This Tuesday was Super Tuesday and we had about a thousand delegates up in the air for the presidential race. Usually if there is a very strong candidate, this is the day that it all really shows if most of those delegates go to one person. This time around, however, it was pretty inconclusive who will win the nomination.
On the Democratic side, Obama and Hillary are neck in neck, with Hillary ahead by less than a hundred delegates. The problem for Hillary now is that she has pretty much exhausted her delegate rich supporting states on the east and west coasts and most of the states to go are either in the south or in the midwest, which is Obama country. The way that yesterday went, I really believe that Obama has a very good chance of winning the Democratic nomination.
On the GOP side of things, the results are a little more definite. John McCain took some key large voting states and is now in the lead with more votes than Romney and Huckabee combined. He is going to get a lot of momentum from this, but I think that Romney has a pretty good shot at the nomination still. There are some very powerful states that are still to vote especially in the Great Lakes regions where Mitt seems to have the upper hand. Also Pennsylvania has a hefty seventy-odd votes that would make up a good part of the deficit.
Along other lines, our first shooting for Dialtone went very well, besides the freezing conditions and lack of tea in the refreshment area. I was up that morning at the most ungodly hour of five thirty but I felt much better than I expected. The hour and a half long drive got a little tedious after a while, especially without a radio, but the way back seemed faster. On the shoot itself, we spent a lot of time perfecting our technical setup (lighting, sound, etc.) and the end result was, we only got about twenty minutes of actual footage for about a eleven hour shoot. Of those twenty minutes of footage, after editing, we will get about six minutes of footage that will actually go into the movie. So, do the math: Six minutes of final footage divided by eleven hours equals about thirty seconds of final footage an hour! We plan to go a lot faster this Saturday when we finish up with this location.
As for school, I am finishing up my speed reading and memory courses and starting to work towards the Analyzing and Interpreting Literature CLEP. Tons of fun. On the side, I am researching a paper, and possible documentary on the Morality of the Revolutionary War. A little more interesting as I am finding some pretty fascinating stuff.
Until next time,
Sam
11 comments:
How come you didn't mention RP ?? Is it because he only won 5 delegates? The fat lady has sung ! He should drop out ! So that people will not waste their votes ! Besides the only thing that I've heard ya'll have against Romney is that he is a mormon ! I would rather have a mormon with good principles, values, and stances on the issues, then a "christian" who (among other things) wants to pull our troops out NOW without a victory !
Who would you rather win the Dem. nomination ?
Melissa
You know, Melissa, I don't mind you having a difference of opinion from me, but I do wish that you would stop being so angry and inflammatory and be as gracious to my candidate as I am towards yours. Yes, Ron Paul had a relatively poor turnout yesterday, but I do not believe that he should drop out. Not that I believe that he can win, but that I want his message to get out to as many people as possible as it can. Just so you know, Ron Paul is, in fact, a born again Christian who believes in the biblical standard of government. He just doesn't wear his faith on his sleeve like Mike Huckabee.
As to the Democratic nomination, I really haven't studyed them closely side by side, but I think I would prefer Obama over Hillary as president. But, on the flip side, I think that Hillary is a lot more beatable than Obama, so I would prefer to see her win the nomination.
Sam,
Whose article are you reading on the morality of the Revolutionary war? Just curious?
I'm really reading a bunch of them. One big one that has really been interesting is one by David Barton. Here is the link: http://www.wallbuilders.com/LIBissuesArticles.asp?id=128
I am quite familiar with that article. What about it do you find interesting?
I personally haven't read the article, but have recieved bits and snatches of it from my dad, when he was reading it.
Had you been coming to prayer meeting, you would have recieved Mr. McKinley's take on the article. It was very interesting. I believe he wrote an article on the topic as well, after reading the one by Barton. I suggest you talk to him!
Jonathan
I would suggest you read the article. One of the things that I find missing, in many objections to the morality of the war for American Independence is a historical excursus on what the belief was at the time on the interpretation of Romans 13.
Of the 56 signers of the Declaration of Independence, 23 of them held seminary or Divinity degrees! The war for Independence was commonly called the preacher's war because of the steady calling for it from the pulpits of America's churches for 30+ years! I have a very hard time writing off very outspoken men of God such as George Whitfield, Samuel Davies, and others.
Every one of these men was very familiar with Romans 13, yet somehow they were in favor of independence. I believe there is more here than meets the eye. It's not as simple as
Revolution is wrong.
The American War for Independence was a Revolution.
Therefore, the American War for Independence was wrong.
I'm not saying that I can prove it was right, but this is what I am starting from.
I will definitely talk to Mr. McKinley about this, thanks for letting me know about him.
Sam,
The Puritans of the time would not have championed rebellion. This can be seen in the exegesis of that quintessential Puritan, Matthew Henry. Here is what he says on Romans 13... "We are taught how to conduct ourselves towards magistrates, and those in authority over us, called here the higher powers, intimating their authority (they are powers), and their dignity (they are higher powers), including not only the king as supreme, but all inferior magistrates under him; and yet it is expressed, not by the persons that are in that power, but the place of power itself, in which they are. However the persons themselves may be wicked, and of those vile persons whom the citizen of Zion contemneth (Ps.15:4), yet the just power which they have must be submitted to and obeyed...."
"Our Lord Jesus was so reproached, though he told them his kingdom was not of this world; no marvel, then, if his followers have been loaded in all ages with the like calumnies, called factious, seditious, and turbulent, and looked upon as the troublers of the land, their enemies having found such representations needful for the justifying of their barbarous rage against them. The apostle therefore, for the obviating of this reproach and the clearing of Christianity from it, shows that obedience to civil magistrates is one of the laws of Christ, whose religion helps make people good subjects; and it was very unjust to charge upon Christianity that faction and rebellion to which its principles and rules are so directly contrary...."
"Besides, Paul had taught them that they were not under the law; they were made free by Christ. Lest this liberty should be turned into licentiousness, and misconstrued to countenance faction and rebellion, the apostle enjoins obedience to civil government, which was the more necessary to be pressed now because the magistrates were heathens and unbelievers, which yet did not destroy their civil power and authority."
Matthew Henry's theology was well known in Puritan circles.
Also, associating Whitefield with rebellion is a gross misquotation. In his bio in the "Cyclopedia Of Biblical, Theological, And Ecclesiastical Literature," we read many times of Whitefield coming to America as a missionary and yet not remaining in America due to homesickness. With such a love for the motherland, how could he be a proponent of rebellion against that motherland? Also, Whitefield died in 1770, 5 years before the outbreak of hostilities against England. It is unlikely that Whitefield would have spoken out against his motherland particularly when you consider that Whitefield was a gospel preacher first and foremost. Methodist ministers, known for their fanaticism, more than likely were the large proponents for rebellion.
Good point, Jon. I officially retract my statement that George Whitfield was in any way (express or implied) involved in the War for American Independence.
That Matthew Henry quote was a good find too.
You still haven't addressed the overwhelming mass of pastors that were involved in the American Revolution, either serving in the military, supporting it from their pulpits, or signing the Declaration of Independence.
My research still isn't complete on this subject yet, so I'm not really ready to start seriously debating the conclusions that I haven't really come to (yet).
The point Sam, is the Revolutionary war was unbiblical ! period, the end ! Romans distinctly says that ! And the pastors who were involved with the DOI were going against the Bible! Haven't you been listening to the past couple sermons ?!?!
Melissa
Sam,
Who called it a preachers war?
I first heard the phrase coined by David Barton, try this article on for size:
http://www.christianitytoday.com/holidays/
fourthofjuly/features/50h010.html
Still studying.......
Sam
Post a Comment