Peace in This World
I'll go right ahead and spoil the ending...I believe the notion of establishing peace in this world to be a false hope.
Please understand; its not that I like the idea of war. Nor do I accept the Hobbesian idea that all of mankind is involved in an internal struggle for power, that civilization exists only as the best mediated path to avoid mutual destruction in the otherwise endless and unavoidable wars.
My reasons for doubting world peace are, in a way, simpler than that. I believe man is sinful--and that while there ARE men who prize peace and want to see men live together in Christian love, there are also plenty of men who will chose to burn in Hell even as they look on the throne of Christ.
I'm not trying to get into a theological discussion on the nature of salvation. What I am talking about is the story told in John's Revelation--that after 1000 years of life on earth with Christ as our King, the number of those that will rise up with the Enemy to defy heaven will be as the sand on the sea shore. Humanity is fallen--it is only by divine grace that we desire goodness.
Why am I arguing this? Because I am frequently chastized by other Christians for ignoring the call to love in the Bible. I have been told that I ignore the commandment not to kill. The problems with the translation of scripture aside (the literal translation of "thou shalt not kill" means no murder, not no war, captial punishment, etc).
There seems to be a disconnect when it comes to reality and those who oppose any and all wars. Realistically, it seems to ignore the fact that there are people who will chose to go to hell even when they have seen God Himself. Realistically, it overlooks the fact that those same people will not hesitate to destroy paradise for their own ends--and while there will come a day when God's strength will answer any selfish desire, in this world, to live justly requires not merely minds and souls that cherish love and peace, but strong bodies who will defend those same ideals from men that hate the very thought of a world without war.
It assumes that America is one of the great instigators of that desire for carnage. America has flaws--nobody would thoughtfully suggest otherwise--but you would be overly cynical and as closeminded as the "war mongers" if you could not believe that those who suggest peace through strength don't understand the appeal of a world where love and peace rule supreme. The reality is, such a world will not exist this side of heaven. Christians shouldn't imagine that they can extricate themselves from the burdens of this world by living for the abstract peace while terrorists and tyrants burn the innocent and helpless.
For every successful "people power" movement, there is always the realistic threat that in the end, if need be, the tyrants will be overpowered by force. The people power revolts that were successful happened when the tyrants realized that the time had come to take the money and run (think Philippine dictator Marcos) rather then run the risk of certain death by trying to fight. Ultimately, force was still a factor--the only reason those instances were resolved peacefully was because the tyrants were smarter/bigger cowards then others who clung on to the bitter end (think Saddam).
Peace in this world is a false hope. But I told you that already. I do believe that it is important to always try to avoid the destruction of war--but a good leader understand the difference between peace and appeasement. Look forward to heaven, and trust that in the meantime God will give us the strength and the faith to endure in a world of darkness and evil men. For the sake of my son, I certainly hope that God will protect us.
Saturday, May 28, 2005
Thursday, May 26, 2005
DONE & DONE.
I handed in my last undergrad paper just now.
Five years and I am done. The relief was almost too much--I had one last exam this morning and the anticipation made it almost impossible to write my last two essays.
Its hard to explain...everything feels a little better--the breeze and the sun outside feel more promising than they have in a long time. I could get used to this.
The only reason I am inside typing right now is because I am waiting for a ride and I wanted to listen to some music in the meantime--which is also my only present complaint--the stupid library computers have all the volume set extremely low--even on the earphones--so for all the exhileration I am presenting feeling, I cannot enjoy music at a volume that would be suitable for this occasion. Oh well--I won't have to be at the library anymore (at least for a while) so I can listen elsewhere. Always a silver-lining. :) Hurrah!
Done.
Done
DONE
DONE
I handed in my last undergrad paper just now.
Five years and I am done. The relief was almost too much--I had one last exam this morning and the anticipation made it almost impossible to write my last two essays.
Its hard to explain...everything feels a little better--the breeze and the sun outside feel more promising than they have in a long time. I could get used to this.
The only reason I am inside typing right now is because I am waiting for a ride and I wanted to listen to some music in the meantime--which is also my only present complaint--the stupid library computers have all the volume set extremely low--even on the earphones--so for all the exhileration I am presenting feeling, I cannot enjoy music at a volume that would be suitable for this occasion. Oh well--I won't have to be at the library anymore (at least for a while) so I can listen elsewhere. Always a silver-lining. :) Hurrah!
Done.
Done
DONE
DONE
Wednesday, May 25, 2005
Indulgence
They say that one of the signs of being a person that rises above the rest is adaptability. Looking at change, adversity, disappointment, and seeing not failure or frustration, but opportunity; hope that something better will come as a result of the new, unforseen path that life inevitably takes.
Still, letting go is difficult. Attaching yourself to ideas, to institutions, to plans that can change within the blink of an eye is a risk for everyone. Allowing those same ideas, institutions and plans to evolve--possibly into something you would never have originally contemplated is difficult. In an odd way, those intangible investments are a part of you, and to see them tossed to the wayside is even painful, and certainly discouraging. You want to indulge yourself--to refuse to change, to stand still and appreciate the comfort of the plans that you have invested in.
Unfortunately, we're not here to indulge our pride. Nor are we here to avoid risk. We're here to change the world, and that cannot be accomplished by resisiting change, cowering from adversity, or caving to frustration. We need to let go and follow where the changes in life lead--as James says, "Go to now, ye that say, To day or to morrow we will go into such a city, and continue there a year, and buy and sell, and get gain: Whereas ye know not what shall be on the morrow. For what is your life? It is even a vapour, that appeareth for a little time, and then vanisheth away." As all things lay in the hands of our God, how can we desire our original path over the new one that presents itself?
Sigh. Knowing this truth doesn't make it easier. But, hopefully, its enough to make us act; truth used to be enough to compel men to act. Now we have surrendered the idea of truth, as Screwtape says, so that we have conflicting "truths" floating simultaneously in our heads without ever realizing the dilemma that places us in. However--this is a truth...and indulgence is false hope, a fool's pride. And if we are ever to grow, we cannot indulge ourselves forever.
I am flawed...but I am cleaning up so well.
They say that one of the signs of being a person that rises above the rest is adaptability. Looking at change, adversity, disappointment, and seeing not failure or frustration, but opportunity; hope that something better will come as a result of the new, unforseen path that life inevitably takes.
Still, letting go is difficult. Attaching yourself to ideas, to institutions, to plans that can change within the blink of an eye is a risk for everyone. Allowing those same ideas, institutions and plans to evolve--possibly into something you would never have originally contemplated is difficult. In an odd way, those intangible investments are a part of you, and to see them tossed to the wayside is even painful, and certainly discouraging. You want to indulge yourself--to refuse to change, to stand still and appreciate the comfort of the plans that you have invested in.
Unfortunately, we're not here to indulge our pride. Nor are we here to avoid risk. We're here to change the world, and that cannot be accomplished by resisiting change, cowering from adversity, or caving to frustration. We need to let go and follow where the changes in life lead--as James says, "Go to now, ye that say, To day or to morrow we will go into such a city, and continue there a year, and buy and sell, and get gain: Whereas ye know not what shall be on the morrow. For what is your life? It is even a vapour, that appeareth for a little time, and then vanisheth away." As all things lay in the hands of our God, how can we desire our original path over the new one that presents itself?
Sigh. Knowing this truth doesn't make it easier. But, hopefully, its enough to make us act; truth used to be enough to compel men to act. Now we have surrendered the idea of truth, as Screwtape says, so that we have conflicting "truths" floating simultaneously in our heads without ever realizing the dilemma that places us in. However--this is a truth...and indulgence is false hope, a fool's pride. And if we are ever to grow, we cannot indulge ourselves forever.
I am flawed...but I am cleaning up so well.
When Things Go Very, Very Wrong
Amnesty International. Not a big fan.
Today they have made ridiculous comparisons to the American prisons for terror suspects and war criminals to the gulags of the Soviets--essentially death camps.
Here's a hint, Amnesty: spend your time, money, and limited talent trying to take on the actual gulags in our world. I find it truly funny that America's prisons are the topic of a lot of hype and angst amongst those who are against the war on terror...but if America allows terrorists to be sent to prisons in other nations, that's clearly much worse. It doesn't get the press that America's prisons do--but everyone knows we're not the modern gulags.
If we were as bad as they say...would it be better if we turned them over to, say, Pakistan? Turkey? Whatever problems may exist in our prisons, the exaggerations in the accusations should make it clear that their skewed evaluations of the United States are baseless. Looking at that fact, its really curious (and kinda sad) that people can still accept the ridiculous premises offered by the slanderers that this war is a war for profit and power.
As long as people continue to look to the US to provide justice and freedom, the accusations that we have been overwhelmed with corruption have no meaning. As long as they continue to accuse us of losing our moral ground, I think its safe to say that we know we haven't. Nobody tells Iran, Syria, N. Korea, Pakistan, etc that they've devolved and become institutions of corruption. That's almost all anybody yells at the US.
The irony is thick this morning.
Amnesty International. Not a big fan.
Today they have made ridiculous comparisons to the American prisons for terror suspects and war criminals to the gulags of the Soviets--essentially death camps.
Here's a hint, Amnesty: spend your time, money, and limited talent trying to take on the actual gulags in our world. I find it truly funny that America's prisons are the topic of a lot of hype and angst amongst those who are against the war on terror...but if America allows terrorists to be sent to prisons in other nations, that's clearly much worse. It doesn't get the press that America's prisons do--but everyone knows we're not the modern gulags.
If we were as bad as they say...would it be better if we turned them over to, say, Pakistan? Turkey? Whatever problems may exist in our prisons, the exaggerations in the accusations should make it clear that their skewed evaluations of the United States are baseless. Looking at that fact, its really curious (and kinda sad) that people can still accept the ridiculous premises offered by the slanderers that this war is a war for profit and power.
As long as people continue to look to the US to provide justice and freedom, the accusations that we have been overwhelmed with corruption have no meaning. As long as they continue to accuse us of losing our moral ground, I think its safe to say that we know we haven't. Nobody tells Iran, Syria, N. Korea, Pakistan, etc that they've devolved and become institutions of corruption. That's almost all anybody yells at the US.
The irony is thick this morning.
Another Quiz...
I know there's little clever about posting personality quizes on your blog...but I don't care. I have fun with these every now and then--everyone needs a distraction from time to time (or more in my case...) and besides--the quizes I post tell you what you would be if you were yourself in another life. Now admit it...that's fun, right?
Which Saint are you? This is me:
I know there's little clever about posting personality quizes on your blog...but I don't care. I have fun with these every now and then--everyone needs a distraction from time to time (or more in my case...) and besides--the quizes I post tell you what you would be if you were yourself in another life. Now admit it...that's fun, right?
Which Saint are you? This is me:
 |
| You are Athanasius! You are willing to fight a losing battle, just to make sure that the truth is told. But don't get discouraged; sometimes it takes more than one lifetime for truth to triumph. |
Tuesday, May 24, 2005
Terri Schiavo...
I know its been a while since she was in the headlines. Almost two months. I didn't blog then, so I write something now.
I was rereading an article on her death, and the various arguments that surrounded her situation. The quotes that particularly interested me was this: "Patients in vegatative states seem deceptively aware. Experts write off their smiles, tears, and gestures as involuntary reflexes. But families still struggle with the decision to remove life support, as the story of Terri Schiavo makes clear." This was a Newsweek article by the by--I doubt they'd track me down and post porn on my blog, but I guess better safe than sorry. In case you're wondering--I didn't write it. :)
The impression I received from this statement is that its foolish nonsense to assume that there remains any meaningful life when someone has passed into a vegitative state. Nothing is intentional--therefore how could anything be worthwhile, right? It passes over the protests of the families--because they're motivated by love and clearly cannot be objective to the reality that when the body fails, life stops...or should stop. At least, that's the message I get from this statement. This really re-enforces the suggestion that more and more we ARE embracing death in our society.
Its not worth fighting to give people a better life (even if we fought for oil, the people of Iraq will be better off in a free environment than they were under Saddam) but refusing the essentials of life from an otherwise self-sufficent woman makes sense--because her life isn't worth living, somehow. The deaths of civilians in the course of opposing terror and a cruel dictator aren't justified--because their lives, no matter how tortured or deprived, were somehow worth living and it wasn't worth risking lives to save them.
I don't get it.
Perhaps I am not being clear...
On the one side, the side that is labeled as war mongering etc, I see values that go beyond the simplistic clinging to the "value" of life as above all others. It suggests that all life is sacred--which applies to Terri--and that since all life is sacred it is the duty of the strong to protect the lives of the weak.
The other side seems to boil down to this: life has a value which can be taken away by the quality of the life--though somehow that quality doesn't include the lack of freedom, the presence of terrorized oppression. In those cases, it seems that this side would say that while it may not be a great life, its still life and its more important to protect that then to end lives in the pursuit of a better life for the majority of people living in that terrible situation. However--people physically incapable, or mentally damaged have lost the true value of life--and shouldn't be made to endure the burden of life any longer then necessary.
This seems very wrong.
I know its been a while since she was in the headlines. Almost two months. I didn't blog then, so I write something now.
I was rereading an article on her death, and the various arguments that surrounded her situation. The quotes that particularly interested me was this: "Patients in vegatative states seem deceptively aware. Experts write off their smiles, tears, and gestures as involuntary reflexes. But families still struggle with the decision to remove life support, as the story of Terri Schiavo makes clear." This was a Newsweek article by the by--I doubt they'd track me down and post porn on my blog, but I guess better safe than sorry. In case you're wondering--I didn't write it. :)
The impression I received from this statement is that its foolish nonsense to assume that there remains any meaningful life when someone has passed into a vegitative state. Nothing is intentional--therefore how could anything be worthwhile, right? It passes over the protests of the families--because they're motivated by love and clearly cannot be objective to the reality that when the body fails, life stops...or should stop. At least, that's the message I get from this statement. This really re-enforces the suggestion that more and more we ARE embracing death in our society.
Its not worth fighting to give people a better life (even if we fought for oil, the people of Iraq will be better off in a free environment than they were under Saddam) but refusing the essentials of life from an otherwise self-sufficent woman makes sense--because her life isn't worth living, somehow. The deaths of civilians in the course of opposing terror and a cruel dictator aren't justified--because their lives, no matter how tortured or deprived, were somehow worth living and it wasn't worth risking lives to save them.
I don't get it.
Perhaps I am not being clear...
On the one side, the side that is labeled as war mongering etc, I see values that go beyond the simplistic clinging to the "value" of life as above all others. It suggests that all life is sacred--which applies to Terri--and that since all life is sacred it is the duty of the strong to protect the lives of the weak.
The other side seems to boil down to this: life has a value which can be taken away by the quality of the life--though somehow that quality doesn't include the lack of freedom, the presence of terrorized oppression. In those cases, it seems that this side would say that while it may not be a great life, its still life and its more important to protect that then to end lives in the pursuit of a better life for the majority of people living in that terrible situation. However--people physically incapable, or mentally damaged have lost the true value of life--and shouldn't be made to endure the burden of life any longer then necessary.
This seems very wrong.
The Revised Post I was Trying To Place When Blogger Went on the Fritz
There was a picture here, but apparently I missed the fact that the artist didn't intend to have the pictures on his public site viewed elsewhere. Since I have no way of contacting him I decided it would be best to simply remove the picture. My apologies--I am still relatively new writing online and hadn't considered that content (particularly a picture) posted on the World Wide Web would be considered private. I in no way intended to take credit for the pictures--was merely enjoying them. Oh well.
There was a picture here, but apparently I missed the fact that the artist didn't intend to have the pictures on his public site viewed elsewhere. Since I have no way of contacting him I decided it would be best to simply remove the picture. My apologies--I am still relatively new writing online and hadn't considered that content (particularly a picture) posted on the World Wide Web would be considered private. I in no way intended to take credit for the pictures--was merely enjoying them. Oh well.
Manila Sunsets.
I recall Thanksgiving evening, my Senior year of high school. I walked by myself out of the main building where several of the missionary families had gathered to share some holiday fellowship, to watch the sunset. It was the most beautiful sunset I had ever seen--with stronger golds, purples, violets, reds, pinks, oranges, and blues than anything I had ever seen, and to this day I don't think I've seen an equal. The thing about Philippine sunsets...at least in Manila, the colors are there because of the pollution. So, its beautiful, but your lungs are being destroyed. Despite this...I loved sunsets in Manila. Our school was on a hill above the city and the smog, and looking out at the Sunset you really could be convinced that life really was that beautiful--that even smog only produced more beauty.
Come to think of it--that was an odd truth about the Philippines--no matter how "bad" something was, it only ended up making things that much better in an odd way. When the torrential rains came, it was bad...but the day after the storm was the cleanest day for the city in a month, and the night after the typhoon, you could see more stars in the sky than you can imagine. One of my favorite memories was laying out on a basketball court with some friends and watching the universe swirl over us.
Good coming from bad--or in spite of bad. Is it foolish optimism that assumes that hope is worth clinging too? Or is there something to it--something that even the sometimes harsh reality of nature bears witness too?
One of my mentors once spoke in chapel on the virtue of Hope: a Distinctly Christian Virtue. One of my favorite messages--I have it on my computer at home and listen to it every now and again because I think he really touched on a truth. It seems inherantly wrong to assume that the worst is and will be our only reality. I don't believe that I have earned some special repreive from the troubles of this world...I am simply convinced that the valley of death will inevitably end in green pastures and cool springs. Christ promised a hope that goes beyond the material concerns of this world--not that our material concerns are unimportant, but we must recognize that they are finite in their scope. The hope of the Christ speaks of deep waters. It involves an answer to the question of the purpose of life, to the fears of death...and when accepted, offers peace unshakeable by even the dying world we live in.
For centuries man has known nothing but fear of the unknown. Death and the gods were to be feared because we couldn't know them, and many of the greatest minds to live tried to understand them better, or to find hope outside of understanding the incomprehensible. The Hellenistic Epicurean Philosophers (old greek guys) suggested that ethics pointed us towards goodness and pleasure--and though they have often been labeled hedonists (those who live for pleasure) they defined pleasure as that which brought us closer to a good life (so they were not into the whole drunken orgy scene). They knew that the Stars and the Planets weren't gods (they believed in gods, but only as very distant, entirely well-intentioned beings who rarely interfered with men). They also believed that the soul was made of matter like everything else in your body. These two beliefs allowed them to logically escape the fear of death and the fear of the gods--because the gods didn't care and death meant nonexistence--so there was no need to fear for tomorrow. Atheists and deists alike have used variations of these reasonings to find hope in an otherwise dismal existence.
Christ's answer to this fear was to offer a reality that showed the false hope just how hollow it truly was: He offered evidence of a real God that was not waiting to destroy humanity, and showed that physical death need not be the end of joy. Instead of an inpersonal god or a god who seemed only to act out the same passions as regular men, Jesus Christ revealed a God both powerful, personal, and intimately interested in us. In salvation, we receive not merely a reprieve from the second death--the destruction of the soul which does not cease to exist--but we also may find a God who has always been present and will always care for us.
So where does hope come in? Besides the hope of salvation from judgement...the knowledge that we are not alone, that God knows us and desires to be known, that death itself is not the end and there is a meaning to life beyond the everyday monotony...this is hope. Hope that this life, which attracts the attention of a loving God, holds promise of more than just suffering or meaningless pleasures. Eternal foundations available to the undulating finite man. A hope that someday, the constant swell and recession that man, who is both spirit and physical being, will finally no longer be a burden--we will cease to war with ourselves. That there will be a joy in release--that though life may be at times a struggle, we toil not in vain for the light will dawn. In this light, the demands of the moment become less daunting for we have hope. In this hope, unshakeable, unbreakable peace may stand in the midst of heartache and worry and be unconerned.
...hmmm...well that's not nice.
So, there are nasty people on the internet. Not really news--I'm not one of them if you were curious. If you checked this blog in the last few hours...I would imagine you were less then pleased with what you might have seen. I know I wasn't happy seeing what I saw. Particularly in the Library. Ah well. If you missed it...be glad.
Short story: I went looking on Google for pics of Manila at Sunset. To my understanding, anything to be found on the World Wide Web is fair game--not to claim it as your own work, but you know--pasting a photo you found online has never been off limits when you're just appreciating it. I certainly didn't say "I took this photo"...if I posted a painting of George Washington I would assume I need not clarify that its not my painting.
Well, apparently I was wrong--or at least, I made someone mad and apparently he had the ability to do something about it. I was going to unsend the post and remove the original pic of a sunset--and then blogger started having problems. I figured I would come back in a few hours to take care of it then. Sigh.
I came back and the person had replaced the photo I had posted to a fairly graphic adult photo that is really not in keeping with my blog. I guess I had copied a live link to his picture or something like that. Anyways--I am sorry if you saw it. Unfortunately I am not really computer savy enough to have anticipated that problem--though I will do my best to keep that from happening again.
So now...all I can do is say that I am sorry for the offensive adult nature my blog took on for a couple of hours...fortunately I'm fairly confident that having protected the photos he has made available to the world, the tresspasser will probably leave me alone now. And, we return to our regularly scheduled PG 13 (at the worst) blogging.
Sigh.
So, there are nasty people on the internet. Not really news--I'm not one of them if you were curious. If you checked this blog in the last few hours...I would imagine you were less then pleased with what you might have seen. I know I wasn't happy seeing what I saw. Particularly in the Library. Ah well. If you missed it...be glad.
Short story: I went looking on Google for pics of Manila at Sunset. To my understanding, anything to be found on the World Wide Web is fair game--not to claim it as your own work, but you know--pasting a photo you found online has never been off limits when you're just appreciating it. I certainly didn't say "I took this photo"...if I posted a painting of George Washington I would assume I need not clarify that its not my painting.
Well, apparently I was wrong--or at least, I made someone mad and apparently he had the ability to do something about it. I was going to unsend the post and remove the original pic of a sunset--and then blogger started having problems. I figured I would come back in a few hours to take care of it then. Sigh.
I came back and the person had replaced the photo I had posted to a fairly graphic adult photo that is really not in keeping with my blog. I guess I had copied a live link to his picture or something like that. Anyways--I am sorry if you saw it. Unfortunately I am not really computer savy enough to have anticipated that problem--though I will do my best to keep that from happening again.
So now...all I can do is say that I am sorry for the offensive adult nature my blog took on for a couple of hours...fortunately I'm fairly confident that having protected the photos he has made available to the world, the tresspasser will probably leave me alone now. And, we return to our regularly scheduled PG 13 (at the worst) blogging.
Sigh.
Hope Confirmed!
Everything is going to be just fine.
I'm elated.
Two weeks ago, none of this seemed possible. There was simply too much--a variety of factors (some of them my fault, others not so much) had all come together to give me nearly 100 pages of work to do (my earlier estimate of 70 pgs was a little low it turns out) in order to graduate, and two weeks to do it.
Today, there is about 10 pages between me and walking, and they'll be done before Thursday morning.
Its really frightening how much you can do when you really don't have any other choice. Of course, part of the reality is I'm at the top of my educational game right now. I can read and write better and faster now than I ever have before. That won't last long--I am actually a little worried about what happens after grad with regard to that. I was talking with a man who is getting ready to return to school in the Fall after years of working with his B.A. Looking at M.A. programs, he's really unsure how juggling a family, work, and school will work. Well, I'm doing it now and honestly I don't know how its happening myself sometimes. I have to admit, even though I am only just getting to the first jumping off point, I recognize those concerns--it only gets harder. Sometimes it feels like my brain is swimming--half the time I am looking at the computer screen my eyes are blurring (right now actually). It wasn't this hard when I was a Freshman in College...how hard will it be three years from now when I try to go into studying again full-bore? Sure there are tricks to studying quickly and accomplishing quality work in a short amount of time...but you stop practicing and it gets harder and harder.
However...I said I am elated--and elated I shall be, without spending time to worry about what being out of school may or may not mean. Hurrah! The end is in sight!
Everything is going to be just fine.
I'm elated.
Two weeks ago, none of this seemed possible. There was simply too much--a variety of factors (some of them my fault, others not so much) had all come together to give me nearly 100 pages of work to do (my earlier estimate of 70 pgs was a little low it turns out) in order to graduate, and two weeks to do it.
Today, there is about 10 pages between me and walking, and they'll be done before Thursday morning.
Its really frightening how much you can do when you really don't have any other choice. Of course, part of the reality is I'm at the top of my educational game right now. I can read and write better and faster now than I ever have before. That won't last long--I am actually a little worried about what happens after grad with regard to that. I was talking with a man who is getting ready to return to school in the Fall after years of working with his B.A. Looking at M.A. programs, he's really unsure how juggling a family, work, and school will work. Well, I'm doing it now and honestly I don't know how its happening myself sometimes. I have to admit, even though I am only just getting to the first jumping off point, I recognize those concerns--it only gets harder. Sometimes it feels like my brain is swimming--half the time I am looking at the computer screen my eyes are blurring (right now actually). It wasn't this hard when I was a Freshman in College...how hard will it be three years from now when I try to go into studying again full-bore? Sure there are tricks to studying quickly and accomplishing quality work in a short amount of time...but you stop practicing and it gets harder and harder.
However...I said I am elated--and elated I shall be, without spending time to worry about what being out of school may or may not mean. Hurrah! The end is in sight!
Monday, May 23, 2005
Special Notice
Special notice to a new link under "People": Jim. This link will take you to a truly enjoyable , if somewhat odd, blog maintained by the genius that is James Harrington. Enjoy.
Special notice to a new link under "People": Jim. This link will take you to a truly enjoyable , if somewhat odd, blog maintained by the genius that is James Harrington. Enjoy.
Dino
Today's a day for Dean Martin. Maybe some Frank later in the day...but for now, definately in the mood for some Dino. Keeps my fingers typing without my mind wandering. Speaking of which...probably time to close the blog window, eh?
Speaking of the Rat Pack...have you seen the movie, The Rat Pack? If you're a fan, its interesting. Not to mention that you get an inside look at the politics of JFK, whom the Rat Pack pretty much helped get elected. Anyways...Mambo Italiano baby.
Today's a day for Dean Martin. Maybe some Frank later in the day...but for now, definately in the mood for some Dino. Keeps my fingers typing without my mind wandering. Speaking of which...probably time to close the blog window, eh?
Speaking of the Rat Pack...have you seen the movie, The Rat Pack? If you're a fan, its interesting. Not to mention that you get an inside look at the politics of JFK, whom the Rat Pack pretty much helped get elected. Anyways...Mambo Italiano baby.
Hypocrisy
Hypocrisy is telling someone that they're wrong when you also doing exactly the same thing. Hypocrisy is suggesting that someone else is truly awful because of problems that they have, while ignoring or denying the problems that exist in your own life. And hypocrisy, as the loud, irritating Chairman of the DNC showed clearly, is also hypocritically preaching that someone else practices hypocritical preaching. Good move there Dean. Call Rush Limbaugh out for calling for moral values based on the fact that he's not a saint (a fact he's admitted and dealt with). What does this mean about the Democrat party? Have they abandoned the call for morality in our society? Or is Chairman Dean actually suggesting that the Dems, unlike the pain-killer abuser Limbaugh, are squeaky clean, without any moral dilemmas whatsoever? Either way...I think Dean's saying something he didn't want to say, but is too arrogant to realize.
Hypocrisy is telling someone that they're wrong when you also doing exactly the same thing. Hypocrisy is suggesting that someone else is truly awful because of problems that they have, while ignoring or denying the problems that exist in your own life. And hypocrisy, as the loud, irritating Chairman of the DNC showed clearly, is also hypocritically preaching that someone else practices hypocritical preaching. Good move there Dean. Call Rush Limbaugh out for calling for moral values based on the fact that he's not a saint (a fact he's admitted and dealt with). What does this mean about the Democrat party? Have they abandoned the call for morality in our society? Or is Chairman Dean actually suggesting that the Dems, unlike the pain-killer abuser Limbaugh, are squeaky clean, without any moral dilemmas whatsoever? Either way...I think Dean's saying something he didn't want to say, but is too arrogant to realize.
A Sign of the Return of Sense?
This sounds very hopeful. I realize that there is still a long ways to go--but the laws protecting even minors from having any sort of accountability seem ridiculous--especially given the seemingly random assignment of accountability ages for voting, drinking, etc.
This sounds very hopeful. I realize that there is still a long ways to go--but the laws protecting even minors from having any sort of accountability seem ridiculous--especially given the seemingly random assignment of accountability ages for voting, drinking, etc.
Friday, May 20, 2005
Personal Reflection pt 2.
What follows is more introspection...I figured a break from the standard political/Star Wars fanboy commentary would be a little refreshing. No need to read, no need to not.
Today was my last official class as an undergrad. I still have some work to turn in, still have two exams to finish up next week. But no more classes. 17 years of schooling. I'll walk a week from tomorrow and receive my diploma. In an interesting way, the end of this semester has only made me want more. Not right away (couldn't even if I wanted too) but I do want more in the future.
I remember when I graduated from Faith Academy. I had a very good high school experience--I didn't care about academics, and that freed me up to enjoy other things. I was the first person from Faith Academy to attend the Far East Wrestling tournies all four years. I participated in more plays than anyone in Faith's history either. I enjoyed four years of choir, and my senior year I took it easy, lifting weights, taking photo, drama, pottery and AP English. It was a good time, and when it ended I was scared to death. I didn't even realize it though...instead I basically couldn't eat for nearly the entire first semester in College (sadly...that changed...) I was so at home at Faith Academy that I wasn't ready for what came next--my confidence did not extend to the possibilities that lay ahead--I, in unspoken desires, longed instead for the safety that I had already grown accumstomed too.
Then I came to Biola. I chose the school, when I was in 7th grade and wanted to learn more about music. My interests changed but my choice in school did not. My family would not be near me--they spent my first year of college on home ministry, but by definition were going home and home was on the East Coast. I was here alone...and I was here for a few reasons; one of them the beautiful lady that I was convinced should be my wife; another (though it came up later) was a program that offered education in a way that made the life of the mind worthwhile. I remember really having no idea what to do--just knowing that college was the "next step" and this was where I wanted to be. Expensive? Yes. Life-changing? Unquestionably.
Now, I'm married to that same wonderful woman, we have a son...and we're thousands of dollars in debt :) and now that its taken me a few years to finally figure out what I am here for...I am getting ready to leave. Happily, I feel much less of the fear that I was unable to even articulate at the end of high school. I'm still not entirely sure which direction we're going to be headed--and we're definately not without our share of concerns. But the confidence that I lost so completely five years ago feels as if it is finally returning, at least in some measure.
Last year I sat in on the Senior Dinner, as I was running some of the techincal aspects of the evening. They were the class I was supposed to graduate with (but changing your major going into your Junior year will have the affect of delaying graduation). I was not in my element. Out of place. Lost. Lagging behind in a race that ends when you die...or so it seemed. A year has passed and things have changed. Tonight I am going to my own Senior Dinner. Its a good feeling. It is an accomplishment...its not the end--nor do I want it to be--but it feels as if it is good to celebrate. There is hope in the future--and though the constant cycle of change can be exhausting at times, this is a change that I welcome gladly.
What follows is more introspection...I figured a break from the standard political/Star Wars fanboy commentary would be a little refreshing. No need to read, no need to not.
Today was my last official class as an undergrad. I still have some work to turn in, still have two exams to finish up next week. But no more classes. 17 years of schooling. I'll walk a week from tomorrow and receive my diploma. In an interesting way, the end of this semester has only made me want more. Not right away (couldn't even if I wanted too) but I do want more in the future.
I remember when I graduated from Faith Academy. I had a very good high school experience--I didn't care about academics, and that freed me up to enjoy other things. I was the first person from Faith Academy to attend the Far East Wrestling tournies all four years. I participated in more plays than anyone in Faith's history either. I enjoyed four years of choir, and my senior year I took it easy, lifting weights, taking photo, drama, pottery and AP English. It was a good time, and when it ended I was scared to death. I didn't even realize it though...instead I basically couldn't eat for nearly the entire first semester in College (sadly...that changed...) I was so at home at Faith Academy that I wasn't ready for what came next--my confidence did not extend to the possibilities that lay ahead--I, in unspoken desires, longed instead for the safety that I had already grown accumstomed too.
Then I came to Biola. I chose the school, when I was in 7th grade and wanted to learn more about music. My interests changed but my choice in school did not. My family would not be near me--they spent my first year of college on home ministry, but by definition were going home and home was on the East Coast. I was here alone...and I was here for a few reasons; one of them the beautiful lady that I was convinced should be my wife; another (though it came up later) was a program that offered education in a way that made the life of the mind worthwhile. I remember really having no idea what to do--just knowing that college was the "next step" and this was where I wanted to be. Expensive? Yes. Life-changing? Unquestionably.
Now, I'm married to that same wonderful woman, we have a son...and we're thousands of dollars in debt :) and now that its taken me a few years to finally figure out what I am here for...I am getting ready to leave. Happily, I feel much less of the fear that I was unable to even articulate at the end of high school. I'm still not entirely sure which direction we're going to be headed--and we're definately not without our share of concerns. But the confidence that I lost so completely five years ago feels as if it is finally returning, at least in some measure.
Last year I sat in on the Senior Dinner, as I was running some of the techincal aspects of the evening. They were the class I was supposed to graduate with (but changing your major going into your Junior year will have the affect of delaying graduation). I was not in my element. Out of place. Lost. Lagging behind in a race that ends when you die...or so it seemed. A year has passed and things have changed. Tonight I am going to my own Senior Dinner. Its a good feeling. It is an accomplishment...its not the end--nor do I want it to be--but it feels as if it is good to celebrate. There is hope in the future--and though the constant cycle of change can be exhausting at times, this is a change that I welcome gladly.
Personal Reflection pt 1.
I had the joy of watching Star Wars last night. Although it has the largest opening in history, some still complain..."Wooden love dialogue", "Wooden Actors", and my favorite "It was too predictable."
Too predictable?!?!?!? What--you expected something OTHER then the turning of Anakin to the Dark Side? Let me guess--it was by insight that you guessed that Palpatine was the emperor, that the Republic was doomed, that Padme would die, that she'd name the kids Luke and Leia, that Obi Wan and Yoda alone of the Jedi would live, etc., right? Oh wait--we already knew all that--we've known it for 20 years now. The point wasn't a new story--it was the chance to see it told in full.
And it was beautiful. I'll admit it wasn't the best story--but Star Wars as a legacy is easily one of my favorites. Despite the failures of Episodes 1 & 2, the Star War's fantasy has affected me more than almost any other fantasy I can think of. Its probably in part due to the fact that it lived on screen before it lived anywhere else--Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings was amazing, but didn't stir the same chord in me that Star Wars does. I watch the Lord of the Rings and I want to read the book. I watch Star Wars and I never want the movie to end (get better, sure, but not end...).
I'll admit it--I'm addicted to the story. The myth that Star Wars plays at is intoxicating. At the end of every one of the six movies I feel instantly a confused mixture of happiness, longing, excitement and sadness. I'm a fanboy--I know it and admit it. Never dressed up, probably never will...never spent money on the fakey looking "lightsabers"...because I don't dream about imitating the magic...my dreams are occupied with living inside it. That's why, though on occascion even I will groan, the dialogue can wizz by me even when its wanting without ruining my time. Its true of almost no other movie (though, again, I'll sheepishly admit I also have a soft-spot for John Wayne movies)...when I watch Star Wars I have always been totally involved in its story, and uninterested in the distracting factors that would pierce its fantasy.
I won't be writing about Star Wars anymore--having watched it there's little reason to continue to opine about my enjoyment of it. But it was a special moment last night. In many ways it was everything I could have wanted it to be--not perfect (and if you want I could give my suggestions for how they could have salvaged it--key word: the love story) but still very special.
I had the joy of watching Star Wars last night. Although it has the largest opening in history, some still complain..."Wooden love dialogue", "Wooden Actors", and my favorite "It was too predictable."
Too predictable?!?!?!? What--you expected something OTHER then the turning of Anakin to the Dark Side? Let me guess--it was by insight that you guessed that Palpatine was the emperor, that the Republic was doomed, that Padme would die, that she'd name the kids Luke and Leia, that Obi Wan and Yoda alone of the Jedi would live, etc., right? Oh wait--we already knew all that--we've known it for 20 years now. The point wasn't a new story--it was the chance to see it told in full.
And it was beautiful. I'll admit it wasn't the best story--but Star Wars as a legacy is easily one of my favorites. Despite the failures of Episodes 1 & 2, the Star War's fantasy has affected me more than almost any other fantasy I can think of. Its probably in part due to the fact that it lived on screen before it lived anywhere else--Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings was amazing, but didn't stir the same chord in me that Star Wars does. I watch the Lord of the Rings and I want to read the book. I watch Star Wars and I never want the movie to end (get better, sure, but not end...).
I'll admit it--I'm addicted to the story. The myth that Star Wars plays at is intoxicating. At the end of every one of the six movies I feel instantly a confused mixture of happiness, longing, excitement and sadness. I'm a fanboy--I know it and admit it. Never dressed up, probably never will...never spent money on the fakey looking "lightsabers"...because I don't dream about imitating the magic...my dreams are occupied with living inside it. That's why, though on occascion even I will groan, the dialogue can wizz by me even when its wanting without ruining my time. Its true of almost no other movie (though, again, I'll sheepishly admit I also have a soft-spot for John Wayne movies)...when I watch Star Wars I have always been totally involved in its story, and uninterested in the distracting factors that would pierce its fantasy.
I won't be writing about Star Wars anymore--having watched it there's little reason to continue to opine about my enjoyment of it. But it was a special moment last night. In many ways it was everything I could have wanted it to be--not perfect (and if you want I could give my suggestions for how they could have salvaged it--key word: the love story) but still very special.
Well, the pictures do reveal a problem...
Not quite the one the British Sun intended to reveal though, I think. Mental note--when trying to expose the cruelties and abuse of the Americans, try to do so without committing insulting acts of degredation yourself. When Saddam Hussein is suing you, and you have to use the "freedom of the press" line of argument to defend yourself, you've reached a new low.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4567341.stm
Not quite the one the British Sun intended to reveal though, I think. Mental note--when trying to expose the cruelties and abuse of the Americans, try to do so without committing insulting acts of degredation yourself. When Saddam Hussein is suing you, and you have to use the "freedom of the press" line of argument to defend yourself, you've reached a new low.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4567341.stm
Thursday, May 19, 2005
The French (and the rest of Europe) on France
I am doing my 20 page research seminar on Franco/Anglo-Saxon relations in the 20th Century...I know--terribly boring, but for some reason it piqued my interest in January. Oh well. Anyways, I thought this was funny, and since I have revisions to write on a paper about the French, I'm fairly appreciative. Enjoy.
I am doing my 20 page research seminar on Franco/Anglo-Saxon relations in the 20th Century...I know--terribly boring, but for some reason it piqued my interest in January. Oh well. Anyways, I thought this was funny, and since I have revisions to write on a paper about the French, I'm fairly appreciative. Enjoy.
Wednesday, May 18, 2005
See, I told you so.
Proof. The Democrats are causing the government to cease functioning. Thank you Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid. Next time you have a complaint about the effectivness of the Federal government--take it up with Reid and his ilk.
Proof. The Democrats are causing the government to cease functioning. Thank you Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid. Next time you have a complaint about the effectivness of the Federal government--take it up with Reid and his ilk.
If
If you can keep your head when all about you
Are losing theirs and blaming it on you;
If you can trust yourself when all men doubt you,
But make allowance for their doubting too;
If you can wait and not be tired by waiting,
Or, being lied about, don't deal in lies,
Or, being hated, don't give way to hating,
And yet don't look too good, nor talk to wise;
If you can dream - and not make dreams your master;
If you can think - and not make thoughts your aim;
If you can meet with triumph and disaster
And treat those two imposters just the same;
If you can bear to hear the truth you've spoken
Twisted by knaves to make a trap for fools,
Or watch the things you gave your life to broken,
And stoop and build 'em up with wornout tools;
If you can make one heap of all your winnings
And risk it on one turn of pitch-and-toss,
And lose, and start again at your beginnings
And never breath a word about your loss;
If you can force your heart and nerve and sinew
To serve your turn long after they are gone,
And so hold on where there is nothing in you
Except the Will which says to them: "Hold on";
If you can talk with crowds and keep your virtue,
Or walk with kings - nor lose the common touch;
If neither foes nor loving friends can hurt you;
If all men count with you, but none too much;
If you can fill the unforgiving minute
With sixty seconds' worth of distance run -
Yours is the Earth and everything that's in it,
And - which is more - you'll be a Man my son!
~Rudyard Kipling
If you can keep your head when all about you
Are losing theirs and blaming it on you;
If you can trust yourself when all men doubt you,
But make allowance for their doubting too;
If you can wait and not be tired by waiting,
Or, being lied about, don't deal in lies,
Or, being hated, don't give way to hating,
And yet don't look too good, nor talk to wise;
If you can dream - and not make dreams your master;
If you can think - and not make thoughts your aim;
If you can meet with triumph and disaster
And treat those two imposters just the same;
If you can bear to hear the truth you've spoken
Twisted by knaves to make a trap for fools,
Or watch the things you gave your life to broken,
And stoop and build 'em up with wornout tools;
If you can make one heap of all your winnings
And risk it on one turn of pitch-and-toss,
And lose, and start again at your beginnings
And never breath a word about your loss;
If you can force your heart and nerve and sinew
To serve your turn long after they are gone,
And so hold on where there is nothing in you
Except the Will which says to them: "Hold on";
If you can talk with crowds and keep your virtue,
Or walk with kings - nor lose the common touch;
If neither foes nor loving friends can hurt you;
If all men count with you, but none too much;
If you can fill the unforgiving minute
With sixty seconds' worth of distance run -
Yours is the Earth and everything that's in it,
And - which is more - you'll be a Man my son!
~Rudyard Kipling
Tuesday, May 17, 2005
Getting Riled Up
They won't hesitate to dictate to the President and Congress what they believe the leadership of the nation should do. However, let the tables be turned, allow someone to suggest that Newsweek needs to make amends for the ridiculous "mistake" it made, and once again freedom of the press is being infringed. Not much else to say...just wanted to point it out because its important to notice the games they play.
They won't hesitate to dictate to the President and Congress what they believe the leadership of the nation should do. However, let the tables be turned, allow someone to suggest that Newsweek needs to make amends for the ridiculous "mistake" it made, and once again freedom of the press is being infringed. Not much else to say...just wanted to point it out because its important to notice the games they play.
The Preposterous Notion of a War For Oil
It seems ridiculous to have to reiterate this, but America did not go to war over oil in Iraq. What we did go to war for was the confrontation of a power-mad dictator who was in violation of international demands concerning his ambitions for becoming a nuclear power. What we did go to war for was the opportunity to remove a dictator who viciously tortured and butchered his people, in favor of establishing a functioning democracy in the center of the Middle East.
Consequentially, we succeeded.
The only people who insist we made war for the sake of oil are the people who have consistently ignored the threat that Saddam posed to the free world.
Of course, the question quickly arises--why didn't we attack North Korea then? Because, contrary to what the critics of the war in Iraq believe, America under the leadership of George Bush is not carving out an empire for itself. Iraq had violated the terms of the ceasefire which ended the Gulf War--and had done so for years under the Clinton administration. By the time Bush came to power, the standard take on the issue was that it was being essentially ignored. Then 9/11 happened and the US was given the incentive to look proactively towards securing the peace for the future. Hence we invaded Afghanistan--with the aim of removing the Taliban and closing one of the terrorist's primary training grounds. Hence we aggressively confronted Saddam's blatant definace of the internationally upheld demands for the cessation of any and all nuclear development. Hence we responded when that was ignored.
In North Korea, the situation is a little different. There are still diplomatic options available--due in part to the fact that North Korea's most important benefactor, China, has the responsiblity of restraining the North Koreans. The situations are not the same. The fact that Iraq happens to possess oil is irrelevant--Afghanistan didn't and we attacked there first.
You would think this wouldn't be something we'd need to go over again. But, you'd be wrong.
It seems ridiculous to have to reiterate this, but America did not go to war over oil in Iraq. What we did go to war for was the confrontation of a power-mad dictator who was in violation of international demands concerning his ambitions for becoming a nuclear power. What we did go to war for was the opportunity to remove a dictator who viciously tortured and butchered his people, in favor of establishing a functioning democracy in the center of the Middle East.
Consequentially, we succeeded.
The only people who insist we made war for the sake of oil are the people who have consistently ignored the threat that Saddam posed to the free world.
Of course, the question quickly arises--why didn't we attack North Korea then? Because, contrary to what the critics of the war in Iraq believe, America under the leadership of George Bush is not carving out an empire for itself. Iraq had violated the terms of the ceasefire which ended the Gulf War--and had done so for years under the Clinton administration. By the time Bush came to power, the standard take on the issue was that it was being essentially ignored. Then 9/11 happened and the US was given the incentive to look proactively towards securing the peace for the future. Hence we invaded Afghanistan--with the aim of removing the Taliban and closing one of the terrorist's primary training grounds. Hence we aggressively confronted Saddam's blatant definace of the internationally upheld demands for the cessation of any and all nuclear development. Hence we responded when that was ignored.
In North Korea, the situation is a little different. There are still diplomatic options available--due in part to the fact that North Korea's most important benefactor, China, has the responsiblity of restraining the North Koreans. The situations are not the same. The fact that Iraq happens to possess oil is irrelevant--Afghanistan didn't and we attacked there first.
You would think this wouldn't be something we'd need to go over again. But, you'd be wrong.
Riiiiight
The most ironic (if disturbing) news today...
In the same court room that he committed murder in, he's pleading not guilty. How can any lawyer seriously try and defend this man???
The most ironic (if disturbing) news today...
In the same court room that he committed murder in, he's pleading not guilty. How can any lawyer seriously try and defend this man???
The Hits, They Just Keep On a Comin'...
Unbelievable. Predictable, but unbelievable.
This should shake the very core of Newsweek, NBC, etc--and more importantly, the motivation behind this story needs to be flately exposed. Its a circus where the people who claim accountability is their primary concern dodge responsibility at every turn.
Unbelievable. Predictable, but unbelievable.
This should shake the very core of Newsweek, NBC, etc--and more importantly, the motivation behind this story needs to be flately exposed. Its a circus where the people who claim accountability is their primary concern dodge responsibility at every turn.
Monday, May 16, 2005
OUTRAGEOUS!
Even when its not our fault, its our fault. Whaddaya gonna do?!?
Senate Democrats Fault U.S. in Iraq Oil Scandal
By AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE
Even when its not our fault, its our fault. Whaddaya gonna do?!?
Senate Democrats Fault U.S. in Iraq Oil Scandal
By AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE
WASHINGTON, May 16 (Reuters) - The United States did not do enough to curb corruption by American companies involved in the United Nations' oil-for-food program in Iraq, say Democrats on a Senate committee investigating abuses in the program.
A report by the Democrats released late Monday said the State Department and the United States Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control had taken "virtually no steps" to ensure that American companies enforced sanctions against Iraq.
"We have to look in the mirror at ourselves as well as pointing fingers at others," said Senator Carl Levin of Michigan, the ranking Democrat on the Senate's Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations.
The committee is to hold a hearing on Tuesday at which a member of the British Parliament, George Galloway, is to respond to allegations that Saddam Hussein gave him the rights to export 20 million barrels of oil under the oil-for-food program. Mr. Galloway has called the allegations "absurd."
The report presented Monday indicates that American imports of Iraqi oil helped finance about 52 percent of clandestine deals carried out illegally under the oil-for-food program at the time when Iraq was under United Nations sanctions.
The report looked at kickback allegations against a Texas company, Bayoil USA, which was indicted in the investigation of the $67 billion oil-for-food program. The program allowed Iraq to sell oil to buy civilian goods for its people living under United Nations sanctions.
Bayoil executives pleaded not guilty last month to charges the company was part of a scheme to pay millions of dollars in kickbacks to Mr. Hussein in exchange for oil deals.
Records kept by the Iraqi Oil Ministry's State Oil Marketing Organization showed that Iraq collected about $228 million in surcharges from September 2000 to September 2002, the report said.
It contends that Bayoil "facilitated" about $37 million in illegal surcharges to Mr. Hussein and then engaged in lobbying efforts to influence the price of Iraqi oil and to oppose American efforts to stop the surcharges.
"Bayoil engaged in this misconduct for nearly two years, from 2000 to 2002, without attracting meaningful oversight from any U.S. agency," the report said.
The report said questions raised by United Nations oil observers about Bayoil's oil-for-food activities produced no American response. Asked about the report, the State Department said it could not comment on a report it had not seen.
The company's lawyer said she would respond later to allegations made against Bayoil in the Democrats' report.
The Message From Cannes
Last year Michael Moore's documentary won top honors. It braved the critics, supposedly--as if suggesting that the action in Iraq and Afghanistan is "illegal" and the result of a conspiracy is brave. Courage, as we've been discussing in our pre-Academy sessions on Plato's Laches, doesn't seem to exist when its the popular status quo. The Right-Wing "nutjobs" suggested that Moore was helping hatred of America take center stage--and of course they were laughed at--criticized as narrow-minded lemmings.
This year at Cannes Film Festival...no Michael Moore. Instead we have a plethora of films criticizing the American life--no longer limited to simply the "illegal" war we're waging, but now aimed at taking down the influence that America has on the free-world as a whole. Take, for example, the sentiments of Danish film maker Lars Von Trier:
Von Trier, whose fear of flying has prevented him from visiting the United States, won thunderous cheers at the world premiere and a news conference, where he said he enjoyed bashing America on screen because it invades his life even in Denmark.
"We are all under the influence -- and it's a very bad influence -- from America," said the 49-year-old Dane. "In my country everything has to do with America. America is kind of sitting on the world.
"America has to do with 60 percent of my brain and all things I experience in my life, and I'm not happy about that," von Trier said. I'd say 60 percent of my life is American so I am in fact an 'American' too. But I can't go there and vote or change anything there. That is why I make films about America."
The whole article is here
.Many things come to mind, reading this. Especially as I study the history of the European nations during the twentieth-century, or the "American Century" as it has been called...I could point out that this Dane would have quite a different complaint if it were for the invasive nature of America--he'd have Germany and the Nazis instead.
I could point out that, having never visited America he is as narrow-minded as he would like to suggest Americans are when they label Europeans.
But most of all, I could point out that regardless of his complaints, he lives in a world where the last remaining Superpower continues to dominate the world in all the important ways--and he has not been prevented from making his hate-film of America. In any other time, under any other power as completely awesome as the United States is today--this man would not have survived his critique. However, due almost entirely to the very nature of the freedom that defines the nation he has chosen to blame for the woes of his nation and the world (and because we have defended that freedom and bestowed it upon almost the entire rest of the world) he can participate freely with other aficionados of the film world in critiquing the affects of the American lifestyle on his world. They have gathered together to celebrate the the burning of America in effigy and it is a media event with glamour and glitz. Someday, the irony may finally catch-up to them. I won't hold my breath.
So much for the valor of Michael Moore. Even Star Wars has gotten into the fray. When you're in the same group as Star Wars--you're not edgy, you're just one of the clones.
Behind the Eight-Ball
Senator Reid, who perhaps needs to be reminded he is the Minority Leader, felt he should offer a compromise to the Republican majority with regard to the Democrat's present stance on Judicial Nominees. The nature of the compromise
? Why, if Republicans will cater to the demands of the minority, then the minority will proceed to continue the delay of confirming Judicial nominees. Win/Win, right?This is getting ridiculous. I think the filibuster should be retained if possible--but what is currently happening is the stage is being set for it to be removed altogether--because its abuse is translating into the dereliction of the government's responsibilities. The Republicans need to make it clear that the majority in our government governs--and the way that the minority is behaving presently may result in serious consequences. But the majority cannot behave as if they are behind the eight ball forever. Warning to Senator Reid--you're cutting ties with your only weapons. You're reasonable options are anything but--and you'll lose more power by trying to close down the government you don't control then you did even when you lost control in 1994.
I continue to watch the demise of the Deomcratic Party with satisfaction--but I am wary. In the vacuum that will be left when the present blowhards of the Left are gone, who will fill the space? The Moore party? The Dean party? The Atheistic Relativism Party?
Bed Time and Glimpses of the Divine.
I know that every husband, every wife and every parent, see images of God in the new relationships they are experiencing. I did on my wedding day. I did when we discovered that from us two would come a son. And last night, I experienced yet another glimpse of the divine through the simple interaction of putting my son to sleep.
He's been very tired. Got his shots (from a free clinic) and has been very tired as a result. Its been very hot recently, so putting him to sleep is something of a problem--he likes to be swaddled and then goes right to sleep--we have tried not swaddling him, and he keeps himself awake, even when he desperately wants to go to sleep. However, this makes him so hot that he'll wake up later in discomfort. So last night we decided to let him sleep on his own--no blankets, cause he'll pull them over his head and cry even more. This was no fun, for Aiden or his parents. He cried so hard, but we had resolved not to help him to sleep--he needed to learn to fall asleep himself. The most we would allow was giving him back his Nuk (pacifier) every now and then. Well, he had cried for about half an hour when I went in to see him. He was lying there, just crying as hard as he could, and upon seeing me raised his arms reaching out for me. I felt bad for him, but was only going to put his Nuk back in his mouth and then leave again. Or so I thought.
When I reached down and gave him the Nuk, he reached up and grabbed onto my wrist. His tiny hand held it and instantly he grew quieter. I stroke his head and whispered that everything was going to be fine--that he needed to sleep. He closed his eyes but mainatined his grip on my hand...and I started to pull away. Instantly he was awake and crying again. I relaxed my hand and again soothed him to sleep. I stayed with him, watching him finally find the peace of sleep. Every now and then his free hand would reach over and stroke my hand which he had never let go. It wasn't until I had waited a full five minutes after he closed his eyes before I was able to gently slide my hand from his and leave him to dream.
I know I didn't do it "right" and that Aiden didn't fall asleep entirely on his own as a result. But I couldn't leave him when just holding my hand gave him peace that he was incapable of finding on his own.
Its probably fairly obvious what parts of this remind me of our relationship with God. All too often I have been the infant crying for even the slightest amount of attention, believing myself to be lost in a bed that offers none of the attention I so desperately crave from my heavenly father. Worse still--often like Aiden I feel that I am not even strong enough to enable myself to move and go where I want to go--and in utter helplessness I feel abandoned.
What was unique for me last night, however, was the other perspective. As the parent. I know that Aiden is alright--even as he screams bloody murder--I know that he is exactly where he needs to be because he needs sleep. And this exercise isn't because I like hearing him scream (far from it!); its so he can grow and learn how to sleep in peace himself. I wanted to help him--to hold him and put him to sleep--but he wouldn't learn then--and probably wouldn't sleep even if I did hold him. The only thing I could do was let him cry and learn the lesson. Then, when I did stand next to the crib and let him hold my hand for comfort...more clearly than I have ever before, I think I saw a little better how God looks on us. The joy that offering even a little comfort can bring is so great, its hard to express. I couldn't leave my son last night...not in the face of the simple need that he had. It made me consider what is actually going on when I feel alone and abandoned by God. Surely He, more than I ever will, understands the needs of my heart. Surely He does not abandon us when we cry out--even if it feels like it. Surely He is with us, even to the end of the age.
The other thing this made me think about was what, exactly, the crucifiction must have meant. "My God, My God--why have You forsaken me?" How God must have wanted to reach out and comfort His son...my desire to offer Aiden a little peace can hardly compare--but because of last night I know a little bit more than I did before. To resist the urge to save His son...it seems impossible. Almost everyone recognizes the concept of sacrifice for romantic love...but sacrifice for paternal love is one we often discount. The love between the perfect father and the perfect son was sacrificed for us--at best, tainted orphans. An awe-some thought.
Not that these ruminations are unique or original. They're just special for me--as is any instance when the simplistic expands our understanding of the boundless eternal and divine. Hearing others explain the truth is never quite as life-altering as glimpsing it yourself.
I know that every husband, every wife and every parent, see images of God in the new relationships they are experiencing. I did on my wedding day. I did when we discovered that from us two would come a son. And last night, I experienced yet another glimpse of the divine through the simple interaction of putting my son to sleep.
He's been very tired. Got his shots (from a free clinic) and has been very tired as a result. Its been very hot recently, so putting him to sleep is something of a problem--he likes to be swaddled and then goes right to sleep--we have tried not swaddling him, and he keeps himself awake, even when he desperately wants to go to sleep. However, this makes him so hot that he'll wake up later in discomfort. So last night we decided to let him sleep on his own--no blankets, cause he'll pull them over his head and cry even more. This was no fun, for Aiden or his parents. He cried so hard, but we had resolved not to help him to sleep--he needed to learn to fall asleep himself. The most we would allow was giving him back his Nuk (pacifier) every now and then. Well, he had cried for about half an hour when I went in to see him. He was lying there, just crying as hard as he could, and upon seeing me raised his arms reaching out for me. I felt bad for him, but was only going to put his Nuk back in his mouth and then leave again. Or so I thought.
When I reached down and gave him the Nuk, he reached up and grabbed onto my wrist. His tiny hand held it and instantly he grew quieter. I stroke his head and whispered that everything was going to be fine--that he needed to sleep. He closed his eyes but mainatined his grip on my hand...and I started to pull away. Instantly he was awake and crying again. I relaxed my hand and again soothed him to sleep. I stayed with him, watching him finally find the peace of sleep. Every now and then his free hand would reach over and stroke my hand which he had never let go. It wasn't until I had waited a full five minutes after he closed his eyes before I was able to gently slide my hand from his and leave him to dream.
I know I didn't do it "right" and that Aiden didn't fall asleep entirely on his own as a result. But I couldn't leave him when just holding my hand gave him peace that he was incapable of finding on his own.
Its probably fairly obvious what parts of this remind me of our relationship with God. All too often I have been the infant crying for even the slightest amount of attention, believing myself to be lost in a bed that offers none of the attention I so desperately crave from my heavenly father. Worse still--often like Aiden I feel that I am not even strong enough to enable myself to move and go where I want to go--and in utter helplessness I feel abandoned.
What was unique for me last night, however, was the other perspective. As the parent. I know that Aiden is alright--even as he screams bloody murder--I know that he is exactly where he needs to be because he needs sleep. And this exercise isn't because I like hearing him scream (far from it!); its so he can grow and learn how to sleep in peace himself. I wanted to help him--to hold him and put him to sleep--but he wouldn't learn then--and probably wouldn't sleep even if I did hold him. The only thing I could do was let him cry and learn the lesson. Then, when I did stand next to the crib and let him hold my hand for comfort...more clearly than I have ever before, I think I saw a little better how God looks on us. The joy that offering even a little comfort can bring is so great, its hard to express. I couldn't leave my son last night...not in the face of the simple need that he had. It made me consider what is actually going on when I feel alone and abandoned by God. Surely He, more than I ever will, understands the needs of my heart. Surely He does not abandon us when we cry out--even if it feels like it. Surely He is with us, even to the end of the age.
The other thing this made me think about was what, exactly, the crucifiction must have meant. "My God, My God--why have You forsaken me?" How God must have wanted to reach out and comfort His son...my desire to offer Aiden a little peace can hardly compare--but because of last night I know a little bit more than I did before. To resist the urge to save His son...it seems impossible. Almost everyone recognizes the concept of sacrifice for romantic love...but sacrifice for paternal love is one we often discount. The love between the perfect father and the perfect son was sacrificed for us--at best, tainted orphans. An awe-some thought.
Not that these ruminations are unique or original. They're just special for me--as is any instance when the simplistic expands our understanding of the boundless eternal and divine. Hearing others explain the truth is never quite as life-altering as glimpsing it yourself.
Why Hate Never Wins
We witnessed something in November that re-enforced the old truth--hate doesn't win. In an election where so much was at stake, and a little less than half the nation was convinced that they would see a landslide to remove the man they deeply hated from office--there were two messages consistently being heard. One was a message of purpose, duty, responsibility, safety and strength. The other was "Anyone but Bush", mixed in with out rhetoric. It wasn't surprising when the Left lost, because simply hating someone or something isn't enough. You need a positive message to win a war.
Well, the terrorists in Iraq could take a page from this book. It makes sense that the Left is intimidated by the hatred that they see in the terrorists--people who believe hate is effective would necessarily be impressed by the intense hatred evident there. But hate cannot build a nation. Hate cannot unite people. Hate loses wars.
We are intentionally building something in Iraq--and our task has been clear since day one--remove a tyrant, and give freedom to the oppressed. The various groups in Iraq have a variety of causes that they fight for...and their unifying trait is, you guessed it, hate. Its simply not enough.
We witnessed something in November that re-enforced the old truth--hate doesn't win. In an election where so much was at stake, and a little less than half the nation was convinced that they would see a landslide to remove the man they deeply hated from office--there were two messages consistently being heard. One was a message of purpose, duty, responsibility, safety and strength. The other was "Anyone but Bush", mixed in with out rhetoric. It wasn't surprising when the Left lost, because simply hating someone or something isn't enough. You need a positive message to win a war.
Well, the terrorists in Iraq could take a page from this book. It makes sense that the Left is intimidated by the hatred that they see in the terrorists--people who believe hate is effective would necessarily be impressed by the intense hatred evident there. But hate cannot build a nation. Hate cannot unite people. Hate loses wars.
We are intentionally building something in Iraq--and our task has been clear since day one--remove a tyrant, and give freedom to the oppressed. The various groups in Iraq have a variety of causes that they fight for...and their unifying trait is, you guessed it, hate. Its simply not enough.
Republicans in '08
So everybody knows we're going to see a Democrat circus in '07 and '08, as Hillary and some other guy prepare to run for the highest office. My guess would be...maybe Hillary and Edwards, but we'll see.
But who's going to run for the Republicans? George Bush has left large shoes to fill, and nobody looks like the obvious choice for heir-apparent. I figured nobody would be interested in Cheney...but I was wrong. So Cheney might receive some consideration...not the most exciting guy, but he's easily one of the most knowledgeable men walking around D.C. today. Then there's Condi...Guilanni...Frist...Allen...who, who, who? I'm glad we haven't jumped the gun--a large difference between the Republicans and the Dems this time around--almost before the election was over people were talking (whether in fear or hope) about Hillary in '08. We don't have anyone like that...though I think Condi comes the closest. Condi and Cheney? Cheney and Condi?
Its gonna be interesting.
So everybody knows we're going to see a Democrat circus in '07 and '08, as Hillary and some other guy prepare to run for the highest office. My guess would be...maybe Hillary and Edwards, but we'll see.
But who's going to run for the Republicans? George Bush has left large shoes to fill, and nobody looks like the obvious choice for heir-apparent. I figured nobody would be interested in Cheney...but I was wrong. So Cheney might receive some consideration...not the most exciting guy, but he's easily one of the most knowledgeable men walking around D.C. today. Then there's Condi...Guilanni...Frist...Allen...who, who, who? I'm glad we haven't jumped the gun--a large difference between the Republicans and the Dems this time around--almost before the election was over people were talking (whether in fear or hope) about Hillary in '08. We don't have anyone like that...though I think Condi comes the closest. Condi and Cheney? Cheney and Condi?
Its gonna be interesting.
Good Call Newsweek...
This is the problem with our press today. So eager to break the stories that will "reveal all" that will show just how corrupt and despicable the tactics of the "illegal" war on terror are...that they publish incorrect information--information that they admit will be used to fan unrest against our citizens, soldiers--and then say "sorry" as if that matters anymore.
Bravo, Newsweek Editors. Next time your "Conventional Wisdom" gives its insight--why not taking a good look in the mirror. As this will very likely NOT happen, I humbly offer my own CW on the situation.
Old CW--Newsweek has an obvious left slant but has some real value to it when it comes to getting news--and the cartoons are the best in the News Mag world.
New CW--Newsweek is all about grabbing headlines, and our soldiers pay the price. Hint--Check sources before printing.
This is the problem with our press today. So eager to break the stories that will "reveal all" that will show just how corrupt and despicable the tactics of the "illegal" war on terror are...that they publish incorrect information--information that they admit will be used to fan unrest against our citizens, soldiers--and then say "sorry" as if that matters anymore.
Bravo, Newsweek Editors. Next time your "Conventional Wisdom" gives its insight--why not taking a good look in the mirror. As this will very likely NOT happen, I humbly offer my own CW on the situation.
Old CW--Newsweek has an obvious left slant but has some real value to it when it comes to getting news--and the cartoons are the best in the News Mag world.
New CW--Newsweek is all about grabbing headlines, and our soldiers pay the price. Hint--Check sources before printing.
Sunday, May 15, 2005
George Lucas and Politics...
He's responsible for one of my favorite fantasies. He's also responsible for turning out two less than acceptable prequels. His presence is unmistakeable if you're familiar with his films...and that usually means both good and bad things.
Nobody ever thought of him as a political officinado. So when he decides to mix politics with the Star Wars legacy...its not just old and stale and poorly done...its in bad taste. If I wanted to hear some Hollywood prima donna opine about their understanding of the American Democracy and politics in the world today, I'd watch Michael Moore's tripe. As it is...leave Star Wars alone. It has enough weight to carry living up to the immortal first trilogy without being saddled with the weight of a bad understanding of international politics.
He's responsible for one of my favorite fantasies. He's also responsible for turning out two less than acceptable prequels. His presence is unmistakeable if you're familiar with his films...and that usually means both good and bad things.
Nobody ever thought of him as a political officinado. So when he decides to mix politics with the Star Wars legacy...its not just old and stale and poorly done...its in bad taste. If I wanted to hear some Hollywood prima donna opine about their understanding of the American Democracy and politics in the world today, I'd watch Michael Moore's tripe. As it is...leave Star Wars alone. It has enough weight to carry living up to the immortal first trilogy without being saddled with the weight of a bad understanding of international politics.
Friday, May 13, 2005
Terry Scott Taylor...TONIGHT!
I get to see him tonight. For Free. Its the end of a very long, and a little discouraging week. This is a highlight.Friday, May 13
Terry Scott Taylor
7pm in the Collegium at Biola University
A prolific singer-songwriter with 30 years of experience making a living in music, Terry Scott Taylor is bringing his one-man show to Biola's Collegium by special invitation. During his long career, Terry has restlessly re-invented his musical style repeatedly: He was an important figure in the "Jesus music" movement of the 1970s, a boundary-breaking innovator throughout the 80s with his band Daniel Amos, and the front man for The Swirling Eddies and the Lost Dogs throughout the 90s. Still presiding over all three bands and maintaining a solo career, Terry also produces for other artists, records soundtracks for movies, TV shows and video games, and whistles on his way to the mailbox. How does he keep it all up? His lyrics are thoughtful, literary, and formed by his deep Christian faith. (Check him out at danielamos.com)
Who can describe a Terry Taylor solo performance? It's a mixture of a concert, stand-up comedy, story-telling, devotional meditations, goofy sing-alongs, tear-jerking ballads, news analysis, punch lines, plot twists, snide asides and prophetic words. He will use his magic powers to hypnotize you.
He may sing songs about the end of the world, the cross of Christ, or his cat. I can't really predict or control his repertoire. (On a personal note, let me say that if you don't like his music, you will only lower my opinion of you.)
Thursday, May 12, 2005
Stupid, Stupid, Stupid...
Its one of those "Why on earth would you go there?!?!???" moments.
"Was It Worth It?" The recent article by Pat Buchanan which essentially decides that one evil in history negates the validity of the struggle against the evil that existed before it. Sigh.
Its bad enough that this man came to this ridiculous suggestion...its worse that he's also associated with the church and therefore will attract those that are looking for any reason to propagate the idea that Christians are callous to the troubles of the world--that he never once mentions the holocaust in his article (either as a positive OR a negative) is truly disturbing. And so the reaction is fairly predictable.
I'm not prepared to summarily judge Mr Buchanan one way or the other...but this was a really bad choice. Really bad. Maybe I'm extra sensitive cause I love history...but this is almost inexcusable in its narrowminded scope.
Plus, I'm a Churchill fan. Big time. Sigh...Bad, Bad, Bad choice.
Its one of those "Why on earth would you go there?!?!???" moments.
"Was It Worth It?" The recent article by Pat Buchanan which essentially decides that one evil in history negates the validity of the struggle against the evil that existed before it. Sigh.
Its bad enough that this man came to this ridiculous suggestion...its worse that he's also associated with the church and therefore will attract those that are looking for any reason to propagate the idea that Christians are callous to the troubles of the world--that he never once mentions the holocaust in his article (either as a positive OR a negative) is truly disturbing. And so the reaction is fairly predictable.
I'm not prepared to summarily judge Mr Buchanan one way or the other...but this was a really bad choice. Really bad. Maybe I'm extra sensitive cause I love history...but this is almost inexcusable in its narrowminded scope.
Plus, I'm a Churchill fan. Big time. Sigh...Bad, Bad, Bad choice.
Medi-Cal...that leech which continues to suck the life from my nerves...
I hate Medi-Cal.
It's not just that they treat you as if you're illiterate (even though at this point...nevermind--suffice to say, I'm not illiterate).
It's not just that they have easily the most inefficently run office in the world (and I have lived in a country that comes close--the immigration offices of the Philippines must have taken their cue from America's poorly run government aid systems).
Its not even (though its almost) the fact that its impossible to be well-informed and on a good basis with your "worker"--because you have to call within the window of two hours in the morning to get a hold of them--and most of the time, you won't even then, and you can't simply walk in and try and sort things out because you can't have an appointment without calling first (which, as I already mentioned, DOESN'T work) so you end up sitting in their overcrowded waiting rooms for hours till someone walks out to tell you that they sent the wrong paper work because the "computer sends all sorts of things."
No--even taken all together, this still doesn't make this the worst office in the world. For that, they have to endanger my family. But Chris, you'll say, surely an institute that is in place to help familes without means provide insurance for their babies so they can get much needed medical attention wouldn't endanger those same babies through negligence...or at least, that's what I said to myself.
But, no. You (and unfortunately I) would be wrong.
Medi-Cal is the devil. They are the devil for this reason: Aiden is not getting the medical attention he needs to ensure that he grows strong and healthy, all because of the inexcusably poor quality of service that they offer. After sending them the forms that they requested at least half a dozen times (though a better estimate might put it at something like 8-10) we are still receiving paperwork from them saying they want the same forms or they will discontinue our insurance. And inspite of involving ourselves in the meaningless task of trying to contact them and clear things up over the phone (and even asking them to call us with notes on the paperwork we send them) we still have made zero progress with these people. At one point, out of extreme frustration, I decided to talk to this imbicle myself--and found out she wanted forms that don't exist. I was at a loss...but we went to Biola and they helped us out by drafting the information in a form for us. I thought that we had finally beaten the system--this was going to be our triumphal moment--and as a celebration we could finally give Aiden his second round of innoculations. Apparantly I am a fool to hope. No sooner did they receive that then they started asking for other paper work--which had already sent--and then they changed our "worker" without any notice--and the new idiot has no idea what's going on either.
However...after a lot of paperwork and calls and what not...we got reinstated and scheduled an appointment (cause we can pay for it again). So now we have a doctor's appointment today. Hopefully they won't call children services because of the long time between appointments. Oh, and we received a notice on Monday that if they don't get X forms by Friday, we'll be discontinued again. Words do not exist for my feelings at present.
I am just at a loss. At this point, I don't care about my time--apparently that's something the government offices have, do and will waste. But this is the health of my son we're talking about here. That's what they're supposed to be there for. And I am getting pretty tired of having them yank us around with him in the middle.
This only re-enforces my belief that the private sector would be a better place for things like this. People in a government job like Medi-Cal don't have to care or worry about their preformance--because who am I, the broke parent, going to talk to? What real power do I have?
The question--do I have any better ideas? Well yes, I do actually. Turn the money that funds Medi-Cal to the private sector. Offer insentives to private insurance companies and make the various options available to the public. The private companies would only get paid if they retained the patronage of people like me (i.e. people who need help for their children's sake). Free market baby. It works everywhere else--are you telling me it wouldn't work in this area? There would be more efficent healthcare, because when there's a chance for profit based on quality, quality instantly begins to show itself. This seems obvious to me...but hey--I'm just a broke, apparantly illiterate, and now neglectful parent. What do I know?
I need a job. A real job that gives coverage to my family. I am going to be applying for teaching positions in Christian schools in Whittier and Pasadena. Pray, please.
I hate Medi-Cal.
I hate Medi-Cal.
It's not just that they treat you as if you're illiterate (even though at this point...nevermind--suffice to say, I'm not illiterate).
It's not just that they have easily the most inefficently run office in the world (and I have lived in a country that comes close--the immigration offices of the Philippines must have taken their cue from America's poorly run government aid systems).
Its not even (though its almost) the fact that its impossible to be well-informed and on a good basis with your "worker"--because you have to call within the window of two hours in the morning to get a hold of them--and most of the time, you won't even then, and you can't simply walk in and try and sort things out because you can't have an appointment without calling first (which, as I already mentioned, DOESN'T work) so you end up sitting in their overcrowded waiting rooms for hours till someone walks out to tell you that they sent the wrong paper work because the "computer sends all sorts of things."
No--even taken all together, this still doesn't make this the worst office in the world. For that, they have to endanger my family. But Chris, you'll say, surely an institute that is in place to help familes without means provide insurance for their babies so they can get much needed medical attention wouldn't endanger those same babies through negligence...or at least, that's what I said to myself.
But, no. You (and unfortunately I) would be wrong.
Medi-Cal is the devil. They are the devil for this reason: Aiden is not getting the medical attention he needs to ensure that he grows strong and healthy, all because of the inexcusably poor quality of service that they offer. After sending them the forms that they requested at least half a dozen times (though a better estimate might put it at something like 8-10) we are still receiving paperwork from them saying they want the same forms or they will discontinue our insurance. And inspite of involving ourselves in the meaningless task of trying to contact them and clear things up over the phone (and even asking them to call us with notes on the paperwork we send them) we still have made zero progress with these people. At one point, out of extreme frustration, I decided to talk to this imbicle myself--and found out she wanted forms that don't exist. I was at a loss...but we went to Biola and they helped us out by drafting the information in a form for us. I thought that we had finally beaten the system--this was going to be our triumphal moment--and as a celebration we could finally give Aiden his second round of innoculations. Apparantly I am a fool to hope. No sooner did they receive that then they started asking for other paper work--which had already sent--and then they changed our "worker" without any notice--and the new idiot has no idea what's going on either.
However...after a lot of paperwork and calls and what not...we got reinstated and scheduled an appointment (cause we can pay for it again). So now we have a doctor's appointment today. Hopefully they won't call children services because of the long time between appointments. Oh, and we received a notice on Monday that if they don't get X forms by Friday, we'll be discontinued again. Words do not exist for my feelings at present.
I am just at a loss. At this point, I don't care about my time--apparently that's something the government offices have, do and will waste. But this is the health of my son we're talking about here. That's what they're supposed to be there for. And I am getting pretty tired of having them yank us around with him in the middle.
This only re-enforces my belief that the private sector would be a better place for things like this. People in a government job like Medi-Cal don't have to care or worry about their preformance--because who am I, the broke parent, going to talk to? What real power do I have?
The question--do I have any better ideas? Well yes, I do actually. Turn the money that funds Medi-Cal to the private sector. Offer insentives to private insurance companies and make the various options available to the public. The private companies would only get paid if they retained the patronage of people like me (i.e. people who need help for their children's sake). Free market baby. It works everywhere else--are you telling me it wouldn't work in this area? There would be more efficent healthcare, because when there's a chance for profit based on quality, quality instantly begins to show itself. This seems obvious to me...but hey--I'm just a broke, apparantly illiterate, and now neglectful parent. What do I know?
I need a job. A real job that gives coverage to my family. I am going to be applying for teaching positions in Christian schools in Whittier and Pasadena. Pray, please.
I hate Medi-Cal.
Wednesday, May 11, 2005
Star Wars article for the week.
Still getting excited about this movie. I haven't bought tickets (no money) but I am going to have to figure out how to manage to see it very shortly. Its too important. :)
Still getting excited about this movie. I haven't bought tickets (no money) but I am going to have to figure out how to manage to see it very shortly. Its too important. :)
Signs of Insanity
I forget the exact wording...the definition of insanity is repeatedly doing an action even after it has proven itself to be ineffective, or something to that effect...
The Democrats qualify for classification as insane, in my humble opinion. They have lost the Congress. They have lost the Presidency (when, according to all their dependable sources, it would be sheer madness to expect George W. Bush to be re-elected for another four years...). They will lose more of the Supreme Court--which will hurt them for years to come.
But they keep running the same people. The answer to the Kerry/Edwards loser approach to an election? Apparently, Kerry, Edwards (and possibly even Gore) believe they can still get the job done. And of course, all of them are lurking in the wings to return of the only other name the Dems think can win an election--Clinton. But I've already commented on Hillary. It's still three years away, but there are already rumors and articles about the prospective chances of various failed Democrat candadites.
Though I do think that the inability of a President to run for a third term opened the door for lame-duck second terms, there's still time before we will have them dominating the news once again. But at some point...don't even the Dems get a little tired of seeing the same names--the same loser names--taking up the space?
I forget the exact wording...the definition of insanity is repeatedly doing an action even after it has proven itself to be ineffective, or something to that effect...
The Democrats qualify for classification as insane, in my humble opinion. They have lost the Congress. They have lost the Presidency (when, according to all their dependable sources, it would be sheer madness to expect George W. Bush to be re-elected for another four years...). They will lose more of the Supreme Court--which will hurt them for years to come.
But they keep running the same people. The answer to the Kerry/Edwards loser approach to an election? Apparently, Kerry, Edwards (and possibly even Gore) believe they can still get the job done. And of course, all of them are lurking in the wings to return of the only other name the Dems think can win an election--Clinton. But I've already commented on Hillary. It's still three years away, but there are already rumors and articles about the prospective chances of various failed Democrat candadites.
Though I do think that the inability of a President to run for a third term opened the door for lame-duck second terms, there's still time before we will have them dominating the news once again. But at some point...don't even the Dems get a little tired of seeing the same names--the same loser names--taking up the space?
Monday, May 09, 2005
Civil Religion and America
You should read this article...I don't agree with everything he says--but at least it suggests that there is someone on the left who recognizes what a bad plan Hillary running would be.
Alrighty...the idea of civil religion is that there are symbols, certain types of speech, etc, which make up a "civil religion" in which all the citizens of a nation believe in--not to be confused with actual faith. Like the flag, or national prayer days. The problem with the theory behind civil religion (a term actually punctuated by the French enlightenment philosopher Roussaeu but elaborated upon for yours truly by Dr.s Richard Pierard and Robert Linder) is that it falls into one of two assuming, over-simplifications; either it lumps all of the actions of our nation into faith inspired/manipulated crusades (think, Battle Hymn of the Republic, Spanish-American war, even the World Wars and Cold Wars) or it suggests that the masses of the nation are blindly devoted to symbols and religious speech which are dangled in front of them by deceiving politicians who know just how big a farce their personal religion is. Also, according to the good doctors, the only really religious (read Evangelical Christian) Presidents were as a result of their real faith, failures.
Here's my problem: this assumes that there is no legitimate faith in the heart of the nation. Whereas...Eisenhower...Reagan...McKinley...Lincoln...and even our current leader Mr Bush all state plainly a firm belief that there is an unshakeable connection to the freedom and prosperity that America (and a free nation) enjoys, and the foundation of religious (read Judeo-Christian faith) at its heart. Now...yes, Judeo-Christianity leaves a fairly large playing field open...but its definately starting on the right track. I agree with Ike--cause I like Ike--our freedoms, our liberty, our values that define us from our enemies (whether terrorist or communist) are rooted in something very deep--something beyond simple rhetoric, something beyond delusions of divine providence. And what I see happening (I say "I" loosely, as I am fully aware that this is not "my" thought--several, much more qualified men and women have said this already) in today's culture is quickly dividing into one of two groups...and the last time we saw a conflict of this magnitude looming before us, with irreconcilable sides demanding the full capitulation of the other, was arguably in 1860 (possibly in 1925, with the Scopes trial and the ending of the age of the Fundamentalists...but I think that was less of a war and more a blind-siding of Christianity by the ACLU).
My belief is that we are headed towards all out war...where the ridiculous suggestions of atheists in Berkeley and San Francisco for the editting of the pledge will find root elsewhere...or, failing that, the blue edges of the country will take the statements of men like Harry Reid and realize that being out of touch with the rest of the country they need to use the power of population in the few states they control to push through changes in the nation.
The interesting thing about this country in that we are a nation of laws which are upheld primarily by the submission of the people to the rule of law. In otherwords--our laws work primarily because we say that our laws work. One of my profs was telling the story of riots that took place in Oklahoma in the late 1920's. martial law was declared, over one city after another, by the state governor in response to the brutal killing of a black man by racists in one small city. Whenever criticism came from another city, the governor closed that city down--till the whole state was locked down. By law, however, the citizens of the state that made up the national guard, couldn't do anything other then enforce the commands of their commander-in-chief, the governor. However, also by law the governor could be impeached by the state council...which is exactly what happened. The state council called a secret meeting and empeached the governor. They announced that he had been impeached, and the period of martial law instantly ended. I could not help but laugh when I heard that story--because it only illustrates just how devoted the American mind is to the ideas of law and justice.
However...given enough provocation...people will break almost any ties that binds. Its happened before...as a historian I am certain it will happen again--and my predicition is it will revolve around the battle of ideas--secular, anti-religionists versus the religious right...and one of these two sides will be irresversibly put down, just as the South was put down into ruin after the war. My sad guess is that it will be the religious right...partly because though I would hope to be successful in our fight, it seems evident to me that God's people will ultimately fail in this world until He returns.
Not exactly a cheery outlook for the day I suppose...I still get excited talking about it though. Growing up I read about the great struggles that had taken place before I was born and wished I could have partaken in the burden. Well, for better or worse I believe that I am living within sight of the next great struggle in our nation--even as the next great struggles of our nation is even now being waged in the Middle East.
And I find that exciting.
Narnia
In a world where we now have Middle Earth, Harry Potter and even Lemmony Snickett's Series of Unfortunate Events on the big screen, I think that Disney and Walden books have really done something very right. The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe is still being made, the teaser trailer for this upcoming fantasy looks very good. Not quite Lord of the Rings good, but still looks like a quality production--more along the lines of the third Harry Potter, The Prisoner of Azkaban. I'm officially hopeful--it was one of my favorites growing up, and its never been done impressively on screen. It has all of the morals and values of Tolkien, with a mix of the atmosphere of a Series of Unfortunate Events and Harry Potter. I'll be watching for more in the future.
Speaking of Harry Potter...here's the new teaser for the Goblet of Fire, due to be released sometime this year I believe. It looks good--one of my favorite things about the Harry Potter series--J.K. Rowling makes it clear that confrontations between right and wrong DO happen, that there is not only gray areas of morality and no action required. Good Stuff.
In a world where we now have Middle Earth, Harry Potter and even Lemmony Snickett's Series of Unfortunate Events on the big screen, I think that Disney and Walden books have really done something very right. The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe is still being made, the teaser trailer for this upcoming fantasy looks very good. Not quite Lord of the Rings good, but still looks like a quality production--more along the lines of the third Harry Potter, The Prisoner of Azkaban. I'm officially hopeful--it was one of my favorites growing up, and its never been done impressively on screen. It has all of the morals and values of Tolkien, with a mix of the atmosphere of a Series of Unfortunate Events and Harry Potter. I'll be watching for more in the future.
Speaking of Harry Potter...here's the new teaser for the Goblet of Fire, due to be released sometime this year I believe. It looks good--one of my favorite things about the Harry Potter series--J.K. Rowling makes it clear that confrontations between right and wrong DO happen, that there is not only gray areas of morality and no action required. Good Stuff.
Good Coffee, Hot Coffee...and Clair de Lune.
I am back in the library. Yesterday was bad. I have Aiden duty on the weekends (Sheri is working to help us stay afloat--and that involves waking up even earlier then I do on the only days that I stay home--so I have no real complaints, just giving an explanation). But I was exhausted yesterday--I'm talking dizzy, aching, delirious. Then our friends the Nicks saved my life and babysat Aiden, giving me the opportunity to sleep for about 5 hours in the afternoon. I now feel much better.
So this morning I am back in the library, preparing to write several papers for this evening...and I have pleasure of sipping very good hot coffee, and listening to Claude Debussy's Clair de Lune, from "Suite Bergamasque" (if you've seen the new Ocean's Eleven, think about the scene in front of the fountain, after they have successfully pulled the job...and the music that was playing as they watched the water dance). Its a beautiful morning.
Now I get to write 24 pages on Civil Religion and American Politics/Government. Piece of cake. If Danny Ocean can rob three casinos, I can write 24 pages. In the physical universe we occupy, it can be done--and, funnily enough, must be done. Cheers!
I am back in the library. Yesterday was bad. I have Aiden duty on the weekends (Sheri is working to help us stay afloat--and that involves waking up even earlier then I do on the only days that I stay home--so I have no real complaints, just giving an explanation). But I was exhausted yesterday--I'm talking dizzy, aching, delirious. Then our friends the Nicks saved my life and babysat Aiden, giving me the opportunity to sleep for about 5 hours in the afternoon. I now feel much better.
So this morning I am back in the library, preparing to write several papers for this evening...and I have pleasure of sipping very good hot coffee, and listening to Claude Debussy's Clair de Lune, from "Suite Bergamasque" (if you've seen the new Ocean's Eleven, think about the scene in front of the fountain, after they have successfully pulled the job...and the music that was playing as they watched the water dance). Its a beautiful morning.
Now I get to write 24 pages on Civil Religion and American Politics/Government. Piece of cake. If Danny Ocean can rob three casinos, I can write 24 pages. In the physical universe we occupy, it can be done--and, funnily enough, must be done. Cheers!
Saturday, May 07, 2005
Friday, May 06, 2005
Democracy Today
A fine day for Democracy today.
Today, Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid declared that in his opinion, President Bush is a Loser. Reid has also suggested that Bush thinks of himself as "King George" not President George. Is there any wonder why the Democrat party is the minority today? They have to first come to grips with reality before they can see results in elections.
And, really, there's nothing more satisfying then having an ex-KGB agent lecture America on Democracy.
Here's to the free world--free enough to withstand two blow-hards like Reid and Putin.
A fine day for Democracy today.
Today, Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid declared that in his opinion, President Bush is a Loser. Reid has also suggested that Bush thinks of himself as "King George" not President George. Is there any wonder why the Democrat party is the minority today? They have to first come to grips with reality before they can see results in elections.
And, really, there's nothing more satisfying then having an ex-KGB agent lecture America on Democracy.
Here's to the free world--free enough to withstand two blow-hards like Reid and Putin.
Thursday, May 05, 2005
Music for the Soul
I'm one of those "listen to my favorite songs (or parts of songs) over and over again" type of people. Sometimes...listening to it once simply wasn't enough. I know Lewis says something about it in his Space Trilogy--an excess of desire or something to that effect. So I try to avoid it if I can. However...
Today I am working in the library. I, of course, have music playing with my earphones on so I can let it get loud if I need too. I decided to play the soundtrack from Blues Brothers 2000 which I saw when I was a...Junior?...Senior? in highschool. It was amazing. The movie, as a movie, was less then good...but the music...I couldn't stop thinking about it. I grew up in a Christian household and though I received a very diverse music education from parents that loved music, I was very naive--I really was only beginning my musical education (albeit with a strong foundation in staples like Simon and Garfunkel, the Beatles, the Beachboys, U2, Bread, America, Badfinger, Sinatra, the Presidents of the United States of America, etc)...but when I saw the Blues Brothers...I soared. The music was so perfect--so freeing. I quickly went out and bought the soundtrack and began listening...and as time went by I learned more and more about who was playing in the large compliation numbers (originally I knew only Eric Clapton, Aretha Franklin and BB King). And I overplayed it and stoped listening to it...
Until today. Ah. Its a rare treat to abandon something that was good because you became too familiar with it and then come back to it later to find that it is as good as (and maybe better than) it ever was before. The only problem with listening to this music that moves with harmonies and rhythms that command your body's attention is that I want to join in with the music and, of course, I am working in a library. Shhh. So I turn it up nice and loud (about 75% on the total potential volume--so my ears get hot listening) and I just try to hold in all that the music brings up. Fortunately I am also alone in my little room, pasting call numbers to books...that way nobdy can laugh at me as I bounce, sway, and mouth-along to the lyrics.
I have so much energy right now, I feel like I could explode. Now that's good music.
I'm one of those "listen to my favorite songs (or parts of songs) over and over again" type of people. Sometimes...listening to it once simply wasn't enough. I know Lewis says something about it in his Space Trilogy--an excess of desire or something to that effect. So I try to avoid it if I can. However...
Today I am working in the library. I, of course, have music playing with my earphones on so I can let it get loud if I need too. I decided to play the soundtrack from Blues Brothers 2000 which I saw when I was a...Junior?...Senior? in highschool. It was amazing. The movie, as a movie, was less then good...but the music...I couldn't stop thinking about it. I grew up in a Christian household and though I received a very diverse music education from parents that loved music, I was very naive--I really was only beginning my musical education (albeit with a strong foundation in staples like Simon and Garfunkel, the Beatles, the Beachboys, U2, Bread, America, Badfinger, Sinatra, the Presidents of the United States of America, etc)...but when I saw the Blues Brothers...I soared. The music was so perfect--so freeing. I quickly went out and bought the soundtrack and began listening...and as time went by I learned more and more about who was playing in the large compliation numbers (originally I knew only Eric Clapton, Aretha Franklin and BB King). And I overplayed it and stoped listening to it...
Until today. Ah. Its a rare treat to abandon something that was good because you became too familiar with it and then come back to it later to find that it is as good as (and maybe better than) it ever was before. The only problem with listening to this music that moves with harmonies and rhythms that command your body's attention is that I want to join in with the music and, of course, I am working in a library. Shhh. So I turn it up nice and loud (about 75% on the total potential volume--so my ears get hot listening) and I just try to hold in all that the music brings up. Fortunately I am also alone in my little room, pasting call numbers to books...that way nobdy can laugh at me as I bounce, sway, and mouth-along to the lyrics.
I have so much energy right now, I feel like I could explode. Now that's good music.
The Da Vinci Code, the Church and Homosexuality.
I decided I should read it. Its become influential enough that if you want to be preparred when talking with someone in our society today about the church or spiritual things, you should know what its all about. I am nowhere near being done with it--I haven't had enough time to really read it--otherwise I think I would have finished it already. I'll say this for it--its a fairly fun read. The author clearly has a handle on the "cliffhanger" endings to his chapters--which might get old if his chapters lasted more then two to three pages maximum. As it is...it keeps the book moving.
That said...I really haven't gotten very far into the book to really know the full philosophy that Dan Brown is trying to espouse. However--a few thoughts have come up that I thought I might comment on...
First: the pagan views of the feminine versus the church views of the feminine. Without going into great detail, my take on Brown's opinion (or at least, the character Langdon's opinion) is that while there is some truth in the suggestion that the church has, in its history, belittled the position of women, he is blaming the entire patriarchal system of the world on the manipulative, sinister (funnily enough, a feminine word) plot by the founders and protectors of the Christian faith. That seems overly simple minded--even if you don't accept the views of the roles between the sexes that are evidenced in the pre-church Old Testament. It ignores the fact that the role of women has never been the same as the role of men--and often women were considered second class citizens (even the enlightened Greeks of Athens, though they did give them citizenship and even bestowed citizenship through the maternal line, did not consider women equal to men).
Second: the suggestion that this pagan belief believes strongly in the need for a balance between masculine and feminine. This would seem to suggest a natural argument against homosexuality coming from the pagans--one completely unrelated to any biblical authority (because the church is pro-male, anti-female according to Brown). In fact, given the ideas that Brown suggested about the belief in male superiority, it seems like the church would be in support (if not directly, at least they would allow it) of Homosexuality (think ancient Athens, with older men loving young boys) while the pagans, the devotees of the "sacred feminine" would be the chief proponents of the arguement that homosexuality is in every way anti-nature.
Instead, one of the leaders of the pagan, Da Vinci, was apparently a homosexual. That doesn't make sense, given the deeper understanding of the universe that the pagans apparently had, compared to the superstituous and manipulative church.
So...thus far, though I am enjoying my read, its hardly a well constructed arguement from what I can see. Its not even consistent with its own presumptions.
I decided I should read it. Its become influential enough that if you want to be preparred when talking with someone in our society today about the church or spiritual things, you should know what its all about. I am nowhere near being done with it--I haven't had enough time to really read it--otherwise I think I would have finished it already. I'll say this for it--its a fairly fun read. The author clearly has a handle on the "cliffhanger" endings to his chapters--which might get old if his chapters lasted more then two to three pages maximum. As it is...it keeps the book moving.
That said...I really haven't gotten very far into the book to really know the full philosophy that Dan Brown is trying to espouse. However--a few thoughts have come up that I thought I might comment on...
First: the pagan views of the feminine versus the church views of the feminine. Without going into great detail, my take on Brown's opinion (or at least, the character Langdon's opinion) is that while there is some truth in the suggestion that the church has, in its history, belittled the position of women, he is blaming the entire patriarchal system of the world on the manipulative, sinister (funnily enough, a feminine word) plot by the founders and protectors of the Christian faith. That seems overly simple minded--even if you don't accept the views of the roles between the sexes that are evidenced in the pre-church Old Testament. It ignores the fact that the role of women has never been the same as the role of men--and often women were considered second class citizens (even the enlightened Greeks of Athens, though they did give them citizenship and even bestowed citizenship through the maternal line, did not consider women equal to men).
Second: the suggestion that this pagan belief believes strongly in the need for a balance between masculine and feminine. This would seem to suggest a natural argument against homosexuality coming from the pagans--one completely unrelated to any biblical authority (because the church is pro-male, anti-female according to Brown). In fact, given the ideas that Brown suggested about the belief in male superiority, it seems like the church would be in support (if not directly, at least they would allow it) of Homosexuality (think ancient Athens, with older men loving young boys) while the pagans, the devotees of the "sacred feminine" would be the chief proponents of the arguement that homosexuality is in every way anti-nature.
Instead, one of the leaders of the pagan, Da Vinci, was apparently a homosexual. That doesn't make sense, given the deeper understanding of the universe that the pagans apparently had, compared to the superstituous and manipulative church.
So...thus far, though I am enjoying my read, its hardly a well constructed arguement from what I can see. Its not even consistent with its own presumptions.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
