths and atheists are doubly divine and dying
We live, we die and death not ends it
Journey we more into the nightmare

Which has nothing to do with Obama directly, but I thought it was interesting in the sense that all paganism springs from a common, dark root of chaos and hate for God. Why use that song title in 2008? Did anyone do any vetting? Silly question. 

Then there are two pieces from mainstream publications, trying hard to find reasons to rationalize still liking or trusting the man, e.g., Newsweek:

“…in ways both large and small, what’s left of the American establishment is taking his measure and, with surprising swiftness, they are finding him lacking. They have some reasons to be concerned… Obama may be mistaking motion for progress…”

They diagnose the problem as his not being forceful enough. ‘In your face’ (meaning ours) is how they put it. I suspect that folks like Rush would disagree. I also suspect they will live to regret such a statement. Desperate times and peoples’ desire to be free of them are what has led, throughout history to calls for desperate measures, a subject which Sina treats thoroughly.

Newsweek, in its still-common quest for a sense of normalcy amidst what may be the real end of history overlooks the plain possibility that he is grossly incompetent, deliberately malevolent or maybe both, perhaps in sequence. As Sina and Vaknin each point out, it is the unwinding of the collective narcissist-follower mass delusion that is painful, unpredictable and highly dangerous. They could have added that just such a ‘flipped-switch’ scenario is characteristic of the change mid-tribulation.

The Seattle Times (marginally more conservative, and more alive, than its hyper-liberal local competitor) notes that:

Since [Obama became president], the market hasn’t just gotten worse — it’s turned in its worst performance ever for a new president. The Dow Jones industrial average has fallen 21 percent during Obama’s first seven weeks in office. Count back to Election Day and the results are even bleaker… a loss of 32 percent.

They go on to ponder whether this might all be a hangover from Bush. Umm… Flog that theory all you want; just don’t be using it next summer, much less next year. It has been my experience, both personally and professionally, that markets respond with extreme speed, often bordering on prescience to new information (or the lack of it). That includes increasing uncertainty as well as perceptions of gross incompetence and social or geopolitical chaos.

In that vein (declining markets), it occurred to me yesterday that although the collective financial losses sustained by Obama voters must be well into the $trillions by now, most still are thrilled with his social policies. Which sparked the further thought: Might it be worth that much to them to retain their anti-Biblical, anti-life freedoms?

Finally, this piece from the fairly staid International Herald Tribune is worth noting for the picture it paints of a financial industry rapidly coming unglued and falling under the whim and purview of a government the power of which which seems to be consolidating around one perhaps unstable and at least untried man.

They [banks] say they plan to return the [bailout] money… as soon as regulators set up a process to accept the repayments. [Question: what if they decide not to for some reason??] …One of the biggest concerns of the banks is that the program enables Congress and the administration to add new conditions at any time [!!!!!]

A growing chorus of industry experts is warning that asking weak banks to carry out the government’s economic and social policies could increase the drain on the public purse. These experts say that the financial assistance, while helpful in the short run, could require weak banks to engage in lending practices that will lose them even more money, and that the government inevitably will become more heavily involved in dictating how banks do their business.

I suspect they will be ‘inevitably dictating’ other things as well before this year ends. [UPDATE: Well, that didn't take long!!]

By definition, the majority of people facing from ‘upstream’ into historical events we now know to have been horrific thought ‘it’ could not happen ‘here’ or to them. Then it did.

Keep watch and keep praying.