Chuck Norris columnist?

Chuck Norris is credited with achieving stupefying feats of strength (not related to “Festivus”) and we here at Last Row have blogged about it, click here to see the post.

Now you can add “columnist” to Norris’ resume, as he shows us his lethal penmanship in this column.

He jokes about all the things attributed to him, and he gives us his opinion on “evolution.” More importantly he stresses the need that we ALL have for a Savior, and the identity of that Savior, Jesus of Nazareth.

Enjoy this candid and refreshing take from a celebrity.

H/T: Ken Ham


21 Responses to Chuck Norris columnist?

  1. Pingback: Tim Ellsworth » Blog Archive » Chuck Norris tells the real facts

  2. Matt says:

    Ah, he writes for, the paragon of objective, unbiased journalism standards.

  3. Lazaro says:

    Matt, thanks for your input.  Is there such a thing as objective and unbiased journalism?

  4. He’s writing a column, Matt. He’s not entitled to an opinion?

  5. Matt says:

    In an ideal world, yes. Unfortunately, ready examples of it are few and far between as news media organisations use their influence to further their own interests (yeah I’m looking at you, Rupert Murdoch) instead of doing their real jobs which is reporting the facts in an objective manner.

    Worldnetdaily is no more reputable than those comedic tabloids that have headlines revolving around the yeti having elvis’ lovechild.

  6. Lazaro says:

    Why is objectivity an ideal?

  7. Matt says:

    Why wouldn’t objectivity be the ideal? There is no point approaching any subject with your mind already made up – you need to look at the evidence and base your conclusions on that. Not on instincts, not on myths and fables and certainly not on gut instincts. It’s the only way you can ever properly comprehend the entirety of any given subject.

  8. Lazaro says:

    I agree, objectivity is the ideal. But as to the why it SHOULD be is still unanswered. By the way, your mind is already made up that objectivity be the ideal, is that objective?

  9. I’m curious, Matt. Would you consider the New York Times, ABC, CBS, etc., to be objective?

  10. I guess we’re not going to get an answer.

  11. Lazaro says:

    Stranger things have happened…

  12. Matt says:

    I can’t answer the question as I do not reside in the United States and thus have no regular exposure to those services.

  13. But yet somehow you’re qualified to speak authoritatively about Fox, which, the last time I checked, is also an American news organization.

    Give me a break.

  14. Matt says:

    That’s odd, I don’t think I’ve ever mentioned the Fox network. Care to remind me where?

  15. Lazaro says:

    Matt, I think Tim is referring to your mention of Rupert Murdoch, who owns Fox News. Not sure if you get Fox News in Australia though I’m sure Mr. Murdoch has other holdings outside of the States…

  16. Matt says:

    If that is the case then Tim needs to be aware that Rupert Murdoch has considerable holdings in Australia and has been a long time supporter of the current Australian Federal Government, which has been displayed time and again in the publications he owns here.

  17. Matt, I knew that Murdoch had multiple holdings abroad, but I wasn’t aware that it was those holdings to which you referred.
    Still, the argument holds. WorldNetDaily is primarily an American news organization. Yes, they cover world events, but their emphasis is on the United States. You seem to know WND well enough to criticize, and yet say you don’t know these other outlets because you don’t live in the United States. That’s pretty convenient.

  18. Matt says:

    Worldnetdaily has a considerable WWW presence and has, many times in the past, been called on it’s inherent political and philosophical leanings. Therefore, it has been of interest in the past.

    Much like the Australian Broadcasting Corporation here in my native land – it was a matter of interest since it had been accused of being a left leaning broadcaster.

    The ABC Boasts a great show called “Media Watch” which is an independent show that targets broadcasters/publishers/etc that do not present news and other stories in an objective manner – they target left and right equally and exemplify what journalism should and needs to be about.

  19. Ed Darrell says:

    Norris is entitled to an opinion — he’s not entitled to change the facts as he tries to do. He can make jokes in his column, too. I don’t think he regarded that column as a joke, though, do you? That would be his best defense: ‘It was parody! It was for April Fool’s Day!’

    Was Ham in jail yet when he gave the tip? I don’t trust most tax cheaters, especially on other areas they are demonstrated not to be expert in.

    WorldNet is Murdoch’s? It’s way below his usual standards.

  20. Ed Darrell says:

    Oops. Memory lapse. Ham’s not in jail — it’s Hovind. Ham’s still on the loose, and not evading taxes so far as I know.

  21. Laz says:

    Always good to have you E.D., LOL

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: