Things that make me say "Huh?"

Note to readers: This is an idle meander through some thoughts on current events. If you're looking for some wise sayings from Scripture or some useful thoughts on matters of real importance, you won't find it here today. Please feel free to skip today's entry.
__________

I have to admit. There are everyday things in my world that make me say, "Huh?" I just don't get it. And I should because they're quite prominent.

There is, as an example, Eric Holder, Attorney General of the United States. Last year Mr. Holder hit the news with the whole "Fast and Furious" scandal. You remember that one. Holder had ordered the ATF to sell arms to the illegal arms dealers so they could track the weapons to cartels. How would they do that? That's unclear, since there were no tracking systems in place. But, not to worry, we found some of them ... when they were used to kill a Border Patrol agent. So, why is Mr. Holder still in office? But it gets worse (as far as my confusion goes). Right after the Sandy Hook shooting, the President put together a commission to examine gun control. Right there, next the president, was "Fast and Furious" Mr. Holder. Now, why would the man who ordered the selling of weapons to cartels be involved in gun control discussions? And it doesn't end there. When Zimmerman was declared innocent, it was Mr. Holder who declared that the "Stand your Ground" laws were evil. Why would this man whose illegal and unethical actions with guns (actions that have never been addressed or redressed) have anything to say about the legal or ethical use of guns? You see? I'm left with "Huh?"

There is, as another example, our own president. After the tragic shooting at Sandy Hook, the president attended a prayer vigil (I'll leave that alone) and spoke. There he (mis)quoted Scripture and pledged to take every possible step to "save another child". Now, how does this line up with his broad defense of all versions of killing babies in the womb? By what means will he determine which children to save or to kill? Because he is firmly in favor of legally executing babies before they're born. He defends early abortion, late abortion, partial birth abortion, and the government's responsibility to pay for this kind of murder. "I'm sorry, Mr. President, what was that about saving one more child?" And the two faces of the president continue. He claims to be religious but complains about the narrow-minded who "cling to their guns and religion" and eliminates a "distasteful" pastor from giving the benediction at his inauguration because of something he said years ago about marriage (you know, where he came out in favor of marriage and opposed to the redefinition of it). He vows to "fight for the middle class" while the middle class has endured a steady decline in income and savings for the duration of his presidency. What's up with that? And there is a whole set of events whirling around the president that brings into question his integrity. What happened in Benghazi? The president claimed it was a riot precipitated by a YouTube video. The CIA, the Libyans, and the rest of the world said otherwise. What is up with the whole "I've evolved in my thinking about gay marriage" thing? He was in favor of it prior to running for president, then became "unsure", and, after being elected to his second term, "evolved" ... into his original position. What? There are, I suppose, questions about voter tampering in the last election, but more concerning is the fact that the IRS targeted groups opposed to Obama, and all indications are that he had his hand in that. And there was the whole Solyndra thing where the Obama Administration gave large sums to the "green" company which went out of business. And the list goes on (and on). Just the kinds of things that make me say, "Huh?"

And, of course, there is the whole issue of "the Church must change" going on, it seems, day after day. The suggestion is that the Church is out of touch and needs to change to suit the culture. Now, in what possible sense does that seem reasonable? The Church is not a product of the culture. The Church doesn't belong to the culture. The Church is not guided by the culture. And yet, it seems, Scripture, tradition, history, and all are not to be considered in determining what the Church believes. Christianity is intended to be run by "Christians" (where we mean "those who call themselves Christians because they want to") rather than by Christ, apparently. Obviously I would oppose such a proposition, but behind it I'm scratching my head and saying, "Huh??!!" because it makes no sense.

I suppose, if I think too much about it, I'll find way too much stuff that makes me say, "Huh?"