PLANET CALIFORNIA

Or maybe the real problem is the message, not the film. And who delivers it.


You are in error because you do not know the Scriptures or the Power of God.
Matthew 22:29

That was Jesus answering a widowed man with seven dead wives who wanted to know which wife would be with him in Heaven. The guy just didn't get it. It wasn't about rules and regulations, it was about salvation and love. Equate the widower's attitude to secularists when they speak about Christianity. They just don't get it, or don't want to get it.

Critiquing Christianity, along with the film has become the latest version of religion bashing which borders persecution, if you get what I mean--more smugness and pomposity than usual --seemed like another great chance to pile on. And quite frankly, I don't understand why they're all so mad.

I question the motives of people like David Geffen and Jeffrey Katzenbach who, net rumor has it, are actively blacklisting Mel. Why? Since when do they care about anti-semitism? Don't they also say they hate Israel? Could it be, oh, I don't know (beat) JEALOUSY?

The film is harsh, brutal, disturbing, vicious, heartbreaking, profoundly serious, deeply touching--for a Christian. I already knew Christ's death was awful, and realizing His suffering on the cross, an image Christians see in every church, is what finally convinced my heart that Christ is real. That indwelling knowledge represents a monumental leap to a higher level of understanding and faith, for which I'm grateful. Imagery helps in comprehending the violence surrounding any crucifixion, especially Christ's.

The much talked about violence is hardly "pornographic" as The Hollywood Reporter self righteously states. It'll sober you up if you're a Christian. But it won't deliver you into a dormant Ku Klux Klan cell as suggested by writers from major print media. Most directors would find it hard to pretty up the death scene of Jesus. Come to think of it, the films we saw at the church when I was a kid were pretty darned gory. "It is as it is, "said the Pope, who evidently listened to all his assertiveness training tapes. He's right.

Mel's portrayal of the Jews is heavy handed, also of the Romans, those absolute monsters with Tails of Nine whips and Morning Stars. There are demons throughout the story, which is appropriate because Satan seems to show up during such events.* But even if the Jews did kill Jesus, which technically, they didn't, yet they did choose Barrabas over Christ--even if they did, who cares? That's the forgiveness part of the story. Christians have been instructed by God that the Jews are His chosen people and they are His. The Jew hating issue, here in America, seems like a bogus argument. This is not Oberammergau, for heaven's sake.

Why Can't Christians Have Their Own Movie?

The securlarists' over reaction to The Passion of The Christ reveals one very unfortunate possibility: they hate Christians. I can only conclude they would like to marginize Christians by grabbing every opportunity to discredit one of Christ's well known followers. If the uproar over a movie is this loud, what's next? I'm beginning to think they're my enemy--something I'm not comfortable saying.

What's obscene, a word overused in The Passion reviews, is not its violence or dialogue. Rather it is that Christians can't produce and distribute into popular culture their own movie without the the secularists becoming dedicated to destroying its producers, writers, directors, actors, back scene people, its existence. That's kind of scary, isn't it?

Frankly, I'm not as worried about secularists not knowing the Scriptures, I doubt it would really make a difference. What these folks should be worrying about is not knowing the power of God.

Thanks for the read



*A scene showing Christ rising up from Hell immediately following his death will interest Bible scholars. There's a debate about whether Jesus saw Hell at that time. Interesting that the director included it.

This election year will be painful. It's already begun.

We've watched the Democrats assail the president and everything he stands for despite the billion dollar pledges to Africa to help with THEIR AIDS pandemic; he's been called an occupier and imperialist despite securing the freedom of some 50 million people (yes, real people) in Afghanistan and Iraq; he's rearranged the economy such that we've had major growth in all areas (yes, even jobs).

The president has shown his good will toward immigrant and illegal immigrant factions by trying to do something, anything, to ameliorate the huge problems we have with our borders. Does he get credit? No.

Moreover, our homeland has never been more secure, despite the cries of civil right abuses from the left. No credit, to be sure. The president seems to have worked himself out of a job.

He's lifted the military above its former level, regardless of noncompliant Congressional Dems' roadblock and dubious shows political support of our troops.

What else? You can name them, I'm sure.

The Fight of Senator Kerry's Life

Arrogance graduates to hubris when Senator Kerry rails against the only politician in the past thirteen years who's had the cajones to stand up to the dictators and tyrants of our time. Kerry calls him a fake. So, those flight logs and records showing the president was flying jet fighters were, what? Fake? At least he didn't throw someone else's service medals at the White House as Kerry did (his own medals hang on his senate office wall). Typical symbolism by the left signifying nothing.

Kerry tells us, along with other spiteful souls such as the occasionally sober Ted Kennedy and fatuous Al Gore that the president betrayed his country by taking it into a war of preemption. How can knocking off sworn enemies, new and old, be called betrayal? "He's sent our sons and daughters out to die for a preplanned war," these fools insist.

First of all, the Bush Doctrine is sound and logical in light of a terrorist-ridden world. Secondly, this baloney about our "sons and daughters" would be humerous if the argument didn't completely ignore the fact America now has a professional, voluntary armed forces. No one's being sent anywhere without their prior permission (signing up).

At every turn, this president has been assaulted by those who truly hate him and what America is--an America that everyone in the world seems to want to come to, by the way.

Hey, Senator Kerry, Psst. Over Here!

Got a newsflash for ya, Pal. Vietnam is not and was not Bush's war. Vietnam resulted in the same old tired problem the U.S. faces regularly: hyperpolitical Europeans leaving their colonial interests to their own devices, abandoning to the world another mess. France gave us Vietnam. Great Britain bungled the new Middle East. Want me to keep going? Indonesia? How about Korea? China, Russia?

I look forward to the day someone debates the record with Kerry. For instance, is it really okay for Senator Kerry to have enmeshed himself with the traitors of the sixties and seventies, e.g., Jane Fonda, Tom Hayden, et al? These were and still are extreme leftists. They may have all had Botox and facelifts, but they're still the resolute, weathy anti-Americans they always were. Their packaging may have been updated, but their views still revolve around a hopelessly sick, neurotic and ego driven ideal about how to socially engineer their world to their liking and sensibilities.

Kerry's voting record shocks most people when they realize just how far gone the guy is. Look it up, if you want to. Kerry's so far over to the left, he's almost bounced to the far side of the right (other extremists).

Bette Davis Said It

Fasten your seatbelts, boys. We're in for a long, rough ride.

Now is not the time to feel crazed about the news. Remember that most of the folks paying attention right now are nothing more than political junkies like me. Our views won't change, likely, and they only precede the real fight to win the hearts and minds of reasonable people like you.

So, the president's appearance on Meet The Press didn't satisfy the medialogues. Big deal. Remember, Reagan was down in the polls about this time in his re-election history.

It'll be all right. Just hang it there. And the next clown that tells you he hates Bush, ask him why. When he inevitably responds with something stupid like, "this is a oil man's war," or "he invaded Iraq to fix his Father's honor," laugh out loud. Then give him facts. Of course, this is about oil. You drive cars, don't you? But it is also about democracy and freedom's only beachhead in that horrible cauldron of hatred and fanaticism. Bush One's honor? Prove it.

As I said, this will be a tough year, but we have to go through it.

Thanks for the read.

Watching the primary results, I'm puzzled why the Dems ignore the terrorism issue.

I'm also wondering if Americans are ignoring the danger.

A deathstar covered nipple at half time seems much more important. Then there are the many felony trials of other celebrities, trips to Iraq by a movie actor, famous for Jerry Lewis impression in I Am Sam, who had to see how things "really" were. Don't forget the statement by a silly fat man from Michigan that the president is a deserter. The list of famous names screaming they'll take America back is as long as my list of ingredients for Grandma's fruitcake.. A Hate Bush rally at the Beverly Hilton put on by the wife of the most negative pen ever taken to paper made top news; and Hwood power couples have thrown their support behind the anti Bush movement.

Celebrity. Why in the world would someone with any substance or conviction listen to people whose only known talents are acting or singing or producing? Why would you and I even take the time to read their news stories? Most of these people haven't even graduated from high school. How could we be so entranced by their views?

The Joke's On Us

Along with their notorious stupidity (Shakespeare alludes to their limited aptitude and intelligence), actors are also infamous for going off the deep end. John Wilkes Booth wasn't exactly the most balanced individual who ever trod the boards. Jane Fonda, the privileged child of a great actor, betrayed her country in Vietnam. Many others decided they too had the mental horsepower to take on the grand issues of our time, only to be later shown as lightweights.

Jane Fonda caused irreparable damage to this country and to our men and women in Vietnam. John Booth, a domestic terrorist, killed President Lincoln, leaving the country in shock and dismay. The actions of these and other malcontented artists are nothing more than ego massaging exercises displaying deep insecurities underneath. Their actions scream, "Look at me." Unfortunately, their egos have cost lives. Those selfish, egocentric punchinellos whose guilt is assuaged by time and, yes, celebrity. By the way, yes I am equating Jane Fonda with John Wilkes Booth. Her ridiculous trip to Hanoi prolonged that war.

Terrorists realize words have consequences. What these neurotics stars don't seem to get, nor did the anti war people in Vietnam, their words, actions, protests and harrangues have consequences to the people in the fight for their livesin Iraq, Afghanistan, in the streets of New York, the docks in Miami, Seattle and Oakland, even the baggage handlers in the basements of our airports.

You Have To Ask Why

Good people can disagree, I guess. But, after so much evidence of terrorism throughout the world, and now on our shores, I have to wonder what's behind all the protests.

Why would anyone in his right mind not be fearful of the terrorist promise to destroy America and everything it stands for--abroad and at home?

A strong sense of self-preservation should be enough to pulls us together. Alas, denial seems to replace it. Denial and stupidity. Our celebrities are just too dumb to know any better. Instead of using their talent and exposure to help Americans be prepared, they flaunt their dubious lifestyles in front of our kids, pull the rug out from under parents and complain about America's imperialistic wars.

I'm just glad the president understands that his role is to protect me and my family at all costs. That is his constitutional duty and contractually, he's bound to it. Be thankful. When it comes to contracts, Democrats, as you'll recall, usually decide to comply only if we all know what the meaning of "is" is.

Janet Jackson and Justin Timberlake, a couple of graceless, obnoxious young people are not only out of line and over the top with their blatantly sexual lyrics, they are participating in a burlesque of sad consequences. Plus they are liars. But then, why would anyone expect anything different? Timberlake, someone only the parents of preteen girls and the preteens themselves know, told a whopper when he said in a press release that the costume malfunctioned.

Malfunctioned? Why not use NASA language, you imbecile, since the folks in Houston were memorializing all things NASA? How about, the suit failed?

Obviously nothing failed, except CBS's gatekeepers. The MTV show, from the network every parent in the western world should fear, belonged on the Las Vegas Strip, not the half time at the Super Bowl.

The baring of Jackson's pastie-covered breast was outrageous because it played to and titilated young boys who watch football games. When some hedonistic twit from lala land tells us "it's just entertainment," I want to throw things. Considering Jackson's pedophilliac brother's background, she doesn't go far to get her lack of taste and morality.

As an aside, I thought Jackson's costume looked like it came out of the Planet of the Apes wardrobe department. Fitting, I suppose. Both these people acted like apes.

If I were a teenager's parent, I'd need to talk with little Johnnie and Mary about how those people are not like us. Then I'd get their butts to church. It seems church is the only safe place from this assault on our sensibilities. It's nuts, absolutely nuts.

But then, what else would we expect?

The next question is what the NFL planning to do about all this. Perhaps a few million letters from outraged parents of future ballplayers would help.

Bush Must Have Hearings, I Suppose

As much as I hate to kowtow to the anti war people, the feeling is strong that President Bush needs to clear the decks with a panel of knowitalls to see what happened with our "intelligence."

I suggest this newest blue ribbon panel start with the Clinton Administration's naive contention that human intelligence is icky (and they hated icky). They saw too many dead people, I guess, and decided we didn't need to snoop.

To date, no one has answered this very important challenge: if Saddam Hussein did not have WMDs, why then did he not allow the inspection teams in and spare himself and his country the horror of war? It makes no sense.

Enough. This is the abolsute last time I'll bring up the WMD question. I've had it with this innane discussion. It didn't matter before we went to war, and it doesn't matter now.

Staying Safe in an Unsafe World

The first step is keeping those elected officials in office who honestly fear the gathering storm of terrorism. We cannot remove the president and his four horsemen (Rummy, Powell, Ashcroft and Cheney) from their self-declared number one constitutional task: keeping me and my family safe from attack.

Shifting or changing leadership in the midst of this world war is risky. Can you imagine someone like John Kerry, the guy who threw his Vietnam medals away in a vainglorious attention getter, or Howard Dean, the egomaniac from somewhere in Vermont who cannot control his temper nor handle a small 41 million dollar campaign budget (he's down to 5 mill now, having spent it all on those idiotic children running his campaign office)? The other Dems in the race don't have a chance, so I won't mention them.

I pray for the WMDs to be found. Yes, I do. I also pray that these terrorists do no further harm to our country. It's a big request, isn't it? But, I've prayed for bigger things.

Thanks for the read.

If there was ever a time for straight thinking, it is now.

The media's fixation on WMDs is liable to disrupt the important work being done in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as our domestic War on Terror. Regardless of the final disposition of the argument--are there or are there not WMDs--the fact remains the U.S. and its partners have developed the momentum to break the back of terror at home and abroad.

U.N. Resolution 1441, a follow up of twelve or thirteen resolutions stating over and over again that Saddam Hussein and his treacherous regime was in violation of the peace fire agreement of the Gulf War. Everyone knew and agreed what the material facts contained, i.e., WMDs and nuclear capability remained in the hands of Iraq which presented problems for not only the middle east but also the rest of the world.

No one disagrees with that fact.

Now the U.S. must content with a nitpicking group of elite world mediasts and propagandists who insist the U.S. invaded Iraq illegally. As with every lie, it seems the more often it is told the more it is believed.

What a tragedy it would be to let this monumental victory go away, short of the huge accomplishments left in the middle east. What a tragedy to allow the one world view Europeans and their supporters to somehow win this stupid argument.

Thanks for the read.