Kermit the Blog

For better, for worse, in dream or in reality

2011-10-03T13:07:00.004-05:00

I dream the strangest things. Sometimes I dream jokes that are still funny when I'm awake, even to other people. (To my wife, at least.)

But last week I dreamed a public policy dream that might even be worth sending to my state representative.

I dreamed that Congress passed a law that the granting of a divorce required the signatures of the officiant and one of the witnesses from the wedding.

This means that if someone wants a divorce, they must contact the clergyman or judge who performed service of marriage, plus at least one of the witnesses who signed the marriage certificate (e.g., Best Man or Maid of Honor), and obtain their signatures on the application for the divorce.

Provisions:
- If the officiant is deceased or for whatever reason no longer performing marriages, the officiant's successor or delegate within the officiating organization may provide a signature.
- If a witness is deceased or incapacitated, inheritance rules apply. If a witness cannot be located, the court may designate a proxy witness. (Note that most divorces happen well within the lifespans of the witnesses. Those who seek divorces late in life will have a harder time.)

The point is that those who profess to regard marriage as more than a legal contract can expect the state to support their beliefs and hold them to them. If marriage participants are not comfortable with the commitments required of the officiating organization, they must find an organization that supports whatever escape clause they want.

In legal terms, this policy prevents one party from wresting control of a legal contract from other stakeholders. In a marriage within the church, those stakeholders include the officiant and witnesses.

It prevents a religiously ambivalent couple from using the church to obtain a marriage and thereafter disregarding its influence.

In colloquial terms, it keeps us all honest. It treats marriage seriously. It causes us as a society to put more thought into both marriage and divorce.

This policy does not weaken the state's power to perform marriages, but inhibits its power to grant divorces to those who marry in the church. It takes nothing from the rights of couples to marry, but places on them the responsibility to carefully choose the organization in which they marry and uphold the rules of that organization. If that organization is the state, "no-fault divorce" remains the option assuming the judge and court witnesses are agreeable. If that organization is a Catholic parish, a legal divorce could not be obtained until an annulment is granted by the Church. A protestant church pastor or other clergyman may grant a divorce under the rules of the given organization.

This does not violate "separation of church and state," but affirms the church has a stake in marriages it performs. It preserves religious freedom by upholding the authority of religious organizations.
It further admonishes the church to prepare applicants for marriage and carefully consider which marriages to perform. It gives legal weight to church marriage.

The state can grant a "no-fault" divorce if the state officiated it, but the state cannot usurp the authority of the church to divide "what God has joined together."

To reiterate, this policy:

- Strengthens the inherent link between a divorce and a wedding.
- Eliminates unilateral ending of a union. (The dissolution of a union involves the parties who participated in it inception.)
- Slows down the divorce process for those who profess a faith that resists divorce
- Affirms religious beliefs of churches and marriage participants
- Allows state and religious organizations to continue to perform marriages, respective of religious beliefs

The bottom line is, if your belief in no-fault divorce is stronger than your belief in the permanence of marriage, don't marry in the church. Or, find a pastor who approves the conditions under which you want to be able to end the marriage. Choose an officiant who reflects your beliefs about marriage, and know that the state will support you in living out those beliefs.

I am interested to hear what others think about this idea. Does it have merit? In my dream, this was a federal law, but I know it should actually be implemented at the state level. (Such details aren't so clear when I'm asleep.)

I wish to point out that I do not support "no-fault divorce." At the very least, couples ought to agree to divorce, but some believe "no-fault divorce" provides a necessary escape from an abusive marriage. I thought the policy I've described here might be appealing to those who support that escape clause but believe in accountability.

This policy could even allow a state to define marriage as it chooses, but preserve the rights of churches to hold more restrictive definitions. I do not support the redefinition of marriage by states or the federal government, but again, the policy described here could promote accountability even under those cirumstances.

Let my comments here not be construed in any way to trivialize the pain of divorce. On the contrary, I have witnessed the devastation families undergo when marriages break up. Divorce is always nothing less than a tragedy. But how many in struggling marriages seek the counsel of those who married them before contemplating divorce? Do officiants and witnesses have no interest after the wedding day? Even among divorcees, few deny that some divorces are frivolous. Could a policy like this avert at least some of those?

I invite discussion on this.

Why the wait?

2011-04-27T10:25:00.006-05:00

After snarking at critics for three years, Obama finally produces a real birth certificate. It's genuine, showing he was born in Hawaii.

You can easily even look up on Bing where he lived.

So the big, big question of the day: If this was available all along, and there's nothing incriminating in it, why did he not release it? What point was there in letting the controversy brew until it took Donald Trump to coax it out of him?

The president likely thinks this will make fools out of his "birther" critics, but it really makes him look foolish for holding out until only 38% of Americans believed he was a natural-born citizen. (Meaning: The doubters were not just fringe GOP kooks.) Again, what was the point?

I am glad to see the President vindicated on this matter, but am completely baffled as to why he waited to put the controversy to rest. Was it a game? A Kenyan newspaper in 2004 publicized Obama as the first Kenyan-born senator. The article has been largely expunged from the Web since he was elected President. Why didn't Obama release his real birth certificate to set the record straight when "birthers" started circulating the article, rather than obfuscate thereby arousing suspicion? It's an easy, easy thing he could have done a long time ago that would have fortified his credibility and affirmed his claim to transparency.

But now that he's finally decided to be transparent about this, it's time to inform NPR, Kenyan officials and the First Lady that his home country is indeed the U.S.A.

The Lazy Slander of Pro-Lifers

2011-01-26T12:39:00.004-06:00

Christianity Today has is a great article dispelling the liberal lie that pro-lifers care more for the unborn than for women. Charges that pro-lifers do little to help women after their babies are born are groundless, but the slander is nonetheless repeated in the media and by "pro-choice" opponents.

The author goes on to dismantle the "pro-choice" argument that providing contraception helps reduce abortions, unplanned pregnancies, and STDs. The reality is that they perpetuate the problems they purport to address. It's really a no-brainer: more contraception = more casual sex = more STDs, more unplanned pregnancies, and more abortions.

"... is it any coincidence that Planned Parenthood serves roughly the same percentage of clients for STIs (31%) as it does for contraception (36%)?"

What's worse is that "pro-choice" groups actively oppose and undermine pro-life counseling centers because they cut into Planned Parenthood's business, that business being greater distribution of contraception and abortion services. How is this profiteering in the best interests of women?

"... the charge should be laid to rest once and for all that the pro-life movement is not active on behalf of women, children, and vulnerable persons generally. Those bringing the charge—the same groups that do very little personally to help women and children—should be held to account, both for their lack of real charity and for their refusal to acknowledge that their entire strategy—state supplied birth control and unlimited abortion—has backfired upon the very groups they promised to help."

One reason I know I would make a lousy counselor is that the first question I would want to ask a woman facing an unplanned pregnancy is, "Where is the man who made you pregnant? Why isn't that lecherous coward here with you?" Pregnancy is not merely a women's issue because women don't make themselves pregnant. That men can do this to women and leave them alone to clean up the mess is the cruelest product of the "sexual revolution." Planned Parenthood owes the public a tax rebate for the societal costs it has created. Those costs could be largely alleviated by the quaint but effective practice of monogamous man-woman marriage, which a) prevents questions of paternity, and b) makes men responsible for their treatment of women and the children they produce with them.

What is more compassionate to women and babies? Severing responsibility between "partners," or promoting actual "partnership?" The verdict is in on promiscuity vs. chastity: the former enslaves women and lets men be animals. Chastity is respect - men for women, women for men, respect for human life, and self-respect. Marriage is the vehicle for conveying that respect.

Do I oversimplify? Perhaps, but I do not exaggerate the destruction wrought by the de-coupling of sex from marriage. Proponents of contraception and abortion do not help women lead healthy lives. A truly compassionate approach must steer women and men, however gently, toward a chaste course. I thank God for the efforts of pro-life counselors who take as a sacred charge the task to help preserve and repair lives.

What you won't see at the State of the Union

2011-01-25T10:16:00.010-06:00

Dennis Prager has some interesting facts about the U.S. House of Representatives chamber, and an interesting theory about why they are seldom seen.

Here are three things you won't see at tonight's "State of the Union."

First thing you won't see: "In God We Trust" inscribed above the Speaker's podium. This is typically cropped out by media cameras and almost never (if ever) seen on TV:

Second thing you won't see: portrait of Moses directly across from the Speaker's podium:

There are actually 23 relief portraits of historic lawgivers surrounding the House chamber. All of them are in profile, facing Moses, who is face-forward, staring straight at the Speaker, or tonight, the President.

Third thing you won't see:

It should be worth watching just for that.

Beast creep

2011-01-24T09:10:00.005-06:00

CNN Money reports today that credit cards are on the path to obsolescence, being replaced by the "electronic wallet" capabilities of smart phones.

"... by the end of the year you may not even think twice about reaching for your phone to pay at the register instead of fumbling for your credit card."

The problem with payment methods that are too convenient is that spending money can become a passive activity, like scarfing snacks. I bought three MP3s this weekend with a mouse click. I didn't have to enter any information - I hardly thought about the fact that I just spent money. It was an effortless, almost mindless purchase. How is this going to bring about a return to responsible consumer spending?

This raises the value of my "stupid" phone, though, because it won't be a target for theft. Nobody wants a phone that only makes phone calls.

The inherent problem in this technology is that it's battery-powered. How soon will we hear of some Best Buy customer freaking out that he can't buy a new subwoofer because his iPhone is dead and he left his charger at home?

I think the next trend will be the microchip implant, probably in the hand, something that you can't lose, is extremely difficult to steal (eeww), and doesn't require electricity or a signature. What could be more convenient than that? (That's funny - everyone's account number starts with three sixes.)

That's when I switch to paper currency, if it's still available.

Projecting hate

2011-01-18T09:27:00.005-06:00

I heard Chris Baker on KTLK interview Trent Humphries on my way in this morning. Humphries is a co-founder of the Tuscon Tea Party and has received multiple threats since the Giffords shooting. One of the victims of the Tucson shooting attended a town-hall meeting where Humphries spoke, and interrupted Humphries, shouting, "You're dead!" That man, James Fuller, had gone on record the day before spouting a vile and gruesome diatribe against Republicans that rivals Jared Loughner's lunatic ramblings. Fuller, incidentally, went out of his way to forgive Loughner, evidently choosing to focus his hate on those hateful Republicans.

James Eric Fuller, 63, who was shot in the knee, had told The Post on Friday, the day before his arrest, that top Republican figures should be tortured -- and their ears severed.

"There would be torture and then an ear necklace, with [Minnesota US Rep.] Michelle Bachmann and Sarah Palin's ears toward the end, because they're small, female ears, and then Limbaugh, Hannity and the biggest ears of all, Cheney's, in the center," Fuller said.

Also on Friday, Fuller stopped by the home of gunman Jared Lee Loughner and told a neighbor he was going to forgive the shooter, The Associated Press said.

On Saturday, Fuller was carted away for a psychiatric exam after disrupting the town-hall meeting by taking a photo of Tucson Tea Party co-founder Trent Humphries and shouting, "You're dead!"

The heavens declare the glory of God

2010-11-18T10:16:00.002-06:00

Wow.

Here are some Incredible photographs by winners of the 2010 Astronomy Photographer of the Year contest hosted by the UK's National Maritime Museum.

The Telegraph has a gallery of entries. (Click the Next and Previous buttons on the right to browse the gallery.) I was surprised how many were submitted by teenagers.

Having attempted night sky photography, I don’t know out how some of these photographers got both the sky and the ground in focus. Given that they move relative to each other, tracking one blurs the other, unless you have a lens the size of a trash can and can actually use a fast shutter.

Photo above by Marcus Davies.

Embracing Gridlock

2010-10-28T10:06:00.007-05:00

FOX News reports today:

After Midterm Elections, Congress Faces Likely Legislative Gridlock

Other sources similarly speculate that Democrats stripped of their majorities, or at least their supermajorities, will lock horns with incoming Republicans over tax cuts, stimulus programs, climate change, and every remaining pet project of the Obama administration. Republicans, lacking sufficient numbers to pass counter-legislation, may do little more than block Democrat efforts. How will either side get anything done?

But therein lies a great question: Is this a bad thing?

At a CATO Institute dinner on May 13, columnist George Will made a surprising point:

Gridlock is not an American problem, it is an American achievement! When James Madison and 54 other geniuses went to Philadelphia in the sweltering summer of 1787, they did not go there to design an efficient government. That idea would have horrified them. They wanted a safe government, to which end they filled it with blocking mechanisms: three branches of government, two branches of the legislative branch, veto, veto override, supermajorities, and judicial review. And yet, I can think of nothing the American people have wanted intensely and protractedly that they did not eventually get. The world understands, a world most of whose people live under governments they wish were capable of gridlock, that we always have more to fear from government speed than government tardiness.

To be clear, I support legislation to reduce federal intrusion in local governments and in the free market. Further expansion of federal power must be stopped, and Washington must return more control to states and individual citizens. I want to see this big-government juggernaut reversed.

But this has been one busy bully of an administration who has disregarded opposition and aggressively and speedily imposed a series of giant, unread, barely understood laws and is poised to stack the courts to complete their efforts. The Democrat freight train has used its speed to an unfair advantage, to implement fundamental change before anyone realizes it, and to enforce it before anyone can repeal or stop it.

President Obama makes a habit of claiming Republicans do nothing but say no. (Which is false - Democrat congressional leaders almost categorically refuse to entertain counter-proposals.) But is it such a bad thing to say no? No, we should not spend more money we don't have. No, we should not bail out that corporation. No, we should not take control of that industry. No, we should not overrule state governments. No, we should not consolidate more power in Washington.

An efficient government is tyrannical. A republic is inefficient by design. It resists rapid change, resists sweeping change: a constitution as an immutable framework for laws, 50 states as laboratories of democracy, where ideas can be tested locally before being considered nationally. Consider in contrast that the most efficient governments in history are characteristically the bloodiest.

The bane of the Obama administration has been the impediments of multicameral democracy. I thank God and the founders that they are there. Government should focus on the timeless over the timely, and we all need to renew our appreciation for checks and balances, that is, gridlock.

International Trailer for "Dawn Treader" Released

2010-10-08T11:34:00.003-05:00

As a huge fan of Voyage of the Dawn Treader, I am disappointed with the obvious deviations this film makes from Lewis' original story. It looks like a cool movie, one I could enjoy if I can detach myself from my love for the book. In fairness, this adaptation looks far truer to the original than its predecessor, Prince Caspian.

VDT has some of the most profound themes of the entire series:

- How Eustace gets "un-dragoned"
- Reepicheep's lifelong desire to reach Aslan's Country
- Aslan's revelation that he lives in our world too

I sincerely hope these themes survive, but I hold out little hope from what I've read and seen so far. Theological illustrations and spiritual quests don't sell movie tickets, so faith must give way to thrills. The personal challenges for Caspian, Eustace, and Reepicheep appear to be replaced with a gratuitous battle against an external evil, an evil that was defeated in the first movie. (Really, the White Witch is dead. Move on.)

I can understand the moviemaker's business need for a return on investment, but if money were no object, someone could make a movie out of love for the story. The Chronicles deserve that kind of treatment. I wish someone would risk a box office flop in order to authentically convey the depth of meaning Lewis instilled in the Narnia books.

Rant du jour: September 21, 2010

2010-09-21T10:54:00.005-05:00

Ahmadinejad: Iran will never recognize "the Zionist regime"

Speaking at the UN today, Iranian ~~iman's puppet~~ president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad predictably reiterated his position on Israel:

"The Iranian nation will never recognize the Zionist regime"

Okay, we get that. We, as you know, not only recognize the nation of Israel, we recognize her right to defend herself against you. And if she asks for our help, we will help.

On other issues, Ahmadinejad evidently considers adultery worse than murder:

Ahmadinejad accused the West of launching a "heavy propaganda" campaign against the case of an Iranian woman who had been sentenced to be stoned to death for adultery but failing to react with outrage over the imminent execution of Teresa Lewis in Virginia, according to state-run IRNA.

Stoning is more humane than lethal injection too, I guess.

Ahmadinejad continued:

"Today Western media are propaganda agents who continuously speak about democracy and human rights though their slogans are sheer lies," he added.

Umm, help me out here. We've said you don't recognize Israel's right to exist and you promote honor killings via stoning ... which you just confirmed. What did we lie about, exactly?

Does the U.S. really need need further reason to get out of the U.N. than that they continue to give the floor to barbaric goons? When in the last twenty years has the U.N. been anything more than a forum for sanctimonious tyrants?

Bill Clinton warns Democrats: Don't Underestimate Sarah Palin

Former President Bill Clinton advised Democrats today not to underestimate the possibility that Sarah Palin could be a powerful candidate in the 2012 presidential elections, citing her resiliency and calling her a "a compelling, attractive figure" who knows how to appeal to her conservative base.

Did anyone else force back a snicker when Clinton said, "a compelling, attractive figure?"

Mark Dayton: Minnesota's own John Kerry

2010-09-14T12:10:00.004-05:00

Jonah Goldberg once called Sen. John Kerry "a human toothache with the charisma of a 19th-century Oxford Latin tutor." (With apologies to 19th-century Latin tutors.)

Minnesota's DFL gubernatorial candidate Mark Dayton is cast from the same mold.

"I'm going to use the powers of intellectual persuasion," he said at the beginning of his remarks at the University of Minnesota's Humphrey Institute of Public Affairs. "Taxes, I believe, are the lubricant for the machinery of our democracy."

I read this quote from Dayton's September 13 presentation and I heard John Kerry's voice in my head. (Ouch!) They obviously use the same playbook, but they must even have the same speechwriter.

"We have a moral responsibility ... to make taxes more fair," he said.

When I think of taxes, the first moral precepts that come to my mind are "Thou shalt not steal" and "Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's goods." Or, for some tax morality from a source other than scripture, try Abraham Lincoln:

"Property is the fruit of labor...property is desirable...is a positive good in the world. That some should be rich shows that others may become rich, and hence is just encouragement to industry and enterprise. Let not him who is houseless pull down the house of another; but let him labor diligently and build one for himself, thus by example assuring that his own shall be safe from violence when built."

Dayton continually proves himself a short-sighted silver spooner who believes wealth is either inherited or redistributed, which, although it may be the story of his life, it denies the overall American experience.

And like Minnesota's perennial bore Walter Mondale, Dayton is campaigning on a promise to raise taxes.

On one hand, I admire Dayton's courage to talk up taxes at a time when the entire country is seething over Washington's phenomenally reckless spending and the nearly perpetual and exponential tax increases it will require. But really, Dayton's blindness is staggering. Anyone who still thinks you can target a tax hike at the rich without impacting the middle class with so much recent history to the contrary is chronically disconnected from reality. His "intellectual persuasion" is devoid of field experience.

Dayton's classist rhetoric characterizes a faith in a ruling class that is better qualified to spend money than the people who earn it. It is the sort of elitism that prompted statesmen like Ronald Reagan to refer to government as "they" instead of "we." We (the people) need a spokesman who is not an insider and will advocate for us against a presumptive oligarchy.

Dayton's tax metaphor is apt. His "lubricant" of democracy is what greases the palms, slickens politicians, and speeds up slippery slopes. It's the snake oil that deceives impressionable voters. We don't want to "lubricate" government any more.

P.J. O'Rourke said, "The mystery of government is not how Washington works but how to make it stop." Maybe a little less grease will do the trick.

The truth Dayton and his ilk refuse to admit is that rich people create jobs - real, permanent jobs, better than government can ever offer, but taxes deter job creators from creating jobs. Entrepreneurism creates jobs, but taxes kill entrepreneurism. Dayton's "lubricant" of government burdens the people and kills prosperity.

Minnesotans are tired of Johnny-one-note politicians like Dayton whose only solution to any problem is a tax hike. The lubricant our democracy needs is free enterprise.

Another blow to the Obama agenda

2010-08-25T10:11:00.003-05:00

The score so far:

Adult stem cell cures: Spinal cord injuries, heart tissue regeneration, corneal reconstruction, Diabetes, Lupus, Crohn's, Parkinson's, many more in development.

Embryonic stem cell cures: Zero, zip, zilch.

Obama's scientism is discredited. Despite all evidence to the contrary, he insists we can find better cures by destroying human life.

Obama to Appeal Stem Cell Ruling

U.S. scientists [the ones busy lobbying, not the ones finding cures] reacted with dismay to Monday's decision by a U.S. judge to halt any expansion of stem cell research using federal funds.

Late Tuesday, ... the Obama administration, which had issued an executive order overturning the Bush order, said the Justice Department later this week would appeal the judge's order.

This is just silly. Obama knows executive orders are meaningless.

Then Came the Dawn (Treader)

2010-06-17T11:15:00.007-05:00

Watch the trailer, then read on:

Overall, I think the trailer looks great, though I wish it would have featured more scenes that were actually in the book. I would love to have seen a glimpse of the dragon or the sea serpent (I will be utterly disappointed if those scenes are left out of the movie), the reunion with Caspian, the altercation between Eustace and Reepicheep.

Peter and Susan's cameos... okay, if necessary to snag fans of the first two movies.

But the White Witch tempting Edmund as she did Peter in Prince Caspian? (Another scene not in the book.) Please. It was a bit contrived before, but at least it fit somewhat with a scene in the original story. She has no place in Dawn Treader. The witch is dead. This story is about Caspian's search for his father's exiled friends, Reepicheep's quest for Aslan's Country, and the redemption of Eustace. DT is an epic adventure of exploration and discovery. Fabricating new personal struggles for established characters can only distract from necessary character development for the real key players in this story.

I want to hear from Aslan things he actually said in the book, not just shallow platitudes from a run-of-the-mill fantasy. Aslan is not some wizard or fairy, he is one of the most brilliant literary depictions of the character of God ever devised, and some of deepest meaning in the entire series is conveyed in this book.

As for the Dawn Treader itself, the ship looks fantastic and I think they did it justice. What 3D could really do for this story is to show how the painting of the "Narnian-looking" ship changed from appearing flat to looking real. Imagine the depth of the image slowly emerging - it could be one of the best applications of 3D effects yet.

But the trailer's focus on fabricated plotlines is disconcerting. As I've said before, I prefer Michael Apted to Andrew Adamson as a director, so I will temper my reservations for now.

I hope this trailer was merely designed for Narnia newbies, FX junkies, and gushing girls dying to see the Pevensie boys again. Maybe the next trailer will be for serious C.S. Lewis fans like me.

A Touch of Crass

2010-06-08T09:54:00.003-05:00

In the tradition of the potty-mouthed LBJ, President Obama again makes presidential news unfit for family listening. Peeved at the suggestion his administration is not doing enough to solve the gulf oil spill, he says he is looking for a Democrat to kick.

Yes, his stated scapegoat is a synonym for donkey, the symbol of his own party.

Surprise cameos in "Dawn Treader" film promo

2010-06-01T13:11:00.006-05:00

My calendar is marked for the December 10, 2010 release of The Voyage of the Dawn Treader (hereafter "VDT"). Today's Google alerts featured a promotional display for the movie that has begun appearing in theater lobbies. It includes the major characters from the story, and also some very puzzling additions.

First, it's interesting to see how Caspian and Lucy have changed. Caspian looks six years older as he should, with a beard befitting a seasoned seafaring king. Lucy should look only one year older, but alas, they grow up so fast.

Those who know the Chronicles will wonder what Peter and Susan are doing in the display, since they are nowhere in this story. Am I wrong? Good catch. There is in fact a Susan cameo in VDT [those who haven't read the books and don't like spoilers, skip to the next paragraph] on the island of the dufflepuds, in a "vision" Lucy sees through the magician's book, where it comes out Lucy has been a bit jealous of Susan. But Peter was not in that vision, so I'm not sure what the moviemakers are up to.

I suspect the elder Pevensies are in the display for the benefit of those who do not know the books and are maybe concerned about continuity now that FOX has assumed the Narnia franchise.

My greater concern about this liberty with the story is that in VDT we get the first hints at what feminist critics of the Chronicles call "The Problem of Susan," which is more fully revealed in the seventh book, The Last Battle (LB). [Those who don't like spoilers, just stop reading. I can't keep dodging these topics.] In LB, Susan is grown up and no longer believes in Narnia. She has been seduced by vanity and has lost any sense of wonder or imagination. Those who don't understand Lewis and his faith read misogynist undertones in his treatment of Susan. More jaded cynics infer other perverse ideas, and to them I simply say please get your mind out of the gutter, you've got it wrong. The "Problem of Susan" is simply the pursuit of youth and glamour and the demise of childlike faith, as summed up in LB, "She has spent her entire childhood rushing to be the age she is now, and will spend the rest of her life trying to stay that age." I hope Susan's presence in VDT supports Lewis' intent and not some inauthentic reinterpretation.

As an aside, I've read elsewhere regarding voices in VDT that more than Edmund's have changed. I was very happy to find that Reepicheep will be voiced by the classier Bill Nighy rather than the foul-mouthed comedian cast in Prince Caspian. Reepicheep deserves better treatment than merely Shrek's Puss-in-Boots with a change of fur. Also, Caspian is dropping his clumsy Spanish accent in favor of a more authentic Narnian British accent.

Back the VDT display, the big question is what in the world is the White Witch doing on it? Is there something in Tilda Swinton's contract that they have to contrive a cameo for her in every film? The witch is dead (ding dong). We don't want to see her again until the prequel, The Magician's Nephew. I hope the screenwriters haven't fabricated some silly excuse to bring her in because of the lack of an arch-villain in VDT. It could be a detrimental distraction from the profound underlying plot in the story: Reepicheep's quest for Aslan's Country.

All said, I have high hopes for VDT, largely because I trust director Michael Apted to have a better appreciation and respect of Lewis' themes than the comparatively shallow Shrekker Andrew Adamson.

YouCut

2010-05-14T09:49:00.008-05:00

Here is an innovative project from Virginia Rep. Eric Cantor: You can help fiscal conservatives set priorities by voting on which government program to target for spending cuts.

Our national debt is simply unsustainable. Not only is it immoral to keep passing on such debt to our children and our grandchildren, but we've reached a point where our current debt and deficit levels are hurting our economy and the prospects for job creation and future economic growth.

Right on. Cantor refers to Washington's "Culture of Spending," a polite euphemism for the blind senselessness of increasing taxes and spending during a critical recession.

Europe is witnessing the economic implosion of Greece, and we delude ourselves if we refuse to see this is where our own country is headed. For the sake of our survival, our government must cut spending. Here's your opportunity to tell Washington where to start.

Of the five spending cuts proposed on YouCut each week, the proposal that wins the most online votes will be presented to Congress for an up-or-down vote. It's a clear, practical, and incremental strategy to begin reversing out-of-control spending.

I want to thank my congressman, Erik Paulsen, for promoting this project and for bringing it to his constituents' attention.

Tea and Toast

2010-04-09T10:38:00.005-05:00

Tea Party Target Stupak Won't Seek Re-Election

Rep. Stupak makes no apologies to his former supporters:

"I've fought my whole career for health care and thanks to Barack Obama and my colleagues, we've gotten it done."

Yes, you've done it, but not what you think. Apparently lobotomies are covered under the government health plan. What else explains Stupak's betrayal of his dedicated pro-life base? I imagine on his departure from office, someone will suddenly snap fingers, then the former representative will shake his head, blink his eyes, and say, "No! You can't make me do it!"

But there was no post-hypnotic trance to excuse Stupak's actions. For whatever reason, he made this choice. Why he made a stand seemingly on principle for so long only to join the enemy at the last minute remains a mystery. He claims now that his career was about health care, distancing himself from his own pro-life record. He knew like the rest of us that Obama's promised executive order prohibiting abortion funding was worthless, but he chose this symbolic gesture over effective action (a no vote), and so opened the floodgates for massive expansion of the abortion industry.

I want to believe Stupak sincerely believed abortion was wrong and that he was merely overwhelmed by the cloud of deceit that surrounded Washington during the debate which in the end only Republicans could see through. I want to believe children's lives are truly important to him and that he betrayed himself when he betrayed his supporters. I want to believe this because it's unthinkable to me that someone who takes an unpopular stand for life could deny it without any immediate or eventual remorse.

Why did he vote for the bill? I don't know. Why he is leaving office may be easier to explain. Yes, he knows the anti-incumbent axe will fall in November, and bowing out now gives his party time to groom a potential Democrat successor, but I think there may be additional motivation. I will go out on a merciful limb and suggest it is shame.

Does anyone believe that a politician voluntarily leaves office to "spend more time with family?" I do believe Stupak when he says it was not pressure from the Tea Party movement that prompted him to leave. He's not a Tea Partier - he doesn't believe in smaller government and free markets.

I think he is leaving because he has lost the favor of his loyal pro-life supporters and he has no excuse to offer them. He burned the bridge that we all thought he was defending. Who would fight with a man who turned on his allies? On one side there is broken trust, on the other there will always be doubt. Stupak has broken confidence with both sides and is no longer viable in any party. Perhaps now that he has nothing to lose, his "time with family" can be spent finding what his real convictions are.

For the sake of his soul, I pray Bart Stupak repents of his fateful pro-abortion vote and once out of office denounces the imminent taxpayer-funded abortion machine. Once free of the trappings of Washington and his overbearing party leaders, I pray he joins in the work of the pro-life groups he abandoned and chooses to atone for the lives of the unborn children whose death warrants he and his 218 colleagues co-signed.

HOPE

2010-03-15T10:39:00.002-05:00

Bob got it right with regard to Dems and Obamacare.

The height of government irresponsibilty

2010-03-11T12:48:00.001-06:00

I am convinced the prospect of Washington taking over the health care industry is the biggest threat to our economy at this moment. The free market that made possible the quality of medicine available in our country has become an endangered species. There are many ways to address the difficulties some Americans face in accessing health care, but Congress and this administration obstinately refuse to entertain any solution that doesn't put them at the helm.

House and Senate leaders are poised to force passage of this bill by outright manipulation of democracy against the will of the people. Senator Obama was right in 2005 when he said of the "reconciliation" process, "A vehicle designed for deficit reduction and fiscal responsibility has been hijacked to facilitate reckless deficits and unsustainable debt." Now, the "most ethical congress in history" is rushing to do exactly this.

Please contact your representative and urge them and their colleagues to vote against this bill, take "reconciliation" off the table, and start over on a bill that fixes real problems (high costs, low accessibility) without creating new ones (conscience violations, unsustainable costs and bureaucracy).

CapWiz provides this helpful wizard for sending the message.

I submitted the following letter to my representative yesterday:

- - - - - - - -
Greg Bittner
March 10, 2010

The Honorable Erik Paulsen
House of Representatives
126 Cannon House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515-2303

Re: Please vote "No" on government health care

Dear Representative Paulsen:

I urge you to vote "No" on the government takeover of health care on the following grounds.

1) Even if this bill was a good idea, this is not the time. Our economy simply cannot take the strain of more new massive government spending. It is time for government to do less and let the market work.

2) Government health care means abortion funding. Congress and the President have opposed every effort to prevent this, demonstrating their commitment to forcing Americans to pay for programs they morally oppose.

3) Government health care means the end of patient choice. When government defines what is health care, doctors can no longer choose what services they will provide, and patients no longer choose what they pay for. We will all pay for whatever government defines as health care.

I believe the President and House and Senate leaders are wholly wrong in thinking it is the responsibility of government to be the arbiter of health care. Health care is not a right, but a need. This Congress and this President seem to have lost all appreciation for this distinction. When we turn to government for our needs, we give up self-government, our founding principle. Government must help remove obstacles to that need, but must not become the provider of it.

A takeover of a free market is a frontal assault on individual freedom and conscience, and its cost will destroy an already fragile economy. This bill and the means House leaders are using to force it through is the height of government irresponsibility.

Please vote against this bill, and do all you can to persuade your colleagues to do the same.

Sincerely,

Greg Bittner

- - - - - - - -

Government cannot fix health care and we need to stop pretending it can. It has neither the resources nor the constitutional authority to do what is being attempted. Even if the authority was there, it is simply impossible for government to pay for. Washington's checkbook is overdrawn and its credit limit is exhausted, and our foreign lenders like China may likely foreclose before the fantasy of government-run health care can be implemented.

Meanwhile, the engine of our prosperity, the free market, is constrained. The market has the resources and will provide cost-effective health care if allowed and encouraged through the mechanisms of competition and limits on litigious thuggery. We have already witnessed the collapse of industries whose irresponsibility was subsidized by government, and government has been powerless to save them. Now our government itself is on the bubble. Are we so desperate as to sacrifice our fragile economy to an unfounded faith in the state?

My own convictions about the free market have evolved slowly. I used to be suspicious of it, but I have come to realize America's freedom and free market are intrinsically linked, and when government take control of a market, America becomes less free. This is a cost Americans must acknowledge for government intervention.

The greatest advantage the free market has over government is its resiliency. When a corporation fails, it closes its doors and customers can move on. When a government program fails, it gets more funding and committees in a furious attempt to keep it alive. One of the clearest indicators of government failure is bloat.

In a free market, one boat can sink while others stay afloat, and others are able to help survivors. Government puts us all in the same boat, and at present, that boat is sinking.

Obamacare is utterly unsustainable. Defeat this bill. Free the market. Faith in Washington is ill-founded. Human innovation and industry can and will provide sustainable solutions if they remain free.

No camels, please

2010-02-16T16:44:00.003-06:00

Hillary Clinton's plane broke down in Saudi Arabia. Her staff had to figure out how to get her home to Washington, D.C. The options they considered included a commercial flight, a C-17 military plane, a new plane, or camel caravan. However, all were ruled out. Fortunately, Gen. Petraeus was in Saudi Arabia and offered her a ride home.

Sounds like a setup for a joke, but it's all in today's news.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/02/16/clinton-grounded-saudi-arabia-hitches-ride-petraeus

Nevertheless, let's see who can come up with a punch line. Anyone?

Empty Jar

2010-02-04T15:16:00.001-06:00

I really wanted to post this picture in 2008, but the timing works out after all. Now that the messianic mojo has run out, the Empty Suit has become an Empty Jar. Too bad there's less wealth left to spread around.

Is Brown Too Gray?

2010-01-22T10:20:00.003-06:00

Jeff Miller (aka The Curt Jester) is somewhat pleased, but less than thrilled, about Scott Brown's victory in Massachusetts.

I knew pro-family groups had reservations about Brown, but he was clearly preferable to Coakley and was our best chance at stopping the current push for federally-funded abortion. Brown is evidently opposed to government health care, not abortion. Miller calls him a RINO.

Now I well understand the chess game involved to stop the federalized healthcare plan and the evil it entails. ... as a chess game it is like sacrificing one of your pieces. Unfortunately that sacrifice could entail the unborn on a different vote. Some have rejoiced over the Brown victory calling it 'Baby steps' - a highly ironic term if I do say so myself.

I am far more optimistic than this. I think Miller overlooks the collateral benefits to Brown's win. Breaking the Democrat chokehold on the Senate allows Republicans, including more conservative ones, back to the table they've been barred from. Also, government healthcare with abortion coverage is the battle at hand. Yes, it would be better to have a strong social and fiscal conservative, but Brown offers us the foothold we desperately needed. Conservatives can resume work on turning back the culture of death. Whether Brown helps with every battle, our team is back in the game, and that is reason to rejoice.

From what I've read, Brown's support for abortion seems more out of complacency than conviction. Like other morally lukewarm politicians, he regards Roe v. Wade as established policy and chooses not to mess with it. Miller is right to invoke G.K. Chesterton here, though I have to wonder whether Chesterton borrowed from Ambrose Bierce:

The business of Progressives is to go on making mistakes. The business of the Conservatives is to prevent the mistakes from being corrected.

My definition of "conservative," and I think the current prevailing defintion, differs from Chesterton's. "Conservative" today carries connotative embellishments, i.e., social and moral positions, not merely fiscal and practical. But I think this is the inevitable development of conservatism. Jennifer Roback Morse asserts that libertarian policy leads to the conclusion that stable, traditional families, in being inherently more self-supporting, are the best basis for a sound economy. This in turn validates conservative Judeo-Christian worldview.

Miller will receive pro-life counsel from his conservative colleagues as well as pressure from his party's platform. But I do not wish that he merely conform to this. I agree with Miller that "we should be praying for Scott Brown that he have a truly pro-life conversion." For me, this means praying that he would follow fiscal conservatism to its logical end and find its completion in moral conservatism.

Back to the Curt Jester, one of his comments struck me as an ironic answer to how this administration is in fact living up to its promise of transparency. Democrats' reaction to Brown's election shows the transparency in their motives for nationalized healthcare:

I tweeted the other day wondering about why we are called single issue voters, yet the Democrats are willing to let the health care plan die if we are not forced to pay for abortions.

With that, I am off to the March for Life in St. Paul.

What? No animatronic teleprompter?

2009-12-03T09:24:00.004-06:00

My family and I are getting ready for a trip to Disney World next week. I don't know whether we'll get to visit the Hall of Presidents this year, but thanks to YouTube, I can get an idea what the latest additions look like:

Seriously, here's what it looks like now: George Washington introduces Barack Obama:

I really think it is not a good idea to have the current president speak in the HOP. Presidents need to be judged by history, and Disney World should not be a PR forum for the current administration. I say this even though I applauded the animatronic W and would struggle to not boo the animatronic Obama. As it is, animatronics of current presidents say absolutely nothing substantive, in order to not put off any Disneygoers. So a good show is interrupted by meaningless fluff instead of any time-tested presidential wisdom. It would be fairer and more inspiring to include a montage of famous past presidential quotes: "Of the people, by the people, for the people..." "We have nothing to fear but fear itself" "Ask not what your country can do for you" "Tear down this wall"

It would be reasonable to adopt the U.S. Mint's policy (actually a federal law): Don't feature living presidents.

It turns out the first current president to have a speaking animatronic was Bill Clinton in 1993. It was a little embarassing when the Lewinsky scandal broke and people began booing the current animatronic president, beginning an unfortunate tradition.

I think Disney should discontinue speeches by sitting presidents in the HOP when the next Republican president is elected because a) this will hopefully be in 2012, and b) Republicans are less likely to protest, or are at least more likely to understand a business decision.

Highly Illogical

2009-12-01T11:22:00.005-06:00

"I guess it's somewhat unusual for a politician to be so precise, logical, in his thought process," actor Leonard Nimoy ...told The Associated Press in an e-mail interview. "The comparison to Spock is, in my opinion, a compliment to him and to the character."

This confirms my suspicion, after seeing the new Star Trek, that Leonard Nimoy is senile.

Or maybe he has Bendii Syndrome, the Vulcan equivalent of Alzheimer's.

Obama hasn't a snowball's chance in Gre'thor at achieving the Kolinahr. This president consistently defies logic: spending sprees during a recession, abandoning allies, befriending enemies, ballooning the deficit and calling it cost savings, denouncing success, for starters.

The AP reporter doesn't know Trek. Obama is not Spock, he's Sybok, Spock's illogical fully-Vulcan half-brother from the movie I tried so hard to forget but which has suddenly become useful for analogy.

Kirk: What is this power you have to control the minds of my crew?
Sybok: I don't control minds. I free them.

J'Onn: Where did you get this power?
Sybok: The power was within you.
J'Onn: I feel as if a weight has been lifted from my heart. How can I repay you for this miracle?
Spock: Join my quest.
J'Onn: What is it you seek?
Sybok: What you seek. What all men have sought since time began. [Free health care?] Ultimate knowledge. [Oh yeah. Then free health care?]

Sybok was a utopian who lured masses to a false god through emotional appeals and hypnotic conversions, abusing his telepathic powers to his own ends, violating the ethics of his own people.

Nimoy should remember this scene:

Sybok: Spock. It's me. It's Sybok. After all these years you've finally caught up with me. Don't you have anything to say to me?
Spock: You are... under arrest. For seventeen violations of the Neutral Zone Treaty.

Sybok's fate was to be destroyed by that which he sought, at the cost of many of his followers.

But back to Nimoy, in 1975 he wrote a book titled, I Am Not Spock. He later wrote I Am Spock (1995). He was right the first time.

Footnote: I have to admit that "Barock" (if you spelled it that way) isn't a bad Vulcan name.

Gollum Plays Screwtape!

2009-11-30T11:02:00.004-06:00

Focus on the Family Radio Theatre today released a new dramatization of C.S. Lewis' novel, The Screwtape Letters.

Lewis' stepson, Douglas Gresham, introduces the program.

Screwtape is played by Andy Serkis, a.k.a. "Gollum" from the Lord of the Rings trilogy.

I'm already a fan of the 1990 Audio Literature production with John Cleese as Screwtape. (And no, he does not begin it with, "And now for something completely different.") Radio Theatre's production is not merely an audio book, but a full dramatization with music, sound effects, and names for all the previously unnamed characters such as Wormwood's "patient," now called "John Hamilton."

Might Serkis opt to change Screwtape's regular greeting of "My Dear Wormwood" to "My precioussss?"

And the wall came tumbling down

2009-11-08T22:33:00.010-06:00

November 9, 2009 marks the 20th anniversary of the liberation of East Germany and the reunification of a divided nation.

November 9, 1989

It was on June 12, 1987 that President Ronald Reagan made his famous challenge, "Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!"

Reagan's words turned prophetic when the wall was torn down two and a half years later. It was possibly the most significant victory for democracy and freedom in the past 50 years, and its symbolic impact was even greater.

Ben Stein used images of the fall of the Berlin Wall in his inspiring conclusion to the film, Expelled, as a metaphor for academic freedom.

It was an event that righted the course of western civilization and was hailed around the world as a victory for all humanity.

It is being celebrated today in Berlin and around the world.

But our president will not be there.

It is inexcusable and truly shameful for the President of the United States to be absent from this event. I might even cut Obama some slack for having urgent business in Washington, were it not for that visit to Copenhagen to lobby for the Olympics, or his upcoming trip to Oslo to accept his (laughable) Nobel Peace prize.

If any man in the past 50 years deserved a Nobel Peace Prize, it was President Ronald Reagan, who had the courage to stand up to the bullies everyone else appeased, and demanded freedom.

In 1999, my wife and I visited Germany for the first time on a family history research tour. In a cemetery in Oettingen, Germany, we were surprised by an elderly German woman who approached us. She recognized we were Americans, and she began to seemingly pour her heart out to us about how the Americans helped rebuild Germany after World War II. My wife spoke only a little German and was barely able to keep up, but I videotaped some of the conversation and we translated more after we got home. The woman told us how the Russians trashed Germany everywhere they went, but (here her toned changed dramatically) the Americans helped restore the country.

The woman expressed deep concern for how young people in Germany were forgetting what socialism did to East Germany. She then took our hands and said to us, "Danke shoene," then still grasping our hands, said, "Vergessen nicht Deutschland!" ("Do not forget Germany.")

Oettingen

The old woman's gratitude was not for us, but for our country, our soldiers, and our presidents who helped liberate Germany not only in World War II, but in the Cold War.

I am ashamed our current president is not representing them today and is not personally recognizing the significance of this day in the history of the free world. This is Germany's day, but it is also a day to acknowledge of the role and responsibility God has given the United States as a force for good. The United States of America is the reason there is a "free world."

I believe this is what the old woman in Oettingen was telling us. While Germany was freed from the grip of a socialist regime, we need to make sure our people do not forget what socialism did to Germany.

"Vergessen nicht Deutschland!"

You will be happy and controlled

2009-11-08T22:25:00.003-06:00

We shall take care of them ... and you will be happy, and controlled.

The passage of the House health care bill yesterday brought this picture to mind.

One of my favorite episodes of the original Star Trek series is I, Mudd. If you need a refresher (or *gasp* you haven't seen it), the Enterprise crew are taken captive by a race of benevolent robots determined to serve humanity and to protect humans from themselves.

One scene reveals what I consider a good description of an anti-free-market, pro-government-control rationale. The master robot, Norman, explains why happiness and safety are better than freedom:

NORMAN: Your species is self-destructive. You need our help.
KIRK: We prefer to help ourselves. We make mistakes, but we're human. And maybe that's the word that best explains us.
NORMAN: We will not harm you, but we will take the starship, and you will remain on this planet.
…
NORMAN: We cannot allow any race as greedy and corruptible as yours to have free run of the galaxy.
SPOCK: I'm curious, Norman. Just how do you intend to stop them?
NORMAN: We shall serve them. Their kind will be eager to accept our service. Soon they will become completely dependent upon us.
ALICE 99: Their aggressive and acquisitive instincts will be under our control.
NORMAN: We shall take care of them.
SPOCK: Eminently practical.
KIRK: The whole galaxy controlled by your kind?
NORMAN: Yes, Captain. And we shall serve them and you will be happy, and controlled.

(The complete script for the episode is at http://tinyurl.com/ybhmzkr.)

Elmer Fudd on Capitalism

2009-10-16T10:21:00.007-05:00

America is a capitalist country. It always has been, thanks to the wisdom of its founders who believed in individual liberty. Our economy became the largest and most productive in history because our people were free to innovate and profit from their own innovations, and were free to compete with other producers. Innovation and competition in a free market make higher-quality products available for lower prices to more people. They also create jobs and raise the overall standard of living. The American free market produced the most prosperous society in human history, and it remains available to everyone as long as it remains free.

I didn't really learn capitalism in my formative years, due either to my disinterest or deficiencies in my public education. But I remember these two cartoons I watched on Saturday morning:

Heir-Conditioned (1955)

Yankee Dood-it (1956)

I learned that these two cartoons were actually commissioned by the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation in the mid-1950s, to provide an entertaining introduction to how capitalism works. The first in the series, By Word of Mouse (1954), is not available online, but all three are on DVD.

Today, some people in our country, including unfortunately our President, have lost faith in capitalism, partly because of the moral failings of a few businessmen. These moral failings by individuals show flaws in humanity, not in capitalism. How many million more businesses continue to operate successfully and with integrity? How many more businesses continue every day to benefit their customers and employees, and build the economy?

Business is not the bad guy. Capitalism remains our best engine for prosperity, but our public schools do not currently teach it as such. They show our kids snide anti-capitalist propaganda like The Story of Stuff (a real looney tune). How about something that's actually fun to watch, and tells kids how to engage in the free market and build a future?

Elmer Fudd needs to host a conference for the NEA.

Operation Coffeecup

2009-08-18T10:42:00.005-05:00

In 1961, while a private citizen and a registered democrat, Ronald Reagan recorded a message titled, Ronald Reagan Speaks Out Against Socialized Medicine. The record was produced and distributed by the Women's Auxiliary of the American Medical Association as part of a campaign named "Operation Coffeecup." The record came with an informational packet encouraging members to listen to the record with their friends, and then write letters to their congressmen urging them to oppose the current socialized healthcare bill.

Michael Moore mocked Operation Coffeecup in his 2007 film SiCKO, selecting potentially conspiratorial-sounding excerpts and conveniently omitting that many democrats promoted the campaign.

This past week, the complete recording has been going viral on YouTube, promoted in e-mails by CURE and the American Family Association, among others.

TexasBestGrok has the story on the record plus the complete recording in MP3 format, including Reagan's introduction omitted on YouTube. Kudos to The Lonely Conservative for transcribing the complete text.

Reagan's message here as clear and insightful as his presidential speeches, and it is almost haunting how much of it could have just as well been written this year. In his history of socialized medicine campaigns, he cites the Truman plan referenced by President Obama during his campaign. And he addresses the argument I've heard most often this past week:

Now the advocates of this bill, when you try to oppose it, challenge you on an emotional basis. They say “What would you do, throw these poor old people out to die with no medical attention?” That’s ridiculous and of course no one’s has advocated it.

Then, as now, proponents of the bill would not entertain alternative proposals, as Reagan points out:

As a matter of fact, in the last session of Congress a bill was adopted known as the Kerr-Mills Bill. Now without even allowing this bill to be tried, to see if it works, they have introduced this [socialized health care bill]

What is the Kerr-Mills Bill? It is a frank recognition of the medical need or problem of the senior citizens that I have mentioned. And it is provided from the federal government money to the states and the local communities that can be used at the discretion of the state to help those people who need it.

Reagan advocated local administration and local distribution of government health care funds for those who need it, rather than a sweeping socialized health care system for all. Above all, he warned that socialized medicine would be a foot in the door to more advanced forms of socialism, adding that, "Governments don’t tax to get the money the need; governments will always find a need for the money they get."

I think this is as good a time as any to revive Operation Coffeecup. Download the complete recording (intro, part A, and part B), or listen on YouTube, and follow along with The Lonely Conservative's complete text.

Served by the Lords of Kobol

2009-05-07T14:51:00.003-05:00

Being in the tea business, and a bit of a sci-fi geek, you can understand why when I mistakenly typed "Ceylon Tea" as Cylon Tea the other day, the picture that came into my mind was:

More scones, byyy yourrr command.

"Up" looks like a 3-D thrill ride

2009-05-05T10:41:00.006-05:00

I just looked up this preview of Pixar's upcoming Up at Fandango. It will be shown in digital 3-D, and in standard 35mm for the weak-stomached. (Don't want any lunches coming ... you know.)

I can tell some scenes will make my toes curl.

More trailers at movie-list.com.

Horton Hears a Truth

2009-05-04T14:01:00.006-05:00

My family and I recently watched last year's remake of Horton Hears a Who, starring the voices of Jim Carrey and Steve Carrell. It had all the frenetic slapstick and the gratuitous bathroom humor I've come to expect from any non-Pixar CG animation project. What I looked for in all that zaniness, and was pleased to find, was that the simple, undeniably pro-life message came through: "A person's a person, no matter how small."

I say the message is undeniably pro-life, but found it incredibly ironic that the author of the story nevertheless denied it.

According to Seuss biographer Philip Nel, Theodor Geisel, alias Dr. Seuss, actually threatened to sue pro-life groups for co-opting Horton's famous line. This begs the question, "What did the author mean, then?" Horton's statement was simple and profound, and to say it doesn't apply to the unborn is to say it means nothing at all.

After seeing the movie, I designed this bumper sticker for my car, knowing I was not the first to think of it.

Horton was right on, and whether pro-lifers use his words verbatim, this is exactly what they have been saying all along. It is a transcendent truth professed for millennia, even by the earliest Christians who rescued discarded infants from the rivers of Rome, long before Dr. Seuss translated it into a memorable motto.

Who else today has the courage and wisdom to risk reputation and personal safety to protect lives others deny exist? It's a shame that Geisel did not have the moral sense of the hero he created. But it shows that Horton's inspiration came from a greater Source.

When Pork Flies

2009-04-29T17:11:00.009-05:00

I was just saying last night, "Has Obama ever heard of Photoshop?"

It cost $328,835 to fly Air Force One and its F-16 escorts over New York this week for what the White House claims was a photo op.

Here's Air Force One over Minneapolis. I did this in five minutes. Give me an hour and $50, I could do it better, with twenty F-16s if you want, and save the country $328,785.

Scrappleface today presented a similar idea:

Iran Offers Obama Advice After Air Force One Scare

“Mr. President, the next time you need a photo of your plane near some major metropolitan area,” Mr. Ahmadinejad said, “there’s a way to do it without evoking the nightmare of 9/11 in the streets of New York City — it’s called Photoshop.”

UPDATE:

Here are some more photo ops for Air Force One:

Havana

Caracas, Venezuela

Chicago

What's wrong with this picture?

2009-04-25T22:55:00.006-05:00

Is anyone as creeped out by this as I am?

WorldNetDaily reports that an artist named Michael D'Antuono created this painting outrageously titled, "The Truth," to commemorate President Obama's 100th day in office.

I struggle to understand what the artist is trying to do with this work. I first assumed it must be a joke, tasteless at best, blasphemous at worst. It may be merely a marketing stunt to get knee-jerk publicity from Christians, in which case I'm one of the duped.

The most frightening possibility is that this is really how the artist views the President. More frightening than that is that there are more like him. In January, an artist in Iowa created a sculpture depicting Obama riding a donkey, complete with waving palm branches, to reflect Christ's entrance into Jerusalem in the gospels.

This is the sad state of religion in the United States: having abolished the real religious traditions of our country, we still have an innate need to worship something. The new religion is government, and the people have elected their Messiah.

It's political cliche to say that liberals look to government for their salvation while conservatives look to God. But statements like these from the art community show conservatives do not misrepresent the opposition.

Those out there who still believe as our founders did that America has no king but God, and that individual liberty and industry are still the machinery that keeps our country alive, please wake up. D'Antuono's painting should shock reasonable people into seeing what kind of a truly kooky future we have ahead of us if we don't stand up to this kind of nonsense.

UPDATE:
After sampling the artist's online galleries, I'm convinced he is merely a sensationalist capitalizing on controversy. He knew those who still consider Obama the messiah portrayed during the campaign would buy it, and those offended by the portrait would give it loads of free publicity. If Christ is a meaningless historical figure to you, it's a smart business move.

A friend of mine said art should "make us think," and said good for the artist that he succeeded. It does made me think. I think the artist should continue the religious themes, and depict Obama as Mohammed receiving the Revelation. See how that sells.

MORE UPDATES:
Artist cancels showing of unconventional Obama portrait

"I canceled the showing out of respect for religion. It was not meant to offend so many people," he said. "I don't think it would be helpful to the cause of unity to show it."

Ya think?

Toasted Peeps!

2009-04-17T21:00:00.004-05:00

A sure sign of spring: The first campfire on the patio, and the last marshmallow Peep...

Wish we had s'more.

America needs you, Ronald Reagan

2009-04-17T13:34:00.007-05:00

Chicago's song, "Harry Truman," has resurfaced in my mind many times this year. Robert Lamm wrote his warm-hearted tribute in 1975, after Nixon's resignation, in nostalgic longing for a president who was witty, forthright, and honest.

I have the same longing, and I think it's time for a remake. Here's how the song plays in my head:

America needs you
Ronald Reagan
Ronnie could you please come home
Things are looking bad
I know you would be mad
To see what kind of men
Prevail upon the land you love

America's wondering
How we got here
Ronnie all we get is lies
We're gettin' safer cars
Rocket ships to Mars
From men who'd sell us out
To get themselves a piece of power

We'd love to hear you speak your mind
In plain and simple ways
Call a spade a spade
Like you did back in the day
You'd still be the cowboy
Each morning take a ride
Speak of what was going down
With honesty and style

America's calling
Ronald Reagan
Ronnie you know what to do
The world is turnin' round and losin' lots of ground
Oh Ronnie is there something we can do to save the land we love
Oh whoa whoa whoa

America's calling
Ronald Reagan
Ronnie you know what to do
The world is turnin' round
And losin' lots of ground
So Ronnie is there something we can do to save the land we love
Oh Ronnie is there something we can do to save the land we love

Original lyrics here. Listen to a sample on Lala.com or Yahoo Music.

Do this in memory of Me

2009-04-09T10:18:00.006-05:00

There are many issues I want to blog about, but nothing is more important than what my family and Christians around the world observe today: Holy Thursday, or Maundy Thursday.

Then he took a piece of bread, gave thanks to God, broke it, and gave it to them, saying, "This is my body, which is given for you. Do this in memory of me." In the same way, he gave them the cup after the supper, saying, "This cup is God's new covenant sealed with my blood, which is poured out for you." - Luke 22:19-20

If just for this moment, I want to think of nothing else.

This can't be Kosher

2009-04-09T10:16:00.003-05:00

President Obama is hosting a Passover Seder, but so far all he's served is pork!

So who will play Obama?

2009-04-02T14:47:00.004-05:00

Ayn Rand's Objectivist treatise, Atlas Shrugged, may finally make it to the big screen in 2011.

For those not familiar with the story, Atlas Shrugged is a novel about visionary entrepreneurs struggling against a confiscatory government taking over industries and instituting socialism during a global economic collapse. Sound ... familiar? It would be easy to call it a diatribe against the current administration were it not written fifty years ago.

The story has everything to entice contemporary audiences: mystery, conspiracy, gadgetry, scandal, political intrigue, disappearances, love triangles, and a chic retro-1950s setting. Those on the rabid left will enjoy the anti-religious tone and military buffoonery in Rand's narrative. Those wary of "stimulus," "bailouts," and other government interference in the market will find profound resonance with the current crisis in American capitalism. Atlas is a pro-free-market camp meeting.

The movie project has been in development for so many years, producers once hoped to cast Faye Dunaway and Clint Eastwood in the lead roles. Now, they're hoping for Angelina Jolie or Anne Hathaway for story's heroine.

It's no coincidence that interest in the book and the movie are experiencing surges. Although I have my own reservations about the story, I look forward to the movie and the inevitable firestorm it will generate. The timing could hardly be better.

Join the National TEA Party!

2009-03-24T11:05:00.003-05:00

Here it is! An organized opposition to the hideous expansion of government: The National TEA ("Taxed Enough Already") Party!

Clear your calendar for April 15, 2009. This ought to be good.

http://www.teapartyday.com/

Minnesota's organizers have assembled their own site:
http://teapartymn.com/

My wife and I have been lamenting for weeks how powerless we feel to do anything to stop the onslaught of socialism and catastrophic debt. This is our chance to publicly stand up to the Obama-Pelosi-Reid Axis of Irresponsibility. I want to be there if only to show solidarity and encourage others who want to see this monster reined in.

Please consider attending on April 15 and making our collective voice loud enough to be heard in Washington.

Happy 200th birthday, Mr. President

2009-02-12T11:41:00.004-06:00

Today marks the 200th birthday of one of my first heroes, President Abraham Lincoln.

I can't at this moment go in to all the reasons I admire this man and president, only this: In this culture of moral ambiguity, America desperately needs leaders of Lincoln's integrity and conviction. In this national identity crisis, we need Lincoln's commitment to liberty and unity. Lincoln believed America was special, set apart from other nations, that our noble experiment was worth preserving, and at great cost. I thank God for his example.

Footnote: Today's Breakpoint notes that Abraham Lincoln, Felix Mendelssohn, and Charles Darwin were all born 200 years ago today. This seems almost as cosmically significant as JFK, C.S. Lewis, and Aldous Huxley dying on the same day in November 1963.

Health care is a responsibility, not a right

2009-02-11T12:23:00.003-06:00

I just wanted to say it, and urge anyone reading this to make this point to your legislators.

This was one of the clearest divisions during the second presidential debate in 2008. To the question, "Is health care a privilege, a right, or a responsibility?" McCain gave the reasonable answer: "A responsibilty." Obama gave the socialist answer: "A right."

With a health care industry (critical note: it's still an industry, not a "system," as though government already owned it) already fettered with regulations and corporate bureaucracy, we have the most liberal administration in history poised to make it a government behemoth. You think it's tough getting health care now? (I don't, frankly.) You haven't seen inefficiency yet.

The best metaphor I can think of for government health care is an enlarged heart. It sounds like a good thing, but it's actually deadly. It results from excessive strain on the heart, causing it to expand in an effort to compensate, accumulating excess fluid in the process. This makes the heart weak and inefficient, leading to congestive heart failure, where the heart can no longer pump enough to sustain the body.

This is what an increase in government oversight will do to health care. Our government was not designed to provide medicine and insurance, and past generations did not expect it to. Any government-mandated availability of health care must necessarily be accompanied by a decrease in quality.

Government is incapable of producing or distributing health. Health cannot be a right any more than happiness can be. We can debate the boundaries of programs like Medicare as part of a government "safety net," but it must remain a net, with boundaries. Health care overall must remain privatized to remain effective.

It is the responsibility of each citizen to seek out the health care he or she needs or wants. This is liberty, the freedom to take care of yourself. If you expect the government to take care of you, know what it will cost you.

"Dawn Treader" Back on Course

2009-01-30T13:35:00.006-06:00

Disney abandoned the Narnia franchise in December due to disappointing returns for Prince Caspian. (Lesson: Make a movie based on the actual book!)

Walden Media still owns the movie rights, fortunately, and Twentieth Century Fox has agreed to finance and distribute Voyage of the Dawn Treader for a Christmas 2010 release.

More news

Obama's Selective Memory

2009-01-19T10:46:00.004-06:00

Tomorrow, January 20, 2009, Barack Obama will re-trace part of the Lincoln Inaugural route by train, and then take the oath of office using the Lincoln Bible.

This is an interesting tribute, and I sincerely hope it is not mere pageantry. But, do we have reason to believe President Obama has intentions of governing like the first Republican president?

Lincoln did not believe in "spreading the wealth around":

"Property is the fruit of labor... it is a positive good in the world. That some should be rich shows that others may become rich, and hence is just encouragement to industry and enterprise. Let not him who is houseless pull down the house of another; but let him labor diligently and build one for himself, thus by example assuring that his own shall be safe from violence when built."

On waging a just but unpopular war, Lincoln wrote:

"The probability that we may fall in the struggle ought not to deter us from the support of a cause we believe to be just; it shall not deter me."

On the courts and litigation:

"Discourage litigation. Persuade your neighbors to compromise whenever you can. As a peacemaker the lawyer has a superior opportunity of being a good man. There will still be business enough."

On public morality (emphasis mine):

"In great contests each party claims to act in accordance with the will of God. Both may be, and one must be, wrong. ... it is quite possible that God's purpose is something different from the purpose of either party - and yet the human instrumentalities, working just as they do, are of the best adaptation to effect His purpose."

And on the value of human life:

"Nothing stamped with the divine image and likeness was sent into the world to be trodden on."

The Family Research Council is offering a free screensaver and desktop wallpaper featuring this quote and a photo of President Lincoln, with the question, "Are not unborn children so stamped?"

It is historical irony and a horrendous shame that the first black president, hailed by many as the culmination of Lincoln's and King's efforts, should promote the view that human life is not inherently worthy of the protection of law.

The Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA), which Obama has pledged to pass, not only strips away all remaining protections for unborn human life, it overrides democracy and state's rights, and it overrules Freedom of Conscience for those health professionals and institutions that refuse to perform abortions or distribute abortifacients. This is abhorrently anti-democratic and must be opposed by every means.

While I understand the joy many in our country feel at the election of an African-American president, I am greatly dismayed that this President also shares the distinction of being the most radically pro-abortion. But wasn't it the goal of Lincoln and King that race should become irrelevant in the choosing of our leaders? Let it not be suggested that race mattered to those like me who opposed Obama on the basis of policy. Had Obama expressed Lincoln's ideals, I would have proudly voted for him.

Tomorrow, January 20, 2009, I will pray for our new President, that he be given wisdom and insight to justly govern our nation. This Thursday, January 22, 2009, I will join the March for Life at our state capitol, one of the goals of which is the defeat of of FOCA. I pray the march is attended by many who voted for our new President, however optimistic that he might change his mind on abortion "rights." Whatever their reasons for supporting him, I do not believe 53% of Americans support Obama's pro-abortion agenda, and I hope some of them are among the first to try to persuade him.

Would that Obama's homage to Lincoln be not shallow symbolism, but a sincere adoption of Lincoln's principles. That's change we need.

History will show that George W Bush was right

2009-01-15T11:27:00.005-06:00

In the London Telegraph today a British historian evaluates the presidency of George W. Bush.

On the War on Terror:

One thing [historians] will doubtless conclude is that the measures [Bush] took to lock down America's borders, scrutinise travellers to and from the United States, eavesdrop upon terrorist suspects, work closely with international intelligence agencies and take the war to the enemy has foiled dozens, perhaps scores of would-be murderous attacks on America. There are Americans alive today who would not be if it had not been for the passing of the Patriot Act. ...

Sneered at for being "simplistic" in his reaction to 9/11, Bush's visceral responses to the attacks of a fascistic, totalitarian death cult will be seen as having been substantially the right ones.

On the economy:

The credit crunch, brought on by the Democrats in Congress insisting upon home ownership for credit-unworthy people, will initially be blamed on Bush, but the perspective of time will show that the problems at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac started with the deregulation of the Clinton era.

On the man:

Films such as Oliver Stone's W, ... will be revealed by the diaries and correspondence of those around him to be absurd travesties, of this charming, interesting, beautifully mannered history buff who, were he not the most powerful man in the world, would be a fine person to have as a pal.

This president has endured rabid, irrational, blind hatred I believe is unprecedented in history. Yet, never did he pound a podium or wag an angry finger in his defense. Calmly and undauntedly, he kept his focus the safety of this country, and has shown himself a greater man than any of his petty detractors.

The Bush legacy, in summary: No terrorist attacks on American soil since September 11, 2001. None. Zero. Zip.

The Gift That Keeps on Taking

2008-12-08T13:18:00.005-06:00

This is sick! Gift certificates for abortions? Celebrate the season of Christ's birth by taking the life of a helpless, innocent child. This could be demented satire. It's hard to believe it's true. Lord, have mercy.

The Family Research Council reports:

Planned Parenthood of Indiana is offering a new gimmick to drive business. Purchased holiday gift certificates can now be redeemed for any service the organization offers -- health screenings, birth control and, yes, even abortions. Planned Parenthood (PP) is marketing the program as an aid to needy women requiring basic health care. However, there is ample evidence that the Indiana Planned Parenthood has violated the legal protections of the very youngest ones it claims to help, including charges of non-compliance with state statutory rape reporting laws. The organization also lobbies against ideas such as parental notification laws that would protect minors who are pregnant.

Planned Parenthood's slogan for the offer, "Choice on Earth" lowers crass commercialism to the depths of hell itself.

Please join me in contacting Indiana House Majority leader Russ Stillwell and ask him to defund Planned Parenthood in Indiana.

Then, make a Christmas donation to an organization like New Life that provides real help to women facing crisis pregnancies.

Who Gave You the Right?

2008-12-06T22:43:00.006-06:00

Atheists in Olympia, Washington are exercising their right to free speech by denouncing the granter of that right.

A plaque placed next to a Nativity scene at a public building reads, "At this season of THE WINTER SOLSTICE may reason prevail. There are no gods, no devils, no angels, no heaven or hell. There is only our natural world."

I have no problem wishing our Atheist friends a happy Solstice, but I see no call for such a frontal assault on the beliefs of the majority of the public. Christmas and Solstice observances aside, I want to explore the implications of the Atheist proclamation above.

The denouncement of Heavenly authority is significant to the definition of rights in a society. In an Atheist society, only humans can grant human rights.

If you'll pardon the expression, God help us.

According to the founding documents of this country, the rights of U.S. citizens are not granted by the government. Americans are "endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights." That means the government did not give them, and the government cannot take them away.

The principle of intrinsic rights is the basis of American democracy, and it depends on the recognition of a Creator. The question to ask is: Where does an Atheist get his rights from? If not from God, they must come from the state, and therein lies a serious problem for democracy.

Objective rights are based on an objective authority, and there is none besides God. Ignore God and the best you have is subjective rights, based on the opinions of shortsighted, fallible humans. The founders of this country believed in a Natural Law expressed in the very workings of the universe, physical laws and moral laws and inevitable consequences to human behavior. Natural Law was a pattern imprinted on Nature by Nature's God. Therefore laws and morality transcend human opinions and whims, yet they are knowable and immutable, and it is the task of every leader in a democracy to use every ounce of their reason to discern these transcendent laws.

C.S. Lewis expressed it this way: "Subjectivism about values is eternally incompatible with democracy ... if there is no Law of Nature, the ethos of any society is the creation of its rulers, educators, and conditioners."

Are right and wrong to be based on our own opinions, or worse, the opinions of our rulers and educators? For right and wrong to be nondebatable, they must not belong to humans, but to a higher authority.

Moving on to the Olympia Atheists' further accusation: "Religion is but myth and superstition that hardens hearts and enslaves minds."

"Hardens hearts and enslaves minds?" What historical support is there for such a statement? The "founding fathers" of the sciences were almost unanimously theist, and it is Atheist zealots on university campuses today that shut down debates as soon as a participant suggests the existence of a designer in the universe.

Furthermore, Atheism is not exactly known for softening hearts. Compassion traditionally results from a sense of duty to God and fellow man. The most selfless, loving people in history were overwhelmingly theists. The historical heroes of Atheism, on the other hand, don't score high on the compassion scale. Of the more recent examples, Ayn Rand's Atheism led her to despise altruism outright. I know there are sincerely compassionate Atheists, but Atheism in its essence is cold and emotionless, and is far less fertile ground for producing generosity and good will.

I do not need to detail the results of applied Atheism on a nation, but merely point to the Soviet Union, China, and Cuba for a few starting examples. Bill Maher and his subscribers fail to acknowledge that in the past century, Atheist governments have caused more deaths than any other sort of government. The United States is inherently theist by virtue of the "self-evident" truths our founders embraced, yet our country promotes free exchange of ideas and free inquiry, unlike Atheist regimes that necessarily suppress religious and intellectual freedom to enforce non-belief. I believe a nation based on Atheism is destined for either tyranny or anarchy.

Atheists arrogantly regard themselves as beyond religion, thinking their sterile view of nature the purest and most refined, the most evolved. But Atheism is not not the absence of religion, it is a religion itself, a definable system of beliefs about the origins, laws, and future of the universe and of humanity. Olympia's Atheist activists are not directly aiming to remove religion from the public square, they are openly professing their religion. If they go further and attempt to pass laws prohibiting religious displays, they attempt to impose their religion on society, violating the civil rights of others. An Atheist society requires the suppression of religious freedom.

When I consider the bitter condescension expressed on the plaque in Olympia, I pity the the plight of Atheists frustrated that they just have a hard time winning converts. But the primary reason for this is, well, reasonable: Atheism has no spirit. It cannot inspire. If existence has no meaning, what motivation is there to create? If there is no authority, why be good? To embrace Atheism is to assume a lifeless life. Without passion, how does an artist perceive beauty? Without transcendent purpose, why does an inventor invent?

Voltaire wrote, "If God did not exist it would be necessary to invent Him." Notions of civic responsibility, honesty, integrity, and compassion cannot be adequately manufactured without God. The human will for goodness is too weak on its own. That is why Atheism only spreads when it is forced upon the unwilling.

Returning now to Christmas, the dominant anthem of this season for Christians is "peace on earth, goodwill toward men," and in that spirit I wish goodwill to Olympia's Atheists. And as to the societal benefits of Christmas, I invoke Ebenezer Scrooge's nephew, Fred:

"But I am sure I have always thought of Christmas time, when it has come round -- apart from the veneration due to its sacred name and origin, if anything belonging to it can be apart from that -- as a good time; a kind, forgiving, charitable, pleasant time: the only time I know of, in the long calendar of the year, when men and women seem by one consent to open their shut-up hearts freely, and to think of people below them as if they really were fellow-passengers to the grave, and not another race of creatures bound on other journeys. And therefore, uncle, though it has never put a scrap of gold or silver in my pocket, I believe that it has done me good, and will do me good; and I say, God bless it!'"

S.O.S. "Dawn Treader?"

2008-12-01T11:52:00.003-06:00

Jim Hill Media reported that Disney's proposed third Chronicles of Narnia movie, The Voyage of the Dawn Treader, may be delayed or scaled back as a result of Prince Caspian's disappointing box-office performance.

Disney and Walden Media are still reportedly moving forward with the third installment in the franchise, and director Michael Apted has been riding herd on Dawn Treader's development since June 2007, the site reported. Actors have been cast (Son of Rambow star Will Poulter has been hired to play Pevensie cousin Eustace Scrubb), and studio space has been lined up (at Baja Studios in Rosarito Beach) for a four-to-five month-long shoot, which is allegedly slated to begin in late January.

But Disney hasn't actually green-lighted production of Voyage of the Dawn Treader. Given that Disney and Walden Media executives are concerned that The Voyage of the Dawn Treader may earn even less than Prince Caspian did, strict cost-control measures have now been put into place.

My Advice: Don’t rewrite the story this time.

Prince Caspian’s poor performance at the box office was due to its relative faithlessness to the book. (Read that multiple ways.) I liked the movie as just another story set in Narnia, but it wasn’t Lewis’ Prince Caspian. Lewis’ story was about restoring a country that had lost its faith. Andrew Adamson reduced it to merely a political battle for a throne. It therefore lacked inspiration, and the characters lacked passion.

I have high hopes for Voyage of the Dawn Treader because the director, Michael Apted, has experience with movies about faith, namely Amazing Grace. The strongest subplot in Dawn Treader is about Reepicheep’s deep desire to reach Aslan’s country. To bring that across, Apted will have to steal back Reepicheep from Adamson’s disappointing interpretation as a rude, sarcastic, wisecracking Shrek leftover. Reepicheep is noble, feisty, and devout – more knight than swashbuckler. More Gallahad, less Puss ‘n Boots.

I’ve often considered Dawn Treader my favorite of the Chronicles (though it’s hard to settle on one) because of its episodic adventures. There are many stories within the story, with two common threads tying it all together: Caspian’s search for the lost lords of Narnia, and Reepicheep’s quest for Aslan’s country. It’s a brilliantly designed book that could lend itself to more than one movie. But Dawn Treader is meaningless if viewed through secular, postmodernist glasses. In Caspian, where Lewis depicted faith, Adamson saw merely nationalism. Dawn Treader must do better at depicting Narnian faith. And most importantly, it must retain Aslan’s announcement that he lives also in our world, but here he is known by another name.

In a word ...

2008-11-05T19:03:00.003-06:00

The Truth and Beauty of Conservatism

2008-11-03T13:12:00.003-06:00

A failure of Randian economics

2008-10-30T11:12:00.005-05:00

Here's a fascinating confession by Alan Greenspan in today's Breakpoint:

Greenspan told a House committee that he had "made a mistake in presuming that the self-interests of organizations," like banks, made them "best capable of protecting their own shareholders and their equity in the firms."

When chairman Henry Waxman said to him, "in other words, you found that your view of the world . . . was not right," Greenspan replied, "Absolutely, precisely." He then confessed to being "shocked" by this "flaw" in his thinking.

I thought, "Wow, Greenspan must have been a Randian," then I read:

Greenspan was a devotee of Ayn Rand, author of Atlas Shrugged, the bestselling book which is still very popular. Her worldview, called objectivism, promoted the idea that if you pursue your own self-interest, it will always be rational and help the most people. We've seen in recent weeks where that leads.

What a revelation, that the banking crisis at least partially resulted from Randian economics. When I get bugged over liberal talk of regulation, I often think of John Galt's words to the socialistic government in Atlas Shrugged: "Get out of my way!" But the book really made me cringe at how it (that is, Rand) assumed self-interest and the utter absence of altruism could result in anything besides anarchy. Rand, and Greenspan, don't recognize how much their own assumptions are guided by the shadows of Christian thought still inescapable in their lifetimes, but now fading rapidly. Like C.S. Lewis pointed out in The Abolition of Man, "They remove the organ and demand the function." Or as Jennifer Morse said, "A free market depends on individuals having a conscience." Or as Colson concluded:

Forget human nature and you don't get free markets, you get the Darwinian law of the jungle—a view of the world that shouldn't come as a shock to any Christian.

Well, They Sure Keep the Food Warm

2008-09-17T13:29:00.003-05:00

From WORLD, September 6, 2008:

Before you upgrade your kitchen countertops to granite, you might want to have it tested for radon and radiation. According to The New York Times, some of the more exotic granites coming from places like Brazil and Namibia emit radiation higher than background levels, in some cases 100 times as high. Experts debate whether the "hot" countertops are a cancer risk, but the Times reports that personal injury lawyers are already advertising for clients. The website http://epa.gov/radon has more information.

I had already written off natural stone countertops for our future house because I know I wouldn't keep up the maintenance they require.

Homeowners, don't take your formica for granite.

This Day in History

2008-09-08T16:00:00.007-05:00

September 8, 1966: The starship Enterprise begins its five-year mission, only to be cut short at three years.

I was exactly six months old and probably saw the premiere, but it remains only a subconscious, black-and-white memory. (Our house didn't go color until 1981.)

Follow-up:

I just discovered another notable event that happened on this date.

September 8, 1947: C.S. Lewis appeared on the cover of Time magazine. The cover story focused on Lewis' book The Screwtape Letters, a collection of correspondences between a demon and his superior about means and methods of temptation. Its brilliant premise intrigued readers who would otherwise yawn over treatises on Christian apologetics. The book is regarded as a classic by Christian and secular audiences. Forty years later, I read it myself for the first time. Further Up and Further In published a review of Screwtape and the Time magazine article.

NOprah

2008-09-08T11:22:00.006-05:00

Oprah Winfrey has responded to reports that she refused to invite Sarah Palin on her show, saying she said she would be happy to invite Palin on, after the election.

Says Oprah:

"At the beginning of this presidential campaign when I decided that I was going to take my first public stance in support of a candidate, I made the decision not to use my show as a platform for any of the candidates. I agree that Sarah Palin would be a fantastic interview, and I would love to have her on after the campaign is over."

But:

Winfrey used her show to introduce Barack Obama to America's women voters, and has endorsed and campaigned with the Democratic nominee. She also was very visible at Obama's acceptance speech last week in Denver.

Oprah's fans are not pleased and are saying so in comments posted on Oprah's own site:

Oprah, you just lost a lot of credibility. If Sarah Palin was a Democrat, or on Obama's ticket, she likely would be on your show, and most people realize the double standard you are advocating. And to say there has been "absolutely no discussion about having Sarah Palin on my show" is very hard to believe.

Go ahead and keep her off the show. You will be contributing to the public's backlash to the media that will sweep McCain/Palin into the White House.

I can tell you that Sarah is very popular. I know several women who are voting for McCain as a direct result of Sarah Palin. These are educated, intelligent and independent women, not women who will vote for any woman candidate. Several of them were intending to vote for Obama, but now will vote McCain/Palin.

Another (former) fan said:

I have been a huge fan for many of my years. But I disassociate myself with anything Oprah from now on. You truly irked me when you threw Obama to the media forefront for your own personal gain and to suffocate us with your political position...

Laura Ingraham, on her radio show this morning, said that Oprah has always claimed to support "strong" women. Citing political rants on Winfrey's show during the 2004 election by activist actresses like Cameron Diaz, Ingraham said Oprah's support is obviously limited to "strong, liberal, ditzy Hollywood women." Ingraham proposed an updated version of the "NOBama" t-shirts for Oprah's mutineers, with "NOprah" on the back.

Rebels Without a Clue

2008-09-05T13:25:00.005-05:00

I hardly want to give any attention to the anti-war protesters gathered (and arrested) in St. Paul this week because as a whole they have no credibility. But on the status of Iraq, here's a headline to ponder:

Nearly 125 Shot Dead In Chicago Over Summer
Total Is About Double The Death Toll In Iraq

CHICAGO (CBS) -- An estimated 123 people were shot and killed over the summer. That's nearly double the number of soldiers killed in Iraq over the same time period. ...

According to the Defense Department, 65 soldiers were killed in combat in Iraq. About the same number were killed in Afghanistan over that same period.

In the same time period, an estimated 245 people were shot and wounded in the city.

Though I won't dwell on this, it's worth noting the higher death toll is in the home town of anti-war candidate Barack Obama.

But to the St. Paul protesters, my point is: this is not your father's war. Vietnam was lost largely because doomsayers in the press managed to demoralize a nation and its military, and protesters waged war against their own country. Your deplorable behavior yesterday shows who is living in a fantasy. You think it's still 1968. People know more and know better today, and supporters of the war in Iraq were determined not to let history repeat itself. The surge is working, as even Rep. John Murtha conceded. Crime is up in Chicago, down in Iraq.

It's time to give up the tired old canard about Bush making up lies to lead us into war. (And get your own story straight - is Bush a babbling idiot, or a deviously brilliant shyster who hoodwinked the world into war? Make up your mind.) The President didn't make up the WMD photos and reports that leaders around the world accepted as evidence of an international threat. Whether the grains of truth in those reports were sufficient justification alone, no one argued Hussein wasn't a dirty fighter. Saddam Hussein thumbed his nose at the U.N., who routinely passes meaningless resolutions it has neither the guts nor the know-how to enforce. Whether Hussein had WMDs yet, he was building them, and he was crazy enough to use them. To put the stakes in perspective, imagine how many lives could have been saved if Hitler had been stopped sooner. We will never know how many lives were saved because Hussein was stopped, pursued, captured, then tried and sentenced by his own people.

And now, freedom is blooming in Iraq. Like it or not, lives are being saved by this war. There has been no mass chemical-bombing of Kurds since April 2003. Schools, hospitals, public infrastructure, and houses of worship are being rebuilt with American help, as they were in Germany following World War II. This is what we do. Yes, the Iraq death toll is tragic, but nowhere near what our enemies want it to be. And for the record, we're the ones trying to keep the count low.

Protesters, let's be introspective: For most of you, "anti-war" is a convenient position to take when you really just disagree with someone's personal morality or politics. That's why we didn't see you when Clinton sent troops to Bosnia and Kosovo. Your hatred for Bush and conservatives has almost nothing, if anything, to do with war. Be honest and go march with NARAL or the nearest anti-Israel rally.

For those of you remaining who are sincerely against war itself and are not blinded by personal hatred of conservatives (you would be the peaceful ones who don't actually commit violence to promote your cause), I understand you because in my pacifist days I made the same arguments, namely that war is the recourse of knuckle-dragging bullies who don't have the intelligence to resolve conflicts with kind words and hugs. I once declared myself a conscientious objector and told an army recruiter I would not kill people to solve problems because I knew a better solution.

My pacifism (anti-war and anti-gun) was drawn directly from my Christian faith, though I was more than a little snide in how I preached it. But over my adult life, reason led me reluctantly to some conclusions:

Bad people don't listen to reason. That's one reason they're bad. When bad people have guns, you need guns to stop them. Stopping bad people from killing and enslaving people saves lives. "Freedom, Justice, and Equality" don't come from dictatorships, they come from democracy. When tyrants are in power, liberty is seldom if ever achieved through negotiation.

This is not philosophy, this is history. Here's the philosophy:

"We believe that freedom and security go together, that the advance of human liberty can only strengthen the cause of world peace."

I learned this from a President I once derided as warmonger and now revere as one of the greatest American heroes of all time, Ronald Reagan.

Sen. McCain said unequivocally last night, "I hate war." I agree. Any reasonable person does. War is evil, but it can be the only means to overcome the greater evil of tyranny. And as a matter of definition, peace without liberty is tyranny. Even a tyrant can achieve peace at the expense of liberty, but such a society is inhuman. This is not how we were meant to live.

So those of you rare sincere pacifists, please consider carefully the logic of your blanket criticisms against war. In principle, I appreciate your rationale, but I ask you look seriously at whether war has historically in the end reduced the loss of life. Lives saved by liberty cannot be measured, but compare the lives lost in WWII, for instance, to the lives lost through the quiet tyranny of the former Soviet Union and other Communist regimes. If only by such numbers, assess the logic of whether war, however evil, can result and has resulted in eventual good.

If you'll acknowledge this, we can talk.

Reaganesque

2008-09-04T12:21:00.004-05:00

It's hard to find a better single word to describe Sarah Palin's speech last night.

Palin's combination of boldness, clarity, humor, confidence, and authenticity was something we've hardly seen from a candidate in twenty-five years.

A Democratic critic claimed he observed Palin intently watching the teleprompter when she spoke about international issues, thereby demonstrating her inexperience in speaking on such matters. Sure. It turns out the teleprompter kept scrolling during periods of extended applause, occasionally scrolling past the point where Palin was to continue. So she resumed her speech - from memory!

None of this was obvious to those of us watching at home. Palin had poise, finesse, and charisma, and could deliver unscripted wit worthy of the Great Communicator himself: "What's the difference between a pitbull and a hocky mom? Lipstick." Then she'd return to the fickle telepromter without missing a beat.

In contrast, those of you who saw CBS's coverage might have caught Katie Couric's gaffe in which she referred to Palin as the governor of Arkansas. I almost disbelieved my ears until it was confirmed by the closed-captions a few seconds later.

My Top Eight Favorite Quotes from Sarah Palin's Acceptance Speech

8. "I guess a small-town mayor is sort of like a 'community organizer,' except that you have actual responsibilities."

7. "... we don't quite know what to make of a candidate who lavishes praise on working people when they are listening, and then talks about how bitterly they cling to their religion and guns when those people aren't listening. We tend to prefer candidates who don't talk about us one way in Scranton and another way in San Francisco."

6. "... there are some candidates who use change to promote their careers. And then there are those, like John McCain, who use their careers to promote change. They're the ones whose names appear on laws and landmark reforms, not just on buttons and banners, or on self-designed presidential seals."

5. "... listening to [Obama] speak, it's easy to forget that this is a man who has authored two memoirs but not a single major law or reform — not even in the state Senate."

4. "This is a man who can give an entire speech about the wars America is fighting, and never use the word 'victory' except when he's talking about his own campaign. "

3. "... When the cloud of rhetoric has passed ... when the roar of the crowd fades away ... when the stadium lights go out, and those Styrofoam Greek columns are hauled back to some studio lot - what exactly is our opponent's plan? What does he actually seek to accomplish, after he's done turning back the waters and healing the planet? The answer is to make government bigger ... take more of your money ... give you more orders from Washington ... and to reduce the strength of America in a dangerous world."

2. "My fellow citizens, the American presidency is not supposed to be a journey of 'personal discovery.' This world of threats and dangers is not just a community, and it doesn't just need an organizer."

1. "... though both Senator Obama and Senator Biden have been going on lately about how they are always 'fighting for you,' let us face the matter squarely. There is only one man in this election who has ever really fought for you."

I urge anyone to read the full text of what I believe will be remembered as an historic speech, keeping in mind this was only the script. You won't find the pitbull joke.

Stork Economics

2008-07-31T10:43:00.005-05:00

My friend Mark linked this article on his blog earlier this month. (Thanks, Mark! Sorry for the "me too" post.) It’s a surprisingly short one for First Things, where I usually must devote 45 minutes to reading an article and another three hours to digest it. This primer is brief, insightful, and funny.

A few summary quotes:

If you ask a child where babies come from, you can get a lot of interesting answers, but traditionally the most common answer is that they come by stork. Children tend to have a similar understanding of economics. If you ask them where their allowance comes from, the two most likely responses are “Daddy’s wallet” and “Mommy’s purse.” In both cases, nothing is created, just transferred. Babies are transferred by storks, and wealth is transferred by parents.

…
Most of us grow up to understand that God allows us to participate in the procreation of babies, but unfortunately very few ever realize that God allows us to participate in the procreation of wealth. Rather than procreation, most people assume what is commonly referred to as a zero-sum view of economics. In this view, wealth can neither be created nor destroyed but only transferred from one person to another. This, essentially, is stork economics.

…
It would be very sad if someone reached adulthood still believing that babies are delivered by stork. … In the same manner, those who still believe in stork economics often find it very difficult to acquire wealth, or at least to create it. … While the method for procreating babies is extremely popular, the methods for procreating wealth are, unfortunately, much less attractive.

Be sure to read the whole article to get to the punchline.

The Wall Street Hangover

2008-07-29T10:57:00.003-05:00

President Bush was caught on a cellphone camera last week making a candid remark about the collapse of the housing market: "Wall Street got drunk and now it has a hangover." The video of course is on YouTube and the viewer comments are vicious. Viewers angry over family members suffering from foreclosures and losses think the President's insult was targeted at them. But the "drunks," according to a Wall Street Journal columnist, were “thousands of traders and executives that pumped up the credit boom [and] made specific decisions to buy ever more collateralized debt obligations. They saw competitors making a mint and followed suit. If they were under the influence of anything . . . it was greed.”

It's so chic to hate the President these days, and I know it's too much to expect YouTubers to give up fashion for reason. Bush was right on about this, as was Chuck Colson in his follow-up today on Breakpoint:

"The problem was greed unchecked by any moral restraint. ... the cause of the market meltdown was moral failure. Free markets -- capitalism itself -- can thrive only when corporations and individuals exercise moral restraint. When those restraints fail, government regulation is sure to follow; which, in turn, makes free markets less efficient, and certainly less free."

The housing market crisis is a national tragedy that is leaving people displaced and disillusioned. I know families affected by it and it has put my own family's housing plans on hold. So if you're a lender or a buyer, look at it honestly and call it what it is: a failure of a market run wild with imprudence. A market based on moral relativity cannot remain free. It will be increasingly prone to bubbles and forced to rely on government intervention and control.

Jennifer Roback Morse said it simply, "A free society depends on the individual having a conscience." If individuals (and investors) will not govern themselves, government will have to do it.

Lewis' Lion is not Mufasa

2008-06-25T12:05:00.007-05:00

I haven't had time yet to write my own review of the film version of Prince Caspian, but my overall sentiments would reflect this commentary by Alex Wainer.

By beef is largely with director Andrew Adamson who, despite a fanstastic job with the visuals in both films so far, does not share Lewis' worldview an thus couldn't see Narnia from Lewis' perspective, like a child who hasn't yet grasped the moral of the story:

Adamson said, "I didn’t really think a lot about the religious aspect. I know C. S. Lewis never really intended it to be allegory, but he definitely wrote from a place of his own belief, and a lot of people get that from the book . . . People can interpret the movie the same way, they can apply their personal belief and interpret the movie the same way they interpret the book."

This soft-peddling doesn’t resonate well with the millions of readers who love the books precisely because they are intended to convey insights on the Christian life, like trusting in God contrasted with trusting in one’s own self. It should not surprise us that the films reflect this myopia. Adamson sees only a great series of children’s fantasy stories but misses the real magic.

Wainer brilliantly identifies the disparate treatment of "magic" in Disney's and Lewis' worlds:

Prince Caspian is a reminder that, despite Disney’s wholesome values, the Magic Kingdom hasn’t truly annexed Narnia as part of its vast empire. In fact, it’s not in Disney’s DNA to assimilate Lewis’ faith-based fairy tales into its collective consciousness.

... in the 1930s, Walt Disney, though raised by strict church-going parents, made the choice to use magic as a dramatic device for creating wonder and transformation rather than God and prayer. Thus, wishing upon a star became the central motif in Pinocchio and, thereafter, a sort of central mechanism of Disney narrative. In a practical sense, Walt Disney found that it made his feature films better able to cross cultural barriers in their translation into other languages. "Disney magic" came to describe the wonder and fun of Disney stories, characters and theme parks.

But in Lewis’s Narnia, magic becomes a clear symbol for spiritual forces of truth, and the way God works in this parallel world. In Disney’s world, magic is something characters call upon to obtain their dreams. In Narnia, magic is the way God governs the universe and in which inhabitants submit themselves. Naturally then, with two such incompatible concepts, to market the Narnia franchise across cultures, the lion had to be tamed and his magic diminished.

In other words, the standard Disney "Believe in Yourself" mantra was antithetical to Lewis.

Looking ahead to the next film, Wainer suggests a new director might put the series on track:

The next book in line, The Voyage of the Dawn Treader, culminates in one of the clearest affirmations of Christian truth in the Chronicles, as Aslan exhorts the children to know him in their own world by another name.

Can spectacular CGI effects ... capture the eternal scope of this and the rest of Lewis’ Chronicles? Perhaps, but only if some with both talent and conviction are allowed to translate those stories.

I am so far hopeful, having read of the choice of director for the next film. In Amazing Grace, Michael Apted managed to portray a compelling story with clearly faith-driven characters.

Breakpoint: To Drill or Not to Drill

2008-06-25T11:20:00.004-05:00

Chuck doesn't often take on economic issues with this fervor. In today's Breakpoint, he doesn't go into detail about the causes of rising food prices, namely grain diverted to biofuels and gas prices raising shipping costs, but he raises other points about why we need to push for energy independence.

I really hope McCain and other Republican candidates have the guts and the eloquence to portray the current drive for biofuels and the prohibition on domestic drilling as what they are - harmful to people, destructive to the economy, ineffective at cooling the planet, and perilous to national security:

In 1973, we imported 28 percent of our oil. Today, it is closer to 60 percent.

... "Most imports come from countries that are potentially insecure, unstable or hostile."

... As Frank Gaffney, a national security expert, wrote in the NATIONAL REVIEW, the war against terrorism and American energy security are inseparable.

Congress has, so far, failed to act because they want to pander to us. I say it is time for us to tell them to get busy. We need this for our national security, and for the sake of our economy. Some environmentalists believe that it would be a good thing to have eight-dollar-a-gallon gas. But it would be a disaster for ordinary, working Americans.

Fillmore Finds the Truth

2008-06-23T12:39:00.007-05:00

I too often think it tragic when a kind-hearted, loving, faithful believer dies, but that is really only the finale to the first show. The sadness is only temporary for those of us left in the theater when the actor leaves the stage.

A real tragedy is when someone with God-given talent squanders that gift on bitterness and cynicism, even carrying it to his grave:
George Carlin dead at 71

Carlin could be insightful, entertaining, and extremely funny in certain venues. I did not hear (nor do I want to hear) the obscenity-laden stand-up routines that dominated his career. I heard sanitized versions of “Icebox Man” and some of his other well-known bits. I enjoyed him as “Fillmore” in Pixar’s Cars, and he was the best narrator the Thomas the Tank Engine series ever had. He had every reason to be happy and thankful for his success, yet he said in one interview:

"I don't have any beliefs or allegiances. I don't believe in this country, I don't believe in religion, or a god, and I don't believe in all these man-made institutional ideas,"

He claimed he “looked forward to an afterlife where he could watch the decline of civilization on a ‘heavenly CNN’: ‘The world is a big theater-in-the round as far as I'm concerned, and I'd love to watch it spin itself into oblivion…Tune in and watch the human adventure.’"

I feel only pity for someone so steeped in disdain for goodness as to be blinded to the good in his life. He had such potential to bless, and even his cursing didn’t poison his best work. He really made me laugh. God gave him potential to speak life, and he wasted his life’s energy ridiculing Him. I pray that somehow in his dying moments God showed him mercy and that George wasn’t too proud to accept it.

Separated at Birth: Andrew Adamson and Matthew Ward

2008-05-19T12:28:00.002-05:00

Taking the lead from my friend Brad, I noticed this similarity last Friday at our Prince Caspian premiere party:

Andrew Adamson: Director of film adaptations of two books in the Chronicles of Narnia series, The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe, and Prince Caspian.

Matthew Ward: Member of the Christian band The 2nd Chapter of Acts (1973-1988) who coincidentally recorded a musical adaptation of The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe titled The Roar of Love in 1978.

I coincidentally own copies of Adamson's and Ward's adaptations.

I might have noted the similarity between Adamson and fellow Kiwi director Peter Jackson of the Lord of the Rings film triolgy, but it doesn't go much beyond their illustrating the apparent shortage of competent barbers in New Zealand.

For Narnia and for Aslan!

2008-05-16T14:10:00.007-05:00

Narniaphiles, grab your tickets! The second book (not the fourth, as chronological revisionists claim) in the Narnia series hits the big screen today. The first Prince Caspian reviews I read claim the movie has too many battles and not enough Reepicheep. Some reviewers obviously never read the books, but those who did say this movie deviates from the book more than the first movie did. I know changes are often needed when adapting a story for film, so I'll forgive a certain amount of flexibility as long as the characters themselves are faithfully represented. We just finished watching the extended edition of The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe last night. I've been listening to the Caspian soundtrack this week and we've pulled out our copious library of Chronicles memorabilia for a Narnia-nerd party tonight after the movie. I'm good to go.

I'll post my own review next week.

Psyched for "Caspian"

2008-05-15T14:22:00.005-05:00

I confess Prince Caspian was my least favorite of The Chronicles of Narnia when I first read them in junior high. I couldn't accept the setting of the story. The Narnia of The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe was gone, Cair Paravel in ruins, and the entire Narnian landscape changed, physically, politically, and spiritually. I also just thought the book took a long time to build any momentum because the protagonist, Prince Caspian, spent the first two-thirds of the story in hiding.

It wasn't really until I read commentaries by Chuck Colson and Gene Veith that I caught on and came to appreciate C.S. Lewis' purpose for depicting Narnia this way. Prince Caspian takes place more than a thousand years after the events of the first book, after Aslan's sacrificial death, after the "Golden Age of Narnia" when the four Pevensie children reigned as kings and queens. In Caspian's Narnia, the old stories are mostly forgotten legends, and the old beliefs are regarded as ignorant or at best quaint. In short, Caspian's world is our world. Caspian believes in Aslan, much to the chagrin and anger of his uncle Miraz, who ridicules and suppresses the ancient faith of Narnia.

What a fascinating illustration of modernism. I obviously did not have the insight to see it when I was 14, but I still didn't get it as an adult. I like constancy and security - I didn't like the shock of finding Narnia in ruins. But time inevitably moves on, and faith in Aslan, like faith in Christ, survives despite the turnover of governments and the decay of majestic old buildings. Like a reactionary mourning the past, I thought Narnia was dead. But Prince Caspian is all about a living faith that survives persecution through the ages, a faith that restores and sustains the world.

The return of the Pevensie children to Narnia makes me think of what it would be like if one of Christ's apostles, or St. Paul, stepped into our world and saw what had happened to Christianity since their time. And to those living in "modern" Narnia, what would it do for their faith to find artifacts of the ancient times and then to meet the heroes out of their own history!

If the heroes of the Christian faith came into our world, how would Christians and non-Christians today respond? What turmoils and revivals would they start? Would Paul speak to Congress the way he spoke to the men of Athens in Acts 17?

I don't expect the movie that opens tomorrow to pose these questions, or to explore to any depth the themes in C.S. Lewis' original story. I expect an exciting, entertaining movie with noble characters and a a good overall message. But understanding now the deeper meaning of the story, I will watch with different eyes than those that couldn't read between the lines years ago.

The Tao of Narnia

2008-05-14T10:20:00.003-05:00

Today's Breakpoint makes me want to reread The Abolition of Man as much as Prince Caspian. It will be interesting to see how well Lewis' jabs at subjective morality come through in the movie this weekend.

“We make men without chests and expect of them virtue . . . We laugh at honour and are shocked to find traitors in our midst.”

On this same topic, Lewis said, "We remove the organ and demand the function." That's the metaphor I remember most from that book. We strip moral education from schools and still demand morality from our kids.

Did I Write This?

2008-05-08T12:50:00.003-05:00

We had to make some space in our storage room last weekend, so I rummaged through stacks of old college notes I had saved, pitching most of them, but I stopped to reread some papers I wrote for some rhetoric classes. Having been employed as a technical writer for 11 years now, I assumed my college writing would look immature by comparison, but I was surprised at how much better it seemed than what I write now.

My favorite paper from the pile was a critique of cartoonist Bill Watterson's treatment of television in his strip Calvin & Hobbes. (Yes, it does sound like a topic I'd choose.) The paper contained several strips (a copyright violation I won't repeat here, as much as I want to), with commentaries on the themes presented in each. My introduction read:

Cartoonist Bill Watterson, in his popular and now retired strip "Calvin & Hobbes," made few overt statements about technology as a whole, but took frequent opportunities to bash television for its detrimental effects on children. In the sensationalist mind of the boy Calvin, television is not merely a means of entertainment, but a living thing. To Watterson, it is an instrument of willful indoctrination whose most profound fruits are passivity, mediocrity, and hyperactivity.

The setting of "Calvin & Hobbes" is the world of a child's imagination, so it's not surprising that the cartoonist would depict television as hostile toward creativity. After all, why should a child squander afternoons and Saturday mornings watching mass-produced, poorly-conceived cartoons when he could be playing, living out more original adventures fabricated spontaneously out of his own imagination. This appears to be Watterson's platform and one of the most consistent messages conveyed in the strip.

I know, the tone of academic writing is almost always dry. Dave Barry once commented on finding highlighted sentences in old college textbooks like, "Structuralized functionalism represents both a continuation of, and a departure from, functionalized structuralism," and remembering a time when you had whole portions of your brain dedicated to things like this.

But I thought my old Calvin & Hobbes paper was pretty interesting, especially since I wrote it before I had children, and the things then I said about television and imagination I still agree with. (Incidentally, we limit not only our son's exposure to TV, but to Calvin & Hobbes. He's just a little too Calvinlike at present.)

But the thing that really struck me was that I think my writing has gotten worse since leaving college, and writing itself is more of a struggle now than it was then. When I was in college, I wrote papers every week. And those papers really weren't bad because I was writing every day and was in the habit.

It may be that technical writing itself is just not much of a creative outlet (ya think?) and it's strongly governed by conventions and things like the implications of choosing the wrong preposition. I've learned to agonize over every sentence, revising endlessly. I try to say as much as possible in as few words as possible, but in getting hung up over this, I begin to fear writing. I also spend about 30 hours researching for every 1 hour of writing. I consider it a good day if I wrote three clear paragraphs, and in this business, that can be better than three pages of unfocused brain dump.

Nevertheless, I've picked up some bad habits and I clearly need to do a little more regular brain dumping somewhere, just to get exercise. So I'm going to try to post more often. I don't expect anyone to read my posts, or even to read what I'm writing now. It doesn't matter. I could journal privately, but that won't help me improve as much as writing in public view. If only for my own sake, I'm going to try to post something every week. If anyone notices, hooray. Maybe in time it will get more interesting than my old college papers.

Children of the Corn Shortage

2008-05-08T12:46:00.002-05:00

A revealing look at cost of biofuels.

"Look at it this way: It takes 510 pounds of corn to make 13 gallons of ethanol—that amount could 'feed a child in Zambia or Mexico for a year,' while it fuels your car only for a week! "

And another point in Maverick McCain's favor:

"What is maddening about this is that the biofuel effort is fueled by politicians handing out massive subsidies to the farm belt and pandering to glassy-eyed environmentalists. Every presidential hopeful who participated in the Iowa caucuses had to sing the praises of ethanol. That is why John McCain stayed away, because he opposes the subsidies."

Marriage as an Economic Institution

2008-04-16T10:54:00.003-05:00

From today's Breakpoint:

"... while the debate on marriage usually focuses on its social, moral, and religious qualities, marriage is also an 'economic institution.' It is a 'powerful creator of human and social capital.'

“Divorce and unwed childbearing create substantial public costs, paid by taxpayers.”

How much? A minimum of $112 billion a year. That is more than a $1 trillion a decade in 'increased taxpayer expenditures for antipoverty, criminal justice . . . education programs,' and lost tax revenues.

This is in fact the premise of Jennifer Roback Morse's book Love and Economics, and is the basis for her argument that Libertarians should be pro-family. In short, marriage and traditional families are good for the economy.

Read Colson's full commentary here, and also yesterday's column, which is equally sobering.

The Ultimate Answer

2008-03-08T06:00:00.007-06:00

And it came to pass after seven and a half million years of relentless computing that Deep Thought, the second greatest computer in all of time and space, announced the Ultimate Answer to Life, the Universe, and Everything.

And the answer was ...

... was ...

Now that the ultimate answer was known, the people realized they did not know what the ultimate question was. And so Deep Thought designed another computer, greater than itself, to derive the ultimate question.

After ten million years, the question came:

Yes! It is the year of the Ultimate Answer for me! (Those who still don't get the joke can brush up on The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy here.)

I had some fun with this at work Friday. I set out a plate of brownies with the above Hitchhiker's Guide clue and invited my co-workers to guess the "ultimate question." The winner got the prize brownie, inspired by Douglas Adams' 42 puzzle:

My wife asked me this morning why I'd advertise my age. I don't normally announce my birthday - it was just an excuse to have a little fun with the number 42, and besides, I'm really not ashamed of it.

The truth is, I don't feel 42. Not even close. I don't think 42. I'm more like 21, two times over. One of my co-workers says I'm more like ten and a half, four times over. I'll go with that.

Narcissistic literary references aside, I am glad to know that the real ultimate answer is not a number, but a person. That the Creator of this incredible universe loved a pitiful human creature and sent His own Son to open the gates of Heaven for me is no farce. He paid the admission fee that I couldn't afford, a spiritual death, then He went in ahead of me. Now the ultimate question is: Will I follow Him? And I have to answer it every day.

There's a deep thought worth anyone's time.

Happy 38th Birthday, Frederic!

2008-03-06T14:38:00.007-06:00

Last Friday some good friends of ours hosted a "Pirates of Penzance Leap Year Party." We watched the 1983 movie version of the Gilbert & Sullivan operetta starring Kevin Kline, Rex Smith, Linda Rondstadt, and Angela Lansbury. We've seen the movie before, but this was the most fun we've ever had with it, watching with a group of families, themed foods (Pirate Sherry, H.M.S. Pineapple, etc.), and kids in pirate costumes. Thanks to the Internet, we had librettos onhand, very helpful when following Gilbert & Sullivan's signature warp-speed lyrical trains. The math teacher in our group was particularly impressed with this verse:

I’m very well acquainted, too, with matters mathematical,
I understand equations, both the simple and quadratical,
About binomial theorem I am teeming with a lot o’ news –
With many cheerful facts about the square of the hypotenuse.

I’m very good at integral and differential calculus;
I know the scientific names of beings animalculous:
In short, in matters vegetable, animal, and mineral,
I am the very model of a modern Major-General.

Come to think of it, a dictionary might have been handy too.

If you're unfamiliar with the story of The Pirates of Penzance and its connection with leap year, here's a teaser: The story is about a young man named Frederic, who as a boy was supposed to have been apprenticed to a pilot of a seafaring ship, but his hearing-impaired nursemaid misunderstood and apprenticed him to a pirate. But Frederic, duty-bound to the point of absurdity, honored his commitment and served the pirates until he turned twenty-one, when he left his pirate band and set out to rid the world of piracy. He falls in love with Mabel, a daughter of the major-general, and life is looking up until his former pirate commander returns and informs Frederic that his contract with the pirates was to be effective until his twenty-first birthday. Having been born in leap year on February 29, Frederic has really had only five birthdays. His sense of duty compels him reluctantly to rejoin the pirates, promising to return to marry Mabel in 63 years.

There are many more hilarious subplots, like the pirates' leniency toward orphans and the policemens' fear of police work that I haven't even mentioned here.

Anyway, according to the story, Frederic's twenty-first birthday was to be in 1940, meaning February 29, 2008 was Frederic's 38th, so Friday night's party concluded with a "Happy Birthday Frederic" birthday cake.

Regarding the movie itself, I am baffled as to why it has never been released on DVD. (Especially given the volumes of outright garbage for miniscule niche audiences you can buy on home video.) Kevin Kline's agility and comic timing steal the show, and Rex Smith and Linda Rondstadt give the best performances of their careers. I was among those who never guessed either of them had it in them, but boy, can they sing! (Rondstadt can't act, but the show is so well-written she doesn't have to.) And the acrobatic dancing is amazing and just plain fun to watch.

On the off chance United Artists pays attention to online petitions, you can voice your support for a DVD release of the 1983 version of Pirates here. They've already missed the chance for a 25th-anniversary edition. Frederic's 40th birthday will be in 2016. I hope they don't wait that long.

When the DVD is released, I will be among the first to buy it, pop it in, and switch on the subtitles. God bless the person who evidently captured a broadcast in wide-screen with subtitles and posted these numbers on YouTube:

A Modern Major-General

When a Felon's Not Engaged in His Employment

A Paradox

It Really Doesn't Matter (Don't blink)

When the Foeman Bares His Steel

With Cat-like Tread

I wish one of these included the slow-motion tumbling during "Sighing softly to the river." We backed that up and watched that a few extra times.

For a rousing, frequently gut-bustingly funny bit of classic family entertainment, don't wait for the next February 29. Buy it while you can still buy VHS, rent it before the rental store's copy wears out, or before I rent it and "forget" to return it.

God and Randomness

2008-02-01T10:11:00.000-06:00

I happened to be reading Joshua 18 this morning, and a thought occurred to me that might answer a question I've had for some time. In this chapter I read that Joshua drew lots to determine God's will regarding how to assign land to the tribes of Israel. It's not the first place I've encountered in scripture where Israel employed what we regard as a game of chance to determine God's will. In the high priest's ephod, for instance, were two mysterious items called the Urim and Thummim, which some scholars think were some sort of dice. These were used to help determine God's will in certain cases.

The thought that came to me after reading Joshua 18:6 is this: To Israel, nothing was random; Even dice were guided by God. By contrast, to a modern atheist, nothing is divine, all is random.

This raises a radically different way to view life: What if nothing is random?

As a Christian, I believe all things happen for a purpose, but do I really believe this? I can't imagine having the faith to believe that God would reveal His will through dice. Einstein insisted, "God does not play dice with the universe." But are dice really a random, completely impartial decision-maker? How can God not know how the dice will land?

Randomness is a myth, and Joshua must have known this. With Moses gone, there was no one available to him who could get a verbal answer from God. He needed a tangible answer, void of any potential claims of bias on His part. For Joshua, strange as it seems, casting lots was an act of faith, not gambling.

This is not to suggest any justification for gambling whatsoever. Frankly, to throw money to what is essentially a god of chance trusting in his favor of "luck" is idolatry now that I think of it. That said, I enjoy games. I just won't play with real money.

But I wonder if I were faced with a situation where I needed God to deliberate an important and potentially life-altering decision between choices with no perceptible difference in risks, and I did not want my own unavoidable biases to influence the decision, would I trust God to govern a roll of the dice?

Thankfully, I have been blessed with wise counselors who help me see when my own discernment is lacking, so I haven't needed to take such a leap. But pondering this whole question has helped me understand why dice and lots might have been used in this way in the Bible.

Atrocity in Perspective

2008-01-22T09:51:00.001-06:00

While praying for an end to abortion in this country on this 35th anniversary of the infamous Roe v. Wade decision, I am adding this abortion ticker to my blog. (With thanks to my friend Brad for first posting it on his.) It was created by a blogger mom named Michelle Potter to put the American abortion casualties in perspective:

I've heard a lot about how many people (read: terrorists and enemy combatants) Bush&Co. have killed by protecting Americans from terrorism and the people of Iraq from a mass-murdering, chemical weapon-possessing, rapist dictator. The irony is that most of these complaints come from the party that promotes the murder of children as a "privacy right." I realize that children have died in Iraq, but that does not compare to the atrocity of abortion for these reasons:

1) The only ones purposely targeting children (or civilians) are the terrorists;
2) We do not consider killing Iraqi children a "constitutional right";
3) Americans do not hold marches, rallies, or fund-raising dinners in support of killing Iraqi children;
4) The number of American babies killed by abortion far outweighs the total number of casualties in the war -- including children, adults, civilians, soldiers, and terrorists. In fact, that's exactly what my ticker sets out to proclaim...

Lord, have mercy on our country. Open the eyes of our leaders and our people to see the slaughter we permit on our own soil and our horrible offense against You. Thank you for the gift of human life, especially that which came into my family this year. Help me to give my own life in defense of it, and use me to help others cherish it. Amen.

Summer of 2008

2008-01-22T08:31:00.000-06:00

Here are three movies I'll be excitedly watching for this summer:

The Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian (May 16)
http://disney.go.com/disneypictures/narnia/

Wall-E (June 27)
http://www.movie-list.com/trailers.php?id=walle

Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull (May 22)
http://www.indianajones.com/site/index.html

The new Indiana Jones movie gets marks for the dumbest title and the movie most likely to be disappointing but I’ll nonetheless be compelled to see because it’s Indiana Jones. This January article in Vanity Fair makes me miss the days when George Lucas had some humility. The first red flag was this line:

But Lucas was adamant. It was this idea or nothing. …

It looks like a fun project because not only is Ford back as Indy, but Karen Allen is back as Marion. Both characters are 20 years older, the bad guys this time are 1957 Cold-War Russia commies. But the absence of Salah (John Rhys-Davies) will be a handicap. And I sincerely hope Lucas didn’t write the screenplay. Lucas’ scripts are like Shatner’s directing, and neither of those walking egos seem to care much what fans think:

Whatever, Lucas is convinced he won’t please everyone. “I know the critics are going to hate it,” he says. “They already hate it. So there’s nothing we can do about that. They hate the idea that we’re making another one. They’ve already made up their minds.”

At least the legions of Indy geeks will be pleased, right?

“The fans are all upset,” Lucas says. “They’re always going to be upset. ‘Why did he do it like this? And why didn’t he do it like this?’ They write their own movie, and then, if you don’t do their movie, they get upset about it. So you just have to stand by for the bricks and the custard pies, because they’re going to come flying your way.”

Fine, George. Just please don’t ruin a good franchise.

Geek Training

2007-12-06T14:01:00.001-06:00

My son is learning about Star Trek and Star Wars concurrently, which presents occasional confusion for the aspiring nerd. The other day I heard him talk about Han Solo getting frozen in corbomite. Obviously, I could not let this error go unchecked, so I took the opportunity to educate him on the difference between carbonite and corbomite.

If I have to explain, you wouldn't understand.

Follow-up: Jack built a Lego ship the other day that he says can go Worf speed. I'll let it slide. At least he's not mixing series this time.

Thinking? Stop it!

2007-11-28T11:58:00.001-06:00

I've been cranking for some time over the proliferation of televisions in restaurants and shops. Sure, the local bar & grill or Mom & Pop's Corner Diner has always had a TV on, and I admit it goes with the setting. And if I wanted to watch a big screen with my Bud Light and beer nuts, I could go to the nearest sports bar. But then Target and Wal-Mart realized they could get non-stop commercial airtime by hanging TVs from the ceilings in the aisles. Our neighborhood Culvers and McDonalds put them up them in every corner to make sure no one had to talk to their children or friends while they eat. Now the Holiday gas station near us plays "fuel-casts" on the pumps, with local news and weather highlights and, of course, more commercials. My latest discovery is that our local Wal-Mart is no longer satisfied that you're getting enough commercials while you're shopping, so they've added TVs at the checkout aisles.

I was never a fan of 3rd Rock from the Sun, but I once saw part of an episode where the aliens discovered TV. Glassy-eyed, one of them said, "This is amazing. I haven't had a thought in my head for about four hours."

I realize TVs in the marketplace are just a natural outgrowth (as in tumor) of the non-stop media. We've become a nation of overstimulated oafs who don't know what to do with our brains if there is isn't a TV feeding us music videos or news tickers. The marketplace has become endless noise. I can't indulge in a second of private thought, even to ask myself if I forgot to buy something. The old audio distractions like muzak and "Attention, shoppers!" announcements, even the Menards jingle heard for the fiftieth time in ten minutes, were tolerable. But TV commercials that are not content to stay in the corner of your eye but insist on being in front of you is like having a pushy robotic salesman in your face the moment you walk in the door.

It's offensive that retailers need to invade your consciousness whenever you stop thinking about them for a moment. I've had enough and I'm making a plan to fight it:

1. I sit out the "fuel-cast" in my car while the pump is running. (Don't worry, I always ground myself on the door to avoid making a spark. Sheesh.)
2. I look away from the annoying TVs at the checkout aisles.
3. I won't eat at a restaurant where I can't sit away from a TV.
4. I'll do as much Christmas shopping as possible online, where I can turn down the volume and think, or maybe play my own music.

These are all symbolic gestures, though. What I really, really want is a weapon, namely one of these:

http://www.tvbgone.com

Is this cool or what? A universal "off" button! Imagine being able to surreptitiously turn off the TV at a restaurant so you and your friends could actually talk while you eat. Imagine leaving with quips from a conversation playing in your head instead of commercial jingles or network bumpers. Imagine being able to think while you're out shopping.

Read what the inventors of the TV-Be-Gone say about it. These are people after my own heart!

Q. Why would one want to live without TV?

A. Because watching TV takes time, and time is precious. There are so many things to do that are fun, healthy, relaxing, and good for your social life! Some people find themselves watching TV when they don't really want to. Have you ever found yourself doing this?

Q. What do you mean when you say that TV-B-Gone® is an environmental management device?

A. The sounds and images from TV that constantly bombard us everywhere we go have a powerful effect on us. Through repetition, we remember the many messages about ourselves and our world that we receive from this potent medium. We may feel better if we have the ability to manage our environment, the impressions that we are exposed to, allowing us to more easily create our own messages and ideas.

I want one of these for Christmas, if I can wait that long. Let the Great Turn-Off begin!

My first target will be the "fuel-cast."

Chuck Norris Approved

2007-11-19T10:49:00.000-06:00

Huckabee's moving up in the polls. Whether you like Mike or not, this is a funny ad. I haven't made up my mind yet who I most want to trounce Hillary, but one thing I like about Huckabee is he takes issues seriously and himself lightly.

Showing a Little Self-Respect

2007-08-30T23:58:00.000-05:00

YES!!

The de-"pornification" of America has begun. Young women are realizing they don't have to dress like ... well, prostitutes. I've been very vocal in my dislike and disgust toward current style. ("Do these hip-huggers make me look fat?" "Well, what did you expect them to do?") It's maddening that my medium-sized wife had to buy an XXL shirt to get one that fits. Modesty has been scorned in the marketplace, but according to today's BreakPoint, it might just be gearing up for a comeback.

Mark Early cites a new clothing company named "Pure Fashion" and a Wendy Shalit's book, Girls Gone Mild as evidence that women have had it with provocative fashion and lifestyle.

Older feminists such as Katha Pollitt have mocked Shalit and see the modesty movement as being naïve and even repressive. But younger women say they find modest clothing not repressive, but liberating. They are realizing that modest clothing forces people to focus, not on their bodies, but on their brains and personalities.

No kidding? Modesty = respect?

These young women, whether they realize it or not, are groping their way back to a spiritual truth. As Pure Fashion notes on its website, modesty exists as an intuition of the spiritual dignity proper to humans. Teaching modesty to children awakens them to respect for the human person. Modest attire encourages purity of heart, not only for the young women who embrace it, but also for the men with whom they hang out.

I checked out Pure Fashion's Web site (http://www.purefashion.com/home). I personally can't say much for some of the colors and patterns, but there's clearly a different motivation. My wife and I have been fashion prisoners since the advent of grunge, so it may be some time before the tide turns sufficiently for us. But I'm hopeful. If this catches on, we might even see the return of some of my favorite styles from the '80s: plaid skirts, lace collars, wool sweaters, polo shirts, knit ties, pin stripes, argyles, oxford collars, penny loafers, ...

BRING IT ON!

Adult Stem Cells Work Where Embryonic Cells Fail

2007-08-22T13:07:00.000-05:00

A heart patient who was treated and cured with her own stem cells says: "I don’t understand ... why we have this huge political mess going on about stem cells. I’m living proof that adult stem cells work far better than embryonic."

My First YouTube Post

2007-07-22T20:07:00.000-05:00

A little funny from this past weekend.

Happy Parents' Day, BTW!

Parents Day July 22

2007-07-05T09:27:00.000-05:00

I noticed on my wall calendar that July 22 is marked as "Parents Day." I had never heard of this holiday before, but after a little googling I found it's a national holiday signed into law by President Clinton in 1994. I found information about it at www.parentsday.com.

I suspected this new holiday was intended to broaden the defintion of "parent" and "family," but it is apparently the opposite, as this site explains (emphasis mine):

In every culture and time period, the family has stood as the most fundamental human institution. Family is the starting point of life, the sustainer of well-being, and the school of love. A family begins with the joining together of man and woman, husband and wife, becoming father and mother – and parents. The most powerful of human bonds is the parent-child relationship.

Commitment to family has always been a core value. Tragically, however, what was often held as a common value, recognized as common sense, even understood as self-evident in the past, is sometimes not so today. ...

... our popular culture over the past several decades has emphasized self-fulfillment and self-gratification. Such focus on the self runs counter to the essence of parenthood, which fundamentally involves unconditional true love.
... [more]

So this holiday seems not about celebrating the individual roles of mother and father, but the importance of the traditional nuclear family, something worth celebrating and desperately in need of promoting.

I can't help noticing the irony that this came from the president whose wife claimed "it takes a village to raise a child," and whose said wife's book got a lot more publicity than this new holiday.

Not to complain, but can anyone tell me why Bill Clinton can institute a holiday like this and sign the Defense of Marriage Act without any significant controversy, but when George Bush calls marriage a union of a man and woman, he is called a theocratic, homophobic bigot?

Anyone?

In any case, a belated thanks to President Clinton for this holiday promoting traditional marriage and family, even though he received almost no credit or flak for it.

How a Nerd Says Happy Anniversary

2007-06-27T11:56:00.000-05:00

If his wife's name happens to be Ruth, they've been married fifteen years, and they're going to the north shore to celebrate.

My bride found this on her computer this morning.

(If the above player doesn't work, you can download the file directly by clicking here.)

For the uninerdiated, see this source material for reference.

A Dave Barry Moment

2007-06-22T09:16:00.000-05:00

Dave Barry has often written about how clueless men are on the domestic front, such as when he dressed his son for the day in an outfit that was half pajamas.

This morning I complimented my son on getting himself dressed. A minute later, my wife came in and with one glance told him, "Good morning, Jack. Your shirt's on backwards." As he turned around, I saw the "Polo Sport" logo on his back. She, of course, didn't need to see that. Her genetically-enhanced vision, powered by a second X chromosome, enables her to see around objects and people. This explains other things, like how women know there's dust behind the furniture.

The Best Value for Fun, Fun, Fun

2007-06-18T11:44:00.000-05:00

Yesterday was Father's day, and my dear wife and son treated me royally. After lunch we all discussed what we wanted to do for the rest of the day. The options included going on rides at to the Mall of America, bumper boats at Lilli Putt Amusements near home, or the Bunker Hills water park, also close to home.

When it comes to entertainment, we're total cheapskates. We didn't have any coupons for the Mall of America, the bumper boats were $4 for probably a 5-minute ride, and the water park was $6.50 each for what probably wouldn't be more than an hour or two. None of the options were a good value for the time and money involved.

I suggested, "How about we have a water fight with our new squirt guns [a father's day present] and we can try out the Slip 'n Slide [bought years ago, never opened] in the backyard?" Jack said yes. Mama opted for the sidelines. (Not the most comfortable activities when you're with child, but she was fine with it.)

So we had a great afternoon for free. We even went down the Slip 'n Slide together (in violation of manufacturer's recommendations), Jack riding on my stomach while I slid on my back.

We finished the day with pizza (Sam's Club) and a movie, our own DVD of Disney's Pinocchio that Mama bought on eBay for $3. Besides being a great Disney classic, the lesson of avoiding temptation and doing what's right is a whole lot better than that of most modern kid's shows that preach: "Do what feels right to you, follow your heart, don't listen to anyone else." It was also fun to hear the quote we've had on our son's wall since he was a baby: "To become a real boy, you must prove yourself brave, truthful, and unselfish."

For inexpensive, guilt-free fun, you can't beat a day like this.

Jack said it well last week during our Sunday afternoon family time at a lakeside park in town. While walking to the car, he gave me a hug and said, "You're like my golden penny that lets me buy fun times. ... Am I a golden coin for you?" "Yes, you are," I said. He continued, "Mama is too. And we're both golden coins for her!"

This is the best entertainment value we could ever find - spending our golden coins with each other.

My golden coins. (With a hidden bonus coin!)

Breakpoint: True Martyrs

2007-06-12T09:42:00.000-05:00

I make a habit of citing Breakpoint, but Chuck Colson's June 11 commentary echoes exactly something my wife and I have been saying since September 11, 2001, namely that Islamists have twisted the meaning of martyr from the willingness to die for one's faith to a willingness to kill.

Geeks Grow Up

2007-05-31T10:04:00.000-05:00

A celebration in L.A. last week marking the 30th anniversary of Star Wars (no bloody I, II, III, IV, V, or VI) featured a display of hand-made, life-sized, remote-controlled and operating R2-D2s (and other Artoo units).

One Artoo unit serves Starbucks and another has an actual hologram of Princess Leia.

The exhibition was put on by the Official R2 Builders Club. I can't imagine how or where these guys get parts to build these, but they'll probably tell you they got power converters from Tashi station.

I guess I was qui-i-i-ite the amateur when I built my R2-D2 from this kit in 1979:

I thought I was pretty clever when I added lights and a speaker inside my 6" model. I always wished I could have made it remote-controlled.

I wonder if any of the guys who built these life-sized versions started out with the same plastic one I built.

BTW, I also built the C-3PO model. (And I made the eyes light up. Ha.)

Scappleface: No Substitute Fertilizer for Freedom

2007-05-29T10:05:00.000-05:00

Thank you, soldiers.

As the United States marks Memorial Day, recognizing those who sacrificed their lives in service to the country, scientists worldwide admit they are likely years away from discovering a “fertilizer for freedom” as effective as the blood of American troops.
...

“Where diplomacy falters, and negotiations fail, where evil reigns, and fear makes men’s arms hang limp, yet hope rises and moves in measure with the beating of American hearts. The soil of barren lands seems to cry out for this peerless nutrient. And we continue to marvel that volunteers still step forward to pledge their own blood for a cause whose accomplishment might await their last drop of devotion.”

Breakpoint: Through the Back Door

2007-05-04T16:45:00.000-05:00

Doctors in the U.K. are engaging in a "moral revolt":

Isn’t this remarkable? The very group that has the most to gain from abortions is turning away from them. They know better than anyone else exactly what an abortion is -- and they want nothing to do with it. And because they are the ones most directly involved, they are having even more impact than the government could ever dream of having.

Nerds in Paradise

2007-05-01T12:16:00.000-05:00

A co-worker and I were just getting nostalgic over our old stereos and record players, and it reminded me of a story from my grade school years that still sends me into snickering fits.

Picture a Saturday afternoon sometime in the '70s, my brother and I in our unfinished basement bedrooms. One of the "walls" of my room was the back of my brother's component stereo system, the wires within reach of my bed.

My dad kept boxes of electronic salvage, one of which was filled with old speakers, mostly from tube radios. He never used them, but I made all sorts of projects with them. One afternoon, my brother and I had a wild inspiration for some fun: blowing them up.

We started out small - a 2" speaker from an old transistor radio. We hooked it up to my brother's 30-watt receiver, put on some song with a good bass line, then slowly cranked up the volume. The speaker smoked and died about 1/3-way up the dial. After a few of these we got bored and had to up the ante.

We moved up to a larger old 9" oval speaker that probably sounded decent in its day, but its cone was now brittle and cracked. Our song selection was "YMCA," starting with the volume almost all the way up. Before the song started, the cone vibrated into an indiscernable blur from the tape noise alone. When the first drumbeat struck, it died a spectacular death in a puff of dust and a spray of shattered cone fragments.

After we picked ourselves up off the floor, we tried one more, an 8" round speaker with a huge magnet, possibly a contribution by my other brother from one of his car stereos. The song: "Disco Inferno," at full volume. The speaker shook and buzzed and floated across the tabletop until the cone actually started on fire, then finally went silent.

Before throwing away the remains of our raucous experiments, we salvaged the speaker magnets. (Stick two large ones together and you can hardly pry them apart.) We joked about erasing each other's tapes with them, and years later I threatened to set one on top of my brother's computer.

Yes, it was weird, the sort of story that makes my wife shake her head and look worriedly toward our son.

But it was good, nerdy fun while it lasted. Which reminds me, did you know electrolytic capactiors explode when you connect them to 120V AC?

Breakpoint: Are Christians Terrorists?

2007-04-13T11:50:00.000-05:00

This story in today's Breakpoint was so outrageous I thought it had to be sensationalized, so I checked it out for myself.

[An] anti-terrorism drill was organized by the Burlington Township Police Department. According to the BURLINGTON COUNTY TIMES, the drill scenario described intruders as “members of a right-wing fundamentalist group called the ‘New Crusaders’ who do not believe in separation of church and state.” The storyline also says the mock terrorists were angry because the daughter of one gunman was expelled from school for praying in class. The drill “specified that two armed men invade the high school . . . shoot several students in the hallways, then barricade themselves in the media center with 10 student hostages.”
...
These drills are more than troubling. They deliberately ignore reality: The killers who have struck at schools -- or who attempt to -- are either Islamic radicals or disturbed students who are angry at other students or teachers.
...
Ironically, school districts probably stick the terrorism label on Christians in part because they are too afraid of what Islamic radicals may do if they dare suggest that Muslims might actually be the ones they have to worry about.

Here's the actual story from the Burlington County Times and local follow-up on the aftermath.

I guess rather than depict a group who might retailiate with an actual terrorist attack, it's safer to just slander Christians. For purposes of a drill, they could have made up an organization of ambiguous ethnicity or ideology. (The Symbionese Liberation Army could have fit that bill.) But they apparently really wanted religious terrorists, so to ensure a realistic reaction from the teachers' union, they chose the group that scares the living bejeebers out of liberals.

The irony of this is that the first Crusaders liberated Christian regions after Muslim invasions. "New Crusaders" could have been those who took on the terrorists of 9-11, or Beslan, or Columbine, or a fictitious hostage crisis.

But why not make a survival exercise an indoctrination as well? Black is white, up is down, and the most dangerous people in the world are really the most peaceful.

It’s another example of how openly those hostile to any forms of Christianity express their contempt.

Michelle Malkin: Johnny Hart, R.I.P.

2007-04-09T12:20:00.000-05:00

Michelle Malkin: Johnny Hart, R.I.P.

I just heard this news today. B.C.'s bold Holy Week strips will be no more, but I can't imagine a more fitting day for passing of their creator: the eve of Christ's resurrection.

The Simple Meaning of Easter

2007-04-09T09:21:00.000-05:00

It's the innocent taking the punishment for the guilty.

http://www.breakpoint.org/listingarticle.asp?ID=6361

In the stories of a death-row inmate, a priest at Auschwitz, and Charles Colson's own prison experience, "I hear the echo of the first Good Friday: Christ taking our place on the cross, laying down His life so that a condemned people might live."

Making Fools of the Wise

2007-04-03T12:00:00.000-05:00

I just read in today’s Breakpoint about a woman named Christa Lilly from Colorado who last month emerged from six years in a “persistent vegetative state,” sat up and ate, conversed with family members, alert and aware. Three days later, she lapsed back into a coma, but her brief awakening still has doctors baffled.

Her neurologist, Dr. Randall Bjork, said he couldn't explain how or why she awoke.
"I'm just not able to explain this on the basis of what we know about persistent vegetative states," he said.

It was almost exactly two years ago that Terri Schiavo was starved to death, a sentence carried out by her remorseless husband and a supremely arrogant neurologist who insisted she would never recover. Christa Lilly was actually unresponsive in her “persistent vegetative state,” but Terri could laugh, smile, and recognize family members. Imagine what she might have done or what "awakenings" she might have shown if she had been fed!

I can’t allow myself to write much about this because my outrage over the injustice perpetrated against Terri Schiavo will resurface all the more. I will say that I praise God Christa Lilly has loving family members in charge of her care and looking after her. Her story should be shouted over the airwaves to every Michael Schiavo and every “right to die” expert who claims to know more about the human brain than what has been revealed to man. Christa Lilly’s case is one of the many that cry out: “You know nothing!”

Jesus said that God has hidden things from the wise and learned (Luke 10:21). Paul, in Romans 1:22 said, “Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools.” Human consciousness is a mystery that will never be fully understood, and it exists on levels I believe we will never be able to read. We must beware any diagnosis that declares a person "dead" while the heart is still beating on its own. Would that every PVS victim awaken to make fools of those who would pass such sentence on them.

To anyone reading this, I wish you a blessed Holy Week, and for Christa Lilly's family I pray for hope and confidence in the Lord of Life who defeated death.

Is My Faith Showing?

2007-03-13T14:58:00.000-05:00

Two recent experiences have left me puzzled and humbly grateful. If you're a Christian and you ever think you don't make enough conscious effort to share the Gospel, these will make you think about your unconscious evangelism.

My wife and I were on a plane last month and somewhere toward the end of the ride, a flight attendant asked us if we were missionaries. We answered no and she didn't ask any more. We scratched our heads wondering what led her to ask. Did we look like missionaries? What do missionaries look like? We were Americans on an international flight, but we never took out a Bible or any obvious clue that might have given us away as Christians. When the food came, we prayed (insert your favorite joke about airline food here), but as far as we knew, this was the only thing anyone might have observed. We barely even talked with any other passengers. Perhaps she overheard our conversations between ourselves. We don't know.

This past weekend, we had dinner with our six-year-old son at a restaurant in northern Minnesota. We talk a lot with our son about his toy habit, doing all we can to keep him tethered to reality. He talks about G.I. Joe, we talk about real soldiers and what makes heroes. He talks about Transformers, we talk about real robots and the engineers who build them. This particular evening we talked about a lot of things. At one point we happened to discuss what life might have been like in Mary and Joseph's home when Jesus was a little boy, how Jesus probably helped his father in his carpentry work, and so on. I told my son I would like to make a little workshop for him next to my workshop in our new home we're building this year. This was all ordinary conversation to us. We were just enjoying an evening out together. When the couple in the booth next to us stood up to leave, the man stopped by and asked me if I was a pastor. We laughed and said no, and wondered why he asked. The man apologized for eavesdropping but told us he appreciated how we talked to each other and to our son. It turned out he was a hospital chaplin himself, so we chatted a little more, then said our goodbyes.

We've gotten great laughs over our being taken for a missionary or a pastor, but in honesty we're not proud of these events. Rather, we're humbled at the realization that what we do and say is noticed by others. What joy and relief that on these occasions we were perceived positively. Would that we always come across so. I shudder to think of the times someone knew I was a Christian but I wasn't acting like it. Thank God these same people didn't observe me when I was driving.

I know that from a certain perspective I could have answered a nuanced "yes" to either question. (Aren't all Christians missionaries, and as a father am I not called to pastor my family?) But I like to think our simple and honest "no" made a stronger impression. Isn't it better to be caught acting like a Christian when you're not paid to do so, and when you're not even trying?

I thank God for these two experiences. Lord, make me always aware of my responsibility as a representative of You. Let me not embarrass You and never disgrace You. Whatever role I fill in your Kingdom, make my behavior a uniform that others see and recognize and trust. Let our faith always be natural, honest, and sincere. Let us always be mistaken for missionaries.

"I pardon you ... let the justice of God be done!"

2007-01-12T10:49:00.000-06:00

Reading about the execution of Saddam Hussein reminded me of a scene I read in Dumas' The Three Musketeers last summer. I commented about that scene in an e-mail at the time and I brought it up again with a friend this morning. I still marvel at that scene as a brilliant depiction of earthly justice and deference to the Divine. Even upon rereading, the scene is profound in ways I can't fully articulate. It reflects a clearly Christian understanding of justice and pity for the condemned.

I read in WORLD this morning that just before Saddam Hussein’s execution, one of the masked guards told the prisoner, “God d-mn you,” and Hussein responded, “God d-mn you.” It's a striking contrast to the execution of Milady de Winter who, like Hussein, was treacherous and defiant to the end. The executioners in Baghdad, however, did not concern themselves with the soul of the condemned, nor even their own.

The following are my comments from last June:

- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
This is a major spoiler if you ever want to read the book, but it doesn't ruin anything for the movies - the scene was left out of them, and at least one movie version let the villainess live on for two sequels.

Here's the setup: The woman being executed is known through most of the story as "Milady de Winter," but she was previously known as Charlotte Backson and Comtesse de la Fere. She is a woman of intense beauty, beguiling charm, snakelike deception, and deadly revenge. I have never seen (or read) a female character so brilliantly devious, and the author builds up her treachery well. Her first crime, while she was a novice in a convent, was seducing a priest, convincing him to steal liturgical objects from church, and running away with her. She somehow took the money and disposed of him. She went on to seduce a government official, poisoned him, was caught, branded (literally) to mark her as a criminal, but she somehow escaped execution, presumably by charming a guard. She deceived and married a wealthy baron, who later becomes the musketeer Athos. Athos, upon finding she was a condemned murderer, hanged her, but she somehow survived. (The author didn't reveal how.) She married Lord de Winter and secretly poisoned him, thus finally acquiring through inheritance the wealth to carry out her schemes for power. This all happened before the timeline of the novel begins.

When you first see her in the book, she is an accomplice of a corrupt cardinal, surreptitiously carrying out his edicts, but clearly for her own gain. What I found most amazing is how cleverly she deceives her victims. When captured in England, her warden is the most trusted and loyal guard to Lord de Winter (brother of the Lord she murdered). When she learns the guard is a Puritan (serving a Catholic lord), she contrives the persona of a persecuted martyr, exploiting the guard's faith while ultimately mocking it. She even convinces him to murder a duke to avenge a fabricated crime.

D'Artagnan is the only person in the story who successfully outsmarts and humiliates her, and for that she tries numerous schemes to assassinate him, eventually exacting her revenge by winning the confidence of the woman he loves, then poisoning her. Nearly every person who encounters Milady de Winter dies or is in some way ruined. She is an evil, evil woman, but so diabolically persuasive that even during her execution, the men guarding her have to be relieved of duty after she talks to them.

Her accusers, including the three musketeers and D'Artagnan, finally track her to an abandoned house, where they try and sentence her. The executioner in this scene is the judge who initially branded her, and coincidentally is the brother of one of her early victims. The scene gets very grim (as in reaper), but I'll describe afterwards what I found interesting about it.

[The chapter cannot be adequately summarized by excerpts. You can read chapter 66 of The Three Musketeers here, or you can download the entire book in a single 1.3 MB text file here.]

I'm not the type to be intrigued by execution scenes. What I found interesting in this was how the accusers pardoned her before God. They forgave her sins against them, thus not holding her bound in in heaven (as in the scripture, "Whatever you bind on earth I will bind in Heaven.") and leaving her soul to the mercy and judgment of God. They then carried out the earthly sentence for her crimes. I can't say I thoroughly understand the theology, but Dumas clearly thought it through. It's an intriguing scene to consider in discussing the moral and political implications of capital punishment.

No Militia to Defend Us

2006-12-21T11:25:00.000-06:00

The question critics of the Iraq war seem to be concerned with is not, "How do we ensure liberty for all Iraqi people?" but, "How do we keep Islamist hotheads quiet?"

Chuck Colson today brings attention to the plight of a group almost completely ignored in the debate over the war: Iraqi Christians.

Avoiding the Final Betrayal

Quoting the New Repuplic, Colson writes:

'Sunni, Shia, and Kurd may agree on little else, but all have made sport of brutalizing their Christian neighbors.' Since neither Iraqi nor Americans officials are willing to protect them, Christians are leaving their ancestral home.

The Iraq Study Group's report forsakes the ancient Christian populations of Iraq ( known historically as Assyrians and Chaldeans):

In its eighty-four pages, the word Christian never appears—not once. The words Assyrians and Chaldeans appear only in passing in the next-to-last recommendation as part of a longer list. Not one paragraph, not one sentence.

In contrast, the report makes multiple references to the fate of the Palestinians whom, last time I checked, don’t live in Iraq.

(Emphasis mine in the preceding quote.)

Colson continues:

Whatever else it represents, the group’s report represents the conventional wisdom about Iraq: Figure out who matters and who needs to be made happy or, at least, less upset. So, while Syria and even Iran are accommodated, the well being of Iraqi Christians doesn’t figure into the equation at all.

As tempting as it may be to throw up our hands, pull out, and let the factions fight it out between themselves (which is immoral and inhumane), we can't do this because there are factions who, as one Iraqi Christian put it, "have no militia to defend us." A democratic republic secures the survival rights of all citizens. The Sunni, Shiite, and other militias fight first of all against religious freedom, an idea they abhor.

Footnote: I admit it hardly occurred to me there were non-Muslims in Iraq until World Magazine wrote about it. There are also Iraqi Jews who have a fascinating history in the region. Islam is the latecomer to the Middle East, founded 700 years after Christianity and millenia after Judaism, yet we listen only to the blustering historic claims and beliefs that arrived last.

Mr. Tinkles' Triumph

2006-09-20T14:05:00.000-05:00

I am one of the ten people on the planet who remember the 2001 movie Cats and Dogs. If you're one of the other nine, skip the next paragraph.

The movie is about cats trying to take over the world and dogs trying to stop them. Jeff Goldblum plays a scientist researching a cure for dog allergies who becomes the prime target of the cats because his discovery would give a tactical advantage to the dogs. The cats and dogs wage a war of espionage and secret weapons in homes around the world, unbeknownst to their human owners. The megalomaniacal leader of the cats is a white Persian known as Mr. Tinkles.

In a story on Reuters today, a San Diego company announced the development of the first hypoallergenic cat.

This is big news on the war front, as these new minions of Mr. Tinkles will make their way into homes from which they were once barred. Allergies will no longer hamper the completion of their spy net. Soon their agents will penetrate the last remaining strongholds of freedom! Beware! Beware!

For those who don't buy the "secret war" theory, and who like cats, there's good news and bad news. The good news, of course, is that if you are allergic to cats, you can own one again. If any of your friends are allergic to cats, you can invite them over again. The bad news is you won't find any "free kitten" giveaways: These ones are $4000 each, and you'll want a purebred.

Back to the movie: If you didn't see it, I frankly don't recommend it. It's a funny premise that makes a great 2-minute trailer but a painfully lame 2-hour movie. All the best scenes are in the teaser trailer, so watch it here to satisfy your curiosity. If you're still curious, watch the full trailer here, and if you're a glutton for punishment, check out the official site here.

Warning: A sequel is reportedly in production.

Be afraid. Be very afraid.

Missing the Irony

2006-09-20T13:55:00.000-05:00

I would comment on the Muslim outrage over Pope Benedict XVI's recent comments about Islam, but I really couldn't say it better than Chuck Colson did yesterday: Proving His Point

Colson says:

Muslims are outraged over Pope Benedict’s recent speech, in which he denounced violence as a means of bringing about religious conversion. How did they demonstrate their anger? Ironically, with violent protest—even murder.

It's remarkably reminiscent of the Danish cartoon flap, about which Ann Coulter stated:

In order to express their displeasure with the idea that Muslims are violent, thousands of Muslims around the world engaged in rioting, arson, mob savagery, flag-burning, murder and mayhem, among other peaceful acts of nonviolence.

A satirist couldn't make this up. Every time someone suggests Muslims are prone to violence, they riot to show how wrong that person is.

If you haven't read the Pope's actual address, which has been grossly misinterpreted as usual, please read it here. The media outlets, as usual, carefully selected the quotes that would provoke the strongest reaction, then published them out of context. It's a safe strategy in a country with freedom of expression, but deadly in countries prone to religious violence. To an angry, overreacting, and generally non-reading mob, the simple message was lost: We want to discuss our religious differences without you getting mad. The Pope's address was an appeal to reason together, to talk honestly about our religions' teachings and acknowledge our respective failures to live up to them. You want to bring up Hitler? Fine. We won't kill you for doing so. You question my religion, I'll question yours, we'll search for the truth together.

Since the press missed them, here are a few key points:

The decisive statement in [Byzantine Emperor Manuel II's] argument against violent conversion is this: not to act in accordance with reason is contrary to God's nature.

The scientific ethos, ... is the will to be obedient to the truth, and, as such, it embodies an attitude which reflects one of the basic tenets of Christianity. ... We will succeed in [overcoming the rift between science and reason] only if reason and faith come together in a new way, if we overcome the self-imposed limitation of reason to the empirically verifiable.

Only thus do we become capable of that genuine dialogue of cultures and religions so urgently needed today. In the Western world it is widely held that only positivistic reason and the forms of philosophy based on it are universally valid. Yet the world’s profoundly religious cultures see this exclusion of the divine from the universality of reason as an attack on their most profound convictions. A reason which is deaf to the divine and which relegates religion into the realm of subcultures is incapable of entering into the dialogue of cultures.

'Not to act reasonably (with logos) is contrary to the nature of God,' said Manuel II, according to his Christian understanding of God, in response to his Persian interlocutor. It is to this great logos, to this breadth of reason, that we invite our partners in the dialogue of cultures. To rediscover it constantly is the great task of the university.

Them ain't fightin' words.

You can understand why the Pope was upset that his words were misused to inflame the very conflict he wants to help resolve. Warmongering mullahs and their accomplices in the media deserve the blame for the bloodshed and are the ones who should be apologizing.

You Thought Your Dreams Were Weird?

2006-09-16T23:31:00.000-05:00

It's strange how often my dreams are comedy sketches.

You know those TV drug commercials for Allegra, Celebrex, and so on? Last night, I dreamt I was watching TV and a commercial came on for a new prescription nasal spray to relieve the burning sensation you get in your nose when you burp after drinking carbonated beverages.

The commercial showed a woman sitting at her computer at home with a can of Coke on her desk. She discreetly tucked in her chin for a moment, then winced and grabbed her nose. She took a few whiffs of her nasal spray, smiled, and resumed her work. The commercial continued, showing people confidently drinking pop while a splashy logo floated by and an announcer read disclaimers.

When I described this dream to my wife, she laughed hysterically in spite of her gender's natural aversion to humor relating to bodily noises. She asked me, "Did you laugh in the dream, or wake up laughing?" I said no, I took it completely seriously in the dream, and as I recall, I gave it the kind of thoughtful "Huh," you give when acknowledging a good idea.

Now when I think about it, this could have been a great commercial on Saturday Night Live. The medicine could be named "Gastril" or "Neutranase." Or maybe it was more than that. It could be a million-dollar inspiration, a subconscious spark of genius. Maybe I should submit the idea to Pfizer.

Maybe I'll have a Coke and think it over.

We Were All Kids Once

2006-09-12T15:39:00.000-05:00

It's an understatement to say our son loves toys. He doesn't merely play with toys, he relates to them.

This is not to say he doesn't relate to real people. To the contrary, he does so very well. In fact, we're proud of how comfortable he is talking to adults as well as kids. Many children are intimidated by adults or just don't know what to say to them, but Jack has found a great ice-breaker. When we visit friends or have adult guests, Jack will open a conversation by asking, "So, what were your favorite toys when you were a little boy (or girl)?" It's wonderful to see how people open up and how he pays attention. Toys are his point of contact. He knows toys, and he knows that every adult was a kid once.

What's more, Jack learns things about our friends and relatives that we never knew. It's funny how everyone remembers favorite toys and is happy to talk about them, and he loves to hear about them.

When he sees old toys, he wonders about the adults who played with them years ago. It's no wonder that some of his favorite stories are Toy Story 2, Raggedy Ann and Andy, Old Bear Tales, and other stories about cherished old toys.

He's figured out that somewhere inside every adult is a person who was once his age, and he can talk to that person. Toys are his window to the world, a way he connects with people and makes them feel young. Then he makes up stories about old toys talking to new toys. The old toys (like people) are more fragile, but they have value because they were once loved by a kid. He's learned a great lesson about life, with little encouragement from us.

No, not every day is like this. He's drawn to every single flashy, cool toy at Wal-Mart, but when we don't buy them, he's just as happy to go to Grandma's and play with the toys his mama and uncles used to play with. It's good for him, and it's good for us to see and remember.

"Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these." - Matthew 19:14

The Mullah in the Cathedral

2006-09-12T13:31:00.000-05:00

Chuck Colson wrote this excellent commentary about America's "dialogue" with Iran. Colson is no right-wing ranter. He is, IMO, one of the most compassionate and sensible commentators on world events today. For him to call something "blasphemy" is not inflammatory. America entertaining a terrorist sponsor in the name of "tolerance" is like inviting a cobra into the nursery.

Our dangerous error is this: We don't know why we believe what we believe, or we don't know what we believe, or as with many Americans, we consider all beliefs equal and therefore irrelevant. Our enemies do not see their religion or their government this way.

Colson is right about why the National Cathedral invited the Iranian spokesman: "... because they don't take the truth claims of their own religion seriously, [they] assume the same of the Iranian leadership."