partsofspeaking

The last post was pure escapism, and I apologize to those of you who might have thought I had lost my sanity. However, John Ankerberg has just published a book on the spiritual themes in LOST, so I don't feel quite so foolish. Speaking of escapism, the Super Bowl is on tonight, and the only part I care about are the commercials. The devotion paid to this football game is remarkable, and I'm using that euphemistically. Fox sanctified it with a very good pregame reading of the Declaration of Independence, for which I salute them. Fox doesn't mind wearing its patriotism on its sleeve. The networks would never produce such a blatant display of love of country, only love of Barak Obama. The reality is, I don't understand football, not truly, just the broad outlines. But I do understand spectacle, I do understand the Patriots are a bunch of shameless cheaters, and the Manning brothers are cute boys from a close family. So I want New York to win though I realize that mig

LOST FANS: It's back. Last night's was not the greatest episode, but it does raise questions and it's still the best show ever on television. 1. Who are the Oceanic 6? Are they necessarily just the ones who go back to civilization, or who live? Or are they just the ones who get the publicity? One blogger claims they are Hurley, Jack, Kate, Sayid, Sun, and Jin (I'm glad, I like the Korean couple the best). Three Americans, three nonAmericans? And not the baby? (They wouldn't do that.) 2. Hurley is an unreliable narrator--or is he? He's the most appealing unappealing character on TV. Honest and sweet but crazy and addicted to food. Everyman. 3. The underlying question--would they all be better off to go back or to stay? Supposedly Jin and Sun have to, for her to survive her pregnancy. Sawyer's a criminal, so is Kate. Rose will get her cancer back. But the others have family and reasons to go back. 4. Are Jack and Claire ever going to find out

Oh, man, am I going to make some people mad. Who am I going to vote for Tuesday? Not that it's anyone's business, but it will be either McCain or Huckabee. I seriously think McCain will be the nominee and Huckabee the vice-presidential candidate. Why not Romney? He seems to be the fave of the pundits, the Ann Coulters and the Rush Limbaughs. Good for them. I'm going on record as saying they do not speak for me, nor do they speak for many, many conservatives. They are hypocrites and elitists. They want the Republican electorate to live, breathe, and vote like they think it should, and they denounce morals of people who are more moral than they. Their rants are full of ad hominem, straw man, non sequitur, and nonsense. Why McCain? Presumably, he is too liberal to be a Republican. The problem with the Republican party (and probably the Democrats, but I don't follow them as closely) is ideological lock-stepism. Why do I or why does anyone have to be totally c