re: #139 Sharmuta

As I read his initial article, I again have to wonder, what is the point of this screed? It makes no sense. It’s like reading a fjordman post, just not quite so long, in that it says a lot without saying much at all.

I spent the past hour reading through some of his writings. He has an odd writing style in which not unlike you describe he seems to use hundreds of words to describe a simple idea. Then I listened to him speak in an online video an it was like seeing two different people.

I did run into this piece in which he incorrectly defines evolution and grossly simplifies the political implications of a creationist candidate:

From The hand of God is there also:

Evolution and its implications are profoundly important to all faiths, peoples and politics: it contends with nothing less than the origin and purpose of man, and as such addresses — though it cannot on its own terms ever answer — the question of existence. The question that Matthews asked was suggested by “a politico.com reader,” and the probability is that the reader was one of two types: either a politicized Christian who regards the issue as a litmus test in itself; or a leftist who thinks it equally important for opposite reasons. Whomever he is, we can say one thing with certainty: on this, in his assumptions, he is wrong.