Iran's Mahmoud Ahmadinejad may be making a truly terrible mistake, one that could set the Middle East on fire--starting with Iran. The late and unlamented Saddam Hussein of Iraq liked to pose, posture and pretend that he had weapons of mass destruction. He thought that it gave him "street cred." What it gave him was a necktie party. He didn't believe that we would attack and invade based only on his braggadocio and without solid evidence. He bet on ambiguity and lost.

While neither Israel nor any western nation wants Iran to have nuclear weapons, the calculation of the need to strike is complex. Civilian deaths must be measured against strategic gains. And the political ramifications of the damage to Israel and the west if there is a strike must be balanced against any military advantage. Finally, the political cost to the west has to be set against the political gain by Ahmadinejad personally. We don't want to give him what he wants.
©2010
www.Dobrer.com

KCRW's treasure, Warren Olney, could not make it for the final day of the fundraising drive. He was felled by a bicycle accident, and while they assured us that he was cognitively intact, they implored us to make our contributions "in honor of Warren."

Both KCRW and Warren Olney deserve our support, but this is mawkish, tasteless and belongs on Jerry's telethon. Will our contributions help Warren get well, and if we don't make a pledge, will he, like Tinkerbell, just tragically fade away? We are accustomed to programs being held hostage during pledge drives (10 more pledges and you can listen to your show...) but the health and healing of a host?

©2010 Jonathan Dobrer
www.Dobrer.com

I've noticed the tabloids in recent months are signaling a meltdown in the Brangelina situation. It does remind me of my puzzling over why social conservatives didn't complain loudly about how Hollywood's glamour couple was redefining marriage far more dramatically than two guys in West Hollywood: the two guys in West Hollywood are seeking the legal rights that accompany a lifelong commitment; but Brad and Angelina left lifetime vows in the dust in order to shack up, adopt and have babies, and then crack this large new family up too. Unless you believe that being gay could become a pandemic, the Brangelina situation seems like a far bigger influence on straight 16-year-olds.

Brangelina posed a far greater "threat" to the traditional definition of marriage. But social traditionalists didn't hit them the way they hit gays. Why is that?

My ruminations about the intersection of religion and politics have caused quite a ruckus among many people. What I find fascinating is a particular division among Christians: conservative Christians find my stuff to be awful and misguided, while liberal & progressive Christians find it to be exhilarating and eye-opening. Go figure. What's even more interesting is that I once sided with the conservatives in hating the kind of person that I am now.

But if you're going to read one book relating to my spiritual processings, I'd rather you read this one, by the Rev. Greg Boyd.

In it, Boyd offers precisely the sort of Biblical evidence that some readers here are demanding regarding the contention that the current conservative mix of faith & politics constitutes a kind of flag-waving idolatry. He uses Pauline theology skillfully to dismantle notions that any country can find "favor" in the eyes of the Lord within a world which Paul says is ruled by sin. If you're a conservative who can read this and not be challenged or even changed, you're spiritually and intellectually dead.

Many of my evangelical friends are disappointed with how I drifted from the Church, after spending all those years studying Calvin, Luther, Barth, Brunner, Schleiermacher, Yancey, Nouwen, Lewis, Merton and countless others.

I tell them that if there were more guys like Boyd, I'd be serving communion with them this Sunday. But the fact that there aren't many guys like this does have an impact on what I see God in heaven up to, as it relates to evangelicals.

This stuff is all so deeply personal, I know it is. I know some friends feel I'm being uncharitable in how I assess Christians and how I'm so outraged by the "rightwing clump" that I see in my imagination. I myself spent 15 years saying, "These folks aren't the real Christians"... and finally I decided, "Actually, maybe they are the real Christians, and the rest of us are the imposters...."

But as for Mr. Newland on this board, I find it interesting that he believes the Roman Catholic Church is the one true authority on Christian faith, when his last two popes have taken a sharply different view of politics than he does. Cafeteria Catholicism strikes again...?

History is written by the winners. It is written by the folks who, as Mohammad Ali used to say, "Have the complexion and the connection" get their story told. Sometimes they write just for each other and sometimes to a distant posterity. Either way other stories, view points and truths get left out or distorted.

In theory I'd be okay with a National Lutheran Week, but they don't need to play catch up. Every week is National Lutheran Week with Garrison Keillor!
©2010 Jonathan Dobrer
www.Dobrer.com

One of the cornerstones of being a Libra is that we are always interested in what's fair. Which is why I don't really believe in Black, Asian, Hispanic or Women's History Month. After all, they aren't the only ones who've contributed to the rise and downfall of this country. Others have, too, so they should be getting all the credit or all the blame, depending on how you look at it. So here are some recommendations:

First, I propose that we have a Jewish History month featuring recipes for matzo ball soup, falafel and kugel along with things about our culture, history, philosophy and a few prayers for rain and things like that in a calendar format.

Jonathan will appear in Liberal History Month, which will happen when we run through the Hmong and all those other history months. There will be a disclaimer on how wrong he's been for supporting some of those candidates.

Earl will be featured under Black History month. We will feature some of his columns and some essays about how easy I am to work with.

Rob will be under Pakistani-American History Month. His smiling mug will replace Gustavo Dudamel's on Ventura Boulevard.

And last but not least, we will have Editor's History Month where we will have our overworked and underpaid Mariel. There will be a pictorial where she signs my checks with my humongous raise.

Then maybe we will all just get along.

While the term Idaho Baptists sounds like a sports franchise, this refers to the, well, the Baptist missionaries from Idaho currently jailed in Haiti and charged with trafficking children. I'm somewhat surprised at the passion and anger all over the Blogosphere concerning these folks. Some are condemning the Haitians for daring to enforce their laws and statutes--particularly in times of chaos and need--and even more particularly against people who only meant well. Others, with equal passion and moral clarity, consider the Baptists to be racist kidnappers who show utter disregard for the law, the truth or the sovereign rights of Haiti.

I think that self-interest, compassion and possibly justice should move the Haitians to release the Minnesota Baptists immediately.

©2010 Jonathan Dobrer
www.Dobrer.com

I have never been one to join organizations and go to meetings because I hate sitting around and listening to other people yammer and generally spout off hot air. I'd rather stay home and de-flea the dog or varnish the bathroom vanity.

But there is an organization I am a card-carrying member of, and that is the Fashion Police. It's an international organization made up mostly of women whose chief activities are rolling our eyes, chortling and commenting on what other people are wearing. Joan Rivers is the honorary president; Melissa Rivers is the Secretary and I am the Honorary Chair of the local chapter.

And like those on missions rescuing people from natural disasters, our work is never done. Driving to work the other day, I spotted my first felony and all before 8:00 a.m., too. It was a teenage girl in leggings and boots bounding across the street. Sensing a violation at hand, I coasted towards the red light for a closer inspection and noticed it, a Code 409, a cellulite and leggings violation. Now I have nothing against cellulite or leggings except when they violate that code of the Fashion Police Bible, which states "thou shalt not wear leggings as pants when thou possesseth too much of the cellulite matter."

The rule further on states that no one whose measurements are ober 30-30-30 or whose body mass index is more than .00001 should even think about wearing them as pants. And this means you, Mr. & Mrs. America, or anyone who hasn't seen the inside of a gym since season one of American Idol.

The other thing that causes our Botoxed brows to wrinkle (as much as possible) and furrow is cleavage. Now we have nothing against having any when it helps fill out an outfit. It's just when it starts to look like a moody fashion designer walked off the job and didn't include the top half of a garment that we get worried. So much so that someone brought it up at our last online convention, and we agreed that an inch to 1 ½ inches of cleavage was good for men and women, no more. And forget about any tats with hearts and fluttering butterflies on it. With that, the guidelines change to ½ to ¾ of an inch. This is the public, after all, and not the inside of a surgeon's or a doctor's office.

And so long as John and Jeanette Q. Public continue acting like they were hit over the head with a mallet, we will continue to protect, render and serve.

The Daily Kos Research 2000 survey that found a majority or a significant percent of Republicans think president Obama is a Red, foreigner masquerading as an American, is marshmallow soft on terrorism, a racist, thinks Palin would be a better President, and should be booted out of office was hardly the revelation of the ages. Other polls and surveys that surveyed GOP rank and file opinion have found pretty much the same thing. The pundits mock the polls as a kind of what do you expect from a party that is chock full of loony, bigoted, paranoid cranks. A party that for the past two decades has egged on, pandered to, and openly courted a wide assortment of anti-government, frustrated Deep South rednecks.
That's a mistake, a potentially fatal political mistake. The endless pack of conservative bloggers, talk show gabbers, websites, and chatrooms that have made Obama bashing a lucrative growth industry with their endless rants, crude, racist digs, slurs, cartoon depictions has been wildly effective. Polls now show that Obama is the most polarizing president in recent American history. And Americans heap almost as much scorn on Democrats as the GOP for the political bickering, infighting, and paralysis. This is not an accident. The GOP has partly tuned the political tide by re-energizing and reorganizing its oldest and most dependable base, the same white males in the Deep South and the Heartland states who are routinely made the butt of fun and ridicule.

Conservative, lower income white males are the GOP's strength and they did not fade away with Obama's win. The 2008 presidential vote gave ample warning of that. Obama won a significant percent of votes from white independents and young white voters. But their numbers came nowhere close to being a majority of white votes. Among Southern and Heartland America white male voters, Obama made almost no impact. Overall, Republican rival John McCain, garnered nearly 60 percent of the white vote.
Even this doesn't tell the whole story. Rightwing populism with its mix of xenophobia, loath of government as too liberal, too tax and spend, and too permissive, and its latent bigotry has been the engine that powered two Reagan and Bush White House wins. Scores of GOP governors, senators and congresspersons have twisted and massaged wedge issues to win and hold office and to maintain regional and national political dominance. The GOP grassroots brand of populism has stirred millions operating outside the confines of the GOP mainstream. In 2008 many of these voters stayed home. Even Palin wasn't enough to budge them. Their defection was more a personal and visceral reaction to the bumbles of Bush than a radical and permanent sea change in overall white voter sentiment about Obama, the Democrats, and the GOP. Even if the GOP is, as is widely seen, an insular party of Deep South and narrow Heartland, rural and, non-college educated blue collar whites as polls amusingly like to remind this is still not a demographic to be dismissed. The numbers are huge.
Much has been made since the election that they are a dwindling percent of the electorate, and that Hispanics, Asian, black, young, and women voters will permanently tip the balance of political power to the Democrats in coming national elections. Blue collar white voters have shrunk from more than half of the nation's voters to less than forty percent. The assumption based solely on this slide and the increased minority population numbers and regional demographic changes is that the GOP's white vote strategy is doomed to fail. This ignores three major factors in voting patterns. Elections are almost always won by candidates with a solid and impassioned core of bloc voters. White males, particularly older white males, vote consistently and faithfully. They traditionally vote in a far greater percentage than Hispanics and blacks.

More importantly blue collar white male voters can be easily aroused to vote on the emotional wedge issues; abortion, family values, anti-gay marriage and rights, and tax cuts. The GOP simply snatched a page from its standard playbook and turned these emotional drenched issues against Obama and the Democrats. The twist is that the backlash came early in Obama's White House tenure, and the GOP governorship wins in New Jersey, Virginia and Scott Brown in Massachusetts are the results.

Tarring Obama as a tax and big spend, closet socialist is not the only ploy that the GOP has used to drag itself off the political mat and do more than fantasize about seizing back congressional power in 2010. It also banks that pundits will continue to mock the GOP as a washed up fringe party stocked with frustrated bigots and political dregs. That's more than a big mistake; it's a prescription for political disaster.

Earl Ofari Hutchinson is an author and political analyst. His new book is, How Obama Governed: The Year of Crisis and Challenge (Middle Passage Press) will be released in January 2010.