Friday, January 25, 2008
The Drowsy Chaperone
We very much enjoyed the show. There's something about a live performance that enthralls and captivates.
Sex and Money
Our government is planning to give us all more money. Sounds lovely doesn't it? There is a problem though. Under our current system our money has a very small intrinsic value. It's worth basically what you would pay to buy pretty green paper. In other words, next to nothing. US currency currently does have a great deal of nominal value. Money represents, among other things, a handy way of comparing the value of differing objects. We call that price. So when we go to Target and see that toilet paper costs $3.99 for a four pack and the Bourne Ultimatum costs $15.99, then we can quickly determine that in a barter system, we would have to trade sixteen rolls of toilet paper for an action movie.
There are two ways to alter the price of something. Change the supply of the item or change the supply of the medium of exchange. If the studios decide to flood the market with DVD's then the price of the Bourne Ultimatum would drop. If they quit manufacturing them, then the price will rise. That is supply and demand. The same rule applies to money.
There are three ways for the government to get money. First is they can tax us for it. That is not going to happen with this rebate. Second is they can borrow it. Likewise, not happening. Third is, they can print it. That is where the 'rebate' is coming from.
If money is rare, then it is like Kate Beckinsale. Every man wants her, and few can have her,
Print more of the stuff and it becomes much like Sarah Michelle Gellar: Attractive, lovely to behold, but not a 'must have.
Print even more and you get a Paris Hilton analogy. Symmetrical features, but not really desirable in and of herself
Print a lot of money and you get Britney Spears: Ubiquitous, over available and totally undesirable
The US dollar used to be at Kate Beckinsale levels until recently. Now it's at Sarah Michelle Gellar. Most people of my generation remember the Ford/Carter years. That was Paris Hilton. That is what may be next. Beyond that lies what's been going on in Zimbabwe and most of the Third World. Money no one in their right mind really wants.
So when you hear about getting money from the government, don't be fooled. Our leaders want you to think you'll be getting Kate Beckinsale or at least Sarah Michelle Gellar. In reality, at best you'll get Paris Hilton or at worst Britney Spears. And they won't be just spending one night. Oh no, they're moving in for the long term with iron-clad pre-nuptial agreements.
There are two ways to alter the price of something. Change the supply of the item or change the supply of the medium of exchange. If the studios decide to flood the market with DVD's then the price of the Bourne Ultimatum would drop. If they quit manufacturing them, then the price will rise. That is supply and demand. The same rule applies to money.
There are three ways for the government to get money. First is they can tax us for it. That is not going to happen with this rebate. Second is they can borrow it. Likewise, not happening. Third is, they can print it. That is where the 'rebate' is coming from.
If money is rare, then it is like Kate Beckinsale. Every man wants her, and few can have her,
Print more of the stuff and it becomes much like Sarah Michelle Gellar: Attractive, lovely to behold, but not a 'must have.
Print even more and you get a Paris Hilton analogy. Symmetrical features, but not really desirable in and of herself
Print a lot of money and you get Britney Spears: Ubiquitous, over available and totally undesirable
The US dollar used to be at Kate Beckinsale levels until recently. Now it's at Sarah Michelle Gellar. Most people of my generation remember the Ford/Carter years. That was Paris Hilton. That is what may be next. Beyond that lies what's been going on in Zimbabwe and most of the Third World. Money no one in their right mind really wants.
So when you hear about getting money from the government, don't be fooled. Our leaders want you to think you'll be getting Kate Beckinsale or at least Sarah Michelle Gellar. In reality, at best you'll get Paris Hilton or at worst Britney Spears. And they won't be just spending one night. Oh no, they're moving in for the long term with iron-clad pre-nuptial agreements.
Thursday, January 24, 2008
It's a mystery
Sally has suggested that I start discussing the books I read more often. Since I don't have a good reason for not doing so, I thought I'd start mentioning books that I've read and enjoyed.
First up is a murder mystery that I finished just today: The Alto Wore Tweed by Mark Schweizer. As a mystery it isn't much, vital clues are withheld until a deus ex machina at the end. But the characters are delightful, there are lot of good choir jokes (the author is a choir director) and lots of good natured snark directed at various churchy types.
First up is a murder mystery that I finished just today: The Alto Wore Tweed by Mark Schweizer. As a mystery it isn't much, vital clues are withheld until a deus ex machina at the end. But the characters are delightful, there are lot of good choir jokes (the author is a choir director) and lots of good natured snark directed at various churchy types.
Obscure Abuse
If the next diocese to leave the Episcopal Church used the following language in their departure amendment, I'd laugh myself silly.
"The visible Church of Christ is a congregation of faithful men, in which the pure Word of God is preached, and the Sacraments be duly ministered according to Christ’s ordinance, in all those things that of necessity are requisite to the same.
As the Church of Jerusalem, Alexandria, Antioch and Rome, have erred; so also the Episcopal Church hath erred, not only in their living and manner of Ceremonies, but also in matters of Faith."
Paraphrase of Article XIX.
I know no one else probably finds it funny........
"The visible Church of Christ is a congregation of faithful men, in which the pure Word of God is preached, and the Sacraments be duly ministered according to Christ’s ordinance, in all those things that of necessity are requisite to the same.
As the Church of Jerusalem, Alexandria, Antioch and Rome, have erred; so also the Episcopal Church hath erred, not only in their living and manner of Ceremonies, but also in matters of Faith."
Paraphrase of Article XIX.
I know no one else probably finds it funny........
Anticipation
My brother and his wife, Sally and I, and my sister in law are all going to see the Drowsy Chaperone tonight. Sally and I saw it last year on Broadway and loved it. So we're pretty thrilled to see it again in a road production.
"Mix ups, mayhem and a gay wedding!"
Of course gay wedding has a different meaning today........
"Mix ups, mayhem and a gay wedding!"
Of course gay wedding has a different meaning today........
The Face of Populism
Ignore the conclusions at the end. This is what a country looks like after its people give up ruling and after the rulers try to buy the people.
No rule of law, expropriation of the means of production and fiat rule, and a civilized nation is living on water in buckets and candle light.
No rule of law, expropriation of the means of production and fiat rule, and a civilized nation is living on water in buckets and candle light.
Wednesday, January 23, 2008
An Experiment in Theological Comprehension
I was reading this. By chance my winamp randomizer played two different versions of Don't Fear the Reaper back to back, one without cowbell and then one with.
I found that my comprehension was lowest without any music. Add in the straight version of the song, and I was aided tremendously. Throw in cowbell and I'm understanding stuff on the first reading.
I gotta fever and the cure is more cowbell.
I found that my comprehension was lowest without any music. Add in the straight version of the song, and I was aided tremendously. Throw in cowbell and I'm understanding stuff on the first reading.
I gotta fever and the cure is more cowbell.
My Three Issues
Years ago I read an essay that argued that every voter ought to isolate the three issues that they feel to be most important and then determine which candidate best fits those issues. The idea of limiting yourself to three issues is that it forces you to prioritize which ones matter the most.
In the interest of full disclosure, here are mine. They all rank about equally for me.
First is the preservation of our rights as established by the US Constitution. Some people favour the First Amendment, some the Second, but I love them all. Any candidate that I support will have to show a working knowledge of the Bill of Rights and some level of commitment to not test their limits.
Second is the elimination or at least radical reduction of earmarks. There is a climate of corruption in Washington these days and neither party and none of the candidates really want to address it. The reason for that apathy is simple. To battle earmarks, they have to fight their colleagues. The logic of Washington is equally simple, the people loathe earmarks and the politicians love them. Currently the politicans are winning on this issue.
Third is space exploration. I am one of those nutty guys who loves science fiction and watched star wars a couple of zillion times. But I also think that of all the things the federal government can do, opening up space for exploration and settlement is the most worthwhile. It would give us back the frontier. We haven't had one for a while and I think we are paying the price for it in the malaise that is affecting the varied worldwide cultures. Thats the metaphysical reason.
The other is that the challenges that are before us currently have no simple solution. For example, if we commit to helping the homeless then we rapidly find that an awful lot of the homeless do not wish to be helped. They are homeless for a reason, be it insanity, drug abuse or alcoholism. And there are no simple solutions to those problems.
If we commit to fight global warming, then we are committing to damning future generations to poverty. Good luck with that one. That's the real reason why no country has actually done anything about global warming.
Space exploration is different. For one thing, if we export our polluting industries to space, there's a really big incinerator down the gravity well from us. Also solar energy, which is generally not practical inside the atmosphere, becomes the optimal energy source in the vacuum of space.
Space exploration and settlement will not be cheap. There are significant technical problems. But the problems that remain are just that, technical. They are solvable.
Those are my three issues. What are yours?
In the interest of full disclosure, here are mine. They all rank about equally for me.
First is the preservation of our rights as established by the US Constitution. Some people favour the First Amendment, some the Second, but I love them all. Any candidate that I support will have to show a working knowledge of the Bill of Rights and some level of commitment to not test their limits.
Second is the elimination or at least radical reduction of earmarks. There is a climate of corruption in Washington these days and neither party and none of the candidates really want to address it. The reason for that apathy is simple. To battle earmarks, they have to fight their colleagues. The logic of Washington is equally simple, the people loathe earmarks and the politicians love them. Currently the politicans are winning on this issue.
Third is space exploration. I am one of those nutty guys who loves science fiction and watched star wars a couple of zillion times. But I also think that of all the things the federal government can do, opening up space for exploration and settlement is the most worthwhile. It would give us back the frontier. We haven't had one for a while and I think we are paying the price for it in the malaise that is affecting the varied worldwide cultures. Thats the metaphysical reason.
The other is that the challenges that are before us currently have no simple solution. For example, if we commit to helping the homeless then we rapidly find that an awful lot of the homeless do not wish to be helped. They are homeless for a reason, be it insanity, drug abuse or alcoholism. And there are no simple solutions to those problems.
If we commit to fight global warming, then we are committing to damning future generations to poverty. Good luck with that one. That's the real reason why no country has actually done anything about global warming.
Space exploration is different. For one thing, if we export our polluting industries to space, there's a really big incinerator down the gravity well from us. Also solar energy, which is generally not practical inside the atmosphere, becomes the optimal energy source in the vacuum of space.
Space exploration and settlement will not be cheap. There are significant technical problems. But the problems that remain are just that, technical. They are solvable.
Those are my three issues. What are yours?
Abomination!
I love invective. When I was in college I learned an awful lot of vulgar Latin (which I have since forgotten) just by reading diatribes by William of Ockham against the pope. Luther later cribbed a lot of the choicer phrases and translated them into German. One of the founders of Anglicanism, Thomas Cranmer, was an excellent writer of invective. When I was an acolyte, I'd amuse myself by reading and rereading the Thirty Nine Articles. Article XXII has always been especial favourite of mine:
That's the work of someone who knows how to say what they mean.
Jesus wasn't too shabby either:
Back when I was in college and was up late studying, I'd head to the commons room and watch Dr. Gene Scott. I was never really sure what he was going on about, but it was fun listening to him rant.
On the modern front, perhaps the best writer of invective today is probably Ann Coulter. If you read her and ignore the issues (which can be hard for some people), you'll find she is rather good at what she does.
What sad is how few of our leaders can use invective. The common reason given for so not doing is that they are too mature. I think that's nonsense. It's not that they will not, it is because they can not.
/rant.
"The Romish Doctrine concerning Purgatory, Pardons, Worshipping and Adoration, as well of Images as of Relics, and also Invocation of Saints, is a fond thing, vainly invented, and grounded upon no warranty of Scripture, but rather repugnant to the Word of God."
That's the work of someone who knows how to say what they mean.
Jesus wasn't too shabby either:
"You snakes! You brood of vipers! How will you escape being condemned to hell? Therefore I am sending you prophets and wise men and teachers. Some of them you will kill and crucify; others you will flog in your synagogues and pursue from town to town. And so upon you will come all the righteous blood that has been shed on earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah son of Berekiah, whom you murdered between the temple and the altar.
Back when I was in college and was up late studying, I'd head to the commons room and watch Dr. Gene Scott. I was never really sure what he was going on about, but it was fun listening to him rant.
On the modern front, perhaps the best writer of invective today is probably Ann Coulter. If you read her and ignore the issues (which can be hard for some people), you'll find she is rather good at what she does.
What sad is how few of our leaders can use invective. The common reason given for so not doing is that they are too mature. I think that's nonsense. It's not that they will not, it is because they can not.
/rant.
Tuesday, January 22, 2008
I've discovered what is missing in my life
And they're only 10 cents!
Elsie Joins Cowmintern
If you are planning on visiting Venezuela any time soon, don't plan on being able to drink milk, or eat anything with butter, eat ice cream or cheese. Hugo Chavez is so put out with farmers looking to get fair market value for their dairy products that he is threatening to seize their cattle.
I predict that the price of Venezuelan beef is going to drop sharply in the near future. And all dairy products will be almost totally unavailable.
Because price supports always, always work. Except when farmers get greedy.
/sarcasm
I predict that the price of Venezuelan beef is going to drop sharply in the near future. And all dairy products will be almost totally unavailable.
Because price supports always, always work. Except when farmers get greedy.
/sarcasm
Monday, January 21, 2008
Three blogs, three hankies
Sunday, January 20, 2008
Why I am Glad I Am Not Dutch
Geert Wilders, a member of the Dutch Parliament is set to show an 'anti-Muslim' film. The money quote is "It is difficult to anticipate the content of the film, but freedom of expression doesn't mean the right to offend," said Maxime Verhagen, the Foreign Minister.
I do not like our government especially much. But part of freedom of speech is, and should be, the expectation that you will be offended. The right not to be offended is the right to muzzle those who disagree with you. Ingsoc is alive and well in the Netherlands.
H/T Jammie Wearing Fool
Where Once There Was Only One
There are apparently two Standing Committees in the Diocese of San Joaquin. Assuming the Rev. Dan Martins is correct, of course. Of course all of this begs the question of what, exactly, is going on in San Joaquin?
Wiki Proposal
In the comments to my Abandonment post, Cathy Lou proposed that a Web page of all Episcopal litigation be created. I'm game to try. I've never set up a wiki before, but the scant reading I've done on it suggests that that might be the way to go. To get things rolling, I'm just going to list the Episcopal church lawsuits that I know of:
1. Rochester NY, currently in appeal
2. Pawley's Island, SC, currently being appealed
3. Peachtree City, GA. Decided. No appeal as yet.
4. San Diego, CA. Three suits, all on appeal.
5. Virginia. One consolidated suit, litigation pending.
6. Connecticut. No information
7. Pittsburgh, PA. I believe the trial is over. I don't know if it has been appealed.
8. Florida. I've heard rumours of litigation, but have no knowledge.
9. Savannah, GA. Suit has been filed. I have no other information.
If anyone has any information about these or other lawsuits, please post in the comments here or email me at mousestalker {at} gmail.com (replace the '{at}' with '@').
Assuming all this can get fleshed out, I'll consolidate the information into a wiki so that everyone can contribute.
What inquiring minds would like to know is who are the parties, who are their attorneys, what is the status of the litigation, where is the suit being brought and how much is it costing everyone?
1. Rochester NY, currently in appeal
2. Pawley's Island, SC, currently being appealed
3. Peachtree City, GA. Decided. No appeal as yet.
4. San Diego, CA. Three suits, all on appeal.
5. Virginia. One consolidated suit, litigation pending.
6. Connecticut. No information
7. Pittsburgh, PA. I believe the trial is over. I don't know if it has been appealed.
8. Florida. I've heard rumours of litigation, but have no knowledge.
9. Savannah, GA. Suit has been filed. I have no other information.
If anyone has any information about these or other lawsuits, please post in the comments here or email me at mousestalker {at} gmail.com (replace the '{at}' with '@').
Assuming all this can get fleshed out, I'll consolidate the information into a wiki so that everyone can contribute.
What inquiring minds would like to know is who are the parties, who are their attorneys, what is the status of the litigation, where is the suit being brought and how much is it costing everyone?
Saturday, January 19, 2008
Wonderful Movie Moment
When I saw the bit that begins 32 seconds in at the age of 11, I knew that I liked girls.
From the movie "Singin' In The Rain"
Friday, January 18, 2008
Question
If someone has asked or answered this, I haven't seen it. Why did 815 go after Duncan, but not Iker? They tried to inhibit and depose Bishop Duncan, but only sent Bishop Iker a nastygram.
The Elephant in the Room
I just finished reading the convention program for the Episcopal Diocese of North Carolina. I grew up in North Carolina and attended two churches there as a child (St. John's, Charlotte and St. Francis, Greensboro). My parents were very active laymen until they retired and moved to my mother's hometown in South Carolina. I have a connection with North Carolina.
I noticed several things. First, the diocese now has three bishops. This is two more than they needed when I was growing up there. Second, diocesan contributions from parishes are now mandatory. Third, plate and pledge income is up. Fourth, North Carolina is now apparently a “mission oriented diocese”.
What really struck me was what I did not see: Any discussion of the systemic decline in membership and average Sunday attendance (ASA) for the diocese and the national church. North Carolina's ASA is down around 7% for the past five years.
The official church line is that numbers do not matter. The only growth that truly matters is individual growth. And that is true, so far as it goes. But if what you are doing is worthwhile, then you will wish to share it, to get others to participate in your activity, be it bridge tournaments, baseball games, helping children or feeding the hungry. That is human nature. And if what you are doing is meaningful, then others will want to join in. That is also human nature.
The resistance to discussing the elephant in the room stems, I think, from the recognition that the Episcopal Church no longer has any meaning. We are a church of familiar faces, whose only remaining function is to be a circle of mutual admiration and self-love. We make all the right noises about serving others, about doing good. But in the end notice how little of the church's work at the diocesan or national level is about volunteers helping others and how much of it consists of paying someone to do something.
In the past the Episcopal Church was seen, rightly or wrongly, as being all about sin and guilt. The 1928 BCP is replete with phrases such as “have mercy upon us, miserable offenders”. The Episcopal Church has backed away from that in the past thirty or so years. The word from our clergy is that sin is largely irrelevant. That God loves us regardless. That we have nothing to feel guilty about, and nothing to worry about. We're good, right?
It's true that God loves us unconditionally. But it is not true that we love God in the same manner. We separate ourselves from God on a regular, almost minute by minute basis. And if we do not repent, that separation will continue and even grow. A church that does not believe in sin will also not believe in repentance and will thus offer no counsel on how to get closer to God.
As its members have withdrawn from God, so has the Episcopal Church. It no longer repents of current actions of intolerance, or bigotry or injustice, but instead repents of actions that none of its current members had any part in. Such repentance reaps its own reward in acclaim in the press, but accomplishes nothing.
The Episcopal Church seems to exist to make its members feel good about themselves. It no longer seems willing to help us be better than we were before. If I have a blister on my foot, telling me that I'm a nice guy really isn't helpful. Pricking the blister with a needle and then applying a bandage is what is needed. So too with sin.
“We don't evangelize”, I've often heard said. In the past we didn't need to yell from the street corners, because everyone knew what the church stood for: Well mannered and well meaning Christianity. Now we do yell from street corners and it doesn't help, because everyone knows what we stand for: A certain radical political progressivism coupled with a worship of the United Nations as well as certain totalitarian regimes. And no one needs to go to church to participate in those causes.
The main sin of the Episcopal Church is not lust, homosexual or heterosexual. It is pride. It is our stubborn refusal to admit that there is anything wrong. And there is something wrong. Our leadership says that there is something worthwhile about being an Episcopalian. And some of our members are buying the company line. But no one else is. That is the elephant in the room. As long as we refuse to admit our sin, we can not and will not do anything about it.
We have become a church without sin. We are also a church without God. And we are rapidly becoming a church without members. And our leadership does not or will not see a connection between those three statements.
We are a proud church, and no matter what happens that condition is not likely to continue. Either, as a church, we repent and humble ourselves before an almighty God, or we won't be a church and so will no longer be proud.
Thursday, January 17, 2008
Politics and Manners
I haven't been a Romney fan, but I think he handles this confrontation rather well. I especially like the lady's comments at the end.
Mostly it's just fun watching an AP reporter make a horse's ass of himself and get called on it.
Mostly it's just fun watching an AP reporter make a horse's ass of himself and get called on it.
Open the Door, It's the Army!
Marko has written an excellent essay about the over-use of SWAT in law enforcement.
I heartily concur with the rash of recent posters on the subject of militarization of the police. My hope is that if the level of concern gets raised and broadened, there will be a backlash against it on the ground level.
I heartily concur with the rash of recent posters on the subject of militarization of the police. My hope is that if the level of concern gets raised and broadened, there will be a backlash against it on the ground level.
Abandonment
I posted something similar elsewhere as a comment, but I think it bears repeating.
Bishop Duncan was not inhibited, but it appears as though the Presiding Bishop is moving ahead to have him deposed. The time line stated in her letter to him makes it clear that the Fall meeting of the House of Bishops will be the critical one.
The problem is that the sole arbiter of the fairness of any proceeding before the House of Bishops is the House of Bishops. There won't be a lot of due process here.
My take on it is that Bishop Duncan will be deposed in the Fall, if he is still around. I'll bet dollars to doughnuts that the Diocese of Pittsburgh will have withdrawn from the Episcopal Church by then.
I think that is what the Presiding Bishop is counting on. Things run much more smoothly in a trial if the accused is not present. Internally, I think this is what she sees.
As far as the greater Anglican Communion, I doubt she will win any friends by what she is doing. She may very well alienate some, who under other circumstances, would be her supporters. I doubt that concerns her much.
While the church documents may charge Bishop Duncan with abandonment of the communion of the church, this whole debacle shows that the Presiding Bishop has abandoned the Anglican Communion.
Bishop Duncan was not inhibited, but it appears as though the Presiding Bishop is moving ahead to have him deposed. The time line stated in her letter to him makes it clear that the Fall meeting of the House of Bishops will be the critical one.
The problem is that the sole arbiter of the fairness of any proceeding before the House of Bishops is the House of Bishops. There won't be a lot of due process here.
My take on it is that Bishop Duncan will be deposed in the Fall, if he is still around. I'll bet dollars to doughnuts that the Diocese of Pittsburgh will have withdrawn from the Episcopal Church by then.
I think that is what the Presiding Bishop is counting on. Things run much more smoothly in a trial if the accused is not present. Internally, I think this is what she sees.
As far as the greater Anglican Communion, I doubt she will win any friends by what she is doing. She may very well alienate some, who under other circumstances, would be her supporters. I doubt that concerns her much.
While the church documents may charge Bishop Duncan with abandonment of the communion of the church, this whole debacle shows that the Presiding Bishop has abandoned the Anglican Communion.
Wednesday, January 16, 2008
Culinary Moral Imperative
It's not often that ethics and cuisine coincide, but I think that's the case here. The very idea of a meat cake demands that such a thing be made. The only question is which of my friends and family are worthy of such an object of awe and wonder.
I will make a meat cake this year. It's a clear moral imperative. The only questions that remain are when, for whom and how many.
Suggested by Rachael Storm (link to the right)
I will make a meat cake this year. It's a clear moral imperative. The only questions that remain are when, for whom and how many.
Suggested by Rachael Storm (link to the right)
For Future Reference
Since it seems likely that certain fora that I frequent (and link to) are about to erupt in a another series of flame wars, I thought linking to the Flame Warriors website might prove helpful.
Which ones are you? I know I have tendencies towards at least three of them.
Which ones are you? I know I have tendencies towards at least three of them.
Tuesday, January 15, 2008
Huckahasbeen
I'm angry enough to violate one of my personal policies against mocking someone's name. I didn't like him before, but now there is no way I would ever vote for the man. No way.
I understand what he is trying to say. I agree it would be nifty if we all lived by the Golden Rule. But we don't. And I can't help but think that what he means by God's law is not what I mean by God's law. One thinks immediately of Prohibition and blue laws when Baptist preachers start talking about God's law. I'm all for faith informed voting decisions, but being able to buy liquor at a liquor store has more to do with palliating congregations than following Scripture. And if you think you can legislate people into loving God and loving their neighbour, then your brain is broke.
I understand what he is trying to say. I agree it would be nifty if we all lived by the Golden Rule. But we don't. And I can't help but think that what he means by God's law is not what I mean by God's law. One thinks immediately of Prohibition and blue laws when Baptist preachers start talking about God's law. I'm all for faith informed voting decisions, but being able to buy liquor at a liquor store has more to do with palliating congregations than following Scripture. And if you think you can legislate people into loving God and loving their neighbour, then your brain is broke.
What a Relief!
I've been reading about America's vanishing middle class and it has had me worried. I am middle class, and I have not been disappearing. Quite to the contrary. Since Christmas, there has been more of me to love and it is not going away, unfortunately. So it was nice to read a post explaining why the middle class is not going away.
Monday, January 14, 2008
From the Land of Bad Results
85% John McCain
76% Mike Huckabee
72% Mitt Romney
69% Rudy Giuliani
66% Fred Thompson
60% Ron Paul
57% Bill Richardson
56% Tom Tancredo
52% Chris Dodd
49% Barack Obama
49% Hillary Clinton
47% John Edwards
43% Joe Biden
43% Mike Gravel
35% Dennis Kucinich
2008 Presidential Candidate Matching Quiz
This quiz is just wrong, by the way. There is no way on God's green earth I'm ever voting for John McCain or Mike Huckabee. One of these days I'll take a quiz and it will give me a velid result. That will be the day I clean my keyboard.
76% Mike Huckabee
72% Mitt Romney
69% Rudy Giuliani
66% Fred Thompson
60% Ron Paul
57% Bill Richardson
56% Tom Tancredo
52% Chris Dodd
49% Barack Obama
49% Hillary Clinton
47% John Edwards
43% Joe Biden
43% Mike Gravel
35% Dennis Kucinich
2008 Presidential Candidate Matching Quiz
This quiz is just wrong, by the way. There is no way on God's green earth I'm ever voting for John McCain or Mike Huckabee. One of these days I'll take a quiz and it will give me a velid result. That will be the day I clean my keyboard.
Effective Propaganda
The very best propaganda is the truth. Here's some truth about the 2nd Amendment.
H/t Laurel Zimmer via Instapundit
H/t Laurel Zimmer via Instapundit
Something About Ikea
Sally and I went to Ikea Saturday. It was the first visit for both of us. I get that the furniture is cheap. After seeing the store, believe me, I get that. But is there any other reason to go there?
The Atlanta store was crowded. It was a beautiful day and late Saturday afternoon the store is jammed full of people. Add to that the layout of the store is like one long check out line. There was no point at which I didn't feel as though we were not standing in line. There is an approved path that winds its way through every department, just so you don't miss the glories of unassembled Swedish flat pack furniture. There are alleged short cuts, but it is impossible to walk in a straight line in the shop.
The store was crowded, noisy and smelled of fibreboard glue. The decorative style was reminiscent of Romper Room. I couldn't help but compare the store to Wal-Mart and Target. Wal-Mart also excels at dislocation, with their stores being laid out with circuitous paths. But it is a lot easier to navigate Wal-Mart once you know where the item you desire is located. There are also occasions where you can actually walk in a straight line to the area you wish to visit.
Target, by comparison, is a joy to visit. Items are located intuitively and there are broad clean aisles that make it simple to navigate your way whilst shopping. Target's selection of cheap furniture is smaller than Ikea's. But if I ever need a throwaway bookshelf, I'm going to Target. I know I can leave once I've found my item. Assuming Target has it, the prices are comparable.
Let's see. So far Sweden has brought us match monopolies, dynamite, clunky cars, cream based cuisine, meatballs, ABBA, Roxette and Ikea.
Is there no bottom to how low those evil Vikings will go?
The Atlanta store was crowded. It was a beautiful day and late Saturday afternoon the store is jammed full of people. Add to that the layout of the store is like one long check out line. There was no point at which I didn't feel as though we were not standing in line. There is an approved path that winds its way through every department, just so you don't miss the glories of unassembled Swedish flat pack furniture. There are alleged short cuts, but it is impossible to walk in a straight line in the shop.
The store was crowded, noisy and smelled of fibreboard glue. The decorative style was reminiscent of Romper Room. I couldn't help but compare the store to Wal-Mart and Target. Wal-Mart also excels at dislocation, with their stores being laid out with circuitous paths. But it is a lot easier to navigate Wal-Mart once you know where the item you desire is located. There are also occasions where you can actually walk in a straight line to the area you wish to visit.
Target, by comparison, is a joy to visit. Items are located intuitively and there are broad clean aisles that make it simple to navigate your way whilst shopping. Target's selection of cheap furniture is smaller than Ikea's. But if I ever need a throwaway bookshelf, I'm going to Target. I know I can leave once I've found my item. Assuming Target has it, the prices are comparable.
Let's see. So far Sweden has brought us match monopolies, dynamite, clunky cars, cream based cuisine, meatballs, ABBA, Roxette and Ikea.
Is there no bottom to how low those evil Vikings will go?
Poster Child
The news from Zimbabwe continues to be sad. One point of reference: At the time of its introduction in 1980, the Zimbabwean dollar was still worth more than the US dollar, with ZWD 0.68 = USD 1.00. In 2006 the Zim dollar was revalued at one dollar for every 1,000 dollars. The exchange rate at the time was $1 US for every Z$650. As of 1/8/2008, the exchange rate was $1 US for Z$3,000,000.
The Downside to Politics
Daron Westbrooke is a Ron Paul supporter. Sultan Knish has collected a series of his posts at a Ron Paul site. They show the pain that a true-believer in a candidate feels when his idol is shown to have clay feet. They also show how difficult it is to evaluate facts when you've committed to a person, heart and soul.
Mr. Westbrooke is not alone. It can be very hard to keep an open mind and to evaluate evidence fairly.
Addendum: I've been thinking about this since I posted it. One further point: Us moderns don't like to think we're prejudiced. But we are. If you have an emotional reaction to facts that contradict something you believe (Ron Paul is the best candidate, Bush was a draft dodger, Britney Spears is a good mother), it may be time to take a step back, take a few deep breaths and ask yourself why the reaction?
For me, the biggest part of being an adult is acknowledging and taking responsibility for errors. We do not like to admit that we make mistakes. But we all do, on a regular basis. Show me someone who doesn't make mistakes and I'll show you someone who is delusional. Admitting that you are in error is the first step to correcting the error and then to getting back in touch with reality.
/sermon
Mr. Westbrooke is not alone. It can be very hard to keep an open mind and to evaluate evidence fairly.
Addendum: I've been thinking about this since I posted it. One further point: Us moderns don't like to think we're prejudiced. But we are. If you have an emotional reaction to facts that contradict something you believe (Ron Paul is the best candidate, Bush was a draft dodger, Britney Spears is a good mother), it may be time to take a step back, take a few deep breaths and ask yourself why the reaction?
For me, the biggest part of being an adult is acknowledging and taking responsibility for errors. We do not like to admit that we make mistakes. But we all do, on a regular basis. Show me someone who doesn't make mistakes and I'll show you someone who is delusional. Admitting that you are in error is the first step to correcting the error and then to getting back in touch with reality.
/sermon
Sunday, January 13, 2008
To Heck With the Luddites
I do not care what the commenters on this thread say, I still think it's a good idea. After all, we are talking about having smoother ice cream!
All Has Been Made Clear
The last frontier of secret knowledge has now been made plain. The Waffle House condiment codes explained.
I am Second
My entire life, I've never felt that I was number one at anything. I was the third boy in my family. In school, although I was tall, I was never the tallest. Even though I'm strong, I was never the strongest, and so it has gone.
I was a poor student until my senior year of high school. I tested into a bunch of AP classes and was not bored senseless for the first time in twelve years. I made straight A's that year. *On a side note my sister started high school the following year and spent three years hearing how wonderful a student I had been. The teachers conveniently forgot my less than stellar other two years. Sorry sis.*
So when I arrived at college, I was feeling pretty good about myself, standing in my very first registration line. I struck up a conversation with the fellow standing in front of me. And within five minutes I knew I wasn't going to be 'Mr Hot Stuff' at college. Steve was and is one of smartest guys I've ever met. And to add insult to injury, he's a really nice, decent fellow.
This all came home to me when I had breakfast with a friend of mine. When we met, we were both starting out as attorneys. Now he is a newly minted curate and I'm still an attorney, still working in the same dull field I started in.
And I'm content. Because when I first met my friend, some twenty years ago, I immediately thought he ought to be a priest. And I've known since I was eighteen that I have no call to be one. Being number two, or three, or fifteen, or what have you, has taught me the value of humility. I still have prideful moments. I still would love to shine in some way. But I do shine when I allow myself to see it. As my wife puts it, I am her favourite husband. And that means a great deal.
Most importantly, God knows me. He knows me and He still loves me. So, I'm a winner after all and always.
I was a poor student until my senior year of high school. I tested into a bunch of AP classes and was not bored senseless for the first time in twelve years. I made straight A's that year. *On a side note my sister started high school the following year and spent three years hearing how wonderful a student I had been. The teachers conveniently forgot my less than stellar other two years. Sorry sis.*
So when I arrived at college, I was feeling pretty good about myself, standing in my very first registration line. I struck up a conversation with the fellow standing in front of me. And within five minutes I knew I wasn't going to be 'Mr Hot Stuff' at college. Steve was and is one of smartest guys I've ever met. And to add insult to injury, he's a really nice, decent fellow.
This all came home to me when I had breakfast with a friend of mine. When we met, we were both starting out as attorneys. Now he is a newly minted curate and I'm still an attorney, still working in the same dull field I started in.
And I'm content. Because when I first met my friend, some twenty years ago, I immediately thought he ought to be a priest. And I've known since I was eighteen that I have no call to be one. Being number two, or three, or fifteen, or what have you, has taught me the value of humility. I still have prideful moments. I still would love to shine in some way. But I do shine when I allow myself to see it. As my wife puts it, I am her favourite husband. And that means a great deal.
Most importantly, God knows me. He knows me and He still loves me. So, I'm a winner after all and always.
One Righteous Man
Maybe because it is Sunday, but this story reminds me of Genesis 18:16-33. Read the whole thing and scroll down. I am so thankful I am not a Canadian.
If you do not understand the importance of freedom of expression, then let me know. I will be happy to enlighten you.
If you do not understand the importance of freedom of expression, then let me know. I will be happy to enlighten you.
Saturday, January 12, 2008
Why Capitalism is Good for the Soul
Peter Saunders has written an excellent essay on the subject.
Read it all.
From Tim Blair via Instapundit.
Read it all.
From Tim Blair via Instapundit.
The Episcopal Way
(with apologies to Frank Loesser)
Wimberly: When I joined this church
As a brash young man,
Well, I said to myself,
"Now, brash young man,
Don't get any ideas."
Well, I stuck to that,
And I haven't had one in years.
Henderson: You play it safe.
Wimberly: I play it the Episcopal way;
Wherever the church puts me
There I stay.
Henderson: But what is your point of view?
Wimberly: I have no point of view.
Henderson: Supposing the church thinks . . .
Wimberly: I think so too.
Henderson: Now, what would you say . . .?
Wimberly: I wouldn't say.
Henderson: Your face is an Episcopal face.
Wimberly: It smiles at primates
Then goes back in place.
Henderson: The diocese furniture?
Wimberly: Oh, it suits me fine.
Henderson: The national letterhead?
Wimberly: A valentine.
Henderson: Anything you're against?
Wimberly: Unemployment.
Henderson: When they want brilliant thinking
From the bishops
Wimberly: That is no concern of mine.
Henderson: Suppose a man of genius
Makes suggestions?
Wimberly: Watch that genius get suggested to resign.
Henderson: So you play it the Episcopal way?
Wimberly: All church policy is by me OK.
Henderson: You'll never rise up to the top.
Wimberly: But there's one thing clear:
Whoever Schori inhibits,
I will still be here.
Henderson: Oh, you certainly found a home!
Wimberly: It's cozy.
Henderson: Your brain is an Episcopal brain.
Wimberly: The church washed it,
Now I can't complain.
Henderson: Hey, the church magazine!
Wimberly: Oh, what style, what punch!
Henderson: The GC restaurant!
Wimberly: Ev'ry day same lunch:
Their haddock sandwich; it's delicious!
Henderson: I must try it.
Wimberly: (Early in the week.)
Henderson: Do you have any hobbies?
Wimberly: I've a hobby; I play gin with Mr. Crews.
Henderson: Mr. Crews! And do you play it nicely?
Wimberly: Play it nicely . . . still, he blitzes me
In every game, like that!
Henderson: Why?
Wimberly: 'Cause I play it the Episcopal way.
Schori's policy is by me OK.
Henderson: Oh, how can you get anywhere?
Wimberly: Junior, have no fear;
Whoever Schori inhibits,
I will still be here.
Henderson: You will still be here.
Both: Year after year after fiscal,
Never take a risk-al year!
The Optimum Presidential Race
I'm backing off of political posts because I seem to be allergic, quite literally, to partisanship. So you can imagine my joy when I found some information that enabled me to be political and bi-partisan simultaneously.
According to a recent poll, 14 per cent of Thompson supporters and 12 per cent of Obama supporters say they have sex almost every day. 5 percent of Clinton and Giuliani supporters have sex that frequently.
I think the answer is clear, if we want America to get lucky, then the winners in the primaries have to be Obama and Thompson. Do it for the future of America. Do it for the children!
According to a recent poll, 14 per cent of Thompson supporters and 12 per cent of Obama supporters say they have sex almost every day. 5 percent of Clinton and Giuliani supporters have sex that frequently.
I think the answer is clear, if we want America to get lucky, then the winners in the primaries have to be Obama and Thompson. Do it for the future of America. Do it for the children!
The Tale of Two Attorney Generals
In Virginia, the State Attorney General has a filed a brief in favour of the constitutionality of Virginia's Division Statute. This helps the break away parishes and hurts, somewhat, the Diocese of Virginia and 815.
Not all that terribly far away, the U S Solicitor General has filed a brief in favour of the Washington DC ordinance banning handguns, saying that the trial court used the wrong standard in evaluating the constitutionality of the same.
How are they related? Well this post finally allows me to use 'guns' and 'episcopal church' tags for the same post.
:)
Not all that terribly far away, the U S Solicitor General has filed a brief in favour of the Washington DC ordinance banning handguns, saying that the trial court used the wrong standard in evaluating the constitutionality of the same.
How are they related? Well this post finally allows me to use 'guns' and 'episcopal church' tags for the same post.
:)
Friday, January 11, 2008
Thursday, January 10, 2008
The Future
I think there is much that remains to be done in Africa, and that is an area where our efforts can easily pay off in manifold ways. The single best way I know to evangelize is to simply be helpful. And it sounds as though our willingness to be helpful is being challenged by the Muslims. that's the sort of competition I think we need to engage in.
As for the home front, many are somewhat discouraged. I am less so. I think that the orthodox Episcopalians were caught off guard by the theologically trendy. We were polite and played nice. They have not. The word that has resonated most with me this new year has been 'truculent'. I think we need to call our Worthy Opponents on each and every word they say. To hold them accountable for every premise, fact or conclusion they offer. In the past five years, that has happened more and more. The process that has resulted has been painful. It is going to be more so, but I think it will bear much fruit.
To use a gardening analogy, I think that we are being pruned. Unpleasant for the tree as it happens, but necessary if it's going to produce in the future.
In response to a post by Anglicat that is well worth reading.
As for the home front, many are somewhat discouraged. I am less so. I think that the orthodox Episcopalians were caught off guard by the theologically trendy. We were polite and played nice. They have not. The word that has resonated most with me this new year has been 'truculent'. I think we need to call our Worthy Opponents on each and every word they say. To hold them accountable for every premise, fact or conclusion they offer. In the past five years, that has happened more and more. The process that has resulted has been painful. It is going to be more so, but I think it will bear much fruit.
To use a gardening analogy, I think that we are being pruned. Unpleasant for the tree as it happens, but necessary if it's going to produce in the future.
In response to a post by Anglicat that is well worth reading.
Because I've Been Picking on Texas a Lot Lately
The audio is set low on this, you may wish to crank it up a bit.
Father Jake Swings, Misses
Terry Martin has written a post about how hard the Bishop of Rochester, Michael Nazir-Ali is making evangelism by being so narrow and homophobic. The concluding sentence is "And we wonder why some of our younger generations consider Christians to be homophobic, judgmental and hypocritical."
Okay.
Let's look at what the Bishop of Rochester has said according to Terry Martin:
1. Couples who are deliberately childless are being self-indulgent.
2. Just war theory may allow a pre-emptive attack.
3. If the TEC bishops who consecrated Gene Robinson get Lambeth invites, he might not attend.
4. Muslims have created no-go areas in certain large British cities.
Let's discuss them one by one. Number one, the selfishness of not having children is in agreement with the theology of the Catholic church. Protestant theologians can and do disagree with that position, but it is a legitimate position. It all boils down to what you believe marriage is for. Unfortunately for Terry Martin, the historical Anglican position on marriage is found in the 1928 BCP enumeration for the reasons to get married, one of which is children.
But more to the point, such a view is not homophobic, and I'm not sure that calling it hypocritical is fair. So that leaves judgmental. Well it could be, but what was the context of the remark? Terry+ links to this BBC article. Here's the money quote: "Writing in a diocesan newspaper, Rochester Link, the bishop advised priests to look kindly on those whose marriages broke down because of the refusal of one partner to have a child. He said that such people should be treated with the same sympathy as victims of 'infidelity, desertion or cruelty'." So he was calling for compassion when couples divorce over the issue. I'm sorry, but how is that judgmental?
The second idea is about attacking Iraq. A lot of people were against the idea. I'm quite convinced that going in was a mistake. The money quote for the article Terry links to is "If the Government's promised intelligence dossier on Saddam's weapons stockpile proved convincing, then military action would be legitimate self-defence." Note the use of "If...then". What the Bishop states is a version of the 'Just War Theory'. Just War Theory attempts to answer the question "When may Christians go to war?". I'm not a fan of Just War Theory, but there you are. Again, I'm not seeing homophobia, hypocrisy or judgmentalism here.
What about the third point? Here's the quote: "The Bishop of Rochester, the Rt Rev Michael Nazir-Ali, said he would find it difficult to attend a Church council alongside those who consecrated or approved the appointment of Anglicanism's first openly gay bishop." Well, the consecration of Bishop Robinson was characterized by the Archbishop of Canterbury as straining the fabric of the Anglican Communion. It was in deliberate violation of commitments made by the Episcopal Church. It went against millennia of Church teaching and practice. Further, an absolute majority of the Anglican Communion is no longer in communion with the Episcopal Church as a result of that act.
And I think this is what has gotten Terry's goat. It isn't the couples without children or Just War Theory. It's that Terry Martin thinks that the Episcopal Church is right and the rest of the world, except maybe Canada, is wrong.
But let's get to cases. I think Terry Martin would say that here we see homophobia and judgmentalism and probably hypocrisy. Perhaps someone can explain how it's hypocritical, because I'm not seeing it. Apparently following Church tradition is homophobic, and judgmental. Can someone explain that one to me as well?
Now to point four, Terry Martin objects to the Bishop of Rochester's statement about 'no go areas'. Unfortunately for Father Martin, the Bishop appears to be right.
What is really going on here? Terry Martin doesn't like Bishop Michael Nazir-Ali. And instead of saying so and then explaining why, he resorts to the epithets of the Left, terming him homophobic, judgmental and a hypocrite. He would have called the Right Reverend a racist, but for the happy chance that the good bishop is a person of colour. I am startled that Terry Martin left off a reference to the patriarchy. The sad thing is not that it is invective, but that it is invective poorly done.
What is the Bishop of Rochester's sin? He dares to disagree with a priest on another continent. He dares to express concern about issues that Terry Martin doesn't think are important. He has forgotten that he is a second class Christian from a third world country. He needs reminding that the liberal white elite know best, and he should keep his mouth shut, unless it is to express agreement with his betters. I've seen this sort of reaction before. It's what also happens to Thomas Sowell and Clarence Thomas, among others.
Instead of explaining why the good Bishop is in error, Father Terry simply resorts to a few epithets. He mis-uses some news articles to provide support for a predetermined and poorly thought out conclusion.
This is why the country and the Episcopal Church are divided. Pompous pusillanimous prating priests such as Terry Martin attack their opponents without ever using the Divinely given gift of Reason. He doesn't just attack, he smears, he labels and he doesn't think. Not ever. His conduct in that one post is reprehensible. Unfortunately, his entire website is replete of examples of how narrow minded, bigoted and self-righteous he really is. If just once he would justify his use of the hackneyed labels of the whitebread Left, I could respect him, maybe.
Conclusion: Father Jake is a jerk.
Okay.
Let's look at what the Bishop of Rochester has said according to Terry Martin:
1. Couples who are deliberately childless are being self-indulgent.
2. Just war theory may allow a pre-emptive attack.
3. If the TEC bishops who consecrated Gene Robinson get Lambeth invites, he might not attend.
4. Muslims have created no-go areas in certain large British cities.
Let's discuss them one by one. Number one, the selfishness of not having children is in agreement with the theology of the Catholic church. Protestant theologians can and do disagree with that position, but it is a legitimate position. It all boils down to what you believe marriage is for. Unfortunately for Terry Martin, the historical Anglican position on marriage is found in the 1928 BCP enumeration for the reasons to get married, one of which is children.
But more to the point, such a view is not homophobic, and I'm not sure that calling it hypocritical is fair. So that leaves judgmental. Well it could be, but what was the context of the remark? Terry+ links to this BBC article. Here's the money quote: "Writing in a diocesan newspaper, Rochester Link, the bishop advised priests to look kindly on those whose marriages broke down because of the refusal of one partner to have a child. He said that such people should be treated with the same sympathy as victims of 'infidelity, desertion or cruelty'." So he was calling for compassion when couples divorce over the issue. I'm sorry, but how is that judgmental?
The second idea is about attacking Iraq. A lot of people were against the idea. I'm quite convinced that going in was a mistake. The money quote for the article Terry links to is "If the Government's promised intelligence dossier on Saddam's weapons stockpile proved convincing, then military action would be legitimate self-defence." Note the use of "If...then". What the Bishop states is a version of the 'Just War Theory'. Just War Theory attempts to answer the question "When may Christians go to war?". I'm not a fan of Just War Theory, but there you are. Again, I'm not seeing homophobia, hypocrisy or judgmentalism here.
What about the third point? Here's the quote: "The Bishop of Rochester, the Rt Rev Michael Nazir-Ali, said he would find it difficult to attend a Church council alongside those who consecrated or approved the appointment of Anglicanism's first openly gay bishop." Well, the consecration of Bishop Robinson was characterized by the Archbishop of Canterbury as straining the fabric of the Anglican Communion. It was in deliberate violation of commitments made by the Episcopal Church. It went against millennia of Church teaching and practice. Further, an absolute majority of the Anglican Communion is no longer in communion with the Episcopal Church as a result of that act.
And I think this is what has gotten Terry's goat. It isn't the couples without children or Just War Theory. It's that Terry Martin thinks that the Episcopal Church is right and the rest of the world, except maybe Canada, is wrong.
But let's get to cases. I think Terry Martin would say that here we see homophobia and judgmentalism and probably hypocrisy. Perhaps someone can explain how it's hypocritical, because I'm not seeing it. Apparently following Church tradition is homophobic, and judgmental. Can someone explain that one to me as well?
Now to point four, Terry Martin objects to the Bishop of Rochester's statement about 'no go areas'. Unfortunately for Father Martin, the Bishop appears to be right.
What is really going on here? Terry Martin doesn't like Bishop Michael Nazir-Ali. And instead of saying so and then explaining why, he resorts to the epithets of the Left, terming him homophobic, judgmental and a hypocrite. He would have called the Right Reverend a racist, but for the happy chance that the good bishop is a person of colour. I am startled that Terry Martin left off a reference to the patriarchy. The sad thing is not that it is invective, but that it is invective poorly done.
What is the Bishop of Rochester's sin? He dares to disagree with a priest on another continent. He dares to express concern about issues that Terry Martin doesn't think are important. He has forgotten that he is a second class Christian from a third world country. He needs reminding that the liberal white elite know best, and he should keep his mouth shut, unless it is to express agreement with his betters. I've seen this sort of reaction before. It's what also happens to Thomas Sowell and Clarence Thomas, among others.
Instead of explaining why the good Bishop is in error, Father Terry simply resorts to a few epithets. He mis-uses some news articles to provide support for a predetermined and poorly thought out conclusion.
This is why the country and the Episcopal Church are divided. Pompous pusillanimous prating priests such as Terry Martin attack their opponents without ever using the Divinely given gift of Reason. He doesn't just attack, he smears, he labels and he doesn't think. Not ever. His conduct in that one post is reprehensible. Unfortunately, his entire website is replete of examples of how narrow minded, bigoted and self-righteous he really is. If just once he would justify his use of the hackneyed labels of the whitebread Left, I could respect him, maybe.
Conclusion: Father Jake is a jerk.
Wednesday, January 09, 2008
Rambling, Old School
Three Episcopal churches in the Diocese of Tennessee have seen their members leave the denomination en masse this year. The Bishop of Tennessee is John Bauerschmidt. From all accounts is personally amiable and theologically orthodox. His last name struck a chord with me and I started digging.
Back when I was in college (University of the South, 1982), I knew a Fritz Bauerschmidt. Fritz was two years behind me. He had a religious bent and was popular with the girls. He's very smart and at the time I knew him could have been a stand in for the platonic ideal of "laid back". Somehow I doubt that has changed, even though he is now married with children.
Some very quick Googling showed me that John and Fritz are in fact brothers. What I learned about Fritz has proven most intriguing. He apparently converted to Catholicism right after I graduated. He continued to be interested in religion, got his doctorate and is now an assistant professor of theology at Loyola in Baltimore.
Several of the people I knew in college have gone on to religious greatness, as it were. But of them Fritz is the only one I thought that would happen to. I never would have pegged Shannon Johnston nor Jim Mathes for being dog-collar bound. Mark Lewis, apparently, has changed little since college. I never thought of him as the priestly type, but when I heard he was, I wasn't surprised. The same holds true for David Dearman, but in a much less spectacular way.
Irregardless of my reminiscences, Fritz has apparently achieved great things in the world of Catholic theology. He has written an intro to Aquinas that is well thought of. And he has written a popular interest book entitled Why the Mystics Matter Now. As soon as I can scrape the appropriate number of shekels together, I intend to order it.
Now you might ask why am I not getting the Aquinas book? Bottom line, I already own the Summa Theologica, have read the Summa Theologica and am not convinced by the Summa Theologica. I became a nominalist in college and remain one, however lapsed and inert, to this very day.
Back when I was in college (University of the South, 1982), I knew a Fritz Bauerschmidt. Fritz was two years behind me. He had a religious bent and was popular with the girls. He's very smart and at the time I knew him could have been a stand in for the platonic ideal of "laid back". Somehow I doubt that has changed, even though he is now married with children.
Some very quick Googling showed me that John and Fritz are in fact brothers. What I learned about Fritz has proven most intriguing. He apparently converted to Catholicism right after I graduated. He continued to be interested in religion, got his doctorate and is now an assistant professor of theology at Loyola in Baltimore.
Several of the people I knew in college have gone on to religious greatness, as it were. But of them Fritz is the only one I thought that would happen to. I never would have pegged Shannon Johnston nor Jim Mathes for being dog-collar bound. Mark Lewis, apparently, has changed little since college. I never thought of him as the priestly type, but when I heard he was, I wasn't surprised. The same holds true for David Dearman, but in a much less spectacular way.
Irregardless of my reminiscences, Fritz has apparently achieved great things in the world of Catholic theology. He has written an intro to Aquinas that is well thought of. And he has written a popular interest book entitled Why the Mystics Matter Now. As soon as I can scrape the appropriate number of shekels together, I intend to order it.
Now you might ask why am I not getting the Aquinas book? Bottom line, I already own the Summa Theologica, have read the Summa Theologica and am not convinced by the Summa Theologica. I became a nominalist in college and remain one, however lapsed and inert, to this very day.
US footage of confrontation in the Gulf - 09 Jan 08
I love the age we live in. Given the prevalence of video cameras I think it ought to be called the "Age of Transparency". Despite the clear evidence of the tape, the Iranians are claiming it's a fake.
Nothing bugs totalitarians more than a lack of censorship. Nothing.
Once Again, Texas Leads the Way
Because the original version of the all bacon burger was too whimpy, the 'inventor' unveils his new and improved recipe.
H/T Fark
H/T Fark
Book Review
I just finished The Dead by Mark E Rogers last night. I haven't been reviewing the books I read, but I thought I'd make an exception in this case.
The Dead is the Tim Lahaye/Jerry Jenkins Apocalypse done by a Catholic in one thin book. As self-published books go, it's fairly well written. It helps that Rogers is an established writer. The book comes with original art that is evocative, but not as good as Rogers' previously published work.
The plot is simple and moderately obvious. Zombies do not scare me, so I didn't find it especially scary. And the characterization is stereotypical. However, the theological discussion is most entertaining if you're currently embroiled in any of the mainstream church controversies. Catholics and Episcopalians will find it particularly relevant. There is one conversation between Father Tim and Father Chuck that I expect will make any revisionist writhe. That it takes place in a tunnel, surrounded by zombies makes it even more gripping.
While I enjoyed reading The Dead, I really wish the author/artist would return to his roots and start writing genre bending parodies again.
The Dead is the Tim Lahaye/Jerry Jenkins Apocalypse done by a Catholic in one thin book. As self-published books go, it's fairly well written. It helps that Rogers is an established writer. The book comes with original art that is evocative, but not as good as Rogers' previously published work.
The plot is simple and moderately obvious. Zombies do not scare me, so I didn't find it especially scary. And the characterization is stereotypical. However, the theological discussion is most entertaining if you're currently embroiled in any of the mainstream church controversies. Catholics and Episcopalians will find it particularly relevant. There is one conversation between Father Tim and Father Chuck that I expect will make any revisionist writhe. That it takes place in a tunnel, surrounded by zombies makes it even more gripping.
While I enjoyed reading The Dead, I really wish the author/artist would return to his roots and start writing genre bending parodies again.
Tuesday, January 08, 2008
Welcome to the new guys
Hazel Stone (that has to be a pseudonym) and Ted Bronson have a brand new blog. It's well worth checking out. Ted got things off to a flying start with one heck of an essay about the nanny state. Note to any politicos: If you really want my vote, the issues he mentions are the issues that will get you my vote. Check it out.
Church Blogging
In honour of the continuing news of people, churches and even a diocese leaving the Episcopal Church since the General Convention, am I the only one who finds this logo from the 2006 GC deeply ironic?
How to be Popular
I only check my viewing stats about twice a week or so. I try very hard not to obsess about who is reading me and why, as this blog is really here so I can spout off on topics that interest me.
Now that I've made that disclaimer, I had more hits yesterday than I ever have had. And after a quickie analysis, it would seem that instead of blogging about weird videos, retro music, Episcopal Church controversies, law and theology, I ought to be ranting about Georgia senatorial candidates. As my friends and relatives know all too well, I have definite political views, but politicians set off my allergies. I think the sickest I've ever been was the week after the State Democratic Convention where I had been a delegate.
The upshot of which is I think I'm coming down with the flu. And I blame Messrs. Vernon Jones, Dale! Cardwell, Rand Knight, Josh Lanier, Maggie Martinez and Saxby Chambliss . I blame all of them.
Addendum: Of course there's absolutely nothing wrong or even mucus forming about political satire.
Now that I've made that disclaimer, I had more hits yesterday than I ever have had. And after a quickie analysis, it would seem that instead of blogging about weird videos, retro music, Episcopal Church controversies, law and theology, I ought to be ranting about Georgia senatorial candidates. As my friends and relatives know all too well, I have definite political views, but politicians set off my allergies. I think the sickest I've ever been was the week after the State Democratic Convention where I had been a delegate.
The upshot of which is I think I'm coming down with the flu. And I blame Messrs. Vernon Jones, Dale! Cardwell, Rand Knight, Josh Lanier, Maggie Martinez and Saxby Chambliss . I blame all of them.
Addendum: Of course there's absolutely nothing wrong or even mucus forming about political satire.
Celebrate Diversity!
I'm actually not a huge fan of the diversity crowd. They're a little too smug and way too PC for me. However, diversity in cuisine hits me where I live. And if I can save a buck or two doing it, then it's well worth doing. Wisebread has an excellent guide to finding what foods in what ethnic markets. Kathy Biehl has a lovely set of links to online ethnic grocers.
Enjoy!
Enjoy!
The Truth Will Out
A realtor finally comes out and says it. Keep in mind though, that practicing law without a license is as evil an act as can be imagined. Selling real estate without a license may be malum prohibitum, but practicing law without a license is malum in se.
How to Behave
Katie Delahaye Paine writes a wonderful post on the necessity and practicality of transparency in building trust. She wrote it as it applies to the business world, but I think the principles she states have a much broader application.
Monday, January 07, 2008
Senator
The Democratic race for Senator in Georgia continues to underwhelm. I have a very deep and personal grudge against one of the candidates (Dale! Cardwell) and I had thought I'd wind up voting Democrat just to vote against him in the primary. The primary is only about a month away and I thought it might be useful to look at the sorry lot of losers who constitute the candidate pool this year.
First we have Vernon (I need a bodyguard) Jones. He's the CEO of my home county (DeKalb) and has never met a spending program he couldn't shift to one of his close, personal friends. He is supposed to be affordable as corrupt officials go, so that's something. Conventional wisdom is that he will get the nod.
Second is Dale! (sanctimonious douchebag) Cardwell. Dale! has received so little support that he is hiding out on top of an abandoned tower in downtown Atlanta. No, I'm not making that up. He's a former alleged investigative reporter with Channel 2 here. As such he was an employee of one of the larger US media conglomerates (Cox Communications). Dale!'s platform is that he won't be beholden to anyone. Either he's lying about that and has the Cox empire behind him, or he's a total tool who successfully managed to piss off his bosses and coworkers.
Third is Rand Knight. Dr Knight is a whitebread technocrat. Boring speaker, colourless past and a lack of achievement have evidently qualified this ex-basket weaver for the Senate.
Josh Lanier is running for the geezer vote. He may have been a success as a businessman, but he has zero political experience, unless you count briefly being a lobbyist and helping to manage the Presidential yacht as political experience.
And lastly we have Maggie Martinez, for whom English is apparently a second language. Normally that's no bar to election in Georgia, but she speaks Spanish as her primary, instead of Talmadge, so that's probably a bit of a hindrance to her being elected.
Happily, everyone of them gets slaughtered by the Republican incumbent in all the polls, so even if Dale! wins the primary, which the polls show him losing, I can still vote against him in the general election. Dem. party insiders are on record off-the-record as conceding the seat to Saxby Chambliss.
Which is a relief, because I still don't know who I like for President. I'm hoping New Hampshire will bring some clarity on that point, because the way things are going, I could wind up deciding which party primary to vote in on election day.
Addendum: Well, if anyone was curious about what happens if you call a candidate from South Georgia a 'geezer', the answer is you get pwned. Josh (from the comments) is right about the difference in the primaries. Unfortunately, he better enjoy his triumph here while it lasts. This election isn't for the Democrats to win, it's for Saxby Chambliss to lose.
And in the interests of bi-partisanship, let me point out that Saxby Chambliss is a man of principle. Please note the careful use of the singular there. His guiding principle is that he will be re-elected. And he is a humble man. When Georgia popular opinion about an issue changes, he isn't so proud that he won't rethink his position and change with it.
First we have Vernon (I need a bodyguard) Jones. He's the CEO of my home county (DeKalb) and has never met a spending program he couldn't shift to one of his close, personal friends. He is supposed to be affordable as corrupt officials go, so that's something. Conventional wisdom is that he will get the nod.
Second is Dale! (sanctimonious douchebag) Cardwell. Dale! has received so little support that he is hiding out on top of an abandoned tower in downtown Atlanta. No, I'm not making that up. He's a former alleged investigative reporter with Channel 2 here. As such he was an employee of one of the larger US media conglomerates (Cox Communications). Dale!'s platform is that he won't be beholden to anyone. Either he's lying about that and has the Cox empire behind him, or he's a total tool who successfully managed to piss off his bosses and coworkers.
Third is Rand Knight. Dr Knight is a whitebread technocrat. Boring speaker, colourless past and a lack of achievement have evidently qualified this ex-basket weaver for the Senate.
Josh Lanier is running for the geezer vote. He may have been a success as a businessman, but he has zero political experience, unless you count briefly being a lobbyist and helping to manage the Presidential yacht as political experience.
And lastly we have Maggie Martinez, for whom English is apparently a second language. Normally that's no bar to election in Georgia, but she speaks Spanish as her primary, instead of Talmadge, so that's probably a bit of a hindrance to her being elected.
Happily, everyone of them gets slaughtered by the Republican incumbent in all the polls, so even if Dale! wins the primary, which the polls show him losing, I can still vote against him in the general election. Dem. party insiders are on record off-the-record as conceding the seat to Saxby Chambliss.
Which is a relief, because I still don't know who I like for President. I'm hoping New Hampshire will bring some clarity on that point, because the way things are going, I could wind up deciding which party primary to vote in on election day.
Addendum: Well, if anyone was curious about what happens if you call a candidate from South Georgia a 'geezer', the answer is you get pwned. Josh (from the comments) is right about the difference in the primaries. Unfortunately, he better enjoy his triumph here while it lasts. This election isn't for the Democrats to win, it's for Saxby Chambliss to lose.
And in the interests of bi-partisanship, let me point out that Saxby Chambliss is a man of principle. Please note the careful use of the singular there. His guiding principle is that he will be re-elected. And he is a humble man. When Georgia popular opinion about an issue changes, he isn't so proud that he won't rethink his position and change with it.
Sunday, January 06, 2008
Saturday, January 05, 2008
How to Sell Newspapers
......Not. The AJC, to no one's surprise has managed yet again to indulge in scare-mongering and illiteracy. I write illiteracy because they misunderstand or mis-state some of the provisions of the bill in question. Either they're illiterate or lying, and because I try to be charitable, I'm assuming ignorance in lieu of evil.
This is a fairly normal editorial for this crew, so of course the high level of thought and writing skill continues to pay off for them in the form of record circulation growth.
{H/T to Rob}
This is a fairly normal editorial for this crew, so of course the high level of thought and writing skill continues to pay off for them in the form of record circulation growth.
{H/T to Rob}
Avenue Q - I Wish I Could Go Back to College
Every time I face a sink full of dishes, I think about this.
Pack the Bags, I'm Coming Home!
Reading this article brought tears of joy to my eyes. I had thought where I lived qualified as a red meat kind of a place. But I have seen the light and I've repented of my weenie ways.
Best quote:"For most people in Argentina, a vegetarian is something you eat."
Best quote:"For most people in Argentina, a vegetarian is something you eat."
Friday, January 04, 2008
A Question For All the Candidates
I know your opponent molests children, smells bad and assassinates nuns, what I want to know is how are you going to end the war in Iraq with honour, fight terrorism, end global warming, balance the budget, reduce the national debt and reduce the bureaucracy's footprint without pixie dust or a magic wand?
I asked this in IM, and I think it's a valid question for the whole lot of them.
I asked this in IM, and I think it's a valid question for the whole lot of them.
TANSTAAFL
With our aging population socialized medicine is looking more and more attractive to huge swaths of voters. The idea of course being that they could continue to receive the same level and quality of health care as before and have some one else pay for it.
Only things aren't all that rosy over in the UK.
Only things aren't all that rosy over in the UK.
Thursday, January 03, 2008
Get Out the Old Crystal Ball
The Chicago Mercantile Housing Price Index (combined ten cities) is not looking real hopeful for the next couple of years. My only hope is that the Atnlanta market (which isn't part of the basket of ten) will show strong individual growth. Unfortunately, I can't think of any good reasons why it should.
Synchronicity
This past Christmas, one of our nephews or nieces thought it would be fun to challenge our plumbing with bubble-wrap. Imagine my joy in reading this little tidbit from New Jersey.
Scott Ott Scoops 'Em all
Once again the website Scrappleface has beaten the rest of the press to a key story.
Wednesday, January 02, 2008
Tuesday, January 01, 2008
Monday, December 31, 2007
Sunday, December 30, 2007
About those MDG's
It appears that China, India and Sub-Saharan Africa are poorer than previously thought.
Let Them Eat Steak
I've been reflecting upon what it means to be poor in America. In temporal and geographical terms, we have the wealthiest poor in history.
Don't believe me? Consider this. Currently the supermarket nearest me is selling USDA Choice Sirloin steak at less than $4 per pound. If a person were to make the foolish decision to live on nothing but sirloin steak for a year, the cost would be around $8 per day (Two pounds of meat). That comes to $2,920 on food per year. The poverty line in the US is $10,210 for a single person household. Our steak eating person would be spending 29% of their income on food.
Let's put this in perspective. Until the Industrial Revolution the lot of most of humanity was fairly miserable. In most countries over 95% of the population were peasants. In most cases they were bound to the land in some way. Often they were simply slaves, rarely did they own their land outright.
In pre-Revolutionary France, which was probably the most prosperous country in the world right before industrialization changed the world, the typical diet of a Frenchman consisted of barley or rye bread, pease porridge, assorted vegetables (onions and legumes) and very little protein and very little fruit. The French serf, and they were mostly serfs, raised wheat for cash to help pay the taxes and rents. Life was indeed brutish, miserable and short. To be poor was to be starving.
Of all of the people in Europe, the one's who could afford to have steak every meal were as follows: The King of France, The Ottoman Emperor (Sultan), the Czar of Russia, and the King of Spain. That's the full list. Steak every meal meant slaughtering a cow a day for an entire year. And even with that, the quality of meat was nowhere near as consistent or as good as the poorest of us can now attain.
All of this is not to say that there isn't poverty in America. There is. But it is to say that we have the wrong image of poverty in America. I see a lot of poor in my daily life. None of them are starving. Most of those I see are men who are unable to work due to mental illness or addiction. Most of the ones I don't see are the ones who are unable to work because they are too crippled or too feeble to work.
The typical homeless person is a middle aged man, who is the sole member of his household. Next time you see or hear someone advocating helping the poor, ask yourself "How does this person intend to help the wino down the street?" Because that is the face of true poverty in America. And I have yet to hear any real solutions for helping those who will not help themselves.
Don't believe me? Consider this. Currently the supermarket nearest me is selling USDA Choice Sirloin steak at less than $4 per pound. If a person were to make the foolish decision to live on nothing but sirloin steak for a year, the cost would be around $8 per day (Two pounds of meat). That comes to $2,920 on food per year. The poverty line in the US is $10,210 for a single person household. Our steak eating person would be spending 29% of their income on food.
Let's put this in perspective. Until the Industrial Revolution the lot of most of humanity was fairly miserable. In most countries over 95% of the population were peasants. In most cases they were bound to the land in some way. Often they were simply slaves, rarely did they own their land outright.
In pre-Revolutionary France, which was probably the most prosperous country in the world right before industrialization changed the world, the typical diet of a Frenchman consisted of barley or rye bread, pease porridge, assorted vegetables (onions and legumes) and very little protein and very little fruit. The French serf, and they were mostly serfs, raised wheat for cash to help pay the taxes and rents. Life was indeed brutish, miserable and short. To be poor was to be starving.
Of all of the people in Europe, the one's who could afford to have steak every meal were as follows: The King of France, The Ottoman Emperor (Sultan), the Czar of Russia, and the King of Spain. That's the full list. Steak every meal meant slaughtering a cow a day for an entire year. And even with that, the quality of meat was nowhere near as consistent or as good as the poorest of us can now attain.
All of this is not to say that there isn't poverty in America. There is. But it is to say that we have the wrong image of poverty in America. I see a lot of poor in my daily life. None of them are starving. Most of those I see are men who are unable to work due to mental illness or addiction. Most of the ones I don't see are the ones who are unable to work because they are too crippled or too feeble to work.
The typical homeless person is a middle aged man, who is the sole member of his household. Next time you see or hear someone advocating helping the poor, ask yourself "How does this person intend to help the wino down the street?" Because that is the face of true poverty in America. And I have yet to hear any real solutions for helping those who will not help themselves.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
