George Bush on Global Warming

Thoughts on Public Aid

If you've read anything I've posted in this blog, you know that I have a very difficult time identifying with the current Republican administration. I think that America made a monumental mistake in 2004 by reelecting President Bush. I forgive the 2000 mistake because the majority of Americans actually voted against Bush.

But my politics are more nuanced than Republican vs. Democrat. I believe in fiscal responsibility. I believe in diplomacy before warfare. I believe in gun control and small government. I was against going to war with Iraq and now I believe we broke it so we have to fix it.

As for public aid, here is what I believe.

• "Struggle isn't bad."
• "Struggle makes you strong."
• "It is better to be poor and self-sufficient than rich and dependant."
• "We shouldn't make policy around the pocketbooks of rich and successful (i.e. worry about taxes)."
• "Policy should aggressively target the struggling poor."
• "The goal of social welfare programs should be providing attainable advancement opportunities."
• "Along with suitable short term safety nets, the government should provide significant advancement opportunities."
• "Aid should be primarily focused on education, reeducation, and retraining programs and on health care."
• "The poor should be taught that if they want to succeed, they can count on sufficient health and sufficient education to do so."
• "Every person who desires to advance through education and retraining programs should not be limited by lack of financial resources."
  

Backpacking in Yosemite

We just got back from a wonderful trip to California. Apart from seeing old friends, the highlight of our trip was the five days and four nights we spent backpacking in Yosemite. We trekked about 34 miles total and encountered everything from thirst to snow.



Map of the adventure.


Sunrise Lakes, Night 1 (pic taken morning of Day 2).


From the top of Clouds Rest, Day 2.


Stirring up some powered eggs for breakfast, Day 3.


Looking down on Merced Lake with Half Dome in the background, Day 3.


Pumping water, Day 3.


Campsite near Babcock Lake, Night 3.


On the way to Booth Lake, Day 4.


Our campsite at Booth Lake after a night of snow, Day 5.


Our campsite at Booth Lake, Night 4 (pic taken morning Day 5)


Tree hugger, Day 5.


No more boots! End, Day 5.

Can We Eat Lettuce in America?

I just read in Newsweek that Barak Obama got in trouble in Iowa for talking about buying arugula lettuce. Apparently good ol' Americans aren't supposed to eat the bitter tasting herb. Nor are good ol' Americans supposed to shop at Whole Foods Market. Somehow, the fact that Barak Obama does both of these things makes him less American and less electable.

I may be naive, but as far as I can remember, it doesn't matter what kind of lettuce you eat in American. Nor does the color of you skin... or your sex. Thomas Jefferson said it best in the Declaration of Independence: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness ," and, may I add, the freedom to eat the lettuce of one's own choosing.

So Barak, eat whatever lettuce you want. But watch out for fickle Americans. Apparently some of them don't think you should be eating arugula or shopping at Whole Foods. Bummer, I know...

Why Dick Chaney Became Vice President

The following clip goes a long way to helping me understand why Dick Chaney became vice president of the United States.



So, what happened to Chaney's preceptive and accurate judgment? September 11 certainly heightened the threat level in the United States, but it didn't change the reality of Iraq. What Chaney argued as true in 1994 is proving true today.

Why the Charges Against Vick are Inconsistant

Watch the video here.

After you have watched it, tell me, with a straight, face why Michael Vick should be tried for animal cruelty? (For information about Vick's indictment, click here).

Better yet, lets go out to eat. We can talk about Vick over a nice juicy stake.

Cruelty to animals is always wrong. But until we deal with our meat, let Vick play football (I still maintain that Vick is over-rated as a quarterback)! The fact of the matter is cuteness or tastiness shouldn't be the criteria we use to determine what cruelty to animals is or isn't! My Chihuahua is no more human, and has no more intrinsic value, then an ugly pig. Actually, any animal can be considered cute if healthy and well cared for. Babe anybody? A law designed to convict me if I let my Chihuahua freeze to death but ignores the meat industry for doing the same thing to thousands of animals a year is ridiculous. If I am wrong, somebody please explain it to me!

Right Vs. Left and Personal Culpability

In recent article, "Red Nation, Blue Nation," Michael Barone elucidates clearly the fundamental difference between the Right and Left. "The differences between the two parties' constituencies reflects two different views of America and the world. Those who see Islamist terrorists as the proximate threat see a world in which Americans are largely blameless.... Those who see climate change as the approximate threat take another view...." That is, Americans are, at least in part, responsible for the effects of climate change. The fundamental differences is that the right feels righteous and innocent and the left feels guilty and responsible. The Democrats are the party of social guilt and the Republicans are the party of personal righteousness.

For the Right, the war against terror, regardless of how it has been prosecuted, is a righteous mandate. The September 11 attacks are seen as completely unprovoked and unwarranted. The Right fails to realize, however, that Al Qaeda and other terrorist organizations were not created in a vacuum. Extremist Islamic leaders perceived a threat from the West and mobilized to neutralize that threat (That they thought bombing the towers would accomplish their objectives highlights their misunderstanding of the West and maybe even their stupidity). The question Westerners need to be asking is not, "What military tactics can we use to defeat the terrorists." It is, rather, "What 'perceived threats' gave rise to Islamic Extremism, and how can we neutralize those 'perceived threats?'" (What are the "perceived threats?" Some possibilities: socio-economic factors {poverty, residue colonial resentment, unconditional support for Israel, past and present interference in political affairs}, western infidelities {media, pop-culture}).  Let me be clear, I don't hold individual Americans personally responsible for the terror attacks. But a careful study of Middle Eastern history leads to the unavoidable conclusion that US involvement in the Middle East is partly responsible for growth of discontentment in the Islamic world (Before you dismiss this point, make sure you read about the CIA's involvement with the Shaw of Iran).

So, in conclusion, the Right is right because Americans are not personally guilty for the rise of Extreme Islam or global warming. The Right is wrong, however, because Americans are collectively responsible, at least in part, for the same two crises. And the converse can be said for the Left. And so at the end we are left with the same question that divided our founding fathers. Do we as a free nation emphasize the individual or the state? Do we emphasize the collective whole (Federalists, G. Washington, A. Hamilton) or personal independence (Republican, J. Madison, T. Jefferson)? Do we establish foreign policy as if we are individuals looking out for out own interests? Or do we establish policy that will promote global harmony in the world and reflect the benign and benevolent intentions most Americans feel? You decide.

The Error in Letting the Generals Decide the Fate of Iraq

The White House has been using strange logic to make the case for not setting a "timetable for withdrawal" from Iraq. It goes like this: "Politicians shouldn't tell the commanders (the experts) how to wage war." On the surface, this sounds nifty. There is not doubt in my mind that the commanders are much better at waging war than the politicians. But to say that the warriors want more unlimited war is a no brainier! Nuclear physicists want nuclear power plants, oil moguls want more oil rights, surgeons want to cut people open, preachers want to preach, builders want to build, investors want to invest, and (surprise, surprise!) soldiers want to fight! For this reason Congress should give the military unlimited funds to wage war in Iraq. Makes sense to me!

The illogical White House aside, the answers to Iraq still aren't clear to me. I'm about to the point of giving up in despair.... There is only one thing left to try, American must pull out its troups and let the Iraqis arrive at peace on their own terms. Could it work? Vietnam doesn't look so bad 40 years later.

Behold! The Antichrist is Here!

Christians have been looking for the Antichrist for a long time, but he has actually been here for about 20 years. See him for yourself here. And by the way, Antichrist doesn't refer to one who is against Christ or opposed to Christ, but rather to the next christ.

Actually, I find this man somewhat frightening! At least his message seems to be of tolerance... wow! I for one won't be getting three sixes tattooed on me and time soon!

More on Ellen White

Some of you may have had the opportunity to browse my very long post called, "What Do We Do with Ellen White?" These conversations about Ellen White have been happening more frequently this winter. The Red Books was his play that premiered recently at PUC has sparked quite a bit of debate. Several of my favorite discussions have come form Julius Nam's blog, progressiveadventism.com. Especially provocative recent post called Red Books and the Mosaic of Adventism. What Julius Nam has to say struck a cord in me. How can we as Adventists chart a way forward that doesn't require firing squads or church inquisitors? How can we learn to accept Ellen White for who she was, "messy and enigmatic," completely human and thus imperfect and sinful, as well as called and inspired by God to do ministry in her time and place? I am reminded of one of George Knight's favorite sayings: "Thou Shalt Not Do Theology Against Thy Brother!" This also fits with how we are to treat dear old Ellen. If she has become primarily an implement of war, animosity, and strife within our church, then we are all responsible for creating this monster. And who is responsible for slaying or taming the monster?

Iraq Revisited: The Facts

Here are some pieces of evidence to support the notion that Iraq is in a dangerous slide and why the US will not be able to stop the slide:

-Nearly 1 million refugees have fled Iraq for Jordan and other countries.
-Condi Rice just pushed through a lucrative oil agreement with the Iraqi government that promises to serve in interests of big oil and not the Iraqi people and thus continuing to foster anti-American sentiments.
-Abu Ghraib prison scandal signaled the end of any perceived moral authority the US may have had in the perception of the Muslim world.
-The US continues to pour money into the war effort instead of the economic revitalization of Iraq.
-Iraq has nearly 50% unemployment. As a result, people are drawn to crime as a way of survival and to violence as a way to speak out.
-Iraq hasn't been able to restart government run industries which would increase jobs and be boost to economic growth. The US hasn't done enough to help them restart these industries.
-Frightened coalition troops on the ground in Iraq continue to breed ill will by terrorising the populace... with good reason they treat everyone with the same suspicion. But these survival techniques have the unintended consequences of breeding anti-American sentiments.
-The general unrest, hardship, and suffering has served to promote extremism. Radical Islam is flourishing in the hostile environment of Iraq, breeding a new generation of extremists who see America as the enemy.
-The Iraq war is too profitable for the private sector war machine that supplies the US forces. Such profits ensure that Congress and the President will always prefer to wadge war instead of look for peace through economic means.

These are a just a few of the facts that I have picked up in the past few weeks. I pray to God that they are untrue, misinterpreted, and blown out of proportion. If they are true, God help us all! If you have another facts Iraq facts, please share them with me.

Iraq Revisited

A few weeks ago I wrote a post "Why Did I Have to be Right?" about the situation in Iraq. In that post I stated that I wasn't sure how America should proceed with the reconstruction of Iraq. At the time, neither "surge" nor withdrawal sounded good to me.

Since that blog, I have become more educated on Iraq. I have read Naked in Baghadad, the account of Anne Garrels who was one of a very few American journalists to stay in Baghdad during the invasion in 2003. I have also heard more reports, read more articles, and had more conversations. I can now state unequivocally that the only solution for Iraq is non-violent, non-military. I seriously doubt that the US can find the solution for Iraq. When the US does withdraw, which in inevitable, Iraq will still be a mess. The only hope for Iraq is political and economic. And it will demand a coalition of the "unwilling" To put Iraq back together. America, the hoards of brave Australians, and prince Harry do not have the political clout, popular support, or moral stature to bring a good conclusion to the matter.

What Do We Do with Ellen White?

On a Monday morning, four friends engaged in an online chat session. The discussion had its roots in a play on Ellen White, called Redbooks, that has been written and preformed by students at Pacific Union College. A provocative play, Redbooks raises many questions about Ellen G. White and how contemporary Adventists should deal with her. The comments here are incomplete in their scope and have not been actively researched. We hope you find them thought provoking and helpful; and and we hope that you actively engage in this timely debate on Ellen White.

Matt: I just went to the first dress rehearsal of the Ellen White play PUC is doing. Lots of conversation fodder.

Mark: Ok. So Matt is stuck on the EGW stuff.

Luke: Tell us, what's the issue?

Matt: The play last night made me really think about it. About all of our experience with her, our parents and our grandparents, our friends… Seriously, its a question for everyone. What do you seriously feel about Ellen White?

Mark: I don't remember the last time I read something she wrote. Well, I did glance at her for prayer meeting just in case someone attacked but I haven't read for personal edification or anything. I don't feel the need to.

Matt: Exactly, Mark. Me either. Julia didn't get three/fourths of the stuff in the play because she just has never cared.

John: Matt, is that the play that you were talking about in SF, that your friends were writing?

Matt: Yeah. I saw them do the dress rehearsal last night. It was amazing. They premier in a week. Julius Nam is coming up from Loma Linda, Spectrum is coming and George Knight is coming down from Oregon for the premier.

Luke: Let me throw out my opinion about EGW so that you can shoot me down: She was a very balanced and godly inspired prophet who did mission in the 1800s. Most of her stuff is out dated, but her core work is still good.

Matt: Ok. That is Luke’s. Mark and John, you are still up…

Mark: I’ll accept Luke’s. Really it’s a non-issue for me. I don't really think about it much.

Matt: Dude, the play is insane, because it is my friend who says he is an atheist who wrote and directed it and he has nailed Adventism and our issues with Ellen. Is Luke's position a dodge? Can a prophet be outdated?

Luke: Yes Matt, a prophet can be outdated because of the principle of the Incarnational Gospel. The gospel reaches people, society, where it is. Thus her message was for that time and place.

Mark: The point of a prophet is to give voice to a message that is needed in a particular time and space. It might be universal but maybe not

John: I don't have a problem with her being inspired, but as we have talked, Matt, I think she was needed in a time to push the church out of infancy. I don't think that everything she wrote was meant for publication. That said, I've only read Steps to Christ, Desire of Ages, and of course Evangelism and Gospel workers. So you can see how important she is to me.

Matt: Is she central to the Adventist sociology?

Luke: She is central to our sociology, unfortunately. But not required to our theology.

John: But the principles and lessons can still be drawn upon today, that's why the OT prophets still work.

Luke: Exactly, John. At face value, she is outdated… she isn’t relevant. If we learn to read her through the eyes of principle, what she says is still truth. Just like the stories from the prophets aren't relevant unless we interpret and apply them to our time.

Matt: So what do we do with someone who is central to our collective experience together - our sociology - who is not relevant?

Luke: We try to look out, not in. We focus our attention and our theology on mission. Focusing on EGW is like me trying to update my dad's clothing style, instead of me just trying to live my own life and style. EGW isn't central to the four of us, to our relationship, to our society.

Matt: So she isn't central to our sociology?

Luke: Not us. Our tradition, yes. Other journeyers, yes.

Matt: What about Adventism, the people we work with?

John: But she is central to our church, especially the conservative sections. One of my fears going back to Texas, is dealing with EGW pounders.

Matt: I think that is the point. There is this mythic figure who is central to our collective experience - whether we are for her or against her - and we don’t know how to relate to the people who are different from us about her. I think it contributes to our dysfunction in a big way.

Mark: I think she's one of the greatest barriers to our growth as a church.

Luke: I can see how that it could be, but it isn't a barrier for me. EGW is a non issue in my context.

Matt: EGW is an issue in your context Luke, because you will have someone bring it up to the new person at church after the Brazilians bring in the sheaves

John: I feel that our church is built on the traditions that she is a huge part of. My fear is that our church will break down after the generation of EGWers die.

Matt: And is the break down of our church bad?

Luke: Here is the problem: for generations we have looked to EGW to be our guide to contextualize the Bible and preach the Gospel. Her methodologies are out dated and no longer works.

Matt: So even the principles of Ellen White no longer work? Then she is irrelevant?

Luke: The operative term is contextualization. She contextualized principles. We are the ones who don't operate on principles; we operate on her 1800s application of those principles. We need to do the hard work of contextualizing Biblical truth to our time and place. And I have no idea about how to do that effectively.

John: I don't think you can say that her principles are irrelevant; I think we have to take her own advice and study the bible more.

Matt: What were her principles? What about her statements that say she is completely inspired in everything she writes, including personal letters?

Luke: We need to read her statements and understand her methods in context. Why did she say what she said? And what principle was she operating on?

Matt: What principle was she operating on when she wrote her first book about masturbation and how it will cause people to become retarded?

Mark: How about we study the bible and make decisions? Do we need her though? I mean, we're spending more time debating her statements than reading the Bible and making decisions based on it!

Luke: I agree, study the bible. Apply the Bible, not some EGW quote. But if you have to read EGW, do it right!

Matt: Is the real question whether or not we need her or what in the world to do with her? We have her, so what do we do?

Mark: Matt, you don't really need to worry about her with your ministry right?

John: I think that's the point we have her, and whatever we or others think, we have to deal with her. It would be easier if we had living prophets like the Mormons, then they could just come out and say what was right and what was wrong....according, of course, to what God told them.

Luke: I agree with that. So it is our task of educating ourselves and others on how to appropriately encounter the Incarnational Gospel in our time and space. And we are forced to account for EGW also.

John: I think she does more harm today than good.

Matt: There is this scene in the play that is called “dodgeball” in which four people—a professor, a pastor, a librarian, and a college president—are all given straightforward questions from a non-Adventist game show host and all they do is dodge the questions. It is hilarious, but also really telling. We don't know what to do. We all want to say yes! or no! but we don't. We dodge the issue of what do we do with a woman most relate to as an OT prophet who has nothing relevant to say to us today.

Luke: As Christians, we must do biblical theology first. As Adventists, we have to account for EGW, at least as a footnote.

John: But will our church every see her as a footnote?

Luke: John, you and I already do. We are part of the church. Those kids at PUC are part of the church, at least some of them.

Mark: True Luke, I’m not going to allow others to define Adventism, we're Adventism too!

Luke: Exactly! Lots of smart Adventists out there don't know what to do with EGW in the contemporary world and they don't do much. Like us.

John: Yeah, but we are only a minute part of a church steeped in tradition

Luke: I'm not sure how minute.

John: My old church revolted when we wanted to move the children story and offering, trying to do something with EGW is different.

Mark: Being in Mid-America was much different than MD Adventism. MD is ready to move on, for the most part. Michigan… we're back in 1888.

Luke: See John, back to the contextualization issues. My church, form the most part, has moved on.

John: But we still have the huge structure of the church to deal with.

Luke: In Adventist Academies I’ve been at, many of the students don't believe in EGW. There is a whole new generation out there that doesn’t believe in her. When I say "believe" I mean "care" or “pay much attention to.” Most kids don’t read her anymore.

John: Most churches that branch out and move on have to break away from the church.

Mark: We can't worry about that. It begins on the local level. In church policy class Burrill basically told us that if we want changes in the church manual, just start doing stuff and if it works people will catch on. EGW is a huge deal and is different from other issues, but I think it is true on a certain level. We can change how we see EGW from the local level up.

Luke: As a pastor, you don't have to preach about, with, or use EGW if your members don't demand it. And if she is an issue... then you do have to educate people about her. For me the biggest rub comes when the Conference takes what she says and pushes bad policy down. I think that is happening less though. There is a strong and positive trend among my dad's generation of pastors. Many of them have it right.

Mark: Example?

Luke: Our insistence on public evangelism and colporteur ministry comes largely from EGW. It is outdated. But the Conferences won't move on.

John: It's a bigger deal to me than just not using her, because I think she still creates this “us against the world” mentality.

Luke: I don't believe that our “us against the world” mentality is an EGW thing. That is a mentality that every denomination used to have. Baptists and Methodists used to never even pray together. Now they almost feel like one big happy family.

John: Yeah, but EGW makes us different and we always have to explain it, and to some it makes us superior

Matt: Ellen does substantiate many peoples’ “us against the world” mentality. And our eschatology is “us against the world.”

Luke: Sure, but she is part of that type of thinking, not the originator. We just haven't given it up.

Matt: She originated that thinking, or at least propagated it. Don't let her off the hook!

Luke: The problem is, Jesus also made comments like that. "The world is against you,"

Mark: But Jesus didn't tell them to hide from the world. Ellen told us to move out of the cities because they are bad. Any group has to justify its existence and how do you do that? Share how special you are and try to discredit others.

Luke: My point is that every other leader in almost every other church did the same thing at that time. It wasn’t till the early 1900s that the World Council of Churches started to break down those barriers.

Matt: But it was much sooner than that for most churches. Billy Graham broke them down in the 50s.

Luke: Sure, but not that quick. And SDAs are always at least 20-30 years behind other Christian denominations.

Matt: But we still have this Prophet's words telling us with authority that we should be set a part from Babylon.

Luke: That is a Theology issue. And, of course, she believed in that theology. We have to contextualize that theology, specifically, the Bible, to our time and place.

Matt: How do you contextualize an exclusive theology in a postmodern globalized culture?

Luke: I have said this over and over, EGW was a prophet to a specific time and place. We are the ones with the problem. We are the ones who won't move on and do good incarnational theology and mission. We have to figure out what exclusive theology accomplished in its original context. Can we learn form that? And Jesus was also exclusive at times. How do we in our postmodern world deal with Him, let alone EGW!

Matt: Because we can't move on until we adequately deal with her, give a firm “yes” or “no” and do not doge it every time it comes up like our parents did. What if the result of her particular theology at that time is not helpful now? How is an exclusive theology for then, good now? Yes, Jesus was, at times, exclusive for him. But never for a particular way of following him.

Luke: Take it back to the principle level. What did the theology do in her time? Was it good then? Was it bad then? What was the principle behind it? Is it really a biblical principle? And how does that principle speak to us now?

Matt: I am trying to ask that what if the principles are no longer applicable? Or were bad ideas to begin with? We always assume that if we really look at it correctly, she'll be proven right. And I am beginning to think that is a bit of a cop out.

Mark: Good point Matt!

Luke: That is a big assumption. It is a presupposition that we have to deal with. If we accept her as inspired, then we have to accept that what she said and did was right in her context.

Matt: We give her a pass by saying "Oh, we just didn't find the context." Ok. Where do we get the presuppositions - and what is our reason behind that presupposition - that she was inspired? Because she said so? Because Uriah Smith said so? Because her husband said so? Because George Knight said so?

Luke: That is a faith assumption. Want to throw the Bible into the mix? Maybe it isn't inspired either. Where do we start with our authority?

Matt: I think that Luther was inspired. But he was wrong when he said that Galileo was wrong and a demon. I think Tony Campolo is inspired, but I don' think he was right when he said that someone in a BMW isn't - on their face - a Christian. The authority of the bible is a cop out as well. The authority of the bible is a tool we use to get people to fall in line. We don't know what we mean when we say “authority of the bible.”

Luke: If the issue is Inspiration, then we have a lot to talk about before we ever get to EGW. I make the assumption that the Bible and EGW are inspired.

Matt: I disagree. We have to deal with Ellen because it is the major issue regarding inspiration that we deal with. I simply think that we have to start actually giving full answers to the Ellen White thing, not cop outs, not half answers that push her aside and make us not deal with it. What happens to Adventism if we conclude that Ellen White was never inspired the way we said? I think the cop out answers are what we are giving because we are afraid

Mark: Well, we’ve got to run! Matt, is the play going to make big waves on the larger scene? Is it controversial?

Matt: I think the play is more positive than Julia and I expected. It is done very well and is very artsy so it might get waves because someone has finally done something about us and Ellen White. Spectrum has done an interview on Eryck already and they are going to come to the premier. Julius Nam is coming and will blog about it. So I think it will get some attention, but not a lot. It does bring up how she was part of this sexually funky Christian group in Portland Maine before she became a prophet. Good stuff!

Sorry about the length of this post. If anybody knows how to extend a long post to a second page in blogger, please let me know.

You've Got to Love New Technology

The Heart of Worship

The Rub of Truth

The Vision of Christ that thou dost see
Is my vision's greatest enemy:
Thine has a great hook nose like thine,
Mine has a sunb nose like mine. . . .
Both read the Bible day and night,
But thou read'st black where I read white.

-William Blake

It is truly difficult to understand how people can start with the same set of data and draw such varying conclusions. I guess the reality is that we don't start with the same data. Our own experience colors how we see things. Until experience is uniform, understanding will be diverse. This is why we must triumph dialog. Until I truly understand you, I will not understand your theology.

How We do Evangelism

Click to see a funny but flippant clip on door-to-door evangelism. Where does "wise as serpents, harmless as doves" fit in to all of this? I also find the YouTube comments on this clip to be revealing. Especially the ones about how "hot" hell is.

P.S. I found this clip at "Life as a Cultural Adventist." Here is the YouTube address: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YPjoP0woZ0s&eurl=

Why Did I Have to Be Right?

I was against the current war in Iraq from the beginning. I made my feelings known to anybody who would listen... I said we could not win such a war... taking down Saddam is not central to the war on terror (even though he was a very bad man). Unfortunately, almost everything I said came true (which just goes to show, you don't have to be a genius to come to these conclusions).

But four years ago I said something else too. I said, if we go in, we will have to finish the job. This is why I cannot decide where I stand on the "surge" issue. I cannot agree with the those who say, "We took down Saddam, gave them elections, now it is up to them to rule." That is complete garbage. How can we expect the Iraqis to take ownership of a bad situation that they didn't create? America is to blame for destabilizing their country. How could we think of leaving now? We have to do everything possible diplomatically, militarily, and politically to help rebuild Iraq. If the Military can still help, we have to double and quadruple our efforts and our troops.

At this point, the only reason we should bring back our troops is if there is no longer a military option, which may or may not already be the case. The point is, America still has responsibility for Iraq. Bush screwed it up, now America has to pay the price and fix it. Whatever it takes! I am open to the possibility that a withdrawal of troops might very well be the answer. The point is, America must act, not react. Most who are calling for withdrawal are reacting, not acting.

And if we fail [likely] to bring peace to Iraq, we will collectivly pay for the imbicility of one man, Dubya, for generations.

Fixing My Car

I love fixing things. Nothing gives me a testosterone rush like fixing one of my cars. Today I had one of those perfectly manly experiences. My alternator went out. I discovered this after I replaced the battery and still had trouble running. Cold weather is hard on electrical systems, especially the battery, and we have been hitting sub-zero temperatures every night for nearly a week! So I went to AutoZone and had them test my system just to confirm my diagnosis (I don't know if I should've trusted them because they then sold me the alternator I "needed").

When I got home, I backed into the garage and went to work. It didn't take me long (good thing too, it was a manly 15 degrees when I started). I soon had the old alternator out, the new alternator in, and the car started. Am I a stud or what?

My advice to you reader: get some tools and try something manly! And if you fail, have parts left over, break, or otherwise damage your victim don't feel bad. That is manly too!

I Like Big Bibles!

This Clip Speaks For Itself

Dreams from My Father

I just finished listening to Dreams from My Father by Barak Obama. It was a wonderful audiobook! I really enjoyed hearing about his struggle to keep his worlds together. Born to a Kenyan international student and a white lady from Kansas, he grew up in Indonesia and Hawaii, attended college in LA and NYC and got a law degree from Harvard. Through it all he had to deal with what it meant to be highly mobile and cross-cultural. Most touching to me was the description of his first trip back to Kenya. Having lived in Africa (Malawi and Kenya) I was able to relate in some way to the struggles he faced, especially with regard to the haves and have-nots. Please read this book!

A Demoralizing Recollection

At about 7:20 this morning, I was finishing up my ablutions and tidying up our bedroom. I was getting ready to go down stairs and have my devotion time. As I approached the bottom of the stairs, I had a very demoralizing recollection. Last night when we got home from prayer meeting, Hadassah and I needed to take out the trash. So I carefully took my Bible and prayer book out of the back seat of our Tracer and laid them on the roof. "That way I'll remember to take them in," I thought to myself. As I approached the bottom of the stairs this morning, I realized that I have forgotten to bring in my Bible and prayer book. Normally this would be not problem at 7:20am because Hadassah usually leaves for work at 9:30am. But this week she has been leaving at 6:00am.

So I frantically looked around the house for my Bible. In the loft... in the living room... in the basement... But my fears were founded. They hadn't made it in.

After a frantic call to Hadassah to determine if they had made it to work with her... I decided to go looking for them. I drove the route Hadassah uses to get to work and even decided to get on the toll way. As I went around the on ramp from i335 to i55, there on the side was my Bible. Pages bent and crumpled, but all fully intact. I said a thank you prayer and returned home. Then I said to myself, "If God blessed me one time, he can certainly bless again." So I repeated the trip looking for my prayer book. But alas... I didn't find it.

So I came home. It was windy last night and the trash that had been out all night waiting for the sanitary engineers to come by and blown all over. I took the empty recycle bin and cleaned up the trash. Then I headed to take our neighbors recycle bins up to her house like I usually do. And there, in her drive way, was my prayer book!

So I feel complete. I have been reunited with my Bible and my prayer book. Today I not only feel blessed, I am blessed! Thank you God!

Write, Just Write!

January 1 I was looking through some old journals. I'm a journaler and am collecting quite a stack of half filled journals. I'm lucky to get 150 entries in a year.

I found a poem that I wrote on September 17, 2002.

Get up!
Face the day
You have the energy

Look at yourself
Look and see
Who stares back?

It is up to you
It is your choice
Make the most of the day!

Get up, go!
God is with you!

Well it isn't much of a poem and it doesn't rhyme (My brother-in-law questions from time to time who it was that said poems didn't have to rhyme... since that fateful discovery, very few actually rhyme...). But it was enormously rewarding to read back through an old journal and find something interesting...

I guess the moral of this blog is journal! Get a book and write down your thoughts. Write down what you ate and what you did, just write!... If for no reason but the promise of opening up an old journal and reading something that reminds you of times gone by.