He's Right, Failure Has Occurred

I gotta give it to Harry Reid. He is absolutely correct. The U.S. has failed at war.

But which war? I say, not the Iraqi war. I say, not the Vietnamese war. Yeah, there are (and were) problems with both. I've never known a professional football team make it through the first quarter, score tied or at least close, and give up because the game was over. Only fans do that, so maybe Harry is more a "fan" of the war than a stakeholder in it.

You tell me one person who could make the perfect decision every time, and I'll show you a person smart enough not to go into politics. :-)

The political war has failed. You know, the one where Democrats and Republicans show off their awesome power and aptitude to the detriment of the country as a whole. The one where the duopoly is in power, and all others are also rans or fringe candidates.

What do I mean? First, let's define "failure" according to Mr. Reid:

• We've been engaged in battle for too long. We'll skip the part about who defined "too long" for now, as that is a farce in its own right.
• We've spent too much money on this initiative.
• Results aren't spectacular enough.
• We've lost out on other opportunities (i.e. the opportunity cost of engaging in Iraq), such as Darfur and other UN peacekeeping initiatives.
• Families are still getting hurt, either through death or other not-so-drastic forms of hardship.

Now that failure has been defined per Mr. Reid's (and others') talking points, let's see what has truly failed:

• The War on Poverty - how much money spent? How long is "too long"? What other opportunities were wasted so we could continue to support these entitlement programs? Results? Aren't most of these families we were supposed to help still having troubles, and aren't new "poor people" created every day?
• The War on Drugs - porous borders, lack of enforcement, a two-decade program. Results?
• The War on Immigration - geez, the symptoms sound a lot like the failure points for the War on Drugs. Results?

And, the grand prize goes to:

• The new Democratic-led Congress! Looking at Reid's own key performance indicators, the Democratic-led Congress is a bigger failure than the war in Iraq. Results?

Harry, I agree with you. You have failed. You've been doing this for too long. You've spent too much money to do it. You've lost out on other opportunities by continually engaging in the political war. Results are desired solely for political gain. And not only are families getting hurt, but the entire nation is being hurt. All on your watch.

Thanks for nothing.

(Republican "leadership", you are no better. You both stink, and both need to be replaced.)

Sieves and Pails

This is a sieve.

This is a pail.

Both have different functions when it comes to fluids. A sieve allows fluid to pass through but catches tiny particles; a pail holds fluid. That is, a pail holds fluid until the volume of fluid flowing into it exceeds the capacity of the pail, then you get a big mess.

No duh, huh? What does this have to do with anything?

Being a project manager, I have developed a pet peeve about problems that are defined improperly and incompletely. Not only does it lead to bad research and outcomes, no matter how proper and accurate the research techniques and methods might be, but the people communicating the problem and its definition look like total buffoons.

Take Michael Chertoff, for example. He is the head of the Department of Homeland Security, or "DOHs" for short. (How increasingly appropriate.) When it comes to immigration, he sees an overflowing pail. How do I know this? He says things like, "We don't have the manpower or funds to handle the number of problems we have". The pail is overflowing.

He's right, to an extent. But taken by itself, he has not defined the entire problem, and doesn't even address the key factor of the problem.

I prefer to look at the immigration problem like a sieve; it lets in all comers, and offers no containment capabilities at all. So, what good is it to complain about the size of your pail when you've actually done nothing to stop the flow of water? If I give you a bigger pail - more money, more power, more control - you've still done nothing to stop the influx of illegal immigrants into the country, and your pail still overflows. DOHs, indeed!

I guess the best way to look at the immigration problem isn't to look at the problem first, but to define what you want the solution to be. My solution would be a large pail with a few strategically placed holes in it, thus allowing some flow of fluid beyond the pail, but giving a large enough containment vessel that the vessel doesn't overflow.

Sounds good, huh? Containment of immigrant processing, but allowing a queuing mechanism to process and permit immigrants to enter the country legally? Yeah, I like it, too.

Now only if we'd solidify the border and start enforcing the laws already on the books.

DOHs around!

Own Worst Enemy

WARNING!!! LONG POST ALERT!!!

It started with this, posted at a “politically open” website that I used to support.

Let’s say it is true, that abortion is not the greatest idea in the world, and that a majority of Americans want to reduce abortion to the greatest extent possible. After all, looking at the stats provided by the CDC, several things are painfully obvious:
- An overwhelming majority of abortions – almost 80% occur out of wedlock.
- Among those 19 years and under, abortion is decreasing significantly; however, almost 50% of all women having abortions are over 25. In other words, they are likely not women who didn’t know better. They weren’t drunk at a college dorm, getting high behind the high school, or anything like that; they were already integrated into the responsible, adult world.
- An underwhelming percentage occurred after 21 weeks of gestation.
- The change in percentage of abortions by race says that, yes, abortion among black women is increasing, but white women are by no means absolved from the problem.

These numbers can’t be false, they come from the government. Can they? These numbers are generally accepted, and they point out a huge number of societal, economic, and political issues.

THIS IS HUGE! It’s obvious that, whether we have a consensus opinion or not, it’s worth spending time and money to make sure the problem doesn’t get any worse. We know the facts – they really aren’t even up for discussion. We know the impact – look at the broken homes, stigma to society, and loss of life. We know the resolution, but we’re not doing enough about it. Sexual expression is the start and end of the biggest cause of abortion: conception.

Conception is the new Global Warning. Consensus says conception is wrong. Consensus says we MUST act, even if the stats and forecasts are askew. Consensus says our world will fall apart if we don’t fix it. The media say it disproportionately affects the poor. Critics aren’t really arguing about it that much. Even Hillary Clinton
wants to minimize the rate of abortion, which can only be done by minimizing conception.

Conception is the new Global Warming…but only if you’re willing to pass out condoms. There is no need for behavior modification, even though it would reduce medical costs and alleviate societal issues, let alone stop freaking out every adult female who is three days late.

So, why do we want to put all the taxpayers’ money behind every potential cure for global warming, when we won’t know for years whether the potential cures will work, but won’t pursue every avenue with conception, when we know what the results will be?

I was ostracized for using satire to make a point, and for trying to manipulate people into believing that abortion was on the same plane of problems as global warming.

It went to this, as comments posted to the same website, but to a different post, searching for some pointed clarification:

There are several elements of your response that raise more issues for me
than they answer.

1. Textbook definitions of ‘consensus’, are: “agreement in the judgment or opinion reached by a group as a whole”. (WorldNet) Or, “an opinion or position reached by a group as a whole”. (American Heritage Dictionary) Or, “majority of opinion”. (Dictionary.com) The first two definitions were the ones I learned throughout my schooling years. I would surmise that the community of believers of the church of Global Warming use the word ‘consensus’ instead of ‘majority opinion’ because they, too, are well aware of what definition we all learned for the word ‘consensus’. This is not honest.

2. You didn’t respond to my charge of blacklisting non-believers and heretics. No one ever does. To me, lack of response on this charge is up there with the non-response the panel gave to the caller. It’s swept under the rug. Prove to me that the heretics aren’t persecuted, and we may have reason to come to the table together.

3. Organizationally, the community of believers looks to be more like a single, non-reproducing amoeba, than it does an emanating group of concentric circles. The former looks like it’s growing because it changes shape, but really doesn’t grow. The latter grows, and its growth is obvious because you have an origin from which you can measure the growth. a) IPCC members have left the GW table over everything from differences of outcome to differences of approach to disagreements about the use of political strong-arming. b) A significant number of scientists that signed the UN report on global warming are not meteorologists or climatologists. That’s like me, as a project manager, signing onto a report on electrical engineering. Here, the community of believers is continually redefined to make it look like we have majority of opinion.

4. Many businesses and industry leaders fail – and bring down their entire enterprise - because they say “we believe it’s true, so we HAVE to do it”. Good people are martyred for having different opinions and approaches, even if they agree with the premise. I’ve been on the wrong side of this by-product of groupthink a number of times. I’m used to it. People become blinded when they are in the “in” group, and regularly lead their projects or movements to dismal failure.

All I’m asking for is intellectual honesty. What I see is folks saying, “so what, we need to do something anyway.” That’s not honest.

The response I received was pointed alright, and ended with me asking to have my name pulled off the contributor’s list. The “science/academic guy” in the group didn't address my issues – that is, educate me – but rather scolded me. (He didn’t like my using religious metaphors to describe the movement, either. Go figure.) Again, he didn’t refute any of my issues, as I was mostly looking for an honest answer to #2, and some discussion of terms and the true population of the community of believers, er, proponents of global warming. Never got it. Hmm.

I don’t believe global warming is a legitimate issue. I’ve seen enough to believe it’s possible, but not enough to believe man has anything to do with it, and definitely not enough to believe that indulgences…er, carbon credits…will make any difference other than making green politicians and green companies rich. (Geez, and they hate Halliburton’s ties to the Bush administration. If that isn’t the pot calling the kettle black, what is?)

All that premise to get to this: the libs who are pro-global warming are really missing the boat. There is a common area of concern for all political types, and it is reliance on foreign oil. Libs don’t want to rely on any oil because of the global warming issue. They myopically forget that many conservatives don’t want foreign reliance for anything we do, including our accumulation of energy sources. So, if we could only reduce oil consumption, we’d all be better off, right?

Well, not so fast here. As easy as I believe it would be for the green left to say, “Hey, America, if we work to change our habits, and change the way we create and consume resources, in ‘x’ years we can eliminate our reliance on foreign countries that want us dead!” Sounds good, right? Lefties would get their way without freaking people out. Other energy sources would not only be considered, but pursued with vigor. Righties concerned with protecting their country would tell their politicians that we should no longer rely on Saudis and other Middle Eastern countries – or Venezuela, for that matter – to provide our oil. Russia would lose a trump card, because we could export our new technologies and take away one of their prime exports. How’s that for socking it to ‘em?

Oops, I forgot about the problem with that method. That would put America on top again. Can’t do that now, can we? That would kill everything the lefties are working for.

Instead, the libs continue to shoot themselves in the foot with global warming. They use scare tactics, and won’t answer legitimate concerns from righties because they see only political questions instead of the opportunity to educate. And they fly a quarter of a million miles in jets to play music – music! I say! – to show that global warming is bad.

I…uh…I see dumb people. D'oh!

Instead of conceding to righties a bit and protecting the country that lets them be bozos, they have to have their cake and eat it, too, all to the detriment of their own causes.

Some people never learn.

------------------------------------------------------------

Oh, and didja know that Gulliver took four journeys in Gulliver's Travels? When I read it in high school, the teacher had us read about the Lilliputians, the Brobdingnagians and the Houyhnhnms, but said it wasn't worth reading about the fourth journey (actually, in sequence it was the third). What was it about? Here's the summary from SparkNotes (emphasis mine):

Next, Gulliver sets sail again and, after an attack by pirates, ends up in Laputa, where a floating island inhabited by theoreticians and academics oppresses the land below, called Balnibarbi. The scientific research undertaken in Laputa and in Balnibarbi seems totally inane and impractical, and its residents too appear wholly out of touch with reality. Taking a short side trip to Glubbdubdrib, Gulliver is able to witness the conjuring up of figures from history, such as Julius Caesar and other military leaders, whom he finds much less impressive than in books. After visiting the Luggnaggians and the Struldbrugs, the latter of which are senile immortals who prove that age does not bring wisdom, he is able to sail to Japan and from there back to England.

Why do I feel like America is turning into Laputa and Balnibarbi?

CLC Radio

The next installment of CLC Radio will be ready in the next day or two. I'm currently having technical difficulties uploading to podOmatic.

If you've noticed the right-hand column in my blog, I now have the CLC Radio listener embedded there. When you click onto my site, the most recent podcast will be displayed at the top of the listener's list. Currently, it's on Trinity 3. So, if you're reading this and it no longer says Trinity 3, then we've uploaded a new podcast.

You can listen by clicking once on the listener, then again on the "play" button (the right-facing arrow) at the top of the listener.

Enjoy!

The Smoking Fun

The Quipper News Service (QNS) has again snagged an exclusive, just for you. Yes, that's right; an exclusive. That means no one else has it. You can only see it here, exclusively, courtesy of QNS.

We have intercepted THE CORRESPONDENCE from a member of the Ohio voting public that caused Senator Voinovich to change his vote on the so-called Immigration Bill. Many people believe that it was his performance on Sean Hannity's radio program that caused him to change his tune. However, QNS has exclusive access to a Senate staffer in Voinovich's office that has confirmed, exclusively, that this correspondence is what finally did him in.

Page 1 of 3

Page 2 of 3

(That should have been, "cause our federal deficit TO rise". EXCLUSIVE!)

Page 3 of 3

There you have it. Exclusively, from QNS. The actual letter that convinced Senator George Voinovich to vote against the illegal immigrant amnesty, don't enforce the current laws bill. (Oops, we mean the Immigration Bill. Don't want to sound partisan, now.)

EXCLUSIVE!

My Senator is an Idiot

A bigger idiot cannot be found in the Senate than George Voinovich.

Unless you talk about Harry Reid.
Or Lindsay Graham.
Or Ted Kennedy.
Or....

Okay, okay, I get it. Practically all of them are idiots. I'm disgusted with this guy.

Guitar Slingin' Pastors Scare Me

Not only do guitar slingin' pastors scare me, but so do hip-hoppin' pastors...and salsa dancin' pastors...and comedian pastors.

Yeah, they do, and it has nothing to do with their theology...okay, it does have something to do with their theology, but that's not the point of this post. It has to do with them.

What's my problem, you ask?

After giving it up for eighteen years, I've been gigging again for over a year now. It's a blast, a great release on the weekends without interfering too much with family life. The little side income helps, too. I have learned a lot so far, like:

• "Kids" of all ages can give you undue adulation. I had one tamborine-playing chick tell me she wanted to be a rock star like me. Hah! It was all I could do not to laugh out loud.
  
• People can tend to go crazy when you do well on stage. They like you, they try to flirt with you, they want to get your attention.
  
• And, if you're not careful, the attention and fanfare can really swell your ego.

I firmly believe that a lot of the contemporary movements of church growth have more to do with these three points than they do with any theology. We live in a needy society where everyone is compelled to make a difference and needs to see the fruits of their efforts. When Pastor Six String puts on that gee-tar and starts playing with the band, he is no longer a pastor (yes, small "p"), he is a superstar. He is a pop idol. He is loved, adored, admired because he is cool. People can relate to him, would like one day to be as fun and influential as he is, and tell him so. He gets exactly what he's looking for. Everyone gives him the thumbs up or the high-five, but he gives them nothing substantive.

I am thankful that my church's Pastors recognize their roles as called and ordained servants of the Word, and do not try to make themselves the main attraction. They preach the word and administer the sacraments, and don't get everyone all caught up in the emotional willy-nilly. They fulfill their vocations, as they should.

If these other pastors want to become rock stars or comedians, they are free to move on to another career, but they should leave it out of the pulpit.

Heard You Missed Me, I'm Back

Yeah, I know, I haven't posting all that consistently lately. Lots of good stuff going on at home, work and for the band. These things haven't necessarily consumed me, but haven't left much mental time for posts. Here is a status update, book review, blah, blah, blah.

General Stuff

• Happy Fathers Day to all you fathers out there. You know who you are. :-)
• I have never really cared for birthdays, which I why I missed my first year blogaversary late last week. I knew it was mid-June but didn't care to make a big deal out of it.
• Oh, yeah, the Cavs...so the guys didn't make their best showing in the Finals, and their key weakness was exposed. Yes, that's singular, not plural. Until they get some consistent shooters - yes, that includes you, LeBron - you can't tell if the coaching is bad or not. As a caller to a local radio station said, "Whoever said 'defense wins championships' obviously assumed that your offense was at least adequate'". How true.

Band Stuff

Our House of Blues gig last weekend (June 8) was tremendous. It was everything we expected and more! The HOB sound crew was awesome, and made us sound like a million bucks! The stage was roomy, allowing me to wireless my way around the stage to interact with all the band members. Our foot is already in the door to play other special events there; now I just gotta finish the promo pack and get it to them.

We'd like to thank Columbia Chemical for asking us to be their event entertainment. For our band, this gig was hopefully only the first in a long line of gigs at HOB.

Books of Note

I recently read three books - okay, I listened to one on tape, and read the other two - that were very interesting.

1. The Tipping Point by Malcolm Gladwell (courtesy of Scribbit). This book talks about how social epidemics are not caused by one event; they are caused by a number of factors, but one seemingly minor factor pushes them over the edge. Very interesting, especially considering the success/failure of the church growth movement and gaining back the importance of doctrine. Which leads me to...
2. The Market Driven Church by Udo W. Middlemann (courtesy of Dana at Principled Discovery). The author believes that objective truth exists, and that it can be known (hmm, seems I've heard my Pastors say that before). He is not Lutheran, but shows how current society and "faith" - or "fayeth" as he calls it - are helping to deterioriate the state of doctrine and the Christian Church in America.
3. ABC of Allergies Asthma & Lupus by Dr. Fereydoon Batamanghelidj, M.D. (courtesy of Lotzastitches via Marie). I didn't realize that not drinking enough water could cause so many problems, or that a little salt works as an antihistamine. My breathing measurements have increased since I started working with "Dr. Batman's" recommendations, and I haven't taken my inhalers nearly as much. We are hoping the Engineer continues to benefit from the practices as well, because he has the same symptoms as me.
   

See, even though my Blogger profile says I don't read any more, I guess I still do. :-)

Selective Defense

I have recently read articles and heard news stories about cities deciding whether they are pro-military or anti-military. Some city councils have voted their dissent of the Iraqi war - as if that's within their jurisdiction or something. Colleges have indicated that the armed forces could not recruit on campus (hello, Berkeley).

I'm fine with this, on one condition: If these cities have decided that they won't support the military, then the military should be under no mandate to defend them.

I'd love to see a city like San Francisco get rid of all military presence, cut police staff, etc., then have a problem and get no help. You make the bed you lie in; these cities should be held accountable for their irresponsible, self-centered choices.

Just a Bassist In a Rock And Roll Band

Today's the day! We're geeked, we're pumped, we're psyched!

Our August 14th gig at House of Blues was moved up to tonight. We're ready and rarin' to go.

Big night, hope we do well. It could lead to other H.O.B. gigs and corporate events. And we won't look like we are in a boxing ring...


Or in a tavern aisle.

Crazy Circles

I was going to write a post on child discipline, responsibility, and setting and observing boundaries. Things came up, but the idea stayed in my head. They lingered for so long, that additional stuff based on recent work experiences came to mind. So, the post now focuses on...

CIRCLES

Why circles? Because they explain boundaries, discipline, and responsibility (for children and adults) so well. And, no, I'm not getting all loopy on you. Heh, heh.


Assigning responsibility
When it comes to assigning responsibility or setting boundaries, there are typically two philosophies that people consider. They are:

1. Inherently trust - in this philosophy, trust is granted before any proof is given for it. Boundaries are set out at a distance, and people are given freedom to do what they need to do. But, watch out! If the person who is to work within those boundaries fails regularly, then the boundaries start to restrict. "X" marks the spot, and the concentric circles mark increasing - or, in this case, decreasing - levels of trust and responsibility.2. Inherently distrust - in this philosophy, trust is earned. Boundaries are set tight, but those boundaries are loosened, and other responsibilities accumulated, when the person proves themself worthy. Again, "X" marks the spot.So, what is the best way to raise children? What is the best way to set expectations with employees? Those are difficult questions, and may vary by family and by personality.

In the Quipper household, we tend to use both methods; inherently distrust, but also pull back if we see backtracking for any reason. We give them assignments and other ways to prove that they are trustworthy given their age (i.e. physical and intellectual capabilities). If they pass the tests, then the boundaries expand. This expansion may be in the form of new freedoms or increased responsibility. If the children repeatedly prove that they can't handle existing responsibilities, even though they had succeeded before, we may pull back.

I have watched parents who inherently trust, and never pull back. This frustrates me because it looks more often as being done out of laziness than out of any plan on the part of the parents. With some parents, I never see an attempt to explain failure or disappointment to their kids, or to pull back (i.e. discipline) when repeated failure occurs.

At the office, though, an even different type of responsibility change can occur. Some core responsbilities may no longer fall into the expectations of an employee's current role. It looks something like this, where beginning responsibilities are replaced by newer responsibilities:I have seen this happen when senior programmers actually no longer do programming; instead, "programmer" is just part of the title, but the employee has different responsibilities. These responsibilities may include mentoring less accomplished programmers, reviewing their work, or designing new computer systems.

In the "job" of life, however, there are some responsibilities, or core values, that should never leave a child's or adult's area of responsibility. At least, I would hope not.


Taking care of business

The same two philosophies apply at the office, too. Recently, a new computer programmer was assigned to one of my projects. I am not his supervisor, but have to give him some direction relative to the tasks assigned to him. I quickly came to realize that his boss inherently trusted him on many fronts, and I found that the programmer was not as accomplished as was first thought.

I normally set expectations and grant trust first, but this scenario is making me rethink my position. Things aren't always as they appear, and it's better to play it safe than sorry. It's not that the "kid" is incapable; we expected too much of him, yet he hadn't been put in a position to prove himself. I have seen this in the past, and have even caused the situation a number of times. I've concluded that I'd rather put someone in a position to prove themself than set them up to fail.

Growing up and job promotions

How does this all apply to children that have been granted some freedoms and responsibilities, and to employees who believe they are ready to "move on" to a better job position? There are similarities here again, but there are also differences.

Promotions are a little more difficult to work with. Again, there are two philsophies: you promote someone into a position they've already proven they can do, or you promote into a position because there is nothing else for the person to prove in their current position. Trust me, they are not the same. Just because someone hits the ceiling in their current position does not mean they can handle things at the next level.

Promotions usually look like this:
You typically retain some of your current duties, but gain a whole new set of responsibilities. You also dispose of some of your prior responsibilities, as shown by the greyed and blacked out circles.

With our children, I don't see a "promotion" per se. As I mentioned earlier, there are some core responsibilities that never leave the child once they start growing up and earning more freedoms and responsibilities. So, with our children, I see more concentric circles emanating from the core, and not a situation where the center circle shifts.

I have learned valuable lessons in fatherhood, and recently during this employee situation. For me, at least, it is better for me to set solid expectations with my employees, start them on easily manageable responsibilities, and let them work up to more difficult responsibilities and greater freedoms. I expend more effort on a daily basis, but resolve problems quicker and give my staff a chance to succeed. At home, I start with tight boundaries, but expand them as my children pass those little tests that prove they are ready for more freedom and responsibility.

Baby Bro's New CD

Hey all,

The following is an e-mail I received from my brother. I urge you all to check out the first link, especially if you like 2-guitar rock. You can hear a two-minute snippet of each song; once you link to the cd/wasted2 link, the left-hand side links you two the song previews.

Hello everyone!

Just leaving an awesome update.

My Band ELEGANTLY WASTED has now officially released our new CD "Desolation Row".

It is available at:

http://www.cdbaby.com/cd/wasted2

Or you can just go to www.cdbaby.com and type Elegantly Wasted or Desolation Row in the search bar.

CD baby will also be distributing to iTunes, but it will take about 30 days before it is up on iTunes.

I do appreciate all the support. CDbaby is registered with sound scan, so any purchase through CDbaby shows up on all music generated reports as well as through ASCAP. It is the equilavlent (to the artist) of going to buy the CD at Best Buy, with the exception - it's not Best Buy.

However, we are in the process of working on that too though.

Also, we are heading back out of the country this Thursday for 10 in Germany and Switzerland. The shows we played there in March/April went so well that we were asked to do 3 summer festivals.

We plan on doing a US tour in September right now. I do not know the exact cities, but we will be stopping/playing in Cleveland!

Again thank you for your interest and support!

I'm excited for him. Please support him if you can.

Immigration Bill E-Z Reference

Have insomnia? Like lotsa legalese (or illegalese)? Bored to tears?

Or do you have a vested interest in what's going on with our elected, um, "leaders"?

TTLB has parsed the immigration bill in to separate links here. The overview of the parsing can be read here.

And You Thought the "New Math" Was Bad

When this is what publik skoul considers education, it's time to move on. I am so glad that we homeschool our children.

The teachers are lemmings, too. Sad.

Marriage Taken Lightly

A couple thoughts hit me today. Unrelated thoughts, really, except for the one concept that loosely ties them together:

Marriage.

I recently learned that someone I've known for a while has filed for divorce. I don't know the particulars, I just know that it is happening. I feel terrible for the children involved, and for the spouses that can no longer make a go of it, for whatever reason the breakup is occurring.

Like I said, I don't know the details. I am not passing judgment on the action. Who knows if there was cheating, illicit activity, abuse, whatnot? I don't, so I am not commenting.

I do know that, in casual, public conversations, the couple has commented - almost proudly - about how matter-of-fact the idea to get married was for them (I was a participant in one of those conversations). They had one child already, with another on the way, when they decided to make it all official.

I pray for the family, and that hopefully some unturned stone can be turned that will enable them to understand the gravity of their decision. I pray that, if there were no indiscretions of the legal or moral variety, that they would stay together.

I had this event in mind when I started reading some political articles on lunch today. I know, what does a divorce have to do with politics? Marriage is a commitment that is intended to be a lifelong commitment. You don't look around - "aw come on, hon, I'm just looking" doesn't cut it - you don't think "what if?" You made your commitment.

Upon reading these political articles, it amazed me how many more people will make a commitment to a political party than they will to marriage. In politics, there is no "love, honor and cherish" vow - made in front of God and at least two witness. There are no moral, legal or familial strings attached in politics. We can leave the arrangement when appropriate - heck, it's not even appropriate to say there is an "arrangement". Yet, in an institution where the commitment is expected and to be revered - marriage - people drop the commitment as though they are shopping for their next house or looking for their next church.

When we hold more commitment to a political party than we do to marriage, our priorities are misplaced. We need to be reminded of what true commitment is, and to whom we are committed.

Unconventional Research

If you're interested in learning about what the media won't tell you (or doesn't want you to know), let me recommend several sites that provide excellent info:

• The Tenth Amendment Center is about, well, the Tenth Amendment. The latest post is from Ron Paul, libertarian/Republican candidate for President. Not only will you learn about proper application and also abuse of the Tenth Amendment, but you will also learn a bit about Ron Paul.

• Maverick News Media covers many facets of the War on Terror, from home and abroad. It's always a good read, and links to many excellent blogs as well (including this post at Town Commons, which is Fred Thompson's response to Michael Moore's challenge via debate).

• Redstate.com, which not only calls out Dems, but Republicans when necessary, too.

• And last, but absolutely not least, Principled Discovery conducts a Carnival for Principled Government. Dana has conducted five of these carnivals already; I only wish I could make the time to thorougly read through all of them.

Statute of Limitations?

I was talking to a co-worker this morning, and he wryly injected a few lyrics into our conversation. I answered his original intent, then exclaimed:

Oh, that was from Radar Love, wasn't it?!?

He grinned, and said that it was. How smart of me to recognize his wit. :-)

We started talking about Golden Earring, the band that recorded Radar Love. We could only remember two of their songs, Radar Love and Twilight Zone. We couldn't remember when they were released (see here for details), but got thinking...

Two hit singles...

At least a decade apart (or so we thought at the time)...

If you didn't listen to music regularly, you might not even know that the band performed both songs...

Hmmm.

What's the statute of limitations on being called a "one hit wonder"? Is it possible to be a "one hit wonder" twice-over?

Inquiring minds want to know. Do you know of any other bands like that?

Saturday Morning Wake Up Call

Ah, Saturday mornings. Saturday is the one day I can usually count on sleeping in. (Recognize that "sleeping in" usually means I wake up before 8am.) But, alas, my son is taking after my brother in redefining the "alarm clock".

In high school, I worked in a tavern as a busboy. I would work on Friday nights until midnight. My brother didn't really care - and if you're reading this, bro, you may not remember this - and would end up using his alarm clock to wake me up some time shortly after 8:30am on Saturday. Here's what the "alarm clock" looked like:


A musician needs to practice, after all. :-)

My son, the Engineer, is following in his footsteps, sort of. Because he has asthma, like me, and because his bedroom is on the first floor, we have a monitor set up in his room so we can listen for problems. The monitor also picks up anything else going on...like the piano he was playing at 7:30 this morning.

I unplugged the monitor. Didn't help; he definitely knows what it means to play forte instead of piano.

So much for sleeping in this morning. At least we know he likes the instrument.

Oops, What I Really Meant Was...

Here's an awesome article from Eye On The World about Iraq's WMDs. Our mainstream media talking heads definitely have short memories...

...and even shorter attention spans when the news doesn't suit us. Fancy that!

And then there's this spinning of an Iraqi resolution, courtesy of the New York Times, of course.

It Can't Happen Here

At least, not if you believe the Democratic leadership, the mainstream media, and academia. But I repeat myself.