Saturday, October 11, 2008

You Betcha!


Well, just because I haven't bashed Sarah Palin lately, and especially because it's so true-to-life / behind-the-glasses humorous, people, here's the latest visual hee-yuk. It comes courtesy of former coworker Priscilla, who's delightfully irreverently funny.

The creator/artist is leftsman and fellow WordPresser Aden Nak. I scoped his blog just now, and (overlooking quibbles over his punctuation and spelling) it's worth the read. NB, however: I do not support or endorse many of his positions, nor his tossing about of Carlinesque vocabulary (although RIP, George C). I do toast his politics overall, and much of his really-rubbed-the-wrong-way way about relating it. He was whoppingly underimpressed by last week's Obama/McPain debate, though I think that may be his sleep deprivation talking. Whereas yours truly sat through it, on the edge of the sofa, shaking head ruefully at insistent bag of hot air trying to blow down young, strong, unrelenting oak.

Tuesday, October 7, 2008

The Moment of Tooth


Having just finished watching the Obama-McCain debate (Barack was rock-steady and solidly on message; John… well, still seemed even at best nearly desperate, and clearly obstinately petty, and arguably overdue for retirement), I'm actually going to veer away from both politics and faith issues, and report a cautionary tale. 
This past Friday evening, conveniently just hours after my dentist's office had closed, I felt half of one of my molars break away. No pain, incredibly, but yike! I really value my teeth. 
So I pushed the piece back in place and there it somehow stayed until lunch on Saturday. Meanwhile I called the dentist's office, and his after-hours number, requesting an ASAP appointment to repair or do whatever might be necessary (despite my current uninsured status). And over lunch Saturday, the piece dropped out… and turned out to be a crown — not the kind under which the head rests uneasy, or are fated to roll in the dust, but a cap Dr. Lyme had put there himself a few years ago (when I did have insurance). 
The office called me back yesterday (Monday), and we set up an appointment for first-thing this morning (8:00 AM). I still dreaded news that the underlying, formerly-capped tooth had been rotting away, causing the crown to loosen. Nope; adhesive had merely worn out owing to a minor adjustment needed to allow for lateral stresses — the tooth was fine, and sound. 
Meanwhile, before he got down to business, I asked Dr. Lyme to do me a favor: to get rid of several books out there in his brand-new lobby, books I found personally offensive (one being Da(m)n Brown's The Dumb-Vinci Code; the other two or three I will not name, but were of the same disturbing ilk, and which I know and am in fact quite familiar with). And I explained why that is (which I've gone to at length here before), and suggested that if he wanted to carry offensive books, I could bring in my copy of Salman Rushdie's The Satanic Verses, Hitler's Mein Kampf (actually neither own nor want a copy), and the collected works of Lester Maddox (also don't own and don't want). 
In the momentary, surprisingly-not-very-tense silence, I realized something particularly foolish about my timing… and immediately (and rather vulnerably!) pointed it out to him and his lovely Caribbean assistant: 
There I was, flat on my back, feet actually higher than my head, and in a position I could not possibly get out of easily without prohibitively expensive damage to his equipment and my limbs… and here he sat, next to me, about to stick sharp metal objects in my mouth. And I chose that moment to criticize his office's reading material? Oh, boy. 
Still, being the gentleman he is, and not as vocal as yours-truly when he might take offense, he proceeded to re-secure my crown, and promise to remove the books. (You know, I really hate sounding like a conservative.) 
Then he had me bite down on a big wad of cotton to hold the crown in place. This also shut me up quite nicely… though I'll charitably assume that wasn't his intention.

Sunday, October 5, 2008

Give Us This Day Our Daily Bread


As I begin writing here, I'm streaming and listening to EWTN's "Sunday Night Live With Father Benedict Groeschel". This man is a living saint: loving, compassionate, deeply intelligent, intensely spiritual, beautifully humble, and supremely hard-working on the side of the weakest, neediest, and most neglected. On this particular episode, he and his guest are discussing abortion.
Most folks who've read a posting or three here know that I am a solid Catholic who is rather left of center both politically and socially (feminist, Zionist, etc.), even while lockstep-obedient with the Church itself. This is not contradictory; I follow (adhere to, in fact) the Church's teaching and Catechism in morals and values, in religion and tradition.
In minor issues I do not always agree, of course – though I stress again that it's little things that are non-faith, non-religion items; and I do find myself at odds, at times, with some individuals in the Church… but again in just fiddlin' little things. When in doubt, I assume I'm clueless and full of crap, and turn to what the Church has to say, though I do dig further and try to understand what lies behind the answer I find. The knowledge and understanding gleaned can help me to help out other confused folks, including the non-Catholic.
Other demands permitting, I plan to set aside several blogs in January to look at abortion itself, and the genuine horrors involved (including to the women, not just the infants), and the idiotic positions/stances held by too many of my fellow left-wingers. Tonight, though, my focus is even more narrow.
I mentioned last Thursday that I do differ with Father Groeschel (and many others) quite distinctly in his focus on the current presidential election as a single-issue choice: thumb-up/-down, based on whether the candidate favors or disfavors abortion. Let me state again that I do not feel that my disagreement there is from a position of any kind of superiority in faith, politics, intellect, or experience. I cannot concede or even assume any differently; if I am wrong come Judgment Day, I may plea ignorance and seek mercy for my stupidity… but here, and for now, I remain adamant.
Even this may change as I continue in my own spiritual growth, but at present I simply cannot vote into office a candidate whose cronies thrive on corruption, greed, violence, and intractability… simply because s/he is opposed to abortion. This I want to get back to – or will at least reiterate in various contexts, over the next thirty days.
Right now, though, I want to quote in full and verbatim (once more without permission) an article from the Baltimore Sun this past June (6/9/2008), clipped out and saved for me by my mother – who continues to improve wonderfully.
The issue here is the determination of some of the Church's clergy (there is no narrow, close-defined position – that I know of – in the Church) to withhold the Eucharist – Communion – from "Catholic" politicians known to stand in favor of abortion.
I cannot countenance that. (And to my relief, Father Groeschel seems to agree… I think.) The Eucharist is utter source and summit of the Catholic (indeed, all Christian) life, in that what once was bread and wine is now the body, blood, soul, and divinity of Jesus himself, creator and Messiah, Who created, loves, and sustains me, and each of us.
It is both judgmental cruelty and spiritually erroneous for our shepherds to withhold this from the believers. Besides slamming the door on physically receiving our Lord, it scandalizes the intended recipient as boldly and blatantly and cruelly as putting him/her into the stocks in the public square.
Nor does it take at all into account the fruit of compassion, grace, and mercy that is the penitence, the turning away, of such a (formerly) misdirected person from his/her previous support for wholesale (and retail) baby-slaughter. I.e., what if the communicant went to Confession the previous day, say, and has abandoned those tenets the Church justifiably opposes (and refutes), and been absolved? The priest/deacon/minister giving Communion ordinarily will not know that.
God is mercy, compassion, and forgiveness; we have to allow for the very real (remote as in some instances it may seem to some of us in our inflexibilities) possibility that said communicant is no longer separated from the Church giving him/her the Bread of Life. Let it be between the communicant and God; the rest of us are woefully underqualified.
(PS: The following text reproduces the full Sun article, which I still have in hardcopy. But the hyperlink takes you to its copy at a very awesome site, Catholics for Obama-Biden, that I've just now discovered. Awesome, and amen!)
by David O'Brien and Lisa Sowle Cahill
Baltimore Sun: Monday, June 9, 2008
What do a former legal counsel for Ronald Reagan and a Democratic governor have in common? As you might expect, it's not the same politics. Douglas W. Kmiec, an esteemed constitutional law professor at Pepperdine University, is a pro-life Republican. Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius is a moderate known for consensus-building. But these prominent Catholics are both the most recent targets of clergy who use Communion as a political weapon and effectively blacklist respected Catholic leaders. It's time for Catholics and all Americans to speak out against this spiritual McCarthyism.
When Mr. Kmiec endorsed Sen. Barack Obama for president, conservative Catholic blogs buzzed with outrage. How could a conservative known for his public opposition to abortion rights support a pro-choice liberal? In a recent Catholic Online column, Mr. Kmiec describes how he was declared "self-excommunicated" by many fellow Catholics. He writes that at a recent Mass, an angry college chaplain denounced his "Obama heresy" from the pulpit and denied him Communion.
In Kansas City, Kan., Archbishop Joseph F. Naumann has ordered Ms. Sebelius, also an Obama supporter, not to receive Communion after she vetoed abortion legislation riddled with constitutional red flags. The bill in question made it easier for prosecutors to search private medical records, allowed family members to seek court orders to stop abortions, and failed to include exceptions to save the life of the mother. Along with many public officials, Ms. Sebelius recognizes the profound moral gravity of abortion. She has supported prudent public policies that have reduced abortions in Kansas by investing in adoption services, prenatal health care, and social safety nets for families. But in his diocesan newspaper, the archbishop blasted the governor over her "spiritually lethal" message and her obligation to recognize the "legitimate authority within the Church."
The archbishop has a right and indeed an obligation to speak out against abortion. But he is on dangerous ground telling a democratically elected official – accountable to federal laws and a diverse citizenry – how to govern when it comes to the particulars of specific legislation. The proper application of moral principles in a pluralistic society rarely allows for absolutes.
Using a holy sacrament to punish Catholics has troubling political implications during an election year. St. Louis Archbishop Raymond L. Burke warned Sen. John Kerry – a Catholic whose record reflects his faith's commitment to economic justice, universal health care, and concern for the poor – not to receive Communion during the 2004 presidential race because of his support for abortion rights. In a New York Times interview just a month before the election, Archbishop Charles J. Chaput of Denver gave signals that Catholics who voted for a pro-choice candidate were cooperating in evil. Mr. Kerry narrowly lost the Catholic vote to President Bush.
Catholics make up a quarter of the American electorate, and are swing voters in key battleground states that will play a decisive role in electing our next president. It's essential that these voters recognize Catholicism defies easy partisan labels and is not a single-issue faith.
The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops warns in an election-year guide that particular issues must not be misused as a way of ignoring "other serious threats to human life and dignity". These threats identified by the bishops include racism, the death penalty, war, torture, lack of health care, and an unjust immigration policy. These broad Catholic values challenge Democrats and Republicans alike to put the common good before narrow partisan agendas.
If we remain silent when respected Catholic leaders are publicly attacked and denied Communion, the proper role of faith in our public square is grossly distorted. This election year, let's have a better debate about faith and political responsibility that reclaims the vital role religion has often played in renewing our most cherished democratic values.
David O'Brien, the Loyola professor of Catholic studies at the College of the Holy Cross, has written books about the history of American Catholicism. Lisa Sowle Cahill is a professor of theology at Boston College and a former president of the Catholic Theological Society of America.

Friday, October 3, 2008

Mad-Dog 20/20


While the left jumps up in down in delight at Palin's pallid performance last night, and the right wrings their hands (and perhaps even Sarah-Smile's advisors' necks... Mr. Rove, is that you again?), I would like to assign the class further reading.
 
The following is excerpted at somewhat hefty length from an even longer, fangs-bared, rightfully-biting-back article that I assume Rolling Stone carried first; at this site it's noted as having been first posted September 27, 2008, or last Saturday. (This time I am fixing up the occasionally rough punctuation, etc.) And once more I stick my neck out legally by reprinting these words without permission... but will back off immediately if requested officially:
 
 
AlterNet's a new one on me (even-further-left firebrand Spartacus forwarded me the link), and I find some of their advertisers and focus very much at odds with certain particulars for which I stand firm and value (e.g., I find rather offensive a man (or woman, for that matter) sneering at a woman's pregnancy). Nor can I condone the original article's vocabulary (in particular with the objectionable words being gratuitous or at least unneedful). But in all, let me state that the author's writing style and knock-you-over intensity are otherwise exactly what twenty-first century political journalism has to be about, particularly from the left. And I say that as the son of a (now-retired) professional journalist, and someone who himself has engaged in (albeit on a far more minor scale) hearty journalism.
 
Biased? Arguably. (Please NB, however, AlterNet's disclaimer: AlterNet is a nonprofit organization and does not make political endorsements. The opinions expressed by its writers are their own.) But the author's money here is where his mouth/keyboard is: he certainly does seem to have engaged in far more research, and presents demonstrable hard facts and figures, than one might see from, say, the right (e.g., FoxNoise), nor is there anything merely superficial knee-jerk / innuendic about it.
 
Read on.
 
Mad-Dog Palin
The scariest thing about John McCain's running mate isn't how unqualified she is -- it's what her candidacy says about America.
Matt Taibibi
 
The defining moment for me [at the Republican convention] came shortly after Palin and her family stepped down from the stage to uproarious applause, looking happy enough to throw a whole library full of books into a sewer....
 
Sarah Palin is a symbol of everything that is wrong with the modern United States. As a representative of our political system, she's a new low in reptilian villainy, the ultimate cynical masterwork of puppeteers like Karl Rove. But more than that, she is a horrifying symbol of how little we ask for in return for the total surrender of our political power.
 
Not only is Sarah Palin a fraud, she's the tawdriest, most half-[butt]ed fraud imaginable, twenty floors below the lowest common denominator, a character too dumb even for daytime TV – and this country is going to eat her up, cheering her every step of the way. All because most Americans no longer have the energy to do anything but lie back and allow ourselves to be [pleasured] by the calculating thieves who run this grasping consumer paradise we call a nation.
 
Until the Alaska governor actually ascended to the podium that night, I was convinced that John McCain had made one of the all-time campaign-season blunders, that he had acted impulsively and out of utter desperation in choosing a cross-eyed political neophyte just two years removed from running a town smaller than the bleacher section at Fenway Park. It even crossed my mind that there was an element of weirdly self-destructive pique in McCain's decision to cave in to his party's right-wing base in this fashion, that perhaps he was responding to being ordered by party elders away from a tepid, ideologically promiscuous hack like Joe Lieberman – reportedly his real preference – by picking the most obviously unqualified, doomed-to-fail joke of a Bible-thumping buffoon. As in: You want me to rally the base? Fine, I'll rally the base. Here, I'll choose this rifle-toting, serially pregnant moose-killer who thinks God lobbies for oil pipelines. Happy now?...
 
The candidate sauntered to the lectern with the assurance of a sleepwalker – and immediately launched into a symphony of snorting and sneering remarks, taking time out in between the superior invective to present herself as just a humble gal with a beefcake husband and a brood of healthy, combat-ready spawn who just happened to be the innocent targets of a communist- (and probably also homosexual-) media conspiracy. It was a virtuoso performance. She appeared to be completely without shame and utterly full of [crap], awing a room full of hardened reporters with her sickly sweet line about the high-school-flame-turned-hubby who, "five children later" is "still my guy." It was like watching Gidget address the Reichstag....
 
Right-wingers of the Bush-Rove ilk have had a tough time finding a human face to put on their failed, inhuman, mean-as-hell policies. But it was hard not to recognize the genius of wedding that faltering brand of institutionalized greed to the image of the suburban American supermom. It's the perfect cover, for there is almost nothing in the world meaner than this species of provincial tyrant. Palin herself burned this political symbiosis into the pages of history with her seminal crack about the "difference between a hockey mom and a pit bull: lipstick," blurring once and for all [time] the lines between meanness on the grand political scale as understood by the Roves and Bushes of the world, and meanness of the small-town variety as understood by pretty much anyone who has ever sat around in his ranchhouse den dreaming of a fourth plasma-screen TV or an extra set of KC HiLites for his truck, while some ghetto family a few miles away shares a husk of government cheese....
 
Sarah Palin is something new. She's all caricature. As the candidate of a party whose positions on individual issues are poll-losers almost across the board, her shtick is not even designed to sell a line of policies. It's just designed to sell her. The thing was as much as admitted in the on-air gaffe by former Reagan speechwriter Peggy Noonan, who was inadvertently caught saying on MSNBC that Palin wasn't the most qualified candidate, that the party "went for this, excuse me, political [BS] about narratives."...
 
Sure, there was politics in the Palin speech, but it was all either silly lies or merely incidental fluffery buttressing the theatrical performance. A classic example of what was at work here came when Palin proudly introduced her Down-syndrome baby, Trig, then stared into the camera and somberly promised parents of special-needs kids that they would "have a friend and advocate in the White House." This was about a half-hour before she raised her hands in triumph with McCain, a man who voted against increasing funding for special-needs education.
 
Palin's charge that "government is too big" and that Obama "wants to grow it" was similarly preposterous. Not only did her party just preside over the largest government expansion since LBJ, but Palin herself has been a typical Bush-era Republican, borrowing and spending beyond her means. Her great legacy as mayor of Wasilla was the construction of a $14.7 million hockey arena in a city with an annual budget of $20 million; Palin okayed a bond issue for the project before the land had been secured, leading to a protracted legal mess that ultimately forced taxpayers to pay more than six times the original market price for property [that] the city ended up having to seize from a private citizen using eminent domain. Better yet, Palin ended up paying for the [blasted] thing with a 25-percent increase in the city sales tax. But in her speech, of course, Palin presented herself as the enemy of tax increases, righteously bemoaning that "taxes are too high," and Obama "wants to raise them."
 
Palin hasn't been too worried about federal taxes as governor of a state that ranks number-one in the nation in federal spending per resident ($13,950), even as it sits just 18th in federal taxes paid per resident ($5,434). That means all us tax-paying non-Alaskans spend $8,500 a year on each and every resident of Palin's paradise of rugged self-sufficiency. Not that this sworn enemy of taxes doesn't collect from her own: Alaska currently collects the most taxes per resident of any state in the nation....
 
[Her] incessant grousing about the media was likewise par for the course, red meat for those tens of millions of patriotic flag-waving Americans whose first instinct when things get rough is to whine like [spoiled little wen]ches and blame other people – reporters, the French, those ungrateful blacks soaking up tax money eating big prison meals, whomever – for their failures.
 
Add to this the usual lies about Democrats wanting to "forfeit" to our enemies abroad and coddle terrorists, and you had a very run-of-the-mill, almost-boring, Republican speech from a substance standpoint. What made it exceptional was its utter hypocrisy, its total disregard for reality, its absolute unrelation to the facts of our current political situation. After eight years of unprecedented corruption, incompetence, waste, and greed, the party of Karl Rove understood that 50 million Americans would not demand solutions to any of these problems so long as they were given a new, new thing to [thoroughly drool] over....
 
[I]n the end it won't matter that she's got an unmarried teenage kid with a bun in the oven. Of course, if the daughter of a black candidate like Barack Obama showed up at his convention with a five-month bump and some sideways-cap wearing, junior-grade Curtis Jackson holding her hand, the defenders of Traditional Morality would be up in arms. But the thing about being in the reality-making business is that you don't need to worry much about vetting; there are no facts in your candidate's bio that cannot be ignored or overcome....
 
Pretty much anyone with an Internet connection knows by now that Palin was originally for the "Bridge to Nowhere" before she opposed it (she actually endorsed the plan in her 2006 gubernatorial campaign), that even after the project was defeated she kept the money, that she didn't actually sell the Alaska governor's state luxury jet on eBay but instead sold it at a $600,000 loss to a campaign contributor (who is now seeking $50,000 in taxpayer money to pay maintenance costs).
 
Then there are the salacious tales of Palin's swinging-meat-cleaver management style, many of which seem to have a common thread: In addition to being ensconced in a messy ethics investigation over her firing of the chief of the Alaska state troopers (dismissed after refusing to sack her sister's ex-husband), Palin also reportedly fired a key campaign aide for having an affair with a friend's wife. More ominously, as mayor of Wasilla, Palin tried to fire the town librarian, Mary Ellen Emmons, after Emmons resisted pressure to censor books Palin found objectionable.
 
Then there's the God stuff: Palin belongs to a church whose pastor, Ed Kalnins, believes that all criticisms of George Bush "come from hell," and wondered aloud if people who voted for John Kerry could be saved. Kalnins, looming as the answer to Obama's Jeremiah Wright, claims that Alaska is going to be a "refuge state" for Christians in the last days, last days which he sometimes speaks of in the present tense. Palin herself has been captured on video mouthing the inevitable born-again idiocies, such as the idea that a recent oil-pipeline deal was "God's will." She also described the Iraq War as a "task that is from God" and part of a heavenly "plan."...
 
All of which tells you about what you'd expect from a raise-the-base choice like Palin: She's a puffed-up dimwit with primitive religious beliefs who had to be educated as to the fact that the Constitution did not exactly envision government executives' firing librarians. Judging from the importance progressive critics seem to attach to these revelations, you'd think that these were actually negatives in modern American politics. But Americans like politicians who hate books and see the face of Jesus in every tree stump. They like them stupid and mean and ignorant of the rules.
 
Which is why Palin has only seemed to grow in popularity as more and more of these revelations have come out. The same goes for the most damning aspect of her biography, her total lack of big-game experience. As governor of Alaska, Palin presides over a state whose entire population is barely the size of Memphis. This kind of thing might matter in a country that actually worried about whether its leader was prepared for his job – but not in America....
 
Sure, Barack Obama might be every bit as much a slick piece of imageering as Sarah Palin. The difference is in what the image represents. The Obama image represents tolerance, intelligence, education, patience with the notion of compromise and negotiation, and a willingness to stare ugly facts right in the face – all qualities we're actually going to need in government if we're going to get out of this huge mess we're in.
 
Here's what Sarah Palin represents: being a fat, [repulsive] pig who pins "Country First" buttons on his man-[cleavage] and chants "U-S-A! U-S-A!" at the top of his lungs while his kids live off credit cards and [the] Saudis buy up all the mortgages in Kansas.
 
The truly disgusting thing about Sarah Palin isn't that she's totally unqualified, or a religious zealot, or married to a secessionist, or unable to educate her own daughter about sex, or a fake conservative who raised taxes and horked up earmark-millions every chance she got. No, the most disgusting thing about her is what she says about us: that you can [rape us viciously] for eight solid years, and we'll not only thank you for your trouble, we'll sign you up for eight more years, if only you promise to [rub] us in the right spot for a few hours around election time.
 
Democracy doesn't require a whole lot of work of its citizens, but it requires some: It requires taking a good look outside once in a while, and considering the bad news and what it might mean, and making the occasional tough choice, and soberly taking stock of what your real interests are.
 
This is a very different thing from shopping, which involves passively letting sitcoms melt your brain all day long and then jumping straight into the TV screen to buy a Southern-Style Chicken Sandwich because the slob singing "I'm Lovin' It!" during the commercial break looks just like you. The joy of being a consumer is that it doesn't require thought, responsibility, self-awareness, or shame: All you have to do is obey the first urge that gurgles up from your stomach. And then obey the next. And the next. And the next....
 

Thursday, October 2, 2008

Palin on Foreign Policy


The following article is reprinted (without permission; sorry about that) from this past Friday's (September 26, 2008) Baltimore Sun; I provide here it in full, verbatim, and without my usual correction of source-material punctuation. The Sun gives no author information, beyond the simple "Associated Press" attribution.
Stating the obvious: her absolute lack of experience and serious qualifications would be riotously entertaining, were she not – potentially – close to being President herself… much like Duhbya's been (when Cheney's allowed). I suspect she's been coached, at least, on how to pronounce "nuclear".
Palin on foreign policy
She defends Russia remark and extent of her experience
NEW YORK
Republican vice-presidential nominee Sarah Palin defended her remark that the proximity of Russia to her home state of Alaska gives her foreign policy experience, explaining in a CBS interview airing yesterday that "we have trade missions back and forth."
Palin has never visited Russia and until last year, the 44-year-old Alaska governor had never traveled outside North America. She also had never met a foreign leader until her trip this week to New York. In the CBS interview, she did not offer any examples of having been involved in any negotiations with the Russians.
Palin's foreign policy experience came up when she gave her first major interview, on Sept. 11 to ABC News. Asked what insight she had gained from living so close to Russia, she said: "They're our next-door-neighbors, and you can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska, from an island in Alaska."
The comment met with derision from Palin's critics and was turned into a punch line for a Saturday Night Live skit featuring actress Tina Fey. Appearing as Palin, she proclaimed, "I can see Russia from my house!"
In the interview with CBS News anchor Katie Couric, Palin said: "It's funny that a comment like that was, kind of made to… I don't know, you know? Reporters…"
Couric said, "Mock?"
"Yeah," Palin said, "mocked, I guess that's the word, yeah."
When Couric asked how Alaska's closeness to Russia enhanced her foreign policy experience, Palin said, "Well, it certainly does because our… our next-door neighbors are foreign countries." Alaska shares a border with Canada.
Palin didn't answer directly when Couric inquired about whether she had been involved in any negotiations with the Russians.
"We have trade missions back and forth," she replied. As she continued, Palin brought up Russian Prime Minister Vladimir V. Putin.
"It's very important when you consider even national security issues with Russia as Putin rears his head and comes into the airspace of the United Sates of America, where – where do they go? It's Alaska. It's just right over the border. It is – from Alaska that we send those out to make sure that an eye is being kept on this very powerful nation, Russia, because they are right there. They are right next to… to our state," she said.
Asked why she obtained a passport only last year, Palin said, "I'm not one of those who maybe came from a background of, you know, kids who perhaps graduate college and their parents give them a passport and give them a backpack and say go off and travel the world."
Earlier yesterday, Palin held a rare exchange with reporters outside a Ground Zero firehouse in New York.
At the firehouse just across from the site of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, Palin took a handful of questions from reporters. She has not had a new conference in the four weeks since Republican presidential candidate John McCain chose her to be his running mate and has submitted to three major interviews – with ABC, Fox News and CBS.
Palin was asked if she thought the U.S. presence in Iraq and Afghanistan was helping to mitigate terrorism.
"I think our presence in Iraq and Afghanistan will lead to further security of our nation. We can never again let them onto our soil."
Now if you'll excuse me, I need to run downstairs and watch the debate (with visions of earlier VP-candidate James Stockdale in my head); I'll nosh on a couple Skinny Cow ice-cream sandwiches in her honor.
After-word, post-debate: Sarah-smile was obviously coached well, and some of it seemed to have stuck... although I was disappointed that she's still shaky on her pronunciation of "nuclear". (And her "Eye-raq" and "Eye-ran"... shudder!) Watch the footage on the news (or in small bites on YouTube, for those of you with more limited attention-spans): note how she consistently failed to answer many key questions, and would steer her responses as well onto familiar ground.
Next to our man Joe – I confess this is the most I've seen of him thus far (and me with a family member out of Wilmington long-since working on his campaign(s)!) – Sarah was indeed palin'; even while bearing up better than expected, she was very obviously out of her league... and her bubbly soccer-mom approach of "Well, John is just gee-golly-whillikers gonna fix it, Gahd bless him!" is utterly insufficient, and leaves me baffled over whether she'd respond to a true crisis with shaking finger, or leveled shotgun.

RE: 2 Chronicles 7:14


-----Original Message-----
From: Mrs. Bosco
Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2008 10:33 AM
To: [a lot of worried Christians]
Subject: Fwd: 2 Chronicles 7:14
ONE MINUTE EACH NIGHT.... 9:00 PM Eastern Time.
Received from a friend and it is true, this is the scariest election we as Christians have ever faced and from the looks of the polls, the Christians aren't voting Christian values. We all need to be on our knees.
Do you believe we can take God at His word? Call upon His name, then stand back and watch His wonders to behold [sic]. This scripture gives us, as Christians, ownership of this land and the ability to call upon God to heal it. I challenge you to do so. We have never been more desperate than now for God to heal our land. This election is the scariest I remember in my lifetime.
2 Chronicles 7:14 "If my people, which are called by my name[,] shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land."
During WWII, there was an adviser to Churchill who organized a group of people who dropped what they were doing every night at a prescribed hour for one minute to collectively pray for the safety of England, its people
[,] and peace. This had an amazing effect as bombing stopped. There is now a group of people organizing the same thing here in America. The United States of America and our citizens need prayer more than ever!!!
If you would like to participate: each evening at 9:00 PM Eastern Time (8:00 PM Central, 7:00 PM Mountain, 6:00 PM Pacific), stop whatever you are doing and spend one minute praying for the safety of the United States, our troops, our citizens, for peace in the world, the up-coming [sic] election, that the Bible will remain the basis for the laws governing our land, and that Christianity will grow in the U.S.
If you know anyone who would like to participate, please pass this along.
Someone said if people really understood the full extent of the power we have available through prayer, we might be speechless. Our prayers are the most powerful asset we have.
Thank You. Please pass this on to anyone whom [sic] you think will want to join us.
 
 -----Original Message-----
From: MT2mb
Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2008 11:31 AM
To: [other fretting Christians]
Subject: RE: 2 Chronicles 7:14
The drive to vote "Christian values" is not as simple as Candidate A vs. Candidate B. One example: which Christian values?
Should we vote against greed, and Mammon? The shedding of innocents' blood? Then the party in power must be voted out, resoundingly.
Oops; "innocent blood" also includes unborn children. So the Dems are out too; sigh. Let's look again.
Even the kindliest, saintliest priests (e.g., Benedict Groeschel) are recommending this be a single-issue election: thumb up/down on abortion: no more, no less. And it pains me greatly, in mind and spirit, to disagree; let's assume ignorance and poor vision on my part: I simply see this election as anything but a single issue before us.
The current badministration was (and is) anti-abortion… and now we have over 4,000 dead American soldiers, hundreds of thousands of dead in Iraq (a dangerous country in 2002, but not an immediate threat at the time – despite the lies we were fed – , unlike North Korea and Iran… both of which continue cooking nukes undeterred).
Another ready example (among dozens): We've been saddled with deregulation (a broken-record / stuck-needle left over from the charming daze – er, days – of Reaganomics… or what the current-president's father himself rightly called "voodoo economics"… before digging heartily into the crow-and-humble pie and jumping on the 1980 ticket), and now are looking to solve the fiscal outrages of the inevitably ensuing problem by throwing boxcars of money at it.
(Other deregulations: the media, the environment, handguns-for-all, lots more… brother. There aren't enough days and soapboxes left!)
(The other party is "tax and spend"? When in 2001 we started out with a huge surplus, and today have the most staggeringly enormous debt in history, one for which our children and grandchildren will struggle and suffer for… while golden parachutes continue to fill the Manhattan sky?) (Please do not site the "War on Terror[ism]" in response: that was hijacked out from under our noses. Counterresponse: why must NATO patrol Afghanistan? And why are we allowing the poppy-trade there to go on… while doing nothing for the tens of thousands of widows and orphans in Iraq? Or for our own veterans?)
We must protect the children, of course – especially the most vulnerable. But I will not swallow warmongering; a blind-but-winking eye to the obscenely rich (how many houses is that, John?); cutting of spending on education and health while the military receives carte-blanche ever costlier toys; police-state controls; an anarchistic free-for-all in the name of "smaller" (i.e., dangerously weakened) government and cruelly unfair tax burdens – let alone further and greater abominations – as the only price to end abortion.
What is the bigger picture, brothers and sisters? What else will your vote next month bring into office? Abortion must end… and at the same instance we must not lose sight of additional evils on our doorsteps while we fight to save tomorrow's children.
It should be obvious which way I'll be voting in a few weeks – and please accept my apologies (but not regrets) if any of the above offends you; I'd rather it only disturbed and troubled. I will most definitely be praying over my single vote, and over all the votes cast that day, with you. I, too, worry for our children and grandchildren, and those yet to be… and the rich traditions and heritage of our country. Fading –
May God have mercy on us; Mater Dei sancta, ora pro nobis.
Regards,
A. Gene Childe

Wednesday, October 1, 2008

Here… From THERE


Just another brief one, folks: all's well, and getting better…
…in particular my mother. More on her progress as soon as tomorrow. Just in brief: the tracheostomy she received some weeks ago at her previous facility (a major East-coast hospital; more on that soon) has been removed and closed up — she's breathing and eating on her own (I'm not sure, though, whether her feeding tube has been removed for good), speech at times rather understandable… although the speech, eating, and walking/standing do still need more work.
Lesser importance: most likely out of catharsis, I've finished the first section (just under ninety pages) of a possible novel — a work I've mentioned here before, but sadly can't quote or detail here, given the ease with which one may, bluntly, steal someone else's labors (something of which, I confess, I'm not entirely guiltless). It's been fun, funny, a delight… and I actually found tears in my eyes as I wound down that section, given that the characters I'd gotten to know and laugh with/at were also crying. (Occasional reader and contributor Spartacus has read some of it, and responded favorably; per his suggestion, I sent a copy each to my two daughters, tasking them with seeing about publishing it if anything should waylay me for good before I can do so.)
I did manage to get three weeks of honest work, last month, and am still nailing and pasting my résumé all around the greater area. Keep those thoughts and prayers coming, folks!
In the Church, today is the feast day (i.e., life-celebration) of my most favorite modern-day saint — Thérèse of Lisieux. She is a stunning, touching role model of trust, devotion, love, and humility… all traits sorely lacking in the modern wo/man. I want to reflect more on her soon, too.
I'm expecting to resume this blog with some regularity again — there's just too much going on that I can't stand by and only watch it happen, follow? I want to bring out some articles on religion and politics (always fun subjects) you've likely missed, and I'm ludicrously overdue in both completing my castigation of a particular Church-hater, and my defense of His Holiness Pope Pius XII (this last more than a year overdue).
With a new month begun, my mind zeroes in on transitions: winding down of the warmer weather, blushing of the trees, new school year (daughter Portia off to her university far away from here… with an angel of mine, and a large piece of my heart)… and upcoming election — for which I do plan to take my gloves off. (E.g., very much a feminist, it pains me to beat on a woman… but Sarah Palin is frightening.)
This all, all, boils down to five simple words:
How is it October already?