Memorial Day 2004

So many have sacrificed so much so that we can live in freedom.

War Monger

A report put out by Reuters says that President Bush has Saddam's pistol in his office as a "war trophy". I guess we're supposed to be aghast that the president would do such a thing. The fact that it was a gift from soldiers involved in Saddam's capture is underplayed.

I'm not sure why this report is considered news. It doesn't even seem to be new information as it was from a Time Magazine article. Perhaps it was just a slow news day at Reuters. See the article here.

Meanwhile, from Ryan's Head comes The Liberal's Creed which sums up what seems to be the ideals of a lot of people on the left of the political spectrum.

My Secret Plan

I call it my secret plan because I haven't seen anyone else blog about it. It's my secret plan for GWB to defeat Kerry by a landslide in the upcoming election.

But you'll have to go to the extended section to read about it...

Incidentally, I blogged about this back in March. (here)

The Bush Administration needs some new blood. I think that a week or two before the Republican Convention in NYC that Dick Cheney ought to announce that he is retiring from public life and will not be Vice-President for a second term. Cheney has plenty of good excuses for doing this. He's an old guy afterall. (He's 63) Then there's that persistent heart condition.

The Atlantic Monthly, a magazine I used to love because of it's dearth of liberal bias, recently did an article about the VP's heart condition. They interviewed some heart specialists who didn't really agree about whether his health was a risk as the Vice-President. Nonetheless, the article came up with this conclusion,

Although the official White House position today is that Cheney is in "excellent health," the Washington-insider magazine National Journal has recently reported that if in the run-up to the 2004 election too many people raise concerns about his political fitness for office, Cheney "could use health and his history of four heart attacks to construct a credible exit." It's possible, in other words, that the Vice President's medical condition could—ironically—help the Bush campaign dodge other electoral liabilities.[Source]

Dick Cheney has a plausible reason for bowing out that wouldn't embarass the President.

Who would be a good replacement?

It might come as a shock to Bob Woodward, but I think Colin Powell would be a great Vice-President.

Powell has broad appeal to those toward the center of the political spectrum. He's well respected and obviously has a ton of great experience. Many see him as a moderating force in the Administration. The fact that he's a retired General ought to keep the conservatives relatively happy and he would be the first African-American Vice-President.

Can Dick Cheney bury his ego long enough to resign as Vice-President? Are GWB's advisors "thinking outside the box" sufficiently enough to think of something like this? I doubt it but I'm hopeful.

Anybody Want A Peanut?

For those of you visiting this site from here, let me explain the statement, "Anybody want a peanut?". It's a line from The Princess Bride and it's in response to an interesting article titled, They Keep Using That Word...

John Kerry Cheesehead?

As if you needed more proof that John Kerry will say anything to get elected, there's this quote from a campaign rally in Green Bay,

"'No matter what it means to the New England Patriots … you’re looking at the biggest Cheesehead in America,’ Kerry told the crowd, which responded by banging green and gold noise makers.”

Call me crazy, but I have a hard time imagining Kerry wearing one of those cheesehead hats. Go read the rest here.

Pray Without Ceasing

A guy I barely know, while on a business call, ended our conversation with, "I'll pray that this business deal of yours works out." I don't know the guy well enough to know if he's a Christian or not, but it started me thinking about prayer.

On a regular basis I pray that GWB wins the Presidential election over John Kerry. Not only that, but I pray that he wins it in a landslide. Some might say that it's wrong to pray about such things. Afterall, they say, God isn't a Democrat or Republican.

I'll grant them that, but I think God wants us to pray about things that matter to us. My concerns are pretty inconsequential in the scheme of things but they are important to me so I pray about them. I believe there is power in prayer and also that prayer helps to change our hearts towards God. The tricky part is accepting His answers when they aren't what I would want.

I thank God Al Gore didn't get elected President and I plan to keep on praying about our upcoming election. How about you?

Be There

Ever wonder what it's like to be a soldier in Iraq? Go read, A 2nd Lt's View from Iraq and find out.

Don't Forget The "A"

Visit Matt Margolis' blog!

Besides being involved with Blogs for Bush, Matt was involved in a physical altercation a while back while trying to exercise his Freedom of Speech rights in Boston.

I noticed Matt didn't have any blogs that start with "A" listed on his blogroll so I wrote him a corny email suggesting a link to a certain blog that begins with an A. He was a good sport about it and added me to his blogroll so I think he deserves at least a little more traffic.

What color is your brain?

What Color is Your Brain?
brought to you by Quizilla
I saw this over at Candy Universe.

Normally I don't post these kinds of things, but this one seemed pretty accurate for me. If you want to see the rest of my "profile" keep reading below. Otherwise, go to Quizilla and find out the color of your brain.

GREEN:

At work or in school: I work best by myself. I like to focus on my ideas until my desire for understanding is satisfied. I am easily bored if the subject holds no interest to me. Sometimes, it is hard for me to set priorities because so many things are of interest.
With friends: I may seem reserved. Although my thoughts and feelings run deep, I am uneasy with frequent displays of emotion. I enjoy people who are interesting and of high integrity.
With family: I am probably seen as a loner because I like a lot of private time to think. Sometimes, I find family activities boring and have difficulty following family rules that don't make sense to me. I show love by spending time with my family and sharing ideas and interests.

Driving While Innocent

Way back in March (here) I wrote about a court case challenging the right of police officers to demand proof of someone's identity without cause.

The New Mexico Court of Appeals recently ruled against the police in a case very similar to the one I blogged about. No Quarters Blog gives you all the details in his post here.

Strong in The Broken Places

This world is everything. What we taste, see and feel provides the only sensations we've ever known. Yet for all it's joys, it's deeply flawed and beyond repair. There is nothing that we hold dear that we won't lose someday. Fortunately, this isn't the end of the story. There's something else...

The inevitability of being forced to let go of everything and everyone isn't news. It's something we all realize, but in the interests of maintaining our sanity we generally choose to ignore this cold reality. The extent to which we love anything is the depth of loss we'll suffer when it's gone.

This acknowledgement comes not from someone who's suffered any great losses but from a Father and Husband who sometimes worries about when the other shoe is going to drop on this great life I've been given. And it's not just people but also pets, jobs, homes, situations, and comforts that we stand to lose. Our senses cause us to be hopelessly addicted. In the midst of this realization, it's almost enough to inspire someone to retreat to the mountains and live a solitary life. But there aren't too many of us who could survive such a thing. We were born with a need to love and be loved. The fact that we must suffer as a result only illustrates the inherent brokenness of everything.

Fortunately, there's a paradox hidden in all of this tragedy. To the extent that we're broken by this world, a great and merciful God can use our weakness for good. There is no loss suffered by those who are called by God that doesn't bring greater good. There is no loss which doesn't hold forth the possibility of making us stronger. No matter how large that loss or the depths of pain it produces. True, the complete fulfillment of this gift must wait until eternity, but it's there and it will come to pass someday as surely as the pain that exists right now. Until then we still have a measure of comfort even among the wreckage of a world that seems laced with a fatal dose of entropy.

I guess I've been thinking about this because I've been listening to a song called, Faith Enough, off Jars of Clay's latest CD called, Who We Are Instead.

The song explores this paradox that in our weakness, He makes us strong. The chorus helps us to remember,

It's just enough to be strong
In the broken places, in the broken places.
It's just enough to be strong.
Should the world rely on faith tonight.

The lyrics for the whole song,

Faith Enough

The ice is thin enough for walkin'.
The rope is worn enough to climb.
My throat is dry enough for talkin'.
The world is crumblin' but I know why.
The world is crumblin' but I know why.
The storm is wild enough for sailing.
The bridge is weak enough to cross.
This body frail enough for fighting.
I'm home enough to know I'm lost.
Home enough to know I'm lost.

It's just enough to be strong
In the broken places, in the broken places.
It's just enough to be strong.
Should the world rely on faith tonight.

The land unfit enough for planting.
Barren enough to conceive.
Poor enough to gain the treasure.
Enough a cynic to believe.
Enough a cynic to believe.

Confused enough to know direction.
The sun eclipsed enough to shine.
Be still enough to finally tremble.
And see enough to know I'm blind.
And see enough to know I'm blind.

Should the world rely on faith tonight.

Take comfort from knowing that it's just enough to be strong in the broken places.

Review of Who We Are Instead

Drink The Kool-Aid

This is a Blog For Bush and each week on "Wictory Wednesday", many of the Blogs for Bush ask people to contribute to the campaign. Well, I was just wondering...how many of the bloggers for Bush have actually donated to the Bush-Cheney campaign themselves.

I know that I was shocked, shocked to find that my own mother had only given $10. I'm really tempted to start looking up the Bush bloggers to see who's been donating and how much. You can see who's "drinking the kool-aid" by going here.

On The Air: Kevin McCullough

I suppose like many of you. I received an email this week from Kevin McCullough of the appropriately named Kevin McCullough Show. I've never heard the radio show but from the looks of it he seems like a devotee of Hugh Hewitt, the patron saint of many conservative bloggers. (I'm still a little bitter about Hugh though since I've never been able to penetrate the "inner circle" of bloggers he likes to mention.)

If you want to have a popular blog you should take a few lessons from what Kevin is doing...

Before you let your expectations get too high, remember that anyone who has a radio or television talk show has a built in web audience. Their volume of hits exist on a different plane than the rest of us normal bloggers. However, there are some things he's done lately to really kick up his numbers and those things offer some good lessons for the rest of us.

KMC's blog strategies:

1. He makes a personal connection. He recently sent out emails asking to be including on the blogs of others. Instead of looking like a form email (which it was), it looks like he's picked your blog from among many because he finds your posts so engrossing and profound. The reality is that one of his staff did some research and found a collection of blogs that roughly correspond to the same political and religious views. Because those are potential listeners and readers, he invited them to link to him knowing full-well they would come visit his weblog.
   
2. Nearly every post has at least one link back to a blog and prominent mention of that blogger's views. All it takes is one post like that and many bloggers will feel indebted for life.
   
3. The stories he does are all very mainstream. In other words, they're things that nearly everyone can relate to. Many bloggers make the mistake of getting so deep into the subject that they run the risk of boring readers to death. I enjoy researching things and getting every little tidbit of information, but in reality, most people probably don't want to read that much. Most people, it seems, just want a quick little blurb that makes a point so they can move on to something else.
   
4. He keeps it light. I suppose this is very similar to what he does on the radio. No one wants to feel bummed out when they listen to the radio or read a weblog. Even serious subjects are given a lighter touch and he's not afraid to poke a little fun of himself either.
   
5. The weblog is easy to read. There isn't any complex design. It's just real straightforward - almost a little cluttered at times - but you don't have to look real far to get a good idea of his views. (A pet peeve I've had lately is blogs that don't fit into the browser horizontally. Instead you have to scroll to the left or right to see the whole thing. I hate that!)

However, there are a few things that I'd like to see him do differently.

First, I can't find anywhere to leave comments. I'm sure people can do this on his talk show but I don't see anywhere to do that on his weblog. Second, I don't see a way to link to individual posts. If I link to him, I'd like him to know it and I'm also going to be a little more hesitant to link to yet another website outside of his blog. For example, I'd like to comment on the post about Dodgeball which he references on his blog. But to even find the link I had to follow another link to yet another blogger who found the dodgeball article he had written at WorldNet Daily. (By the way, I love dodgeball. Always have, always will.)

Finally, Kevin has taken the liberty of sending out daily email updates pointing back to his weblog. As much as I enjoy them, I don't necessarily want a daily email to add to the tons of spam that I currently receive. Maybe a weekly update would be better?

I enjoy checking out KMC and I would encourage you to check out his site too. He's doing some good things there that can teach a few of us some new tricks and he's fighting the culture war along with the rest of his. He needs out support so let's give him some.

Belief Seeking Understanding

This is the 9th in a series of interviews with bloggers who are part of The Blogdom of God. The Blogdom of God is a loose group of Blogs that identify themselves as 'God blogs'.

Today's interview is with the blogger of Belief Seeking Understanding This blogger will help you to see the phrase, "Fruit of the Womb" in a totally different way.

Q. Are you familiar with the EFCA?

A. I hereby confess I first thought you were referring to the Evangelical Council on Financial Accountability, instead of the Evangelical Free Church of America. That tells you right there that I'm not very familiar with it.

*I asked this question because the church I grew in which I was raised, The Evangelical Free Church of America is headquartered in Minneapolis. -jdm

When I was in college, many years ago, one of my friends in InterVarsity Christian Fellowship was planning to be an EFCA pastor. EFCA congregations are pretty rare in Texas, where my wife and I have lived most of our lives. We have visited an EFCA congregation since coming to Minnesota.

Q. Every created thing reflects some aspect of it's creator. What do you think the invention and subsequent development of the computer reveals about the human race?

A. It reveals that the human race is not only creative, but is continually improving the tools to express its creativity. Apes use a tool to extract termites from a hollow log, but they don't build power drills. I show a slide in my classes that show that the amount of computer power you can buy for a dollar has been exponentially increasing since 1885. The rate of growth jumped with the beginning of electronic computing in the 1940's, and again in the 1980's with the advent of VLSI chips. Moore's Law is just the tail end of this growth curve. The development of computers shows that humanity reflects on the consequences of tools. It means that humanity has
the capacity for wonder. "Hmm, well, if we can do this, what would happen if we try to do that?"

Q. Why did you start blogging?

A. The entry for October 13 pretty much says it, but I will add some background. Looking at Hugh Hewitt's website got me interested in the SCSUScholars, which got me interested in writing about higher education. The blog of Bruce Eckel, author of "Thinking in Java" and a number of other
books, inspired me to blog about things I was noticing regarding software. Some of my students have encouraged me to publish a newsletter about things in my classes, so the blog satisfies some of that. I've read the One Year Bible about four times, and it occurred to me that I discovered some things the second time that I didn't notice the first time, and it might be useful to share some of the things I noticed.

Q. How did you end up teaching? How did you end up teaching at St. Thomas?

A. My first teaching job was at a technical school, which was little more than a tube between the federal government and the proprietors of the school, using the student loan program as the principle means of extraction. I hereby tell the truth and shame the devil. I was going nowhere slowly career-wise, and I wandered into it, because it seemed like a better opportunity than anything else at the time. When I was there, I felt like a safecracker, trying to figure out the combinations of the minds of the students, but for the purpose of putting something into them instead of taking something out. In between teaching at a technical school and teaching at St. Thomas, I obtained a Texas teacher's certificate, and had a brief, undistinguished career as a high school math teacher in Garland, Texas. I talk about this briefly in the post "Purpose Driven Life Day 3 - What's My Obsession?" My father assisted me in continuing my education,
which I did, getting a master's in 1995 and the Ph.D in 1999. I would have gotten it a year earlier, but my advisor went on sabbatical.

I had heard numerous horror stories from Ph.D students about the difficulties of job hunting, so I took a shotgun approach. St. Thomas was very enterprising in responding to my application, sending me emails when I was at a conference in Australia, bringing me up for an interview in the week between Christmas and New Year's Day. My wife was tired of living in Texas, and didn't want to live on either coast. One of our children had significant allergies, and we thought the shorter growing season would be good for him. I wrote about this a little bit in the posts "Purpose Driven Life Day 9 - The Smiles Of Heaven" and "Purpose Driven Life Day 10 - Love, Devotion and Surrender" Minnesota is a great place to live, if you like fishing in the summer and snow in the winter.

Q. In simple terms, what is a Cayley Network?

A. The very asking of that question raised you several notches in my book. A Cayley network (Cayley is capitalized as it is named after the mathematician Arthur Cayley) is a collection of vertices and edges which follows certain rules related to finite groups. These networks or graphs have the delightful property of looking the same way no matter which vertex they are
viewed from. This is a good thing because if you were connecting many processors in a parallel computer, you wouldn't want the network connecting them to have any intrinsic "bottlenecks." The networks used in parallel computers these days (rectangular grids with wraparound, called torii) are Cayley networks.

Q. Can you explain to me why C++ is inferior to Java?

A. Let me count the ways! Bjarne Stroustrup, the inventor of C++, said "C makes it easy to shoot yourself in the foot. C++ makes it harder, but when you do it blows your whole leg off."

The replacing of pointers in C++ with references in Java immediately gets rid of a number of horrible things which can be done with C++. It greatly reduces that direct control over memory that one has with C++.

Java and C++ are both object-oriented languages, but Java reduces the potential complexity by eliminating the feature of multiple inheritance. Multiple inheritance means that an object can say "I have all the capabilities of both object A and object B." But what if A and B have different ways of doing capability C? Which one is the effective one? Java's getting rid of this reduces the number of ways you can mess things up this way.

One of the big problems of C and C++ is memory leaks, which happen when a programmer reserves some memory at some point, and something happens where that memory doesn't get released. Java solves that problem by using garbage collection, where memory that is being taken up by something that isn't being used anymore is returned to the space of free memory.

Finally, Java delivers on the promise of portability made by C. It was supposed to be possible to seamlessly port a program written in ANSI C that ran on one machine to another machine that supported ANSI C, but there were lots of things about the ANSI C standard that kept this from being the case. For example, if you specify a variable with the data type int in ANSI C, it
could be either 16 bits or 32 bits. Java's additional layer of abstraction (the Java Virtual Machine) keeps this from happening.

The developers of Java claimed that Java was an evolutionary development over C++, as opposed to a revolutionary development. Another way of saying this is that Java is C++ without guns, knives and clubs.

Q. Do you have a shredder at home that you use regularly?

A. I do have a shredder at home, but I don't use it regularly! You must be asking this after I've gone on and on about the Dennis Bennett identity theft case. I should use it more than I do.

Q. What type of church do you attend?

A. Ah, confession time. We have visited a number of churches in Minnesota. We have attended Speak The Word Church, a large interdenomination charismatic church. We have attended the local Lutheran church where some of our children went to school. We have visited Grace Church, the evangelical mega-church in Eden Prairie. We are currently in between churches. This is
something about which I'd appreciate it if you and your readers would pray, that there would be a church where we can both serve and grow.

Q. You've written a lot about The Purpose Driven Life. Can you summarize the most important lesson from the book?

A. And I'm going to write a lot more before I'm through! Somehow reading this book and writing about has given me an opportunity to write about things that are near and dear to me, the existence and discovery of purpose, meaning and direction. It has also inspired me to share my weaknesses, which I think has added some credibility to my writing. The most important
message is that you have a purpose that the world didn't give to you, that the world can't take away. It's not immediately obvious, but you can discover it and live according to it.

Q. On the political spectrum where would you place yourself?

A. I took one of those tests the other day where it placed me on a map, where north and south represented beliefs regarding economic freedom, and east and west represented beliefs regarding personal freedom. I'm a centrist with libertarian tendencies. I thought I was more of a conservative. But I'm not a total libertarian, becuase I don't believe in repealing all regulations on sexual behavior, and I don't believe in repealing all drug laws. I'm not a total conservative, because I don't believe in repealing all taxes, and I don't believe in getting rid of foreign aid.

Q. You have six kids. Did you plan on having a big family or did it just happen?

A. In the immortal words of our former chief executive, it all depends on the meaning of the phrase "plan on having a big family." Dr. Laura Schlessinger says that if neither spouse gets their tubes tied, then both spouses are planning to get pregnant. We consider a big family to be a blessing. It never occured to me until I read the Bible that the brand name "Fruit of the
Loom" was a pun on the Bible verse that says "the fruit of the womb is a reward." Two of our children were planned, four of them happened.

Q. Are you from a big family?

A. Not only am I an only child, but my father was an only child, and my mother was the younger of two sisters. I think my children are better off than I was, because they have to learn to get along with others more than I did.

Q. Is there anything special you'd like people to take away from your blog?

A. Delight in God, skill with computer technology, developing lifelong learners who keep their beginner's mind - it all goes together.

Q. Is there anything else you'd like to say?

A. This poem by the Bengali poet Rabindranath Tagore, from the collection "Gitanjali" or "Song Offerings," is my prayer.

Where the mind is without fear and the head held high;
Where knowledge is free;
Where the world has not been broken up into fragments;
By narrow domestic walls;
Where words come out from the depth of truth;
Where tireless striving stretches its arms towards perfection;
Where the clear stream of reason has not lost its way
Into the dreary desert sand of dead habit;
Where the mind is led forward by Thee
Into ever-widening thought and action;
Into that heaven of freedom, my Father, let my country awake!

It turns out that Tagore toured America in the 1920's. One of the stops on his tour was Southwestern University in Georgetown, Texas. There was a young man attending the lecture named Myron Bass, who was my grandfather. It just goes to show that the seeds one sows have consequences far beyond what we can see.

If you haven't read previous Blogdom of God interviews, check them out here:
Josh Claybourn
Adrian Warnock
Fr. Jim Tucker (Dappled Things)
SecretAgentMan
Totem to Temple
LaShawn Barber
Antioch Road
Ryan's Head

If you are a member of the Blogdom of God and would like to be interviewed, please contact me. -jdm

Michael and Che

Before you get all misty-eyed over Michael Moore's enthusiastic reception at Cannes [source] keep in mind that this is the same festival that is trumpeting a movie about Che Guevera. Che was a revolutionary and quite an accomplished murderer. (Story here)

Grace Under Pressure

Go read this story. Not only is it inspirational, but it highlights the current worldwide struggle between two immense and, some say, incompatible tribes.

Girl On Girl

I'm watching a show on FNC and one of the shows guests brought up an interesting thought. She said that most people would rather see pictures of two women kissing than two men. (She was referring to coverage of gay marriage.) Personally, I would rather see the former as well but I thought that was just because I'm a guy... I'm wondering if this is more of a universal sentiment than I originally thought.

The Myth of Fingerprints

I've been thinking lately about how race and culture are often confused.

Let me explain...

If I understand world history correctly the human race has developed thusly. The human race originated in the area of Iraq now known as "The Cradle of Civilization". At some point in time, groups of people began to emigrate to different parts of the world. Due to factors such as the amount of sun, the degree of isolation from other groups, diet, and other factors the people in these groups adapted physically to their environment. The result was that some groups had very dark pigmented skin and some very fair skin. Not only that but many other aspects of physical appearance changed (over time) in response to environmental factors.

But that's not even the end of the story. The various people groups migrated further over time. Some Asian people groups migrated to the South Pacific and possibly to South America. Some people groups migrated over the Bering Strait to North America. The various tribes in Europe also migrated North, South, East and West. (The history of England is a great example of how various peoples migrated and intermixed over history.) In other words, there really is no such thing as a "Pure" race. The faulty logic behind the existence of a so-called pure race is what leads many to oppose interracial marriage. (See here and here for some related explanation of this.)

Race is a very fuzzy concept and those who discriminate on the basis of race are misleading themselves that there is any such thing as a pure race. Culture, on the other hand, is a little different. (Technically, what I'm really referring to here is called sub-culture.) Culture is self-defining and based on norms (mores) established within a group. Any set of people with a common identity will develop a unique culture. Culture helps the group to recognize others in the same group and, among other things, helps the members to protect themselves from those perceived as outsiders.

Culture is amoral, not inherently good or bad. There is a discriminatory purpose to culture but that doesn't necessarily make it good or bad. People should have the right to freedom of association. The main question then is this: When does discrimination turn from something relatively benign and natural to something that is insidious and evil?

Part of the answer comes down to our identity and how it's defined. First and foremost, we are Americans. As Americans there are some basic rights that should be accorded to all who are members of this overarching group of citizens. However, beyond that we are free to define ourselves any way we choose whether it is as Baptists, Left-Handers, Red Staters, or Midwesterners. As long as our associations in our sub-cultures do not violate any of the rules we've established as Americans, we should be free to do as we choose.

The problem comes when, in the name of political correctness, we are prohibited from holding certain beliefs or engaging in certain practices. An example of this type of legislation is so-called "hate crime" laws. (Not that it's okay to murder someone of another race. Just that murdering someone is already illegal and to try and define what someone was saying or thinking as a hate crime is really beside the point.) These types of laws confuse the issue between discrimination based on race or gender or whatever and allowable discrimination based on the freedom of Americans to associate with those whom they choose.

Racial discrimination is wrong. Discrimination that violates our shared rules for how we should treat fellow Americans (as defined in the Bill of Rights and Constitution) is wrong. Discrimination based on personal beliefs, our ethnic identity, religious beliefs or any similar type of criteria is okay and may even serve a noble purpose.

Now before anyone comments let me add a few disclaimers. I'm not an anthropologist therefore I admit I may be wrong on the particulars of the development of the various races. The main point is that Race is by and large an artificial and arbitrary due to the great intermixing of peoples over time and the fact that we all descend from the same set of ancestors.

Also, I'm not a sociologist, therefore I may be wrong on some of the particulars regarding culture and how cultures develop. The main point is that development of culture isn't inherently good or bad and that it's a normal part of being human.

A Long Hot Summer

Two political conventions, the olympics, and the threat of terrorism looming over everything. It will be a long hot summer.

A group calling itself the "NoRNC Clearinghouse" is coordinating various activist liberal groups in an attempt to disrupt the Republican National Convention in New York City,

When the vote does not place in power those who represent the will of the people, democracy must be taken to the streets. This administration's choice of New York City, historically known for its diverse population, its welcoming of immigrants from far off lands, and its radical politics will prove to be their biggest mistake yet. [source]

From the quote above, it seems they think they represent "the will of the people"...

The NoRNC Clearinghouse offers lots of advice about how to disrupt the convention. They point out where the majority of the delegates will be staying. here There's a collection of snippets culled from the media that provide information about various aspects of the convention. here There's even a guide that shows where cameras are located in public places. Presumably this is so protester's can avoid having their pictures taken.

There's a whole lot more information on the site and it appears to be at the nexus of a well-organized group of liberal activist organizations.

Right now you may be asking yourself, "What about Republican plans to disrupt the Democrats' convention?"

Well, I haven't heard of any, but the Democrats aren't out of the woods.

An organization calling itself The Black Tea Society has plans to disrupt the Democratic National Convention in Boston. They're not Republicans though,

Why should we protest the Democrats? I know I hate virtually all that Bush has done to this country and the world since his administration was placed into office. Why don't I like Bush? Because he is corrupt, doesn’t allow the American voice be heard, because he bases his policies on the ideas and visions that are only shared by the elite and mega-rich. He veils this agenda in a well-spun and calculated manner by which millions of Americans are deceived and the rest are intimidated. [Source]

I'm tempted to say, "That's just not fair" in regards to disrupting a political party's convention but the level of civil political discourse has gotten so low these days that citing "fairness" is just a joke. I suppose these people have a right to make their opinion known. However, a good look at their websites hint that they have more in mind than a peaceful march.

As if all of that isn't enough there's the story of the rocket launcher found next to some train tracks in Atlanta. Via Murdoc Online comes speculation from ACE that such a thing could be a dry run for an actual terrorist attack.

It's going to be a long hot summer. Let's just hope (and pray) that it's a safe one.

Ignorance is Bliss

It's all his fault. I was happy in my ignorance until he informed me that I was a Marauding Marsupial in the TTLB Ecosystem and moving up. At that moment the scales fell from my eyes and I began to see the blogosphere in a whole new light.

Before, I was happy with the number of visits I was receiving each day and I didn't even think about links to my site. Now I spend my time wondering, how can I become a Mortal Human or, dare I say it? A Higher Being...

Since that fateful day I've become a Large Mammal but it's not enough. To make matters worse, I ranked as high as 403 back on May 8th but now I've fallen to a weasely 532! It's almost more than I can bear.

I made the mistake of looking to see which weblogs rank higher than me. How depressing. I don't want to name any names since I doubt that would do much for my blogging popularity. There are some very deserving blogs ranked above mine, and also, some very rotten ones...but I'm not going to let that get me down. No, sireee.

I had high hopes for The Blogdom of God Interviews. Not only is it an interesting project but it also seems like the kind of thing that would be popular. Sadly, I'm now waiting on pins and needles for a few errant bloggers (who shall remain nameless) to return their interview answers. I realize they have day jobs that actually pay the bills and everything, but what could be more important? (I know, it's all about me.)

Besides continuing to keep things up to date and attempting to write witty or otherwise profound posts, I have another idea. I think I'll try one of those little button thingys like a lot of sites have. If you like this blog and you're a really nice person, you could consider putting one of my little buttons as a link on your blog.

There are a few choices below. I'd like some feedback on them and, more importantly, I'd like you to use them for linking to yours truly. As a link, feel free to use either of the following urls:
www.stillmanvalley.org/aoo/
or
www.armyofone.org

This is the petite one for those of you with very little room.

This is the elegant yet tasteful, full sized one.

I think this one looks the coolest, but it might not appeal to some.

So, I'll try this button linking thing. Mortal Human here I come...I hope.

Peace Through Strength

Ronald Reagan had the right idea. "Peace Through Strength" is the argument he used with the disarmament proponents and how he dealt with the Soviet Union. It's just as valid today in dealing with Arab countries as it was then...

I've heard it said about the Arab culture that, "Arabs are either at your feet or at your throat". (I believe originally it was Winston Churchill who said it and he was referring to "Huns". However, I've since heard it also applied to Arab cultures.) An article via Blackfive found here seems to affirm the saying,

"It's a significant change in the right direction," said Capt. Dominique Neal, the new Lima Company commander. "I was surprised. I thought they'd be more fearful than anything. I think the amount of force that we displayed over the past few days definitely has changed their outlook."

The article goes on,

"One thing that I do know is that the Iraqi people respond to who they think is the strongest," said Neal, 29, of San Francisco. "They saw the velvet glove when we first came in, and then we took off the glove and showed them the iron fist." [Source]

An article in The American Enterprise theorizes that societies are one of two different types. They are either shame-based or guilt-based. In guilt-based societies individuals will tend to mistrust their own native aggression and will actively seek to protect others from aggression. In shame-based societies,

By contrast, shame-vulnerable individuals are constantly vigilant toward aggressions of others against their sense of honor. If insulted, they feel humiliation and rage. The shame-prone willingly submit only when the external power appears so invincible that there is no alternative but surrender. Beneath their outward defiance, the shame-prone often hold unconscious yearnings to be submissive; the seemingly omnipotent conqueror allows them to be passive without shame. [Source]

The article goes into great depth about shame-based societies and I highly recommend it.

The point here is that we will not get anywhere in Iraq by showing weakness to the population. Of course, I'm not justifying abuse, however we need to be very careful that when we choose to retreat from a situation rather than fight that it isn't misinterpreted as weakness. From our point of view in a guilt-based culture, walking away from a fight for a noble cause is considered almost heroic, but not in an Arab culture. This is especially true for a nation that feels it has long been humiliated by a ruthless dictator.

With all of the talk of "negotiations" going on in Fallujah and elsewhere I only hope those in charge of things understand how certain actions can be interpreted when applied through a different cultural lens.

Jonah Knows

Let me take this opportunity to toot my own horn. Just for the record, my article about Tim Russert and his ego was posted here on May 17th. It was called King Tim in case anyone wants to check it out.

Jonah Goldberg of National Review posted his article on May 19th. Arguably, his article has the better title, Reality Touches A Sunday Morning Gorilla, but it does agree with what I said in my King Tim article.

Jonah, give me a call anytime you want some ideas for your columns.

Meta-Wictory Wednesday

Wictory Wednesdays is sponsored by Blogs for Bush. It works like this; each Wednesday you invite your readers to donate or volunteer to the Bush-Cheney campaign.

Unfortunately, there's a few problems with it. First of all, it's boring. As soon as people see that you have a Wictory Wednesday post they skip right on to something else because they know what it's going to say. Secondly, I went through quite a few of the blogs listed on the blogroll for Wictory Wednesdays and found an appalling number of them without a WW post. (Also, it was amazing how many of them haven't been updated in a very long time or simply have ceased to exist.)

In my quest to make WW just a little more entertaining, I've evaluated some WW posts and found the best one...

The Best WW Post I found was from The Pudgy Pundit. He had pictures of both President Bush and John Kerry throwing footballs. This was his caption,

Friends, Look at the pictures above, and tell me which one you want to be our "Quarterback" for the next four years?

I know, its a no brainer here, but I had to ask for the sake of "fairness"... Liberals love "fairness" you know, except when it comes to hearing, or speaking the truth.

As usual, I ask you to join me in my fight to help George Bush stay in the Oval Office, an institution that once again has meaning, honor, and new carpeting.

Finally, I want to make sure to invite you to Donate to the Bush-Cheney campaign as I have done. Also, be sure to visit one of the many blogs who are actually participating in Wictory Wednesdays by clicking on the links listed below.

This guy invented the whole WW concept so he deserves a wisit!

Days of Yore

It was 1992 and the storyline was taut with suspense. Patriot Games was a blockbuster in the movie theaters. But that's ancient history now and Patriot Games is relegated to reruns on Sunday afternoon.

A bunch of rogue Irish terrorists sure seem quaint these days. In the movie, no one is cutting anyone's head off. No IED's. No chemical or biological weapons. Just people killing each other with good old-fashioned ak-47's. Those were the good old days. The world seems like a lot scarier than it used to be.

Anybody but Kerry?

Things look pretty grim right now for the Bush Administration. Zogby Polls show the President's approval ratings have dropped to a record low of 42%. Iraq continues to be a gordian knot between the prisoner abuse scandal and the violent gunbattles with Al-Sadr's followers. The "tell-all" books just keep rolling out with scandalous accusations against the President and his administration. To top it all off, conservatives seem to be losing the cultural war with the legalization of gay marriage in MA only the latest disastrous skirmish.

This might be a good time to review why I support President Bush for re-election...

1. We are fighting a World War against Terror. Bush realizes it and Kerry doesn't. Kerry has voiced his opinion that it's basically a law enforcement problem. Bill Clinton tried this approach and it was an utter failure. We need a President willing to fight the terrorists anywhere, anytime, anyplace.
2. The Bush response to economic problems was to cut taxes. Kerry's response is more beaucracy and government regulation.
3. Bush believes marriage should be between a man and a woman. Kerry has also voiced this although he doesn't seem too enthusiastic about it and I wonder what he'll really do when the pressure is on from the gay rights activists who currently support him.
4. Bush voted to ban partial birth abortion and is against abortion. Kerry supports abortion and thinks it's a "woman's right" to kill her unborn child.
5. Bush will appoint judges who follow the constitution rather than those who re-interpret it in the name of political correctness.
6. John Kerry is a war hero who subsequently tossed his medals (or was it ribbons?) over the White House fence and proceeded to accuse his fellow veterans of atrocities in Vietnam. Kerry has shown that he'll say anything in order to get elected.
7. Kerry has an abysmal record in the Senate. He voted down funding for every major weapons system and is ranked as one of the Senate's most liberal members. He's still a Senator although you wouldn't know it by looking at his attendance record.
8. George Bush is known as a man of personal honor who is compassionate and helpful to those around him, even when it won't yield any positive PR. John Kerry is known as somewhat of a prick who blames secret service agents for making him fall down while skiing.
9. John Kerry seeks to "internationalize" our efforts in Iraq. How he would do this is a mystery to me. Why he would want to get the UN involved when they've failed Iraq in every way imaginable is also a mystery. Kerry seems to want the US to be liked by other nations so much that he's willing to sacrifice our sovreignty in order to achieve this.

George W. Bush is the best man for the job. Yet a large number of Americans feel otherwise. It's very possible that this election could be lost. We can then look forward to being the butt of other country's jokes and we can leave Iraq with our tail between our legs. Remember what it was like during the malaise of the Carter years? Well, if Kerry is elected we'll get to relive those halcyon times.

In fact, everything going on right now makes me feel like making a donation to the Bush-Cheney Campaign.

Brown vs. The Establishment

Usually I prefer to provide content rather than just pointing it out, but the post found here perfectly summarized my thoughts as I watched last nights television news.

King Tim

Over the weekend Tim Russert interviewed Colin Powell. At some point, an overzealous staffer tried to cut off the interview by moving the television camera. Powell basically kept talking to Russert and ordered his aide to stop interfering with the camera. Russert made sure to state how "inappropriate" he thought it was that the interview should be interrupted. The interview itself went on and Powell was able to actually address some foreign policy issues. Afterward, Powell telephoned Russert and apologized for the incident. However, it was too late. Russert decided to leave the whole thing in the taped interview because it was "unacceptable"...

In other words, how dare anyone try to step in the way of one of Tim Russert's interviews. Nevermind the fact that the interviewee was clearly cooperating and obviously not complicit in cutting off the interview, Mr. Russert was going to show the whole thing anyway. In The Washington Times Mr. Russert is quoted,

"Now, this is someone paid by the U.S. taxpayers, trying to cut off an interview with an American journalist and the American secretary of state," Mr. Russert said. "I've been in countries where staffers pull the plug on people. This is the United States of America. It really is unacceptable."[Source]

By Russert's tone you would think some great miscarriage of justice had occured. Cutting off an interview mid-question isn't exactly polite, but it isn't exactly like Russert's constitutional rights were violated. Especially when it was obvious to all involved that Powell was more than happy to answer the question. It isn't polite to carry on in an interview past the allotted time period either and it would've been nice of Russert to apologize for hogging Powell's time.

I'm not sure of Russert's politics but this isn't yet another case of liberal media bias. I have no doubt that the Secretary of State would've been treated the same way if it had been Madeleine Albright. Guys like Russert seem to think that it's all about them. They suffer from a common problem that journalists and especially television reporters all experience. They seem to think that because they are interviewing great leaders and have their face splashed all over the news with these leaders, that somehow it makes them great too. In a sense, I think they feel that they're even greater than these leaders because great leaders come and go, but a successful reporter's career lasts a very long time.

Russert is guilty of arrogance and of being petty. This is something we've come to expect from news celebrities.

Wisdom at Abu Ghraib

The abuses at Abu Ghraib have become the focal point for much of the media's reporting, but there's another side to this story. Not everyone participated in the abuses and some soldiers actually reported them. Spc. Matthew Carl Wisdom is one of the soldiers who wouldn't participate in the abuses. He's the son of a Methodist minister who, apparently, raised his son to do the right thing. You can read all about him here.

The New Tobacco

In the news lately I've heard fast-food referred to as the "new tobacco". What that means, of course, isn't that fast food will become as addictive as cigarettes, but that the whole industry will be sued to recompense the fatties that can't stop eating so much. Instead of fast food being the "new tobacco" I have a proposal for something else to take it's place...

With tobacco, I guess, the argument was that since it causes so many health problems even in people who don't smoke, that the cost to society was too great. Somehow the big tobacco companies must be forced to pay in order to reimburse society for the huge health and other expenses.

Although I think it's laughably silly, that's the thinking with fast food. In fact, a recent film fittingly called, Supersize Me! dramatizes the health problems of a man who ate nothing but fast food for 30 days. Last year, federal researchers announced that the health-care costs of obesity now rival those of smoking, with $92.6 billion spent in 2002 alone. So you can see, fast food is well on it's way to becoming "The New Tobacco".

However, there's something else that's way more dangerous to our society. No, I'm not referring to liberalism although that is a big danger.

I propose that we make Divorce the new tobacco. A recent study released by The Heritage Foundation and available here documents the high cost to our society.

For one thing, divorce has become an epidemic in our society,

...in 1950 for every hundred children born, that year, 12 entered a broken family --- four were born out of wedlock and eight suffered the divorce of their parents. By the year 2000 that number had risen five fold and for every 100 children born 60 entered a broken family: 33 born out of wedlock and 27 suffering the divorce of their parents.

The article goes on to summarize the huge emotional impact,

The children of parents who reject each other suffer: in deep emotional pain, ill health, depression, anxiety, even shortened life span; more drop out of school, less go to college, they earn less income, they develop more addictions to drugs and alcohol, and they engage in increased violence or suffer it within their homes.

This excellent article from The Heritage Foundation only scratches the surface of problems caused by divorce. In fact, the effects are so well documented and well reported that you'll find thousands of sites on the web reporting on it's damage.

Realistically, I know Divorce won't become "The New Tobacco". Obviously we can't sue people and force them to stay together and there are circumstances where divorce is the preferable option. Still, it would be nice if we could figure out a way to help people remain in committed marriages with all of the benefits to their children, themselves and to the rest of the society.

The Heritage Foundation report sums it up this way:

In this time of an obvious failure of one phase of America’s experiment with freedom, the challenge before you, the leaders of this nation, is how to lead America back to having a culture of belonging rather than being a culture of rejection; to being a country where people and families belong to each other and especially fathers belong first to the mothers of their children and mothers belong first to the fathers. Parents belonging to each other are what children need more than anything else this nation can give them.

American Pride under Attack

Athletes for the US Olympic team have been warned not to get too exuberant in waving their country's flag at the Olympics in Athens. Officials from the US Olympic Committee are afraid we're going to anger those from other countries. So says a story in today's Telegraph newspaper,

The spectacle of victorious athletes grabbing a national flag and parading it around the stadium is a familiar part of international sporting competition, but US Olympic officials have ordered their 550-strong team to exercise restraint and avoid any jingoistic behaviour. [source]

According to a consultant for the US Olympic committee, such displays are likely to cause problems with our "image" around the world...

As a proud American this type of thing sickens me. I've always thought that part of the rationale behind the olympics was to allow countries to have a sense of national pride and thereby avoid other types of conflicts involving guns and bullets. Perhaps, we should allow people from some of the more "unfortunate" countries to win gold medals. That might make them feel really good about the USA.

It isn't sportsmanlike conduct to taunt other teams, however, if we can't celebrate our victories as Americans then what's the point of even being at the olympics? Our athletes are risking their very lives by even appearing at the olympics. Yet they aren't supposed to celebrate their wins?

It seems to me that there's another agenda at play here and it comes from the same people who are always wringing their hands over the reaction of the "international community". What they don't seem to understand is that part of the reason America is so great is that we don't follow the other nations. Throughout world history we've done things our way.

When we win at the olympics we represent the power of individual freedom and democracy to bring out the best in people. There are those from other countries who will never accept such a thing, but the vast majority of the world's population wants what we have. The elitists would have us "dumb ourselves down" to avoid making any waves. What they suggest is a recipe for failure.

I'm proud of America and American's victories. I hope they inspire other countries to become more like us. The last thing we need is to become more like them.

Since registration is required, the rest of the article from the Telegraph is below:

The plan is part of a charm offensive aimed at repairing the country's international reputation following the deepening crisis in Iraq and damaging revelations of torture and mistreatment of detainees by US forces at the Abu Ghraib prison.

"American athletes find themselves in extraordinary circumstances in Athens in relation to the world as we know it right now," said Mike Moran, a veteran former spokesman for the US Olympic Committee who has been retained as a consultant to advise athletes about the correct way to behave.

"Regardless of whether there is anti-American sentiment in Athens or not, the world watches Americans a lot now in terms of how they behave and our culture. What I am trying to do with the athletes and coaches is to suggest to them that they consider how the normal things they do at an event, including the Olympics, might be viewed as confrontational or insulting or cause embarrassment."

Four years ago, at the Sydney Olympics, the victorious American 4 x 100m relay team were widely condemned for their arrogant strutting with the US flag following their gold medal presentation, and American officials, mindful of the country's precarious standing in world opinion, are desperate to avoid any repeat.

"Unfortunately, using the flag as a prop or a piece of apparel or indulging in boasting behaviour is becoming part of our society in sport because every night on TV we see our athletes - professional, college or otherwise - taunting their opponents and going face to face with each other," said Mr Moran. "We are trying, for 17 days, to break that culture.

"What I am telling the athletes is, 'Don't run over and grab a flag and take it round the track with you.' It's not business as usual for American athletes. If a Kenyan or a Russian grabs their national flag and runs round the track or holds it high over their heads, it might not be viewed as confrontational. Where we are in the world right now, an American athlete doing that might be viewed in another manner."

Mr Moran added that the behaviour of British athletes could face similar scrutiny in Athens, though the British Olympic Association insists that there are no plans to ban them from celebrating with the Union flag.

A spokesman for the association said: "It's up to every athlete how he or she wishes to celebrate their Olympic success and there are no plans to issue any instructions. We are confident that every athlete will celebrate in a responsible way."

The US Olympic Committee's anxiety at over-exuberant displays of jingoism is a far cry from the scenes at the 2002 Winter Olympics, hosted by Salt Lake City, where the American flag became the defining symbol of the Games.

A different environment awaits the American team in Athens, where officials are anxious to replace apple pie with humble pie.

Americans were booed at the World Athletics Championships in Paris last year - largely as a result of Jon Drummond's histrionic protest at his disqualification from a heat of the 100 metres. And at an Olympic football qualifying match in Mexico earlier this year the American team was subjected to sustained barracking by a section of the crowd, including chants of "Osama, Osama".

Despite the extra burden being placed on American athletes, officials still predict a US medal haul of more than 100, and have made it their target to finish top of the medals table. The irony is that finishing the Games as the most powerful nation is unlikely to endear them to the rest of the world.

"We're not the favourite kid in the world right now," admitted Bill Martin, the US Olympic Committee's acting president.

"We are sensitive not only to the security issue but to jingoism in its raw sense. That is why we are sending people around to educate the athletes as to the appropriate behaviour."

from The Sunday Telegraph

Do It With Passion

Condi Rice spoke at Vanderbilt University on Thursday for it's commencement. Of course, there was much hue and cry from many on campus who don't feel it's appropriate to have a Republican (gasp!) speak at a commencement. Protest letters and petitions were circulated and signed by many faculty, including the chancellor's wife.

It's nice to know that free speech and the expression of "diverse" views is so welcomed on college campuses these days...

One of the letters written to protest Rice's visit was from the Wesley Society. It read,

"And because the administration she serves shamefully co-opts religious images and ideals to further justify its ideological objectives in the world, I am saddened that Vanderbilt University is not taking a more prophetic stance against such wanton abuse of power," wrote the Rev. Mark Forrester of the university's Wesley Foundation and United Methodist Foundation. [Source]

Let me take this time to go off on a little tangent.

I've probably mentioned on this blog before how absolutely distasteful I find it when clergy are more interested in politics than in the spiritual well-being of the people they are supposed to serve. Rev. Forrester seems to be one of those people. You can see a picture of him here. Also, if you are so inclined, please feel free to email the Rev at: m.forrester@vanderbilt.edu to tell him what an ass he is. Also, it would be interesting to find out if he thinks any of the 400,000 people buried in mass graves all over Iraq would find it to be a "wanton abuse of power" to overthrow Saddam's regime. Okay, that's the end of my rant. Back to the rest of the post...

The story about Condi Rice does have a happy ending though.

The Chancellor held his ground and didn't cancel the speech. Excerpts have been posted here which I found thanks to a post here.

From what I've seen the speech was an excellent one. According to the Vanderbilt University website here, Rice received a standing ovation and lengthy rounds of applause from the more than 10,000 people in attendance.

Condi Rice is a great woman. She gave up a career as a concert pianist to study the political science of Russia. She ended her speech by saying, "Whatever you do, do it with passion."

Nothing But Fear Itself

CBS is the network I love to hate. As far as liberal bias is concerned the gloves have come off for the media elite. They don't even pretend to be balanced anymore. (It's an election year afterall.) If all you watch is the major broadcast networks then you're living in a parallel universe divorced from the stringent demands of reality.

A new website documents the bias present at CBS and especially, it's main news anchor, Dan Rather. Fittingly the site is called, Rather Biased.

In a story posted today (here), they make the point that the last several years CBS and Dan Rather have really ramped up the Fear Factor on their weekend news broadcasts...

I've noticed that fear is a big item during the week on all the newscasts as well. This is especially evident in all of the health based reporting. Someone who watches these shows and buys into this stuff might as well be a hypochondriac. "Womens" health problems seem to be featured quite a bit.

On an additional note, Rather Biased and others have noticed the vast difference in the coverage of the Nick Berg beheading vs. the salacious pictures out of Abu Ghraib. I'm not advocating showing the video on network television. I have no desire to watch it. However, it's amazing how quickly Nick Berg's story fell off the front page and top of the news.

This just goes to show that it isn't just the slant on the news stories, but even the choice of what's covered and how much time it's given.

Incidentally, I passed a small pickup truck the other day on the interstate. It's bumpers were covered with stickers cheering on various liberal causes. Included was a sticker that said, "What liberal bias?" The guy driving looked to be about the right age to have been around during the Vietnam era. I really wanted to give him the finger until I remembered a couple of key points. First, Christians aren't supposed to do such things and secondly, this is America and one of the great things about it is that we can still hold idiotic views without being persecuted.

He must be one of those people who gets their news from the broadcast networks.

Evangelist Squirrel

I rarely open the little jokes that people seem to enjoy forwarding to their friends, neighbors, and anyone with whom they've even had a passing contact. Unless they're from a certain friend - then I know they will really be funny.

The following link goes to the Evangelist squirrel. It's pretty funny and it's good for a Friday laugh.
Revival!

If you're a religious person that has no sense of humor, move along, there's nothing for you here.

One Question

I raised my hand and surprisingly he called on me, "Yes, JD?" I spoke up, trying to sound as newspaperly as possible, "Mr. President, how can you ever hope to stabilize a country when you don't have it's borders sealed?" and then like an old pro I piggybacked another question on top of that one, "It seems the moment you get a group neutralized, another bunch of foreign fighters crawls over the border and settles in. Do you have further plans for securing the Iraqi border?"

Of course, the whole thing I'm describing is fictitious, but I've never heard a good answer. Don't get me wrong. I support the President and the war in Iraq, but this whole topic seems to be common sense to me and I'm wondering why it isn't to anyone else.

Achieve New Lows!

Not much of a joiner? Me either. I can spout the company line when necessary, but I've never been, as they say, very "Rah, Rah!" I'd like to think I maintain a healthy sense of cynicism.

That's why I've always enjoyed demotivators. There are so many good ones to choose from but my favorite goes like this,
"Hard work often pays off over time, but laziness pays off now."

You should really look at them all, including the graphics, to get a feel for how they can inspire you to new lows.

Some of my favorites:
Underachievement
Mediocrity
Incompetence
Arrogance
...and many, many more.

Interview FAQ

So far I've posted eight interviews with bloggers who are part of The Blogdom of God. The Blogdom of God is a loose group of Blogs that identify themselves as 'God blogs'. For those who are interested, this is the FAQ for those interviews.

What's up with the interviewing thing?

I could act like I do the interviews for the good of humanity or some altruistic reason, but that's not it. I do them because it's a great way to get links from other sites. There's also a second reason. I enjoy doing it. For me, it's interesting to find out a little about the people doing the posting. I find it interesting to see what people think about various issues as well as their rationale for believing them. I'm amazed at the differences between the Blogdom of God blogs as well as the common beliefs.

Why do you only interview Blogdom of God bloggers?

Well, I ripped off the idea of doing interviews from Jen's History and Stuff. However, I thought I had something different to add since I could come from a Christian perspective. Interviewing only Blogdom of God blogs gives me a nice little niche and I hope Jen doesn't mind.

How do you decide who to interview?

First, at the bottom of every interview I invite people to drop me an email if they'd like to participate. I've had a few people do that. Second, I look around at the Blogdom of God blogs and when I see someone that looks kind of interesting I send them an email and ask if they're willing to participate. So far, no one's turned me down although I did have one person who never responded.

How do you decide on the questions?

I go to the bloggers site, read their "about" page, read old posts they've written and whatever else I can dig up about them. The questions are based on what I learn. There are a few standard questions that I always use though.

Besides getting more hits, what do you try to accomplish with the interviews?

Since the blogger has spent their valuable time responding to my pesky questions, I want to make sure they get something out of the interview. I want the interview to serve as a platform for them to promote their ideas and their blog. I'm careful to link to their site at both the begining and end of the interview and I keep a running list of links to past interviews.

What happens if an interviewee doesn't agree with your opinions?

I disagree with nearly all of them on at least some points. I've been really tempted to editorialize and add my own comments. However, I decided that this is their chance to promote their blog and I post their responses as written, without any additional comment from me.

Do you expect the interviewed blogger to reciprocate in some way?

No. It's nice if they do, but that's not a condition of the interview. What I really like is if they promote the interview on their own blog and also give me a permanent link from their page, but if they choose not to do so that's okay too.

Is there anything that has surprised you about the interviews?

Yes. I'm amazed at how willing people are to answer the questions. I come up with some goofy questions, but so far everyone's been a good sport. The second thing that's amazed me is how many Catholic bloggers are out there.

Who's next?

Well, I'm looking forward to getting some responses from Parablemania and I plan to ask Uncle Sam's Cabin. Otherwise, I haven't decided on anyone else.

Any more questions? Let me know.

If you haven't read previous Blogdom of God interviews, check them out here:
Josh Claybourn
Adrian Warnock
Fr. Jim Tucker (Dappled Things)
SecretAgentMan
Totem to Temple
LaShawn Barber
Antioch Road
Ryan's Head

-JDM

Grozny then Athens?

Chechnya is a violent place. It seems to be a huge thorn in the side of Russia, but it's also a problem for the West. The bomb that killed Chechen President Akhmad Kadyrov was reported to have been planted during renovation of the reviewing stand where the President was sitting. [story here]

I wonder, how closely are authorities watching the construction in Athens for the 2004 Olympics? [story here]

Victory Vednesday

Every Wednesday certain bloggers for Bush put out an appeal for donations. This presidential campaign offers two candidates who stand in stark contrast to each other. If you've never donated to a presidential campaign because you wanted to wait for the right time -- now is the right time. There's a lot at stake here and this is one way to help.

Donate Now!

Also, be sure to visit one of the many Bloggers for Bush supporting the President ...

Rebel Yell

John Kerry is a roughhewn sort of guy. The kind of guy who wears flannel shirts and spits his chewing tobacco into a styrofoam coffee cup. Here's how Mr. Kerry says it,

"Have you had a beer with me yet? I like to have fun as much as the next person, and go out and hack around and have a good time."

And you better not mess with his woman. Mess with her and you're messin' with him,

"If they want to attack her, they're going to have to go through me. I'll be the first to defend anything she does. ... She doesn't pull her punches"

The Kerry's are just commoners like us. One imagines spending a night with them at their doublewide, sitting around the kitchen table playing poker, beer cans strewn all over the floor. Heck, they might even show you their tatoos.

The rest of the story is here.

The Stumbling Block

As guest chaplain of the Florida State Senate, Pastor Clayton Cloer was asked to open the session in prayer. Cloer felt he followed the guidelines given to him for prayer. He didn't realize this meant there were certain words he couldn't say...

Pastor Cloer made the "mistake" of mentioning Jesus name in his prayer, not once, but twice. He mentioned it first in the context of being thankful that people had the religious freedom to believe in Jesus Christ and then the second time, he closed the prayer in Jesus name.

At the conclusion of his prayer a Senator stood to object to the prayer but the President of the Senate instead prevented her from speaking and apologized, "To those of you who were offended or feel hurt, I personally apologize."

The guidelines offered for opening the daily session are for prayer that:

-- seeks the highest common denominator without compromise of conscience;
-- calls upon God on behalf of the group as a whole and avoids individual petitions;
-- uses forms and vocabulary that allow persons of different faiths to give assent to what is said;
-- uses universal, inclusive terms for the deity rather than proper names for divine manifestations. Some opening ascriptions are "Mighty God," "Our Maker," "Source of All Being," or "Creator and Sustainer." Possible closing words include "Hear Our Prayer," "In Thy Name" or simply "Amen"; and
-- remains faithful to the purposes of acknowledging divine presence and seeking blessing; not preaching, arguing or testifying.

In other words, it's supposed to be a generic prayer.

Apparently, some felt offended by the use of Jesus' name. But what about those whose beliefs are offended by leaving out Jesus' name? Aren't their beliefs just as valid? If a Unitarian Minister stepped up front and offered a prayer to "The God that is within us", wouldn't a lot of people be offended?

If the person praying felt their prayers needed to be made in a certain way in order to be heard or valid shouldn't they pray in that way?

The very same day that Pastor Cloer prayed to open the session of the Senate, author Rick Warren prayed to open the session of the Florida House. He ended his prayer with, "In His Name, Amen". There were no complaints. Is there something about the J-Word that offends people or is it something else?

I don't believe it is possible to have a "level playing field" for all religions without offending people or diluting the beliefs of the religion beyond something that is meaningful to it's adherents. The choices seem to be; either we risk being offensive to some or eliminate religion altogether from public life.

Both the text of Rick Warren's prayer and Pastor Cloer's prayer can be read at www.FloridaBaptistWitness.com

The source for this story was Baptist Press News

Ryan's Head

This is the 8th in a series of interviews with bloggers who are part of The Blogdom of God. The Blogdom of God is a loose group of Blogs that identify themselves as 'God blogs'.

Today's interview is with Ryan's Head. The rest of him might decide to chip in on a few of the questions too.

Q: How would you define the difference between evil and insanity?

A: Evil persons commit evil acts with the full knowledge that what they are doing is wrong. Insane persons can commit evil acts; however, their mental capacity separates them from intent. Thus, some would argue that insane persons could not be considered evil.

In the context of Hitler, there is reluctance by many in labeling Hitler as insane because it would further cloud the question of WHY, separating him from the murder of millions of people. I don't believe we will ever have a satisfying answer to the question of WHY; and I'm not convinced that trying to understand Hitler will ever satisfy. The fact is, Hitler was but one person. Whether he was insane or not, he had many evil men (they can't all be insane) following his orders and fulfilling his will.

Additionally, there are also scholars who are reluctant to call Hitler "evil" because there is a lot of evidence pointing to the fact that Hitler thought what he was doing was good for humanity. He didn't see the extermination of Jews as an evil act. Therefore his intent was not evil. Now that's something to chew on.

Q: Why do you think the vast majority of German people followed Hitler?

A: There were many reasons, fear being the greatest of them. It was either kill of be killed, or at least, offer consent through silence.

German Nazi Leader Adolf Eichman's defense during his trial in Israel was that he was simply following orders. However, evidence shows that Eichman quite enjoyed his growing political status within the Nazi leadership. So there was the motivation of political and social advancement as well.

However, Hitler wasn't only empowered by the Germans. Most of the world sat in silence while he continued to build his power throughout Europe. The leaders of Europe were more interested in appeasing Hitler than they were in mitigating the threat. On October 3, 1938, after the signing of the Munich Agreement, Duff Cooper resigned his position as First Lord of Admiralty
because he believed the British Government "should have been fighting to prevent one great power from dominating the continent of Europe by 'brute force'." In his speech he noted, "When Herr Hitler broke the treaty of Versailles he undertook to keep the Treaty of Locarno, and when he broke the Treaty of Locarno, he undertook not to interfere further or to have any territorial aims in Europe. When he entered Austria by force he authorized his henchman to give an authoritative assurance that he would not interfere with Czechoslavakia. That was less than six months ago. Still the Prime Minister believes that he can rely upon 'the good faith of Hitler'…" The leaders of Europe continued to offer concessions to Hitler. The rest of the world stood by in silence. Eleven months later, WWII began.

Q: Do you think there are any situations analogous to that one today?

A: Certainly. However, this could make for an entire book. I will say that, in the absence of any of our own interests, we remain reluctant to stand up to those who are guilty of genocide.

800,000 Tutsis were killed by the Hutu majority in Rwanda when, in April 1994, their government called for Tutsi extermination. I would argue that, to know history, does not necessarily mean we won't repeat it.

And then there's Saddam. And appeasement by the U.N….

Q: How long have you lived in So Cal? (I see you lived in Denver too - which one did you like better?)

A: I am a native Californian. My family moved to Littleton, Colorado in 1984 and we lived there until 1993. From 1993 to July, 1996 we lived in the Wilkes-Barre/Scranton area of Pennsylvania until we moved to Orange County.

I love Colorado, but I don't think I could ever leave Southern California. One day it would be nice to have a cabin in the Rocky Mountains– maybe Estes Park or Winter Park.

Q: Is there anything you can say about Southern California that most people don't know?

A: Most people think California is the land of "fruits and nuts." I'm happy to say that, literally, we are. Fruit and nut cash receipts totaled $7.14 billion in 2001.

I've always thought it would be cool to live in San Diego. People out there seem to complain a lot about the high cost of things, etc but interestingly enough, I never meet people who live in my area that moved from California.

Q: How would you guess the overall quality of life in your area measures up to other areas of the country?

A: Cost of Living is high, but the quality of living out here negates the costs. My brother and his wife are renting a three-bedroom town home in South Carolina for approximately $400 dollars a month. Ms. Lovechunk and I paid $1400 a month for a one-bedroom apartment out here (you don't even want to know what our mortgage is for our thousand square-foot condo). We wouldn't trade it for anything. We have the mountains, the ocean and 330 days of sunshine a year.

Q: You are a single income family in a world of double income families. How's your life different than theirs and do you think you'll ever join the world of double income families?

A: I guess there is a difference, but I'm not sure we notice. My wife and I decided a long time ago that when we had children, we were going to raise them. That meant that daycare was out of the question. Period. So, we refuse to see it as a bad thing that we can't afford certain luxuries because of our single income. Besides, it is only temporary. When the kid(s) grow, my
wife may want to return to work. But that infers that her staying home is not work. Believe me. It is.

Q: I'm reassured to know that someone else out there hates both minivans and PT Cruisers with the same level of intensity as I do. I refer to PT Cruisers as dorkmobiles because every person I've ever known or seen driving one, is one. What kind of vehicle do you drive and, within reason, what would you like to be driving? (No, I'm not fabulously wealthy and you're not going to wake up tomorrow and find that I've anonymously bought you your dreamcar. Sorry.)

A: We own a Jeep Grand Cherokee and a Toyota Corolla. The Jeep WAS mine before baby was born. Now, the Jeep is for mom and baby. I hate the Corolla. We had plans to purchase a new Volvo S60 but that's just not in the cards right now. Sometime down the road I wouldn't mind driving a Lincoln Navigator or a Toyota Land Cruiser. Both nice, but not necessary at this point.

Q: Do you think politics and religion can mix? How? (or not)

A: That's a tricky question. I think religious people have the right (and the duty) to work in politics. Regardless of the politicians who take the separation of church and state too far, there is a moral baseline that needs to be laid down. A person should not be disqualified simply because their morals and values are based on their faith.

Q: Does your wife really like being called Mrs. Lovechunk?

A: Her full name is Ms. Dewey Lovechunk. I've called her that since we started dating in 1997. It's unique and it makes some people nauseous. She likes it.

Q: Is Get Fuzzy your favorite comic strip?

A: I like the tone of Get Fuzzy, but it's not my favorite. Peanuts is my favorite.

Q: How is being a father different than what you thought it would be?

A: The jury is still out. Andrew is only 10 weeks old and isn't asking any difficult questions about life at this point. I expected crying and feeding and changing. I expected a lack of sleep and new demands on my time. It's been an absolute blast.

Q: Are you involved with a church? What kind of church?

A: I read this somewhere: I am a Christian who chooses to live out my faith in the Catholic tradition (since 2002). And yes. We are involved.

Q: What would you like people to get from your weblog?

A: I hope they find it entertaining. I started Ryan's Head because, although I have always had the passion to write, I lacked the discipline to stay consistent. It isn't easy writing in a vacuum with very little interaction from the world around you. However, I knew that, in order to get better, I needed to write. Everyday.

Hugh Hewitt's book pointed me in the direction of the blog.

Q: How long have you been a Republican? Why?

A: Since 1993. The three years I spent in Pennsylvania could definitely be considered my "coming of age." And, while it's not a period of time I would choose to relive, I am blessed to have lived it because I learned a lot about myself.

To pay for school, I worked on a production line for a company that manufactures circuit boards for electronics (black boxes, etc.) On the line, we weren't allowed to talk but we could listen to our own personal radios and such. I started listening to talk radio. The more I listened to Rush the more I realized I wasn't a Democrat in any way shape or form.

I would have voted for Bill Clinton in 1992. Things were much different by 1996.

Q: If you could spend 15 minutes alone with George W. Bush, what would you tell
him?

A: Keep the faith. It may seem that you are alone in this world, but that doesn't mean you're wrong.

Q: Is there anything else you'd like to say?

A: I think I've said enough.

Don't forget to drop by Ryan's Head and check out what's going on in there.

If you haven't read previous Blogdom of God interviews, check them out here:
Josh Claybourn
Adrian Warnock
Fr. Jim Tucker (Dappled Things)
SecretAgentMan
Totem to Temple
LaShawn Barber
Antioch Road

If you are a member of the Blogdom of God and would like to be interviewed, please contact me. -jdm

Forty

I've noticed that the older people get the less likely they are to take risks. Instead, they begin to sequester themselves more and more in their own little environment where they feel safe and secure. They tend to stay within the confines of their community, see all the same friends, and play it safe. It's as if they tighten their grip on life in anticipation of one day being forced to let it go altogether.

It's unfortunate because as people get older they tend to become more financially secure. Many develop sound judgement and the great wisdom that often comes with age. Professionally they are at the height of their careers and all the knowledge that goes with those careers. They may not be into the latest and greatest fads but they have the perspective to see when something is a fad and whether it is worth pursuing. If they don't know all the answers they at least know how to get the answers.

On the other hand, younger people tend to be more idealistic. They aren't holding as tightly to the reins of their life and are more willing to travel to foreign countries, try new things, and meet new people. Unfortunately, the finances and other resources for doing these sorts of things are usually in short supply. They may reassure themselves by saying that when they get older and can afford to do such things they will. What they don't notice is the tendency to hold on tighter to life the older they become until eventually those earlier aspirations are forgotten.

This tendency to hold onto life tightly is natural but not inevitable. We all must come to the realization that our lives could end at any time and in ways totally unpredicted. We could die quite as easily sitting at home in front of the television as out traveling on some foreign soil. However, when you're sitting at home in your easy chair it is much easier to maintain the illusion that you're in control of your destiny and that's what matters to many people.

Not everyone succumbs to this malady in old age. Some become ever more adventurous and loosen their grip on their lives as they become older. People like, Larry and Jean Elliot, who travelled to Iraq as missionaries. They sought to fulfill a higher purpose on earth. Instead of curling up inside their safe shell they were able to truly live.

It's possible to hold on to life more loosely without travelling to foreign lands or embarking on great adventures. It could mean spending time actively mentoring someone younger. It could mean giving of yourself to someone who needs you. It probably means that you re-discover your purpose in life and make a commitment to storing up treasures in heaven rather than trying to hoard them here on earth.

On this day, my fortieth birthday, I want to make a commitment to hold onto life more loosely. Whether I live another year, another 10 years or until I'm 100 years old, I want to live it doing what I know will lead to making the most of what I've been given. I want to take calculated risks for some higher calling. When I get old I want to have great stories to tell my grandchildren. I don't want to say something like this, "Well,lads, I spent 30 years shuffling papers around on some desk at my company until I finally retired and got my gold watch." Instead, I want to be able to show them what God has wrought through my faithfulness and courage.

I'm 40 now. I could start that long slow slide toward heaven or I could continue to climb the mountain. I want to continue climbing and seeking new ways to hold onto life a little more loosely.

Join me.

-JD Mays
May 10, 2004

This Is Your Life
by Switchfoot

yesterday is a wrinkle on your forehead
yesterday is a promise that you've broken
don't close your eyes, don't close your eyes
this is your life and today is all you've got now
yeah, and today is all you'll ever have
don't close your eyes
don't close your eyes

this is your life, are you who you want to be
this is your life, are you who you want to be
this is your life, is it everything you dreamed that it would be
when the world was younger and you had everything to lose

yesterday is a kid in the corner
yesterday is dead and over

this is your life, are you who you want to be
this is your life, are you who you want to be
this is your life, is it everything you dreamed that it would be
when the world was younger and you had everything to lose

don't close your eyes
don't close your eyes
don't close your eyes
don't close your eyes

this is your life are you who you want to be
this is your life are you who you want to be

this is your life, are you who you want to be
this is your life, are you who you want to be
this is your life, is it everything you dreamed it would be
when the world was younger and you had everything to lose

and you had everything to lose

Read It
Hear It
Buy It

A Message from Mom

My wife received this email from the Bush-Cheney campaign. It's purportedly written by Barbara Bush.

It starts off like this,

With Mother's Day coming up this weekend, I've been thinking about how proud I am of our children.

Read the rest...

Dear Wife of "Army of One" Blogger,
(actually it really said my wife's first name)

With Mother's Day coming up this weekend, I've been thinking about how proud I am of our children.

And it's with a mother's pride that I'm writing you today to ask you to support our eldest, George W., and his re-election campaign with a donation of $1000, $500, $250, $100 or $50.

www.GeorgeWBush.com/Million/

George W. has been President during challenging times and he has met the tasks at hand with a steely determination and clarity of purpose. From fighting the War on Terrorism to defending the homeland, the President has shown steady and strong leadership.

He has worked with Congress to lower taxes three times so American workers and entrepreneurs can get the economy growing again; pass the No Child Left Behind Act to help every child learn to read; and provide seniors with a prescription drug benefit.

The President has accomplished a lot in the past three and half years but there is much more he would like to accomplish. He will continue to help strength our homeland defense and lay a strong groundwork to win the War on Terrorism. He has put forward plans to save Social Security, secure pension plans and enhance retirement security for all Americans. And he has a comprehensive energy plan to make America less dependent on foreign oil.

Earlier this week, our son's re-election team announced their "March to a Million" campaign. Never before has a presidential campaign received contributions from over one million supporters. With your help, we'll make history.

www.GeorgeWBush.com/Million/

This election is going to be a tough one. That is why I'm asking for your support. For months the President has been facing negative advertising from John Kerry and all sorts of pro-Kerry groups. I've been particularly disappointed in the personal attacks.

Your donation, no matter what the size, will help advertise the President's positive agenda for America and deliver his compassionate conservative message directly to the voters.

www.GeorgeWBush.com/Million/

America needs a strong leader like George W. Bush. He is the right man to lead America during these challenging times.

Thank you very much for your support today. I hope you and your family enjoy a wonderful Mother's Day.

Sincerely,

Barbara Bush

==end of email==
Okay, I guess the message is good but it strikes me as kind of funny that the President of The United States has his mom begging for money for his campaign.

I wonder if John Kerry's mom is begging for money too?

Reads Like Fiction But It's Not

Wow! The post found here reads like a novel - only it isn't.

I don't know what this blogger does for a living but he should be writing novels!

Peoples Republic of Canada

I've only been to Canada once and I was there for only about 15 minutes. It was just enough time to drive across the bridge from Detroit, do a big circle through some neighborhoods and drive back across the bridge to the good ol' USA. As a result of this minimal exposue, I don't know much about Canada, including their Constitution. (They probably call it something else.)

Recently, though, I learned something new about Canada...

Their parliament recently passed into law a Bill, called Bill C250, that makes it illegal for anyone to make disparaging remarks about homosexuality in public. To wit,

Every one who, by communicating statements in any public place, incites hatred against any identifiable group where such incitement is likely to lead to a breach of the peace is guilty of:
(a) an indictable offence and is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years; or (b) an offence punishable on summary conviction. Wilful promotion of hatred.[Source]

Proponents of this new law claim that it won't be applied to health courses where homosexuality might be discussed or to churches that might believe that homosexuality is wrong and preach accordingly. It doesn't help that the sponsor of the bill in the first place, Svend Robinson, has a history of antagonism toward Christians and is quoted as saying of the bill that it would make,

"the current use of homophobic pejoratives in public schools and in public places" socially and criminally reprehensible." [Source]

Apparently, then, it isn't legal anymore to say anything negative about homosexuality in places where other people might hear.

It might not give many Christians optimism to note that Amnesty International supported the bill and Canada's Unitarian Church also supported it. The Catholic Legate gives a very detailed explanation and criticism of why this new law (then it was only a bill) serves to undermine Freedom of Speech. View it here.

As I said earlier, I knew very little about Canada. I know that their former Prime Minister Chretien provided no support for the war in Iraq and I know that several senior government officials there have referred to President Bush in a less than complimentary manner. I also know that they don't seem to be doing their part in keeping terrorists from entering the US. Now, I can add to my list this particular law. This doesn't exactly make me want to pack up the kids and head North for a family vacation.

I wonder if liberals here in the US are taking notes. It's ironic that they're the ones who scream the loudest about diversity and free speech, until it comes to diversity or free speech that doesn't suit their standards. This type of law would seem to be the kind of thing that they would be thrilled to see here in the US. My guess would be that homosexual activists are sharpening their teeth on this and desperately hoping a certain Democrat from Massachusetts gets elected. Yes, the stakes are high this November. All you have to do is look to the People's Republic of Canada to realize what could happen.

The Known Unknowns

Beacon Blog sums up perfectly what I think about the whole Abu Gharib Prison Abuses mess. It's also a pretty nifty looking blog and one that I plan to add to my blogroll. Well, what are you waiting for? Go read it!

Rather Biased?

I just received an email from a website called, Rather Biased. I didn't ask to be put on their mailing list so I suppose the email smells a little bit like spam. However, I visited the site anyway and found it to be very interesting...

It documents some of CBS Anchor, Dan Rather's, liberal bias. Personally, I think the level of bias on the network news broadcasts is so bad that it's just too painful to watch the networks. What? You don't think so? Well, go watch Fox for a while and then come back to the networks. It's a lot more obvious when you're not constantly exposed to it. I'm not saying that Fox isn't biased. I think they're a little biased to the conservative side, but I also think they tend to be a whole lot more honest about it.

Don't forget to check out Rather Biased.

Oh, and if you're thinking about leaving a comment challenging my contention of liberal bias - go here first and take a good long look.

Adopt Our Troops

Most people have heard of the National Day of Prayer, which is today, but not as many people know about The Presidential Prayer Team or about Adopt Our Troops in Prayer.

Read more...

The Presidential Prayer Team is a non-profit independent organization with one purpose. That purpose is to encourage people to pray daily for the President. PPT is non-partisan and prays for the President regardless of his party affiliation. On a regular basis, Presidential prayer requests are published on the site as a guideline for what to pray.

PPT also promotes Adopt Our Troops in Prayer which brings the needs of our soldiers before God. Please visit The Presidential Prayer Team and consider getting involved.

Below is the latest Prayer request for the President from the site:

Pray for the President as he continues to meet with world leaders to look for ways to improve global security, win the war on terror, and improve economies both in the United States and around the world. Upcoming visits scheduled include meetings with President Oscar Berger of Guatemala and Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong of Singapore.

Pray for the safety of our servicemen and women around the world, especially in Iraq and Afghanistan. An increase in attacks has been noted in recent days, and the rebel Shi'ite leader El-Sadr has threatened to launch suicide attacks against US and coalition forces in Iraq if they attempt to serve the warrant for his arrest in the murder of another Islamic cleric.

Pray for the members of the Supreme Court as they near the conclusion of another term. Oral arguments for this year have concluded, and the Justices now will spend the next several weeks discussing and voting on the crucial cases in front of them, including the Pledge of Allegiance case.

Pray for peace around the world. Recent days have seen new fighting in Kosovo (including the deaths of two American peacekeepers), terror attacks against Israel, and the arrest of suspected terrorists in England, Jordan and Afghanistan. Pray for cooperation between the police, intelligence, and military forces of many countries as they work to prevent further death and destruction.

The National Day of Prayer

Received this in an email on Wednesday,

The National Day of Prayer is an important part of our national heritage. Since the founding of our nation, we have relied on prayer. In 1952, a joint resolution by Congress, signed by President Truman, declared an annual, national day of prayer. In 1988, the law was amended and signed by President Reagan, permanently setting the day as the first Thursday of every May.

Read more...

Every year, the President of the United States issues a proclamation encouraging all Americans to join together in prayer. Below is President Bush's proclamation for the National Day of Prayer, May 6th, 2004.

BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

A PROCLAMATION

In his first Inaugural Address, President George Washington prayed that the Almighty would preserve the freedom of all Americans. On the National Day of Prayer, we celebrate that freedom and America's great tradition of prayer. The National Day of Prayer encourages Americans of every faith to give thanks for God's many blessings and to pray for each other and our Nation.

Prayer is an opportunity to praise God for His mighty works, His gift of freedom, His mercy, and His boundless love. Through prayer, we recognize the limits of earthly power and acknowledge the sovereignty of God. According to Scripture, "the Lord is near to all who call upon Him . . . He also will hear their cry, and save them." Prayer leads to humility and a grateful heart, and it turns our minds to the needs of others.

On this National Day of Prayer, we pray especially for the brave men and women of the United States Armed Forces who are serving around the world to defend the cause of liberty. We are grateful for their courage and sacrifice and ask God to comfort their families while they are away from home. We also pray that the people of Iraq and Afghanistan, and throughout the Greater Middle East, may live in safety and freedom. During this time, we continue to ask God's blessing for our Nation, granting us strength to meet the challenges ahead and wisdom as we work to build a more peaceful future for all.

The Congress, by Public Law 100-307, as amended, has called on our citizens to reaffirm the role of prayer in our society by recognizing annually a "National Day of Prayer."

NOW, THEREFORE, I, GEORGE W. BUSH, President of the United States of America, do hereby proclaim May 6, 2004, as a National Day of Prayer. I ask the citizens of our Nation to give thanks, each according to his or her own faith, for the freedoms and blessings we have received and for God's continued guidance and protection. I also urge all Americans to join in observing this day with appropriate programs, ceremonies, and activities.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this thirtieth day of April, in the year of our Lord two thousand four, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and twenty-eighth.

GEORGE W. BUSH

Blame America First

During the Cold War there were those who insisted that America was the root cause of the conflict with the Soviet Union. They proclaimed loudly and often that we should get rid of our nuclear weapons and stop being so "aggressive". The reasoning went that such actions only caused the Soviet Union to be more involved in promoting communism in countries all over the world. The Soviets were simply trying to defend themselves, it was said, and if we only laid down our weapons then they would lay down theirs...

During the battles in Central America, Afghanistan and other places in the 1980's, America was again painted as the aggressor. Protests against the "Contras" were commonplace. If we would only leave these poor countries alone then everything would be fine, they said.

Of course, the Soviet Union ceased to exist and communism as a viable movement has been relegated to only a few unfortunate locales. The active involvement of American forces opposing communism helped to topple a corrupt system. All over the world now, people are free because of the strategies employed in previous decades. Those same strategies that were derided in various street protests.

But the "Blame America First" people haven't gone away. The latest example involves the abuses at the Abu Gharib prison in Iraq. Of course, it's a horrible incident that no one wants to see happen, but the Blame America First folks are all over it. They are quite busy wringing their hands and pointing out that this is symptomatic of how America oppresses those around the world. They quickly tie this incident to their perception that the Iraq war is unjust and even the way we handle prisoners from the conflict in Afghanistan must also be cruel and unjust. They start with the assumption that whatever America does must be motivated by greed or the lust for power and can't possibly be for altruistic reasons.

At the same time, they wring their hands with false-guilt and encourage Americans to plead for forgiveness from the rest of the world. The Blame America First crowd craves the adoration of the "international community". In their minds, if America would only seek peace, then everyone would love us and the world wold be a better place.

The irony is this; they forget the 400,000 people murdered and buried in mass graves all over Iraq. They forget that torture was a daily fact of life under the regime of Saddam Hussein. During the time this was going on the Blame America First people were strangely silent. Their compassion for the Iraqi's was oddly missing. Just as it was during every other war fought to free the oppressed. It is a strange type of myopia that only sees the victims of a few unjust individuals simply because they're American and is blind to the suffering of millions.

There is nothing wrong with criticizing the actions of the US Government. There are times when unjust actions are taken. Individual soldiers, despite all of the good done by them, will sometimes make poor decisions. Any individual or group that unjustly harms innocent people should face justice. But the Blame America First people will take isolated incidents and use these incidents as an indictment against everything being done for all the right reasons and in the right way. They never seem to take into account the many innocent victims on the other side of the equation. The focus is placed squarely on America and the harm it supposedly does in the world.

Ironically, most of the Blame America First people are Americans. Some are well-meaning people who unintentionally buy into the lies told to them. Others simply hate America. They are content to enjoy the freedoms that Americans enjoy while at the same time condemning those who make those freedoms possible. Others are from other countries like Canada, France, or Germany. The Blame America First people from these countries are very self-righteous and vocal about what America shouldn't be doing, but when it comes to taking a courageous stand in order to rescue the oppressed they always seem to have only reasons for doing nothing. Their vaunted "international community" ends up being responsible for things like making Sudan the chair on the UN Commission for Human Rights.

I have no patience for these people. They are complicit in some of the worst atrocities of the age because of their failure to support any meaningful action against tyrants and despots. Their condemnation of American policies means nothing to me and their so-called "international community" consists of nothing more than cowards.

America isn't perfect and will always need involved and courageous citizens to speak up when something wrong is taking place. Those who never support our country and who choose to do nothing when faced with action against injustice, those who turn a blind eye to the rest of the world's suffering and corruption, will never have any credibility with me. At best I consider them cowards, at worst they are traitors and complicit with those who commit evil acts as a matter of routine policy.

In the coming days when even more details about the abuses committed at Abu Gharib emerge, let's remember to keep a broader perspective. Perhaps some changes will need to be made. Certainly those responsible will need to be brought to justice, but let's not forget the many more who suffered before America took action.

Profoundly Bizarre

Project 666 is one of the most bizarre websites I've seen in a long time. There aren't many coherent sentences to choose from on the site, but here's one,

The new economic, new political and new social system for the European Union and the whole world, using 666 as a new currency to make a Paradise on Earth, and created by “Mr. 666” which deserves To win a Nobel Prize in Economy with Project 666!

If you're a little bored, go take a look for yourself - here.

Every Silver Lining Has A Cloud

Last night, while the rest of the nation was thrilled about the escape of Thomas Hamill from his Iraqi captors, [story] but CNN was busy pointing out how not everyone was quite as happy in the state of Mississippi. They then cut away to a family in Columbus, MI who recently lost a soldier in Iraq. On any other night they wouldn't have cared about the soldier from Columbus but tonight it serves their purpose to promote a certain agenda. I guess that's one reason why I rarely watch CNN.

Antioch Road

This is the seventh in a series of interviews with bloggers who are part of The Blogdom of God. The Blogdom of God is a loose group of Blogs that identify themselves as 'God blogs'.

Today's interview is with Jason of Antioch Road.

Q: First, the most obvious question, what's it like to be a new dad?

A: Amazing. I absolutely love it. I'm not sure how else to describe it in words. God used my wife and I to make this person, that I am now responsible for teaching and protecting. I've never had a greater responsibility. And it's a responsibility that, now that I have her, I
would hate living without.

Q: How is it different than what you thought it would be?

A: It's actually not all that different, except in the sense of the normal difference between imagination and reality. That is, I imagined the joy and I imagined the work, but you never *really* know the joy and know the work absent the reality.

Q: Is it hard to be a Chicago Cubs fan out in Iowa? How about being a Bears fan?

A: It's not hard at all to be a Cubs fan in Iowa. There are many of us. I'd say you're much more likely to find a Cubs fan here than a Cardinals fan (though there are many of those) or a Twins fan. The Cubs are on TV pretty much all the time here on some channel, are on the radio all the time, and Wrigley Field is only about a 4 hour drive away from eastern Iowa. It's a little "harder" being a Bears fan, because there are so many Vikings and Packers fans around here. But really, if you're talking football, the Iowa Hawkeyes are the big thing around here.

Q: In your pictures, you look like you're about 12. (I know I'm getting old because everyone looks like they're about 12) Yet you're a lawyer. How long has it been since you finished law school?

A: It sounds like I need to do some photo editing to make myself look older ;) Or perhaps grow a beard.

I finished law school in May 2003, studied for and took the bar exam that summer, and started practicing in September.

Q: What kind of law do you practice and why?

A: Our firm is a full-service firm. I work in with the litigation section, and primarily do personal injury defense and some commercial litigation. Being a young associate, I also do a variety of research projects on other topics. As for why, well, it's probably because I like (perhaps a little too much) to debate (i.e., argue). There's plenty of opportunity to do that as a litigator.

Q: How did you decide to become a lawyer?

A: By default really. I entered college not really knowing what I wanted to do, but knowing I liked history. So I decided to become a high school history teacher. I student taught the 1st semester of my senior, and generally had a really good experience. I was teaching mostly college bound students, so discipline problems were minor. But I also discovered that I liked learning about history a lot more than I liked teaching what I already knew. I was bored. That's not a good thing for a teacher to be.

Well, there's not much you can do with a history degree besides teach or . . . go to law school. So I made the quick design to take the LSAT (the law school admissions test), did well on it, and applied to the same schools that my wife was applying to physical therapy graduate programs for. And we ended up at the University of Iowa.

Q: What's your favorite U2 Album? (Mine is Achtung Baby, followed by Zooropa)

A: Excellent question, and I'm impressed that you named Zooropa, which I think doesn't get enough credit as being a great album (The Unforgettable Fire is also underrated). But Achtung Baby is my favorite as well.

Q: Watching professional baseball on TV is perhaps one of the most boring things I can imagine. Do you have any suggestions for how the game should be changed?

A: Boring? I can only say that you're missing out. No, no suggestsions for how the game itself can be changed, except perhaps having a uniform rule across both leagues regarding the DH. But, really, it's a wonderful game. The best, in fact. There are, of course, things MLB can do a
better job of in terms of marketing the game. And it needs to do a better job of enforcing prohibitions on steriod use.

Q: Many people refuse to believe the Bible is infallible or that it should be interpreted literally, yet you do. Have you ever had problems with what you read in the bible?

A: Before I was saved, and *thought* I was a Christian, I questioned portions of the Bible all the time. Now, I know the Bible to be perfect and true. If I were to discount some of it, I would have no principled basis on which to count the rest of it as absolutely true. There are
many reasons for considering it authoritative. One could write a book on the reasons (and many have).

I can't really think of a specific example of having a problem with anything I read in the Bible now. In any event, if I did, the problem could only be mine, and not the Bible's.

Q: Do you think there are some parts of the bible that should be interpreted as cultural norms of the time when it was written and aren't necessarily to be applied today?

A: It depends on the context of the passage. Some passages are clearly prescriptions applicable without regard to time or place. Some passages are merely descriptions of historical events. I can't think of a moral prescription stated in the Bible not intended to be applicable today.
There were certain ceremonial and judicial prescriptions applicable only to the Hebrew nation, but those are different from moral prescriptions. God does not change (Mal. 3:6; Heb. 13:8).

Q: Do you believe that women should be ordained as Pastors? Why or Why Not?

A: No. 1 Tim 2:11-12 is clear on this point. That does not make men "better" than women. It means that God has given men and women different roles (see also Titus 2:3-5). We do a great disservice to women and to society when we discount the roles women have traditionally played by implying (and sometimes expressly saying) those roles are somehow "lesser" roles.

Q: Are there a lot of cultural differences that you notice between the Baptist Church and the Lutheran Church?

A: Yes, though I can really only speak from my own experiences, and thus only on the churches I have attended. I largely grew up in ELCA churches. In high school, I attended a Lutheran-Missouri Synod church. For the past several years, I've attended a couple of different fundamental independent Baptist churches. So I've become more conservative doctrinally. As for cultural differences -- independent Baptists dress more conservatively and are stricter about male-female relationships before marriage (no dating, kissing, etc.). Lutherans are generally more willing to be a part of the prevailing culture -- they will drink alcohol, go to bars, wear clothing more in line with secular society (short shorts and skirts and tight clothing), listen to the music and watch the movies everyone else watches, etc. (This also has the effect of Baptists being more critical of others' behavior, and the effect of Baptists appearing more hypocritical, as we often fail to live up the standard we set for ourselves. Thankfully, we are saved by grace through faith). Most fundamental Baptists even think contemporary Christian music isn't worth listening to at all. (That's one thing I
haven't exactly conformed to.) The Baptist church I now attend also does a lot more reaching out to the poor and to prisoners than any other church I've attended.

There are also many worship style differences, but I suppose that's a different question.

Q: Do you think the pro-life movement is making progress against abortion?

A: Yes, though not enough. But there is polling showing a majority of Americans are pro-life, and younger Americans tend to be more pro-life than their parents, which is a good sign. But there hasn't been enough progress in convincing people to translate their pro-life beliefs into
legislation (or, even better, a constitutional amendment protecting unborn children). There's long been some confusion about when life actually begins. But biologically speaking (and Biblically speaking), that confusion is unfounded. Biologically speaking, life begins at
conception. I became a human being at conception (and "human being" and "person" are synonymous terms), just like any animal became a member of their species at their conception. The product of human conception cannot be anything other than human. With more advanced technology and
greater use of ultrasounds, more people are beginning to realize that human life *does* begin at conception. But there are still many who don't realize that, so more progress needs to be made on that front as well.

Q: Is there anything else you'd like to say?

A: Thanks for interviewing me. These interviews are really interesting, and I hope mine can at least come close to continuing that. Praise God. Jesus Saves. I love my wife and my daughter. Coke is better than Pepsi. Go Cubs.

If you haven't read previous Blogdom of God interviews, check them out here:
Josh Claybourn
Adrian Warnock
Fr. Jim Tucker (Dappled Things)
SecretAgentMan
Totem to Temple
LaShawn Barber

If you are a member of the Blogdom of God and would like to be interviewed, please contact me. -jdm

False Prophets

Why is it that I'm always the most suspicious of someone who has Reverend in front of his (or her) name?

It's ironic that I tend to be especially wary of pastors since I was raised in a great church and I've known plenty of great people who were pastors. I guess some of it comes down to the fact that evangelicals, in general, don't look too kindly on mainline denominations. Or it could be my own issues with authority figures. Mainly though, I think it's because we've all seen our fair share of false prophets and heretics. They can be eloquent and persuasive. They may sound really spiritual but at the end of the day they end up being exposed for being fakes.

I guess that's why hearing a pastor preach doesn't mean much to me without having some context for his preaching. If I don't know anything about the person, I tend to not listen to what they have to say. Some people have the gift of being able to take things at face value. I'm not one of those people. When my wife and I first started going to our present church, it took me nearly a year to stop double-filtering everything the pastor said. He's moved on to another church now, but he is without a doubt one of the most godly men I've ever met.

Sometimes it can be really difficult to see that a minister is legitimate and sometimes it's really easy. I was at a Rotary Club meeting the other day and I overheard a guy introducing himself to someone else. He said he was a Minister with the American Baptist denomination and that he'd served in churches in both Hollywood, CA and Manhattan, NY. You can probably guess what I was thinking. On the outside, I was calm and tried to act like I wasn't listening in but on the inside I was screaming, "LIBERAL HERETIC!".

For all I know, the minister might be a great and godly man. It's just that I don't trust ministers until I've had a chance to evaluate them. This is part of what I look for:

• What are his kids like? If they're adults, do they still follow Christ?
  
• Does the guy ever think he's wrong about anything or is he one of these guys that acts like he has a direct line to heaven?
  
• Does he have a sense of humor about himself?
  
• Does he treat different people differently? Is he really great to the rich "important" people and only nominally polite to the others?
  
• What kind of watch does he wear? If it's a rolex, that makes me wonder. If it's an el-cheapo from the drug store, that makes me wonder too.
  
• Does he speak directly or use all sorts of euphemisms? Sometimes ministers can preach an entire message and I really have no idea what they were trying to say because they dress it up in so many spiritual sounding words with no real-life application.
  

In all honesty there's probably even more than what I listed. I guess I'm a hard guy to please.

People who claim to be religious, especially ministers, often hide behind a veneer of spirituality that camouflages something else that isn't genuine. I suppose many people do, but they aren't standing up in front of the church trying to tell me how I should live my life. I guess the standard seems a little higher for ministers. Maybe that's not how it should be, but that's how it is, at least for me.

Ultimately, the most important test I have for a minister is this: Do they preach the gospel?
Without that, there isn't much point in looking at anything else.

Blogging Malaise

I'm in a little big of a blogging malaise right now. In politics, nothing too much is going on. John Kerry keeps stridently trying to sling mud at GWB while GWB keeps trying to act Presidential while hoping and praying that things in Iraq turn around soon. In Iraq, it seems to be the same day after day too. Our marines and soldiers there keep getting killed and the Iraqi's continue to be ungrateful and unwilling to help out in any meaningful way. Meanwhile, the economy is really starting to boom but hardly anyone in the media wants to notice for some strange reason. Overall, it's the same stuff that's been going on for quite some time now.

Right now, I know what you're thinking, "With the help of my friends and family I'll get by without having to read your profound witty observations..."

But don't worry. I have a Blogdom of God interview coming up with the blogger of Antioch Road and I'm sure some other stuff is on the way too.