Sympathy for Jesse Jackson

I've agreed with very little of what Jesse Jackson has said or done the last twenty years. Like the generals of the old bromide, he was fighting the last war- his language and tactics, I thought, being wrong, even counterproductive for this day and age. Like a still-touring 60s rock band, he had become a parody of himself.

Then came the flap over the live-mike, unguarded comments about Barack Obama. I don't need to repeat what he said; everyone has heard it. Heck, there are undiscovered Neolithic peoples in the rain forests of Indonesia who could quote it. It was a Nine Day Wonder, endlessly deconstructed on both TV and radio talk shows. Then came Gaffe Part II, when it was revealed that he had used the "N" word during the diatribe, setting off another round of clucking.

I feel genuine sympathy for Rev. Jackson for the first time in decades. What must he feel when he looks at Obama? Here is proof that he could have been a candidate- perhaps President- if the Democratic Party had ever truly been behind him. He now knows that he had been nothing but a token, a bit of affirmative action to the party, a means to an end- not respected for what he was, but merely for the votes he could deliver. He sees an interloper in his chair, a kid who hasn't been there, hasn't done that; someone who was in diapers while Jesse was putting his life on the line. Someone with great potential replacing someone with great accomplishments.

Isaac Newton said "If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of Giants." Never before have I wondered what it must have felt like to be one of those giants.

For all STAR WARS fans

The Imperial AT-AT Walker lives, courtesy of DARPA .

More updates to "An Inconvenient Truth"

Al Gore has appeared before Congress and more importantly (judging by popularity ratings) Oprah Winfrey saying that man-made Global Warming is now "settled science", comparing dissenters to "Flat-Earthers". Some Global Warming activists have gone farther than that- Scott Pelley has been quoted on the CBS News PublicEye blog saying: "There is virtually no disagreement in the scientific community any longer about ‘global warming.’ … The science that has been done in the last three to five years has been conclusive.” Pelley also posted this quote to the same blog: “If I do an interview with [Holocaust survivor] Elie Wiesel, am I required as a journalist to find a Holocaust denier?”

Is that the case? Are those who deny that the Global Warming that occurred between 1970 and 2000 (there has been no change the last eight years) no better than holocaust deniers? Let's look at them. There are a few deniers associated with the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine ... 31,000 of them! "On May 19th 2008, OISM announced that over 31,000 scientists, including more than 9,000 with Ph.D.s, signed a petition that states, "... There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane or other greenhouse gases is causing, or will cause in the future, catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere and disruption of the Earth's climate..." Signatories include such luminaries as theoretical physicist Freeman Dyson, MIT's atmospheric physicist Richard Lindzen and first National Academy of Sciences president Frederick Seitz. More than 40 signatories are members of the prestigious national Academy of Sciences."

Then there's the American Physical Society , which has reversed its stance on climate change and is now proclaiming that many of its members disbelieve in human-induced global warming. "In a posting to the APS forum, editor Jeffrey Marque explains,"There is a considerable presence within the scientific community of people who do not agree with the IPCC conclusion that anthropogenic CO2 emissions are very probably likely to be primarily responsible for global warming that has occurred since the Industrial Revolution." This Article shows one of the things they are discussing:
"WASHINGTON (7-15-08) - Mathematical proof that there is no “climate crisis” appears today in a major, peer-reviewed paper in Physics and Society, a learned journal of the 10,000-strong American Physical Society, SPPI reports. Christopher Monckton, who once advised Margaret Thatcher, demonstrates via 30 equations that computer models used by the UN’s climate panel (IPCC) were pre-programmed with overstated values for the three variables whose product is “climate sensitivity” (temperature increase in response to greenhouse-gas increase), resulting in a 500-2000% overstatement of CO2’s effect on temperature in the IPCC’s latest climate assessment report, published in 2007."

Let's not leave Europe out- in a paper from the Danish National Space Center entitled "Reply to Lockwood and Fröhlich –
The persistent role of the Sun in climate forcing", they authors say, "As for the upward linear trend removed from Fig. 2 (lower), it is customary to attribute to greenhouse gases any increase in global temperatures not due to solar changes. While that is reasonable, one cannot distinguish between the effects of anthropogenic gases such as carbon dioxide and of natural greenhouse gases. For example, increased evaporation means that infrared radiation from water vapor, by far the most important greenhouse gas, will tend to provide positive feedback for any global warming, whether driven by anthropogenic or solar forcing. In any case, the most recent global temperature trend is close to zero."

It's starting to sound to me that there's some wiggle room here, that anthropogenic Global Warming is "settled science" only to Al Gore. What is the truth? I don't know; I'm not competent to say. Neither is Al Gore. In fact, neither are many of the scientists on both sides of the debate; a scientist, when speaking outside his specialty, is merely an educated layman. Even Nobel Prize winners. You doubt me? I offer in evidence William Shockley
, 1956 Noble Prize winner for physics, co-inventor of the transistor, one of the founders of silicon valley... who believed that it could be mathematically proven that Blacks are inferior to Whites. His math was correct, but his presumptions were wrong- which is what Global Warming debaters are saying about each other.
This being the case, it bothers me that both Presidential candidates are big believers, and want us to spend a fortune on programs that will further damage our economy before it is even determined what can be done, and what should be. I'm hoping that the new Congress will consider any such measures closely.

Today's job market

A pet peeve I have about our denomination

is demonstrated by this video from the excellent DiscoverUU :

The Unitarian Universalist Association was created in 1961- only four people in that list lived beyond that date. The others may have been Unitarians, (although technically, some of them must have been Congregationalists, as the AUA wasn't formed until 1825), or they may have been Universalists, but they weren't Unitarian Universalists. Actually, I suspect that many of them, were they alive today, would be UCC rather than UUA.

What is this tendency we have to claim any celebrity in all of history who doesn't have a formal declaration of belief in the Nicean Creed on record as one of ours? Are we insecure about the comparative youth of our denomination, like a fuzzy bunny Wiccan who claims unbroken descent from Lilith? Whatever it is, I wish we'd stop; there's plenty to be proud of in the UUA's short history, and we should be touting that- we don't need to borrow glory from predecessors who may or may not even agree with what we are today.

Here's one I haven't heard before

Man goes to church. Man says he was asking God to have "a real experience" while praying at church. Man says he was so consumed by the spirit of God that he fell and hit his head. Man sues church!

An example of why P.C. "experts" are ignored

This headline from the Telegraph: "Toddlers who dislike spicy food 'racist'"

"Toddlers who turn their noses up at spicy food from overseas could be branded racists by a Government-sponsored agency.

The National Children's Bureau, which receives £12 million a year, mainly from Government funded organisations, has issued guidance to play leaders and nursery teachers advising them to be alert for racist incidents among youngsters in their care.
This could include a child of as young as three who says "yuk" in response to being served unfamiliar foreign food."

Of course, everyone on the planet- expect for race relations experts- knows that toddlers are notorious for their food issues; every book on childrearing ever written contains a chapter on it. Sometimes they are finicky, sometimes they develop irrational hatreds of or attractions to certain foods at random- and then change their minds with a rapidity that leaves flip-flopping politicians in the dust. It is a natural stage of human development.

But that means nothing to such "experts", who can stretch farther than Reed Richards in the pursuit of offense. We are frequently chastised for using "code words" that are so well coded that neither the speaker nor the audience understood the "code". Indeed, sometimes the codes are not merely obscure, but fictitious; for example, "picnic" has nothing to do with lynching, "rule of thumb" is not derived from wife beating, and people went on "outings" long before gay activism. You'd think "experts" would use Google or Snopes before going out on a limb, but then as a rule they don't have to worry about anyone calling them on it.

I just pray that the spicy food hadn't been packed in a brown bag .

UPDATE: I've just learned that "Black Hole" does not mean a collapsed star with near infinite gravity, as I've believed all my adult life; it is a racial epithet. So is "Devil's food cake", according to this Dallas County Commissioner

Apparently, in Provincetown

"sex on the beach" is not a drink. I've seen this story a number of times over the past week, but could never come up with a satisfactory comment. Then I realized that the perfect comment had been made forty years ago.

Parents, are you raising children or adults?

This is the question asked by sociologist and youth minister Jim Hancock in his book "Raising Adults: A Humane Guide to Parenting in the New World". What he means by that is explained in this Indianapolis Star article : "Our task has often been defined as raising children," Hancock said, "and ultimately that's what we've ended up with -- adult-aged children who don't feel very well prepared for life in the real world. I think if we were to shift our emphasis to raising adults, everybody is happier."

Jim describes a method of parenting that teaches children how to become independent. "One thing we should never ask our kids is, 'Do you have your jacket, homework, gym bag, backpack, keys,' listing everything I can think of that you might possibly need in order to survive your day. I think effective parents learn to ask their children, 'Do you believe you have everything that you need for today,' and teach their children to figure out what is on that list." He demonstrates classic errors: "Hancock tells the story of a woman who skipped a business meeting to take her adolescent son's homework to him at school. "I thought, 'how long has she been doing that?' Probably since he was 6 years old, and he's learned to depend upon her for those kinds of details. He will be very angry with her one day when she takes a vacation or dies and he's left without his homework. Not to mention when he's 32 and the boss needs the memo, and his mother is not there to bring the document to him."

He also offers a free online book , "Ten Things We Should Never Say to Kids".

Women earn only 87% of what men earn

if they work for Barack Obama, according to this story from the Cybercast News Service. The 26 men working for Obama's Senate staff office average $55,962.00 per year; the 31 women average $48,729.

What about McCain? After all, "Mr. McCain is an honorable man, we respect his service. But when you look at our records and our plans on issues that matter to working women, the choice could not be clearer," Obama said in Albuquerque, N.M. last week. Of McCain's non-intern employees, 30 were women and 16 were men. After excluding interns, the average pay for the 30 women on McCain's staff was $59,104.51. The 16 non-intern males in McCain's office, by comparison, were paid an average of $56,628.83.

Hmm. That is a clear difference.

This is why

"Civil Union" or "Domestic Partnership" is not an adequate substitute for marriage. A woman who was prevented from seeing her dying spouse- despite having a power of attorney in hand- is suing the Hospital involved. The hospital has not made a statement, but I doubt they can claim any medical reason for keeping her out- brain aneurisms are rarely communicable. details here


P.S. See Why pro-marriage equality is a conservative position

The $300 million challenge

proposed by Senator McCain for the development of a better battery for electric cars would be a waste of tax dollars, because the battery is not the limiting factor for electric cars.

What do I mean? Suppose there were a battery that was the size of a pack of cigarettes, held enough power for a family of four to travel 500 miles, was non-flammable, non-toxic, biodegradable, and cost $0.29 to manufacture- it still wouldn’t make the electric car viable. Why? Because the battery has to be recharged- and we simply don’t have the electrical capacity to do it.

Look- a gallon of gas is equal to 36.6 kw/hrs. We go through 400 million gallons of gas a day. That equals 14.6 gigawatt/hrs/day. We generate 4 million gigawatt/hrs per year... divided by 365, that makes 11 gigawatt/hrs/day. If we did nothing but recharge our cars every day, we’d still have only 2/3 the electrical capacity needed. Even if you assume vast improvements in efficiency for the electric car, we still can’t generate even a fraction of the electricity needed for electric cars. Heck, we can’t even generate enough electricity to avoid rolling brownouts on really hot days as is.

McCain was on a better track when he proposed building 45 nuclear power plants by 2030- the only thing wrong with that was its timidity. We need 400 more nuclear power plants, not 45. France gets 80% of its electricity from nuclear- we only get 20%. If we got 80% of our power from nuclear, we’d cut our carbon footprint far, far below Kyoto standards... if we doubled that we could then have our electric cars as well, and not only be independent of foreign oil, but take our carbon emissions back to 1890 levels, not 1990.

If anyone can tell me why it wouldn’t work, I’d love to hear it.

Saved by the bra

Had this woman been an old-school feminist, she'd be dead by now.

When you're away from home...

... and you really gotta go, who you gonna call? mizpee.com!

God is alive, magic is afoot...

Talking with some people about my post, All's right with the world" , I realized that many did not get the reference, so here's where it's from- words: Leonard Cohen; music: Buffy Sainte-Marie; from the album Illuminations, 1969:

"Wisconsin's Selena Fox says pagans abuzz about "unicorn.""

So says the headline of this article in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. While Ms Fox does not speak for me, I must admit the unicorn is pretty cute!

The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly in race relations

The Good: Barack Obama took up Bill Cosby's fight for black families in this Father's Day speech at the Apostolic Church of God in Chicago, calling for more involvement by young black fathers in their children's lives. This is not a new issue for him: "Obama often speaks about the importance of parental involvement. In Washington, he sponsored legislation to get more child support money to children by offering a tax credit for fathers who pay support, more efficient collection and penalties for fathers who don't meet their obligations."

The Bad: In this interview with Alicia Keys at Blender.com, she explains that "Gangsta rap" is a government conspiracy:
"“‘Gangsta rap’ was a ploy to convince black people to kill each other,” she says, putting down the sandwich. “‘Gangsta rap’ didn’t exist.”

Come again? A ploy by whom?

She looks at us like it’s the dumbest question in the world. “The government.”"

Perhaps she listens to too many of Rev. Wright's sermons.

The Ugly: A company in Utah is selling- I'm not making this up - sock monkeys dressed as Barack Obama. *sigh* I suppose I should say that they claim no offense was intended, that they were just naive... hmm... as naive as we would have to be to believe that?

A war on the Summer Solstice

Anyone who remembers Bill O'Reilly's complaints about a "war on Christmas" will be amused by this article from the Roanoke Times.

A photograph of the soul?

So claims Dr. Andrew Newberg of the University of Pennsylvania, according to this story from the St. Petersburg Times. He uses a process called single photon emission computed tomography, or SPECT, to scan the brains of deeply religious people such as monks and nuns while they are praying or meditating, and has discovered unusual functioning of two portions of the brain while they were doing so.

"The frontal lobes got especially busy. They're the part of the brain he calls the "attention area." The meditators had clearly tapped their frontal lobes to focus on their task.

He also saw the thalamus kick in. That's a pea-sized piece of the brain atop the brain stem that, among other things, sends sensory information to the frontal cortex, where much of our heavy thinking happens. Whatever was happening in meditation, the thalamus was making it feel very real.

The surprise was elsewhere, in the parietal lobe, the part of the brain that helps us orient ourselves in relation to things around us. Newberg discovered that the nuns and Buddhists had actually shut down that part of the brain, suspending their senses of space and time. It was then that they entered the peak of their transcendent experiences — altered states of "timelessness and spacelessness."

If religious devotions are a brain function, that may answer the question I raised, Do we choose to believe?

All's right with the world

I saw the first fireflies of the season in my backyard last night. "Magic is alive, God is afoot..."

Questionable judgment

The Marines have been performing urban warfare exercises here in Indianapolis for a few days now, and aside from the inevitable protests, they have come off smoothly. This afternoon I was able to witness some of them directly.

A helicopter gunship much like this one did a number of "touch and go" landings in Ellenberger Park, 100 yards from my house. Between the landings a number of aerobatics were performed; some obviously attack maneuvers, like tight turns and dives at treetop level, some defensive, such as a zoom climb that began at treetop and went up like a gray comet. The heavy thumping sound of the rotor blades spoke of vast power barely controlled, but the aerial maneuvers were a graceful dance that belied their purpose. It was beautiful to watch.

It was also completely irresponsible.

This wasn't an air show, where all aerobatics- by law- are performed along the flightline or over empty fields beyond, so that should an accident occur, there is only ground to fall on. These maneuvers were being performed above homes full of families. They weren't being performed at thousands of feet; sometimes not even hundreds of feet- when I said "treetop", I was speaking of tens of feet altitude. Should something have happened, it would not have been a choice of whether a house would be hit, but which one.

I'm not being Chicken Little here- accidents do occur. Even the Blue Angels and the Thunderbirds have had their accidents, and helicopters are by their very nature the least reliable of all flying machines. Don't tell us here in Indianapolis, where in 1987 an A-7 D Corsair crashed through the lobby of a Ramada Inn, that it can't happen.
Yes, I know that statistically the odds of an incident were very low, but it was a risk that need not have been taken at all. The ground troops need a live city to practice urban warfare in, but helicopter units do not. There are abandoned neighborhoods, and in this economy, a lot of abandoned industrial parks they could have used- if, for some reason, they couldn't have used mockups. Nothing happened this time, but only because they had a good dice roll. I hope policies are changed before they come up snake eyes.

Global Warming may occur faster than we thought

From a scary article in the New York Times:

"Adaptation -- the peaceful shifting of food-growing areas, coastal populations and so on -- seemed possible, if difficult, when abrupt change meant a few degrees in a century," he wrote. "It now seems a much more formidable task, requiring global cooperation with swift recognition and response."

The new studies found that the average global temperature can change as much as 18 degrees Fahrenheit in a couple of decades during interglacial periods, Dr. White said. The current average global temperature is 59 degrees Fahrenheit."

The interesting thing about this is that this article is from 1993, and is referring to climate events 250,000 years ago. Damn, did cavemen have SUVs?

A question not asked

In the speculation about whether or not Senator Obama will pick Senator Clinton as Vice President, the question I’ve not seen anyone ask is whether she should accept if asked. I think she’d be wise to refuse.

If Obama wins, she will get no credit for it- even in a normal year, it is conventional wisdom that people vote for the top of the ticket, not the bottom; and this time, with the Republican party at its nadir and Obama being so charismatic, she’d be seen as unnecessary icing on the cake. Should Obama lose, rightly or wrongly she'd be blamed for the loss, as Ferraro was before. There is simply no upside for her in the campaign.

Should they win, Obama could not afford to give her any real power. If she had power and success, the Cheney to his Bush, then with or without her permission her followers would paint her as the power behind a charismatic figurehead- it would be the perfect setup for her own run eight years from now. Obama could not allow that, and not just for his own ego; it would be the ultimate irony if the first black President was seen as a token figurehead. There's no way he'd accept that legacy. On the other hand, should she be given power and fail, President Obama would get the blame in the end, and rightly so; "the buck stops here." Therefore, should would never be given any real power in an Obama administration.

If she were to serve as Vice President without any specials powers, she'd suffer the fate of all such vice Presidents: instant obscurity. That would give Nancy Pelosi another eight years as the most powerful woman in America, making her a serious threat to Senator Clinton's chances to become the first female President. On the other hand, should Hilary stay in the senate, then given Senator Kennedy's poor health and the fact that Senator Byrd can't last forever, she will quickly become the public face of the Senate, a perfect place to launch her next campaign from. the one and only thing she gains from serving as Vice President is the chance to become President without standing for election should the unthinkable happen, and the last two Presidents who reached the office that way, LBJ and Ford, were not successful.

This wasn’t in the owner’s manual

A new use for your cell phone!



and



Hmm… I wonder what portion of the brain is next to our ears?

Missing the point

I was struck once more while reading blogs and talking with friends about Obama quitting his church that many- if not most- Unitarians never understood what the real issue was in the first place. The source of this misunderstanding is the very nature of UU itself.

Uus share a great many things- values, community, a love of good coffee. We share the humanist (small h) principle of putting our values into action, working to make the world a better place. The covenant let into the wall of my congregation begins “Love is the spirit of this church, and service is its law…” But the one thing we do not share is belief.

A Unitarian who agreed with everything he heard from the pulpit would be nervous; no two Unitarians in the entire denomination would agree with each other on everything- not even that statement. This being the case, it’s hard to understand the uproar over the things said by Obama’s pastor- “Of course he doesn’t agree with that, but so what? I disagree with my minister over a lot of things! They’re just trying to play the patriotism card or the race card.”

But a “John 3:16” Christian is very different. They don’t share “values”; they share beliefs. Beliefs are the only way to heaven, the only thing that matters. They do not fellowship for the purpose of doing good works; indeed, the Baptists- I know, I was raised one- actually warn against “trying to buy your way into heaven with good works”. To them, good works are the result of salvation, not the cause, and none of the good you’ve done in your life will save you if you don’t believe.

No such Christian, therefore, would stay in a church where he had any serious disagreement with the Pastor in any matter of faith or interpretation of scripture. If a lot of his fellow congregates agreed with him, he’d call for a vote to dismiss the Pastor- I know, I have witnessed such proceedings more than once; if not, he’d leave to find a congregation or denomination he’d more compatible with. That’s why there are so many different denominations to begin with.

This is why Obama had to quit his church. Some fundamental Christians will believe that he did it for political reasons only, but others will give him the benefit of the doubt, believing that he was tempted to stay as long as he did because he had friends there… but once having his nosed publicly rubbed in what was being preached there, staying would have been a public declaration to many tens of millions of Christians of his agreement with it, by their lights. Even if he were not running for President, becoming a public figure removed the option of staying with a church whose Pastor he disagreed with, no matter how comfortable he’d been there.

The etymology of phrases

In her latest post , CC asks, “Ever wondered where “That’s what she said” came from?” She’s expecting a negative, for she says, “Me neither…”, but actually I have wondered.

I find the etymology of phrases and picturesque language as fascinating as the etymology of words themselves. They make the difference between informing someone and telling a story; properly used, they produce effects and generate images that one would not have thought mere words capable of. They are the mark of the true educator, author, or journalist.

Their power can be told by the fact that once a particularly effective phrase enters the common vernacular, it gets run into the ground. One such is “fast and furious”- I became curious about this one a couple years ago after reading and/or hearing it spoken seventeen times in a single day. It may well be the single most overused couplet in the English language; many people seem incapable of even saying the word “fast” without completing it.

I started researching it- not seriously, but whenever I thought of it while a resource was available. To date, the oldest use of the phrase I can find is Robert Burns’ poem, “Tam O’Shanter”:
“As Tammie glower'd, amaz'd, and curious,The mirth and fun grew fast and furious…And how Tam stood like ane bewitch'd,And thought his very een enrich'd"

Is anyone aware of an earlier usage?

P.S. If any of you are Cutty Sark fans, are you aware that both the ship and the liquor were named for this poem? The young witch whose dancing so entranced Tam wore a “cutty sark”, which apparently is a nightshirt far too short to answer the call of decency.

P.P.S It occurs to me that an appropriate use of the phrase would be to describe Danica Patrick's walk down pit row in the 500.

The Indiana Voter ID law

Indiana’s Voter ID law has now been upheld by the Supreme Court, and much hooting and hollering has come from the left as a result. One example of such is this opinion piece in the Chicago Tribune, Indiana voters shut out for no rational reason by Steny Hoyer and Chris Dodd. Hoyer & Dodd speak of the requirement that voters who registered before 2007 (if you registered after, you can get the FREE ID on the spot) show some form of photo ID before voting as “…a high hurdle in front of their right to vote—the most fundamental right in a democracy.” They use as their example the case of a dozen nuns who were turned away at the poll in this last election as proof.

Of course when one reads the story, ( Indiana nuns lacking ID denied at poll by fellow sister ), one might well come to another conclusion- especially if one adds a couple details known because one lives here. Point: They had three full years since the law was passed to prepare for this election. Point: The ID is FREE. Point: Even without ID, you’re allowed to cast a provisional ballot and are then given another whole week to present some form of ID. These nuns did none of these things- evidently, because they depended on the poll worker, another nun, to let them in anyway. Unfortunately for them, she obeyed the law.

Hoyer & Dodd claim this law will “…place a disproportionate burden on the thousands who are too poor, too elderly or too disabled to meet rigid ID laws.” Really? Hmm… the law accepts any dated, government issued photo ID- which includes the ID’s issued to almost all recipients of government assistance such as WIC, AFDC, Section 8 housing vouchers, SSI, VA benefits, etc. So the “too poor, too elderly or too disabled” who would have this “disproportionate burden “ would have to be someone who has never driven, never served in the military, never received government assistance, and is just mobile enough to get to a license branch to register to vote, but cannot stay long enough to get his picture taken for the free ID to be issued. That’s a pretty narrow window- so narrow that the first judge to hear the case asked those seeking to strike down the law to give him a single name, a single person in a state of six million who would be so affected… and they couldn’t.

The Democrats opposing this law (and the opposition has been 100% Democratic so far) say that their only motivation is fear that somebody, somewhere might be disenfranchised. Curious… last year, right here in Marion County, Indiana, the new County Clerk botched an election so badly that hundreds of polling places opened hours late, and a dozen never opened at all. This was genuine disenfranchisement- you can’t even cast a provisional ballot if the poll never opens. And not one of these Democratic champions of Voter’s Rights filed a suit, issued a statement, or wrote an op-ed denouncing this clerk for disenfranchising thousands of voters. So what’s the real story, guys?

The soul of the Libertarian Party in the balance

When the Libertarian Party holds its convention in Denver over the Memorial Day weekend, their selection of a candidate for president will be a defining moment for years to come. The leading contender, many pundits say is Bob Barr .

Bob Barr is a former Republican, and very popular among that very set of Republicans most disappointed with the choice of McCain. A “conservative’s conservative”, he had a lead role in the impeachment of President Bill Clinton. He’s a fiscal conservative, and an advocate of the “Fair Tax”, which would bring another disaffected group of voters. He calls for smaller government, and is against the Gulf War. With him at the helm, the Libertarian Party could get a bigger share of the vote than ever before, become a real player the other two parties would have to deal with.
However… he also is many things anathema to the Libertarian spirit. “Bob Barr was a strong supporter of the War on Drugs. He wrote the Defense of Marriage Act. He also voted for the Patriot Act. Bob Barr also proposed that the military ban the practice of Wicca among its ranks…” For someone like me, this makes him a non-starter- it is incomprehensible to me how the Libertarian Party could in good faith accept his application.

Will the Libertarian Party, in the pursuit of the bright elusive butterfly of votes, sell its soul, or will they accept the lesser role of goad and hold to their principles? Am I to be shouldered out of yet another party, to have no political home at all?

Movie review: Iron Man

In a word, fantastic! The best adaptation of a Marvel Comic to a live-action movie yet. The high points:

1. Casting. It would never have occurred to me to cast Robert Downey Jr. as Tony Stark- which is why casting directors make the big bucks, and I don’t. He and Paltrow captured the relationship between Stark and his Gal Friday Pepper perfectly. Is it just me, or is Jeff Bridges starting to look like Jesse Ventura nowadays?

2. Special effects. It would have been so, so easy to go over the top- but they didn’t. The effects were exactly what was needed to tell the story- perfectly done, but no flash for flash’s sake.

3. The story. In today’s atmosphere, it would have been tempting to make the story a debate on America’s presence in the Middle East- but they told the story of personal crisis of conscience and personal redemption that the original comic book dealt with. It will be interesting to see in the inevitable sequels whether they deal with his alcoholism as well.

As a fan of the original comic book, I couldn’t have asked for better, and didn’t expect it to be this good. If you’ve never read the comic, don’t let that stop you from catching a fine summer flick.

I guess nothing is so bizarre…

That it can’t become normal if you live with it long enough. Consider the newest vacation resort…

“The sands are white, the sea laps gently and crowds of bronzed Americans laze in the Caribbean sunshine.
They have a cinema, a golf course and, naturally, a gift shop stocked with mugs, jaunty T-shirts and racks of postcards showing perfect sunsets and bright green iguanas.”

Where is this ocean front paradise? Welcome to "Taliban Towers" at Guantanamo Bay !

“While the detainees lie incarcerated, visitors can windsurf, take boat trips and go fishing for grouper, tuna, red snapper and swordfish.
The United States' 1.5million service personnel and Guantanamo's 3,000 construction workers are eligible to visit the "resort", which boasts a McDonald's, KFC and a bowling alley.
They even have a Wal-Mart supermarket.”

While most would consider the resort a bargain, "The vacation comes at a knock-down price: just $42 (£20) per night for a suite of air-conditioned rooms, including a kitchen, bathroom, living room and bedrooms.", I think it only fair to note that 300 men are living there at no charge...

The Earth moved

for me- did it move for you, too?

Abortion as an art form

From the Yale Daily News : "Art major Aliza Shvarts ’08 wants to make a statement.

Beginning next Tuesday, Shvarts will be displaying her senior art project, a documentation of a nine-month process during which she artificially inseminated herself “as often as possible” while periodically taking abortifacient drugs to induce miscarriages. Her exhibition will feature video recordings of these forced miscarriages as well as preserved collections of the blood from the process. "

Ok, I know my pro life opinions are a minority view within the UUA, but I kind of hope that even those of my fellow UUs who consider me a Neanderthal are just a little squicked out by this.

update

Yale University issued a statement saying it investigated and found it all to be a hoax that was Shvarts' idea of elaborate "performance art." She stands by her claims, but it sounds thin Yale Daily News

I still want to spit on her, but for different reasons.

Energy breakthrough

"New Method Rapidly Produces Low-Cost Biofuels From Wood, Grass" is the headline of an article in Energy Daily ,describing a revolutionary new method for making biofuels, or "green gasoline," from wood or grasses, a process that would be much less expensive than conventional gasoline or ethanol made from corn. Even if you double the most pessimistic of their cost estimates, this new biofuel would still be less than we're paying for gasoline today. We could be energy independent as quickly as we can build the new type of stills!

Some thoughts inspired by Ms. Kitty

Back on April 2nd, Ms. Kitty (Ms. Kitty's Saloon and Road Show) announced that she was writing a sermon about the wisdom of earth-centered traditions as a source of UUism, and asked for personal insights to share. Being both a fan of hers and a Neopagan, I immediately sat down to jot off a few things for her... and found I couldn't even begin. Much to my surprise, more than a week of introspection resulted instead. If the following thoughts seem a bit disjointed, well, that's just the way they occured to me.

I am a Pagan who fellowships at a UU congregation, not a UU who happened to find new insights in some Pagan writings. ("Looky what I found- a new metaphor!") While most Pagans are flattered that UUs are so interested in their beliefs, and were genuinely dismayed when CUUPS was disaffiliated, we nonetheless share the misgivings of the Native Americans Ms. Kitty mentioned in her resultant sermon ... the feeling that your faith and way of life has been reduced to "a source" in someone else's religious menu. In the Pagan comic strip "Oh My Gods!", the Unitarian character is named UU of 8 - a reference to Star Trek's "Borg", the alien race that has no native culture, assimilating the new cultures they run across instead.

I was surprised at the strength of these sudden emotions, as I've considered myself a good UU for a dozen years. I found myself thinking of the people I know- including a number of bloggers that those reading these words will probably also know- who have either left the UUA or added a second church into their lives to satisfy a spiritual need Uu just couldn't fill. In fact, one of the Pagans who answered Ms. Kitty's call for personal insights, Jamie Goodwin, is one of those. I fully understood Jamie's dilemma when he had announced his decision some months back- I, too, get very little spiritual satisfaction from UU services.

So why do I still attend, I asked myself. Truth is, nostalgia and inertia account for a lot of it. During coffee hour, I can close my eyes and feel Phil, my late and much missed father in law at my side, ready to discuss the sermon. The aisle I walk down to our favorite pew is the same one I walked to get married. We have friends there. Rev. Clear's sermons are still as intriguing as the day I joined a dozen years ago. But the truth is that if we moved to a new town, it's even money I wouldn't find enough at the local UU congregation to bring me back for a second visit, much less join it. UUism simply isn't a stand-alone religion for people like me or Jamie; we need more.

Back in January, I took exception to the following words by Patrick Murfin: "Inclusion of some pagan rites, whether historically accurate or cooked up in some Victorian eccentric’s garden, does not alarm me if the practitioners do not believe that they are literally invoking specific gods, goddesses or spirits who will perform specific tasks or expect the congregation to do so. While there are Wiccans out there—and other organized and semi-organized pagans and neo-pagans—who really, really do believe that every incantation uttered is both real and true, those are not the folks who are comfortable being part of a UU community any more than a Christian who literally believes he/she is consuming the body and blood of Christ in communion will be comfortable." He may have been right for the wrong reasons. The issue is not, as he would have it, that anyone who actually believes in anything is a dangerous fundamentalist.

The real issue is that despite everything else they may have in common that would make them seem natural fellows, one who has felt the presence of the immanent Divine has very little in common with someone who can find genuine spiritual satisfaction and renewal in a mere discussion of nature- especially if the former's path to God is regarded as a mere metaphor for the latter's discussion. These two do not speak the same language; indeed, they just barely share the same reality. Of course they will never be totally comfortable with each other's form of spirituality. They're bound to grate on one another occassionally, even when (especially when?) they're trying to be "tolerant".

And yet both are good UUs- there being no "Pope" of UU to say otherwise. This begs for Ms. Kitty's question to be reversed- what is UU, that studying Earth Centered religions would enhance it? Is there an "it" to be enhanced? Is UU greater than the sum of its sources, or is merely the collective that "UUof8" will assimilate Neopaganism into?

From the sublime to the...?

First watch this indescribable video ...

Then imagine that little girl going into Toys-r-Us for her own tramp stamp tattoo . Coming this summer- plastic practice nipple rings?

The best position on Global Warming- the "Radical Middle"

This story from The Press Association sums up the best policy on Global Warming in the first three paragraphs:

"It would be cheaper and more effective for the world to adapt to global warming rather than fight it, scientists have said.

The scientists - including Mike Hulme, the founding director of the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research at the University of East Anglia - accept the scientific consensus on the causes and effects of climate change, but differ on what to do about it.

Their view, which has caused them to be labelled "the new pariahs of global warming", is that the world should work to reduce hunger, storm damage and disease, rather than spending trillions of pounds trying to stabilise carbon dioxide levels across the planet."

These thnigs should be mankind's goal with or without Global Warming! What are the fears from Global Warming? Drought? Drought is not a function of weather; it's a function of bad water management and bad planning- heck, most of the third world doesn't have reliable water supplies now. It's one of mankind's greatest shames that there are billions of people without potable water. If we built the aqueducts, viaducts, canals, and where necessary, desalinization plants to serve the people who need it today, a one or two degree average temperature change would not be able to overwhelm the system.

What else? Famine? As I noted previously , the United Nations says enough food exists to end hunger today- not in some wistful future, today. All we need do is build the political trust and the distribution systems. Once such systems were in place, food would be routinely routed from places having bumper crops to places having bad crops. Once again, with such systems in place, Global Warming could not overwhelm it.

What else? Disease? It boggles the mind that the world tolerates millions dying from easily controlable diseases even without Global Warming. We have hot years now- in 2003 there was a heat wave that caused tens of thousands of deaths by heat stroke in Europe- but there were no malaria or encephalitis epidemics. We know how to control these things, and controling the CO2 in the atmosphere isn't the method.

If we cared about our fellow man today, we could worry less about Global Warming tomorrow.

We don't see with our eyes

We've just returned from the previously mentioned trip to Italy a little worse for the wear, being both jetlagged and suffering some upper respiratory thing. This has left me feeling too tired to do any housework, so I've been pondering things I learned on the trip- one of which has to do with human nature in general.

I normally wear a necklace- just a thin black cord with two small pendants, both one inch in diameter. One is a gold UUA symbol, and the other, which usually overlays the chalice, is a silver star. A curious thing is that while I was in Italy, a round dozen noted the star. A couple asked if I was Israeli... one older man at the laundromat spoke of his childhood in Beirut... a Murano glass dealer displayed a beautiful handblown menorah.

Why did I call these encounters curious? Because the pendant is not a Star of David, it is a pentacle. Outside of England, Paganism is virtually unknown in Europe, so when they saw a star, their minds saw the Star of David, not the five-pointed star their eyes were seeing. I didn't bother to correct them- there was too much language barrier to fully explain, and they were being so nice it would have been churlish to try... but it did teach me something.

CC, when you become a lawyer, you might want to remember this lesson about eyewitnesses.

Facing my demons

I haven't made an entry in a while because I've been rather busy- traveling in Italy! We've found a lot of fascinating things traveling together- me, my wife, Ginger, and her mother (who I love), Marcia- but it was on a solo side trip that I found the most fascinating and terrifying experience of the trip so far.

We were in Florence, and a must-see on my list (but nobody else's) was the interior details of Dell Duomo. It's not that I'm a major fan of cathedrals, but this one has a very famous dome- huge, masterpiece painted on the inside, and the world's first example of the "dome within a dome" construction technique later used on our own capitol. Most important of all, you're allowed to climb to the top, within the walls, between the domes, to see the construction techniques all the way to the cupola on top, from where you can see nearly all of Tuscany.

I was slightly apprehensive about the climb, 463 vertical steps, but finally told myself, "So what if you're slow- let 'em go around!" As it happened, the kids did squeeze around me, at first, (at the landings, the stairs themselves were far too narrow for passing- in many places my shoulders touched on either side) After a few hundred steps, however, I was no longer being overtaken, my endurance had outlasted their youthful speed.

When we got up to the base of the dome, the path turned from inside the walls to inside the base of the dome itself- you could look up and see the magnificent paintings overhead, look down and see the marble floors hundreds of feet below. At this point I should mention that I have what other people call a fear of heights, and what I call a fear of falling. The distinction is not a silly one; if I feel secure, I can easily look into the abyss, height makes no difference. I can look out the window of an airplane without fear... but a five foot precepice with no railing can make me nervous. It's purely a question of how secure I feel, not how secure I really am.

This walkway, while high enough to thoroughly squick me out, was solid stone, part of the church; I was able to work my way around to the far side of the dome where it re-entered the wall. From there one climbs another seemingly endless spiral of stairs until one reaches a T intersection: straight to the cupola and observation deck, turn to exit.

Suddenly, I was afraid... I had a good idea why one had to turn to exit. I put it off for a while, but eventually one must exit. There was no question of going back the way I came, even if it were permitted, the tightness of the fit would have meant forcing everyone back down with me. Telling myself, "How bad could it possibly be?", I stepped through the archway labeled "Exit" that I knew would lead me back inside the dome.

It could be bad indeed. This time, the walkway was near the very top of the dome, even with the paintings, this time, the walkway was so narrow that not only did I have to turn sideways to fit, but suck it in, too- my butt pressed against the wall and my lower belly against the railing. A few steps, and some projection on the wall popped a suspender buckle off my pants in back; another step and something in front caught the top button of my pants. I slid my hand down between pants and railing and looked down to see what had caught me.

Here's a funny thing I didn't know about domes: when you're inside one like I was, not on the bottom looking up, it's very disorienting- there's nothing to differentiate "Wall" from "Ceiling"... and when I looked down, my perspective shifted and I was suddenly on the ceiling, looking straight down at the floor 463 steps below, with nothing but a stuck waist button to keep me from falling.

My eyes snapped shut, my head snapped back. I chewed on my tongue to prevent the scream that I knew would never stop if I permitted it to start. Tasting blood, I turned my head left (the direction I had to go) and opened my eyes, hoping to find a focal point to prevent me from looking in other directions. I found my self looking at the portion of the painting that depicts Hell. Well, more specifically at a sinner some demon had speared in the back, the poor guy's arms and legs splayed in agony. OK, to be more precise, I was staring at what this poor sinner, were he a Chuck Berry fan, would call "My Ding-a-ling". As stupid and childish as it sounds, I was able to get control of myself by focusing on a 600 year old painting of a wang.

I was able to start moving again. As I did, my eyes slid to the next figure in Hell- a woman this time. And I noticed something. (I had been anxious to notive something, to occupy my mind) The thing I noticed was that the agonies of Hell had caused her legs to come together, rather than splaying apart as the male sinner's had. This observation created a game to occupy my mind, to keep me from thinking of you know what. As my eyes slid from scene to scene, I noted how male nudity was handled differently from female nudity, and kept a running total of wangs / to whats (say it quickly). When I reached the safety of the stairs down, the count was 11-0.

When I rejoined Ginj and Marcia at the Galleria Dell Accademia, I resumed the count; by the time we left for dinner it was 73-2. Contemplating that count prevented me from having any nightmares.

Now you know how twisted I really am.

I would watch more television

if more ads were like this one.

Cafe standards won't fix it

Raising the CAFE standards is the first thing mentioned by any politician when discussing the oil crisis, and they throw out ambitious (to say the least) numbers- 40, 50, even 100 MPG requirements. I guarantee you one thing: any politician calling for 100 MPG CAFE standards either doesn't understand the problem, or is a lying demagogue. Even 50- as a fleet standard, not for a single model- is a fantasy without a breakthrough in basic technology. It might be possible to reach 35- but that's not enough to solve the problem.

Why do I say this? Three sentences: Force equals Mass times Accelleration. Work equals Force over Distance. Power equals Work over Time. What does that mean? That you can only have two- at best- of the three characteristics- size, performance, economy. A certain level of performance is absolutely required for safety's sake- that's part of why they don't allow bicycles on highways- and a certain size is needed for survivability. Those requirements put limits on the third factor, economy. The smallest car in mass production (it doesn't even pretend to have a back seat) that will accellerate quickly enough to merge on a highway ramp (just barely) or drive in the mountains (possibly), and meet American safety standards is the Smart Car, and it only gets 40 city/45 highway. Hybrid cars, despite some claims, don't do any better in real life. Nothing with an internal combustion engine is ever going to do significantly better, (many people don't realize this, but despite the great strides we've made in reliability and cleanliness, the specific fuel consumption of the internal combustion engine has improved very little in the last 75 years) and there is no technology yet ready to replace it. (See Who killed the electric car? ) These are not Republican or Democratic positions, these are physical realities.

Richard Nixon, for all his other flaws, understood this; that's why he lowered the speed limits instead thirty years ago during the first oil crisis- doesn't anyone remember the double nickel? That is still the only quick answer, if it weren't for the fact that the American public is firmly in Sammy Hagar's camp. Finding an alternative fuel will take longer and be more expensive, specially if you want to reduce the carbon footprint at the same time- hydrogen is the only candidate we have at the moment fitting that description, and we're years away from making that practical. Light rail is not an answer- a rail system extensive enough to seriously cut into our gas consumption would take decades to build, and be so hideously expensive as to be "the moral equivalent of war".

It's time to realize that "I can't drive 55" is just 80s big hair rock, not a lifestyle.

Diabetics look away

Ok, I try not to fill the blog with cutsey pictures- there's way too much of that goin' round anyway... but I can't resist this one .

The last one just blew...

Something under three years ago I bought a dozen fluorescent bulbs to replace the incandescent bulbs in all the household fixtures. (except the chandeliers that use shaped bulbs). I've bought another half-dozen since. The first of the original batch went in less than nine months, and the last of the original batch blew today. Of the eighteen or so I've bought, three remain functional.

Verdict: the experiment is a total failure. They don't last a single day longer than incandescent, and even when they worked, I had to buy or position supplemental lamps to be able to read, write, or do any fine work without glasses. The total dollar cost was never amortized because the claimed "longer life" didn't hold true. Given the much greater manufacturing cost, the energy/carbon difference was never amortized, either, and the environmental impact is also a net loss, given that the fluorescent bulbs contain mercury.

Moral: Even if you believe in Global Warming, don't leap on every bandwagon that claims to be a solution without extensive study- which wasn't really done with the Compact Fluorescent Light. It was an example of what is called "politician's logic"- something must be done; this is something, therefore we must do it. You think I jest? Congress has outlawed the incandescent bulb, beginning 2014, and Bush signed it . This is a lesson for future such measures as well- even if actions of humankind have a significant lobal Warming impact, we must take the time to find out if the unintended consequences of our "solutions" won't make things worse rather than better.

Fascinating optical illusion

Things like this make you question whether we live in the "real" world, or just the version of it we see.

Watch "Meet the Press" this coming Sunday

for a big announcement from consumer advocate and perrenial Presidential candidate Ralph Nader, according to Breitbart.com,"Nader to Discuss Election Plans" . Evidently, Nader has been quietly positioning for another run this year:

"Kevin Zeese, who was Nader's spokesman during the 2004 presidential race, but is no longer working for him, said Friday that Nader has been actively talking to "lots of people on all sorts of levels" about the possibility of making another run.

Zeese said he could only guess what Nader might do, but added: "Obviously, I don't think ("Meet the Press" host) Tim Russert would have him on for no reason.""

Hillary and Barack may have more to worry about than who is plagiarizing whom.

Not again

There’s been another school shooting, this time at Northern Illinois University. As of the moment I write this, six are dead.

Why have there been so many school shootings in recent years? The easy answer that many jump to is the ready availability of guns- but that doesn’t bear close examination.

100 years ago, everything- up to and including cannons and machineguns- were legal. The Tommy gun , the machinegun made famous by the “Untouchables”, was sold mail order, no questions asked. (which is why so many criminals owned it) Only big cities required a license to carry a gun, and there were no restrictions on buying them. There were no school massacres.

When I was a very small child, machineguns were restricted, and you had to be 18 to buy a pistol in most places, but anyone any age could buy a long gun at any hardware store. You could still buy guns mail order. Lee Harvey Oswald obtained the surplus Italian infantry rifle he assassinated JFK with from an ordinary sporting goods store. No school massacres.

When I was a just a little older, Marlin advertised their .22s in comic books, and Col. Larsen, “The Marlin Man”, a famous sharpshooter, would wow kids by shooting through the hole of a Lifesaver candy at shows and fairs. I learned to shoot in the cub scouts. No school massacres.

In high school, I was on the school rifle team, and more than half the high schools had their own firing range. This was after the King and Robert Kennedy assassinations, so there were now more gun laws in place, but I still could, and did, buy a shotgun as a teenager. No waiting periods, no number of guns bought restrictions, no background checks- and no school massacres.

A couple of years ago, Indianapolis set a new homicide record, both in total number and per capita. I researched the records then, and noticed something: there were more non-firearm homicides- fists, knives, and clubs- in that year than there were TOTAL homicides, INCLUDING guns, the year I was born.

All this makes it really difficult to blame the availability of guns for the modern shootings. Guns are harder to obtain than they’ve ever been in my lifetime, but the violence still keeps getting worse. Some people are blaming poor background checks, not keeping guns out of the hands of the mentally ill. But that still doesn’t explain why these school shootings have been happening only these last few years- there were people with mental illnesses fifty years ago.

One needn’t be a Jerry Fallwell to conclude that there’s something wrong with society itself that is behind this- there are other symptoms as well: rampant drug use, illegitimacy and divorce rates so high that less than one child in five is raised to majority in a two-parent household. But that doesn’t mean the past was better- widespread racism, sexism, homophobia, and injustice so bad that children reading of it in school can scarcely conceive how bad it was.

Is Humankind doomed to live at the poles? Are the choices always repression and oppression, or anarchy? Does it always have to be either public prudery or public licentiousness, either censorship or open sewers aimed at our minds? Either Prohibition or crack dealers on every corner? Won’t anyone tell people “No, we don’t act like that. Not because it’s illegal... not because you’ll burn in Hell... but because you’re better than that.”?

Valentine's Day in the news

Here's an interesting sampling of how Valentine's Day is being covered in the media. First, origin stories; some trace it to the Roman holiday Lupercalia, some to the Christian Saint Valentine, some both: from Western Cape, South Africa City Vision . From the Brunswick, NJ, dailytargum . From the Opelika, AL OANOW . From the Seattle, WA the DAILY . From the Logan, UT The Utah Statesman . And from the Dimapur, Assam, India Morung Express . Finally, from the Brooklyn, NY Global Politican notice that not everyone approves of the annual rose and chocolate infested frivolity.

Dueling headlines

From Reuters: Climate change may kill thousands in UK by 2017 . "There is a 25 percent chance that a severe heat wave will strike England and kill more than 6,000 people before 2017 if no action is taken to deal with the health effects of climate change, a report said on Tuesday."

From BBC: Global warming 'may cut deaths' . "However, even 6,000 deaths pales in comparison with the number of cold-related deaths, which in the UK currently average about 20,000 per year."

So is Global Warming good or bad? And how much change does it take to matter- we've been talking one or two degrees change in a century... but those stories are talking about a mere ten years from now. And the baked chicken littles wonder why we question whether they know what they're talking about.

The first story referrences the 2003 heat wave that killed 14,000 people in France alone. I had occassion to look that up a few years ago, and learned that in the US, despite having ten times the population, and despite the heat being worse in areas like Texas than it was in France, we had less than four hundred heat-related deaths. The second story mentions 20,000 per year dying of cold in England- again, doing a story on homelessness, I had reason to look up the US numbers, and they're a fraction of the British mortality. Maybe, juuuust maybe... it's time for Europe to start installing central heating and central air conditioning?

The rich are getting richer,

the poor are getting poorer, and the middle class is getting squeezed out of existence. Right?

For the last two weeks I have been pondering

The discussion of worship at Ms. Kitty’s Saloon and Road Show, here and here . They are actually continuations of a discussion Tom Schade began, but her points and her readers’ comments were what sparked my thoughts. (Don’t forget to vote for Ms. Kitty in the Fourth Annual UU Blog Awards - I can say that without reservation, as she and I are nominated in different categories)

For me, one of the problems with our worship services- and, I think, one of the reasons our numbers are so small- is that in most UU services one feels like a member of the audience, not a participant. Indeed, if you equate a hymn with the pledge recited at many civic organizations, there’s little difference between a service and a lecture series. This is why UUs feel so free to play hooky; unless you’re a needed participant, you only need go to the lectures you’re interested in.

Part of the reason for this is our distaste for ritual, and our contempt for “making a joyful noise”- you’d never hear a shout-back from a UU congregate unless the Minister said something nice about George Bush. Another reason is simple inertia; we come from a rather dour, reserved tradition. Other old-line denominations have the same problems, but at least Christians have communion to make them feel they’re part of the show.

One of the most popular services at my home congregation is the annual Christmas Eve candlelight service. Everyone is issued candles; during the final hymn, “Silent Night”, the lights are put out, the candles lit, and the sanctuary is lit by our candles as we file out in a single file procession, extinguishing the candles at the door as we leave. It’s very moving, but not the most effective worship service I’ve seen.

The most powerful worship service I have ever attended was a Pagan Yule service at UU church of Indianapolis. This was not because of the Pagan theology, but the format. UUI has no built in pews, so the Pagans put the chairs in the round, with the leaders in the center. Everyone was given candles. Near the end of the service, the candles were lit, and they started a spiral dance towards the center, singing “This Little Light of Mine”. When we got to the center, we put our candles in a sand box- not extinguishing them, but setting them upright, still burning. By the time I made it back to my seat, “my little light” had become part of a mighty united blaze... it touched a very primitive part of my soul; I felt as if it was the force of our faith, not blind cosmology, that was driving winter back. I watched others return to their seats and gasp when they turned and saw the spectacle they had helped create; many had tears in their eyes. No one who was there that night will ever forget it.

Why can’t we be more like that? It’s not a question of theology; it didn’t matter whether it was Jesus or Sol Invictus being born that night- most Pagans take those stories just as symbolically as most UUs. It was the ritual and the participation that produced the effect. The leaders of that Pagan Grove were not ordained ministers, they didn’t have Doctorates of Divinity. They merely knew how to worship, how to refresh the soul. They knew how to create a sense of belonging, even if it was your first time. If we could capture those elements, we’d never need worry about attendance again.

What this campaign is all about

Here is the program of all the candidates, summed up in a brief synopsis:

Confused about Superdelegates?

Don't be. Here's a simple explanation on how they work in the Democratic Party in my home state, Indiana. (Thanks to Matthew Tully and the IndyStar )I do admit that many other states are more complicated- California much more so- but Indiana tried to keep things simple...

"...Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama -- should their battle continue until Indiana's May 6 primary -- will each walk away with a decent portion of the state's 84 delegates. (Actually, it could be 85. I'll explain that in a bit.)
Let's start at the top. There are two groups of delegates: pledged delegates and superdelegates. First up, the 72 pledged delegates. A portion of these is assigned to each candidate based on the percentage of the popular vote they receive... Of the pledged delegates, 25 are split between candidates based on their percentage of the statewide vote, so if one candidate gets 51 percent of the vote, he or she receives 13 of the 25 delegates.

The other 47 pledged delegates are tied to results in each of Indiana's nine congressional districts. Each district gets between four and six delegates to split between Clinton and Obama. (The exact number each district receives is based on how well Democratic candidates for president and governor performed in 2004.)...

Now let's talk about superdelegates. Indiana has 11. They include the four Democratic members of the U.S. House and Sen. Evan Bayh. Chairman Parker, state Vice Chairwoman Cordelia Lewis-Burks and former Democratic National Committee Chairman Joe Andrew also occupy spots on the list, as do Democratic National Committee members Phoebe Crane, Bob Pastrick and Connie Thurman.

Andre Carson would become a 12th superdelegate if he wins the March 11 special congressional election.

(I hate to bring this up, but there's also one "unpledged add-on" delegate. It's confusing, but the bottom line is this spot likely will be assigned to Democratic contributor Bren Simon.)..."

Simple, but then Indiana is not sophisticated like Massachuessetts or California or Florida. No wait, Florida's delegates don't count; they're being punished. But the thing to watch is the Superdelegates in each state.

Why? First let me note that I'm about to say applies to both parties; I'm not picking on the Democrats here. When they decided to introduce some democracy into the democratic process, rather than having candidates pick in back rooms at conventions, they were afraid it might get too democratic- the people might pick the wrong candidate. So the party created Superdelegates, older and wiser heads that could throw the nomination back to the right choice.

They've never had to overrule the electorate before, but we've never had dueling candidates like this before. Which will the party think is more electable in the fall? Make no mistake; whatever the voters say, that's the candidate who'll win at the convention.

I finally saw "Across The Universe"

Cancellations turned this into a found day for Ginj and me, so we had a nice brunch, complete with newspaper, at our favorite cholesterol cafe, then took a turn through Blockbuster to see if any of the films we missed all summer had come out on DVD yet- we settled on Across The Universe and Elizabeth.

We decided to watch ATU first. I made a huge batch of popcorn in our Theatre II popper, cranked up the volume, and hit play.

***

Well, it was a true 60's film... by which I mean it would have been a great film with a couple hits of Mr Natural in me.

Now for Elizabeth.

Is McCain a foregone conclussion?

Here is how Huckabee plans to win the nomination.

Breakthrough in prisoners' rights

The rights of prisoners who belong to minority religions- Wicca, Asatruar, Santeria, etc.- have been argued at the state and federal level for decades, but never at this level before, and never with their own representative speaking. Friday, February 8, for the first time ever, a Wiccan Chaplain will speak at the Commission on Civil Rights in Washington, DC . Rev. Patrick McCollum, a member of Circle Sanctuary Wiccan church and Wiccan and Pagan civil rights activist, was part of the team that got the Pentacle added to the list of religious emblems that may be inscribed on veterans' tombstones, recently became the Director of Prison Chaplaincy for Cherry Hill Seminary, and chair of the National Correctional Chaplaincy Directors Association. He will speak at 9:30 am on Friday, February 8 at U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, 624 Ninth Street NW, Room 540, Washington, DC.

I cannot follow the logic

of Rev. Rosemary Bray McNatt, UUA Trustee from the Metropolitan New York District , in her decision to not attend the next General Assembly. The issue, of course, is the security requirement that attendees show a government issued ID; she says, "This situation exemplifies our Fifth Principle writ large, and I am consumed by the idea that we have given the US government the capacity to dictate to our General Assembly who might and might not join us." Ok... assuming the worst from the Port security officials, who would be excluded by this? Anyone who drives to GA is already prepared to show ID at any traffic stop. Those who take a train or plane must show their ID just to get there. Anyone staying in a hotel must show ID to get a room. These things apply in every city, not just Ft. Lauderdale. So the only person affected by the special security in the Port of Ft Lauderdale and not at a GA in any other city would be the one who hitchhikes there, and stays at a homeless shelter or tent city in a park, AND who cannot get a government ID for some reason.

So who cannot get the required ID? Not the poor- even if your state does not give free ID as my state does, (Indiana requires ID to vote, and so gives free ID to those who cannot scrape up $10 for a drivers license), and this poor person receives no governemnt aid of any kind, (AFDC, SSI, all other government programs require ID as well), the UUA will buy it for you! (see Frequently Asked Questions About Security in Fort Lauderdale ) So the poor are able to get ID, as are convicted felons, Communists, VooDoo Houngans, left handed albino pipe fitters... in fact, the one and only class of people unable to get U.S. Government ID are illegal aliens. Actually, even an illegal alien could get in if they have ID from their nation of origin- the Ft. Lauderdale Port Security accepts ID from foreign nations, and does not run a computer check on them. (again, see the FAQ) So the only delegate who could be refused is an illegal alien who doesn't even have ID from their home country. Perhaps my congregation is a snooty elitist one, but that description does not fit any of our delegates.

As there is no practical reason for objecting, the only remaining reason is one of principal- the refusal to submit to government even when you're on their turf, rather than your own. I can understand that one, but it seems to me that there's another principal at stake here, too, one that should be balanced against the absolutist non-complance stand- and it has to do with our current debate on the Peace resolution. The raison d'etre for the extra security is that ports are both targets and conduits for terrorism. If there is another 9/11, there will be another war- as simple as that. Unlike the Iraq war, the Afghanistan war had popular support because it was the country from which 9/11 was launched- and a great many of those against the Iraq war are only complaining about how badly it's been handled, not the concept of the war. It seems to me that it's incumbent upon those most strenuosly opposing war to take the lead in following all measures meant to prevent war, and another attack might well mean the full might of the US Military being brought to bear upon the Middle East, rather than the police action it's been treated as so far- something I don't think we want to contemplate. If we want to take peace seriously, we have to take security seriously. Given what's at stake, what kind of example does it set for someone who has to show ID to rent a video to object to showing ID to enter a port?

Is your driver’s license “real” ?

This coming May 11th, the Real ID Act takes effect. From that day forward, if your state’s drivers license does not comply with “Real ID” standards, you can’t use it to enter airports or any Federal facility- including SSI, Medicare, and Veterans’ Affairs offices... and only half the states have so far complied! (the link above will give your states state of compliance) Four states have flat-out refused. Mark your calendars to watch the fireworks...

A special cautionary word for Obama supporters

Remember that the Democratic Party has 796 Superdelegates ; unelected party officials who nonetheless have votes at the convention. It is possible for Obama to win 60% of the elected delegates, and still lose the total delegate vote 48%-52%, if the party regulars break for Senator Clinton... and the Clintons have a lot of markers to call in. If you really want Senator Obama, vote big.

A cautionary word for the 2008 election

The UU Blogosphere is full of hopeful posts about Barack Obama. Perfectly understandable. But they are basing much of their hopes on his ability to change things in America- which is a mistake, and one that could lead to bad feelings in the future. As important as the choice for President is, it’s not the most important choice in front of you in 2008. Not even close.

More important are your choices for House and Senate. The President cannot spend a single dime unless they give it to him, he cannot start a war they don’t give their approval to, he cannot give an executive order they cannot override. In the end, all power is invested in the Congress- even the Supreme Court can be forbidden to rule upon Congressional order. And you cannot depend upon your political party to make a wise choice of candidates; both parties have held power in the last ten years, and neither one has covered itself in glory.

More important still, if you really want things to change, are your local races. A great deal of ink, airtime, and bandwidth will be spent debating the Presidential Candidates’ tax plans, and yet for those of us in the bottom 75% of wage earners, our Federal income tax bills will be meaningless compared to our state and local taxes; many in the bottom 50% with families will pay no Federal income tax at all after Earned Income Tax Credits, etc. It was not President Bush nor Speaker Pelosi who increased my property taxes by $3,000.00 this year, (that’s not the total, that’s the increase), nor was it they who increased the County income tax by 65%- and neither McCain nor Obama will be able to lower them.

Much will be made of the candidates’ education programs- and yet it is not they who build the schools, hire the teachers, select the books, buy the buses- or float the bonds to pay for all those things. The candidates will speak of new or expanded programs for the poor- but it will be the Township (or Ward or Parish, depending on your state) Trustee administering those programs who will make them a success or failure. The candidates will speak of law and order, but it is not they who will decide between new patrol cars or funding the police pension plan. They will talk of bridges to the future- but it will be the local Public Safety and Transportation Commissioners who fix the real bridges we depend upon to get to work.

In Indiana, every facet of government is run by an elected official- counting all levels, we have over 11,000 elected officials. While that’s more than average, there’s not a state East of the Mississippi that has fewer than 6,000- I guarantee that if you look it up, the total number in your state will shock you- especially since I know that you have no idea who they are. Here in Indy, a billion dollars will be spent this year by people no one outside of a few political junkies knows, most of whom ran unopposed... and the same thing is true in your town. Meanwhile, the average citizen votes only in Presidential years- and then says the system is broken when nothing changes.

Let this pattern be broken in 2008. Learn the names of the people who will affect your daily life, and let them know that you know... fix your Ward, your Township, your City, your County, your State- and see how much your life changes, regardless of the presidency!

In the play, "A Lion In Winter",

One character remarks on the unlikelyhood of the scenario they had been discussing. The other replies, "In a world where carpenters are ressurected, anything can happen." From now on, that reply will be "Hey- Giants 17, Pats 14!"