Expose in St Pete Times on Scientology

Did you catch these articles from the best newspaper in Florida, and one of the best in America, The St. Pete Times regarding the cracks in the armor of Scientology. It is an illuminating set of articles. I wager that it will be nominated for a Pulitzer, if I were a betting man.

Here is the link to the entire series. It is worth reading in its entirety if you have a chance.

Link

Also, here is commentary by The Daily Beast.

3 random things (torture, Carnival and "Christian Rock")

I have come across 3 things to make you aware of:

1. rant warning- Did you see this? The New York Times reports that 2 of the terrorism suspects were waterboarded 266 times. One of them was waterboarded 83 times, while the other (a bad man I do admit- but punishment is for the courts to decide) was waterboarded an astounding 183 times. I have a hard time believing each of those times were to get info, and none were for other reasons. But, however we feel about these individuals, how can one not believe that waterboarding someone 183 constitutes anything but torture? Seriously, how blind to your own nationalism or belief system does one have to be to think this is acceptable behavior, especially if one believes in the concept of American Exceptionalism (if you believe in this, you must see that what makes American "great" is its "values"- and the values expressed by this, are not particularly exceptional). And if you are a Christian and feel this is justified, you need to reexamine your belief system, because something besides Jesus and Scripture are guiding you.

Un-freakin-believable.

Rant over

2. Did you check out Bono's latest op-ed in the New York Times? While disjointed it is worth reading, covering Carnival, Christianity, lent and Easter for believers and non-believers. There are lots of great little quotes, including:

I come to lowly church halls and lofty cathedrals for what purpose? I search the Scriptures to what end? To check my head? My heart? No, my soul. For me these meditations are like a plumb line dropped by a master builder — to see if the walls are straight or crooked. I check my emotional life with music, my intellectual life with writing, but religion is where I soul-search.

and

So much of the discussion today is about value, not values. Aid well spent can be an example of both, values and value for money. Providing AIDS medication to just under four million people, putting in place modest measures to improve maternal health, eradicating killer pests like malaria and rotoviruses — all these provide a leg up on the climb to self-sufficiency, all these can help us make friends in a world quick to enmity. It’s not alms, it’s investment. It’s not charity, it’s justice.

3. Manchester Orchestra's second album dropped today. It is phenomenal, seriously. Wow. I was writing a review and then saw Paste's. It literally said everything I was going to say, only better. Imagine a bunch of young emo influenced Christians that showed serious potential their first time around, realizing they wanted to make a big rock-n-roll album while channeling everything good about Nirvana and not sounding derivative. This band could be a future Emergent Idol band if they continue on this trajectory. The lyrics are for anyone except those with sensitive Christian ears, easily offended by doubt. The opening line of this album is, “I am the only son of a pastor I know who does the things I do."

Anyway, here is the review by Paste. I really needed this album after so much navel gazing post-rock and folky stuff. I needed something smart and rowdy. It is the perfect combo of the holy grail- intelligence, melody and noise.

Mean Everything to Nothing is only $7.99 on Amazon (Cd or MP3) and iTunes.

Gaza Reporting

I am in the midst of a slightly longer post on the situation in Gaza, focusing on the something more personal than the common post on this subject. However, as I watched NBC News last night (yes, I still watch network news), something struck me, confirming the bias in American media that no one talks about... in the attempt to be fair and balanced, our news media makes sure that the suffering seems the same on both sides (of course, if Israel were suffering like Gaza, this would not be the case). We are in the pocket of Israel so we do not do honest reporting. If anyone strays from the party line on the subject, they are ostracized and accused of everything from terrorist support to lack of patriotism.

On the report last night, they focused on 2 Palestinian girls killed on their way to school and an Israeli woman killed taking out the trash (I believe that is the detail). They did not tell how many civilians had been killed on both sides, but made it seem like the casualties were equal.

The official toll tells us this:

Civilian Palestinian deaths- at least 64 (according to UN)

Civilian Israeli deaths- 3

all tragic, but not equal. 

By the way, an Israeli court is forcing Israel to allow reporters into Gaza to give us the whole story, not just government propaganda.

Conservative Fratricide

this was to be merely a link to an excellent article by an Conservative Independent that has left the Republican Party behind and thinks it is doomed to destruction. Link Here

_____________________________________________

As you may have noticed, evidenced by Colin Powell's endorsement of Obama, over the past few weeks,* the Republican Party has been breaking apart under its own weight, due in part to fiscal mismanagement, incompetence from a Republican Administration, an ill conceived and ill managed war, misanthropic behavior towards those outside the fold and the ill conceived VP nomination of Sarah Palin. This has caused the exodus of many PBRs (pre-Bush Republicans), Conservatives with conscience, Libertarians, Independents, Moderates and Religious Folk (those that care about issues broader than abortion** and gay marriage). While McCain could win in the case of unpolled racism or an October Surprise (like the Bosox coming from 7 down in the 8th in game 5), the party is still in pieces.

The Democratic Party, through no effort of its own, beyond nominating someone appealing has been the beneficiary. The victims have been the Republicans and Conservatives that dare speak against the President, the Party line or the potential VP, some of whom are shining lights of the movement or true believers. Many have left of their own accord, while others are unceremoniously dumped, metaphorically fragged by teammates, or called RINOS (Republicans In Name Only). 

What many ultra-conservatives do not understand is that they are the cause for the dismantling of their movement. They supported Bush's incompetence, DeLay's crookedness, along with issues like torture, big government for their benefit and borrowing and spending-drawing a line in sand that many conservatives of good conscience (especially Religious ones) had no choice but to cross. They took a movement and turned it into a racket. 

It is not a coincidence that many smart conservatives are questioning their party, considering a vote for a Third Party or a Democrat. It is not a coincidence that Right Leaning newspapers are lining up to endorse Obama and Reagan/ Bush I era Republicans are leaning towards Obama or away from McCain/ Palin. It is not a coincidence that many reliably Republican strongholds are breaking blue and many Evangelical church members are speaking up about once secret party affiliations. This is an indictment of the Conservative movement and the Republican party, not an endorsement of Democrats and Liberalism.

In fact, I think the best thing that can happen to the Republican Party for the sake of America is to lose big. Such a loss can be cleansing.

Sadly, many in the Christian Right are among the last vestiges, valuing personality and profession of belief over competence and intelligence, assigning their names to non-Christian attitudes on torture, race, hospitality to the other, war and truth speaking (among others). They support a candidate for VP that would not qualify to lead many of their churches (not just because she is a woman). 

Does this make the Democratic Party good? No. It makes it the only option in town for many since the Republicans started this friendly fire campaign and closing the tent.*** The Democratic Party is doing nothing besides opening its arms to people it might disagree with if the conversation ever got too deep. It is growing, not because of new ideas, but because the Republican Party is seen as bankrupt, the party of DeLay, Foley, Cheney, Bush and all things bad during the previous 8 years. 

Instead of blaming Democrats and Liberals, closing ranks ever more narrowly, trying to find any dirt possible on Obama,**** and shooting their wounded (killing the messenger is never a good idea), each Conservative/ Republican should look inside themselves, seek guidance from the smart conservatives with a conscience and take time to clean their own house instead of pointing out how dirty the Democratic House is (I think there is a Scripture about this). 

They should stop reading, watching or listening to Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity (seriously the guy is a joke), Hugh Hewitt, Bill Kristol, the guys at Townhall and Fox News. They should not start listening to Rachel Maddow and Kieth Olbermann. They should find conservative voices that are questioning assumptions, listen to them and ask similar questions (see list below).

Some of the bad Conservatives and Republicans- those that must be either misguided, stupid, or not following God:

Peggy Noonan,George Will, Christopher Hitchens, The Chicago Tribune and 25 other papers that endorsed Bush (and counting), Christopher Buckley, Colin Powell, Rod Dreher, Kathleen Parker, K Lo, Andrew Sullivan, Ross Douthat, Reihan Salam, Daniel Larison, David Brooks, some of the guys at Culture 11, even Charles Krauthammer and an Eisenhower. not all these support Obama, but they all question the direction of the Republican Party, McCain and/or Palin.

For a list of prominent Republicans supporting Obama, click here. While much of this support for Obama is due to his talent, vision and temperament, if there was a credible Republican alternative (and party) this would not be the case. Note that much of Powell's decision to support Obama revolved around his feelings regarding the Republican lurch to the right (as it dies).

Some thoughts on the Civil War brewing in Conservatism and the Republican Party: 

The Civil War

The Next Right on what the Right needs to do

the excellent blog posting that got this going

a previous article on the historic underpinnings of modern conservatism's fall. 

Andrew Sullivan, Rod Dreher and Ross Douthat are obsessed with this subject. Read any of their blogs.

* the breakup actually began in the aftermath of September 11, followed closely by the Iraq War, Mission Accomplished, the lack of WMDS, no Osama, vilification of John Kerry's Vietnam record, Katrina, DeLay/ Foley, financial mismanagement, Obama coming on the scene, no good Republicans in the primary, the McCain campaign, the financial meltdown and Sarah Palin. It will continue in the aftermath of the Nov 4 loss of McCain and subsequent blame shifting and scapegoating.

**many of whom that are still very Pro-Life.

***full disclosure- I registered as a Democrat at 18, became and Independent in 1994 (after working on a Republican presidential campaign). I became a Democrat this year to vote in the primaries. I will become unaffiliated once again (Independent) after the election. I have voted for Republicans as often as Democrats (if not more) in state and national elections. I have even voted for 3rd parties on occasion. I am not a Liberal (though, if I were, I would proudly wear the label- as I would if I were a Conservative. I find nothing wrong with principled conservatives and liberals).

 ****I heard 1 on the radio complaining yesterday about Obama's 2-faced support of both World Series participants as reason to vote against him.

mini rant about Freddie and Fannie- yes I am being intentionally simplistic

in the midst of this bailout to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, I am wondering how many of my Republican friends that fancy themselves ideological Libertarians, Free Market Conservatives, anit-Socialists, "stop welfare mommers," and good ole fiscal conservatives feel about the idea that tax payers are on the hook for such a huge amount of money and the CEOs of these companies will clear about $25 million for taking their companies down, along with all the other executives that will be paid... all because of a government payout.

It smacks of the evil Socialism and welfare for the rich to me. If a mother on welfare should not get money from the government, why should the CEO of one of these companies? Also, imagine how may recipients of welfare it would take to equal the amount of money a few of these guys will make (all at tax payer expense)?

Once more I would mention that I am not ideologically biased? I am a principled (to me) pragmatist and Moderate on these things. I understand the "reason" behind this bailout from an economic standpoint (although Adam Smith and his invisible hand would be wagging a finger at this!). As my friend Brandon and I were discussing, Obama is sounding like Ron Paul on this is (yes, Ron Paulites- you are correct once more).

It is my contention that between rank-and-file Conservatives and Liberals, there is a big difference. One believes in socialism for some things and the other believes in socialism for other things. One believes in welfare for a specific population and the other believes in welfare for another population. It is only the purists on both extremes that believes differently.

I am reminded of one of Gandhi's deadly sins- "wealth without work" 

the free market loving Cato Institute on Freddie and Fannie and here

Chuck Todd should replace Tim Russert

is there anything I don't have an opinion on?*

As a self professed political junkie** (in fact, a nickname in college was "Politico" with another Fraternity brother designating me the PJ), I have been wondering what could happen to election coverage in wake of the tragic death of the incomparable Tim Russert. A fan of NBC's political coverage (by far the most mature, most comprehensive and least shrill) for years now, I have watched Meet the Press most Sunday mornings (or TiVoed it) for a number of years.

During this election coverage I have grown to appreciate Chuck Todd and his careful analysis of election patterns, voter percentages, campaign missteps and walking the Russert-line of non-partisanship with strong opinion. A couple of days ago, while considering who should fill Russert's incredibly large chair, I realized he was the right person for the job. He has many of the same qualities that made Russert so strong. He is smart, well prepared, slightly schlubby, an everyman and young enough to keep the chair for years.

While I can see David Gregory becoming Washington Bureau chief, I don't think he is right for the MTP chair. Of course, Chris Matthews would be a disaster and Kieth Olbermann is a lightening rod. I am sure others are bandying for the spot as I write this.

But, Chuck Todd is the right choice. Apparently I am not the only one with this opinion (so make it happen, NBC. Andrew Sullivan, Kos and Jonah Goldberg agree.

* probably not

** I consider myself pretty astute on the political front. actually I feel my analysis and understanding is better than my understanding of theology. My wife says that it is because my natural bent and talent is sociological. I am drawn to politics because of the sociological aspects and towards the sociological and relational aspects of church and theology (which shapes my theological understanding- not the other way around). She is probably right.

Debate

I have been trying to swear off the political stuff for a few weeks, mostly due to the fact that I have some resumes out and know people don't want to see a bunch of political opinions from a job seeker when they google my name (although it should be better than what happens when some 20-somethings with too much info on myspace are googled by potential employers). However, I found this and thought some of you (that have not seen) it, may be interested.

You probably saw (or heard about) the debate last Wednesday on ABC (the worst network, with the worst newscast) which was "moderated" by Clinton supporter George Stephanopoulos and milquetoast Charlie Gibson. Many of Obama's supporters thought it was a bit of a joke suffering from bias and poor journalism. According to this analysis, the critics are right.

link

Iraq and Global Warming

As we enter the 6th year of the Iraq War I am reminded of how we edit facts to fit our narrative instead of fitting our narrative into the facts surrounding us (we all do this- especially those of us that follow college and professional sports).

I have noticed that many of those that are so quick to disavow the idea of Global Warming are the same people that were supporters of the Iraq War. On GW they tell me that I believe the media and political accounts while they believe real science. In the future they will be justified by the facts of science while my narrative will be crushed when the creeks don't rise.

My question to them is this... In 2003 you fully believed that Iraq had WMDS which have never been found and have been judged by most organizations to have never been there in 2003. In 2003 you believed there was a connection between Iraq and Saddam Hussein which has been disproven by every media and intelligence outlet. You even believed there was a connection between Iraq and Al Qaeda which the pentagon disproved. You believed we would be greeted as liberators. You believed it would be over within weeks, maybe months and would cost less than 1000 million dollars, all of which would be paid for by Iraq's oil reserves. You even believed that an ink stained Iraqi finger would change their country.

Today, you either acknowledge (when no one else is around) you were wrong, keep waiting to be proven right in some alternative universe or believe a narrative based upon desire instead of reality.*

My question is this. If you were so wrong on Iraq, how can you be so sure you are right today on Global Warming? Have you not learned anything? If your trusted media and news sources were so wrong on Iraq, should you not view their "news" on Global Warming a bit suspect?

*I just realized I forgot the most common stance for those supporting the war since Day 1. it is what I call the Mark McGwire stance. Lets not talk about the past. Lets not talk about who was right and wrong. Lets talk about winning now that we are there. The past is not any indication of future judgment. Imagine these folks once the oceans rise, "I am not interested in who was right or wrong, lets just hope the oceans quit rising soon."

political coverage

now that we have almost 7 weeks until Pennsylvania, what can we do to keep up with coverage without the constant barrage from the television news? How can we filter through all of the back-and-forth and find the real messages? How can we know if something is a cynical ploy (i.e. Bill Clinton "promising" the VP candidacy to Obama so his supporters- especially blacks in Mississippi- will vote for Hillary thinking they get Obama anyway) or truth?

In an election cycle it is a bit difficult. We have to find places we can trust, whose voices we can stand, whose agendas we know and can sift past (either attack everyone or tell me up front your agenda). In case you are wondering where I go (that is probably very presumptuous of me), here are a few:

on television I head over to MSNBC for a few reasons. First of all, unlike CNN and Fox they make no claims to be the best political coverage in the galaxy. Also, they have less annoying graphics (very important) and a solid team that is a bit smarter than the others. Brian Williams stops by every once in a while. Tim Russert has the experience to see through the BS (and gets good scoop). Kieth Olberman is wicked smart, while Joe Scarborough is refreshingly goofy and I get to see if Chris Matthews' head will explode live on television. Even if I think Andrea Mitchell is in Hillary's purse, I can take it.

print (but online) my first stop is Slate, owned by the Washington Post. John Dickerson is a great political journalist and they run the gamut in their politics, which is refreshing. Of course, I read the coverage from Rolling Stone (Liberal bias- yes). But, they have little respect for any campaign and candidate and a "leave no prisoners" attitude, especially Matt Taibbi. For a world perspective, I look at the Economist. I also keep up with the NYT and Post columnists, along with their coverage. I look at Time and Newsweek when they have something truly interesting.

podcast I pick up the political podcasts from NPR, but my addiction is to Slate's political gabfest. Three smart 30-somethings wise beyond their years, slightly snarky and fun. yes, they lean moderately left, but like good journalists they are able to separate their leanings from their analysis.

Blogs My first stop is Andrew Sullivan's The Daily Dish. if you have never read Andrew, please check him out. He is British, but now an American. He has a strong faith perspective. He is gay. He is a conservative, libertarian. He hates the war and thinks Bush has ruined conservatism. He loves Obama and thinks the Clintons are Machiavellian monsters. He is a fresh voice and an uberblogger (up to 10 postings per day). Go back a week and check out what he is saying about the Hillary campaign. I usually wander over to Crunchy Con, a very traditional conservative with hippie leanings that hates the war (yes, I think true conservatism is against the war). Every once in while I head over to the Huffington Post, but usually at the behest of someone else. Others include Instapundit, National Review's Corner, Rolling Stone's Political Blog, Politico and Jesus Politics.

Radio even though I will listen to Amy Goodman occasionally (to hear something no one else talks about), her bias wears me out (at least she is not a yeller). It is the same reason I cannot listen to the talk radio guys or watch them on television. They are mean, especially the Conservatives. I cannot read their postings either. they have nothing in common with the William F. Buckleys, George Wills, or David Brooks (I can even put up with Joe Scarborough and Tucker Carlson) of the world: true conservatives of principle, not blowhard hate mongers (see Hannity, Beck, Limbaugh, Coulter, Malkin, etc.).

article on the EMC Tour stop in Tampa

As you may know Brian McLaren is coming to Tampa tomorrow as part of his Everything Must Change Tour. It looks to be a great event and I just found out I will be part of the panel discussion on Saturday morning. I am not sure what I can add, but I have been asked numerous times and finally came around (I hate anything that smacks of self-promotion- except on this blog*).

As part of the promotion for the event I was interviewed by a local journalist. Here is a link to the article in the Tampa Tribune. I did not exactly say what the article says I said (it is a summation, not exact quotes), but I agree with much of the premise. Hopefully I don't sound like too much of a dork, which I usually do in print.

*this is my little fiefdom, so I can promote the ruler of this corner of the Internet.

God is Sued

If this was in the Onion, you would not be surprised. However, it is not, which makes it funnier...

A Nebraska legislator, trying to make a point against frivolous lawsuits sues God for widespread death, making terroristic threats, destruction, etc. Instead of ignoring the lawsuit, God responded.

Read here.

Why we need to wait on opinions (Taibbi on the Imus scandal- best thing by far you will read)

Countless times you have heard be sing the praises of Rolling Stone's Matt Taibbi, far-and-away the best political journalist/ commentator in the Ameircan press. He is offensive and usually right. In his latest posting for RS, Taibbi takes on the Imus affair. You may say it has been played out, but you must take the time to read this scathing diatribe against the American culture that creates such a spectacle. He takes on Imus, NBC, Sharpton and Jackson, Snoop Dogg, Ludacris, a USC professor, Baywatch, Carlos Mencia, Paris Hilton, Tupac, and the entire music industry. Yes, he even calls today's rap singers minstrel singers.

No one could get away with speaking such truth on television. Please read and let me know what you think. Warning- offensive language and serious thoughtfulness.

Here are some choice quotes:

First of all, let's just get this out of the way: The idea that anyone in the media world gives a s__t about the dignity of women, black or white, is a ridiculous joke. America's TV networks have spent the last forty years falling over each other trying to find better and more efficient ways to sell tits to the 18-to-35 demographic. They make hour-long prime-time reality dramas these days about shopping-obsessed sluts hitting each other with pocketbooks, for Christ's sake. Paris Hilton -- dumb, rich -- gets her own prime-time show. MTV, the teenie mags, the pop music industry, they're basically all an endless parade of skinny, half-naked brainless women selling makeup and jeans to neurotic, self-hating, weight-obsessed little girls.

The idea that NBC -- the company that proudly produced 241 episodes of Baywatch, a show whose two main characters for nearly a decade were Pamela Anderson's tits -- was "offended" by the use of the word "ho" is beyond preposterous. Until this incident, I would have wagered very good money that "ho" would be in the title of at least one NBC-produced reality pilot within the next ten years...

...as an adult white male I also know a minstrel show when I see it, and that's what rap has turned into. Satan himself couldn't have designed a more effective vehicle for marginalizing black culture than modern hip-hop. In the early days rap music was scary social commentary; it was raw and real and it vividly described a violent street culture that white people didn't know about and didn't want to know about. But very quickly rap turned into a multibillion-dollar industry in which the same corporate behemoths who sold us crap like Garth Brooks and boy bands and Britney Spears made massive profits selling a stylized, romanticized version of black misery to white kids in the suburbs.

That was bad enough, but even worse was the way black politicians and black intellectuals so easily bought into the idea that these endless video images of gun-toting, ho-slapping black men with fat wallets, rock-hard tattooed abs and fully-accessorized rides were positive living symbols of "black empowerment" and "black manhood." Like Tupac was the next Malcolm or something.

Yeah, right. Seriously, how dumb do you have to be to not see through this s__t? Here you've got the modern-day version of The Man signing big checks to back your record deals and cheering along as all the artistic talent from the black community starts walking around in public wearing one-word stage names like strippers, writing song lyrics featuring preschool-level spelling and primping endlessly for the cameras with gold teeth and swimming pools and pimped-out cars -- all of them absurd caricatures of the capitalist wealth
fantasy. How exactly is any of that that different from the minstrel show, the conk and the zoot suit? The black man who can dance and sing, but can't control his urges, can't resist ____ and just can't get enough of what Whitey is selling, can't stop preening in his Caddy...that's innovative? That's empowering?

Bull___. Rap was real once, but once it became an industry it turned into the same con white people have been playing ever since they set foot in this country. It's a bunch of shiny trinkets for the isle of Manhattan. Here's your Hummer and your b_____s, knock yourself out. You need us, we'll be buying the African grain market. Oh, and, thanks for the cap, my kid loves it, he wears it sideways just like you...No matter how catchy the music is, on a deeper level, that's what big-money rap acts amount to now. And the longer the black community eats it up, the more time Whitey is going to have to laugh all the way to the bank, like he always has...

...we love our black jokes, we love our Jew jokes, we love our redneck jokes and we love our misogyny -- we just don't want it all on the wrong network in the wrong time-slot, coming from a white guy, in whose mouth it might very well sound like the bigot in all of us. And when it does pop up in the wrong place, coming from the wrong person, we've got to pull the "I'm shocked, shocked" act and pretend it's a criminal aberration. Because that's much easier than facing the truth about what we just heard.

* by the way, this is an example of a non-Immediatista. Matt waited until the heads shut up and listened to everyone before giving his assessment on the subject. This article makes the idiocy of the entire Imus debacle worthwhile.

I hate the Immediatistas, part 1 (24 hour news and Virginia Tech)

There are many things I love about the Internet in general and blogs in general. However, when pressed, I can tell anyone what I consider to be the greatest flaw in the Internet and blog revolutions. While misinformation is bad enough and a serious flaw of the blog, it has been around for a long time.

However, when coupled with the need to get information out first, this becomes a great danger to the world around us. We see this phenomena in the 24 Hour News Channels also. Instead of doing good investigation of sources and information, we trust whomever will give us the information we want, the way we want and the quickest. When this is absent, we always have innuendo, perfected by the folks at FoxNews (see Swift Boats and Obama is Muslim) and the political blogs- and seen at every outlet this week.

This phenomena of getting an opinion out there first has come to a head in my mind this week. The Immediatistas* (it is always hard to spell a word you just made up) offered up their judgements on gun control, campus security, one guy's mental illness and the problems of freedom in America within moments of the massacre. The worst being a National Review writer calling VT students to task for not being brave enough (about 24 hours after news broke of the event)

Instead of listening, we speak. Watching the news conferences and the questions asked by some members of the media (all looking for the real scoop, which never happens at news conferences- don't they know this?) frustrated me beyond belief. However, seeing some blogs and news agencies disseminating false information, in hopes they got it right and would win the Scoop War (no one remembers when you are wrong and you can change history if you speak wrongly loud enough- see FoxNews and the 2000 election) is sickening. There is never any accountability.

No bloggers or commentators should have had anything about the VaTech massacre for at least 24 (heck 48) hours apart from straight news reporting or condolences. There should be a moratorium on opinion until the facts are in. I know, I know.. I am a dreamer.

That said I offer 2 things (since it has been more than 48 hours)

1. Nothing will change regarding gun laws. We are a cultish society that worships the idea of Gun Rights and will stop at nothing to keep any sane laws off the books (we even try to tie Jesus to gun freedom). We are a violent society and violent societies with absolute freedom have consequences. Decide what you want to do with that freedom, but there are unintended consequences for everything (I am not advocating anything, just offering a thought- of course my opinions on America's facination with violence are posted below).
2. My only connection to this story is my time in (and love for) Virginia. As a student minister for half a decade, Virginia Tech was the number 1 school my students ventured to each fall upon graduation from area high schools. Thank the Lord all of those students and their siblings are safe. Also, my father-in-law works for Virginia Tech. He is an Agriculture Economist and works directly with farmers and is rarely on campus. That said, I am terribly saddened by this story. But, I cannot get the idea out of my head that such horrible death and destruction is happening daily in Iraq, mainly due to US presence. With 100 civilians killed daily in Iraq, mostly by car/ suicide bombers and ethnic cleansing, parents are mourning the loss of their children daily (children with futures as bright as those at VT). That is 3 VT massacres per day in Iraq. Our world must expand to care deeply for those lost souls and we must not forget that, ever.

*Immediatistas are those in the media and blog world that must report an opinion on a subject before anyone else does (or report on news before it is verified). Whether it is hard news or reporting on music (my next rant) without properly digesting it, they offer no service besides the stroking of their own ego. They get to be first, but rarely are they best or long lasting.

This is why you may notice I am usually a day or 2 behind news on my blog. It is why I may review a film after seeing it twice or an album after listening a number of times. It is about proper digestion (I don't eat fast food and don't want fast news). Its purpose is not to get to something first, but to post on a subject when I have had a chance for reflection and thought. I am sure it does not make what I say any more insightful, but hopefully it is not even less insightful.

new leader of the Religious Right (let us hope)

Talk to Action considers whether SBC leader Richard Land is usurping the power of James Dobson as the leader of the Religious Right. While I am no friend of the Religious Right and feel much of its political power is a danger to the nation and cause of Christ, I would welcome this change.

While I disagree with Land on a number of issues (OK- most issues), his understanding of Biblical, personal and moral ethics is consistent, which is terribly important to the debate. He has already parted ways with the Falwell, Robertson, Dobson Hard-Right on a number of issues, including immigration reform (taking Matthew 25 seriously). He took Dobson to task for his call to the NAE to fire Cizik over global warming and he has the same problems with Newt Gingrich and Dobson's support of his candidacy that most people do. He even treats Wallis and liberals with respect while debating them.

I just hope he uses his Oxford educated brain and comes to his senses on the war, patriotism and and the relative unimportance of gay marriage. He is much too smart to hold some of the traditional SBC beliefs with out question. He has shown a thoughtful side on a number of issues and I hope he continues to move in that direction in the future and does not retreat to his throne, believing his own hype, like Dobson, Perkins and Fallwell continue to do.

the Only Proof He Needed For the Existence of God Was Music

above is his desired epitaph

The great Kurt Vonnegut died last night and while watching the news we are still subject to the Duke Lacrosse trial, Ana Nicole's baby's daddy and the continuance of the non story of the Don Imus remarks (hey media and black leaders- can you go after Beck, Limbaugh, Savage and Coulter who make worse remarks on a regular basis?).

You are telling me that the death of one of the great icons of the 20th century and one of its 4-5 greatest authors does not deserve more play than Imus? While I know he had a wonderful life, I am saddened by the knowledge I will never see another interview, oped piece or writings from this classy gentleman. I am glad I am still able to spend time reading his protege John Irving.

My favorite memory of Vonnegut is from the Rodney Dangerfield film Back to School. Dangerfield's character hires Vonnegut to help him write a paper on Slaughterhouse 5. His teacher gives it an F stating that the author obviously knows nothing about Kurt Vonnegut or his writings. Classic! An important author who parodies himself.

Take the time to read some of his writings, even if you don't read his novels. Read about his experience during WWII as a POW during the bombing of Dresden or his latest book A Man Without A Country, a collection of essays.

Read one of his last interviews, with Rolling Stone here.

Here are some great quotes (take the time to read them);

Kurt on humanity "We're terrible animals. I think that the Earth's immune system is trying to get rid of us, as well it should."

Kurt on evolution/ ID "I do feel that evolution is being controlled by some sort of divine engineer. I can't help thinking that. And this engineer knows exactly what he or she is doing and why, and where evolution is headed. That’s why we’ve got giraffes and hippopotami and the clap."

On life "Everything you need to know about life is in 'The Brothers Karamazov"'

Advice for young people "What should young people do with their lives today? Many things, obviously. But the most daring thing is to create stable communities in which the terrible disease of loneliness can be cured."

On Supporting the troops “In case you haven’t noticed, we…dehumanize our own soldiers, not because of their religion or race, but because of their low social class. Send ’em anywhere. Make ’em do anything. Piece of cake.”

On Why we are here "I tell you, we are here on Earth to fart around, and don't let anybody tell you different."

On politics "There is a tragic flaw in our precious Constitution, and I don’t know what can be done to fix it. This is it: Only nut cases want to be president."

On Christianity and politics "For some reason, the most vocal Christians among us never mention the Beatitudes. But, often with tears in their eyes, they demand that the Ten Commandments be posted in public buildings. And of course that’s Moses, not Jesus. I haven’t heard one of them demand that the Sermon on the Mount, the Beatitudes, be posted anywhere.
"Blessed are the merciful" in a courtroom? "Blessed are the peacemakers" in the Pentagon? Give me a break!"

On art and writing "If you really want to hurt your parents, and you don’t have the nerve to be a homosexual, the least you can do is go into the arts. But do not use semicolons. They are transvestite hermaphrodites, standing for absolutely nothing. All they do is show you’ve been to college."

Kurt on death "(Speaking at Isaac Asimov's funeral) Isaac is in heaven now, that was the funniest thing I could have said to a crowd of Humanists. God Forbid, Should I pass on sometime, may all of you say that Kurt is in Heaven too."

And finally, Kurt on himself "You realize, of course, that everything I say is horseshit."

most quotes from Wikiquote's Vonnegut entry.

Abondoning the SS Cowboy Bush as it takes on water

Two and a half years later, the mea culpas are beginning. Many of the very people that returned Bush to the White House to continue leading America on its downward spiral towards a Rome-like ending of its era as a Super Power are seeing the folly in their ways.

Hopefully the rest of the 23% who voted for Bush but no longer approve of his handling of our nation will repent in the near future, leaving the under 30% left supporting the worst president since my mother was born (1930) to misunderstand the nature of conservatism, foreign and domestic policy, faith and politics, war and peace and America's place in the world.

I have noticed a number of former Bushites repenting or coming clean with their negative assessments lately. You should use these quotes on your blogs (if they are read by Bushheads) or email them to your Bushonista acquaintances. Some of these people cut deeply because they believe so strongly in the conservative agenda Bush sold them in 2000 like Robert Tilton sells salvation to rural widows.

As many of you know Matthew Dowd, former strategist for Bush publicly disavowed his former support for Bush, seeing that the Bush he helped elect is not the Bush in the White House. Seeing W's lack of leadership in wake of Katrina, his refusal to meet Cindy Sheehan, and gross mismanagement of the War (along with the goodwill of the world after 9/11), Dowd says this,

"I had finally come to the conclusion that maybe all these things along do add up... That it's not the same, it's not the person I thought."

Also we have Vic Gold, advisor to Goldwater and Agnew (these are older Republican leaders today's Bushies may have never heard of), friend to and biographer of H W Bush. He believes George W and his minions are the biggest threat to conservatism and America's future in his lifetime. He tells us this,
"For all the Rove-built facade about his being a "strong" chief executive, George W. Bush has been, by comparison to even the hapless Jimmy Carter, the weakest, most out of touch president in modern times. Think Dan Quayle in cowboy boots."

Lastly we have the Dark Knight of conservative pundits, Robert Novak, a huge Bush supporter in the past. Even he is disillusioned telling us how bad Bush has become,
"With nearly two years remaining in his presidency, George W. Bush is alone. In half a century, I have not seen a president so isolated from his own party in Congress - not Jimmy Carter, not even Richard Nixon as he faced impeachment."

Come on Bushheads, can you not see the:

• He is now holding troops hostage in Iraq to get the funding he wants with no accountability, of course.
• He is destroying the National Guard by redeploying it with little or no rest (no time in history has been harder on the NG and reserves). America cannot handle this war and the military is being stretched so thin we are becoming a vulnerable laughing stock to our future enemies. These tour extensions and short rotations are not troop support. Bush and his poor war planning are advocating the wholesale destruction of the military and its morale in ways the Democrats, pacifists and the "mainstream media" could never do.
• He is hurting (maybe irreparably) military families by extending tours of duty to 15 months.
• Our economy suffers, as well as the NG and reserve families due to lost wages while deployed.
• He continues to tell us we will be followed by terrorists to America if we leave Iraq. So, I guess he is telling us that he has done a terrible job keeping America safe if it is easy for them to follow us home. What are the going to do, hitch rides on the planes and ships returning to the US?
• Don't you see how dangerous he has made the world for America through his misguided war and emboldening of terrorists through his foreign policy blunders and cowboy management style?
  

A few of his supporters still believe history will be kind to this man and we will look back at his administration as successful. If you know someone like that, remind that person what his "supporters" are saying about him now.

If you have a favorite quote from a former supporter, feel free to post it in the comments section.

stop these presses

I would like to read the newspaper, look at news sites and watch the news without hearing anything about the following stories.

1. Ana Nicole Smith's continued death coverage and the paternity of her child
2. Don Imus' racist remarks about the Rutgers Women's Basketball team
3. Britney Spears self destruction
4. the Sopranos final season
5. How Sanjaya (or whatever his name is) is ruining American Idol (or any AI story on any network besides FoxNews)
   

With the scandal at the Justice Department, the fight over War funding, the fiasco's continuance in Iraq, the situation in Iran and North Korea and dog food tainting, we do not have time for such trivial stories (no the Imus story is not trivial, but it should be a story that takes 10 minutes in its entirety- not the lead story on NBC News- they took 10 minutes tonight).

Who would Jesus Shoot?

I am moralizing today (sorry if you do not like that, but remember I have no job or pulpit presently from which to expound). So, you, dear readers, are subject to such whims of fancy from a particularly bothered DJ Word..

From Cynthia Tucker comes this wonderful quote on America's misguided love affair with firearms:

"This folly will continue, fueled by a perplexing cultural ethos that worships individual gun ownership. A century from now, anthropologists will look back and wonder what in the world this was all about. They'll sift through the ruins of the historical record, in much the same way anthropologists today puzzle over cannibalism and the sacrifice of virgins in long-dead civilizations. they'll wonder how a highly advanced and sophisticated culture allowed unchecked personal gun ownership, despite the carnage."

This article points out the increase in violent crime the past few years, especially gun related violence. The NRA has let us know that we would be foolish to think guns have anything to do with gun violence.

Of course, I am sure the increase since 2005 has nothing to do with daily images of Americans at war, dehumanization of our enemies, the approval of the destruction of those we disagree with and violent rhetoric from pundits and politicians (especially Cowboy Presidents)....

....coupled with entertainment bent on culturally conditioning us to accept any amount of blood and gore with no questions to our own sense of humanity loss. With television and film violence unparallelled in human history, whether it is the torture fantasies of 24 and The Sopranos or the gory spectacles of dismembered teenagers with large breasts and bulging biceps of sickening "entertainment" like Saw I, II and III and the films of talent waster supreme Quentin Tarantino or the bloody genius Mel Gibson, we are on the precipice inches from acceptance of snuff films and public death. Of course, I am sure first person shooter video games have had no affect upon millions of young adults and their love affair with violence.

Sure, I am sure I am just a prudish Nanny stater foolish enough to think these things are connected (well, besides the video games- I know the right wing hates those, as long as they are not War games or Left Behind killfests).

Sadly, just like divorce, dealing with poverty, plastic surgery and materialism Christian beliefs and behavior related to violence are no different from that of our non-Christian neighbors. How can we talk of a Prince of Peace when fighting for a Gun Culture, supporting the destruction of an entire race of people (Arabs) and justifying the embrace of extreme violence in entertainment because we are "'merican Christians?"

What will it take for Christians to embrace the teachings of Jesus and take our history seriously. Will it take violence against our own kind for us to see that violent culture is more damaging to a true "Culture of Life" -our Cowboy President's words- than those issues used by Dobson, The SBC and radio pundits to increase their coffers and attendance; knowing that speaking the truth on these issues would affect their bottom line and challenge their followers in a manner that would get less Amens and more people walking out because their toes are uncomfortable.

* I am sure many of us can try to justify the violence in anything we watch by stating something about the deeper meaning or that it really shows the impact of violence. While I believe this is true in many war films or westerns such as The Proposition and The Unforgiven, we cannot have it both ways with a shows like The Sopranos and 24 which no longer give viewers a lesson in morality concerning the consequences of the actions of the main characters, as they lose their humanity due to their actions (see Crimes and Misdemeanors or Matchpoint, both by Woody Allen, for such moral fables- or V for Vendetta, a violent film with a point).

When Jack Bauer kills innocent persons for the "greater good" he has lapsed into a new territory, like that of Tony Soprano when he strangles an enemy because of the opportunity in Season 1. At this point we can no longer say it is really about workplace politics. It is insulting to say such a thing.

BTW, I am not rooting for Tony Soprano to be murdered this year. I am hoping the creators have the guts to have him pay the consequences for his actions and rot in prison for the rest of his stinking life.

for your perusal if you are bored or jobless

• Why Passover and Easter are not the competitors that Christmas and Hanukkah are. link
• How far does $1 per day go in the places people live on that amount. link
• Instead of buying a new iPod every year when your battery begins to fail, maybe you should buy something durable with that $300, like Apple stock. Check out this Mother Jones article on the planned obsolescence of our consumer products and the introduction of new products in this article entitled iWaste. link
• David Plotz of Blogging the Bible tells us why God needs Satan. link
• Time Magazine gives us 51 ways to save the earth. link
• How suburbs are destroying the American Dream (schlock and awe). link
• The 25 best rumors in rock history (#1- Paul's dead, of course). link
• Unlike me, you may actually think the Democrats will win the Presidency in 2008. If you believe that, read this article from Rolling Stone on the Democrats greatest enemy to winning elections , its own consultants. link
• Music to keep you hip. link
• A Gay and Lesbian pro gun group. link
  

Lastly, you must see this:

• Worst Album list from people that should know better. This is the R&RHOF's list of albums. It is insulting and too ridiculous to comment on. Who paid for this list? Just check out #s 13, 2-freaking-1, 27, 33, 36 (which is the same album as 21), 37 (John Travolta???), 44, 76, 84, 94 and 95 (my hands are shaking just looking at this list and acknowledging its existence- it has taken me weeks to be able to calm down enough to mention it publicly without breaking down and needing counseling). link
  

Responsibility for War Crimes

In his latest post, Matt Taibbi has this to say about the ethical lapses of young soldiers in Iraq, whether it is Abu Ghraib, youtube videos of soldiers smashing taxi cabs, killing innocent civilians, or what could be considered atrocities (while I disagree on the personal culpability of individuals for their own actions, I agree that the greater responsibility for all of these sins lies at the feet of those that put them in this untenable situation)...

It's not that I don't believe these stories, and not that I don't want to hear them. I'm just wary of sullying the debate over this war with a referendum on the behavior of young soldiers who have been placed in an impossible position, sent to fight in a strange and hostile place with no clear mission and no detectable strategy for securing peace or victory. In my mind, all the people in the Bush administration and in Congress and in the media who got these kids sent there in the first place have to be the first ones held responsible for whatever those kids do after being thrown into the fire. I just don't yet have the stomach to start pointing the finger at a bunch of teenagers and twentysomethings who never should have been sent there in the first place.