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...

I want to start this entry with a statement of a proud mother. My son has been awarded the opportunity to go to Boston to a national conference. I'll leave the particulars out, but I am so proud of him for his responsible behavior that led to this opportunity. Moving on. Right now, at least in this election, the Democrats seem to know who they are. They know what they stand for; it's just a matter of details of when and how to implement and who would be the best one to carry it out. They stand for big sweeping government solutions. And they are honest about it. So what about the Republicans. There seems (to me) to be more disagreement among the Republicans about issues and even what it means to be a Republican. Are we going to be Reagan Republicans? Compassionate conservatives? Libertarians? What do any of these words even mean? They all pay some lipservice to the idea that the government is based on a constitution that supports law and order and protection from ext...

I am a political junkie. I'm loving this race; there's so many personalities and so much drama (which rhymes with Obama). Unfortunately, the most qualified Democrat quit today, and I'm sorry. He was too real to be elected. And John Kerry--talk about lacking loyalty. He couldn't even endorse his own past running mate. That's just tacky. It is hard not to post on Obama. But I'm not Ann Coulter (heaven help us, she is mean, but funny at times). Let's just say he was snarky to Hillary the other night in the ABC debate, and should have shown more respect. I'm not one of those, "OOOHHH, he's really a closeted Muslim, blah, blah, blah." I just think there's not much there, despite his great speaking (and yes, for someone who teaches history of public speaking, it is nice to see a presidential candidate who really can do oratory.) But I may be wrong, and he may be president, and I would say, while it's a logical fallacy to vot...

It is my opinion, and only my opinion, that Abraham/Abram is the most interesting character in the Old Testament and at least in Genesis. Joseph is too good and his father is too sneaky and his grandfather is too wimpy. But his great grandfather Abraham is a wonderful study on progressive revelation and the possible changes in a person's life, over time, from a thoroughly pagan worldview to something much closer to a holistic and God-based worldview. There will be several posts on this, but we'll just start with Abraham and women. First, he's married to his half-sister. Uuuuuuu--for us, maybe, because we live post Leviticus 18, where it's very clear that the accepted incest of the ancient world was not morally or spiritually or genetically acceptable to God. (Which brings up the question of how literally we can take Adam and Eve, since there had to be incest in their children right off the bat. That's another subject, see below.) Second, Abraham takes anoth...

Two items today: Visiting family at Christmas and the nature of blogging We returned yesterday from visiting my husband's family out of state, about four hours away by interstate. It went better than I expected due to the large number of people getting together and the generally bad experiences we have had in the past. My husband's family, like many, can be a cantankerous bunch, and it's exacerbated by chronic unemployment, drinking problems, failed marriages, deaths, children out of wedlock, illnesses and disabilities, and enabling. Humph. Is there a family in America that doesn't have one, several, or all of these? The interim pastor at our church said a couple of weeks ago, "My favorite lights at Christmas are the taillights on the cars of my relatives leaving after Christmas visits." And as the old saying goes, After three days, fish and house guests . . . So we stayed exactly 72 hours (73 maybe) and three nights. And we were probably as happy to ...