Woman sets up cross in her own yard

Post-moderns cry foul.  On one hand, I can see their point.  That is, from the post-war tendency to put things above people.  It's nothing new.

"Let the kids have a little basketball park to play and recreate."

"No!  It will make our beautiful neighborhood look bad!"

"But we should let them have a place to go and do things so that maybe they will stay out of trouble."

"Screw'em!  I love my home values!"

So this isn't anything new.  We put far more value on things than people, unless there's a natural disaster or tragic event that suddenly injects that God perspective on us about people being, you know, valuable.  So in one case, I can see that people wouldn't want a huge cross in a nearby yard.  Though the fellow bellyaching that it looks like there's a church on the street is telling.

But as usual, what gets me is the combox responses.  It's not just because of the superiority of property over people that many jump on.  It's the 'religion is evil and stupid' meme that they advance.  My favorite was from a young lady who says the parable of the Good Samaritan proves Jesus is a racist, so she's glad he's dead.  I suppose that means if she thinks a person is a racist, she hopes that person dies.  But far more stupid is the fact that the parable of the Good Samaritan has always been pointed to as an example of Jesus smacking at the prejudice and bigotry of his day.  That a Good Samaritan would be an oxymoron in Jewish circles is exactly the point of his parable of just what is someones neighbor.  And so blinded is she by her faith in faithlessness, she misses it by a mile.

Again, anyone still laboring under the delusion that to reject religion is to be intellectually superior must have been on an island out of contact with people who have rejected religion.

File under poetic justice

Looks like Julian Assange, of 'Wikileaks releasing unauthorized secret documents to the world' fame, is rather upset that he was unable to prevent the release of an unauthorized autobiography (for the record, I didn't know there was such a thing as an unauthorized 'auto'biography, but I guess it's possible).  If I remember correctly, the only thing to worry about is if anyone gets hurt or killed.  Otherwise, there's nothing wrong with releasing anything.  He who lives by the sword, you know.  FWIW, normally I would sympathize with a person who feels they were being wronged by someone releasing a book about them such as in this case.  But it's very, very  difficult to forget his self-righteous arrogance back when people were begging him to have the same considerations he has now demanded for himself. 

A headline that parodies itself

Ted Haggard and Gary Busey join "Celebrity Wife Swap."  The only thing more disturbing than the headline is the fact that some network's research indicates there would be an audience for this.  The ghosts of medieval peasants continue to laugh.

R.E.M. is breaking up!

I didn't know they were still together.  But then, they were never my cup of tea.

Why I love the fall

Because of this:

This is a picture of Kenyon College in Ohio from a Forbes article on the most beautiful colleges in the world. Kenyon ranks #1! How cool is that? But notice the picture chosen. A fall picture. Doesn't it just evoke? Who doesn't think of college and remember days walking through the leaves, the chill autumn air, the football games on Saturdays (OK, anyone who went to school in the Southern portions of the country, I know). But when Hollywood wants a college for a setting, as often as not they go to one in the fall in the north. And not because colleges have to be associated with fall, it just makes the whole look better. More beautiful. Fall is God's own fireworks display. It's when we are reminded of just how much fun God must have had creating the universe, and how much fun we are supposed to have enjoying it. Sure, there are other parts to fall. The energy that must be ingrained in us from a lifetime of going back to school, meeting new friends, the anticipation of the fun, the homecoming parades with cider and apples, the field trips to orchards and pumpkin patches, Halloween... And right around the corner Thanksgiving and then the granddaddy of all holidays: Christmas! There is just so much to love about the fall, and God gave us the pleasure of such a wonderfully eye pleasing backdrop against which to enjoy it all. No wonder St. Francis's day is smack in the middle of Autumn! Who else but one who enjoyed everything God created with such zeal:

Most High, all-powerful, all-good Lord,
All praise is Yours, all glory, honor and
blessings. To you alone, Most High, do they
belong; no mortal lips are
worthy to pronounce Your Name.

We praise You, Lord, for all Your
creatures, especially for Brother Sun,
who is the day through whom You give us light.
And he is beautiful and radiant with
great splendor, of You Most High, he bears your likeness.

We praise You, Lord, for Sister
Moon and the stars, in the heavens you have made them
bright, precious and fair.

We praise You, Lord, for Brothers Wind and
Air, fair and stormy, all weather's moods,
by which You cherish all that You have made.

We praise You, Lord, for Sister Water,
so useful, humble, precious and pure.

We praise You, Lord, for Brother Fire,
through whom You light the night.
He is beautiful, playful, robust, and strong.

We praise You, Lord, for Sister
Earth, who sustains us with her fruits, colored flowers, and herbs.

We praise You, Lord, for those who pardon,
for love of You bear sickness and trial.
Blessed are those who endure in peace,
by You Most High, they will be crowned.

We praise You, Lord, for Sister Death,
from whom no-one living can escape.
Woe to those who die in their sins!
Blessed are those that She finds doing Your Will.
No second death can do them harm.

We praise and bless You, Lord, and give You thanks,
and serve You in all humility.

Science in a Wikiworld

Michael Flynn has written one of the best pieces on our modern abuse of science that I've read.  Read it here.  It is so, so true.  Science is used as a club by various segments of our society to win arguments, often when I'm not 100% sure those using the club have any more grasp of the science than I do.

I've said before that I'm a skeptic when it comes to science.  I believe that just like a thousand years ago, the bulk of the things we think are true today will either turn out to be false, or will be entirely reinterpreted when humanity has its next great 'Scientific Revolution.'  Not that we throw the baby out with the bath water.  To me, though, it's worth remembering, especially as the current mantra of modern 'science' is the evils of Global Warming, due largely to all the pollutions that came about when we used old time science to invent all those swell things like cars and trains and washing machines.

But that is where Mr. Flynn tackles a history of how science was treated, and how it was approached.  And why when folks today appeal to airplanes or air conditions to prove their points, it might just be that they are missing the entire meaning of what science really is, and what it isn't.  Read the post, it will be well worth your time. 

Sam Harris makes me chuckle

Like many post-moderns, Mr. Harris saw in the 10th anniversary of the 9/11 attacks a chance to advance his ideological dogmas.  Here's the whole piece if you can't find any other comedy routines to enjoy.

Here is the part I liked.  

“Whatever else may be wrong with our world, it remains a fact that some of the most terrifying instances of human conflict and stupidity would be unthinkable without religion. And the other ideologies that inspire people to behave like monsters—Stalinism, fascism, etc.—are dangerous precisely because they so resemble religions. Sacrifice for the Dear Leader, however secular, is an act of cultic conformity and worship. Whenever human obsession is channeled in these ways, we can see the ancient framework upon which every religion was built. In our ignorance, fear, and craving for order, we created the gods. And ignorance, fear, and craving keep them with us.”

Look at that again.  Notice the bold print.  In other words, in a way reminiscent of Christopher Hitchens and other Atheist zealots, he has said that religion is the cause of evil in the world.  And more to the point, evil that isn't the result of religion looks an awful lot like they were treating things like religion when they did their evil, so that goes to show you religion is the cause of evil in the world!

I know, most thinking people would laugh their gourds off at logic like that.  Religion is evil because all the evidence proves it, and evidence that doesn't support it doesn't count since we've already concluded religion is evil.  Uh huh.  If Glenn Beck or Sarah Palin or Pat Robertson said something like this about any other topic, folks would blow beer out their noses in laughter.  It's a testimony to the fact that both our modern journalism and higher educational institutions are in such a mess that he isn't whipped off the stage with chords of contempt and derision.

Instead, he's a darling of the Atheistic zealotry movement that has found its niche since 9/11.  Cheered on by the media, embraced by academia, and generally seen as a god-king for informing us that his dogma regarding the evil of dogmas is eternally true, and that we must eliminate all the religious traditions he hates, Harris continues to demonstrate that compared to a 21st century Western pundit, your average peasant in the Middle Ages is beginning to look pretty darn smart.

Infanticide isn't really that bad?

Apparently in Canada it isn't.  This little gem of a story has made its rounds, as one can expect.  Now, that a mother can go crazy and slaughter her children is all but an accepted part of modern life.  How common it was in the not-too-old days is hard to say.  But after so many cases, we've come to realize the sympathies, while reserved in some parts for the young victims, tend to lie heavily with the mothers in question.  So it's no shock to see the judge say this:

"This is a classic infanticide case — killing a newborn after a hidden pregnancy by a mother who was alone and unsupported."

This little bit of clinical observation coming in the story after this paragraph:

Court of Queen's Bench Justice Joanne Veit said the public naturally grieves for the dead baby boy.
"But Canadians also grieve for the mother," she said.

You see, there is some grieving for the dead baby boy, but hey, let's not forget Mom!  I give you one of the tragic byproducts of radical feminism.  Not that there isn't a place for the mentally insane who would do such things, and even a place for forgiveness.  But the idea that the grief for the mother deserves to be within a million miles of the grief for the innocent baby, is part and parcel of feminism's mantra of 'equality always whenever convinient', and the second mantra no less important than the first: 'women matter, everything else?  Eh.'

But even that isn't what has sent people over the edge.  That comes from another part of the decision regarding the case:

“The fact that Canada has no abortion laws reflects that ‘while many Canadians undoubtedly view abortion as a less than ideal solution to unprotected sex and unwanted pregnancy, they generally understand, accept and sympathize with the onerous demands pregnancy and childrbirth exact from mothers, especially mothers without support,’ she writes.
The judge noted that infanticide laws and sentencing guidelines were not altered when the government made many changes to the Criminal Code in 2005, which she says shows that Canadians view the law as a ‘fair compromise of all the interests involved.’

It's that comparison to abortion that has many on edge.  Now some have tried to put a positive spin on this, suggesting that the comparison at least admits what abortion is: the slaughter of an unborn child.  But me?  I'm not so sure.  I think it is the logical consequence of our post-Christian narrative.

You see, the post-Christian, post-modern, progressive narrative goes something like this:

Once upon the time cavemen created God because they couldn't figure out why the sun rose and set.  Meanwhile, humans being nothing more than glorified animals, lived in harmony with nature, relishing equality, women's rights, gay rights, and the wonders of socialized medicine while making love in the green grass behind the stadium without nary a consequence. 

Of course, then came the dark days, the age of the Christian Faith.  From here the world was taught intolerance, sexism, racism, homophobia, anti-Semitism, and a hatred of science, learning, intelligence, and socialized medicine.  Over the next two thousand years, it was 'a never ending symphony of villainy and infamy'*, until, finally, the Renaissance happened, enlightened men stopped believing in God, invented science and learning, brought back tolerance, equality, diversity, free and inconsequential sex, and of course, socialized medicine.  As soon as we've swept away the last relics of that ancient force of stupidity and evil, the world will right itself and we'll truly enter into that Utopian paradise of sex, drugs, bathroom humor, government censorship for the glorious tolerance, and socialized medicine.

Well, that's fine as far as it goes.  But there is, and historically had been, a different view.  That view is that despite its flaws and failings, the ideas of the dignity of the human person, equality of the human person, and fundamental rights to be enjoyed by the human person came as a result of, not despite, the Christian contributions to Western Civilization. 

Outside of this tradition was a world of barbarism, slaughter, rape, incest, human sacrifice, ritual torture (some of which found its way into European civilization), infanticide, matricide, patricide, and every other -cide you can think of.  The strong dominated and consumed the weak, and that's how it was because that's how animals do it.  But it was the Christian faith as much as anything - so the old stories went - that put an end to many of these terrors.

For decades we've denied that, suggesting that such tales were fanciful propaganda by the Church (you know, THAT Church), in order to justify its corruption and lust for wealth, power, and world conquest.  While most enlightened thinkers knew that our only hope for a world of peaceful chanting of John Lennon songs was to uncover the veil of deception, and release humanity to our pre-Christian enlightenment.

But there are a few problems with this little tale of Christian horrors.  One, archaeological evidence continues to show us that some of those old tales of human sacrifice and brutal, barbaric living might have something to them after all.  Second, the progressive mantra that 'White European and American heterosexual men are the manifestation of sadistic evil and the singular cause of all human suffering in the world' might be a bit of a stretch, especially as we notice other cultures doing bad things, or controversial things, no matter how much we try to blame the aforementioned.

Finally, there is this story.  For all the decades and even centuries of promising us that to rid ourselves of religion would bring peace, love, and harmony...has it?  The 20th century was the least religiously driven century in history.  A time of peace?  Anyone?  Bueller?

Is our culture thriving?  Are we growing in tolerance, joy, happiness, and togetherness?  Or are things like this - a mother slaughtering a baby and society saying no problem - proof that when we toss out the Christian, we don't get Utopia, we get what was there before: a barbaric, kill or be killed, eat or be eaten rape, pillage and murder world?  Not because its values call for better though its adherents fail, but because that is exactly what the values end up promoting, just as they did before the light of enlightenment came, not in the guise of science and secular philosophies, but came through the stubble and straw surrounding a baby in a manger so many ages ago.   Food for thought, at least IMHO.

*From the lyrics of one absolutely cool and enjoyable song from the movie 'Scrooge'.

Clint Eastwood reminds us that Conservative is a relative term

'Republican' certainly is, as Mr. Eastwood reminds us his concerns for such things as Gay Marriage runs far closer to the more progressive than the traditional Christian.  Many confuse the terms Conservative, Republican, and Christian, as if the three are interchangeable.  They're not.  There is an entire swath of secular Conservatives who are no less impatient with traditional Christian (and other religious) believers as their secular leftist counterparts.  Others tolerate the traditional Christian insofar as they may help at the ballot box.  Still others go even further, and can appreciate the unique contributions that Christian heritage gave to Western Culture, which they value.  They see traditional religious values, particularly Christian values, as more or less something that goes with traditional Americana, somewhere between apple pie and baseball.  Just which group Mr. Eastwood falls into is beyond me.  What is clear is that his Republican identity is in no way linked to a traditional, conservative Christian identity or set of priorities.

Of course his rather eloquent take on the issue, suggesting that anyone should be able to marry anyone, would be better if it were put in context.  Does he mean adults can marry children?  Adults can marry animals?  Adults can have multiple spouses?  Is he really for complete equality for all people, or is he just one more person disguising his prejudices against certain adults by making it sound like support for Gay Marriage is the only true litmus test for absolute moral superiority, tolerance, and enlightened diversity?

Meanwhile, Leonardo DiCaprio, not to be outdone, jumps in with a post-modern version of Archie Bunker's famous 'case closed' brand of arguing:  

"That's the most infuriating thing -- watching people focus on these things," DiCaprio told GQ. "Meanwhile, there's the onset of global warming and these incredibly scary and menacing things with the future of our economy."

Spoken like a true sage.  What I would love to do is say, "You're right  Leo, let's just accept gays can't be married and drop the whole issue and focus on those other issues you say are threatening our lives."  I can't help but think that's not what he means.  Of course he doesn't.  What he means is obvious.  Problem is, like so many progressive values and standards, it's telling it like it ain't, in the hopes that nobody cares enough to notice.

Today, just remember the events, the victims, and those who have died to keep us safe

When we knew everything had changed

The forgotten attack that we sometimes overlook



The sorrow and pride in the first Americans of many more who would die trying to save our country



A headline for the Internet era

Note the headline:

Rich Perry Sex Tape Video Scandal

That's all that anyone needs.  Until you read and discover that the whole thing is done tongue-in-cheek.  There was no sex tape scandal at all.  There is mention about some of the other 'scandals', meaning controversies, or in the case of his religious meeting, meaning failing to conform to secular post-modern dogmas.  But that's it.  This is how you start an Internet rumor: put a headline out, someone googles, sees the headline, and voila!  You've got Perry in another sex scandal that proves all of those religious types are a bunch of hypocrites.  And within days, you'll have folks in comboxes insisting that this is as true as the invention of the wheel.  Nicely done Yahoo News, way to plant the seeds.

Working for Aflac

Is a busy proposition.  I have no doubt it can be a rewarding career, as most who have been there for more than a half dozen years or so love it, make tons of money, and seem happy.  The trick is, making it a half dozen years.  To do that, one has to accept the more or less Darwinian approach that new agents must endure.  An approach that more or less treats one like a sea turtle: you're born, now make it to the ocean, try not to get killed, and survive.  Because of that, my days, nights, and many weekends have been spent trying to keep up.  The fruits have yet to materialize, and I know I can't go on forever pouring out thousands of hours and hundreds of dollars in expenses. 

But I'm ever optimistic.  It is a good company, has good products that do what they say, and it does take care of its employees (those who survive).  So I'm still going to be swinging that bat and hoping for some home runs.  As a result, posts will come in bursts, and then pass for many moons.  In the meantime, enjoy this awesome, and I mean even more awesome than beanie-weenies awesome, picture of Saturn.  So beautiful it almost looks fake, and almost perfect enough to make you think someone may have planned it all (enjoy those on the comments box who were able to take this and make it a debate between the religion of God and the religion of the atheist's intellect). . 

Gibson to make movie about Jewish Warrior

Oh the scandal.  You talk about something that just reeks of 'everything is bad.'  I mean, this was what old gray haired conservatives yelled about back in the day.  Or so the popular narrative of the time suggested.  Now everyone yells about everything.  Everyone is offended.  We attack and accuse.  We condemn.  And we wonder if we learn anything from history.  Much less those who seem hell-bent on insisting we learn and never forget.  How strange.   Does that mean I can be offended if Jewish directors portray the Christian faith in a bad way?  And if I am, should anyone care?  I doubt it.

Clash of the 60s Titans

What with the web buzz about Martin Luther King's potentially embarrassing marital infidelities (in which we are assured it was no big deal since he didn't seem to make an issue of such things anyway), we are hit with another potential Scandal.  John Kennedy, the Messiah for the 60s generation has been found to have blasphemed the same generation's Holy Prophet, St. MLK. 

I look at things and just shake my head.  The generation that took great glee in tearing down the icons of old - Lincoln, Washington, Jefferson (except his whole banish religion stuff), Religion, Jesus, Moses, God, you name it - is now watching the godlike icons it tried to thrust upon us come under the same cynicism and love of scandal it wielded to do its dirty work.  Live by the cynicism and die by the cynicism.

Now, had it been a Billy Graham, or a Reagan, or a Nixon who was found to have said such a thing about King, you can bet your bottom dollar that there would be horror and outrage and your usual 'told you those religious conservative types are a bunch of racists!'  But now, it's Kennedy.  Even though most younger folks seem to see him as more hype than substance as a president, and one around whom scandal flew like crows, the old Boomers still look to him as the real King Arthur of Camelot. 

What will be the reaction?  What will be the controversy?  What will be the conclusion?  I'll bet nothing that has to do with liberals, Democrats, or any post-Christian ideals.

It figures

Multi-millionaire's son wins Mega-Millions lottery ticket. 

Yep, and there's a mocking laughter in it all that makes commentary more or less worthless.  But my favorite:

'Thanks again universe, always looking out for the little guy.'

Naturally at this point the winner is committed to spending the money on ... himself.

Catholic priest is murdered - post moderns cheer!

Yes, it's been a while, and I'm really wanting to jump start the old blog.  Was away for vacation, and then getting ready for school.  Things will slow down - hopefully - over the next few weeks.  I'm also wanting to rethink and reevaluate just how I do the blog.  Do I bring back the comments?  Do I try to engage in thoughtful discussions?  Do I just plow in with the usual 'Me and everyone like me is cool and hip, and everyone else is stupid and evil' that dominates so much of the blogosphere?  I don't know.

I know it makes it tough to resist the temptation to enter such low level debate when I see things like this story about a priest found murdered in Nicaragua.  It's not the story so much as it's the comments.  Basically they go something like this: We all know the Catholic Church is evil, all priests are rapists, so who cares?  This guy got what he had coming to him.  Never mind that the vast majority of Catholic Clergy, like the vast majority of most professions, was not involved in the scandal.  This is post-modernity. We don't suffer trifles like facts.  We just want our side to win.  And if it means the other side should be murdered while we blow beer out our noses laughing, all the better.

Remember - and I think this whenever I see such reactions - the Nazis who slaughtered and persecuted Jews were as often as not laughing it up when they were doing it.  Just like those torturing terror suspects in US prisons.  They weren't bemoaning the actions, they were yucking it up all the way.  Something worth pondering.

Anyway, while it's tempting to want to reduce myself to the level of such folks, I still feel torn.  It worries me where our society is headed, and things like this don't change that.  Still, I know it's more fun to get in and give as good as it's gotten.  I'll see I guess.  For now, that's my thought on seeing so many cheering over the death of a priest that, as of now, we know nothing about. It probably says what we fear the most - that despite assurances to the contrary, the only thing we've learned in the last 70 years or so is nothing at all. Maybe less than was known to begin with.

Boardwalk just isn't worth it

FWIW category.  I've long said that scooping up the low cost, low rent properties as early on as possible is the key to victory in the classic game Monopoly.  Turns out at least one math guru has run the numbers and concluded that's not as far off as some might think.  He at least agreed with me that those who obsess about Boardwalk and Park Place are not sure things when it comes to victory.  Also worth noting, buying up those Orange spaces like Tennessee and New York Avenue are worth the money.  Why?  They are landed on more than others because people leaving jail will inevitably land on them in addition to normal chances.  Oh, and hats off to my wife who insists the Railroads are really all that.  Despite being the son of a Railroad Engineer, my faith in the Railroads was always skittish.  But turns out they are a good buy, but with diminishing returns, as they can't keep up with the income levels once hotels enter the scene.  Altogether a fun article.  And maybe one that wouldn't hurt our nation's leaders to read, and a game that would be worth their while to play.

The economy is neither good nor bad but spin makes it so

We can rest assured that it will all be OK.  Warren Buffett has said we're a AAAA rated nation in his non-partisan and entirely objective opinion.  Besides, we are now being told that S&P's royally sucks anyway, is incompetent and nobody really cares what it thinks (as opposed to about a week or so ago when we were told we had to do anything to keep S&P from downgrading our credit rating).  Plus, President Obama has assured us that pundits are correct, and we are still a AAA country, since S&P and any downgrades don't mean anything.  And let's not forget, Barney Frank said that S&P was wrong anyway, since even had we missed the deadline last week, it shouldn't have mattered since we had plenty of money to pay our bills for some days afterwards.  So you see, all those weeks we heard how we had to come up with a deal or else the end of the universe would happen because S&P was threatening to drop our AAA rating, turns out to have been for nothing.  Of course it does leave us with the troubling, nagging question that if all of those saying we were going to die if our rating was slashed and the deadline was missed were actually wrong by their own admission, then doesn't that mean they could be wrong this time?  Nah.  I wouldn't worry about it.  No matter what happens, we can take comfort in knowing that it was all the Tea Party's fault anyway.

In other news, S&P's downgrade isn't so bad after all

At least that's what they're saying in many news outlets, and that's what Democrats are insisting.  Take Barney Frank.  Why on MSNBC earlier, I heard him say S&P was wrong for saying there was anything big about the process of agreeing on the debt.  Why he insisted that even had we missed the deadline by a few days, there was still plenty of money to take care of things and avoid default.  Several news agencies have assured us of the same thing, and reminded us that this is just S&P after all, either it doesn't matter or it's all part of some vast [fill in the blank] conspiracy.  There are other agencies that haven't downgraded us, and in all likelihood, this won't impact the average American in any event.  Not that we shouldn't care of course.  But it isn't, you know, the end of the world or anything.              

Now, this does sound a little different from a week ago, where we were assured that missing the deadline would touch off Armageddon.  And of course we had to get the process in line and stop messing around with stalemates and cantankerous politicians who wouldn't compromise since it could cause something like S&P to downgrade, and that would be catastrophic. 

But you see, that was last week's undeniable truth.  That was the narrative of a week ago.  In the Internet age, 5 seconds is approximately 4.5 seconds past the average attention span, and what happened a year ago is about when the Pyramids were constructed.  The media, every bit a player in our age of punditry and partisanship over principles, stands by and aids or attacks according to its own ideals and agendas, not being overly concerned that anyone cares what is true.  In short, good luck finding out what is really true in our world. 

Think about that. Can we even know?  Sure, partisanship and punditry have been around since the beginning of time.  But there always seemed to be an umbrella of common values and common sense that said it was time to put the agendas and ideals aside for the greater concerns.  There was a point where someone, somehow demanded some shred of evidence and measured it against a collective fail-safe common sense of priority. Hence Republicans could go to Nixon and say 'You're out of here, you've crossed the line.'  Or Democrats could abandon Jimmy Carter's inept and impotent leadership and try to give Ronald Reagan a chance for the good of our country.  Or Republicans could, again, abandon George H.W. Bush because he betrayed their trust and demonstrated weakness in handling the problems of the day.

But somewhere between 1992 and 1999, when almost the entire left of our nation said ethics, truth, morality, character, perjury, sexual intimidation, affairs, slander and abuse of the office of president to carry it out, family loyalty, and just about any other trait no longer mattered as long as we had plenty of money (while standing by and watching economists warning of out of control debt be obliterated by the president's axe men), we became a country that said 'we don't care.'  Facts?  We don't care.  Data?  We don't care.  Promises?  We don't care.  Ethics?  We don't care.

We care about one thing: Our side winning.  And nothing can happen to this country that we aren't willing to allow to happen if only our side wins.  Truth?  What is truth?, Pilate asked Jesus all those years ago.  And by the 21st century, America has lost any ability or any concern about even trying to find an answer.  If only our side wins.

Happy Birthday Lucy!

I Love Lucy is one of my Mom's all time favorite shows.  If not the favorite.  I grew up listening to that theme (and thinking how cool it sounded), and watching the episodes.  I particularly loved William Frawley's grouchy portrayal of Fred.  Of course everyone is tossing out the accolades and the praise today, this being Lucial Ball's 100th anniversary of the date of her birth.  It's worth mentioning, however, that Desi - the man who loved Lucy - was every bit the brains behind the outfit, and many things that various stories have credited to Lucy today, in terms of innovation and production of the show, belong to him. 

She, of course, was every bit as important and creative and innovating, and it was her perfect comic timing that set the stage for all television comedians of the future.  But we shouldn't forget that Desi also contributed and, in fact, it was as a team that they left their mark and changed the way television would always be produced.  In many ways, their show was the Citizen Kane of television, teaching of what this relatively new medium was capable.  Its popularity is in a league all its own, and my Mom still enjoys regaling us with tales about how stores would close early on the nights Lucy was on, and the almost national obsession when she was pregnant and about to give birth.

And yes, they wouldn't have said pregnant.  And you know what?  Compared to what is out there today, it's a shame sometimes that someone decided it was time to say it.  Because look at where it has gotten us.  But that's for another post about another time that is no more. Today, it suffices to say 'Happy Birthday Lucy', you made us laugh, and changed an art form.  And that's not bad in a single life.

I leave everyone with one of the best skits from a show filled with them.  The show was so influential and so immitated that sometimes watching it can seem a bit stale, as we've seen it all before a million times.  But I Love Lucy was where it all came together for the first time, and in its day, it was like nothing anyone had ever seen.  Despite the time and distance from that era, despite the copies and imitations, some of the skits still look fresh and hilarious all these years later.  Several leaped to mind, but I found this one worthy of a look.  Laugh and enjoy.