The Pendragon's Hall

Does anyone believe this? Fox News ran a story today on what the 2008 presidential candidates would be doing if they were not in politics. In the latest example of how Democrats posture shamelessly even in stupid instances like this, only the Republican candidates appeared to take the interview at all seriously. Mitt Romney said he would be an auto executive...well, that makes sense, he used to work with cars. Giuliani said he would be a sports announcer...man, do I wish this were reality! But yeah, that's a plausible alternative I guess. Sam Brownback, I guess, wants to be a farmer...well, sure, he's from Kansas. And Mike Huckabee, who is actually in a band (the reasons not to vote for this guy are mounting by the day), would like to cut a cd track apparently. Even the one honorable Democrat running (Bill Richardson) said he would want to play baseball...I get all of these. But does anyone seriously believe that Obama would be an architect? That Hillary would be in a university? OK, as head of the College Greens yeah maybe, but as a thinker? I don't see it. It's just her way, like dropping Rodham from her name, of telling people, "This all I want to do." And Fox naively believes she let her guard down. Not her! But seriously, does anyone really believe Edwards would choose to be "a mill supervisor"!? Oh please, now he's really stretching it. Whatever pangs of conscience his lawyer-status affords him, I'm sure being worth $25 million makes it easier. And Dennis Kucinich would have wanted to be an astronaut?! Actually I take it back--that one makes sense. If you're already a space cadet...why not go the whole way? I'm willing to pay for the rocket.

It's a good thing the hopeful Pendragon has a sense of humor or even the distant prospect of one of these clowns running the country would plunge him into a pit of depression.

As it is Sunday, it's a good time for reflecting on Christian topics. The Pendragon would like to offer my readers a quick translation of what pastors really mean when they say stuff. They have a code too.

"I'm preaching on a topic most pastors aren't comfortable preaching on," means "I've preached on it before, and at least ten other pastors in this general area have preached on it, all saying the same thing: 'I'm preaching on a topic most pastors aren't comfortable preaching on.'"

"I was surprised to read...[insert Biblical background fact here]," means, "Any kid who's sat through Sunday School knows this and I learned it in seminary and used it last week as an example, but I'm hoping you won't notice I've recycled my messages."

"I read a story recently," means "Some weirdo I don't know forwarded this story to my mother-in-law and she shared it with me."

"I had a sermon all prepared but God is telling me to do something differently," means "Well, I had two choices and now I feel like this one."

"God is telling me there is someone here that needs salvation," means, "Come on, people, I'm dying up here"

Of course this is not an across-the-board dissection. Sometimes God may actually have told the Pastor to do something different, and there is almost always probably someone in need of salvation...the other three are pretty much always true. The Pendragon respects men of the cloth, but they are rapidly losing points for originality when it seems like they've all attended the same conferences. Not a plug for abandoning Christianity, but a plea for clergy to stop reading out of a book other than the Bible.

The dog bites the hand that feeds him. If Carl Bernstein's new book on Hillary Clinton, "A Woman in Charge," takes down the Clinton II for President campaign, the Pendragon promises to reverse his opinion of the man whose dubious reporting made a major scandal out of minor political backstabbing and took down the most promising president between Eisenhower and Reagan. The Times of London is suggesting that Bernstein's unauthorized biography drawing on sources close to the Clintons comes close several times to suggesting Bill and Hill have not been entirely honest about their lives. Of course we cranky conservatives have been saying that for years, but it's nice to finally have you on board, Carl. I hope you know what you're getting yourself into--Nixon may have put you on some imaginary list of enemies he supposedly had, but now you're going to be audited by the IRS. Hope your taxes are in order. I also hope you're not in the habit of walking in dark parks at night--or you may end up "committing suicide" like Vince Foster. The Pendragon admires bravery in all men and women--even bitter foes--and this is a gutsy move, Bernstein. Prepare to have your not-so-pretty private life dragged out for the world to see. And I hope you're better at fact-checking than your buddy Woodward because if you leave any loophole at all, Hill will find it and claim you're part of the vast-right-wing conspiracy. Better polish off the ballot you cast for McGovern in 1972 and get it ready for display. In the meantime, can I get an autographed copy of your book? Welcome to the winning side!

The Democrats had their little pow-wow debate two nights ago and, surprise, Washington pundits and commentators claimed a victory for Clinton while polls of the in-state viewers of South Carolina gave the edge to Obama. This is getting scary. If the choice is between Hillary/Obama on the one hand and Giuliani/McCain on the other hand, what is the poor Pendragon to do? It's enough to make one support the flagging campaign of John Edwards, or even the non-existent campaign of Al Gore.

I knew this would happen. MSNBC reported today that a high school student near Chicago, Illinois, has been arrested and suspended for writing a violent essay in his English class. The essay apparently fantasizes about walking into a building, shooting all the people in it, "and having sex with the dead bodies." Disturbing, right? The student in question, Allen Lee, is a straight-A student with no discipline problems who enlisted in the Marines, and of course the press is trying to drum up support for him as the kid caught by the backlash of the Virginia Tech shootings. He is in counseling at the moment while the school tries to decide what to do with him. Lee says he was simply following the assignment, which directed him to write what he was thinking--"do not judge or censor what you are writing." The kid is obviously weird, but I mean, come on! What kind of an assignment is that? I know it's common--that's the problem. It's that whole introspective, obsessed with ourselves culture re-emerging. Why would you tell someone to just write out what they're thinking without censoring themselves? Is it therapy? Maybe so, but it also teaches them that self-expression is more important than thinking about what you say, more important to get out whatever you're feeling than to think about other people and the effect it might have on them. Get the drift? Me, me, me. If you've ever baby-sat a toddler and still come away committed to self-expression, you may indeed want to have your head checked. But this kind of assignment fuels the problem. I doubt that Allen Lee intends to go on a shooting rampage--he's probably ok--but let's just think about what you're doing. You're telling a fallen creature to look deep inside and find all the darkness. Then express it. Now it's just a writing exercise--tomorrow the expression could be murder. The Pendragon grows weary of beating this dead horse, but they just keep proving it. In an Everybody Loves Raymond episode, Raymond's mother has just spoken out during her son's wedding ceremony because "I felt the need to say something." When challenged by the bride's mother, she claims, "I was doing it for them." To which the new mother-in-law responds, "I think maybe you were doing it for you. You were so focused on yourself and what you had to express, you didn't think about anyone else, including your son. I think that's called narcissism." Bingo! But what is lighthearted fun on a television sitcom can so easily turn nasty as we saw at Virginia Tech. The answer to our problems does not lie within...that is where our problems lie. The answer lies outside ourselves...not in some smarmy stuffed-suit getting us to "express" ourselves, but in a relationship, both with other people with with the One who created us.

It is rare indeed that a Democrat obligingly proves the underlying thesis of his/her party's anti-life bias. But New York Governor Elliot "Spitwad" did just that today. In the same paper, the Pendragon was humorlessly amused to read that in the wake of the Supreme Court upholding the ban on the horrendous process of partial-birth abortion, our new governor has vowed to vamp up New York's ancient abortion laws to more efficiently protect "a woman's right to choose" to kill her baby, and his and Assembly Democrats' reluctance to act in concert with Senate Republicans to require the death penalty for people who shoot cops (a rash of this kind of activity has broken out in New York state recently). Sure, the Pendragon gets it: Kill murderers? Nah, let's kill babies instead. But this is part and parcel of the same package. Like others in his Party, Spitzer believes in killing the innocent and letting the guilty live. I believe in killing the guilty and letting the innocent live. What it all boils down to, like the shooting at Virginia Tech last week, is a culture based on the narcissistic assumption that individual autonomy rules all. The mother gets to make a choice to kill her unborn child, who has no say in the matter. The gunman gets to make a choice to shoot a police officer, who gets no say in the matter. The Pendragon is not impressed by appeals to autonomy because it's more of this "give-me-my-rights" crap we get everyday. What's missing from the national discourse, of course, is the simple fact that your rights are circumscribed by the rights of others to the basics of life. The Left is real big on this when it comes to stripping achievers of their money to hand out to people on welfare, but when it comes to anything real, they don't seem to get it. The baby has a right to live as well--the police officer has a right to know the state he serves is looking out for him. The Pendragon is now a father and looking at my tiny child, I cannot fathom what would possess somebody to choose their so-called "right" to an easy life and limitless sex over the undeniable right of the child to live. This country was founded on the "self-evident" truth that "All men are created equal and are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, and among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness." Thomas Jefferson would not recognize the republic today--the pursuit of happiness has swamped everything, drowning out the right to life and liberty. It is a sick twist of fate that makes unborn babies inconveniences to be stomped out and psychotic murderers pitiable victims of their environment. It's time to end this. We need to rid ourselves of the psychologized, therapeutic culture of narcissism that turns everything upside down. Spitzer, the murderers of police officers, the Virginia Tech gunman are only the latest symptoms, and it's going to get much worse.

And so another lackluster candidate joins the ranks of Republican hopefuls. Senator John McCain, who has been angling for the spotlight since his defeat in 2000, officially announced his candidacy for the Republican presidential nomination today. My man Mitt Romney commemorated the occasion by attacking the McCain-Feingold bill that restricts freedom of speech in the name of ending special-interest control of politics. You can find Romney's whole column here. What can I say? He's right--if McCain and Feingold were really interested in curbing special interest control over political campaigns, they could push for more transparency in the making of political donations. The DNC, of example, has refused for years to release the list of contributions it receives (most obviously because it would be embarrassing to have so many foreigners and Hollywood billionaires financing "the People's Party"). A law forcing them to do so would probably reveal many illegal maneuvers that could then be corrected. The RNC, incidentally, has released all its lists, and I believe I read, the average donation is $50. But that is neither here nor there. Restricting political action groups from championing their chosen candidates within thirty days of the election (e.g. the law can be used to punish Right-to-Life groups for airing commercials within thirty days of the election that mention any candidate by name) is a violation of every American's right to freedom of speech, and the Pendragon can only hope that the Supreme Court will put this law where it belongs--in the trash can. Romney is the only Republican candidate I am aware of who has made the repeal of this law a central theme in his campaign--one more reason to select him for President on primary day.

That being said, the Pendragon bears John McCain no real ill-will. Despite his RINO credentials, he is the lesser of two evils when compared to Giuliani, let alone to anyone on the Democratic side of the aisle. Good luck, senator. And try not to offend too many Christians this time.

I still think "narcissism" is the correct word.

The late great Rich Mullins as usual had good words for Christians living in this age. The problem with a culture that repeatedly urges its citizens to "look within" for answers is looking in the wrong place. Human beings are depraved, fallen creatures and looking within ain't pretty. This one's for Rich.

I thought of it first. AOL news ran a story yesterday noting that the Virginia Tech gunman was a loner trapped inside himself with a need for friendship. Which is exactly what the prideful Pendragon suggested. Of course, the news media is spinning it as a unique thing. The problem is, our culture actually fosters these kinds of cases. Most of us are not pathologically narcissistic, but we all have that problem to a lesser or greater degree and our culture actually approves of it. Do you know the real message that a billions-per-year psychiatric profession sends to our people? The Pendragon laughed grimly to read that professors at Virginia Tech wish now they had been more forceful in getting the gunman into counseling. It would not have changed a thing. Psychiatry is a symptom of the deeper problem--the idea that each of us is so innately fascinating and worth studying that we need teams of professionals to help us find ourselves. Sure, there's a cure for narcissism: tell the guy he's fascinating. The Pendragon will not, Tom-Cruise-like, tell people not to seek help for depression or other mental disorders, but a culture that places such a high premium not on virtue but on "mental health" is not going to solve the problems that really give rise to loners like the Virginia Tech gunman.

If you don't believe me on the gunman story, try this one on for size: the Pendragon was knocked reeling when a friend of mine recently informed me that there was a girl on the internet claiming to be the mother of a premature baby and asking for gifts and money who turned out to be a fraud! That's right. Someone actually made up a whole story, created a blog to support it, and weasled money and gifts from soft-hearted people. If you had told the Pendragon that there were people on the internet running premature baby scams, I'd have told you you'd been reading too many spy novels. I am sick at heart at the depravity of human beings--that anyone would take advantage of a wonderful community of support like the other mothers of premature babies who bought gifts, sent money and flowers, even held prayer meetings for the life of this little baby who turned out not to exist is simply unconscionable. But there you have it--she was looking out for #1. Our society is sick and no amount of band-aids in the form of stepped-up gun control, more psychiatric counseling, or even bans on violent video ganes is going to change this. The culture needs to be changed from the bottom-up, which means less reliance of individuals, more teaching of responsibility to the whole of society, and a moral foundation based on absolute truth, not on the latest opinion polls. I will not be holding my breath--even Christians shy away from teaching community responsibility--but the more I experience, the more convinced I become that reckless individualism is every bit as great a threat to the moral fabric of society as any we have ever faced. John Jay was right: you will be governed from within by the effects of your conscience and the Holy Spirit or you will be governed from without by the bayonet. A people morally adrift cannot be free to do as they please. You must take your pick.

The Pendragon wishes to express my sincere condolences to the families of the victims of Monday's shooting spree at Virginia Tech. In times like these, it is customary for liberals to jump on the bandwagon of gun control and conservatives to leap on the issue of violence in video-games and movies, but with all due respect, neither comes close to solving the problem. The fundamental problem with our society is what the late Rochester historian Christopher Lasch called "the culture of narcissism." As a culture we have become entirely too obsessed with ourselves. Therapy is a billions-per-year industry because we've been told to "look within" for the solutions to all your problems. Most of us are not going to become murderers, but we all partake of this basic culture--it's all about me. While the video left behind by the gunman ranted against the hedonism of certain rich kids, a picture is emerging of a loner locked in his room hating everyone, hating himself. It's pretty easy to guess what happened: when he wasn't popular, for whatever reason, he spent all his time alone wondering what was wrong with him and why nobody liked him. There is no answer within. Instead of hanging out with people and doing things with people, he just kept beating himself up. But what this always turns to in the end is a hatred of the outside world. After all, we can't blame ourselves, can we? One of his plays, which I will not quote due to the offensive nature of the language, contained a young man (much like him) griping because his teacher punished him for an obscene diatribe in the classroom. His friends comfort him: "You were only expressing your opinion." Narcissism: I get to do whatever I want and nobody can tell me no. If things aren't going the way I want in my life, it's not my fault--it's not something I could change. It's something that the rest of the world is forcing on me. His final video informed the world,“You had a hundred billion chances and ways to have avoided today. But you decided to spill my blood. You forced me into a corner and gave me only one option. The decision was yours. Now you have blood on your hands that will never wash off.’’ It's not my fault--it's the world's fault. He is an extreme case, but there is a cultural undercurrent here of a culture obsessed only with themselves. To note this is not to say that he is a passive victim of an evil culture. He is responsible for what he did, and no amount of blaming the people at Virginia Tech for not inviting him to parties is going to change that. The Pendragon was actually worried about saying this, since it some could construe it as blaming the victims (which I certainly do not), but until we fix the narcissistic culture, we're still at risk for things like this. We can beef up gun control laws or we can ban violent video games, but that just rids us of the symptoms and not the problem itself. Nor is this narcissism a new, American thing--it's as old as Eden when our first parents put their own immediate desires before the longterm good of others. Now more than ever, we need to blend the God-loves-you message with the kick-in-the-pants message that each individual is not the be-all and end-all of the universe. You have rights, but you have responsibilities as well. The Pendragon is heartbroken over this tragedy and I sincerely hope that rather than fuel partisan bickering over tangential issues, this incident will bring Americans of all persuasions together to discuss needed changes in our culture, changes that can save lives rather than destroy them.

Actor and wienie Sean Penn is making waves again. This time he presumes he can dictate to the country at large. Not entirely sure who his presumed allies are, but the Pendragon was heartened to hear Penn declare that he was voting for Dennis Kucinich. He railed about the Iraq War (as usual), claiming that he has been outside the Green Zone of Bagdhad "without security" as Bush has not. I'm not sure what respect this entitles him to, since even terrorists are smart enough to know who their true friends are and I'm sure he was in no danger (except maybe some friendly fire here and there). Killing Bush would help their cause; killing Penn would hurt them. He called Iran "a great country" and "one of our most promising future allies in decades" (whatever that means), showing as usual no regard for tiny little things called facts. Iran has not been our ally or considered a future ally in my memory. He read his statement on C-Span, but couldn't even get through the reading without stuttering. I thought this guy was an actor--he couldn't memorize a five-minute presentation? I have long suspected that Hollywood stars can't read and Penn's stumbling over words like "criminal" and "obscene" (both of which he applied to the American government without making any kind of explanation for what makes us "criminal" and "obscene") confirmed the theory. My favorite part was when he said, speaking to President Bush, "We cower when you shake your finger at us." I don't know; there's an awful lot of Sean Penns shooting their mouths off about Bush and the Iraq War (they even come on this blog once in awhile) to give credence to the idea that Bush scares them. Or, when he said, "We (by "we" I guess he means Hollywood) tell the Democratic Party what to do." Or when he called on his fellow Hollywood billionaries trying to pretend they give a rat's behind about the poor to "show we can fire this President and put him in f*ing prison." Earth to Sean: Bush isn't up for re-election. When the people were given the choice to fire or re-hire him, they chose to re-hire, but the 2008 election is not about that. Plus, your record is quite so unspotted.

With friends like these, Democrats don't need enemies. Sean Penn, convinced that the macho roles he plays in movies are real, tries to get all manly and shout at the President but can't even make it through a prepared statement without stammering and shaking. I found this response to Penn here thoroughly enjoyable to watch. I do not know who Cynthia (the girl in the video) is but her brains apparently match her looks. She's certainly got Penn's number.

The question of collective responsibility for past actions is a live topic in historical politics even yet. Recently, the states of Virginia and Maryland passed resolutions expressing regret for their involvement in slavery and segregation. North Carolina, Texas, Georgia, and even the US House of Representatives have taken up similar projects. The question being argued all over this country is this: should our contemporary society be held responsible for the actions of our ancestors?

The Pendragon is not as hostile to the idea of collective responsibility as you might think. But there are some very stringent conditions that should be considered before deciding to take that plunge (thanks to John Kekes' Against Liberalism for the articulation of these principles): first of all, the organization being judged must be a moral organization. If a member of a chess-club once shouted a racial slur, it is unfair to penalize all future members of the chess club. But if a church does something of that nature, it may make sense to consider all members of that church, even into the future, as being somewhat tainted. The second step is that the action being condemned must be characteristic of the organization--a doctor's association may be held responsible for one of their number refusing to treat a black man because doctors are supposed to treat sick people. Third, the people committing the crimes must have identified themselves with the group in question, and it must be an enduring indentification. If the group expelled them after they committed the crimes, they have done their duty and bear no responsibility. But the killer element is, would Americans today do the same if put in the same position? This is a very difficult thing to decide, and it would seem fair to concede that we probably would (at least assuming that we were put into the position knowing only what people at the time knew and no more). John Locke popularized the idea of tacit consent--merely the fact that you remained within a group and received its benefits means you are giving silent approval to the group's activities. This may be true if you are talking about the Freemasons, but when dealing with membership in a country, the picture becomes blurry. What about those who would like to leave in protect but cannot afford to do so? The second difficulty with this response is practical in nature: suppose we accept the idea that individuals can be held responsible for others in their group, what obligation does that lay on the individual?

Let's apply this to the debate today. Should states acknowledge past wrongs and express regret? Yes. The criteria fit. Should they take it another step and authorize payment to the descendents of slaves and Indians and the Japanese? No. They should acknowledge past shortcomings and work to reform their systems, but nothing should be said about some kind of repayment to people who never suffered by those who did not inflict the suffering. Even if it is argued, as it is with some merit, that the mistreatment of blacks was a fundamental characteristic of American society, the current public has acknowledged the error of these ways and rejected the values that caused them—therefore, the American public can be assigned no blame in the matter for what their forefathers may or may not have done to black slaves, American Indians, or anybody else. This does mean, as noted above, that the American public cannot make some kind of public apology, but this should be restricted to words and then ensuring the like never happens again. This is likely not to happen as southern apologists will hate the idea of even admitting they ever did anything wrong, and leftists will be unlikely to let it rest merely with moving into the future. After all, the very existence of the NAACP and the jobs of men like Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson depend on blacks and whites alike continuing to live in the past.

As usual, the liberals themselves have provided the best reason for choosing Mitt Romney to take down the wicked witch next November. Noted moron Gary Trudeau, whose main claim to fame is putting easily-refuted lines into the mouths of people far, far smarter than he is, used his cartoon "Doonesbury" this Sunday to mock Republicans for claiming to be the party of morality when their frontrunners--whom he conveniently defines as McCain, Giuliani, and Gingrich--have five divorces between them, all involving adultery. The Democratic frontrunners on the other hand have no such bad record. Leaving aside for the moment that Gingrich is not even placing in the national polls, so where Trudeau comes up with the idea that he is a frontrunner is beyond me, we do have a frontrunner (possibly two if Fred Thompson of Tennessee chimes in as he is expected to) who have no divorces and are solid family men. This is a main reason the Pendragon rejects McCain and Giuliani (though the good senator only has one divorce to Giuliani's three). In spite of the fact that the hypocrisy argument is unfair (Republicans could just respond that they were taking Democrats' advice and leaving personal lives out of the contest, turning the hypocrisy back on them), it will be used. Hillary did not like Bob Dole using his moral high ground in 1996 (which he undoubtedly had)--but you can bet she'll use whatever she can against Rudy or McCain. Back in 2005, the Pendragon feared such an outcome--Rudy vs. Hillary for New York Senate was bad enough. Rudy vs. Hillary for US President would be far, far worse.

The issue of choosing issues over theological beliefs is nothing new in American history. In 1800, a Presbyterian minister responded to the charges of Deism raised against Thomas Jefferson (true charges by the way): "Because Mr. Jefferson is suspected of Deism, are we to raise a hue and cry against him, as if he ought to be instantly deprived of his rights of citizenship? If he be an infidel, I lament it for two reasons: from a concern for his own personal salvation, and that a religion, which is so much spoken against, does not receive his countenance and aid. But notwithstanding this, I think myself perfectly consistent in saying that I had much rather have Mr. Jefferson President of the United States than an aristocratic Christian (emphasis added)." The Pendragon is not quite sure he would have gone that far in 1800 (I rather like John Adams) but the case remains true today. Presidents should be chosen on the basis of where they stand on the important issues of the day and not their commitment to any abstract theology. In fact, as the below listing shows, some of the Presidents ranked the highest by Christians had rather questionable religious affiliations. The reverse is also true.

Today is Good Friday, the day Christians remember the sacrifice Jesus made for the sins of the whole world. The Pendragon has recently been involved in a discussion about a certain character in the Harry Potter series who reminds me of Judas, at least I think he does. We'll have to wait for Book 7 in July to decide for sure. But the discussion I had made me wonder a bit about Judas. Did he have a choice? Assuming your God is not a vengeful, angry God, I can only believe he chose to betray Christ. But when might he have backed away? Again, this is only speculation, I have no claim to inside knowledge, but perhaps it went something like this.

He turned his head away. Yeshua was coming for him next. He had washed everyone else's feet. He was the only one left. But he could suddenly not stand to have the Master touch him. Not with the bag of silver strapped to his belt. He tried to speak as Peter had done, but Yeshua was kneeling before him now, dipping the cloth in the water. "Yehuda, one who shares my bread," He whispered, and began to wash His follower's feet.

Yehuda raised his head gingerly and looked at the man before him. Yeshua spoke no word, but he heard a voice, speaking, as it were, within his head. Yehuda, you do not have to do this.

Of course I do.

No, you don't. The door is open. I will turn myself in. All will go according to plan. You do not need to do this.

For a moment, Yehuda hesitated, torn. Yeshua had been his master for some three years, had trusted him when no one else did, had let him control the group's money. He squirmed a bit. He had been helping himself to the funds for a long time.

I know, Yehuda. I am not so hopeless with money as you seem to think. But it doesn't matter now. Give it up. Come back.

Almost, he said the words. Almost he threw the coins away. But he had such need of money. Always traveling left him with little resources of his own. If he were ever to form an army for an uprising against Rome he would need plenty of money. And Yeshua showed no sign of wishing to lead that army. Yehuda looked down. The Master had finished, but was still watching his face intently. Waiting. Yehuda gave a barely perceptible shake of his head. Sorrow swam in Yeshua's brown eyes, but he rose from his kneeling position and laid a hand on Yehuda's shaking shoulder. "What you are about to do, do quickly," He whispered and returned to his place.

Yehuda got up and went out. Darkness had fallen.

Americans love conspiracy theories. The Pendragon has often been embroiled in conversations about various organizations and the nefarious grip they have on our government our national culture. If it's not some leftist bemoaning the power of the Christian right, it's a Christian wringing his or her hands over the influence of Mormons, Unitarians, or Freemasons. For myself, I have always discounted such things, not being given to conspiratorial thinking, but I have recently discovered that historical records now back me up on at least one of these famous conspiracies: that of the Freemasons. The Pendragon has often been called to debate whether the Founding Fathers could possibly have been Christians since so many of them were Freemasons. Of our 43 Presidents, at least 3 (Washington, Jackson and Andrew Johnson) were Freemasons and some well-meaning Christians, taking over from the Anti-Mason Party of the 1820s and 30s, have decided that this means American has no Christian background and was founded by a cult. But whatever the current implications of being a Mason are (and I am far from sure it disqualifies one from being a Christian even today), in the late 18th-century, historian Steven Bullock notes in Revolutionary Brotherhood: Freemasonry and the Transformation of the American Social Order, 1730-1840, Freemasonry, for all its lore of stretching back to the builders of Solomon's Temple and possessing secrets of craft from the ancients, were actually an enlightened society and more of a social club than anything else. When Freemason Benjamin Franklin's pious mother grew worried over her son's involvement with a group suspected, even then, of magical leanings, Franklin quietly responded, "They are harmless enough people." This seems to have been the only time he mentioned the Masons in all of his voluminous correspondence. His involvement with the group was not a huge part of his life. George Washington, the other famous Mason, only attended the lodge on public occasions--he did not make a habit of hanging out there. It is hard to advance the argument that Freemasonry exerted a great, sinister, influence on America when its two most famous members barely ever contacted the group. Washington and Franklin used the group as a social outlet for networking with other leaders, but weren't too wrapped up in its stranger manifestations.

Why is this important? It's important because too often politics in America is based on fear of the conspirator. When people are motivated by fear, they make foolish choices. A proper understanding of the choices before us is a must if we are to make wise decisions about the future of our country. Americans have not done too well on that in previous centuries, but perhaps there is hope we can move beyond the hype about groups we have never tried to understand, and deal with real life.