I just read my blog to my wife and somehow I left her out. Really I can't go more than a few hours without needing to hear her voice or show some affection. How could I have left her out?

Lately I've been working on reviewing half a dozen Bonhoeffer books for cornerstonemag.com due to be posted on or before the sixtieth anniversary of his death April 9th. And there's this new book out Toward An Evangelical Public Policy by Ronald Sider and Diane Knippers which has sixteen chapters that I'm trying to absorb for review/interview. Then there's an ad due that I have to design and some accounting due. Then there's three cute little kids needing attention and a PS2 MX game I bought "for my son." Sound like enough to keep me from blogging?

From Wikipedia:

Conservatism vs. fascism

While conservatives often identify with nationalist movements, there is a clear distinction between conservative nationalism and the ultra-nationalism of fascism. Conservatism, at its root, is an attitude of political and social quietism. The big plans of the Big Man, the noisy and levelling mass movements, the Führerprinzip, the personality cults, and the strong propensity toward totalitarianism that are central to fascism, are antithetical to the positions of classical conservatism. Conservatism stands for learning from the mistakes of the past, and primum non nocere is an essential conservative principle.

Nonetheless, historically, some conservative traditionalists have been drawn to Fascist movements, just like some liberal have been drawn to Communism and Stalinism during the 1970s. Some may have admired the moral and military renewal that Fascist leaders promised. Others may have merely thought fascism a more palatable alternative to socialism or communism. For example, in mid-1930s Britain, conservative media baron Lord Rothermere's Daily Mail enthusiastically backed Sir Oswald Mosley's British Union of Fascists, whilst a number of Tory peers and MPs supported closer ties with Nazi Germany. For a more contemporary example, in a 2003 article in National Review, John Laughland accuses contemporary neoconservative Michael Ledeen of "flirting with fascism", citing examples of the latter's praise for Italian fascist Gabriele D'Annunzio. [3]

Did you see the Dateline NBC special on Benny Hinn last night?
I did and I invited a friend over to watch it. Some time back The Wittenburg Door did a DVD that has all the Dateline profiles on Hinn from over the years. My friend and I watched that together so this was like a recent update. But here are my thoughts about last night's program:

1. Benny Hinn's problem is not unique. He loves and needs wealth. Doesn't he fit right in with mainstream America then?
2. This latest update is not shocking and will probably do little to hurt Hinn's finances. He already has a reputation, established over the years of shows done on him. But what it does (in my opinion) is justify viewers in their own spending habits. They might say, "Here's this 'man of God' using God to get wealth. If he can have it all why should I be deprived?" That's the gospel Hinn teaches and in our society that's not only acceptable, its laudable.
3. The show appealed to a sense of outrage among decent hardworking God-fearing church going Americans. It expects that their Values will speak to them and say, "This man must be stopped." Well, it assumes too much. Its one thing to report a missing person or a crime in progress. Its quite another to change the minds of a charasmatic gospelinc. subculture of millions who worship the ground someone walks on.
4. Benny Hinn is selling what evangelicals are buying. They need the assurance that wealth is part of godliness. That comfort and charm are what being a Christian is all about. And if they feel a bit guilty he'll give to the Tsunami victims like everyone else.
5. America needs Benny Hinn to be comfortable with itself. God help us all.