“Probably the saddest thing you'll ever see is a mosquito sucking on a mummy. Forget it, little friend.”
- Jack Handey, from Saturday Night Live
Thursday, March 26, 2009
Saturday, March 21, 2009
Irony Alert.
Today, this unfortunate kid came in the door and asked for an application.
You may be (ARE) thinking: what's so funny here?
The whole situation ties together once you know what his T-shirt said:
"Genius by Birth / Slacker by Choice"
Hmmmm....
Friday, March 20, 2009
Wednesday, March 18, 2009
"Ironic" by Alanis Morrissette
This quote from comedian Ed Byrne is right on the money about this song:
"The only ironic thing about that song is it's called ironic and it's written by a woman who doesn't know what irony is. That's quite ironic."
"The only ironic thing about that song is it's called ironic and it's written by a woman who doesn't know what irony is. That's quite ironic."
Monday, March 16, 2009
Promising Signs of a Developing Sense of Humor
My kids love this character, Katie, from the movie (she's NOT in the book!), "Horton Hears a Who!" She is such a bizarre addition to this movie, which is already a bit off-kilter since it's from the mind of Dr. Seuss. The scene pictured above makes them crack up, especially Zoe, who can imitate her to a T.
I love it because the humor is weird. It makes me have hope in my little chillun. They will surely go far.
Watch this to get the full effect.
Saturday, March 14, 2009
"Ministry of Information": A Larger-Than-Life Government
Is our government becoming something akin to this? This movie, "Brazil", is an excellent (and yes, highly surreal - this is a Terry Gilliam film, after all) glimpse into a future that is all too near. Although it leans heavily on themes from George Orwell's prophetic "1984," the story still has its own voice. There are many more scenes similar to this one, but I love the over-the-top satire of what excessive government work looks like. If you get a chance to see this movie, I believe you'll enjoy it. It is difficult to figure out, at times, but that's what makes it awesome; you have to decipher and put some "work" into viewing it to make ends meet. Not an easily digestible piece of art, but well worth it. The set design and camerawork are astounding.
Monday, March 09, 2009
Obama NickJr PSA
OK - try to imagine if there was something akin to this made about President Bush. Having a difficult time? That right. Because it would be something that would NEVER HAPPEN. This is hilarious, in the sense that it makes you laugh at the absurdity and cry at how our children are being indoctrinated.
Wait a minute..... wait a minute. It's not really biased. Especially the part that says, "...and he writes WONDERFUL speeches!"
My face is frozen in a stunned position.
Thursday, February 26, 2009
Discovery
Last night, I had a minor epiphany. I went to a local business establishment and ended up talking with the employee at the check-out counter for about 5 minutes. When I had gone to this place before, I remember noticing this guy and kind of laughing to myself. He looked like something out of the early 80's, in terms of what he wore and how his hair was styled. I even remember laughing with my Father-in-law about this same guy as we left this place a few weeks ago.
It's funny, but I realized that stereotypes are the language of an outsider. True, there are reasons for stereotypes. Mainly, that they contain some degree of truth about their subject. But, they paint in broad strokes and are a vague impression of said subject. By no means do they take into account the individual.
As I was driving home, I thought about how nice this guy was. I thought about our discussions involving having children and being a Dad. I thought about how he's working 2 jobs to make ends meet. I also appreciated how truly inquisitive he was about my job and my life after graduating from UGA, among other things. We actually had some similarities.
I saw him in a new light because I had begun to get to know him. It was a simple thing, but profound. I think if we all knew people better, it would go a long way toward increasing our understanding and empathy. Of course, you can't know everyone on that level. Simply being aware that there's "more than meets the eye" is a powerful reminder that everyone's life is a novel - full of detail and unique experiences. That being said, we're all more similar than we imagine.
It's funny, but I realized that stereotypes are the language of an outsider. True, there are reasons for stereotypes. Mainly, that they contain some degree of truth about their subject. But, they paint in broad strokes and are a vague impression of said subject. By no means do they take into account the individual.
As I was driving home, I thought about how nice this guy was. I thought about our discussions involving having children and being a Dad. I thought about how he's working 2 jobs to make ends meet. I also appreciated how truly inquisitive he was about my job and my life after graduating from UGA, among other things. We actually had some similarities.
I saw him in a new light because I had begun to get to know him. It was a simple thing, but profound. I think if we all knew people better, it would go a long way toward increasing our understanding and empathy. Of course, you can't know everyone on that level. Simply being aware that there's "more than meets the eye" is a powerful reminder that everyone's life is a novel - full of detail and unique experiences. That being said, we're all more similar than we imagine.
Thursday, February 12, 2009
Good Point
This is a hypothetical question posed to Pres. Obama. It contains some surprising figures, comparing the economy in the 80's to our current one. Interesting points by Larry Elder.
"Mr. President, this is a two-part question. In your opening statement, you called today's economic situation "the most profound economic emergency since the Great Depression" and later "the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression." But in the 1981-82 recession, unemployment reached 10.8 percent in 1982 versus 7.6 today. Reagan inherited an annual inflation rate of 13.5 percent, while you, sir, came in with a 0.1 percent inflation rate. Prime interest rates reached 21.5 percent at the end of 1980, compared with 3.25 percent at the end of 2008. Reagan did not ask for a "rescue" or "bailout" package. He cut taxes and slowed the rate of domestic spending. Unemployment, inflation and interest rates went down. The Treasury collected more revenue than ever. First, how then -- at least so far -- is this the greatest economic crisis since the Great Depression? And second, given Reagan's success, why not cut taxes, reduce domestic spending, and leave taxpayers and consumers with more money to save, spend and invest?"
The Old Gipper was a wise one. Here is the link to the full article this question originated from. Here's one more bonus quote from Ronnie:
"Government's view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it." - Ronald Reagan
"Mr. President, this is a two-part question. In your opening statement, you called today's economic situation "the most profound economic emergency since the Great Depression" and later "the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression." But in the 1981-82 recession, unemployment reached 10.8 percent in 1982 versus 7.6 today. Reagan inherited an annual inflation rate of 13.5 percent, while you, sir, came in with a 0.1 percent inflation rate. Prime interest rates reached 21.5 percent at the end of 1980, compared with 3.25 percent at the end of 2008. Reagan did not ask for a "rescue" or "bailout" package. He cut taxes and slowed the rate of domestic spending. Unemployment, inflation and interest rates went down. The Treasury collected more revenue than ever. First, how then -- at least so far -- is this the greatest economic crisis since the Great Depression? And second, given Reagan's success, why not cut taxes, reduce domestic spending, and leave taxpayers and consumers with more money to save, spend and invest?"
The Old Gipper was a wise one. Here is the link to the full article this question originated from. Here's one more bonus quote from Ronnie:
"Government's view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it." - Ronald Reagan
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
Sweet Words
I've noticed, since the first time Obama came on the scene, how everyone is so amazed at his eloquence. His way with words. I admit, he is a polished speaker, no doubt about it. If that is all he is, though, we might as well have elected a trained actor or a poet. If someone is applauded merely for their ability to speak words in an artful way, is that enough?
There could be a man on the corner of the city sidewalk, who plays with words like an artist. He could also be mentally deranged. But, hey, his words sound great!
The point I'm making is that wordplay, alone, is a cheap prize. Something else to be treasured, but rarely is these days, is wisdom. Is Barack Obama a wise man? That's where I'm not sure.
He is the product and darling of the university system. Where our universities were once institutions of deep learning, nowadays, they are a far cry from those past places. Now, we have loads of professors who are learned and intelligent people, no doubt, but aren't necessarily wise. Some are, I'm sure. The vast majority, though, are persons whose minds are full of knowledge. Is knowledge enough? Obama has plenty of knowledge, I would imagine.
Ultimately, our world is caving in on itself and the emptiness of our own vanity. We love to appear smart. We love to appear beautiful. Do we love wisdom? I don't see our government being guided by wisdom. The stimulus package just passed in the Senate looks eerily similar, in concept, to Roosevelt's "New Deal." We're still haunted by some of these New Deal systems: social security, Fannie Mae. Are they still causing trouble today? Yes. Just look at the role Fannie Mae played in the recent housing debacle.
Some verses from 2 Timothy come to mind:
"For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths." 2 Timothy 4:3&4
This brings to mind all kinds of things - from talk shows, to infomercials, to educators, to government leaders.
Who is truly wise in this day and age?
There could be a man on the corner of the city sidewalk, who plays with words like an artist. He could also be mentally deranged. But, hey, his words sound great!
The point I'm making is that wordplay, alone, is a cheap prize. Something else to be treasured, but rarely is these days, is wisdom. Is Barack Obama a wise man? That's where I'm not sure.
He is the product and darling of the university system. Where our universities were once institutions of deep learning, nowadays, they are a far cry from those past places. Now, we have loads of professors who are learned and intelligent people, no doubt, but aren't necessarily wise. Some are, I'm sure. The vast majority, though, are persons whose minds are full of knowledge. Is knowledge enough? Obama has plenty of knowledge, I would imagine.
Ultimately, our world is caving in on itself and the emptiness of our own vanity. We love to appear smart. We love to appear beautiful. Do we love wisdom? I don't see our government being guided by wisdom. The stimulus package just passed in the Senate looks eerily similar, in concept, to Roosevelt's "New Deal." We're still haunted by some of these New Deal systems: social security, Fannie Mae. Are they still causing trouble today? Yes. Just look at the role Fannie Mae played in the recent housing debacle.
Some verses from 2 Timothy come to mind:
"For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths." 2 Timothy 4:3&4
This brings to mind all kinds of things - from talk shows, to infomercials, to educators, to government leaders.
Who is truly wise in this day and age?
Saturday, February 07, 2009
Saturday, January 24, 2009
Enemy Territory for News?
Anyone else find it funny that the headquarters for both Fox News and CNN are located in areas that (generally) are opposite the political persuasion of each station? You'd think someone would suggest a location swap.
Maybe it's good for them, in some way. The antagonism might serve as a fuel, of sorts.
Maybe it's good for them, in some way. The antagonism might serve as a fuel, of sorts.
Thursday, January 22, 2009
New Musics!
First, U2 is back on the move. Their new album is on the horizon (oh. that was horrible.. he he). Here is the first single:
Get On Your Boots
This new Coldplay video is quite clever, I think. Puppets - ha!
Life in Technicolor ii
Get On Your Boots
This new Coldplay video is quite clever, I think. Puppets - ha!
Life in Technicolor ii
Wednesday, January 21, 2009
Change has come, indeed
Well, here we are - officially into the Obama administration. It's funny, but there's been a complete and utter turn-around in the general media's attitude. On everything and everywhere you hear the message of "Let's work TOGETHER!" and "We are one." Where was this feeling for the last 8 years? So, now we're supposed to be one, big family? Obama IS magic!
This article by David Limbaugh (note to those who hate Rush: this is NOT *that* Limbaugh) says it better than I can. My above-written paragraph is just a synopsis of one of his points.
I do acknowledge the historical implications and importance of Obama being President. Of course. But, I'm appalled (not surprised, though) at how the media has turned on a dime and changed it's tune. It's all very, very subjective.
This article by David Limbaugh (note to those who hate Rush: this is NOT *that* Limbaugh) says it better than I can. My above-written paragraph is just a synopsis of one of his points.
I do acknowledge the historical implications and importance of Obama being President. Of course. But, I'm appalled (not surprised, though) at how the media has turned on a dime and changed it's tune. It's all very, very subjective.
Thursday, December 18, 2008
Penn Says: A Gift of a Bible
This is interesting. An impact was made on this entertainer, Penn (who is an atheist), by someone simply being kind and bold. The way he words his response is very thoughtful and intriguing.
Wednesday, December 10, 2008
Mute Math - Reset
Brad W. had posted a music video awhile back (the awesomeness known as "Sabotage").
I post this live clip of MuteMath, not only to let people know about them who might not have seen them before, but in anticipation of a new album from them. Should be out soon. This whole band are amazing musicians. The drummer is phenomenal. The interplay between the bass guitar and the drums is fantastic. Fans of rhythm will appreciate this.
Sunday, December 07, 2008
The Comfort of...Jeans
I saw this commercial the other day. Got me to thinking more about it than I probably should. It had Brett Favre, quarterback extraordinaire, talking about his Wrangler jeans. He spoke about how his dog gives him comfort, and how his jeans do, too. I suppose the guy is unmarried, so his dog is his best friend, I guess? Anyway, it made me think about modern advertising.
So many families are splintered apart. Many individuals experience isolation and a lack of community. While I highly doubt that anyone takes the comfort of blue jeans past a fleeting thought, it's funny the way a company will hire a celebrity to pimp their product with steep claims of satisfaction. Who knows if Mr. Favre is a lonely person in his personal life (heck, he's got his dog), but we all know now that his jeans give him comfort. Even if it is subliminal, someone out there in the world who sees this commercial and is feeling incomplete in some way or another might take to the streets in search of the Wrangler jeans. I know it's silly and ridiculous, but I think this is the power of advertising.
Wrangler paid loads of money to purchase the power of Favre's fame. Favre says these clothes give him comfort. They're trying to sell a product to make money; he's making money from his reputation and talent on the football field. Wrangler has a vested interest in the public's response to Brett Favre and they're betting that you want comfort. To compound the situation with irony, who knows if Favre even wore Wranglers before this commercial contract? I'm sure he has an endless supply now, but does he really find comfort in his jeans?
Some might be laughing or pounding their head on the wall. "Why are you bemoaning this stupid jeans commercial," you might ask. It's because when I listen to what's pounded into us, day in and day out, I find it astounding. Would anyone from the previous century have thought their pants give them comfort?? The pants might've been awful back then, for all I know. Past a strictly functional appreciation of the clothing, would anyone think twice about it? I doubt it. But here we are, all evolved on the brink of 2009, listening to someone who we recognize but don't personally know, talk about how his jeans and dog are a source of comfort for him. How far we've come.
I'm thankful for my family. I'm thankful for a relationship with God. And I'm thinking I might enjoy some century-old pair of pants that's really scratchy and terrible. At least I wouldn't bank my hopes for joy on them.
So many families are splintered apart. Many individuals experience isolation and a lack of community. While I highly doubt that anyone takes the comfort of blue jeans past a fleeting thought, it's funny the way a company will hire a celebrity to pimp their product with steep claims of satisfaction. Who knows if Mr. Favre is a lonely person in his personal life (heck, he's got his dog), but we all know now that his jeans give him comfort. Even if it is subliminal, someone out there in the world who sees this commercial and is feeling incomplete in some way or another might take to the streets in search of the Wrangler jeans. I know it's silly and ridiculous, but I think this is the power of advertising.
Wrangler paid loads of money to purchase the power of Favre's fame. Favre says these clothes give him comfort. They're trying to sell a product to make money; he's making money from his reputation and talent on the football field. Wrangler has a vested interest in the public's response to Brett Favre and they're betting that you want comfort. To compound the situation with irony, who knows if Favre even wore Wranglers before this commercial contract? I'm sure he has an endless supply now, but does he really find comfort in his jeans?
Some might be laughing or pounding their head on the wall. "Why are you bemoaning this stupid jeans commercial," you might ask. It's because when I listen to what's pounded into us, day in and day out, I find it astounding. Would anyone from the previous century have thought their pants give them comfort?? The pants might've been awful back then, for all I know. Past a strictly functional appreciation of the clothing, would anyone think twice about it? I doubt it. But here we are, all evolved on the brink of 2009, listening to someone who we recognize but don't personally know, talk about how his jeans and dog are a source of comfort for him. How far we've come.
I'm thankful for my family. I'm thankful for a relationship with God. And I'm thinking I might enjoy some century-old pair of pants that's really scratchy and terrible. At least I wouldn't bank my hopes for joy on them.
Monday, December 01, 2008
Saving the World
I work for a company that's "green." If you're not familiar, that means we're ecologically aware. We try to encourage recycling whenever possible to reduce our carbon footprint. Again, to some a familiar term.... to others, total gibberish.
This being said, I began to really think about this today at work. I'm all for doing our part to reduce waste and keep things clean. However, when you go deeper into this subject, people typically split into two factions. One group typically believes that recycling isn't super-important. They're either supportive of it, but not passionate (that's where I live) or they're totally opposed to it and think it's a waste of time. The other group is strongly supportive, to the point to being dogmatic and even religious about it.
There's two ideologies at work, I believe, that form the basis for these two group's attitudes towards recycling. One mode of thought involves the belief that we're not fully responsible for the ultimate destiny of the earth. The other set of beliefs holds that it is our full and sovereign duty to uphold the earth...or else. While I'm all for doing what we can to save paper, reduce waste, re-use materials, I'm not going to obsess over it and spend all my time and energy to make sure I do that. I'll do it when I can and work to change my habits, but I don't feel dread that, if I don't save everything, the earth will perish. I believe the earth is on a timetable that God is in control of and ultimately, that God will redeem this earth. Do I trash it in the meantime? No. But, I don't feel the weight of the impossible task of trying to sustain the earth.
The second set of beliefs - the ones supporting the belief that we are fully responsible for the sustainability of the earth - doesn't hold to the worldview of a God who's in control, at least as far as I can figure or conclude. If so, why would there be such a push to "save the world," as if we had the ability to even do that? I don't agree with a humanist POV, which imagines it possible that we are not only responsible for saving the planet, but that we are even capable of that feat. Even if every human alive were to be on the same team, in one accord of effort, I don't think we could sustain life or all the resources indefinitely. I don't believe it was meant to be around, in its current state, forever.
What are your thoughts on this issue?
This being said, I began to really think about this today at work. I'm all for doing our part to reduce waste and keep things clean. However, when you go deeper into this subject, people typically split into two factions. One group typically believes that recycling isn't super-important. They're either supportive of it, but not passionate (that's where I live) or they're totally opposed to it and think it's a waste of time. The other group is strongly supportive, to the point to being dogmatic and even religious about it.
There's two ideologies at work, I believe, that form the basis for these two group's attitudes towards recycling. One mode of thought involves the belief that we're not fully responsible for the ultimate destiny of the earth. The other set of beliefs holds that it is our full and sovereign duty to uphold the earth...or else. While I'm all for doing what we can to save paper, reduce waste, re-use materials, I'm not going to obsess over it and spend all my time and energy to make sure I do that. I'll do it when I can and work to change my habits, but I don't feel dread that, if I don't save everything, the earth will perish. I believe the earth is on a timetable that God is in control of and ultimately, that God will redeem this earth. Do I trash it in the meantime? No. But, I don't feel the weight of the impossible task of trying to sustain the earth.
The second set of beliefs - the ones supporting the belief that we are fully responsible for the sustainability of the earth - doesn't hold to the worldview of a God who's in control, at least as far as I can figure or conclude. If so, why would there be such a push to "save the world," as if we had the ability to even do that? I don't agree with a humanist POV, which imagines it possible that we are not only responsible for saving the planet, but that we are even capable of that feat. Even if every human alive were to be on the same team, in one accord of effort, I don't think we could sustain life or all the resources indefinitely. I don't believe it was meant to be around, in its current state, forever.
What are your thoughts on this issue?
Saturday, November 15, 2008
Trustworthy History
Moving past any sort of political post it seems.......
Was thinking today about history and memories. How things are told. When someone writes a history of something, or even if they write an autobiography, how trusted can that story be? We tend to gloss things over and only "remember" things that are more than likely better than they really were. So, things are subjectively related. How does that make you feel about your own stories? How does it make you feel about what you'd read in school? Or something you're reading now?
We usually make things more dramatic than they truly were, too. "Fish stories," if you will. What do we really know about things in the past? Do we think we're that much different than those who came before us? Maybe not. We all experience the same minutiae, the same seemingly pointless things that don't "mean" anything grand and profound. Those who grew up in generations past were human, just like we are now. They went through the same things we do now, outside of the historical and chronological differences which are unavoidable.
For some reason, I know I find myself somehow imagining that "those people" were so different from myself. Their style, the look on their faces - just don't seem to fit the modern world I inhabit. But something inside me knows this can't be true. I know I came from the same places they came from. I know they went through some of the same struggles I go through now. I know this because we're both participants in the human condition.
Some of the details could be more advantageous to creating a better story, so I can't always trust if something happened just the way it's related. But - I can trust that in the humdrum of normal affairs, that guy from 200 years ago was trying to figure out life the same way I am today.
Was thinking today about history and memories. How things are told. When someone writes a history of something, or even if they write an autobiography, how trusted can that story be? We tend to gloss things over and only "remember" things that are more than likely better than they really were. So, things are subjectively related. How does that make you feel about your own stories? How does it make you feel about what you'd read in school? Or something you're reading now?
We usually make things more dramatic than they truly were, too. "Fish stories," if you will. What do we really know about things in the past? Do we think we're that much different than those who came before us? Maybe not. We all experience the same minutiae, the same seemingly pointless things that don't "mean" anything grand and profound. Those who grew up in generations past were human, just like we are now. They went through the same things we do now, outside of the historical and chronological differences which are unavoidable.
For some reason, I know I find myself somehow imagining that "those people" were so different from myself. Their style, the look on their faces - just don't seem to fit the modern world I inhabit. But something inside me knows this can't be true. I know I came from the same places they came from. I know they went through some of the same struggles I go through now. I know this because we're both participants in the human condition.
Some of the details could be more advantageous to creating a better story, so I can't always trust if something happened just the way it's related. But - I can trust that in the humdrum of normal affairs, that guy from 200 years ago was trying to figure out life the same way I am today.
Wednesday, November 05, 2008
What Worries Me
OK, it's been awhile since any posts. I was inching towards political "out-of-controlness."
Now that the election's behind us, it's time to look ahead. Obama is in. Our next President and Commander-in-Chief. A good friend, Justin B, had written a wise statement (not sure if he had the original thought, but regardless, it's truth) about B.O. He said that if B.O. had tried to join the FBI, he would've been rejected based on his past associations. Well - now he's leader of the free world.
I got to thinking about the next 4 years. Here's what is worrisome. Because a large majority of the reason for Barack's victory is found in the so-called "youth vote," you can examine some of "youth's" negative tendencies and characteristics. Youth tends to be idealistic and sometimes arrogant (ignorantly casting a blind eye to wisdom). I sense that, because most of the youth will feel this is "their" President, anything said about Barack appearing to be critical will be defended out of pride. Not wanting to own up to any failure (surely this will be inevitable on some situations in the next 4 years, seeing as Obama is green as they come), they will fight, tooth and nail, to justify all of B.O.'s actions and decisions. It will become tied up in their own self-worth. You can bet on this.
The other thing, that has been cited before by many others, is the "racism card." I'm joining the chorus and agreeing that many, many viable disagreements will be written off as "racist." If you disagree or are critical of B.O., you are tagged "racist." Count on this happening. However, if Obama is to get any kind of respect, he will have to call this down and ask for some degree of rationality in judging people's critical eye. Unless he is off-the-charts arrogant (and I believe he's got the intelligence and discernment to realize it), he will do this early on in his administration to get it cleared off the table and dealt with. If he does not address it, I worry for a "bullet-proof" administration that will not accept any criticism and accept only the one-sided praise of its partisan base. That would truly be the "lone ranger" mentality that Bush has been accused of for the past several years.
I do trust that God is in ultimate control and authority. We survived Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton. As another friend pointed out, we might do good to settle down and be patient; it takes a Carter to get a Reagan.
Now that the election's behind us, it's time to look ahead. Obama is in. Our next President and Commander-in-Chief. A good friend, Justin B, had written a wise statement (not sure if he had the original thought, but regardless, it's truth) about B.O. He said that if B.O. had tried to join the FBI, he would've been rejected based on his past associations. Well - now he's leader of the free world.
I got to thinking about the next 4 years. Here's what is worrisome. Because a large majority of the reason for Barack's victory is found in the so-called "youth vote," you can examine some of "youth's" negative tendencies and characteristics. Youth tends to be idealistic and sometimes arrogant (ignorantly casting a blind eye to wisdom). I sense that, because most of the youth will feel this is "their" President, anything said about Barack appearing to be critical will be defended out of pride. Not wanting to own up to any failure (surely this will be inevitable on some situations in the next 4 years, seeing as Obama is green as they come), they will fight, tooth and nail, to justify all of B.O.'s actions and decisions. It will become tied up in their own self-worth. You can bet on this.
The other thing, that has been cited before by many others, is the "racism card." I'm joining the chorus and agreeing that many, many viable disagreements will be written off as "racist." If you disagree or are critical of B.O., you are tagged "racist." Count on this happening. However, if Obama is to get any kind of respect, he will have to call this down and ask for some degree of rationality in judging people's critical eye. Unless he is off-the-charts arrogant (and I believe he's got the intelligence and discernment to realize it), he will do this early on in his administration to get it cleared off the table and dealt with. If he does not address it, I worry for a "bullet-proof" administration that will not accept any criticism and accept only the one-sided praise of its partisan base. That would truly be the "lone ranger" mentality that Bush has been accused of for the past several years.
I do trust that God is in ultimate control and authority. We survived Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton. As another friend pointed out, we might do good to settle down and be patient; it takes a Carter to get a Reagan.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
