HT: Rick via Twitter
This story really turns my stomach. Even more, I'm stunned at the places that are immediately urging for forgiveness and healing... how about starting with getting all the truth out?
Preacher/Songwriter Faked Terminal Illness
Wednesday, August 20, 2008
Tuesday, August 19, 2008
Obama and McCain and the evangelical vote
I missed the Open Forum hosted by Rick Warren which puts me in the unique position of commenting on it from utter ignorance. Instead, I've spent more time reading reactions (rather than transcripts), and interpreting them. The question of "Who won?" has prompted the following generalizations:
Obama won: Because he gave thoughtful, nuanced answers to a mostly Republican audience without apologizing for his party's platform. He took his time, was not the impassioned orator of his rallies, but instead offered detailed remarks and looked Rick Warren in the eye as he spoke. He validated the "already Obama fan" evangelical, though it's unclear he won over any of the fence-sitters looking for an unapologetic pro-life stance. Some say he supported Rick Warren's "Whole Life" idea (that we are not to be concerned merely with conception through birth, but the after birth as well).
McCain won: He spoke with deliberateness, spoke concisely, made remarks consistent with the conservative wing of the R party. While detractors said he pandered (didn't actually look at Rick as he spoke etc.), fans felt he nailed the questions with black and white answers suited to his audience. His stories engaged viewers and audience alike, his style showed more confidence and panache than anyone expected. His overall tone didn't just reassure evangelicals who were unenthusiastic about his candidacy; he gave them reasons to vote for him with some level of conviction.
Warren won: Lots of people have said that Warren won - he drew the long stick, getting the two candidates together for the first time in front of the nation. He made his church, his constituency, his worldview a player in the election in a way unprecedented, even when Bush was running away with the evangelical vote.
My take on all this, though, diverges. I'd say the Democratic party won.
Here's why. Evangelicals are no longer a monolithic block. Let's look at how fractured these evangelicals have become. For the last four years, a growing number of malcontents within the evangelical Republican community have voiced their shift in focus from heaven-hell theology to social justice. This shift has enabled formerly hardcore Republicans to consider the party platform of the Democrats. The lack of progress in the laws related to abortion under Republican presidents and a Republican congress has unmasked the "wedge issue" nature of that platform item. Pro-life is a Republican slogan, not a conviction among the powers that be. That means, for the first time since Reagan, committed pro-lifers have had to ask what actually reduces (in real numbers) the abortion rate (not just how can the laws be changed).
Turns out social programs help: inner city education and job training, birth control and health care options do give unwed mothers alternatives to abortion. The party who cares more about that is the Democratic party.
Additionally, the war has become a moral issue for Christians. Can we justify supporting a president and party that lied to the American people to start a war in a sovereign state? Can we keep sending our young people into a civil war that we can't contain or control?
McCain represents more of the same: a commitment to the platform that got George Bush elected. He has even back pedaled on his more moderate positions (he has a record of supporting stem cell research, for instance) in order to provide reassurance to doubting hardcore, xtn Republicans. What he is not calculating is that there is a growing number of evangelicals who don't want to hear the same old answers.
Those evangelicals are interested in Obama. Abortion is the number one stumbling block for those Republicans. They want to believe that a changed view (a Democratic view) of economics, the government's role in social welfare programs, diplomacy over war, and increased taxes would be a more moral vision than the one that's failed them for the last eight+ years. They want to believe that abortions (the real ones, not the theory or laws about them) will go down under a changed model of leadership.
McCain did nothing to reassure those evangelicals. He merely corralled the already hardcore right that he is the next Bush, but with more conviction and better war stories.
For the remaining disaffected, new theology evangelicals (the McClaren followers, the emergents, the college kids who can't relate to Dobson or Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity), Obama represents a risk they are more and more willing to take.
What that means, then, is that the evangelical "base" is fractured. It only takes a small percentage to undermine the "block vote" they once represented. And that is why I say that Warren's open forum was actually a win for Democrats. The truth is, even just hosting it proves the evangelical world has gone through a shift. There is no way in hell (I mean it) that Clinton would ever have been invited to an evangelical church for a conversation with the Republican candidate.
Today, you can say you are voting Obama and not feel that your church membership or salvation are suddenly in question. That's what change means. Proof that evangelicals won't be the key demographic this time.
GObama 08!
Obama won: Because he gave thoughtful, nuanced answers to a mostly Republican audience without apologizing for his party's platform. He took his time, was not the impassioned orator of his rallies, but instead offered detailed remarks and looked Rick Warren in the eye as he spoke. He validated the "already Obama fan" evangelical, though it's unclear he won over any of the fence-sitters looking for an unapologetic pro-life stance. Some say he supported Rick Warren's "Whole Life" idea (that we are not to be concerned merely with conception through birth, but the after birth as well).
McCain won: He spoke with deliberateness, spoke concisely, made remarks consistent with the conservative wing of the R party. While detractors said he pandered (didn't actually look at Rick as he spoke etc.), fans felt he nailed the questions with black and white answers suited to his audience. His stories engaged viewers and audience alike, his style showed more confidence and panache than anyone expected. His overall tone didn't just reassure evangelicals who were unenthusiastic about his candidacy; he gave them reasons to vote for him with some level of conviction.
Warren won: Lots of people have said that Warren won - he drew the long stick, getting the two candidates together for the first time in front of the nation. He made his church, his constituency, his worldview a player in the election in a way unprecedented, even when Bush was running away with the evangelical vote.
My take on all this, though, diverges. I'd say the Democratic party won.
Here's why. Evangelicals are no longer a monolithic block. Let's look at how fractured these evangelicals have become. For the last four years, a growing number of malcontents within the evangelical Republican community have voiced their shift in focus from heaven-hell theology to social justice. This shift has enabled formerly hardcore Republicans to consider the party platform of the Democrats. The lack of progress in the laws related to abortion under Republican presidents and a Republican congress has unmasked the "wedge issue" nature of that platform item. Pro-life is a Republican slogan, not a conviction among the powers that be. That means, for the first time since Reagan, committed pro-lifers have had to ask what actually reduces (in real numbers) the abortion rate (not just how can the laws be changed).
Turns out social programs help: inner city education and job training, birth control and health care options do give unwed mothers alternatives to abortion. The party who cares more about that is the Democratic party.
Additionally, the war has become a moral issue for Christians. Can we justify supporting a president and party that lied to the American people to start a war in a sovereign state? Can we keep sending our young people into a civil war that we can't contain or control?
McCain represents more of the same: a commitment to the platform that got George Bush elected. He has even back pedaled on his more moderate positions (he has a record of supporting stem cell research, for instance) in order to provide reassurance to doubting hardcore, xtn Republicans. What he is not calculating is that there is a growing number of evangelicals who don't want to hear the same old answers.
Those evangelicals are interested in Obama. Abortion is the number one stumbling block for those Republicans. They want to believe that a changed view (a Democratic view) of economics, the government's role in social welfare programs, diplomacy over war, and increased taxes would be a more moral vision than the one that's failed them for the last eight+ years. They want to believe that abortions (the real ones, not the theory or laws about them) will go down under a changed model of leadership.
McCain did nothing to reassure those evangelicals. He merely corralled the already hardcore right that he is the next Bush, but with more conviction and better war stories.
For the remaining disaffected, new theology evangelicals (the McClaren followers, the emergents, the college kids who can't relate to Dobson or Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity), Obama represents a risk they are more and more willing to take.
What that means, then, is that the evangelical "base" is fractured. It only takes a small percentage to undermine the "block vote" they once represented. And that is why I say that Warren's open forum was actually a win for Democrats. The truth is, even just hosting it proves the evangelical world has gone through a shift. There is no way in hell (I mean it) that Clinton would ever have been invited to an evangelical church for a conversation with the Republican candidate.
Today, you can say you are voting Obama and not feel that your church membership or salvation are suddenly in question. That's what change means. Proof that evangelicals won't be the key demographic this time.
GObama 08!
Sunday, August 17, 2008
Have to post the happy family photo
because yesterday was a great day! Brooke Christensen (like a daughter to me) is leaving for Amsterdam to plant a church with a team of people and we were all at her family's house in Columbus to say goodbye. This is one of those photos that Johannah thinks is too posed and that took much cajoling and guilt-tripping of the teenage and adult children to produce, but in the end, makes parents oh-so-very happy. :)
Click to enlarge.
(Left to right: Caitrin, Jacob, Julie, Jon, Liam, Noah, Johannah)
Saturday, August 16, 2008
Liam and Linkin Park
I wasn't the only parent attending this concert with a teen (or younger kid!). But I might have been the only parent who knew the lyrics to all the songs, jumped up and down (which is not a risk-free proposition for a mother who's given birth five times) and devil horns'ed Chester and Mike.
I don't know what it is about Linkin Park, but I love that band. Their sound is original for rock, Chester and Mike trade off so easily and with what appears to be genuine respect for what each one brings to the table. Their lyrics accurately (painfully) depict the inner world of a teen misunderstood by a parent (a dad!) or a lover or a friend.
Pathos combined with trademark screams, DJ, drums, killer guitars... such an emotional concert. Cathartic.
Chester Bennington exerts relentless energy on the stage (akin to a young Bono - there I said it!). He doesn't waste vocal chords or time talking to the audience about getting drunk or smoking weed (like the "still not prime time" bands that went before LP). He puts everything (rippling muscles, voice, soul and tattoos) into each lyric. I have no idea how he sustains the melodic, tuneful part of his voice when he gives each scream the maximum "nails on the blackboard" screech that lasts as long as Michael Phelps under water after a turn. Some people are born to perform. Chester is one of them.The combination of lights (awesome light show), intensity of performance, the tight band which never missed a note, chord change or drum beat, and the natural, friendly interplay between the two front men make Linkin Park a likely candidate to be one of those "great bands" we all feel glad to have seen in the early years. I told Liam that when he's in his thirties, I fully expect him to take one of his kids to see LP and he'll be saying he saw them when they only had three-ish albums to draw from.
I left exhausted... in the happiest way. Liam and I hugged, sang, shouted, jumped, and hugged again. Nothing but exhilaration. And further proof that I'm just not indie at core. Give me rock... but make it fresh.
Set list to come.
Russ Noland dies of massive heart attack last night
Stratopastor was an e-friend. He is the second e-friend I've known who's died of a heart attack. It's such a deeply sad feeling to lose someone you liked online - no way to connect to the family, an "erasure" of their virtual presence.
Russ was a terrific man - humorous, interested, a good thinker, a good guitar player... (at least so he said [g]) and the genuine article as far as Christianity is concerned. He will be missed.
Namaste Russ.
Russ was a terrific man - humorous, interested, a good thinker, a good guitar player... (at least so he said [g]) and the genuine article as far as Christianity is concerned. He will be missed.
Namaste Russ.
Friday, August 15, 2008
Matthew 25 Obama ad
Check it out! Brian McLaren and Matthew 25 have created an ad for Senator Obama.
Obama and McCain will be at Saddleback church on Sunday too. V. Interesting.
Wonder how xtns will vote, particularly those emergent ones. I like these developments.
Obama and McCain will be at Saddleback church on Sunday too. V. Interesting.
Wonder how xtns will vote, particularly those emergent ones. I like these developments.
Thursday, August 14, 2008
Wonder how the Chinese blog?
We did. In fact, we were interested to know how the Chinese type anything into a keyboard with literally thousands of characters (pictograms) to choose from. So thanks to the Almighty Google, we discovered the complex world of typing in a non-phonetic system.
Check out this story.
Aren't you loving all this exposure to China? Isn't it, too, a bit, um, intimidating?
Google has launched a self-promoting Chinese-language blog, not long after unveiling its controversial Chinese search engine last month. According to the Washington Post, China already has as many as 16 million bloggers. How do you type Chinese characters on a keyboard?All I can think after reading about how they handle the idea of keyboard and writing is that their brains must be a heck of a lot more agile than ours as they juggle the hundreds of micro-thoughts and adjustments we never have to face.
Check out this story.
In the Peoples' Republic of China, most computer users type out their Chinese in transliteration, using the standard Roman alphabet keys on a QWERTY keyboard. To generate a character, you type out its sound according to the same spelling system—called Pinyin—that represents the name of China's capital with the word "Beijing." The computer automatically converts the Pinyin spelling to the correct Chinese characters on the screen.
Or at least it's supposed to. There are lots of Chinese words that sound similar but look different on paper. If you're using the Pinyin input method, you'll have to put in some extra effort to make sure the right characters show up onscreen. First, you can follow a syllable with a digit, to indicate which of several intonations you want. If the computer still doesn't have enough information to pick a character, you'll have to choose from a pop-up list of possibilities.
Aren't you loving all this exposure to China? Isn't it, too, a bit, um, intimidating?
Wednesday, August 13, 2008
8 good reasons men are lying liars
I miss writing on my blog so I'm going to use it for writing practice. Today's topic: "Give 8 good reasons it is okay for men to lie."
Ready go:
Men lie. Margaritas make me drunk and Linkin Park screams. So what else is new? Well "good reasons" would be the new part. Let's do a little "top eight at 4:48" ala David, the liar, Letterman.
Number 8: A good reason to lie is to impress middle aged friends with what a stud you were as a gangly youth.
Number 7: An equally good reason to lie is to impress a female who doesn't actually care if you were a kick-ass Green Beret or simply like to wear those little hats as a fashion statement.
Number 6: Men justify lying by reminding us that everyone does it and they do it better than everyone else.
Number 5: It's a good idea to lie, they reason, if the jeans she is wearing really do make her look fat.
Number 4: Men rationalize lying by lying about lying saying that they don't lie and then they believe themselves and feel like they are good human beings who would never lie except about lying and sex with Monica Lewinsky or a gay hooker on meth in Denver.
Number 3: It is always okay to lie if it saves money or cheats the IRS.
Number 2: Lying is always okay if you are a senator who plays footsies in a men's bathroom.
Number 1 good reason that men lie: They know their women will forgive them.
Hey that was cathartic. We'll try that again tomorrow. Baby steps out of gloom.
Ready go:
Men lie. Margaritas make me drunk and Linkin Park screams. So what else is new? Well "good reasons" would be the new part. Let's do a little "top eight at 4:48" ala David, the liar, Letterman.
Number 8: A good reason to lie is to impress middle aged friends with what a stud you were as a gangly youth.
Number 7: An equally good reason to lie is to impress a female who doesn't actually care if you were a kick-ass Green Beret or simply like to wear those little hats as a fashion statement.
Number 6: Men justify lying by reminding us that everyone does it and they do it better than everyone else.
Number 5: It's a good idea to lie, they reason, if the jeans she is wearing really do make her look fat.
Number 4: Men rationalize lying by lying about lying saying that they don't lie and then they believe themselves and feel like they are good human beings who would never lie except about lying and sex with Monica Lewinsky or a gay hooker on meth in Denver.
Number 3: It is always okay to lie if it saves money or cheats the IRS.
Number 2: Lying is always okay if you are a senator who plays footsies in a men's bathroom.
Number 1 good reason that men lie: They know their women will forgive them.
Hey that was cathartic. We'll try that again tomorrow. Baby steps out of gloom.
Monday, August 11, 2008
A weekly blog perhaps?
Three steps to kill your blog:
1. Go to therapy. Seriously, if you just don't want to blog like ever again, have some female mid-thirties MFCC crawl into your brain every week where she fishes around for messy, painful stuff to process that you can't possibly share with all the Internets. Then do her homework assignments (with puffy eyes and snotty nose) about things like "What do I want, desire, need?" (oh so "I'm okay; You're okay" seventies, I know) and "How can I forgive myself for not being perfect during my first 25 years as an adult?" Yeah, that'll do it. Surefire writing block creator.
But if that isn't enough for you, you can take the next two blog killer steps.
2. Addict thyself to Twitter. It's like blogging but there's this wonderful character counter that yells at you to hurry up and finish before it CUTS YOU OFF. I get it all said in a few stream of consciousness words instead of blathering paragraphs. Right? I mean nice break for you, doncha think? (P.S. Follow me! Or let me follow you...)
3. Join a Fantasy Football league. It's that time, mes freres. So that means researching, radio, distraction...
I will be back to the blog (you know, once I include it on the therapist list of things I "want, need, desire, crave, have to have.") But for now, Twitter and FB are where you can find me more reliably. Or email me!
1. Go to therapy. Seriously, if you just don't want to blog like ever again, have some female mid-thirties MFCC crawl into your brain every week where she fishes around for messy, painful stuff to process that you can't possibly share with all the Internets. Then do her homework assignments (with puffy eyes and snotty nose) about things like "What do I want, desire, need?" (oh so "I'm okay; You're okay" seventies, I know) and "How can I forgive myself for not being perfect during my first 25 years as an adult?" Yeah, that'll do it. Surefire writing block creator.
But if that isn't enough for you, you can take the next two blog killer steps.
2. Addict thyself to Twitter. It's like blogging but there's this wonderful character counter that yells at you to hurry up and finish before it CUTS YOU OFF. I get it all said in a few stream of consciousness words instead of blathering paragraphs. Right? I mean nice break for you, doncha think? (P.S. Follow me! Or let me follow you...)
3. Join a Fantasy Football league. It's that time, mes freres. So that means researching, radio, distraction...
I will be back to the blog (you know, once I include it on the therapist list of things I "want, need, desire, crave, have to have.") But for now, Twitter and FB are where you can find me more reliably. Or email me!
Sunday, August 03, 2008
Ferrets times two
There's a reason we say "ferret out a problem." Liam brought home two chicas today: Sugar and Bandit. They wiggled and wormed their way into every nook and cranny of our house within minutes of their arrival. Long skinny noses and slinky bodies slipped between dresser and wall, under covers, inside drawers, up the slippery plastic covering a prom dress and flattening themselves to squeeze into spaces not even an inch high.
These two are well tamed. We knew they were when we entered the apt. where they've been living and one of them hung "feather boa" style around a two year old boy's neck! He gripped the little she-devil by the middle and slung her down so quickly, I wondered if she'd nip his fingers. Rather, she put up with the acrobatics nonplussed and then slunk away on the carpet without twitching a whisker which is when I knew they'd be perfect for our family.
I'll post photos once I take a few. Liam is our animal lover. He used to have a pair of rats, but they only lived two years and had to be put to sleep when they developed tumors. (I knew they shouldn't drink Fresca?)
Ferrets live a bit longer (about 7 years) and are not known for any saccharine addictions.
And what about me? Well, life moves about like molasses these days. I've never felt the march of time to be more dirge-like. But I'll take it. Summer is here and I get to wear tank tops and flip flops. That counts for something! What's new where you are?
These two are well tamed. We knew they were when we entered the apt. where they've been living and one of them hung "feather boa" style around a two year old boy's neck! He gripped the little she-devil by the middle and slung her down so quickly, I wondered if she'd nip his fingers. Rather, she put up with the acrobatics nonplussed and then slunk away on the carpet without twitching a whisker which is when I knew they'd be perfect for our family.
I'll post photos once I take a few. Liam is our animal lover. He used to have a pair of rats, but they only lived two years and had to be put to sleep when they developed tumors. (I knew they shouldn't drink Fresca?)
Ferrets live a bit longer (about 7 years) and are not known for any saccharine addictions.
And what about me? Well, life moves about like molasses these days. I've never felt the march of time to be more dirge-like. But I'll take it. Summer is here and I get to wear tank tops and flip flops. That counts for something! What's new where you are?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)