I have just finished reading The Abolition of Man by C.S. Lewis (thankfully I had a 2 hour plane flight yesterday on which my kids slept). I have only read 3 or 4 of Lewis' books. This is probably the deepest. I have yet to form a complete opinion on what he says. So far I would say that I agree with him. I find his metaphor of "men without chests" to be amazing. I have never heard a more powerful description of modern man than this. I agree that all value comes from a single source, what he calls the Tao. I would go futher and say that the source of this Tao is God. I do not understand why he doesn't take this step. It may be that he is not attempting to turn men to Christ in this book. Rather, he is attempting to show the existience and value of universal values. This he does quite effectively. He makes a strong point by evidencing that most every "religion" upholds the same basic values. There does seem to be something to this. One of his most striking statements is that Man's conquest of Nature is actually Nature's conquest of Man. This is profound. He says later that to see through everything is to see nothing.
I hope to ponder this book much more. I wonder if anyone else has read the book and has some thoughts on it?
Wednesday, March 30, 2005
Monday, March 28, 2005
Notes on "Notes"
I have recently finished reading Notes from the Underground by Fydor Dostoyevsky. The three best novels I have ever read, though I don't read many novels, are by Dost.--Crime and Punishment, The Brothers Karamozov, and Notes from the Underground. No other author can more effectively portray the inner man. As you read Dost., you feel as though you are looking at the world through the eyes of his characters. He is absolute genius. He is genius in total control of his art.
Notes is a fascinating look at a disgusting individual. I think the narrator of Notes is so disgusting because we are so much like him. At least, I am at times so much like him. Many of the narrator's thoughts are often my thoughts. Someone said the "I" in the story is all of us. I have a few diverse thoughts that came directly and indirectly from the book.
1. Consciousness v. intellegence--The narrator talks at times about being a conscious individual. He talks at others times about being an intellegent individual. Are these different words for the same state? Is being conscious the same as being intellegent? Is intellegence simply a more acute consciousness of yourself and your surroundings? I think it is. Most people we call intellegent are just aware of most everything. It is not capability. Some people are capable of retaining knowledge, but are not intellegent. It is not being knowledgeable. Many people are knowledgeable idiots. The narrator is very knowledeable. He is most likely very capable. But he is mostly just conscious. Understand, there is some irony in the novel here, because, though the narrator is "conscious", there are many things about himself he cannot see. That may be Dost.'s point. The question still strikes me as interesting. What does it mean to be intellegent?
2. Free will--In the first part of the book, the narrator strives to make the point that men do what they want to do. There is no overriding principle that makes men do what they do. He argues against the position that men do what is good for them. They merely do what they want. What is it that makes me do what they do? I believe that man has a completely free will, and that is chooses to do everything he does. He may do many things out of habit. He may do many things without being aware of the motivation. Yet he always to chooses to act. Now, what makes him choose what he chooses, which may be the real question? Jonathan Edwards said that the will always is as the greatest apparent good is. This seems to be the best description of the will. Seldom is what seems good for us truly good for us. We do stupid things frequently. This is one aspect of the novel. The narrator seems unable to do many of the things he wants to do. He wants to bump in to the soldier, and yet he doesn't. He wants to tell his friends what he really thinks, and yet he doesn't. What is it that determines our will? Unfortunately, I have no answer.
Hopefully, I will have more remarks as I ponder on the novel more. To be continued . . .
Notes is a fascinating look at a disgusting individual. I think the narrator of Notes is so disgusting because we are so much like him. At least, I am at times so much like him. Many of the narrator's thoughts are often my thoughts. Someone said the "I" in the story is all of us. I have a few diverse thoughts that came directly and indirectly from the book.
1. Consciousness v. intellegence--The narrator talks at times about being a conscious individual. He talks at others times about being an intellegent individual. Are these different words for the same state? Is being conscious the same as being intellegent? Is intellegence simply a more acute consciousness of yourself and your surroundings? I think it is. Most people we call intellegent are just aware of most everything. It is not capability. Some people are capable of retaining knowledge, but are not intellegent. It is not being knowledgeable. Many people are knowledgeable idiots. The narrator is very knowledeable. He is most likely very capable. But he is mostly just conscious. Understand, there is some irony in the novel here, because, though the narrator is "conscious", there are many things about himself he cannot see. That may be Dost.'s point. The question still strikes me as interesting. What does it mean to be intellegent?
2. Free will--In the first part of the book, the narrator strives to make the point that men do what they want to do. There is no overriding principle that makes men do what they do. He argues against the position that men do what is good for them. They merely do what they want. What is it that makes me do what they do? I believe that man has a completely free will, and that is chooses to do everything he does. He may do many things out of habit. He may do many things without being aware of the motivation. Yet he always to chooses to act. Now, what makes him choose what he chooses, which may be the real question? Jonathan Edwards said that the will always is as the greatest apparent good is. This seems to be the best description of the will. Seldom is what seems good for us truly good for us. We do stupid things frequently. This is one aspect of the novel. The narrator seems unable to do many of the things he wants to do. He wants to bump in to the soldier, and yet he doesn't. He wants to tell his friends what he really thinks, and yet he doesn't. What is it that determines our will? Unfortunately, I have no answer.
Hopefully, I will have more remarks as I ponder on the novel more. To be continued . . .
Thursday, March 17, 2005
It is not too late
I need to change some of my picks for the Madness. After making these picks I realized a couple of things.
First of all, I had no Number 1 seed advancing to the Final-4. I don't believe there has ever been a time when no No.1 seeds advanced. I doubt this year will be the first.
Secondly, I believe I underestimated two teams, Duke and UNC. They are both very good teams. I still believe that UNC struggles with maturity, and this will affect them when they get deep in the tourney. But they will make the Final-4. I almost wish, for Roy Williams' sake, that they didn't. If they make it to the F-4 they will be expected to win. If he doesn't, that is just more hearbreak for him. Duke is a great team. They only have 5 losses this season. One was to Virginia Tech at VA Tech, and VA Tech played their best game all year. They couldn't miss, and Duke couldn't make anything. That loss was a fluke. They lost to Maryland at Cameron. They just played a poor game, and Maryland played well. They lost to Maryland at College Park. The game went into overtime. Duke might have won had not 5 players fouled out. Duke lost a close game to Wake Forest at Wake Forest. They lost by 3 points. Redick kept them close and almost tied the game at the last second. They lost a close game to UNC at Chapel Hill. They were up towards the end. UNC's last basket came off a tremendously athletic offensive rebound. Redick had a chance to win, but missed. So they have no really bad losses. They have many great wins--GA Tech thrice, NC State twice, Wake Forest, UNC, Michigan State. They won the ACC Tourney. Coach K. has them playing very good. Sean Dockery will be back for the tournament. They are going to beat Syracuse. I think they will make it to the F-4 if not the championship game. Go Duke.
First of all, I had no Number 1 seed advancing to the Final-4. I don't believe there has ever been a time when no No.1 seeds advanced. I doubt this year will be the first.
Secondly, I believe I underestimated two teams, Duke and UNC. They are both very good teams. I still believe that UNC struggles with maturity, and this will affect them when they get deep in the tourney. But they will make the Final-4. I almost wish, for Roy Williams' sake, that they didn't. If they make it to the F-4 they will be expected to win. If he doesn't, that is just more hearbreak for him. Duke is a great team. They only have 5 losses this season. One was to Virginia Tech at VA Tech, and VA Tech played their best game all year. They couldn't miss, and Duke couldn't make anything. That loss was a fluke. They lost to Maryland at Cameron. They just played a poor game, and Maryland played well. They lost to Maryland at College Park. The game went into overtime. Duke might have won had not 5 players fouled out. Duke lost a close game to Wake Forest at Wake Forest. They lost by 3 points. Redick kept them close and almost tied the game at the last second. They lost a close game to UNC at Chapel Hill. They were up towards the end. UNC's last basket came off a tremendously athletic offensive rebound. Redick had a chance to win, but missed. So they have no really bad losses. They have many great wins--GA Tech thrice, NC State twice, Wake Forest, UNC, Michigan State. They won the ACC Tourney. Coach K. has them playing very good. Sean Dockery will be back for the tournament. They are going to beat Syracuse. I think they will make it to the F-4 if not the championship game. Go Duke.
Wednesday, March 16, 2005
Movies that actually are good
I didn't realize until halfway through this list of the "105 Best Movies of All Time" that the author, Semicolon, was a lady. This would explain why some of the films that are on the list are on the list, and why some of the films that are not on the list are not on the list. I can appreciate her taste. Yet I cannot agree with her on many choices--most notably Pirates of the Caribbean. I didn't like this movie. I can watch some films for the sole purpose of entertainment, but most movies need to have much more. This movie had nothing. Behind the fluff was cardboard. I personally found it excruciatingly shallow, and simplistic. I recently watched the movie Hero. This wasn't a great movie. It did seek to be more than simply a martial arts flick. It did have some fantastic fight seqences with amazing choreography and cinematography. I enjoyed this movie, even with the subtitles.
Let me now remind you of some "guy movies" that are certainly great films. Ever hear of The Godfather? This isn't entirely a guy's movie--my wife liked this film. I personally liked The Godfather, Part II more. The scene where Fredo is killed is one of the most ironically beautiful scenes ever. While speaking of mobster films, let me mention Goodfellas. This is a harsh, violent, melodic film. It is hard to watch, with all the language and blood, yet it is difficult to stop watching it. It is so compelling. The characters draw you completely into the story. Another great Scorsese film is Raging Bull. This might be my favorite. Never has there been a more brutally beautiful film than this. It is dark and tragic. It is a masterpiece. Another dark and tragic masterpiece is Unforgiven. This is a complicated film. Few modern directors utilize shadows as effectively as Eastwood. Gene Hackman gives one of the strongest supporting roles in recent years. None of these films will find a place on many "Chick Flick" lists, but they are great films.
If we go back a few years, we find a film named Citizen Kane. How any film lover can leave this off their list is beyond me. This is the greatest film ever made. I love every scene of this film. I love the deep focus techniques. I love the screenplay, the dialogue, the characters, the sets, the cinematography. I love this film. Although I nearly prefer another Orson Welles' film, Touch of Evil. This is a powerful character study. I am not fond of Charlton Heston. He is somewhat misplaced, though effective, in this film. By far the greatest opening shot to any movie.
Surely we cannot avoid one of the greatest epic films of all time, Lawrence of Arabia. Semicolon mentioned Bridge on the River Kwai, which is a great film. I think that Lawrence is better. I could almost watch this movie without any sound. The scenery is breathtaking.
Let me introduce a few foreign films. We begin with Seven Samuri. It is long, and subtitled. Yet it remains a great action film. Another great film by Akira Kurosawa is Ran, made in the early 80s. This is a gorgeous film. This is one of the most tragic movies I have ever scene. The final scene is a tremendous.
I will leave the list at that for right now.
Let me now remind you of some "guy movies" that are certainly great films. Ever hear of The Godfather? This isn't entirely a guy's movie--my wife liked this film. I personally liked The Godfather, Part II more. The scene where Fredo is killed is one of the most ironically beautiful scenes ever. While speaking of mobster films, let me mention Goodfellas. This is a harsh, violent, melodic film. It is hard to watch, with all the language and blood, yet it is difficult to stop watching it. It is so compelling. The characters draw you completely into the story. Another great Scorsese film is Raging Bull. This might be my favorite. Never has there been a more brutally beautiful film than this. It is dark and tragic. It is a masterpiece. Another dark and tragic masterpiece is Unforgiven. This is a complicated film. Few modern directors utilize shadows as effectively as Eastwood. Gene Hackman gives one of the strongest supporting roles in recent years. None of these films will find a place on many "Chick Flick" lists, but they are great films.
If we go back a few years, we find a film named Citizen Kane. How any film lover can leave this off their list is beyond me. This is the greatest film ever made. I love every scene of this film. I love the deep focus techniques. I love the screenplay, the dialogue, the characters, the sets, the cinematography. I love this film. Although I nearly prefer another Orson Welles' film, Touch of Evil. This is a powerful character study. I am not fond of Charlton Heston. He is somewhat misplaced, though effective, in this film. By far the greatest opening shot to any movie.
Surely we cannot avoid one of the greatest epic films of all time, Lawrence of Arabia. Semicolon mentioned Bridge on the River Kwai, which is a great film. I think that Lawrence is better. I could almost watch this movie without any sound. The scenery is breathtaking.
Let me introduce a few foreign films. We begin with Seven Samuri. It is long, and subtitled. Yet it remains a great action film. Another great film by Akira Kurosawa is Ran, made in the early 80s. This is a gorgeous film. This is one of the most tragic movies I have ever scene. The final scene is a tremendous.
I will leave the list at that for right now.
Christian Carnival--3.15.05
Go see this week's Christian Carnival:
"The 61st Edition of the Christian Carnival is being hosted here this week. I decided to break the posts up into several categories. In some cases posts could have fit in various categories so I placed them either where I thought they best fit, or to balance out the groupings."
Tuesday, March 15, 2005
Meditations on the Madness
I love college basketball. There is no greater sport in America. I enjoy the exciting pre-season match-ups. I delight in conference play. The conference tournaments are like cheesecake after a steak dinner. And nothing in sports compares to March Madness.
I believe that the "analysts" at ESPN don't know squat. Digger Phelps said Syracuse would beat Duke because Boeheim is a great tournament coach. What?!! What happened to Coach K? Since when did he become a second-class tourney coach? Syracuse is a great team, and they could very well defeat Duke if they meet in the Sweet-16. Syracuse first needs to get passed Vermont, which will not be easy. Duke's 3-point shooting will do a number on the dreaded 2-3 zone. My pick is Duke. I do have them loosing to Kentucky in the Regional Final, and match-up I am really wanting to see. That will be a great game.
I have not heard any analysts talk about Eddie Sutton. This is probably his last legitimate chance to win the National Title. He will retire in a year or two. Ok. State is loosing 7 quality players, all of whom were in the Final Four last year. They are my pick to win it all. I think they are stronger and tougher than the great Illinois team. Ill is strong, but I don't think they can match the Pokes.
I am picking Gonzaga to go to the Final Four. They will get past Wake Forest. WF is good, but they struggle on defense, and the Zags have a great, powerful offense. WF is smooth, but I think the Zags will out-power them.
I had picked UNC to win it all, but after watching them many times this season, I don't think they will. They are too immature. They get too frustrated too easily. They are too dependent on the play of their guards. If they meet UConn in the Regional Final, which I think they will, they will not outlast them this time. Incidentally, the "analysts" at ESPN have been talking recently on how well the Huskies (UConn) have been playing. Then they say they will loose because they don't have a back-up point guard. Marcus Williams is leading the country in assists. I believe he can take the Huskies to their second consecutive Final Four without a back-up. I still would like to see a UNC-Kansas match-up in the Regional Final. KU needs Keith Langford healthy, though. Even still, I don't know if they can get past UConn.
I think Louisville will do well. I think they can beat Washington (a very good team), but I don't think they will get by Gonzaga.
Let me summarize my picks:
Elite-8: Illinois, Oklahoma State, Louisville, Gonzaga, UNC, UConn, Duke, and Ketucky.
Final-4: Ok.St., Gonzaga, UConn, and Kentucky
Championship: Ok.St. and Kent.
National Champions: Oklahoma State
Tourney MVP: John Lucas.
Not too far from my picks in January.
I believe that the "analysts" at ESPN don't know squat. Digger Phelps said Syracuse would beat Duke because Boeheim is a great tournament coach. What?!! What happened to Coach K? Since when did he become a second-class tourney coach? Syracuse is a great team, and they could very well defeat Duke if they meet in the Sweet-16. Syracuse first needs to get passed Vermont, which will not be easy. Duke's 3-point shooting will do a number on the dreaded 2-3 zone. My pick is Duke. I do have them loosing to Kentucky in the Regional Final, and match-up I am really wanting to see. That will be a great game.
I have not heard any analysts talk about Eddie Sutton. This is probably his last legitimate chance to win the National Title. He will retire in a year or two. Ok. State is loosing 7 quality players, all of whom were in the Final Four last year. They are my pick to win it all. I think they are stronger and tougher than the great Illinois team. Ill is strong, but I don't think they can match the Pokes.
I am picking Gonzaga to go to the Final Four. They will get past Wake Forest. WF is good, but they struggle on defense, and the Zags have a great, powerful offense. WF is smooth, but I think the Zags will out-power them.
I had picked UNC to win it all, but after watching them many times this season, I don't think they will. They are too immature. They get too frustrated too easily. They are too dependent on the play of their guards. If they meet UConn in the Regional Final, which I think they will, they will not outlast them this time. Incidentally, the "analysts" at ESPN have been talking recently on how well the Huskies (UConn) have been playing. Then they say they will loose because they don't have a back-up point guard. Marcus Williams is leading the country in assists. I believe he can take the Huskies to their second consecutive Final Four without a back-up. I still would like to see a UNC-Kansas match-up in the Regional Final. KU needs Keith Langford healthy, though. Even still, I don't know if they can get past UConn.
I think Louisville will do well. I think they can beat Washington (a very good team), but I don't think they will get by Gonzaga.
Let me summarize my picks:
Elite-8: Illinois, Oklahoma State, Louisville, Gonzaga, UNC, UConn, Duke, and Ketucky.
Final-4: Ok.St., Gonzaga, UConn, and Kentucky
Championship: Ok.St. and Kent.
National Champions: Oklahoma State
Tourney MVP: John Lucas.
Not too far from my picks in January.
Friday, March 11, 2005
Aesthetics: The Intro
What is a poet? An unhappy man who conceals profound anguish in his heart, but whose lips are so fashioned that when sighs and groans pass over them they sound like beautiful music. His fate resembles that of the unhappy men who were slowly roasted by a gentle fire in the tyrant Phalaris' bull—their shrieks could not reach his ear to terrify him, to him they sounded like sweet music. And people flock about the poet and say to him: do sing again; Which means, would that new sufferings tormented your soul, and: would that your lips stayed fashioned as before, for your cries would only terrify us, but your music is delightful. And the critics join them, saying: well done, thus must it be according to the laws of aesthetics. Why, to be sure, a critic resembles a poet as one pea another, the only difference being that he has no anguish in his heart and no music on his lips. Behold, therefore would I rather be a swineherd on Amager, and be understood by the swine than a poet, and misunderstood by men.
This quote comes from Soren Kierkegaard's work, Either/Or. It is from a section of that work named "Diapslmata." That quote has always haunted me. It provokes me to think about the meaning of beauty. I am sure many people have written books and essays on Christian aesthetics. I have not read many of these, however, and am not very familiar with many perspectives on aesthetics. That being said, I have begun to formulate a philosophy of Christian aesthetics. I want to be able to define and describe what beauty means for a Christian. Kierkegaard is an excellent resource in this field. The book I mentioned above discusses many aspects of beauty. One of K's main teachings is his "spheres of existence." The first of those spheres, or stages, is the esthetic stage. This stage is much more than what is commonly indicated by esthetics. It involves living in the moment. It involves an emotional, accidental perspective on the universe. But it does contain many descriptions of beauty. I have not read anyone who could eludicate on beauty as poetically as K. He is a master. One of the most astounding passages I have ever read is "The Banquet" from Stages on Life's Way.
I have formulated some beginning principles on beauty, which may or may be tenable.
1. Beauty is a reflection of God.
2. Beauty is transcendant.
3. Beauty is illogical.
4. Beauty exists in context.
5. Beauty is contrast.
6. Pain is the absense of beauty.
7. There is a false beauty.
I hope to add more. I hope to expand on these basic principles. I hope to find what true beauty is.
Tuesday, March 8, 2005
Berry on relationships
I have not seen or heard anyone who has a stronger grasp on relationships than Dave Berry:
"Of course, as a professional journalist, I would never resort to psychological trickery (Gary! Marry Suzanne!). But I do think we need to explore the commitment problem, which has caused many women to mistakenly conclude that men, as a group, have the emotional maturity of hamsters. This is not the case. A hamster is much more capable of making a lasting commitment to a woman, especially if she gives it those little food pellets. Whereas a guy, in a relationship, will consume the pellets of companionship, and he will run on the exercise wheel of lust; but as soon as he senses that the door of commitment is about to close and trap him in the wire cage of true intimacy, he'll squirm out, scamper across the kitchen floor of uncertainty and hide under the refrigerator of Non-Readiness."
Monday, March 7, 2005
Some cure
I doubt England will regret passing comprehensive gun bans, but they should:
God bless those jolly ol' chaps.
"In a pattern that's repeated itself in Canada and Australia, violent crime has continued to go up in Great Britain despite a complete ban on handguns, most rifles and many shotguns. The broad ban that went into effect in 1997 was trumpeted by the British government as a cure for violent crime. The cure has proven to be much worse than the disease."
God bless those jolly ol' chaps.
Political insanity
Welcome to Muffinville, where morons are kings and the national pastime is sophistry:
In other words, sane people know that personal accounts are a horrible plan. Only Republican hacks support the President's crazy plans. Keep up the good work, Ms. Pelosi.
"Also on Sunday, House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi said on Fox that because of Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan's support of personal accounts, some people 'have seriously questioned the independence of the Fed.' She declined to say whether she would describe Greenspan as a 'political hack,' as Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid did last week."
In other words, sane people know that personal accounts are a horrible plan. Only Republican hacks support the President's crazy plans. Keep up the good work, Ms. Pelosi.
Apathy
Martha Stewart
Michael Jackson
Robert Blake
Scott Peterson
Donald Trump
Ashlee Simpson
Jessica Simpson
Barry Bonds
Brad Pitt
Jennifer Anniston
What do these people have in common? I do not care what these people do. I do not care to know what these people are involved in. I do not want to hear their names. I do not want to hear the most current updates on these people. This is the only time I plan on mentioning these people. I could add others to the list, but I feel the list is sufficient.
What these people do is insignificant. Why should we pay attention to these people and what they do, and meanwhile ignore the many people that are doing worthwhile tasks? Why do we have to have news broadcasts and television shows dedicated to these average human beings? Why do we have to report the munutiae of these people's existence? What possible good could knowing these people's eating habits do for America? What are we going to remember of these people in 50 years? in 20 years? in 10 years? in 1 year? These people are not captivating. They are not interesting. They are not special in any historical context. They are people, no better or worse than any other person. Leave them be, and let us live our lives without incessantly hearing what type of shoes some person just purchased.
Michael Jackson
Robert Blake
Scott Peterson
Donald Trump
Ashlee Simpson
Jessica Simpson
Barry Bonds
Brad Pitt
Jennifer Anniston
What do these people have in common? I do not care what these people do. I do not care to know what these people are involved in. I do not want to hear their names. I do not want to hear the most current updates on these people. This is the only time I plan on mentioning these people. I could add others to the list, but I feel the list is sufficient.
What these people do is insignificant. Why should we pay attention to these people and what they do, and meanwhile ignore the many people that are doing worthwhile tasks? Why do we have to have news broadcasts and television shows dedicated to these average human beings? Why do we have to report the munutiae of these people's existence? What possible good could knowing these people's eating habits do for America? What are we going to remember of these people in 50 years? in 20 years? in 10 years? in 1 year? These people are not captivating. They are not interesting. They are not special in any historical context. They are people, no better or worse than any other person. Leave them be, and let us live our lives without incessantly hearing what type of shoes some person just purchased.
The Eclectic Reader, 3.07.2005--College Basketball
Illinois--
Illinois was beaten for the very first time this season. Ohio State beat them by one point in the last regular season game. Illinois is a very good team. They are one of the best in the country, if not the best. Their RPI rank is number 2, with a Strength of Schedule rank of 80. They have had some huge wins this season, 29 of them in fact. They beat Wisconsin twice, in one of them ending Wisconsin's 38 game home win streak. They have defeated Michigan State twice. They defeated both Wake Forest and Gonzaga, two top ten teams. I don't think the national polls mean much, but if they are to mean anything, then the Illini should remain number 1. I think they deserve to remain at the top spot. Ohio State is a good team. They are 19-11 overall, and 8-8 in conference. They RPI rank is 55 with a Strength of Schedule rank of 60. I had thought that if Illinois was to be beaten, it would be by a good team, but not a strong, nationally recognized team. Illinois deserves to be number 1 in both polls, and they deserve to be number 1 overall in the tournament.
Duke and UNC--
What a game last night! Unquestionably the greatest rivalry in any sport. UNC defeated Duke 75-73. I am somewhat upset that Duke lost. I always want to see them win. They did much better than I thought they would do, so that makes me happy. At least they lost at Chapel Hill. Sean May had a monster game, 26 points and 24 rebounds. Redick scored 17 points, and yet he didn't score the last 25 minutes of the game. He did have 6 assists. Sheldon Williams was great with 22 points and 6 blocks. The ACC tournament begins this Thursday, and should be a thriller. I hope Duke does well. I would love to see them win, though it will be difficult for them. I want to see them receive a high seed in the NCAA tourney. I am hoping for at least a 3 seed, which they should get. They have a RPI of 3 with a Strength of Schedule of 11. Those are pretty good numbers. They might even receive a 1 seed if they win the ACC tourney.
BTW: Does anyone know the last time Duke was not ranked in the top ten in the national polls?
John Cheney--
What has happened with John Cheney is a shame. What he did was a shame. I imagine he knows what he did was wrong, and I imagine he feels truly sorry for it. There is no excuse for his actions. A coach has the duty to keep his players and the other team's players safe. I know it is very difficult for a coach to deal with a game that is loosely or tightly officiated. It is very frustrating, and it is easy to retaliate. Coaches should never do this, and they ought to be held accountable when they do. The question is, how much should they be punished? John Cheney is an excellent coach. By the end of the 2003-2004 season, he was number 20 on the all-time win list with 708. He had a win percentage of .714. He has done as much for basketball as any other coach in recent years. He has done so much for his players. He is a mentor and a inspiration. I believe he is a great man. He has made many mistakes. Should those mistakes erase years of quality, honorable leadership? I don't think so. I am a big fan of Bobby Knight. He too has made many mistakes. He should never have done many of the things he did. He too is a mentor and an inspiration. You would be hard pressed to find a player that has been under these coaches that do not admire and respect these men. Most players are better men because of the "life-coaching" of Cheney and Knight. They are not perfect, and we should never gloss over these blemishes. We should look at their lifetime of achievement, and understand all men make mistakes.
Illinois was beaten for the very first time this season. Ohio State beat them by one point in the last regular season game. Illinois is a very good team. They are one of the best in the country, if not the best. Their RPI rank is number 2, with a Strength of Schedule rank of 80. They have had some huge wins this season, 29 of them in fact. They beat Wisconsin twice, in one of them ending Wisconsin's 38 game home win streak. They have defeated Michigan State twice. They defeated both Wake Forest and Gonzaga, two top ten teams. I don't think the national polls mean much, but if they are to mean anything, then the Illini should remain number 1. I think they deserve to remain at the top spot. Ohio State is a good team. They are 19-11 overall, and 8-8 in conference. They RPI rank is 55 with a Strength of Schedule rank of 60. I had thought that if Illinois was to be beaten, it would be by a good team, but not a strong, nationally recognized team. Illinois deserves to be number 1 in both polls, and they deserve to be number 1 overall in the tournament.
Duke and UNC--
What a game last night! Unquestionably the greatest rivalry in any sport. UNC defeated Duke 75-73. I am somewhat upset that Duke lost. I always want to see them win. They did much better than I thought they would do, so that makes me happy. At least they lost at Chapel Hill. Sean May had a monster game, 26 points and 24 rebounds. Redick scored 17 points, and yet he didn't score the last 25 minutes of the game. He did have 6 assists. Sheldon Williams was great with 22 points and 6 blocks. The ACC tournament begins this Thursday, and should be a thriller. I hope Duke does well. I would love to see them win, though it will be difficult for them. I want to see them receive a high seed in the NCAA tourney. I am hoping for at least a 3 seed, which they should get. They have a RPI of 3 with a Strength of Schedule of 11. Those are pretty good numbers. They might even receive a 1 seed if they win the ACC tourney.
BTW: Does anyone know the last time Duke was not ranked in the top ten in the national polls?
John Cheney--
What has happened with John Cheney is a shame. What he did was a shame. I imagine he knows what he did was wrong, and I imagine he feels truly sorry for it. There is no excuse for his actions. A coach has the duty to keep his players and the other team's players safe. I know it is very difficult for a coach to deal with a game that is loosely or tightly officiated. It is very frustrating, and it is easy to retaliate. Coaches should never do this, and they ought to be held accountable when they do. The question is, how much should they be punished? John Cheney is an excellent coach. By the end of the 2003-2004 season, he was number 20 on the all-time win list with 708. He had a win percentage of .714. He has done as much for basketball as any other coach in recent years. He has done so much for his players. He is a mentor and a inspiration. I believe he is a great man. He has made many mistakes. Should those mistakes erase years of quality, honorable leadership? I don't think so. I am a big fan of Bobby Knight. He too has made many mistakes. He should never have done many of the things he did. He too is a mentor and an inspiration. You would be hard pressed to find a player that has been under these coaches that do not admire and respect these men. Most players are better men because of the "life-coaching" of Cheney and Knight. They are not perfect, and we should never gloss over these blemishes. We should look at their lifetime of achievement, and understand all men make mistakes.
Wednesday, March 2, 2005
The Christian Carnival--3.02.2005
I am not a fan of Soap Operas, yet I encourage you to check out this weeks The Christian Carnival:
"I have always been fascinated by soap operas, those afternoon dramas of angst. So, I thought it might be a bit of fun to classify the posts under the program of which they reminded me."
Tuesday, March 1, 2005
Doctor dog
Dave Berry reminds us why we shouldn't make doctors out of dogs:
"If you know anything about dogs, you know how Refrigerator spent his recuperation period: He licked himself pretty much full time. Dogs are very big believers in the healing power of licking. If dogs operated a hospital, here's how it would work: A patient would arrive in the Emergency Room, and a team of doctor dogs would gather around to conduct an examination, which would consist of thoroughly sniffing the patient. (They would also sniff the floor, in case anybody had left food lying around.)
Then, the doctor dogs would hold a conference, and whatever the patient's symptoms were -- coughing, lack of pulse, a spear passing all the way through the patient's head -- the doctor dogs would agree that the best course of treatment was: licking. And we're talking about a LOT of licking. Not just the patient licking himself or herself, but also the doctors licking the patient, licking themselves, and licking the other doctors. This is state-of-the-art medical care for dogs."
Friday, February 25, 2005
Krauthammer on Israel
There are few columnists that are as knowlegeable and insightful on Israel as Charles Krauthammer. In his recent column, he partially agrees with my assertion that Sharon deserves much credit for what he has done in the Mid-East:
"Why did Ariel Sharon do this? Did the father of the settlement movement go soft? Defeatist? No. The Israeli right has grown up and given up the false dream of Greater Israel, encompassing the Palestinian territories. And the Israeli left has grown up too, being mugged by the intifada into understanding that you do not trust the lives of your children to the word of an enemy bent on your destruction.
For now, you trust only the defensive fence and the deterrent power of the Israeli army. Sharon is no dreamer like Yitzhak Rabin and Shimon Peres, who bargained away land for a piece of paper. Sharon, like any good general -- and he was a great general -- is giving up land for a stable defensive line.
Everyone wants peace, but Sharon's real obsession is terrorism. From his days as a young commando in the 1950s, he has been a fanatic about fighting terrorism. Take away the terror weapon and everything else follows: safety, stability and the conditions for a final peace. A peace based not on the good will of a Sharon or a Mahmoud Abbas but on the new reality on the ground: separate nations delineated by a temporary barrier to produce a temporary peace -- and the possibility of a final one."
Don't mess with us
For the first time in history, Canada is using semi-harsh rhetoric:
PM Martin has also promised that, if we do fire a missile over Canada, he will send all 12 members of the Air Force, armed with "the absolute best compound bows Canadian dollors can buy" to shoot down the intruder. He is really serious about not wanting to be protected should a nuclear missile find its way to the Great Northern Blight. "As a sovereign nation, we have a right to choose nuclear winter to the more politically objectionable missile defense.
BTW: I am fine with Canadians. My soon-to-be brother-in-law is Canadian. Yet, I find Canadian politicians amusing.
Ottawa — Prime Minister Paul Martin is insisting that United States seek permission before firing any missiles over Canada.
The insistence came Friday in response to warnings that Canada has abdicated part of its sovereignty by refusing to take part in the U.S. missile-defence project.
PM Martin has also promised that, if we do fire a missile over Canada, he will send all 12 members of the Air Force, armed with "the absolute best compound bows Canadian dollors can buy" to shoot down the intruder. He is really serious about not wanting to be protected should a nuclear missile find its way to the Great Northern Blight. "As a sovereign nation, we have a right to choose nuclear winter to the more politically objectionable missile defense.
BTW: I am fine with Canadians. My soon-to-be brother-in-law is Canadian. Yet, I find Canadian politicians amusing.
Thursday, February 24, 2005
How do we witness?
Any Christian that is worth their salt knows that they are to be salt. He knows that the primary function of a Christian is to "Go and teach." Though most agree on the goal, few agree on the method. Stones Cry Out has a post discussing Korn and P.O.D. One of the members of the rock group Korn has abdicated for personal reasons. In the post, Rick discusses P.O.D.'s love for the Lord. Another blog, Ryan comments, "Let us thank God that he can work through a band like P.O.D. who is popular but has not abandoned God. This is the witness we need to be. We shouldn't shun away from sinners because how can they be reached in a vacuum without God fearing people?"
Though we may not agree on the best methods, we can agree that there are wrong methods. I doubt anyone would propose handing out tracks at a strip club, or placing Bible verses in a Playboy. To become a drug addict to reach drug addicts is a bridge too far. There are methods that are obviously inherently wrong. The question is, where is the line. At what point are Christians wrong and sinful in their methods? Is there a point we actually do more harm than help? If we present people an anesthetized form of the gospel in a secular wrapper, arewe fulling the mandate of "teaching all nations all things whatsoever I have commanded you"?
I am not a fan of P.O.D.'s music. It is loud and obnoxious. That being said, I don't have as much of a problem with their style as with their philosophy. I see them as disguising themselves as the world in order to reach the world. Their purposes are noble, and they presumably are successful at times. We cannot measure the legitimacy of a method by intention or effectiveness. I could reach many people by posting Scripture on a porn site. I may even reach a few people. None of that makes the method Biblically legit. I will not contest whether or not P.O.D. love the Lord, and seek to do His will. Only they can know that. We can only accept what they say.
We need to recongnize the difference between evangelism and entertainment. What may be acceptable for Christians for entertainment may not be acceptable for Christains for evangelism. I can enjoy and be enlightened by a movie that contains violence, foul language, and drug use. I may not be justified in using foul language and drug use to witness to a sailor. The music that P.O.D. plays may not be wrong as entertainment for Christians. But that is not what P.O.D. intends it for. They intend it to be for evangelism. That is why they tour with secular, hard-rock groups.
How should we witness? What should be our methods? What is right and what is wrong? God can work through any method. But that doesn't mean he approves of any method.
Though we may not agree on the best methods, we can agree that there are wrong methods. I doubt anyone would propose handing out tracks at a strip club, or placing Bible verses in a Playboy. To become a drug addict to reach drug addicts is a bridge too far. There are methods that are obviously inherently wrong. The question is, where is the line. At what point are Christians wrong and sinful in their methods? Is there a point we actually do more harm than help? If we present people an anesthetized form of the gospel in a secular wrapper, arewe fulling the mandate of "teaching all nations all things whatsoever I have commanded you"?
I am not a fan of P.O.D.'s music. It is loud and obnoxious. That being said, I don't have as much of a problem with their style as with their philosophy. I see them as disguising themselves as the world in order to reach the world. Their purposes are noble, and they presumably are successful at times. We cannot measure the legitimacy of a method by intention or effectiveness. I could reach many people by posting Scripture on a porn site. I may even reach a few people. None of that makes the method Biblically legit. I will not contest whether or not P.O.D. love the Lord, and seek to do His will. Only they can know that. We can only accept what they say.
We need to recongnize the difference between evangelism and entertainment. What may be acceptable for Christians for entertainment may not be acceptable for Christains for evangelism. I can enjoy and be enlightened by a movie that contains violence, foul language, and drug use. I may not be justified in using foul language and drug use to witness to a sailor. The music that P.O.D. plays may not be wrong as entertainment for Christians. But that is not what P.O.D. intends it for. They intend it to be for evangelism. That is why they tour with secular, hard-rock groups.
How should we witness? What should be our methods? What is right and what is wrong? God can work through any method. But that doesn't mean he approves of any method.
The Ponitff is ailing
The Pontiff is ailing:
I am not a Catholic. I consider much of Catholic Dogma to be errant. Yet, Pope John Paul II is a noble person who has done much good for our world. All Christians, Protestant or Catholic, should be praying for him. I am not at all aware the Church's hierarchy, so I do not know who would most likely replace the Pope. What I wonder is, will the new Pope take the rather strong moral stand the current Pope has taken? John Paul has taken a stand against pre-marital sex, homosexual marriage, cloning, and other prescient issues. He has been a strong force for traditional values. If the next pontiff isn't as strong morally, what will this mean for our world? Not that this John Paul is keeping the world from sliding completely into decadence, but he does seem to be a deterant. This could be an issue all Christians ought to be aware of.
VATICAN CITY Feb 24, 2005 — Pope John Paul II was rushed to the hospital in an ambulance for the second time in a month Thursday after suffering fever and congestion from a recurrence of the flu, the Vatican said.
I am not a Catholic. I consider much of Catholic Dogma to be errant. Yet, Pope John Paul II is a noble person who has done much good for our world. All Christians, Protestant or Catholic, should be praying for him. I am not at all aware the Church's hierarchy, so I do not know who would most likely replace the Pope. What I wonder is, will the new Pope take the rather strong moral stand the current Pope has taken? John Paul has taken a stand against pre-marital sex, homosexual marriage, cloning, and other prescient issues. He has been a strong force for traditional values. If the next pontiff isn't as strong morally, what will this mean for our world? Not that this John Paul is keeping the world from sliding completely into decadence, but he does seem to be a deterant. This could be an issue all Christians ought to be aware of.
Wednesday, February 23, 2005
The Sound of Silence
Hello darkness, my old friend,
I’ve come to talk with you again,
Because a vision softly creeping,
Left it’s seeds while I was sleeping,
And the vision that was planted in my brain
Still remains
Within the sound of silence.
In restless dreams I walked alone
Narrow streets of cobblestone,
’neath the halo of a street lamp,
I turned my collar to the cold and damp
When my eyes were stabbed by the flash of
A neon light
That split the night
And touched the sound of silence.
And in the naked light I saw
Ten thousand people, maybe more.
People talking without speaking,
People hearing without listening,
People writing songs that voices never share
And no one deared
Disturb the sound of silence.
Fools said i,you do not know
Silence like a cancer grows.
Hear my words that I might teach you,
Take my arms that I might reach you.
But my words like silent raindrops fell,
And echoed
In the wells of silence
And the people bowed and prayed
To the neon God they made.
And the sign flashed out it’s warning,
In the words that it was forming.
And the signs said, the words of the prophets
Are written on the subway walls
And tenement halls.
And whisper’d in the sounds of silence.
The Sound of Silence
Simon and Garfunkle
I’ve come to talk with you again,
Because a vision softly creeping,
Left it’s seeds while I was sleeping,
And the vision that was planted in my brain
Still remains
Within the sound of silence.
In restless dreams I walked alone
Narrow streets of cobblestone,
’neath the halo of a street lamp,
I turned my collar to the cold and damp
When my eyes were stabbed by the flash of
A neon light
That split the night
And touched the sound of silence.
And in the naked light I saw
Ten thousand people, maybe more.
People talking without speaking,
People hearing without listening,
People writing songs that voices never share
And no one deared
Disturb the sound of silence.
Fools said i,you do not know
Silence like a cancer grows.
Hear my words that I might teach you,
Take my arms that I might reach you.
But my words like silent raindrops fell,
And echoed
In the wells of silence
And the people bowed and prayed
To the neon God they made.
And the sign flashed out it’s warning,
In the words that it was forming.
And the signs said, the words of the prophets
Are written on the subway walls
And tenement halls.
And whisper’d in the sounds of silence.
The Sound of Silence
Simon and Garfunkle
J.J. Redick
Anyone who says that J.J. Redick is not one of the top 10 players in college basketball doesn't know squat. The way he is playing right now, I would put him in the top 5. I have said before that Daniel Ewing is the most important player on Duke, and I still think he is, though he has been down recently. I am not sure why. Coach K benched him at the start of the Wake game, to wake him up (pun not intended--yet I still point it out). He didn't have that great of a game. 13 points, 2 assists, 1 steal. Not too far off his average, but not good enough to lead the team. Meanwhile, Redick had 38 points (a career high), 1 assist, 1 steal. And he played 40 minutes. In the GA Tech game this night, Redick had 21 points, Ewing had 12. Ewing also received a technical foul for a really stupid decision--he taunted the other team after a dunk. I don't know what he is thinking. He is a senior and one of the leaders of the team. Redick has really taken over this team and done what needs to be done. His averages are impressive--23 ppg, over 40% FGs, including 3s. His defense is still not as good as Ewings, but he is making up for it with his hustle and his moxie. I haven't been able to find out yet, but I believe he played all 40 minutes tonight. He is playing the best basketball in at least the ACC right now. I hope he can continue. I also hope Ewing steps up and starts playing like a senior.
BTW: Tonight was a big win. Both GA Tech and Duke needed it. Thankfully, Duke took it. But barely.
BTW: Tonight was a big win. Both GA Tech and Duke needed it. Thankfully, Duke took it. But barely.
Cheaper iPods
Goodness me! Apple's iPod Minis are now $199! I do have a birthday coming up in a couple of weeks (7, to be exact).
Schiavo case
I came across this powerful letter regarding the Terry Schiavo case. It was written by a concerned citizen, not, apparently, a professional journalist:
Dory at Wittenburg Gate has done an excellent job at following this story. Check out her website and the round-ups she has.
This innocent and disabled woman who committed no crime, and had no jury, will be put to death by the most cruel and torturous process of starvation, which the Judge views as her “right to die” when there is no indication that this is true. Just because she had no living will, should the Judge err on the side of death? It is tough to write this, so I have taken off the gloves and decided to pour my heart out to you to try and convince you to take a closer look at the injustice being handed down by this court upon Terri Schindler Schiavo. I'm trying to save the life of an innocent woman. If you believe in God as I do, you will do everything in your power to help change this travesty of Justice because it is the right thing to do.
Dory at Wittenburg Gate has done an excellent job at following this story. Check out her website and the round-ups she has.
Tuesday, February 22, 2005
and the winner is . . .
. . . surprisingly, me. I won the "Spoiler Jeapordy" at Lean Left. I am excited. I never win these type of contests. I even loose the silly contests at my school's Christmas party, mainly because the questions are poorly written. I should note that many of the movies I have not seen, or fully seen, but was familiar enough with the plot to answer. If you would like to make some guesses, then read no further and go to the link for "Spoiler Jeapordy". If not, then here is my take on some of the more controversial answers.
#2 His mother. --The Manchurian Candidate.
I cannot believe I missed this one. I like the movie, and have seen it several times. I guess, as Keith notes, Blade, which I hate, and have not seen completely.
#3 Her penis. --M.Butterfly.
Keith said he none of the answers were obscure films. I am quite familiar with film, and I have not heard of this movie (how many people could name one film directed by David Cronenberg--not many). We should have received credit for Ace Ventura, as the "revelation" was quite unexpected. Then again, I won and shouldn't be complaining.
#9 He's not really dead. --The Third Man.
I should have guessed this one as well. This is one of my favorite movies. I considered submitting this answer, but thought it was too obscure. I didn't think many people were aware of it. If you haven't seen it, you should. The Ferris Wheel scene has some of the best dialogue in any movie ever.
#15. The dead man is the hero. --The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance.
I wasn't even close to guessing this one. I wouldn't have guessed 12 Monkeys, as Joe did, since there isn't really a hero in that movie. BTW: 12 Monkeys is one of the most intellegent, philosophical, and presumably accurate time-travel movies.
#16 & 17. He was on earth the whole time; They were on earth the whole time. --Total Recall & Planet of the Apes.
Total Recall? How Keith ever put this one in there I don't know. There is no point to that movie. At least, there is no perceiveable point. And I do not retract my "crying like a girl" statement--I have never been fond of Charlton, though I liked his character in Touch of Evil
#20 It's the wrong bird. --The Maltesse Falcon.
I am a sorry film fan, for I have not seen this movie, which is why I foolishly placed Gregory Peck in the lead role. Yet I was able to get it right. Trivia is about what you know, not what you have seen.
As you can see, I am a greatly flawed film fan. And yet, I will gladly accept the reward. I look forward to Keith's next contest.
#2 His mother. --The Manchurian Candidate.
I cannot believe I missed this one. I like the movie, and have seen it several times. I guess, as Keith notes, Blade, which I hate, and have not seen completely.
#3 Her penis. --M.Butterfly.
Keith said he none of the answers were obscure films. I am quite familiar with film, and I have not heard of this movie (how many people could name one film directed by David Cronenberg--not many). We should have received credit for Ace Ventura, as the "revelation" was quite unexpected. Then again, I won and shouldn't be complaining.
#9 He's not really dead. --The Third Man.
I should have guessed this one as well. This is one of my favorite movies. I considered submitting this answer, but thought it was too obscure. I didn't think many people were aware of it. If you haven't seen it, you should. The Ferris Wheel scene has some of the best dialogue in any movie ever.
#15. The dead man is the hero. --The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance.
I wasn't even close to guessing this one. I wouldn't have guessed 12 Monkeys, as Joe did, since there isn't really a hero in that movie. BTW: 12 Monkeys is one of the most intellegent, philosophical, and presumably accurate time-travel movies.
#16 & 17. He was on earth the whole time; They were on earth the whole time. --Total Recall & Planet of the Apes.
Total Recall? How Keith ever put this one in there I don't know. There is no point to that movie. At least, there is no perceiveable point. And I do not retract my "crying like a girl" statement--I have never been fond of Charlton, though I liked his character in Touch of Evil
#20 It's the wrong bird. --The Maltesse Falcon.
I am a sorry film fan, for I have not seen this movie, which is why I foolishly placed Gregory Peck in the lead role. Yet I was able to get it right. Trivia is about what you know, not what you have seen.
As you can see, I am a greatly flawed film fan. And yet, I will gladly accept the reward. I look forward to Keith's next contest.
Words matter
Michael Spencer at Internetmonk is always interesting and provocative. He writes a compelling article on the importance of Christian language:
We have anesthetized the teaching our churches. I don't think that language is the core problem. I think that the core problem is a lack of intellectualism. Young people today no longer think. They want to have ideas handled to them coated in chocolate. They do want to analyze anything. There are probably many reasons why this is so. Much of it has to do with the MTV-effect. MTV, and almost all of television, is pre-digested material. All the viewer has to do is swallow. No chewing. No cutting. Just enjoy. This has helped to produce an epedimic of laziness. I doubt that MTV is the sole purveyor of laziness. But it has done as much as anything else.
Our non-cognitive education system has added to the problem. We know longer teach kids logic, or latin, or rhetoric. In many schools, all kids have to do is smile and they pass. We no long do things the old fashion way, which is, in Alfred Hitchcock's words, to "earn it." Everything in life is handed to them. The primary skill kids learn in schools is how to build a stool out of toothpicks and marshmellows. Students are not expected to think, so they don't. We they arrive in the church, they expect the same courtesy, that of having the information fed to them. They expect to be entertained, which is what most of our schools major in.
I want my children to think. I hope I can get my kids interested in reading, and thinking. When I watch TV and movies with them, I want to analyze what we see and make a judgement. I want them to own their beliefs. I want them to come to ownership through work. I want them to take the difficult way of figuring problems out on their own. I don't know if I will succeed, since I am often intellectually lazy. But I will make the attempt, something most people never do.
"It occurs to me that it is no longer any news that Christians have abandoned the distinctive vocabulary of faith. I am not making a shocking announcement to say that in our attempt to become acceptable to the larger culture, we have surrendered the words that define our faith. Today, illustrations about squirrels, beavers and geese are expected to be our communication with the world. Christian music has adopted the vocabulary of romance. God is my girlfriend, faith is falling in love, the Bible a love letter and so forth. Preaching has adopted the vocabulary of modern psychology and the self-help industry. Sin is a lack of self-esteem. Christ came to give us meaning and purpose in life. The church is a support group, preaching a motivational talk. Oprah and Dr. Phil, not Paul and Moses, provide our new vocabulary."
We have anesthetized the teaching our churches. I don't think that language is the core problem. I think that the core problem is a lack of intellectualism. Young people today no longer think. They want to have ideas handled to them coated in chocolate. They do want to analyze anything. There are probably many reasons why this is so. Much of it has to do with the MTV-effect. MTV, and almost all of television, is pre-digested material. All the viewer has to do is swallow. No chewing. No cutting. Just enjoy. This has helped to produce an epedimic of laziness. I doubt that MTV is the sole purveyor of laziness. But it has done as much as anything else.
Our non-cognitive education system has added to the problem. We know longer teach kids logic, or latin, or rhetoric. In many schools, all kids have to do is smile and they pass. We no long do things the old fashion way, which is, in Alfred Hitchcock's words, to "earn it." Everything in life is handed to them. The primary skill kids learn in schools is how to build a stool out of toothpicks and marshmellows. Students are not expected to think, so they don't. We they arrive in the church, they expect the same courtesy, that of having the information fed to them. They expect to be entertained, which is what most of our schools major in.
I want my children to think. I hope I can get my kids interested in reading, and thinking. When I watch TV and movies with them, I want to analyze what we see and make a judgement. I want them to own their beliefs. I want them to come to ownership through work. I want them to take the difficult way of figuring problems out on their own. I don't know if I will succeed, since I am often intellectually lazy. But I will make the attempt, something most people never do.
Ambiguously PC
If you don't read Scrappleface on a regualr basis, you should start. His satire is very insightful and revealing. He notes a connection between Ward Churchill and Larry Summers:
"(2005-02-22) -- In a last ditch effort to save his job, Harvard University President Larry Summers today compared female professors of math and science to Nazis, in a fashion reminiscent of Colorado Professor Ward Churchill's characterization of 9/11 victims."
Movie Reviews
I watched the movie Celluar, last night. I wouldn't normally watch a movie like that, but I was with my family and they wanted to watch it. I wasn't impressed. I have seen better writing on candy wrappers. Or, to quote from Get Shorty, "I have seen better film on teeth." I really dislike contrived, manipulitive plots. No one would ever act the way the people do in movies like Celluar. The film-makers are asking us to completely suspend all logic. These movies do not entertain me. I am entertained when I have to think. Mindless action and gratuitous explosions do not make an interesting movie.
I also recently watched Garden State. This movie wasn't perfect, but it was alot better than most other movies out there. It was smart and funny, and realistic. The characters were actual people with actual problems. I thought the ending was a bit too sentimental, and it was oftimes quirky for the sake of being quirky. But it was about something more than just instant entertainment. The best movies say with you and prompt you to think. There are some of these out there, but not many.
I also recently watched Garden State. This movie wasn't perfect, but it was alot better than most other movies out there. It was smart and funny, and realistic. The characters were actual people with actual problems. I thought the ending was a bit too sentimental, and it was oftimes quirky for the sake of being quirky. But it was about something more than just instant entertainment. The best movies say with you and prompt you to think. There are some of these out there, but not many.
Monday, February 21, 2005
Endangered Terri Schiavo
Scrappleface knocks one over the fence with this post:
BTW: Scrappleface is a satirical site.
"(2005-02-19) -- The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) has, at least temporarily, saved the life of Terri Schindler-Schiavo, the Florida woman whose former husband, Michael, had planned to disconnect her feeding tube on Tuesday.
The 11th-hour reprieve came in response to a plea from the Schindler family to have Terri classified as a silver rice rat (Oryzomys argentatus), considered an endangered species by the state of Florida and the USFWS."
BTW: Scrappleface is a satirical site.
Dave Berry's medicine
Dave Berry is tired of pharmacuetical commercials:
"Recently, I was lying on the sofa and watching my favorite TV show, which is called, ''Whatever Is on TV When I'm Lying on the Sofa.'' I was in a good mood until the commercial came on. It showed an old man (and when I say ''old man,'' I mean ''a man who is maybe eight years older than I am'') helping his grandson learn to ride a bicycle.
I was watching this, wondering what product was being advertised (Bicycles? Dietary fiber? Lucent?) and the announcer said: ``Aren't there enough reasons in your life to talk to your doctor about Zocor?''
The announcer did not say what ''Zocor'' is. It sounds like the evil ruler of the Planet Wombax. I figure it's a medical drug, although I have no idea what it does. And so, instead of enjoying my favorite TV show, I was lying there wondering if I should be talking to my doctor about Zocor. My doctor is named Curt, and the only time I go to his office is when I am experiencing a clear-cut medical symptom, such as an arrow sticking out of my head. So mainly I see Curt when I happen to sit near him at a sporting event, and he's voicing medical opinions such as, ''HE STINKS!'' and ''CAN YOU BELIEVE HOW BAD THIS GUY STINKS??'' This would not be a good time to ask him what he thinks about Zocor (''IT STINKS!'')."
The Eclectic Reader, 2.21.2005
It has been a long time since I post an ER, so here we go:
Coaching: I coach the Ladies Basketball Team at my high school. This is the fourth year I have coached. This past weekend we participated in our league's State Championship. We won first place, which completes our undefeated season, 17-0. The girls are hard workers, and play with a lot of intensity. My job it seems is to aim them in the right direction and let them go. Our success has to do with their work ethic. They now get to participate in the regional tournament. It should be really exciting. We will see what happens.
Wake v. Duke: I saw some of the Wake Forest-Duke game last night. I watched what I could in the airport as my family and I were on our way to Colorado. It seemed to be an exciting game. I was sorely disappointed in Duke's performance Wednesday night against Va Tech. They couldn't rebound anything. They didn't seem to want to win. Last night was another team. Redick was amazing. This was probably one of their most important wins all season. If they lost this, they would really be in a pickle. Now they have a chance to place second in the regular season, if Wake loses again. Very proud of the Dukies.
Jet-Blue: As I mentioned, my family and I are on vacation in Colorado. We flew from Boston to Denver on Jet Blue. I had never flown on this airline before. I enjoyed the Direct TV. I can't figure out why other airlines don't include this. Jet Blue is fairly inexpensive. Yet, they have Direct TV for each seat and they have more leg room. I don't know if they can maintain their distinctive for long. We will enjoy it while we can.
Coaching: I coach the Ladies Basketball Team at my high school. This is the fourth year I have coached. This past weekend we participated in our league's State Championship. We won first place, which completes our undefeated season, 17-0. The girls are hard workers, and play with a lot of intensity. My job it seems is to aim them in the right direction and let them go. Our success has to do with their work ethic. They now get to participate in the regional tournament. It should be really exciting. We will see what happens.
Wake v. Duke: I saw some of the Wake Forest-Duke game last night. I watched what I could in the airport as my family and I were on our way to Colorado. It seemed to be an exciting game. I was sorely disappointed in Duke's performance Wednesday night against Va Tech. They couldn't rebound anything. They didn't seem to want to win. Last night was another team. Redick was amazing. This was probably one of their most important wins all season. If they lost this, they would really be in a pickle. Now they have a chance to place second in the regular season, if Wake loses again. Very proud of the Dukies.
Jet-Blue: As I mentioned, my family and I are on vacation in Colorado. We flew from Boston to Denver on Jet Blue. I had never flown on this airline before. I enjoyed the Direct TV. I can't figure out why other airlines don't include this. Jet Blue is fairly inexpensive. Yet, they have Direct TV for each seat and they have more leg room. I don't know if they can maintain their distinctive for long. We will enjoy it while we can.
One important question
One question: Would all that is occurring in the Md-East, particularly Syria, be occurring had not we removed Sadaam?
Will our actions in Iraq turn out to be the major catalyst for change? Will freedom soon spread to Syria and Iran? Could President Bush actually be right?
"Thousands of demonstrators marched in central Beirut to call for an international investigation into the assassination last week of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafiq Hariri. The massive demonstration also called for the quick removal of Syrian troops in Lebanon, as well as an end to Syrian dominance of the Lebanese government.
Chanting 'freedom, sovereignty and independence' thousands of Lebanese citizens marched through the streets of Beirut waving flags and demanding that Syria end its political and military presence in Lebanon."
Will our actions in Iraq turn out to be the major catalyst for change? Will freedom soon spread to Syria and Iran? Could President Bush actually be right?
A leap of faith
Israel is taking a tremendous leap of faith:
No one knows what is going to happen in the Mid-East. I am one who is still a bit incredulous. I do not trust the Palestinians. They have maintained a culture of deception and betrayal, thanks to the impactful leadership of Don Arafat. They have turned back on their word before. This time may be different. Abbas may be Arafat-ish, but he is not Arafat. I don't know if anyone has given Sharon the credit he deserves. He may be the most significant factor in the whole process. History may prove the strong stand he has taken against his own government and against the terrorists is the right policy. I hope it all turns out well, and violence-less.
"JERUSALEM -- Israel freed 500 Palestinian prisoners in a goodwill gesture Monday and President Bush pledged to support efforts to resolve the conflict, saying peace based on a two-state solution was within reach."
No one knows what is going to happen in the Mid-East. I am one who is still a bit incredulous. I do not trust the Palestinians. They have maintained a culture of deception and betrayal, thanks to the impactful leadership of Don Arafat. They have turned back on their word before. This time may be different. Abbas may be Arafat-ish, but he is not Arafat. I don't know if anyone has given Sharon the credit he deserves. He may be the most significant factor in the whole process. History may prove the strong stand he has taken against his own government and against the terrorists is the right policy. I hope it all turns out well, and violence-less.
Thursday, February 17, 2005
I don't feel any older
We need to contact Mel Brooks and ask him to validate this claim:
The inquisitive mind is bound to ask, "How did they determine the age?"
The article says "determined" when I think they meant "decided." Wouldn't you love to have a paleoscientist as your defense attorney?
Attorney: I demand that you drop all charges against me client.
Judge: On what basis?
Attorney: My colleages have determined that the crime was perpetrated by a thief. Theives live in prisons. My client does not live in a prison, therefore he is not a thief. Thus, he could not have commited the crime.
It must be extremely convient to be able to contrive your premises ex nihilo. I wish Christians were allowed the same freedom.
NEW YORK -- A new analysis of bones unearthed nearly 40 years ago in Ethiopia has pushed the fossil record of modern humans back to nearly 200,000 years ago - perhaps close to the dawn of the species.
Researchers determined that the specimens are around 195,000 years old. Previously, the oldest known fossils of Homo sapiens were Ethiopian skulls dated to about 160,000 years ago.
The inquisitive mind is bound to ask, "How did they determine the age?"
"To find the age of the skulls, the researchers determined that volcanic rock lying just below the sediment that contained the fossils was about 196,000 years old. They then found evidence that the fossil-bearing sediment was deposited soon after that time."
The article says "determined" when I think they meant "decided." Wouldn't you love to have a paleoscientist as your defense attorney?
Attorney: I demand that you drop all charges against me client.
Judge: On what basis?
Attorney: My colleages have determined that the crime was perpetrated by a thief. Theives live in prisons. My client does not live in a prison, therefore he is not a thief. Thus, he could not have commited the crime.
It must be extremely convient to be able to contrive your premises ex nihilo. I wish Christians were allowed the same freedom.
More trouble brewing
Do you remember that "Far Side" that shows a dingo farm next to a daycare center with the caption, "Trouble brewing"? We could say the same thing about South America:
I noted recently that the recent collusion in SoAm could prove threatening to the US. This is a situation we ought to watch, especially as we seem to be financing Cuba's totalitarian regime. Communism is far from dead. Americans need to realize this. Radical/Fundamental Islam and terrorist groups are a major threat to the US, but so are Communist regimes. SoAm is a very important region, much more so as their oil becomes more important. We should be concerned about what happens there. They are much closer to us than Nepal, Bangledesh, Vietnam, and other Marxist states. I for one am going to keep my eye on Latin America.
"'A danger to democracy is brewing right here in our backyard,' writes U.S. News and World Report publisher Mortimer B. Zuckerman in his recent column.
By 'backyard' Zuckerman is referring to Venezuela and its Castroite president, Hugo Chavez."
I noted recently that the recent collusion in SoAm could prove threatening to the US. This is a situation we ought to watch, especially as we seem to be financing Cuba's totalitarian regime. Communism is far from dead. Americans need to realize this. Radical/Fundamental Islam and terrorist groups are a major threat to the US, but so are Communist regimes. SoAm is a very important region, much more so as their oil becomes more important. We should be concerned about what happens there. They are much closer to us than Nepal, Bangledesh, Vietnam, and other Marxist states. I for one am going to keep my eye on Latin America.
Wednesday, February 16, 2005
TV commercials
I am a big fan of TV commercials. Many of them are banal and annoying--probably 95%. But there are some that are intelligent and artistic. In The Agora tipped me to this commercial, which is the best I have seen in a while. I wish it were available for download.
Tuesday, February 15, 2005
Were there no Bible . . .
What would we Christians do were there no Bible? What would our lives with Christ be like without the Word of God? How effective would be our Christianity without the Logos?
These questions have stirred my recollections recently. I have been reading a book by Baruch (Benedict) Spinoza, Theologica-Political Treatise. Spinoza is a very interesting writer. He is a Dutch-Jewish mathematical philosopher. In his book, he posits the idea that the Bible in not universal. It is a specific message for a specific group of people. He says that God "spoke" to the authors the same way He speaks to us, through the "Divine light of reason." He believes that prophets possessed a higher level of imagination. He believes that the Bible is beneficial as a moral storybook, but God speaks to each person. I do not agree with the un-universality of the Bible. Yet, I wonder what happened to the "Divine light of reason."
Most Christians I know believe God speaks through Natural Revelation (i.e. nature) and Special Revelation (i.e. the Bible). I do not recall many of them including reason with Natural Revelation. I will. What I fail to understand is what happened to Natural Revelation? Does the Bible supercede what our minds tell us? Do we no longer need to exercise our logical abilities? Is the only way to know God through the text of the Scriptures?
Man is a depraved creature. I have thought at times that man cannot know God except God drew man near to Himself. I have currently less Calvinistic, and believe there is some ability within man. I am content to call this a "free will." Whatever the case, most would agree that when man is justified he is reconcilled. Man was created to love God. God gave man all the necessary skills to love Him. Man was created to exist "within" God. By that I mean man can only thrive when he is in union with God. Sin separates us from God. It brings disunion. It disconnects us from the Sovereign Lord. That is why it was necessary for Christ to engage in the "ministry of reconcilliation," as Paul describes it. Reconcilled man no longer has a problem with understanding and knowing God. He can comune with God. The primary purpose of the Bible is to lead men to God. Once they are saved, they have the ability to seek God through Natural Revelation. However, many Christians I have met demean the "Divine light of reason," and focus solely on the written revelation. Could we thrive in our Christianity without the Bible? We certainly can. We certainly should.
Michael Spencer at Internetmonk writes an compelling essay on how to approach the Scripture. He lists the ways Christians normally approach the Scriptures. One way is to treat the Bible as "a magic book, where God speaks to us in unusual ways." This method leads people to read until a particular verse "speaks" to us, and the "go and do likewise." Another perspective is "by collecting verses." He calls this the "grocery list." We use some computer program to find a list of verses on a specific topic, and then build our doctrine from there. He doesn't hold tightly to either of these approaches. He notes that they can have their benefit, but they are not the best way. He says:
I have been witness to many "expositions" of Biblical passages. Often they are insightful. Yet, often they are tedious. It is possible to pull a cavalcade of principles out of any verse. But this tends to overlook the primary purpose of the passage. He compares the books of the Bible to the ingredients of a recipe:
We need a much broader view of the Bible. It is a complete work. God inspired every word, but that doesn't mean we need to take each word and build a doctrine on it. And it doesn't mean that the Bible is the end of our knowledge of God. George MacDonald, a writer I am beginning to respect, authored a book entitled Unspoken Sermons. In the first volume, he discusses the place of Scripture in "The Higher Faith."
He basic thesis is that the Inspired Word is only part of His revelation. He speaks to each person even today. We need to listen to God's voice as He speaks directly to us. MacDonald anticipates some objections:
Many would say that God plays an active role in our lives. They restrict, however, His workings to the words of Scripture. Does God have to use Scripture when He speaks to us? Can a person who is reconciled with God and genuinely seeking Him find Him? It would be a fairly malicious prank to leave us as a subordinate to a book. What would we do if the book is taken from us? Do they purloin our Christianity as well? MacDonald makes a very profound point later:
These are compelling thoughts.
My logic is far from consistent here, and I know I have skitted about randomly. I have not come to any conclusions on this matter--am still in the process of rumination. But these are important issues. They are issues we cannot let fall by the side. I encourage you to read the essay and the sermon. Ask yourself, how does God intend for us to know Him? What would we do were there no Bible?
These questions have stirred my recollections recently. I have been reading a book by Baruch (Benedict) Spinoza, Theologica-Political Treatise. Spinoza is a very interesting writer. He is a Dutch-Jewish mathematical philosopher. In his book, he posits the idea that the Bible in not universal. It is a specific message for a specific group of people. He says that God "spoke" to the authors the same way He speaks to us, through the "Divine light of reason." He believes that prophets possessed a higher level of imagination. He believes that the Bible is beneficial as a moral storybook, but God speaks to each person. I do not agree with the un-universality of the Bible. Yet, I wonder what happened to the "Divine light of reason."
Most Christians I know believe God speaks through Natural Revelation (i.e. nature) and Special Revelation (i.e. the Bible). I do not recall many of them including reason with Natural Revelation. I will. What I fail to understand is what happened to Natural Revelation? Does the Bible supercede what our minds tell us? Do we no longer need to exercise our logical abilities? Is the only way to know God through the text of the Scriptures?
Man is a depraved creature. I have thought at times that man cannot know God except God drew man near to Himself. I have currently less Calvinistic, and believe there is some ability within man. I am content to call this a "free will." Whatever the case, most would agree that when man is justified he is reconcilled. Man was created to love God. God gave man all the necessary skills to love Him. Man was created to exist "within" God. By that I mean man can only thrive when he is in union with God. Sin separates us from God. It brings disunion. It disconnects us from the Sovereign Lord. That is why it was necessary for Christ to engage in the "ministry of reconcilliation," as Paul describes it. Reconcilled man no longer has a problem with understanding and knowing God. He can comune with God. The primary purpose of the Bible is to lead men to God. Once they are saved, they have the ability to seek God through Natural Revelation. However, many Christians I have met demean the "Divine light of reason," and focus solely on the written revelation. Could we thrive in our Christianity without the Bible? We certainly can. We certainly should.
Michael Spencer at Internetmonk writes an compelling essay on how to approach the Scripture. He lists the ways Christians normally approach the Scriptures. One way is to treat the Bible as "a magic book, where God speaks to us in unusual ways." This method leads people to read until a particular verse "speaks" to us, and the "go and do likewise." Another perspective is "by collecting verses." He calls this the "grocery list." We use some computer program to find a list of verses on a specific topic, and then build our doctrine from there. He doesn't hold tightly to either of these approaches. He notes that they can have their benefit, but they are not the best way. He says:
Now here is the crucial thing I have to say in this essay: In understanding the Bible, it is far more important that we understand, as best we can, the message and meaning of entire books, and the story told by those books, rather than just having a personal experience with individual verses. The study of Biblical books and the assessment of their story and message is the basic kind of Bible study that is needed in the church, and in preaching/teaching. This entails the study of smaller units of text, but the larger picture/story is the most valuable picture/narrative for the Christian life. I hope and pray nothing more than that my brothers in the ministry could make this connection: Understanding the Bible is understanding the books of the Bible, and how they relate together into one message.
I have been witness to many "expositions" of Biblical passages. Often they are insightful. Yet, often they are tedious. It is possible to pull a cavalcade of principles out of any verse. But this tends to overlook the primary purpose of the passage. He compares the books of the Bible to the ingredients of a recipe:
Obviously, these books are different, and it is entirely reasonable to say that some books are essential to the message and some are less essential. This is the difference between eggs and flour, and sesame seeds or food coloring. The Bible would survive without Obadiah. It could not survive without the Gospels. Any part of the whole can be seen as presenting some aspect of the final message, but like a play with two acts and 66 scenes, the Bible is meant to be seen in all its scenes. Editing or omitting may or may not damage the play's ability to say its message (like Mel Gibson's edited Hamlet might be critiqued as different from Branaugh's complete "Hamlet.") But what we have is the whole, and the whole is understood primarily by understanding books and the larger narrative of those books.
We need a much broader view of the Bible. It is a complete work. God inspired every word, but that doesn't mean we need to take each word and build a doctrine on it. And it doesn't mean that the Bible is the end of our knowledge of God. George MacDonald, a writer I am beginning to respect, authored a book entitled Unspoken Sermons. In the first volume, he discusses the place of Scripture in "The Higher Faith."
Sad, indeed, would the whole matter be, if the Bible had told us everything God meant us to believe. But herein is the Bible itself greatly wronged. It nowhere lays claim to be regarded as the Word, the Way, the Truth. The Bible leads us to Jesus, the inexhaustible, the ever unfolding Revelation of God. It is Christ “in whom are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge, not the Bible, save as leading to him. And why are we told that these treasures are hid in him who is the Revelation of God? Is it that we should despair of finding them and cease to seek them? Are they not hid in him that they may be revealed to us in due time—that is, when we are in need of them? Is not their hiding in him the mediatorial step towards their unfolding in us? Is he not the Truth? the Truth to men? Is he not the High Priest of his brethren, to answer all the troubled questionings that arise in their dim humanity? For it is his heart which Contains of good, wise, just, the perfect shape.
He basic thesis is that the Inspired Word is only part of His revelation. He speaks to each person even today. We need to listen to God's voice as He speaks directly to us. MacDonald anticipates some objections:
But is not this dangerous doctrine? Will not a man be taught thus to believe the things he likes best, even to pray for that which he likes best? And will he not grow arrogant in his confidence? If it be true that the Spirit strives with our spirit; if it be true that God teaches men, we may safely leave those dreaded results to him. If the man is of the Lord's company, he is safer with him than with those who would secure their safety by hanging on the outskirts and daring nothing. If he is not aught of God in that which he hopes for, God will let him know it. He will receive something else than he prays for. If he can pray to God for anything not good, the answer will come in the flames of that consuming fire. These will soon bring him to some of his spiritual senses. But it will be far better for him to be thus sharply tutored, than to go on a snail’s pace in the journey of the spiritual life. And for arrogance, I have seen nothing breed it faster or in more offensive forms than the worship of the letter.
Many would say that God plays an active role in our lives. They restrict, however, His workings to the words of Scripture. Does God have to use Scripture when He speaks to us? Can a person who is reconciled with God and genuinely seeking Him find Him? It would be a fairly malicious prank to leave us as a subordinate to a book. What would we do if the book is taken from us? Do they purloin our Christianity as well? MacDonald makes a very profound point later:
Do you count it a great faith to believe what God has said? It seems to me, I repeat, a little faith, and, if alone, worthy of reproach. To believe what he has not said is faith indeed, and blessed. For that comes of believing in Him. Can you not believe in God himself? Or, confess,do you not find it so hard to believe what he has said, that even that is almost more than you can do? If I ask you why, will not the true answer be, "Because we are not quite sure that he did say it"? If you believed in God you would find it easy to believe the word. You would not even need to inquire whether he had said it: you would know that he meant it.
These are compelling thoughts.
My logic is far from consistent here, and I know I have skitted about randomly. I have not come to any conclusions on this matter--am still in the process of rumination. But these are important issues. They are issues we cannot let fall by the side. I encourage you to read the essay and the sermon. Ask yourself, how does God intend for us to know Him? What would we do were there no Bible?
Racial rhetoric
This type of rhetoric cannot but incite more prejudice and animosity:
The ethnic situation in our country is far from perfect. We are world's away from MLK's dream of a colorless society. Some of the greatest agitators are black preachers and adovocates. I don't think that we can make the problem disappear by ignoring it. Neither can we pull "racism" out of every situation, and constantly bemoan the struggle of the black community and the oppression by the white man. Whatever we need to do, this article is not it.
There was a time when Black preachers could be counted on to confront the ruling pharaohs of their day when the powerless were receiving a raw deal. But if Black folks had to depend upon today’s clergy for leadership, they would still be confined to the back of the bus.
At a time when black America is in murky, troubled waters, too many of the Black clergy, especially those heading mega-churches, are either apolitical or apologists for the status quo.
The ethnic situation in our country is far from perfect. We are world's away from MLK's dream of a colorless society. Some of the greatest agitators are black preachers and adovocates. I don't think that we can make the problem disappear by ignoring it. Neither can we pull "racism" out of every situation, and constantly bemoan the struggle of the black community and the oppression by the white man. Whatever we need to do, this article is not it.
Judeo-Christian values
Dennis Prager has been writing articles this year defending the importance of Judeo-Christian values. In his latest installment, he compares and contrasts Judaism with Christianity:
Dennis Prager is one of the strongest advocates of morallity and values. He is highly intellegent and articulate. I have enjoyed his series. This article is interesting. I don't know if his analysis is completely correct, but it is worth some thought. I understand that my Christianity emanates from the Judaism of the Old Testament. I believe that my Christianity is a completion of the Judaism of the OT. Prager would disagree with me on this point. We do not disagree as to the importance of values.
"One way to understand Judeo-Christian values, therefore, is as values that emanate from a Judeo-based Christianity. Christians have always had the choice to reject the Jewish roots of Christianity (which, when done, enabled Christian anti-Semitism), to ignore those roots, or to celebrate and embrace them. American Christians have, more than any other Christian group, opted for the latter."
Dennis Prager is one of the strongest advocates of morallity and values. He is highly intellegent and articulate. I have enjoyed his series. This article is interesting. I don't know if his analysis is completely correct, but it is worth some thought. I understand that my Christianity emanates from the Judaism of the Old Testament. I believe that my Christianity is a completion of the Judaism of the OT. Prager would disagree with me on this point. We do not disagree as to the importance of values.
OPEC in South America
Is it possible we could see a OPEC-style collusion in South America?
This is another reason why we should promote as much oil-exploration in the US as possible. We must have our own source of petroleum.
"Brazil and Venezuela have signed a series of 26 bilateral agreements to strengthen what they call their strategic alliance.
Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva and his Venezuelan counterpart, Hugo Chavez, signed the agreements in Venezuela's capital Caracas on Monday.
The accords cover areas such as defence, mining and energy.
The two countries' state-owned oil companies have also signed joint ventures for a range of projects."
This is another reason why we should promote as much oil-exploration in the US as possible. We must have our own source of petroleum.
University bias
Does anyone need evidence that my of America's colleges and universities are raving-liberal havens? There has been many stories recently about the Solomon Amendment. Recently, a scuffle broke out at a college in Seattle:
This is not a free speech issue. It is a financial support issue. The schools receive government funding. I should say, the schools receive taxpayer money. The military protects the taxpayers, and the universities for that matter. What possible reasoning can there be behind prohibiting military recruiters from campuses? So the school is opposed to war. Great. We are opposed to giving them funding if they bar recruiters. This latest episode is unexcusible. We cannot allow anyone to harm military recruiters. Would the college students act the same way is the "recruiters" were from NARAL or NOW?
"DENVER - Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld should withhold federal funds from a Seattle college for its failure to ensure the safety of military recruiters who visited the campus last month, the Secretary was advised by a public interest law firm in a letter.
According to news reports, military recruiters were forced to flee from Seattle Central Community College after being assaulted and battered by a student mob. Mountain States Legal Foundation advised Secretary Rumsfeld that the college's actions violated the Solomon Amendment, which requires that colleges and universities permit military recruiters on campus or lose all federal funds."
This is not a free speech issue. It is a financial support issue. The schools receive government funding. I should say, the schools receive taxpayer money. The military protects the taxpayers, and the universities for that matter. What possible reasoning can there be behind prohibiting military recruiters from campuses? So the school is opposed to war. Great. We are opposed to giving them funding if they bar recruiters. This latest episode is unexcusible. We cannot allow anyone to harm military recruiters. Would the college students act the same way is the "recruiters" were from NARAL or NOW?
Speaking English
Would we expect someone who works at McDonalds to know how to make a hamburger? Would we expect someone who plays basketball to know a little bit about the rules? Most people would answer yes. Would we expect someone who lives in a country to speak the language? Many people would say, "No." I don't see much difference between the examples. There is a judge in TN who holds a similar opinion:
I don't know if the decision was a proper one in this case. I do think English ought to be the national language. Diversity is good, but so is unity. We can be a nation of many different personalities and still be unified. Language can be this unifier. I think a multi-lingual community breeds predjudice and disharmony. We need to be able to communicate to understand each other. Some of our "racial" problems could be eliminated with a single national language. But then, I may be wrong.
"Some consider it unorthodox and others say it is unconstitutional, but nevertheless a Tennessee judge has ordered some Hispanic mothers in child abuse and neglect cases to either learn English or risk losing their children.
Despite criticism from some legal corners, Wilson County Judge Barry Tatum, a first-term jurist and former attorney, has defended his decisions, saying he made his rulings because the women need to assimilate American language and culture for the betterment of their children."
I don't know if the decision was a proper one in this case. I do think English ought to be the national language. Diversity is good, but so is unity. We can be a nation of many different personalities and still be unified. Language can be this unifier. I think a multi-lingual community breeds predjudice and disharmony. We need to be able to communicate to understand each other. Some of our "racial" problems could be eliminated with a single national language. But then, I may be wrong.
Monday, February 14, 2005
The Persecuted Church
What is happening in Iraq is happening all over the world.
These atrocities do not reveal the turmoil that is in Iraq. They reveal the turmoil that is in the Islamic world. Islam is a violent religion. To be a dedicated Muslim means to be anti-Semtic, anti-Christian, and altogether xenophobic. Our nation needs to understand the violent and barbaric persecutions that occur daily. We cannot be reminded enough.
They’ve been left "out in the cold." They’ve resided in that locale for 5,000 years but are still treated as strangers. They are not liked by the Sunnis, Shiites, nor Kurds. They have appealed for US-led Coalition help but have not received any. So the Assyrian Christians are tortured, left to fend for their own safety, indeed their survival.
These atrocities do not reveal the turmoil that is in Iraq. They reveal the turmoil that is in the Islamic world. Islam is a violent religion. To be a dedicated Muslim means to be anti-Semtic, anti-Christian, and altogether xenophobic. Our nation needs to understand the violent and barbaric persecutions that occur daily. We cannot be reminded enough.
Stupid logic
I sure hope isn't significant:
Let's not dissect how people were given these "rights." Let's just accept the fact that they were given them and go on from there. We won't worry about the fact that government cannot "give" anybody any right, it can only acknowledge and protect a right. I suppose if the government accidentally gave his paycheck to someone else, he wouldn't attempt to get it back, since "the deed had already been done." I feel very comforted knowing this guy is our state's chief prosecuter. Then, we can't take much of what he says seriously. He is running for governor.
"BOSTON The Massachusetts attorney general who fought legalizing gay marriage now says he's in favor of some same-sex unions.
Thomas Reilly says he'll vote against a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage if it qualifies for a vote next year.
Reilly is an unannounced Democratic candidate for governor.
He tells The Boston Globe today that 'once rights are given, they should not be taken away.'"
Let's not dissect how people were given these "rights." Let's just accept the fact that they were given them and go on from there. We won't worry about the fact that government cannot "give" anybody any right, it can only acknowledge and protect a right. I suppose if the government accidentally gave his paycheck to someone else, he wouldn't attempt to get it back, since "the deed had already been done." I feel very comforted knowing this guy is our state's chief prosecuter. Then, we can't take much of what he says seriously. He is running for governor.
Friday, February 11, 2005
A sick world
This world is full of discusting people:
I know this is harsh, but I think these people, once they are found, ought to be run over by a garbage truck, and then thrown in the garbage truck, where they belong. Hearing stories like this only increases the love I have for my children.
Update: Apparantly, we were swindled:
I still believe there are sick people in our world.
NORTH LAUDERDALE, Fla. – The county sheriff said Friday he hopes that the people who threw a newborn boy out of a moving car are feeling remorse and will come forward.
Investigators are trying to identify the couple who threw the boy, believed to be less than an hour old, alongside a busy street Thursday afternoon, Broward County Sheriff Ken Jenne said. The car then sped away.
I know this is harsh, but I think these people, once they are found, ought to be run over by a garbage truck, and then thrown in the garbage truck, where they belong. Hearing stories like this only increases the love I have for my children.
Update: Apparantly, we were swindled:
NORTH LAUDERDALE, Fla. - Authorities said Friday that the story of a newborn boy who survived being thrown out of a moving car was made up by a depressed woman.
The 8-pound, 2-ounce boy, who was believed to be less than an hour old and whose umbilical cord was still attached when he came into the custody of authorities on Thursday, was in good condition at a hospital in Fort Lauderdale.
Broward County Sheriff Ken Jenne said at a news conference Friday afternoon that the boy was “absolutely perfect.” Nurses at the hospital have nicknamed him Johnny after the doctor who first treated him Thursday, he said.
Jenne said the baby was taken to a local sheriff’s office Thursday by a woman who said she saw it being tossed from a moving car, wrapped in plastic. She claimed that a man and a woman were arguing in the car at the time, he said.
In fact, Jenne said, the Good Samaritan, the woman in the car and the baby’s mother were one and the same, identified as Patricia Pokriots, 38, a barmaid for a non-profit fraternal organization.
I still believe there are sick people in our world.
Reuters' editorializing
This wire is an example of Reuters' pitiful editorializing of a story:
When they say, "Nobody sees military action as the best way," I think they mean, "Nobody who holds the enlightened view of foreign policy would think military action as the best way." It may not be the best way, but it may end up being the only way. Reuters has decided, it seems, that military action would be a completely idiotic option. Our President has said that we will not allow Iran to possess nuclear weapons. I believe that he is willing to use military force when (not if) diplomacy breaks down. And I am one who thinks that he should.
Update: I just noticed this was not a news wire, but an "Analysis." Either way, I think Reuters' is wrong. And I think that this is the way they think, and it distorts their coverage.
"LONDON (Reuters) - Nobody sees military action as the best way to tame Iran's suspected nuclear weapons ambitions, but as the rhetoric heats up, mutual miscalculation could suck Tehran and Washington into an unpredictable showdown.
European-sponsored talks have yet to resolve the dispute over Iran's nuclear enrichment programme, which could help it build a bomb. With postwar Iraq in turmoil, the world is jittery about any fresh instability in the oil-supplying Gulf region."
When they say, "Nobody sees military action as the best way," I think they mean, "Nobody who holds the enlightened view of foreign policy would think military action as the best way." It may not be the best way, but it may end up being the only way. Reuters has decided, it seems, that military action would be a completely idiotic option. Our President has said that we will not allow Iran to possess nuclear weapons. I believe that he is willing to use military force when (not if) diplomacy breaks down. And I am one who thinks that he should.
Update: I just noticed this was not a news wire, but an "Analysis." Either way, I think Reuters' is wrong. And I think that this is the way they think, and it distorts their coverage.
Stupid headline
There is something about the headline and opening paragraph of this story that settles unwell with me:
The article details Rumsfeld's surprise visit to Iraq, but it puts it in the context of Rummy defending U.S. Policy. They do not praise him for visiting the troops and giving them his personal thanks. They spin his visit to be one of political strategy. I am may be reading it wrong. But anyone would have reason to be skeptical as it does come from CNN, and they are having a quite a problem with unbiasedness and Eason Jordan.
"BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- Donald Rumsfeld has told U.S. troops in Iraq they have shown the world America is a land of liberators not occupiers, and that they can return home once Iraqi security forces are trained and confident."
The article details Rumsfeld's surprise visit to Iraq, but it puts it in the context of Rummy defending U.S. Policy. They do not praise him for visiting the troops and giving them his personal thanks. They spin his visit to be one of political strategy. I am may be reading it wrong. But anyone would have reason to be skeptical as it does come from CNN, and they are having a quite a problem with unbiasedness and Eason Jordan.
Thursday, February 10, 2005
Pondering poetry
"O who can ever gaze his fill,"
Farmer and fisherman say,
"On native shore and local hill,
Grudge aching limb or callus on the hand?
Fathers, grandfathers stood upon this land,
And here the pilgrims from our loins shall stand."
So farmer and fisherman say
In their fortunate heyday:
But Death's soft answer drifts across
Empty catch or harvest loss
Or an unlucky May.
The earth is an oyster with nothing inside it
Not to be born is the best for man
The end of toil is a baliff's order
Throw down the mattock and dance while you can.
"O life's too short for friends who share,"
Travellers think in their hearts,
"The city's common bed, the air,
The mountain bivouac and the bathing beach,
Where incidents draw every day from each
Memorable gesture and witty speech."
So travellers think in their hearts,
Till malice or circumstance parts
Them from their constant humor:
And slyly Death's coercive rumour
In the silence starts:
A friend is the old tale of Narcissus
Not to be born is the best for man
An active partner in something disgraceful
Change your partner, dance while you can.
"O stretch your hands across the sea,"
The impassioned lover cries,
"Stretch them toward your harm and me,
Our grass is green, and sensual our brief bed,
The stream sings at its foot, and at its head
The mild and vegetarian beasts are fed."
So the impassioned lover cries
Till is storm of pleasure dies:
From the bedpost and the rocks
Death's enticing echo mocks,
And his voice replies:
The greater the love, the more false to its object
Not to be born is the best for man
After the kiss comes the impulse to throttle
Break the embraces, dance while you can.
"I see the guilty world forgiven,"
Dreamer and drunkard sing,
"The ladders let down out of heaven:
The laurel springing from the martyr's blood:
The children skipping where the weepers stood:
The lovers natural, and beasts all good."
So dreamer and drunkard sing
Till day their sobriety bring:
Parrotwise with death's reply
From whelping fear and nesting lie,
Woods and their echoes ring:
The desires of the heart are as crooked as corkscrews
Not to be born is the best for man
The second best is a formal order
The dance's pattern, dance while you can.
Dance, dance, for the figure is easy
The tune is catching and will not stop
Dance till the stars come down with the rafters
Dance, dance, dance till you drop.
--W.H. Auden
There are many things in this world I do not completely understand. At the top of the list is Social Security and poetry. I like poetry, however, and it irks me that I cannot decipher it.
I enjoy reading poetry. I thoroughly enjoy Robert Frost. The images his poetry invokes are remarkable. His simplicity and beauty are entirely refreshing. I recently bought a book of poems by W.H. Auden. I wanted to read him because the literary critic (wacko) Harold Bloom said Auden was Kierkegaard's twentieth century disciple. Kierkegaard is my literary hero. Thus, I have been reading through the book, and I do not understand any of it. I read about 20 poems before I came across one that held any resonance with me. This is highly frustrating. I want to be able to pull meaning from poetry, whether it is the meaning the author originally intended or not.
I read the preceding poem today, and it resonated with me. I am not sure what it is about. It seems to be very cynical, but then, Auden may just be being ironic. I do not know what he means by "dance." I had hoped that by typing it out and commenting on it, I would be inspired, but so far I have not. I suppose I will just have to take it for whatever I can, which is an ambiguously aethsetically pleasing literary work.
Farmer and fisherman say,
"On native shore and local hill,
Grudge aching limb or callus on the hand?
Fathers, grandfathers stood upon this land,
And here the pilgrims from our loins shall stand."
So farmer and fisherman say
In their fortunate heyday:
But Death's soft answer drifts across
Empty catch or harvest loss
Or an unlucky May.
The earth is an oyster with nothing inside it
Not to be born is the best for man
The end of toil is a baliff's order
Throw down the mattock and dance while you can.
"O life's too short for friends who share,"
Travellers think in their hearts,
"The city's common bed, the air,
The mountain bivouac and the bathing beach,
Where incidents draw every day from each
Memorable gesture and witty speech."
So travellers think in their hearts,
Till malice or circumstance parts
Them from their constant humor:
And slyly Death's coercive rumour
In the silence starts:
A friend is the old tale of Narcissus
Not to be born is the best for man
An active partner in something disgraceful
Change your partner, dance while you can.
"O stretch your hands across the sea,"
The impassioned lover cries,
"Stretch them toward your harm and me,
Our grass is green, and sensual our brief bed,
The stream sings at its foot, and at its head
The mild and vegetarian beasts are fed."
So the impassioned lover cries
Till is storm of pleasure dies:
From the bedpost and the rocks
Death's enticing echo mocks,
And his voice replies:
The greater the love, the more false to its object
Not to be born is the best for man
After the kiss comes the impulse to throttle
Break the embraces, dance while you can.
"I see the guilty world forgiven,"
Dreamer and drunkard sing,
"The ladders let down out of heaven:
The laurel springing from the martyr's blood:
The children skipping where the weepers stood:
The lovers natural, and beasts all good."
So dreamer and drunkard sing
Till day their sobriety bring:
Parrotwise with death's reply
From whelping fear and nesting lie,
Woods and their echoes ring:
The desires of the heart are as crooked as corkscrews
Not to be born is the best for man
The second best is a formal order
The dance's pattern, dance while you can.
Dance, dance, for the figure is easy
The tune is catching and will not stop
Dance till the stars come down with the rafters
Dance, dance, dance till you drop.
--W.H. Auden
There are many things in this world I do not completely understand. At the top of the list is Social Security and poetry. I like poetry, however, and it irks me that I cannot decipher it.
I enjoy reading poetry. I thoroughly enjoy Robert Frost. The images his poetry invokes are remarkable. His simplicity and beauty are entirely refreshing. I recently bought a book of poems by W.H. Auden. I wanted to read him because the literary critic (wacko) Harold Bloom said Auden was Kierkegaard's twentieth century disciple. Kierkegaard is my literary hero. Thus, I have been reading through the book, and I do not understand any of it. I read about 20 poems before I came across one that held any resonance with me. This is highly frustrating. I want to be able to pull meaning from poetry, whether it is the meaning the author originally intended or not.
I read the preceding poem today, and it resonated with me. I am not sure what it is about. It seems to be very cynical, but then, Auden may just be being ironic. I do not know what he means by "dance." I had hoped that by typing it out and commenting on it, I would be inspired, but so far I have not. I suppose I will just have to take it for whatever I can, which is an ambiguously aethsetically pleasing literary work.
What's next?
I wish my school would adopt this practice:
This is a very good idea. But they have not gone far enough. They need to place this radio chip in a little tag that could be attached to the child's ear. This would prevent the children from losing or swapping badges. We could monitor everywhere the go, even later in life. It would help us chart the migration patterns of these children, and also give us some insight into their mating practices as they mature. It is possible there would be a bit of pain involved in attaching these tags, so we could shoot the children with a tranquilizer dart while the run around at recess. They would then be asleep when the tag is pinned to their ear lobe. They might one day wonder why they have a small orange tag on their ear, but we could quickly change the subject and give them a cookie. I am going to present this idea to my school administrator.
"SUTTER, Calif. - The only grade school in this rural town is requiring students to wear radio frequency identification badges that can track their every move. Some parents are outraged, fearing it will take away their children's privacy.
The badges introduced at Brittan Elementary School on Jan. 18 rely on the same radio frequency and scanner technology that companies use to track livestock and product inventory. Similar devices have recently been used to monitor youngsters in some parts of Japan."
This is a very good idea. But they have not gone far enough. They need to place this radio chip in a little tag that could be attached to the child's ear. This would prevent the children from losing or swapping badges. We could monitor everywhere the go, even later in life. It would help us chart the migration patterns of these children, and also give us some insight into their mating practices as they mature. It is possible there would be a bit of pain involved in attaching these tags, so we could shoot the children with a tranquilizer dart while the run around at recess. They would then be asleep when the tag is pinned to their ear lobe. They might one day wonder why they have a small orange tag on their ear, but we could quickly change the subject and give them a cookie. I am going to present this idea to my school administrator.
The Dons of Ghana
It is astounding the number of illegal activities with which the Annans (Kofi and Kojo) seem to be connected:
They are the Vito and Michael Corleones of the international community. And Kofi is the head of the most significant international body. The UN has been a breeding ground for crooks and Marxists, which is why the Annans fit in so well. I know that many of these allegations have yet to be proved, but the sheer preponderance of allegations is damning. Kofi has been Martha Steward-ish concerning the Oil-for-Food investigations. Happily, it seems as though the Volker Commission is doing a mediocre job of exposing the corruption of the UN. I am one American that wants the Annans, Kofi in particular, to come clean and engage in full disclosure. I know Kofi is not Kojo, and Kofi cannot be held accountable for everything Kojo does. But Kofi holds such a prominent position he has the duty to either defend exhaustively his son, or repudiate his actions. Failing to do so reflects very poorly on him, especially when there is so much scandal surrounding his Secretariat.
Out with the Annans.
While United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan was patently ignoring a President Robert Mugabe oppressed Zimbabwe, his son, Kojo was making money building the Zimbabwean capitol’s airport.
They are the Vito and Michael Corleones of the international community. And Kofi is the head of the most significant international body. The UN has been a breeding ground for crooks and Marxists, which is why the Annans fit in so well. I know that many of these allegations have yet to be proved, but the sheer preponderance of allegations is damning. Kofi has been Martha Steward-ish concerning the Oil-for-Food investigations. Happily, it seems as though the Volker Commission is doing a mediocre job of exposing the corruption of the UN. I am one American that wants the Annans, Kofi in particular, to come clean and engage in full disclosure. I know Kofi is not Kojo, and Kofi cannot be held accountable for everything Kojo does. But Kofi holds such a prominent position he has the duty to either defend exhaustively his son, or repudiate his actions. Failing to do so reflects very poorly on him, especially when there is so much scandal surrounding his Secretariat.
Out with the Annans.
Wednesday, February 9, 2005
Christians in Iraq
Do you know that there is a minority of Iraqis that are Christians? I came across an interesting article discussing their disenfranchisement:
The author of the article calls on Evangelical Christians to disseminate the plight of ChaldoAssyrian Christians. He feels the EC have a strong influence on the President's policy. I am not so sure we have as much influence as he believes, but I do think we ought to be doing something about this. I think the chances of Iraq becoming an Iranian style Theocracy are pretty slim, but then no one really knows for sure. I think the chances are better the Christian minority ending up with very little political voice, and could end up being persecuted, like Christians are in Sudan, Pakistan, Nepal, China, Vietnam, and many other countries. Evangelical Chrsitians need to work hard at making everyone aware of persecution that occurs on a regular basis. I hope that EC bloggers pick up on this story, and follow some of the article's author's suggestions.
"While Iraqi and Coalition officials continue to label Iraq's January 30 elections as an extraordinary success, hundreds of Christians protesting outside Iraq's Green Zone on Sunday beg to differ.
While both the ChaldoAssyrian and Turkomen communities pointed to specific voting issues that prevented what one spokesman estimated to be 200,000 people from voting, some election officials have already made statements minimizing the claims even before their own investigations have been completed."
The author of the article calls on Evangelical Christians to disseminate the plight of ChaldoAssyrian Christians. He feels the EC have a strong influence on the President's policy. I am not so sure we have as much influence as he believes, but I do think we ought to be doing something about this. I think the chances of Iraq becoming an Iranian style Theocracy are pretty slim, but then no one really knows for sure. I think the chances are better the Christian minority ending up with very little political voice, and could end up being persecuted, like Christians are in Sudan, Pakistan, Nepal, China, Vietnam, and many other countries. Evangelical Chrsitians need to work hard at making everyone aware of persecution that occurs on a regular basis. I hope that EC bloggers pick up on this story, and follow some of the article's author's suggestions.
World records
I am glad I live in a world where there always exists a record to make or break:
"Two Russian women set a record for blimp speeds during a contest in Moscow.
Airship commander Natalia Volodicheva and second pilot Yekaterina Kochetkova set a world record for female blimp speeds on an VH-4 air ship in the category of 1600-3000 cubic meters, the Newsru.com site reported, citing a press release of the competition. "
Nitpicking
I don't suppose people could get any more particular about the so-called "Separation of Church and State":
It probably doesn't make any difference, but this attorney also believes the government placed a radio transmitter in the seal that can read his thoughts and send them to the Attorney General's office. How absurd can we get? Are we going to comb through every government building to determine if any architectual components form a cross? Since Jesus was crucified on a "tree", should we ban trees from governmental property, since they could be a indirect support of religion? Where is the sanity?
"SAN FRANCISCO - The federal appeals court that ruled the Pledge of Allegiance was an unconstitutional endorsement of religion is being sued for allegedly displaying the Ten Commandments on its seal and courthouses.
The case was brought by an attorney who was admitted to practice before the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in June. In his lawsuit against the San Francisco-based court, Ryan Donlon said the certificate admitting him contains the court's seal which unlawfully contains what he believes is a tablet object representing the Ten Commandments."
It probably doesn't make any difference, but this attorney also believes the government placed a radio transmitter in the seal that can read his thoughts and send them to the Attorney General's office. How absurd can we get? Are we going to comb through every government building to determine if any architectual components form a cross? Since Jesus was crucified on a "tree", should we ban trees from governmental property, since they could be a indirect support of religion? Where is the sanity?
Peace in our Time
Appeasement has never been successful. Many times in history well-intentioned diplomats have been swindled by evil-intentioned crooks. I hope that the new Palestinian situation is not one of those times:
I have been skeptical many times before about the Middle East situation (though I am not as knowledgeable or pessimistic as Charles Johnson is on the subject). I don't trust Abbas, or any of the Palestinians. I do not believe any of them want peace in any traditional sense of the word. It is very disconcerting when, along with the peace talks, you hear about this:
Hamas won many positions in local elections recently, so they are becoming an influencial political force. It seems that many like them, and whether we call it bribery or extortion, that fact remains that they have clout.
We will obviously have to wait and see what happens. Abbas is not Arafat, but he is a Palestinian. The culture of violence and hate created by Arafat still exists, and may be the strongest deterent to peace.
Update: Powerline has a good post with some good links on this topic.
"SHARM EL-SHEIK, Egypt -- Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas declared Tuesday that their people would stop all military and violent attacks against each other, pledging to break a four-year cycle of bloodshed and get peace talks back on track.
With their national flags whipping in the wind, Sharon and Abbas met face-to-face at a Mideast summit, smiling broadly as they leaned across a long white table to shake hands. In one sign the talks went well, Egypt and Jordan announced afterward that they would return their ambassadors to Israel after a four-year absence - possibly within days."
I have been skeptical many times before about the Middle East situation (though I am not as knowledgeable or pessimistic as Charles Johnson is on the subject). I don't trust Abbas, or any of the Palestinians. I do not believe any of them want peace in any traditional sense of the word. It is very disconcerting when, along with the peace talks, you hear about this:
GAZA CITY (AFP) - Palestinian Islamist militant movement Hamas said that it was not bound by the ceasefire announced by Palestinian leader Mahmud Abbas at a Middle East peace summit in Egypt.
Hamas won many positions in local elections recently, so they are becoming an influencial political force. It seems that many like them, and whether we call it bribery or extortion, that fact remains that they have clout.
We will obviously have to wait and see what happens. Abbas is not Arafat, but he is a Palestinian. The culture of violence and hate created by Arafat still exists, and may be the strongest deterent to peace.
Update: Powerline has a good post with some good links on this topic.
Tuesday, February 8, 2005
Predictions
I need to get some of my college basketball predictions in writing, so in a few months I look like either an augur or a dufus.
As of right now, I would put the following teams in the Elite Eight:
Duke, UNC, Wake Forest, Louisville, Kansas, Oklahoma State, Gonzaga, Illinois (my alternates are Boston College, Vermont, and Syracuse)
The Final Four will be UNC, Kansas, Oklahoma State, and Illinois.
Championship game will be Kansas and UNC.
And the Champion . . . UNC.
I somewhat doubt that I am right. Kansas is a good team, though, and has a solid chance of going undefeated in the Big 12. Mainly I am just wishing. Wouldn't a Kansas-UNC championship be intriguing? For any who don't know, Roy Williams, the current coach at UNC, formerly coached at Kansas. He took them to at least 2 championship games, but never lost. Bill Self, the current coach at Kansas, formerly coached at Illinois, but never lead them to a championship game, or a Final Four for that matter.
Futhermore, I would choose Francisco Garcia from Louisville as the Player of the Year. He is extremely smart and talented. He can play 4 positions, and play them all very well. He is one the best leaders in all of college basketball.
I think Defensive Players of the year could go to either Sheldon Williams (I am very partial to Duke) or Ivan McFarlin of Oklahoma State. Both are very athletic and very tough.
No one at ESPN or CBS Sports or Sports Illustrated will listen to me, though they should. I challenge anyone to dispute my choices.
As of right now, I would put the following teams in the Elite Eight:
Duke, UNC, Wake Forest, Louisville, Kansas, Oklahoma State, Gonzaga, Illinois (my alternates are Boston College, Vermont, and Syracuse)
The Final Four will be UNC, Kansas, Oklahoma State, and Illinois.
Championship game will be Kansas and UNC.
And the Champion . . . UNC.
I somewhat doubt that I am right. Kansas is a good team, though, and has a solid chance of going undefeated in the Big 12. Mainly I am just wishing. Wouldn't a Kansas-UNC championship be intriguing? For any who don't know, Roy Williams, the current coach at UNC, formerly coached at Kansas. He took them to at least 2 championship games, but never lost. Bill Self, the current coach at Kansas, formerly coached at Illinois, but never lead them to a championship game, or a Final Four for that matter.
Futhermore, I would choose Francisco Garcia from Louisville as the Player of the Year. He is extremely smart and talented. He can play 4 positions, and play them all very well. He is one the best leaders in all of college basketball.
I think Defensive Players of the year could go to either Sheldon Williams (I am very partial to Duke) or Ivan McFarlin of Oklahoma State. Both are very athletic and very tough.
No one at ESPN or CBS Sports or Sports Illustrated will listen to me, though they should. I challenge anyone to dispute my choices.
Pres. Bush's Budget
Pres. Bush couldn't have made a bigger stir in Congress if he had passed gas on the Senate floor:
I do not have enough economic knowledge to completely assess his plan. Nor do I have 15 spare days to peruse the multi-million page budget. Neverthe less, here are some thoughts:
I appreciate the fact that the President is making an attempt at cutting spending. This is rather remarkable, considering he has been spending taxpayer's money like he was P. Diddy. Any President who takes the politically dangerous step of proposing spending cuts is brave. He is doing what he said he would do, which should not suprise us that much any more.
How in the name of Norman Schwartzkopf can Demos complain that Bush is not doing everything he can be doing in Iraq, and then complain he is spending too much money on Iraq? How in the name of Mike Tyson can the Demos complain about the President's spending cuts while simultaneously complain about the President's spending? How can the Demos be so foolish to defend fiscally irresponsible programs? What is their deal?
Sen. Harry Reid is very intelligent when he says:
Leave it to the opposition party to distort and denigrate the President's plan. The spirit of Dashle is alive and well. Rather than attempt the argument through reason, the demos seem content to advance the argument through fear. "They will take your children. They will steal your money and build a golden statue of themselves. They are devils. Listen to them not!" The days of intellectual discourse ended when America's politicians sold their souls for a Mercedes.
"WASHINGTON -- President Bush sent Congress a $2.57 trillion budget plan Monday that seeks deep spending cuts across a wide swath of government from reducing subsidies paid to the nation's farmers, cutting health care payments for poor people and veterans and trimming spending on the environment and education.
Democrats immediately branded it a 'hoax' because it left out the huge future costs for the war in Iraq and Afghanistan and did not include the billions of dollars that will be needed for Bush's No. 1 domestic priority, overhauling Social Security."
I do not have enough economic knowledge to completely assess his plan. Nor do I have 15 spare days to peruse the multi-million page budget. Neverthe less, here are some thoughts:
I appreciate the fact that the President is making an attempt at cutting spending. This is rather remarkable, considering he has been spending taxpayer's money like he was P. Diddy. Any President who takes the politically dangerous step of proposing spending cuts is brave. He is doing what he said he would do, which should not suprise us that much any more.
How in the name of Norman Schwartzkopf can Demos complain that Bush is not doing everything he can be doing in Iraq, and then complain he is spending too much money on Iraq? How in the name of Mike Tyson can the Demos complain about the President's spending cuts while simultaneously complain about the President's spending? How can the Demos be so foolish to defend fiscally irresponsible programs? What is their deal?
Sen. Harry Reid is very intelligent when he says:
"This budget is part of the Republican plan to cut Social Security benefits while handing out lavish tax breaks for multimillionaires," said Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev. "Its cuts in veterans programs, health care and education reflect the wrong priorities and its huge deficits are fiscally irresponsible."
Leave it to the opposition party to distort and denigrate the President's plan. The spirit of Dashle is alive and well. Rather than attempt the argument through reason, the demos seem content to advance the argument through fear. "They will take your children. They will steal your money and build a golden statue of themselves. They are devils. Listen to them not!" The days of intellectual discourse ended when America's politicians sold their souls for a Mercedes.
Friday, February 4, 2005
Point of order
Daddypundit has included my on his blogroll. I enjoy reading his blog. He is a father like myself. I see that he has some of the same tastes in music and movies as I do, i.e. Chris Rice and "The Sting". He has a blog roundup with some good links.
BTW: Best line from "The Sting" (I cannot remember the characters' names, so I will use the actors')
Redford: He is not as tough as he think he is. (Speaking of Robert Shaw's character, Doyle Lonigan)
Newman: Neither are we.
BTW: Best line from "The Sting" (I cannot remember the characters' names, so I will use the actors')
Redford: He is not as tough as he think he is. (Speaking of Robert Shaw's character, Doyle Lonigan)
Newman: Neither are we.
Free speech
There was a number of stories on O'Reily this evening regarding free speech (O'Reily was out and John Gibson was filling in--very refreshing). One story pertained to Ward Churchill, the professor at the Universtiy of Colorado who received much criticism for some comments he made regarding 9/11. I have not read the essay in question. I have just heard exerpts. He wasn't on the program, but some of his students were there to defend him. They felt the professor ought to be able to speak his mind. They thought it would be wrong for the school to dismiss him.
Another story dealt with a police officer in Denver (what's up with my beloved home state?) who told a woman she had to remove her obsene bumper sticker. This corresponded to a situation in Oregon where an Oregon State employee had to remove a "Support the Troops" bumper sticker. The First Amendment Attorney who was talking about the two bumper stickers said, in reference to the Oregon State event, the state has a right to set their own rules. He is absolutely right.
There is a major difference between the government restricting speech, and a private organization restricting speech. Private organizations can restrict almost anything they want. If you visit Cedar Point (the amusement park) in Ohio , you will be escorted out of the park if you are using lewd language. This is their right. The University of Colorado has every right to fire this quack if he is using "language" that may be deemed anti-American. True, CU is a state university, but they still have a right to determine what their employees can and cannot do. The First Amendment original purpose was to keep the central government from prohibiting a person to speak their opinion. It was never intended to apply to private organizations. I grow tired of people applying the First Amendment to businesses and schools and such.
Futhermore, there is a major difference between expressing your opinions and expressing your lewd thoughts. The latter is protected by the First. Our Founding Fathers wanted people to be able to express their disagreement and discontent with the government without fear of reprisal. Any one who has read anything about our Founding Fathers cannot honestly say they intended the First to apply to vulgar and obsene language. Too few people in our country understand what the freedom of speech actually means, and that is a shame.
Another story dealt with a police officer in Denver (what's up with my beloved home state?) who told a woman she had to remove her obsene bumper sticker. This corresponded to a situation in Oregon where an Oregon State employee had to remove a "Support the Troops" bumper sticker. The First Amendment Attorney who was talking about the two bumper stickers said, in reference to the Oregon State event, the state has a right to set their own rules. He is absolutely right.
There is a major difference between the government restricting speech, and a private organization restricting speech. Private organizations can restrict almost anything they want. If you visit Cedar Point (the amusement park) in Ohio , you will be escorted out of the park if you are using lewd language. This is their right. The University of Colorado has every right to fire this quack if he is using "language" that may be deemed anti-American. True, CU is a state university, but they still have a right to determine what their employees can and cannot do. The First Amendment original purpose was to keep the central government from prohibiting a person to speak their opinion. It was never intended to apply to private organizations. I grow tired of people applying the First Amendment to businesses and schools and such.
Futhermore, there is a major difference between expressing your opinions and expressing your lewd thoughts. The latter is protected by the First. Our Founding Fathers wanted people to be able to express their disagreement and discontent with the government without fear of reprisal. Any one who has read anything about our Founding Fathers cannot honestly say they intended the First to apply to vulgar and obsene language. Too few people in our country understand what the freedom of speech actually means, and that is a shame.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)