Is the sky falling?

One of my biggest gripes with evolution rests in the fact that secular universities have proclaimed it as fact for so long that most Christians concede to some form of transitional evolution. I'm not speaking of species adaptation but the reptiles-to-birds, apes-to-men evolution.

The same insidious deceit has crept into government. Prior to the Great Depression, government tinkered with the economy. It could only tinker because it kept getting its knuckles rapped by that pesky Constitution. Meddling in the economy does not exist within any of the constitutional Articles.

Economic catastrophe and economic panic caused the citizens to bow to the saviors in government who promised to get our nation back on its feet again. Pandora's box was not cracked, FDR threw the box wide open and then busted it into a million tiny bits. The demon unleashed, government dependence through legal plunder, would not be recaged.

Here we are today and our nation's knees are knocking. What do we do?

There are no guarantees.

Despite FDIC, your money is not 100% secure in any bank. It's not. You don't know what tomorrow will bring.

Well, land is a secure investment, you'll counter. It's not. Has land ever been seized in the past with an unjust compensation returned to its owner? You don't know what tomorrow will bring.

Gold and silver. They always keep their value, right? I remember in high school when a few friends purchased silver. They were going to get rich. They bought it at its price apex in the late seventies. Silver (and gold) lost nearly all of their value. You don't know what tomorrow will bring.

Here's the deal: There are worse things than failure, far worse. I say, let them fail. Our nation was built upon those who overcame failure and poverty. That's the American story.

When our brothers and sisters are down and out, it's incumbent upon us to reach out a hand, not to have government reach in its hand to remove our wallet and then give it to the down and out. That's thievery. Welfare without holding the recipients responsible does nothing but umbilical them to the state. We create welfare junkies.

What about me? My future financial investments have lost thousands in recent weeks, but my future investment, my real investment is secure.

“Do not lay up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy and where thieves break in and steal; but lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust destroys and where thieves do not break in and steal. For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also."

This is not a happy platitude. It is the truth, a sure anchor during times like these. Let us trust our God alone (therein is peace). Let us help our fellow man as He commands us (therein is love). Let us NOT cede those responsibilities to any government (therein is our hope).

QotD: The debates

From Jay Nordlinger of National Review after watching the debates:

McCain is genuinely a moderate, I believe; Obama plays one on TV.

It's really not funny

The financial panic bums me out. These two political cartoons brought a smile to my face until the sad truth crafted lines bummed me out yet again. Both deserve a close examination (note the lower right corner of the first).

by Michael Ramirez

And that doesn't even address the national debt ($9.8 trillion at this moment in history)! The next one left me in tears...you guess which kind.

By Steve Breen

The debate & statistics

True confessions: I didn't watch the debate.

As I've mentioned earlier, if you don't know the fundamental positions of the candidates on the fundamental issues, you just haven't looked. If you are undecided because you don't know, I'd like to ask you to extract your head from the sand and do a bit of research. It won't take long before you figure out how these gentlemen align with your position.

The commonality between the two candidates? Male senators. Beyond that? Not much.

Which is why it isn't surprising to see a split in the polls as wide as a California freeway. The gap is not just between the candidates. It's between the candidates and between the web-sites.

For example, CNN polled its readers regarding who they thought won the debate. Any guesses? If you are undecided about the candidates, your probably in the dark as to how this poll tilted.

• Obama: 67%
• McCain: 26%

Likewise, you'll not be surprised to know that the similarly questioned poll at Townhall.com yielded:

• McCain: 70%
• Obama: 22%

Drudge:

• McCain: 67%
• Obama: 31%

The smallest gap? From one of the last places I would expect to see it, MSNBC:

• Obama: 51%
• McCain: 34%

Who knows? Maybe their readership isn't up yet.

What do the stats tell you? Conservatives thought McCain fared better; Liberals felt Obama handled himself better. Oooh. An epiphany? Not so much.

Polls and stats get skewed by the statisticians and pollsters. It's the nature of the beast. It's in the nature of the questions. So don't give much credence to the polls. Do your homework, now.

Debates had purpose in the day when you didn't have access to the internet through 17 different devices in your home, not to mention television and radio. Folks had to hear from the horse's mouth where he stood on issues because they had no other means of learning it apart from the occasional newspaper article.

Now debates are only opportunity to fail, to look bad ("You're no Jack Kennedy!"). Go to the Huffington Post and you'll read about McCain's gaffes with very little about his substance. You'll read about Obama's aura with very little about his worldview. The guy with the best one-liner, the best zinger is the guy who wins the debate. "I WANT TO BE ENTERTAINED!"

Back on planet earth, I'm awaiting Palin-Biden for the same reason most folks love NASCAR. Carnage. Pass the popcorn.

Acuna v. Turkish

I've got another post for "dudes" ruminating, but of late, the defense of innocent life has come oft to the fore. Since I give no credence to coincidence, when things come in bunches with the same information from different sources, I think somebody ("S"omebody) is trying to get my attention.

Consider this opening line from Sheila Liaugminas' National Review Column, "Court Contradictions":

For the first time in the 35 years, the Supreme Court has been asked to decide whether this statement is biological fact, or mere ideology: “Abortion terminates the life of a human being.”

In light of yesterday's QotD (Quote of the day), I'm listening.

Liaugminas (pronunciation, anyone?) details a case the SCOTUS (Supreme Court of the US) will consider hearing. The official title is Acuna vs. Turkish. She tells of Rose Acuna's desire to terminate her pregnancy but not wanting to do so if what was inside was a person. The doctor's horrifying response, "Don't be stupid; it's only some blood."

A few weeks later she returned to the hospital for massive hemorrhaging. Enroute to the OR, she asked the nurse what was wrong to which the nurse responded, "They left part of your baby in you."

God have mercy. Woe unto us. Woe.

Mrs. Acuna felt she had been lied to and wanted just compensation. All of the courts have told her, you get none. And so the SCOTUS will decide if it will hear the case.

So what? The previous court decisions have ruled that, because of Roe v. Wade, the child was not a person. This challenge flies in the face of that tragic decision and could possibly overturn the most grisly judicial decision in civilized history.

Liaugminas highlights the changes that have been brought to light through the wonders of technology:

Mrs. Acuna had put into the record scientific proof from internationally renowned biologists, embryologists, and geneticists that the embryo is an independent, living human being from the instant of fertilization. Turkish’s lawyers presented no evidence that contradicted this.

"Let us not grow weary while doing good, for in due season we shall reap if we do not lose heart" (Galatians 6:9). Continue to pray that our holocaust will come to an end and America will become a nation, rare in the world, that holds life as sacred.

If you are being called to act, rise up and be counted! Be silent no longer.

QotD: The culture of life

I read this passage in Proverbs a few days ago. Consider it in light of the en utero and the infirmed:

Rescue those who are being taken away to death;
hold back those who are stumbling to the slaughter.
If you say, "Behold, we did not know this,"
does not he who weighs the heart perceive it?
Does not he who keeps watch over your soul know it,
and will he not repay man according to his work?

Proverbs 24:11-12

Wow!

Okay, you're not going to care about this, but it's my blog.

My Twins swept the White Sox. Two days ago, they were two and a half games out of first. Now, with three games to play, the Twins are atop the AL Central, vying for the last spot in the playoffs.

Tonight, they were getting hammered 6-1, but as Yogi Berra used to say, "It ain't over 'til it's over." Well, now it's over. The Twinkies won 7-6 in the bottom of the 10th. How I'd have loved being in the Dome on a night like this. Instead, I'm glued to ESPN's on-line GameCast like some computer/baseball junkie. Hmmm...

Three more against the Royals and that'll wrap the season. If you've been following this insanity with me since June (who follows the AL Central??), I don't think there's been more than four games separating the Twins and the ChiSox all summer.

Anyway, for me and the land of 10,000 lakes and 10 jillion mosquitoes, we're tickled!

QotD: $$$$

In my "brain" yesterday (my scheduling calendar):

I've never been poor, only broke. Being poor is a frame of mind. Being broke is only a temporary situation.

Michael Todd

This person is obviously not a Democrat.

In a similar vein (through the sage and proven thoughts and ideas of others):

If we are not free to fail, then we are not truly free.

Put that in your pipe in light of the current economic situation.

Dudes: Shmuley

Yeah, it's spelled right. And it's pronounced like it looks. It's a name. A first name. The last name I can pronounce only because I heard it spoken on the radio (Boteach...not bo-teech but bo-tay'-achk...with a Germanic sound at the end). At the time, I thought him an abrasive man as he discussed current events with Michael Medved with a passion I have come to understand as his norm.

He pens with greater subtlety, but his points drive into the belly.

While I labeled this post as for "Dudes" it is for "dudettes," too. His column today confronts our conduct and character, items lacking but ached for in our fleshly focused land. Like Edmund ravenous obsession for Turkish Delight, we lust for and connive to get that which leaves us empty and troubled.

A few quotes:

As women confront the vulgar reality of how men treat them, they discover that becoming masturbatory material to men is not particularly liberating.

Ouch. Is this what women's libber signed up for? The J. Geils Band put it to music in the '80's with "My Angel is a Centerfold." Shmuley rips into such shallow pursuits. He continues:

(T)he only way to truly affair-proof one's marriage is to decide that the pleasure of righteous action and moral heroism by far outstrips anything that can be experienced in illicit sex.

That, ladies and gentlemen, cannot be topped. Read the entirety of his article, please, right here.

QotD: Psalms

This verse came to mind as I was presenting a message tonight at church. The message dealt with worship and praise to God from Psalm 113. I was talking about God's sovereignty over the affairs of man (verse 4). Then, in light of that Psalm and the turmoil of the American election season, Psalm 2:1 came to mind:

"Why do the nations rage,
And the people plot a vain thing?"

The verses that follow will pop you in the noggin. They did me. I have been a distracted man...

Perhaps it is about race

The media excoriated Geraldine Ferraro. Her crime? She suggested to the Torrance, California Daily Breeze:

"If Obama was a white man, he would not be in this position. And if he was a woman of any color, he would not be in this position. He happens to be very lucky to be who he is. And the country is caught up in the concept."

That was nearly six months ago. Amidst the hoopla, she had to resign from her position in the Clinton campaign.

What Ferraro said was not racist in the manner of Archie Bunker or Robert Byrd. Her analysis was spot on, which leads me to believe that a big chunk of this election is in fact about race.

First let me say that Barack Obama meets the constitutional qualifications for being PotUS. But what has elevated him to one of two (electable) in the nation? What has set him apart as the candidate who seemed to have a lock as President #44?

Is it leadership experience? No.

Is it extraordinary heroism or exceptional accomplishment? No.

Is it, as we have heard so often, his ability to unite and build bridges? Consider this. According to the National Journal (here and here), who was the most liberal voting Senator of 2007? Barack Obama. In each of the last three years, his record tilted further and further left as he went from 16th in '05 to tenth in '06, and finally earning his laurels in '07. Number three this past year? Joe Biden.

So is Barack Obama a unifier, bridge-builder, centrist? No.

Authored significant legislation, chaired committees? No, and you guessed it, no.

Can he give a speech? Yes. Masterful.

Is he a smart man? Yes.

Would he be a viable candidate for the Vice-Presidency? Superb (if leftist ideas make you giddy ... an interesting take on that point here)!

But what is it that has vaulted him to #1 on the leftist hit parade? Could Ms. Ferraro be onto something? Is the left so bereft of ideas that they would opt for surface over substance? Considering the threatening rhetoric coming from the left (note an early post), that seems to be the case. Dennis Prager launched from a similar shore in his column today (here) noting the troubling comments being bandied about should the Republicans retain the White House.

If Obama's ideas, platform and political solutions weigh superior to McCain's, vote Obama. If his leadership qualities and proven abilities exceed McCain's, vote Obama. If his actual ability to work across the aisle impresses you over McCain, then vote Obama.

If you're voting for him out of novelty, if you're voting for him because he is black or because he would be the first black president, you are a racist.

KISS

No, not the kabuki-painted, fire-spitting, metal-heads. It's the old saw, "keep it simple, stupid!"

Yesterday, I posted about the idiocy of bailing out those who had squandered their money and the money of others. This column (here) addresses that predicament and is KISS in spades.

You may mock the author's bio (as many did Reagan), but his ideas skewer the bulls-eye!

Checkbooks

As I sit hear reading about the federal government wanting to spend $700 billion (that's with a "B") to prop up a fractured monetary system, I thought about a joke I'd heard a few years back.

A newly wedded husband, who upon opening his bank statement, had a conniption. The account rested $970 overdrawn.

He approached his bride with the statement and asked how it could be that after only two months of matrimonial bliss, they could be approaching one thousand dollars in debt.

She pulled her checkbook out and exclaimed, "It's not my fault. I still have checks in my checkbook."

The United States still has checks in its checkbook, but the account was overdrawn decades ago. The CPR required to keep these failing companies, banks, etc. from dying today (no telling whether they'd survive through 'til tomorrow) requires a financial burden from the population of $2333 per person. No, not per adult person. Not per wage earning person. Per every person.

If I were writing checks (does anyone write checks anymore?) on money I did not have, the government would soon terminate my check-writing in favor of rock-pounding. They'd give me a nice set of clothes, three hots-and-a-cot, but it would be in a local penitentiary.

So why can the government do this? Why can they spend beyond their budget, and then go out and spend even more?

Why? Because we let them. Really, it's our fault. You know, "...of the people, by the people." How do we let them? Silence. No letters to our congressmen. No letters to the editor. Votes. Cast for same-old, same-old without a clue how same-old has voted in the last term on issues of fiscal responsibility (or any issues). Ignorance. We don't know our own Constitution. Neither nor do we hold our legislators and executives accountable to nor do we restrain them in their responsibilities

So Uncle Sam is about to pitch $2333 of your dollars at failing companies with no promise of any return on any of your dollars. And you're going to let him.

Oh, we are a cluster of fools.

There once was a man...

Dudes diss poetry. Yes, that's a general statement. My son railed against rhythm and rhyme the other day despite my countering that the music he loves is nothing more than poetry (some pretty good, some lame to the uttermost).

I came across this limerick a few weeks back amidst Jay Nordlinger's Impromptus, his regular ramblings at National Review Online. The author was not cited. Limericks are indeed poetry. Most often comical. Often ribald. You could almost call them "groaners."

Anyway, it deposited some sunshine into the middle of my day.

There once was a poet named Todd
Whose meter was seriously flawed.
His limericks would tend
To come to an end
Suddenly.

Non sequitur of the day: Patriotism

This was said a few days ago, but it still makes my mind recoil. Joe Biden challenges,

"It's time to be patriotic!"

Ooh, sounds stirring. Sounds compelling? But to what is he referring? Military service? No, that would be a free choice and hence, patriotic. Public service? Nope. Another free choice. Charitable giving? No. Again, your choice.

So what's Joe talking about? More taxes.


In case you think that he misspoke, he respoke:



If my money is being taken from me, and I have no choice, how is that being patriotic?

Again, that's just a snippet, but it jives completely with how the Democrats plan on governing our nation. What they don't get is hitting those who own the businesses and invest in the businesses will only affect those of us who buy those goods and services (apologies to Fred Thompson). Like food. And cars. And gas. And computers.

Islam's rise

Islam continues its burgeoning growth throughout Europe. It's not the message. It's immigration.

"Native" Europeans are not procreating at a rate to sustain their population, but to sustain their socialist programs they need bodies to tax? How to make that happen? Open the doors to immigrants. From whence cometh those tax payers? The Muslim Middle East. As the immigrants enter the land, they continue their baby-producing ways (no problem sustaining and growing their populations).

So what? Many predict an Islamic Europe by the turn of the next century. Others bump that closer to 2050. Mark Steyn, in America Alone, goes so far as to refer to the continent as "Eurabia."

So what, again? All's well and good if we can all get along. That's the point of Marvin Olasky's recent column (here). The problem comes when rather than accommodating themselves to the culture into which they move (when in Rome...), the Muslims have begun to alter the culture to accommodate them, a case made plain in Steyn's book and in Diana West's recent article (here).

We have become brainwashed by T-ball. Someone, somewhere thought it would be nice for each child to bat (likely the parent of a terrible ball player). Someone, somewhere thought it would be nice for the score not to be kept (likely the parent or coach of the team perennially trounced).

But life is not that way. Cream rises...always. Worldviews, the way folks believe and live out their lives, are distinct and are NOT equal. The Islamic worldview and the Christian worldview are, if I may, worlds apart. A cursory study of the foundational documents, the Koran and the Bible, and of the fruits that have been borne out of the societies that truly practiced that which is found within yields the difference between Saudi Arabia and America, England and Iran, and despite the chaos that is France, France and Syria (though as France has moved further and further away from the Bible, they in their godlessness, begin to look more and more like Syria).

Our Founders knew Islam and they knew Sharia law. They chose the principles of Christianity upon which to build a free nation, a nation of responsible citizens, where religion could be practiced freely without pressure from the state, whether Christian, Jew, Muslim, Hindu, or pagan.

As the pressures of Islam begin to push from within and from without, America must stand for the principle of unchanging natural law and the Constitution upon which we were founded. Or by 2100 AD we might just become Amerabia.

Political/cultural web-sites: An assessment

**Warning: While you'll find nothing objectionable within this post, I have linked and discussed a site and articles that, quite frankly, I find objectionable.**

If you've tripped through any of my blogs, you know I highly tout Townhall.com as a great place to get smart on issues. With few exceptions, most of the columnists write utilizing facts and keep inflammatory comments to a minimum (a few exceptions: Ann Coulter, who in my mind has grown tiresome, and Mike S. Adams and Doug Giles, who I happen to enjoy).

For sake of balance, I offer to you the Huffington Post. I know my brother, who is a liberal/progressive, gets much of his information at that site. This morning, in hopes of being enlightened by rigorous rhetoric on the planks of the Democratic platform, I waded into the Huffington Post this morning.

Thoughts and warnings:

• Outside of the three columnists cited from Townhall, you'll find nothing objectionable on the Townhall site. If there is something remotely edgy, there will be warnings about graphic content, etc. Not so on Huffington's site. It is replete with stuff that you'd not share with your children.
  
• Huffington has ample information on Democratic thought; the second columnist on the list today is Barbara Streisand (compare that with Chuck Norris being a regular at Townhall). Of note though, the argumentation within the columns about why "progressive" application tops "conservative" application is disconcerting. Where inflammatory commentary is the rarity at Townhall, it is the norm at Huffington. What do I mean by inflammatory commentary? Unsubstantiated name-calling. In commenting upon a recent Rush Limbaugh radio broadcast, columnist John Ridley wrote:

  "What is it with bigots that makes them think there is a context for bigotry? When much was made of that paragon of virtue Bill Bennett's assertion "if you wanted to reduce crime, you could -- if that were your sole purpose -- you could abort every black baby in this country,"

  "Bill and his supporters claimed that statement was taken out of context.

  "No one who wasn't wearing a white hood has ever fully explained to me what the context is for positing the extermination of black children to lower the crime rate."

  Context does matter from right to left and left to right. That is why I will try to link to the sites that I quote so you can see all of what was said...in context! But context and rhetoric are sparse. Cutting the sound-bite, glomming onto the gaffe, and inciting the masses with us/them labels seem to be the tools of the trade for such sites.
  

I found the Huffington Post disturbing. A great example came from the pen of Francis Schaeffer's son, Franky. I admire much of the late theologian and his works. His son has deviated far from the path of his father. The link is here. There is some vulgarity. The article illustrates the name-calling, negative associations, and general lack of support for its assertions common in what comes from the left. Is he effective? Is the Huffington Post effective? Note the comments below Schaeffer's article.

Anyway, there you go. Townhall vs. Huffington. Right v. Left. Red v. Blue. McCain v. Obama. Now, friends, it is incumbent upon us to determine which stands for biblical principles and which does not.

QotD: Experience & and the (vice) presidency

Sarah Palin has received arsenals of flak for her youth, "inexperience" and potential proximity to the presidency. Clifford May of National Review kicked off his recent column (here) with this gem:

Let’s be blunt: If John McCain wins the election and drops dead during his first year in office, someone not very experienced will become president. But the same is true if Barack Obama wins the election and doesn’t drop dead during his first year in office.

The same is summed nicely by this political cartoon:

Cartoon by Eric Allie

The looming race eruption

I have no doubt some folks will not vote for Barack Obama because of his heritage. It would be nice if we could shuffle such folks off to some isolated island north of the Arctic Circle, but such is life (those voters, not the Senator).

What you will not hear from any media source is that there are likely folks on both sides of the fence so bigoted that they will not vote for Obama. We don't have to look to far in the past to find bedsheets in political closets both blue and red.

Why, then, has there been the accusations and threats from the left that if Obama loses the election, it will be because of race?

I can give you more reasons than I have time to blog why the furthest left member of the US Senate would be a dire selection for our nation, and the amount of melanin in his skin is NOT one of them.

Jack Cafferty, a "progressive" pundit for CNN, muses here that the only reason the polls are so close is because Obama is darker than I am (and that's only because I didn't get near the sun that I've gotten in past summers). That's a wee bit insulting. Does he think that all of us on the right stepped out of "Deliverence" complete with our set of three teeth and an iPod full of "Dueling Banjoes" renditions? Could it be that we are actually thrilled beyond belief that John McCain made a solid "right" turn in selecting the conservative governor from Alaska? Nah! Even Whoopi Goldberg cast her racist stones at John McCain that his running mate is a strict Constitutionalist regarding Supreme Court nominees by feigning concern that she might be destined for slavery. Hollywood (sigh).

Also on the left side of left is Kansas governor, Kathleen Sibelius.

“Have any of you noticed that Barack Obama is part African-American?” Sebelius asked in response to a question about why the election is so close. “That may be a factor. All the code language, all that doesn’t show up in the polls. And that may be a factor for some people (in the evening of the polls).”

Um, Kathleen, it may be a factor on both sides! And it may be because the Democrats picked the most socialist member of the Senate to run for President!

What concerns me most about this assertion being made from left to right is what happens if McCain is elected president? Note this comment from Fatimah Ali in the Philadelphia Daily News (article linked here):

"If McCain wins, look for a full-fledged race and class war, fueled by a deflated and depressed country, soaring crime, homelessness - and hopelessness!"

Wow. When folks start tossing language around like that, the Molotov cocktails aren't far behind. The left, the party that professes to be color-blind, has begun to inject the race card at such regular intervals that it seems they've become addicted. And when the drug gets cut off in favor of personal responsibility, then comes the backlash.

A couple of solid articles came to light today on race ("Barack Obama and White Privilege" here and "The High Cost of Racial Hype" here). It's sad that few on the blue side of the fence will ever read them.

Pray for the peace within our nation if John McCain is elected. I fear we may rip ourselves to pieces.

E'08: Indecision

I'm baffled. How is it that anyone remains undecided this election?

Oh, I follow how one might struggle between one of the big two and a fringe candidate. I can see someone wrestling between Ralph Nader and Barack Obama. I understand indecision about whether to go all in for Ron Paul or for John McCain.

Being undecided about John McCain or Barack Obama requires staunch conservatism on some issues and complete liberalism on others. "Sybil" comes to mind.

A good read: words vs. deeds

This commentary from across the waves, examines Barack Obama, the orator, and Barack Obama, the voting senator, and notes the wide disparity between the Kumbaya singer and the most liberal voter. A perceptive quote:

"This election is a struggle between the followers of American exceptionalism and the supporters of global universalism."

It doesn't get much clearer than that, even from a Brit.

As we continue to slog through the election process, I hope your waders are watertight.

Tip of the hat: Barack Obama

I came across the cartoon at the right by Glen McCoy yesterday. It highlights how deep many believe Sarah Palin has gotten inside the head of Barack Obama and the Democratic Party.

That said, Senator Obama has handled the situation with political grace. Even if his "lipstick on a pig" was meant to jab at Alaska's governor, he deserves a touche' instead of a rebuke. It's a common descriptor, and in light of Sarah's RNC speech, a great retort in the political realm.

It doesn't approach the toxic effluence that has flowed from the left. Therein Senator Obama has shown his grace or savvy, I don't know which. If he's hoping to make this an election about issues and not character assasination, he shows grace. If he sees those trying to destroy Palin as dashing themselves upon the rock of her character, he shows his savvy by distancing himself from them.

Regardless, good on him for speaking against those who have slandered Sarah Palin.

Just another day: Ike

I wish I had an original thought. Since I don't, I'll continue to pass on to y'all the good stuff that I come across as I surf the web.

"Just another day" doesn't usually look at the good stuff, though. We tend to pass through the pages of the calendar and forget that each one is God ordered and God ordained. His good purpose is coming to pass--in and through the alphabet of hurricanes that have beset us, in and through our elections. Through "Just another day," I hope to make you aware of events that have caught my attention.

So here we go...

• Tremors. Okay, this one was more than that. Iran got smacked with a 6.1 magnitude earthquake yesterday. Not to be outdone, Indonesia shook to their own 6.6. In keeping up with the Joneses, the Japenese tipped the scales at 6.9, matching the island Vanuatu's 6.9 three days ago. 6.9! That's more than a kick from the carbuerator.


• Tremors II. This time from a landslide. It killed 128 in China.


• Ike. Fay, Gustav, Hanna. All have caused issues for our country. None, I say with great thanksgiving to God, have brought major devastation. Ike's looming in the Gulf and looking nasty. Meteorologists are predicting a category four by landfall. I looked it up. Those are winds between 131 and 155 miles per hour. Most aircraft begin to lift off at that speed.

Hurricanes, landslides, earthquakes???

Into the geo-political cesspool...

• Viscera. Politics. It's all about mud-slinging, right? Dance through the news sites. Have any of you ever heard anyone spoken against with the ugly rhetoric that Sarah Palin is receiving? If she is inept, unqualified, or criminal, let's hear it. And please, back up your case. But the slander that woman is receiving is beyond the pale (slander -noun, a malicious, false, and defamatory statement or report). I'll provide no examples. You can scan Drudge today or any day in the next few weeks. Matt Damon is the most recent to make his point clear. And the Democratic chair from South Carolina. You have to at least give her credit for the grace and aplomb with which she's handled the assaults.


• Europe & Obama. Seems that if Europe has a say, the Illinois senator will be our next president. 80% of France favors Obama (here). A BBC poll indicates that all 22 countries they polled would go blue (here). If you're toes aren't tickled yet, Russians like Senator Obama, too (here). And the Islamic world (here...more on this one tomorrow). You can tell a lot about a person by their friends.
  


• Kim Jong...ill? Experts (who are they anyway) think that the North Korean president had a stroke some time ago and has been incapacitated. Some believe he is dead. And now North Korea is back to playing Hide-and-Nuke. The only thing worse than Kim Jong Il and his instability is no successor in this nuclear gambit. Waiting to hear North Korea's endorsement for blue.


• Polypolypolygamy. This from the BBC. A Nigerian court ruled that an Islamic religious leader would have to get rid of some of his wives. Eighty-two of them! They wanted him to pare it down a bit. At least he gets to keep four. I don't know how they'll keep up with the 170 kids. Think of the alimony! Yikes.

On that note, I'm out.

------------------------

Okay, not quite. A tip of the hat to my dad. He'd have been 74 today. Now I'm gone.

Life: The chasm between nominees

The protection of life in the womb delineates more than any other issue the difference between presidential choices this November. Yuval Levin examines the topic in this National Review article.

Within the article, he takes note of how science, like the Republican party, goes to bat on behalf the uni-celled, multi-celled, and barely formed child. Over and over, the more science learns about the mind-boggling machinations within the womb, the more they concede the humanity of the child from the moment of conception.

Levin noted that Senator Obama Houdini'ed around Pastor Rick Warren's question during the Saddleback Forum regarding the moment at which life begins. The candidate asserted that the answer was above his pay grade. In other words, who is he to know the mind of God.

Levin summed up the parties' position with this gem of a query:

"Now tell me again which party seeks refuge in theology when it doesn’t like the facts that science helps us know."

-----------------------------------
A number of other articles have surfaced on the strong stand the Republican party has taken regarding the sanctity of human life in its addition of Sarah Palin to the ticket. Some superb articles just today:

• Ken Blackwell, "Candidates Abortion Views Inform"
• Rich Lowry, "Choosing Trig"
• Paul Weyrich, "The Speaker's Unusual Description of Catholic Dogma"

This is about choice, the choice that we as a nation will make to speak out on behalf of the weak, the frail, those who cannot speak for themselves. Will we speak on behalf of the innocents?

Emulation

Once upon a time, a three-year old girl wanted to "chalk" in her driveway. Her daddy, busy pondering the expanse of the universe and the microcosm of his life, said sure.

With effervescent excitement, she began to scrawl. With the honesty of Lincoln, that's the best that could be said of her etchings.

Her name was discernible. And there might be a stairway in there. But one line followed another with little purpose, with little end.

The daddy smiled at the Picasso and moved away from the driveway to the clean slate of the sidewalk. Upon selecting his canvas, he began to draw. His princess came up from behind and took the adjacent slab of concrete to watch what Daddy would do.

As soon as the giggly imp recognized Daddy's drawing, she got to work herself. One shape and then concerted study. Another shape. A line. More examination. More lines, but this time, the picture emerged. And a big smile from two faces.

No lessons were given. No corrections were made. A daddy just drew for his little girl, and the apple of his eye tried, and succeeded, to draw just like him.

Just another day: Complacency

• Fay, Gustav, Hannah, Ike and Josephine: The backups for KC and the Sunshine Band? Or Sly and the Family Stone? Dating myself, I know. Fay amounted to not much. Gustav, for all the roar, dropped some rain but made landfall in a region with low populace. Hanna? More wet. Ike? Losing steam. Josephine? Yawn.

• Tremors. San Francisco rumbled on Friday night to the tempo of a 4.0. Like the hurricanes, it seems a merciful nudge, BUT IT'S FOOTBALL SEASON!! Not to mention the couple of 6.0's in China recently, and I'm not talking about men's diving.

• Goobers. Speaking of football, Cincinnati Bengal Chad Johnson, number 85, wanted to have "OchoCinco," the monikker he prefers the media to use when referring to his holiness, emblazoned on the back of his jersey. The Bengals sanely stated, "No." Not to be thwarted, the wide receiver had his last name changed to "OchoCinco." HA! Take that! I suspect the folks in the Bengal front office still have sore ribs from unquenchable laughter. My Spanish may be rusty, but "OchoCinco" either stands for "eighty-five" or "dork." I'm not sure which. At least illegal-aliens who have trouble with numbers will be able to I.D. the biggest ding-dong between the sidelines.
  

• More shaking. A rockslide in Egypt has killed 24 and buried a shantytown.

• Lame duck. Unemployment, a statistic that's about as clear as the U.S. tax code, is at a five-year high. Looks like President "Pin-cushion" Bush is going to take a few more sticks before getting out of his own personal Nightmare on Pennsylvania Avenue.

• Sarah's savvy. Continuing the stranger-than-fiction rise of Sarah Palin and adding to the extraordinary nature of her speech Wednesday night, did you know that her teleprompter malfunctioned mid-speech?

• Qaddafy, Gadhafi, Khadaffy...or just plain Daffy. Does anybody know why Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice is in Libya's insane assylum? Perhaps Muammar has a to-die-for recipe for humous.

• Continuing the "insanity" theme. A Newsweek article attempting to paint Sarah Palin as Mussolini's bed-fellow begins with this headline: "What Happened to Family Values? Palin's pro-life extremism is as ethically flawed as it is politically damaging to the GOP." So being pro-life now stands contrary to family values? You can read some of the freakiest polemical contortions here. If you understand "2 + 3 = garden hose," you'll track nicely with the article.

• Giving a man a fish. Once again, I'll try and end on a happy note. Economist Walter Williams speaks of the damage that has been done by affirmative action within the Black community in his recent column (here). His cogent analysis applies to government aid in all non-disaster circumstances.
  

QotD: Eyecandy

From across the waves comes a British look at the distinction between Barack Obama and Sarah Palin (by the way, who are the other two guys in the race?):

“What's the difference between Sarah Palin and Barack Obama?”

“One is a well turned-out, good-looking, and let's be honest, pretty sexy piece of eye-candy.

“The other kills her own food.”

Taken from Timesonline.co.uk

Oprah

When Oprah had Democratic presidential nominee, Senator Barack Obama, on her show, she was captivated by the man. Not long after that, and for the first time, Oprah Winfrey threw her weight behind a candidate for public office.

Since then, there has been no doubt in anyone's mind, O is for O.

When Sarah Palin struck the political landscape like lightening, it seemed, despite being political opposites, that to highlight womanhood as Oprah often does, Sarah might be a natural for Oprah's show.

Maybe not so much.

According to Drudge, Oprah has said no way would she have the extremely conservative nominee on her program. Winfrey's team has retorted that the mega-celeb has said no such thing.

Here's the deal: Oprah can do as she pleases; it's her show!

The grumbling from the right toward Winfrey continues to increase its volume and pitch. "She had Obama on her show. It's not fair." Um, it's her show! If she wants to divorce herself from conservative America, that is her choice. Sadly, half of conservative America doesn't give a nit about Oprah's political leanings. They'd still watch her if she worshiped Vladimir Putin (she does, you say?).

This is the same kind of stupid thinking that tells business owners they can't have smoking sections any longer (certain states), or that they can't establish who they will and won't hire. It's their business!

It's coercion.

Frankly, I think it would be genius to have the raven Republican on her show. But it's not my show. If Oprah's viewership plumets into the abyss, I guarantee the businesswoman in her will bring the governor onto her show faster than you can say, "hockey mom."

You'd like to think her motivations would be higher, but we'll never know what moved Oprah if she decides to have Palin on her show.

We live in a country of free people. She should be free to do as she wishes, just as every business owner should be free to do so. Then, let the people decide whether the business succeeds or fails. Is the product brought to us that satisfies the citizens?

Sarah or not, Oprah will likely go on. But at what cost?

"Merge, everybody, merge!"

If you become deluded about the nobility of man's basic nature, you have only to drive on a city highway to become resobered to the fact that we're closer to "The Lord of the Flies" than "The Lord of the Rings."

There's an overpass in our town where many are merging in from the right while many in the flow need to get over to the left to exit. The merge/exit takes place within about a quarter mile.

If you are already established in the right lane going up the overpass, you're set. Folks coming in from the right to merge have to yield to you. Folks to your left have to either move ahead of you or work in behind you. At rush hour, two-thirds of the folks are looking to exit, even those who are just merging.

Because of this dynamic, it's the perfect crucible for human nature.

Today, I witnessed a red pick-up 1) accelerate to force the merging traffic to slow/stop, 2) reaccelerate to disallow an accelerating woman in the left lane to position herself for an exit, and then 3) once established on the long sweeping exit, slow as if to exult himself as Lord of the Off-Ramp.

My head almost exploded watching this.

Why do we do this? Why is it when we get into our mechanized cage we devolve into some hideous troll? "HAH! YOU CAN'T GET IN! HA-HA!" we conquer. "I'LL BE A GIRL IN A TUTU IF I'LL LET YOU BEAT ME TO THE OFF-RAMP! HA-HA!"

Repugnant, rapturous rudeness. It's hideous...and we love it! And it spotlights the darkness of our self-absorbed souls.


At the same time, don't hesitate to honk at the fools, gentlemen. Yeah, I know about road rage, and the likelihood that you'll get the redneck salute. Carrying will alleviate a few of those fears, but at the same time, it's poor citizenry to not police our own. If we don't, entropy (sin) will continue to make mayhem of our motorways. I'd just soon my bride NOT have to deal with knuckle-draggers like that when she's toting around the girls (and her little friend).

With a tip of the hat to Brian Regan, "Merge, everybody. Merge!" Ease off, make some space, and show your brother a little grace. (Sorry)

Handling the Bible: A contrast

I have no doubt that in the next few days, we will learn who received Sarah Palin's first kiss and how many desks received her bubble gum in first grade. Considering Barack Obama's pastor received such media scrutiny, "it's only right" that Governor Palin's pastor, the Reverend Ed Kalnins, receive as deep an examination.

Do you know what they found? He believes that the world is going to face a horrible time and then Christ is going to come back to the earth (GASP)!

Folks don't get Christians because they don't get the Bible. David Gushee, a "Christian" ethicist at Mercer University in Atlanta, Georgia, said about Palin's biblical understanding of the Bible, "To me, it is highly relevant to someone who potentially has her hand on the nuclear button," he says. "If that is her worldview, I would want to know about that."

Oh, yeah! All of us who believe what it says in Revelation want to hasten Christ's return by nuking the world. Sarcasm aside, how is it that they always find the Christian ethicists who believe nothing of what the Bible says? And how is it that folks think your whacked when you expect God to fulfill the Revelation the same way that He fulfilled the rest of His prophecies (i.e. just like He says He will)?

On one side, the media thinks you're daft for holding to the word of God. On the other side of the ghastly coin, they love you to pieces of you say you're a Christian but disregard the majority of what is written.

The heretical head of the Episcopal Church in America, Katherine Jefforts Schori, received "sunshiney" treatment from the USA Today. While the Episcopal Church had been in tenuous straits for awhile as it drifted left in its ordination of women and views on abortion and marriage, Schori's eleveation to Presiding Bishop has begun a splintering of the denomination already in decline.

How heretical are her views?

She sees two strands of faith: One is "most concerned with atonement, that Jesus died for our sins and our most important task is to repent." But the other is "the more gracious strand," says the bishop who dresses like a sunrise.

It "is to talk about life, to claim the joy and the blessings for good that it offers, to look forward.

"God became human in order that we may become divine. That's our task."

You can mark my words that those churches that have separated themselves from the "bishop" will thrive (in the eyes of God).

Kalnins holds to the Bible and is seen as nutty as a jar of Jiff. Ms. Jefferts Schori does her best Eckhardt Tolle with God's word and is praised for her personalized vestments.

White has become black and black has become white.

A woman? A pitbull...with lipstick!

Our Sunday school class has recently gone through an extensive look at God's ordained roles for men and women especially focusing on what the Bible says regarding marriage.

Then comes Sarah.

One of my sons bounced the question off of another son that the media has yet to pick up on. If Christians (Bible-believing, Bible-adhering, born-agains) recognize the biblical direction for male leadership within the church, is Sarah Palin as the Veep verboten? The last post even had a couple of comments dancing on that topic.

The Biblical design, generally, is male leadership. Within the church, that is specific. Within the home, when the husband is present, that is specific. Outside those two God-ordained institutions, not so much.

Interesting that God raised up Esther to be the queen in a pagan land. So, also, as referenced in a recent comment, Deborah to lead Israel for a time. Would God's raising up a small-town wife and mother to the second highest position in the free world be contrary to His word and His nature? I don't think so. Non-standard, out of the ordinary, rattling our John 6 cage?

Could an immense God do something so odd, so unexpected, so confounding and surprising? So wonderful? Yes.

Senors Obama and Biden best lace up their skates and suit up with full-pads if they're going to skate with this inspired woman. She hits hard.

Cartoon by Brett Noel

E'08: Surface or substance?

Great ideas wrestled and wrangled birthed this great nation.

In November, our nation decides its future's path. Many times in our history, the two pathways separated very little, appearing to disappear in the distance at the same point. The end desired by all parties was the same, the means to that end nuanced.

Not so today. From the point of separation the vector of the two parties, while not 180 degrees, are as divergent as I have ever known them to be.

Here's what troubles me. I hear very little about the ideas and their implementation from Progressive America. Even the national media speaks little about the substance of the Democratic Party. The things that I have read from the left trouble my soul.

"But you only stew in conservative writings," I hear you say. Only is a powerful word. My news intake comes from all over. My prominent five sites: CNN, Fox, Drudge, Pravda, and the Jerusalem Post. Others dipped into: NY Times "International" site, Al-Jazeera. I do delight in the clear, cogent, mostly reasoned writing found at National Review, the Weekly Standard, and Townhall.com. I have not found such well-reasoned sites on the left. It's time to go looking.

The most neutral site, though, simply because he links you to other news sources is Drudge. From his site, you can go to the right of anarchy or to the left of dictatorships.

In recent days, while scanning current events, the liberal end of the political spectrum reared itself in shocking ugliness. Consider:

• Michael Moore considered it an act of God, even thanking Him, that hurricane Gustav distracted America from the Republican National Convention. I used to think that MM was considered a cartoon by the left, not really a mouthpiece of that for which they stand, but I have never read nor heard anyone from that side distance themself from the filmmaker.
• If you merely think that Balaam's ride had again begun to speak, not so. the National Chair of the Democratic National Committee, Don Fowler, joked about the same thing to a friend on a plane.
• Note the thick insults toward Sarah Palin from a columnist who finds her selection as the VP candidate insulting (here).
• Extremes. Hyperbole is a wonderful and artful tool...when used like salt. Too much and the entree becomes inedible. This piece from the Philadelphia Daily News illustrates much of my concern about what's coming out of the left (here).
• If that weren't bad enough, Pravda's work is slanderous (here, there are two pages to the article). "Yeah, but that's the sworn enemy of the United States." I might agree with you if it didn't echo the standard commentary found on MSNBC. Notice the author. It's not a Russian. David R. Hoffman is an American, an attorney and a college professor.

Dictatorship. Unjust. Unjust invasion. Stole the election. Empire building. Rich getting richer. Stepping on the poor. Racist. Economic havoc and devastation. Environmental cataclysm. These are the deceitful and incendiary comments regularly leveled by liberals against the current administration or its ideals, unsubstantiated and disproven all.

In deepest sincerity, would someone point me to a site where liberal ideas are clearly articulated? If you know some sites, please include them under comments and leave yourself "anonymous." The stuff I've been reading makes me want to take a bath...and that from the pens of the left.

Can anyone explain why America ought dive headlong into a socialist way of life? We need to wrestle these ideas. Some of them have been in the dark too long and need to be exposed to the scrutiny of the light.

Perhaps such scrutiny will reveal an ideological monster, and after wrestling, we might once again find our paths drawing closer to a common end and the monster defeated. Perhaps.

Frodo

Once a year, far too seldom for my sons' tastes, we cart out the Lord of the Rings trilogy for family movie night. Considering we purchased the extended versions, we watch the three over a period of weeks, and each film takes a couple days (dad's early bedtime).

Last night we concluded "The Return of the King."

As I once again sat mesmerized by the climax of the film. The armies of the west led by Aragorn set out to sacrifice themselves against the filth at the Black Gate to distract the evil forces in hope of giving Frodo a chance to destroy the Ring. Sam and Frodo spend every last ounce of what they had to scale Mount Doom. Watching this unfold, I shuddered at the cancerous depth of sin's grasp on the human heart.

While Sam tangled with Gollum, Frodo summoned what strength remained to haul himself into the mountain's darkness. Sam, casting Gollum to the side, witnessed Frodo's entrance and followed his charge, hoping to witness the final victory.

But the victory does not come. Sam stands dismayed as Frodo stands at the precipice of the furnace eying and caressing the Ring, his "Precious."

Tolkien describes it thus:

Then Frodo stirred and spoke with a clear voice, indeed with a voice clearer and more powerful than Sam had ever heard him use, and it rose above the throb and turmoil of Mount Doom, ringing in the roof and walls.

"I have come," he said. "But I do not choose now to do what I came to do. I will not do this deed. the Ring is mine.!" And suddenly, as he set it on his finger, he vanished from Sam's sight. Sam gasped...

The Return of the King

Frodo knew the ring was evil. He hauled that tonnage over hill and dale to see it destroyed. Upon entry into the mountain's fiery heart, he intended that very purpose.

But the Ring's enticement proved too great. Reason and clarity evaporated like a drop of water on a Phoenix sidewalk. Frodo could not, in his own strength, separate himself from the sin that bound him. He intended to end it, to destroy it, but he could not.

As I look back at my life before Christ, I loved my sin. Having been raised in the church, having been raised with a great knowledge of God's word, I knew that my "Precious" stood contrary to God's design, His will and His plan. Oh, but I loved my sin. Paul describes our inability to separate ourselves from our sin like this:

"And you were dead in the trespasses and sins in which you once walked, following the course of this world, following the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that is now at work in the sons of disobedience— among whom we all once lived in the passions of our flesh, carrying out the desires of the body and the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, like the rest of mankind. But God, being rich in mercy, because of the great love with which he loved us, even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ—by grace you have been saved—" (Ephesians 2:1-5)

Dead men do nothing. They have no strength and no power do anything. That's why God is the mover in this passage. Plainly, God's work of grace in our lives breathes into us new life. Resuscitation. Regeneration.

What events does He use? Different for each soul. A book. A person. A circumstance. For some, it requires the gnawing off of a finger to remove the festering blot from his soul. "...And this not of your own doing (the faith that brings salvation); it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast." (Ephesians 2:8b-9)

As the rest of the movie played out (Peter Jackson should have ended it after the coronation), I thanked God for the lengths He went to (a bloody cross) to redeem an unlovable Hobbit like me from the abyss.

And for those of you who had a hand (or a tooth) in chomping off my finger, thank you, too, for serving as God's agents in my life.

Now the choices begin.

All photos copyright New Line Cinema