Year-End Chuckle

Thankfully, 2009 is coming to a close. It has been an anxious year in many respects, and full of many newsworthy events - some of which can only leave you scratching your head wondering if the world has indeed gone stark, raving mad.

Nevertheless, we remain blessed, and I am thankful for family, for provision, and for the opportunity to once again look to the year ahead with - dare I say it - "hope."

This morning, I treated myself to Dave Barry's "Year in Review." Read the whole thing, but here are a couple of my favorite excerpts:

. . . [H]istory is made in Washington, D.C., where a crowd estimated by the Congressional Estimating Office at 217 billion people gathers to watch Barack Obama be inaugurated as the first American president ever to come after George W. Bush. There is a minor glitch in the ceremony when Chief Justice John Roberts, attempting to administer the oath of office, becomes confused and instead reads the side-effect warnings for his decongestant pills, causing the new president to swear that he will consult his physician if he experiences a sudden loss of sensation in his feet. President Obama then delivers an upbeat inaugural address, ushering in a new era of cooperation, civility and bipartisanship in a galaxy far, far away. Here on Earth everything stays much the same.

. . . Congress passes, without reading it, and without actually finishing writing it, a stimulus package totaling $787 billion. The money is immediately turned over to American taxpayers so they can use it to stimulate the economy.

No! What a crazy idea THAT would be! The money is to be doled out over the next decade or so by members of Congress on projects deemed vital by members of Congress, such as constructing buildings that will be named after members of Congress. This will stimulate the economy by creating millions of jobs, according to estimates provided by the Congressional Estimating Office's Magical Estimating 8-Ball.

The big health story in April is the rapid spread of swine flu, a dangerous new virus strain developed by the makers of Purell. Public anxiety over the flu increases when Vice President Joe Biden, demonstrating his gift for emitting statements, declares on the Today show that he would not recommend traveling by commercial airplane or subway. A short while later, White House spokesperson Robert Gibbs assures reporters that he is ``not aware of any `Vice President Joe Biden.' ''

In another embarrassment for the White House, New York is temporarily thrown into a panic when Air Force One flies low over Manhattan for a publicity photo shoot. Responding to widespread criticism, Gibbs notes that President Obama inherited Air Force One from the Bush administration.

Also, as the year draws to a close, the Centers for Disease Control releases an urgent bulletin warning of a new, fast-spreading epidemic consisting of severe, and in some cases life-threatening, arm infections caused by ``people constantly sneezing into their elbow pits.''

But despite all the gloomy news, the holiday season brings at least temporary relief to a troubled nation – especially the children, millions of whom go to sleep on Christmas Eve with visions of Santa in his reindeer-powered sleigh flying high overhead, spreading joy around the world.

With a North Korean missile flying right behind.

So, albeit it a couple days early: Happy New Year - may 2010 be a whole lot better than 2009. But even if it is not, I will treasure closely the things that matter - because even a cynic like me knows that happiness is more about choice than it is about circumstances.

See you next year.

Dona nobis pacem

As is likely common for many people, the last couple of weeks have been a blur of activity: Christmas treats and meal cooking, school Christmas parties for the boys, Christmas gift buying, holiday travel planning, cold-weather gear purchasing, not to mention the political circus in Washington that tends to distract me … it just doesn’t seem to slow down. To think, a couple of weeks ago I was enjoying a peaceful moment of winter wonder. Now we stand at the threshold of Christmas, and I find myself struggling to get in the proper mindset. A quiet, peaceful, contemplative Christmas is just not in the cards.

When I was younger, my family and I would travel to the Chicago area for Christmas to visit with both sets of grandparents. We would attend an 11:00pm Christmas Eve service to ring in the Day of Christmas, sitting with the choir. If memory serves, one of the traditional songs the choir would perform was the canon version of Dona Nobis Pacem, typically sung in the round. Over the years, those Christmas Eve nights have become a precious memory.

I went looking for a good quality video to include with this post, but unfortunately did not find one that met the standards I was looking for. This one is probably the best of them, if you can tune out the noise in the background.

Instead, allow me to offer the following version, as arranged by Bach. It is very well done, and takes me back to my college years when I sang regularly in a choir ensemble called Perfect Peace:


I don’t really have the opportunity to sing like this anymore, given that I attend a church with a modern worship style. But performances like the above do take me back, and allow me to step outside the rush of reality, slowing down time to just “be” with the music. I miss it.

Below is a John Rutter arrangement of a common benediction and blessing. I sang this version in college, and the performance below is very well done. I lift it up as a prayer for us all – may we all find peace this Christmas, and may the blessings of the Father be upon us all.

Rocky Mountain High

Whenever I get into one of my trademark "contemplative" moods, I sometimes find a bit of solace dreaming of a place in the mountains with a lake, crystal clear sky, and just the sound of the air in the trees. I've never lived in such a place, although during my growing-up years we would periodically take week-long fishing trips to Northern Minnesota. No mountains, of course, but nevertheless I can still tap the well of serenity last experienced 25 years ago.

Certain kinds of music augment that solace, such as those composed by John Denver. My grandfather was a fan of his music, and that appreciation has passed down from my father to me. I don't listen to him often, because after a while it produces in me a spirit of melancholy. But the lyrics and his guitar do "call" to me, producing a longing for the simplicity that is so difficult to find in this life. Honestly, I'd give almost anything to have a voice like that. I have a guitar I've never learned to play, but if I ever do take lessons, my goal will be to play some of his music.

Our holiday travels this year are taking us to Colorado, to the land of mountains and snow and crystal blue skies. So while the visit will be packed with family and celebration, perhaps somewhere in there we'll find a piece of serenity to bring back with us.

Do we know what we think we know?

In the report study issued by the American Revolution Center, the authors note a disturbing trend in American education:

“Many high schools now forego teaching about the American Revolution in favor of global studies. The trade-off is that, for many of us, learning about the American Revolution ends after grade school.”

“Today, according to a survey by the American Council of Trustees and Alumni (ACTA), not one of the nation’s top 50-ranked universities and liberal arts colleges, as defined by U.S. News & World Report in 2002, requires a course in American history.”

To me, that trend is scary. Not that the study of other cultures is a bad thing, but without a establishing a foundation of knowledge based on our American heritage, we risk cutting ourselves off from that heritage.

Time for a Pop Quiz:

1. Is the Bill of Rights part of: a) U.S. Constitution; b) Declaration of Independence; c) Gettysburg Address; or d) Articles of Confederation?
2. The most important consequence of the Boston Tea Party was: a) Repeal of the tax on tea; b) Failure of the other colonies to support Boston’s action; c) Opening negotiations between Britain and Massachusetts; or d) Enactment by Parliament of the Coercive Acts?
3. Which document outlines the division of powers between the states and the federal government: a) Declaration of Independence; b) Marshall Plan; c) U.S. Constitution; or d) Homestead Act? 

Answers can be found at the end of this post. These questions are the first 3 offered in the survey by the ARC. Majorities correctly answer the first and third questions, but only 12% could answer the second. Generally speaking, the report found (emphasis mine):

Major Finding 1:
The vast majority of Americans thought that knowledge of the history and principles of the American Revolution is very important. Most also said that it is very important for schools to teach this subject.

Major Finding 2:
Most Americans gave themselves high marks on their knowledge of the American Revolution and our Founding documents.

Major Finding 3:
On a 27-question test, a national sample of American adults scored an average of only 44 percent correct. Nearly 83 percent received a failing grade, meaning that they could not answer more than 16 of the 27 questions correctly.

Major Finding 4:
Based on what they knew about the American Revolution and the Founding, most Americans said that freedom and liberty, freedom of speech, and freedom of religion were the most important values upon which America was founded.

Clearly, solid majorities are willing to say that knowledge of our American heritage is important. But unfortunately, that doesn’t translate into actual knowledge. We can look at an idea in the abstract and declare it good. We can say that knowledge is important, but when put to the test, with the spotlight on us, we can easily fall short. In this day and age, it is becoming more and more important to be able to articulate what we think, what we believe and what we know. Forgetting specific facts isn’t as big a deal as it is when we talk about specific principles on which America was founded. At least it appears that most still associate America's founding with the principles of freedom and liberty. That's a hopeful sign, but as the report also declares: “Without constant reinforcement, knowledge erodes.”

The common refrain of the bored student says, “Why do I have to learn this? How is it ever going to help me in the future?”

Considering the economic and domestic policies of today’s political class and the expansion of government in the last several decades, I’m thinking we’ve elected some of these formerly bored students to public office.

I think we all could stand a refresher course.

The answers: 1) A; 2) D; 3) C.

Bigger Gov't in the Dark of Night

With this morning’s news declaring that the Senate is now prepared to push through their version of healthcare reform, an effort that I tend to view as a major expansion of government control that limits the individual’s right to self-determination, I become more and more convinced that the political class is hopelessly adrift from the principles they claim to uphold, the mores of liberty and frankly, common sense. What else can explain an about-face from a politician who turns his back on his public stand against a bill because of its provisions for the federal funding of abortion, for what amounts to a special monetary exemption for his state – and only his state? I guess principle always has a price.

Like the leaf on the outmost branch of a large and spanning tree, connection to the roots is essential for continuing existence. Sometimes, we get so far away from those roots that we forget they exist. But once you cut yourself off, you cease to be a part of that being, and slowly but surely, it ends. Can the tide be stemmed?

With a midnight vote on a weekend when few are paying attention? Chances are fading by the minute. Bigger government is on the way.

Ho. Ho. Ho.

The M-Word: Part 2

While it may seem funny during the heart of the Christmas season, the thought of continuing this thread about ministry is near the bottom of my list of things I’d like to do. In previous posts, I talked a little about the retreat that I attended back in February which challenged me to a period of self evaluation, particularly as it relates to my calling in ministry. Back in September, I attempted to explore the question “What is my ministry?”. In this post, I appear to be tasked with addressing the subsequent query: “Where am I right now?”

Clearly, where I was in February when this question was first asked is not necessarily where I am today. Then, I was coming out of a long period of serving in leadership at my church (nearly 12 years), the latter 3 years at the center of an understandably difficult (and almost traumatic) period of transition. How I felt in February could best be described as a deep spiritual and emotional exhaustion. And although some of that has eased over the course of this year, I still sense some lingering internal ache that continues to color my attitude and my outlook.

I have spent the better part of this year detoxing from the near constant anxieties associated with church leadership. The Lord has given me both teaching and leadership gifts, but the experiences of the past few years have taxed me greatly. Even now, the thought of returning to a leadership role fills me with unease – not exactly the attitude one should have toward service. Yet the never-ending call of obligation and concern I have for the church still weighs upon my mind. Still, the lack of joy at the root of that thought feels like a warning, telling me that I may not yet be ready to resume a leadership role, especially since at some levels the underlying crisis continues.

In September, I wrote:

The institutional church, whether intentionally or not, has impressed upon its members that service to Christ really means service to the church. Do something for God by doing something for the church. Be a part of this church program or that, because what matters is that we serve.

It could be argued that the obligation demands service, that the call of duty does not concern itself with feelings, or attitude. For even if done grudgingly, the job gets done. But that just doesn’t seem right to me. For if the spirit in which I do a thing is toxic, I am “but a clanging cymbal.”

I cannot help but to feel that, for me, the most important thing I can do is to properly and humbly posture myself before the Lord, and seek to rediscover, revive and reignite the passion to be the vessel I am designed to be. The heart’s posture before the Lord is far more important than half-heartedly doing what others expect out of a misguided sense of obligation.

This is not a cop out to service. Quite the contrary. It is ensuring that I am putting Christ first, and aligning myself to the work He is calling me to do, as I prepare to one day re-enter this thing called Ministry. And today, that means focus on my walk of faith, and it means diving in once again to the passion I have for the written word. Yes, even this little blogging adventure is reawakening a certain creativity and understanding of the gifts the Lord has given me. While leadership is something I understand, it is not the only avenue of service.

John 15:16 says: “You did not choose me, but I chose you and appointed you to go and bear fruit – fruit that will last.” As it was the first day this verse came alive for me, so it is today. This is my ministry. Countless are the ways this can be fulfilled. It should fit my passion, my gifts, my heart, my abilities, my personality and my experiences. It should also fit the overarching plan of what God is blessing – or desires to bless.

So where am I right now in all of this? The only answer I can give with integrity: Not yet where I need to be. Yet able to finally acknowledge it.

An Informed Citizenry

A few days ago, I posted here about a newly released study by The American Revolution Center. I read through the report last weekend. I found it to be a fascinating survey - and wish there was an easy way to reproduce it to make it an online quiz you could take, but I certainly don't want to run afoul of any copyrights that may be involved. Still, with proper citing, I can reference some of it here. Discussion of specific survey questions will come in a later post.

I will confess to a bit of envy regarding the authors of this report. When I read something that resonates with me, I often search for words to better express why. In this case, I cannot improve on the turn of phrase or the idea expressed (and frankly, I wish I had written it). In speaking about the importance of passing the ideal of self-governance to subsequent generations, the authors wrote (emphasis mine):

"As careful students of history, our nation’s Founders knew that republics were fragile and that government “of the people, by the people, and for the people” would not endure without an informed citizenry. “If a nation expects to be ignorant and free,” Thomas Jefferson warned, “it expects what never was and never will be.”

Today, perhaps more than ever, understanding the Founding values and principles born of the American Revolution is critical to defending our liberties and preserving our system of self-government. Our society, our very existence as a free people, rests on our success in ensuring that all Americans understand our history, rights, and responsibilities, and
pass this knowledge on to rising generations."

Unless we are deliberate in educating both today's generation and tomorrow's, this understanding will slip away. Consider yesterday, for example. Flags all over were hung at half-mast. How many people understood it to be in honor and memory of the events of December 7, 1941, when the Japanese Empire attacked the U.S. Naval Base at Pearl Harbor? I suppose it is inevitable that specific events not experienced by a particular generation will slip from our collective consciousness. Inevitable maybe, but not necessarily right or good. Despite the new age push for our global enlightenment as a species, the world remains one giant game of Risk ®.

We all don't need to be experts in geopolitics. But we would do well not to be ignorant of the ideologies (left and right) which shape our world, our government and public policy. As the ARC stated: "Our society, our very existence as a free people, rests on ... ensuring that all Americans understand our history, rights and responsibilities."

Proponents of global enlightenment are pitching a freedom that is false, and it begins by undermining the knowledge and remembrance of things past. It is the historical equivalent of New Math - forcing the abstractions without proper context at the expense of a fundamental understanding of the mechanics of a progressive, industrious and innovative civil society. It begets ignorance, which leaves us vulnerable to having the wool pulled over our eyes, bequeathing control and freedom to those who excel in the manipulative arts.

Now, we don't have to obsess over these things. But neither should we be indifferent. Why? Because we have a responsibility to the upcoming generation - our own children - to ensure that they know and understand why we hold dear the values that we do. An informed citizenry can make all the difference.

Seeing is Believing

I was joking with co-workers yesterday about the weather, as forecasters were predicting up to a half-inch of snow for Northern Alabama. The common refrain, not surprisingly, was your typical "I'll believe it when I see it."

Well, seeing is believing:


In the 90's, we actually would have a decent snowfall / ice event at least once a year, enough to slow things down for a day or two. But this decade, we've generally only received a moderate dusting once during the winter, if any at all. Forecasters promise much, but for whatever reason, snow just doesn't materialize here - the air is often just too dry.

But today, with the Christmas tree lights on, and the opportunity to enjoy a fire in the fireplace, what a wonderful - if sadly short lived - winter delight.

Knowing History and Who We Are

I almost hesitate to use the above title for this post, as it draws heavily and blatantly from this post by Scott Johnson on Powerline. For that matter, I'm borrowing heavily and blatantly from his whole post. But the title is clearly apt, and it hits me in the sweet spot of interest and passion. Rarely a week goes by that I don't wish I had the latitude to pursue further education in the subject of History.

Powerline reports on a newly released study by a relatively new organization called The American Revolution Center. The ARC has a neat website complete with an interactive timeline that allows you to also view some of the artifacts within its collection. But of more interest to me is the nationwide survey they conducted to assess the knowledge people possess about the American Revolution and the founding of this country. I have downloaded the final report, and perhaps I'll post more on the topic as I study it. From what I've read of it so far, it is fair to say (using the contemporary colloquialism) that I'm "geeked" about it.

From Powerline (emphasis mine):

"The survey results show that a whopping 83 percent of Americans failed a basic test on knowledge of the American Revolution and its principles. But the results also revealed that 90 percent of Americans think that knowledge of the American Revolution and its principles is very important.

Among other things, the results also show that 89 percent of Americans expected to pass a test on basic knowledge of the American Revolution. We do not suffer for lack of self-esteem. But we do suffer for lack of knowledge."

I believe that much of the confusion, concern and attitudes afflicting American politics today are caused in great part by the apparent reality that much of the American populace lacks sufficient understanding and grounding in the principles that undergird the American Experiment. Powerline also quotes author David McCullough (emphasis mine):

"In the rotunda of the Capitol in Washington hangs John Trumbull's great painting, "The Declaration of Independence, Fourth of July, 1776." It's been seen by more people than any other American painting. It's our best known scene from our past. And almost nothing about it is accurate. The Declaration of Independence wasn't signed on July 4th. They didn't start to sign the Declaration until August 2nd, and only a part of the Congress was then present. They kept coming back in the months that followed from their distant states to take their turn signing the document. The chairs are wrong, the doors are in the wrong place, there were no heavy draperies at the windows, and the display of military flags and banners on the back wall is strictly a figment of Trumbull's imagination. But what is accurate about it are the faces. Every single one of the 47 men in that painting is an identifiable, and thus accountable, individual. We know what they look like. We know who they were. And that's what Trumbull wanted. He wanted us to know them and, by God, not to forget them. Because this momentous step wasn't a paper being handed down by a potentate or a king or a czar, it was the decision of a Congress acting freely."

As Scott Johnson further notes (emphasis mine):

"And yet, McCullough observes: "We are raising a generation of young Americans who are by-and-large historically illiterate." We do not know the names or faces of most of those 47 men."

Perhaps the greatest thing that every American can do for their country is to uphold the principles upon which it was founded. We must understand the value and function of freedom, and preserve it not only by a willingness to defend it (to which the sacrifice of our military men and women attest), but to be educated and knowledgable about our national heritage. I fear it is a sad indictment when our generation can more readily recite the discography of Michael Jackson than they can the essentials of the Bill of Rights. Still, the opportunity - and indeed, responsibility - to educate is there, and kudos to outfits like The American Revolution Center for working to do just that.

Back to a Reason

As the calendar turns to December, so begins the almost daily replay of my Trans-Siberian Orchestra album, The Lost Christmas Eve (2004). My kids love listening to it over and over, and so we do, constantly, on the drive into school each day. Truth be told, it is one of my favorite albums as well, although by January I'm usually ready to move on to something else. Nevertheless, this is a new Christmas season, and I am enjoying the experience of getting lost once again in the story.

The inside sleeve of the CD contains both lyrics and a story narration. This narration, not read on the CD, places each song in the context of the fable. The songs however transcend the story, and have the ability to trigger something within, awakening a deeper meaning than may have been originally intended. Indeed, that's how I often know when God is present, because He takes the creative combination of words and music to touch the soul. And He will often do so whether or not the composer is fully aware, though I'm certain at times they are.

Track 17, entitled "Back to a Reason, Part II," hits me more deeply than any other song on the album. I've linked the audio below. The lyrics, some of which I've reproduced here, are beautifully tragic yet redemptive. They speak to me of my own desperate need to find joy, to recapture whatever it is I may have lost, and to recover a childlike faith.

I'm looking for you
I'm looking for I don't know what
I can't see there anymore
And all my time's been taken

Is this what it seems?
The lure of a dream
And I'm afraid to walk back through that door
To find that I've awakened

The night seems to care
The dreams in the air
The snow's coming down
It beckons me dare

It whispers, it hopes
It holds and confides
And offers a bridge
Across these divides

The parts of my life
I've tried to forget
It's gathered each piece
And carefully kept

Somewhere in the dark
Beyond all the cold
There is a child
That's part of my soul

Got to get back to a reason
Got to get back to a reason I once knew
And this late in the seasons
One by one distractions fade from view
The only reason I have left is
You

The Christ child is a part of my soul, as even my own children are. But the child I seek, the one that most needs to be found, may very well be ... me.

Freedom that Begets Sacrifice

During my daily blog reading this afternoon, I came across a fascinating guest post on Powerline by Professor Paul Rahe, of Hillsdale College. A professor of history and Western heritage, Professor Rahe makes frequent appearances on Powerline, especially in the context of the apparent leftward lurch by our government. His essays are fascinating reading, and today's is no different.

The traditional story of Thanksgiving revolves around the legend of that first feast, with the Pilgrims, Samoset and Squanto, and the Plymouth colony. The history of the colony is often told in religious terms, illustrated by a communal spirit in which all colonists shared virtually everything - no private property, common fields, and equal shares of all the food. Indeed, given their deeply religious roots, it was very much an attempt to structure a community in accordance with the understood model of the early church.

What is less discussed are the struggles this budding American community faced in trying to order its society that way. Apparently, quarrels would frequenty arise among them due to the inequities of labor compared to the forced equity of its benefits, which actually tended to make them less industrious. As Professor Rahe notes:

William Bradford, Governor of the Plymouth Colony, reports that, at that time, he and his advisers considered "how they might raise as much corn as they could, and obtain a better crop than they had done, that they might not still thus languish in misery." And "after much debate of things," he then adds, they chose to abandon communal property, deciding
that "they should set corn every man for his own particular" and assign "to every family a parcel of land, according to the proportion of their number, for that end."

The results, he tells us, were gratifying in the extreme, "for it made all hands very industrious" and "much more corn was planted than otherwise would have been." Even "the women now went willingly into the field, and took their little ones with them to set corn; which before would allege weakness and inability; whom to have compelled would have been thought great tyranny and oppression."

Moreover, he observes, "the experience that was had in this common course and condition, tried sundry years . . . amongst godly and sober men, may well evince the vanity of that conceit of Plato's and other ancients applauded by some of later times . . . that the taking away of property and bringing in community into a commonwealth would make them happy and flourishing." In practice, America's first socialist experiment "was found to breed much confusion and discontent and retard much employment that would have been to their benefit and comfort."

I have often struggled with the structure of the early church, and our failure to adequately model it in today's church. It is often suggested, even today, that a socialist community would better model what a Christian community is to be. Yet I cannot help wondering about the inherent conflict with that, given that the Lord has chosen to give to each according to His will - each person has different gifts, talents and calling, yes for the benefit of the whole, but not necessarily in equal parts. Is it yet another example of human failing, however, that rejects forced charity? To share of one's blessings willingly is a greater blessing than being told that your labor is to be for the benefit of someone else, without the freedom to give it willingly. It is a puzzle to me, because while socialism claims equity of benefit for all, clearly all do not contribute to such endeavors. It demands and forces charity and sacrifice from some, which is no charity at all - no gift freely given, no compassion, no love. The center of any such community is government, taking the place of the church, in the communal model. Man is still fallen, and the inevitable outcome is resentment and discontent. Again, to Professor Rahe (emphasis mine):

The moral is perfectly clear. Self-interest cannot be expunged. Where there is private property and its possession and acquisition are protected and treated with respect, self-interest and jealousy can be deployed against laziness and the desire for that which is not one's own, and there tends to be plenty as a consequence.

But where one takes from those who join talent with industry to provide for those lacking either or both, where the fruits of one man's labor are appropriated to benefit another who is less productive, self-interest reinforces laziness, jealousy engenders covetousness, and these combine in a bitter stew to produce both conflict and dearth.

Go read the whole thing. Again, I remain somewhat conflicted. Secular, socialist government does not breed contentment in its populace. It runs counter to every understanding I have about the spirit of America. But when I consider the church, and the commitment of believers one to another, I am reminded that God's ways often don't make sense to man. In the end, government is not the church, and it cannot and should not replace the church. How should we order our lives, our society?

In the context lies the answer. Freedom that begets sacrifice, mercy and grace.

Thanksgiving

Being by nature an over-stressed, rarely content, glass-is-half-empty kind of guy, taking time-out to count my blessings is something that happens all too infrequently. It is not that I am unthankful, quite the contrary. But I admit it does take a little more effort to stop long enough to appreciate the joys in my life, such as:

• My wife, without whom I cannot survive. She is my best friend, my partner in life and parenthood, and truly the better part of me.
• My oldest son, who amazes me every day with his insatiable desire for knowledge, his genuine and sensitive heart, and his maturity in handling unfortunate circumstances.
• My youngest son, whose delight of life finds joy in so many ways, his infectious smile, his creative imagination and enthusiasm.
• My family, who though far away are never far from my thoughts. And for my in-laws, who ease the loneliness I feel at times being so far away from my own.
• My brother-in-law and sister-in-law, who fill roles as both family and closest friends.
• The prosperity I enjoy but never take for granted - good employment, a comfortable home, and the means to do for others.
• The opportunity to live free in a country that remains a beacon on a hill.
• The men and women throughout America's history who have fought and sacrificed much to keep us free.
• Our Father in Heaven, who by His grace allows me to stand, who has blessed me in so many countless ways, but challenges me to move forward in faith, and not remain stagnant. For His unrelenting patience, and for His healing touch.

Yes, I am thankful, and this Thanksgiving, I will contemplate these wonderful blessings and enjoy my family, my friends, and my life.

 

What History Teaches

I caught myself this morning thinking of a teacher I had in high school. Betty Reed taught World History and American History, primarily to 10th and 11th graders. Bar none, Mrs. Reed was my favorite teacher, although it didn't start out that way. Over the last 20 years, I've often thought of her, in part because our relationship was at times, shall we say, volatile. But mostly, I remember the transformation in my thinking and awareness that occurred the day she let down her guard and allowed me to see her classroom and students from a teacher's perspective. That moment of transparency would eventually lead to a reorientation of my approach to history, and to thinking in general.

For many, history is labeled as one of the most boring subjects of all time. And I agree, for when history is reduced to dry facts and dates set apart from the context of the philosophies and perspectives of those who experienced those events, history can indeed seem a little dull. Mrs. Reed, however, understood that from the beginning. Constrained to a point by the curriculum, her approach to breaking through the barrier of glazed-over eyes erected by semi-comatose students was to introduce the absurd and hypothetical into the dialog. She would be discussing some topic, and then out of the blue, she would offer a patently ridiculous and indefensible supposition and declare it as fact. Never one to let an argument go by, I would often tackle her conjecture head on. I remember one day, she introduced what I believed to be an absolute whopper - that the devastating wars of human civilization would not have occurred if society was matriarchal. If I remember correctly, we were discussing Cleopatra and Egypt's eventual absorption into the Roman Empire (which is interesting in itself, given the Ptolemaic dynasty's Hellenistic roots, but I digress), when Mrs. Reed loudly declared that if a woman had ruled the Roman Empire, it never would have fallen, because a woman would have governed better. For a few stunned moments, no one responded. A few were looking around, wondering if they had heard her correctly. Of course, I dove into the breach - basically dismissing her argument and challenging her to back it up. I wish I could remember the particulars, because that one was quite energized. Always spirited, these "debates" - which included one or two other students in the room - almost always ended up with Mrs. Reed claiming the last word, if not the victory. At the time, I can't say that I really liked her, and my attitude during these discussions was hardly friendly. I got into trouble fairly frequently, because I would often cross the line. Most notably was the episode that led to the moment of transparency I alluded to earlier.

We were finishing up a Friday test, using those good old Scantron forms. Mrs. Reed called for the forms to be turned in. However, I wasn't finished, and belligerently, I decided I was going to finish my test. I completed the test, and went up to her desk to turn it in. She glared at me, and stated that I was getting a zero, because she had called for papers 2 minutes before, and they were already on their way to the office to get scanned and graded. Fuming, I waited until she turned her attention to another student, and then I proceeded to walk out of the room and straight to the office, where I slipped my Scantron form into the stack with the rest. Before I could get out of the office, Mrs. Reed stormed up to me telling me I could just stay in the office and not to bother coming back to the class that day. The vice principal was trying to hide his amusement - because I certainly was not a typical troublemaker. That stunt landed me a month's worth of detention, of which I only served 3 days. Not that I didn't deserve it - I was willing to accept the full consequences of my action, and really wasn't bothered with the detention. When I screw up, and make a poor choice, I'm generally willing to pay the price.

I served 3 full days of after-school detention, beginning on a Monday. Mrs. Reed added to the punishment by making me sit at the desk next to hers in class. But I had reverted back to giving her the proper respect, and frankly I wasn't even upset anymore. In class that Thursday, Mrs. Reed assigned the class to read a chapter for the rest of period. I finished early. Noticing that I had finished, Mrs. Reed and I began to talk. She said,

"Look out there. They are sleeping through the most important part of their lives. Now is their opportunity, and instead of taking it, they are letting it slip all away. If they don't start to learn how to think now, it will be almost impossible for them to succeed later. I try and I try to break through, and a few of you are smart enough to challenge yourselves and defend your positions. But the rest simply don't put forth the mental effort. I'm grateful for the few, and I love to see the light come on when students start to truly think for themselves, but I truly grieve over the rest."

It was at that moment that I understood that her method of sparking dialog through outlandish statements was akin to using a defibrillator on a dying patient. She was literally trying to shock her students minds awake, to bring life to a sadly dormant muscle. We talked for a while longer, and for the first time, I began to think about others in a completely different way. And then she waived the remainder of my detention. Our relationship changed for the better after that.

We each observe the world in which we live through our own set of preconceived notions and filters. We take positions of matters of both little and great importance. We should welcome challenges to our ways of thinking, if only to ensure that we are able to better articulate a defense of our views. We would do well not to isolate a single historical event outside the context of all the influencing factors of society and civilization, but neither should we impose our notions of those factors absent a proper understanding of its underlying cultural characteristics. Understanding causes and effects within a human population is not a simple exercise, but it is not entirely impossible either. Being able to rationally evaluate actions and their possible consequences is a fundamental, but learned skill that all of us should endeavor to improve upon. Emotion plays a role, but it shouldn't be the primary factor. Our decisions may not always be right, but if they are thoughtful, there's a better chance they will be.

I am indebted to Mrs. Reed for giving me a new perspective, and encouraging me to observe and to a degree embrace (or at least acknowledge) a bigger picture. In her own way, she jolted me out of my narrow world view and awakened in me a certain desire to educate. I too find joy when eyes light up with understanding, and grieve for those whose eyes remain dark of their own choosing. History teaches me that life is wonderfully complex, and that the stories and events that shape our lives are marvelously connected. It is not merely who, what, where and when, but most importantly, a true understanding asks the question "why" - and then seeks the answer. It is that mystery, that combination, which makes history so interesting to me. I certainly don't fathom it all now, but I do look forward to that day when all will be made clear. In the meantime, I will continue to learn, and perhaps, grow.

A Better Future

The post below represents a few thoughts I put down on paper back in 2003, during the first year of war in Iraq. These thoughts still apply today, as we remember our veterans (emphasis mine).

“A current of … ambivalence raced across Baghdad along with jubilation and surprise. Relief was tied up with trepidation, joy with anxiety. What next, many seemed to ask. Faleh Hassan, 51, a little weary, hoped the future would be better than the past. ‘I want to feel that I'm a human being, I want to feel that I'm free and that no one can take it away,’ he said. ‘I want to work, so that my family has enough to live. I want to live like everyone else in this world who lives in peace.’"

As reported by Anthony Shadid, Washington Post - Foreign Service on Thursday, April 10, 2003

Eloquent words from a man tasting for the first time that which so many of us take for granted. What Faleh Hassan is learning is what so many of us have forgotten – that freedom is a privilege to be treasured, an opportunity to become more than we are today, and that it comes with a cost.

Some of our country’s finest men and women died so that Faleh Hassan and others could throw down the shackles of tyranny and oppression. Freedom from oppression comes with a price. The freedom that you and I know today came at a similar cost, time and again, over the last 230 years. But far too many of us have forgotten, and too few of us care. The reach for a better future must be grounded in a remembrance of the past. If we remember the price that was paid, the living fire of freedom will be preserved and bring the light of hope to others.

It is not too late to remember what we have forgotten. Acknowledge the cost, and once again embrace the hope that the future will be better than the past.

To our noble veterans, thank you.

Remembering History

There is an old but familiar adage that says "those who forget history are doomed to repeat it." Frequently, it is used to remind society of its great failings in the face of evil intent, such as that perpetrated by the Nazis during the Holocaust and WWII. The history of human civilization is but a repeating cycle of war, conquest, peace, drift, oppression, tyranny, revolution, war and back to conquest. Technology changes, but the patterns remain the same. Prior to the advent of Western democracy, wars fought between nations were primarily in the interest of material and imperial conquest. Afterward, the concept "liberation" took hold as the Allied nations beat back this conquest ideology. The long-held American belief of self-determination prevented us from absorbing Europe as American territories. Granted, America maintains a military presence that dates back to WWII, and some indeed may look upon the reconstruction efforts of that era - as well as today's Iraq - as imperialistic. I think that is a mistaken viewpoint driven by propaganda, but I can see the perspective.

The Cold War, however, was something new in the sense that the battle was fought by proxy in lands apart from the primary ideological combatants. The stakes were high - to maintain spheres of influence that could stand firm against the waves of communist and socialist ideologies that began to emerge in every corner of the world. It really is quite amazing that we have yet to experience a full-scale nuclear conflict. Perhaps because even above ideology, there remains a core instinct for self-preservation.

Who were the victors of the Cold War? Who were its gallant champions? Truman, Thatcher, Pope John Paul II, and of course, Reagan. The fall of the Berlin Wall, 20 years ago yesterday, remains a vivid image in my mind. It was merely an outward, yet important feature that all but marked the beginning of the end of the Cold War, as Soviet communism began to accelerate its collapse upon itself. In a war of disparate ideologies: liberty and communism, there was a clear and undisputable victor. It is an achievement worthy of celebration and joy - and it was, for those who remember watching the blocks fall into the night as German celebrants danced on top of the crumbling structure that for so long served as the physical manifestation of the Iron Curtain. America, that beacon on a hill (as Reagan used to call her), stood tall, alone and proud - not as a conqueror, but as an inspiration to all those seeking self-determination and liberty.

Yes, it is said that those who forget history are doomed to repeat it. Yet what can be said about those who forget, not through complacency or neglect, but rather by deliberate omission or rejection? After a monumental struggle spanning over 40 years, fought by two generations of Americans, this moment deserves more than a few minutes of platitudes by tape delay.

While there is nothing inherently wrong about the President's video comments below, the treatment of the anniversary as a footnote in history, lauding only a President whose limited forays into the Cold War were nearly disastrous, strikes me as terribly insufficient to the sacrifices and courage of countless Americans and freedom-loving people. And frankly, I'm turned off by yet another injection of his election into the narrative. Historic his election may be, it has absolutely nothing to do with the fall of the Berlin Wall. (h/t: Powerline)


I realize it is perhaps too much to expect of our President to honor Reagan, Thatcher and the late Pope. But the failure to reinforce the facts of history, to minimize the American exceptionalism that led directly to the dismantling of that wall, is simply to set this generation on a course for drift and oppression. If that be true, then tyranny - whatever form it may take - is soon to follow. In that day, will the light of liberty still shine from America?

Who are the extremists?

Back in the early part of the presidential campaign, candidate John Edwards (D) used to talk about two Americas, basically referring to the haves and the have nots. Our current President disavowed such talk, and asserted that if elected, he would be President of all Americans.

Apparently, he does think there are two Americas: populated with devotees and extremists. In yet another moment unbecoming of the Office (emphasis mine):

Mr. Obama, during his private pep talk to Democrats, recognized Mr. Owens election and then posed a question to the other lawmakers. According to Representative Earl Blumenauer of Oregon, who supports the health care bill, the president asked, “Does anybody think that the teabag, anti-government people are going to support them if they bring down health care? All it will do is confuse and dispirit” Democratic voters “and it will encourage the extremists.”

The "teabag, anti-government people" comment is a furious slur against the millions of Americans using their Constitutionally protected right to protest, speak and challenge their elected representatives on matters of policy. I won't go into the pros and cons of the Tea Party Movement here, but the fact is that these people are not, by any stretch, "anti-government." Rather, they hearken to the principles of government advocated and established by the Founders. It would be better to say they are "anti-"big"-government.

I find it greatly disturbing to know that such words may have issued from the mouth of our "post-partisan" President, whose oratory supposedly brings all humanity together in peace, vision and harmony. On the contrary, I'm starting to think that he really does have tremendously little respect for people. If not contempt.

And just who is he referring to with the word "extremists"? Anybody who disagrees with him? (h/t: The Corner)

Commander in Chief

I really have tried to be objective. I have tried to give the President the benefit of the doubt - as a person - despite the fact that I disagree with his priorities and approach relative to foreign and domestic policy.

But following the horrifying events at Ft. Hood this week, I watched his first public statement - when he finally got around to mentioning it - and came away questioning his sincerity. Today I learned that his schedule for the weekend has him in Camp David. He's the Commander in Chief. At least Constitutionally.

Contrast that with our former CiC:

Former President George W. Bush and his wife, Laura, visited wounded soldiers and their families near the site of the worst mass shooting on an Army post in the United States.

The Bushes made their private visit to Fort Hood's Darnall Army Medical Center on Friday night. Bush spokesman David Sherzer said in an e-mail that the couple thanked Fort Hood's military leaders and hospital staff for the "amazing care they are providing."

I'm sorry, but that is the action and compassion of a real Commander in Chief.

Almost Heaven ...

At this stage of life, I am far removed from the concept of retirement. But the photograph below looks to me nothing short of heaven. What I wouldn't give for that kind of serenity.

Photo Credit: Copyright 2008 by Cam H.

Good for Joe

As a long-suffering fan of the Chicago Cubs, my allegiances lie with the National League. I generally have no affinity for the American League, where they insist on playing the game with a designated hitter. Suffice it to say, I am not a Yankees fan, although I can easily admit that their dominance of the sport over the past 100 years is certainly worthy of respect. And in winning their 27th World Series championship last night, they got the job done with an ex-Cub at the helm.

I have long been a fan of Joe Girardi. Over a 15 year playing career that started with him behind the plate at Wrigley Field, Girardi was a steady force and a prototypical student of the game. He was not a dominating hitter, and he only made one All-Star team (2000, during his second stint with the Cubs). But he played the game with class, and thus far appears to be managing the game with class. He was a part of three Yankees championships as a player, and I'm glad to see him earn his 4th ring as their manager.

I'll never forget sitting down to watch the Cubs-Cardinals game one Saturday afternoon in 2002. I missed the pregame, but when I finally tuned in, the announcers were breaking the terrible news of the death of Darryl Kile. I was transfixed as Girardi, the Cubs player representative, took to a microphone at home plate to announce to the sold out crowd at Wrigley that the game was cancelled. I remember thinking at the time that the Cubs could not have had a better spokesperson at that moment in time - that having Girardi make the announcement (instead of a PA announcer) exhibited the right tenor for the moment. Girardi simply commanded that much respect from both players and fans.

Even last night, apparently Joe was in the right place at the right time to provide assistance to a motorist involved in an accident well after the game. Again, I'm not surprised, because that fits with the character he seems to have demonstrated time and again.

So, while I cannot cheer for yet another Yankees victory, I will say wholeheartedly, good for Joe. He's a class act, and I'm happy for him.

Cliff? What cliff?

Last month, I came across an article in the New York Times about the role of government in the marketplace. It briefly touches on the financial crisis that led to TARP and the so-called $787 billion "stimulus" bill. More directly, however, the author presents a view that highlights the dangers of politicizing the individual and major sectors of the economy. Fundamentally, the effect of inserting political influence over critical areas of the market (an effort that has been going on for several decades) by default creates additional "special interests" that because of their role in underpinning our financial and regulatory systems, must be "protected" at all costs, rather than allowing pure market forces to self-correct the issues. Much like the new hate crimes law, which adds special protections to certain classes of people, the over-involvement of government in our economy creates a privileged set of market sectors. From the Times (emphasis mine):

"President Dwight D. Eisenhower warned of the birth of a military-industrial complex. Today we have a financial-regulatory complex, and it has meant a consolidation of power and privilege. We’ve created a class of politically protected “too big to fail” institutions, and the current proposals for regulatory reform further cement this notion. Even more worrying, with so many explicit and implicit financial guarantees, we are courting a bigger financial crisis the next time something major goes wrong.

We should stop using political favors as a means of managing an economic sector. Unfortunately, though, recent experience with health care reform shows we are moving in the opposite direction and not heeding the basic lessons of the financial crisis. Finance and health care are two separate issues, of course, but in both cases we’re making the common mistake of digging in durable political protections for special interest groups."

By no means am I an expert on the economy, nor do I hold any particularly strong opinion on the level of regulation required to ensure that consumers and investors are protected from predatory institutions. I am, however, a firm believer in liberty and the right to buy, sell or use whatever product I choose, and to be able to make my own choices based on what I believe is the best value to me. When it comes to health care, I would highly prefer an a la carte solution so that I could pick and choose coverage benefits that make the most sense to me and my family. However, due to government regulation AND insurance provider restrictions, that will never come to pass. I do not want the government telling me what options I get to choose from, and neither do I think the government should dictate to insurance providers what "minimum standards" of coverage should be enforced. Otherwise, I end up with coverage I don't need at a price that can only be explained if the cost is actually intended to pay for somebody else's coverage. Which, of course, is precisely the intent of this proposed overhaul of health care. And, based on this breakdown of tax increases found inside the latest House bill, it means everybody is going to pay. (h/t: Hot Air)

So again, coming full circle, we have a stimulus that the administration claims has created or saved a million jobs, at a cost to the taxpayer that amounts to several hundred million dollars per job. How much do these jobs pay? Not that much, so where did the money really go? But we've been told that the institutions that received bailouts were "too big to fail" and that the gargantuan stimulus was necessary to save a million jobs. Why is it the government's responsibility to save or create any jobs in the first place? And that assumes any jobs were created in the first place, as even the AP and CBS question. Isn't it nice to know that our taxpayer dollars helped 129 people at a day care get raises?

The New York Times article closes with a final thought that I have no doubt will fall on deaf ears (emphasis mine):

"In short, we should return both the financial and medical sectors and, indeed, our entire economy to greater market discipline. We should move away from the general attitude of “too big to take a pay cut,” especially when the taxpayer is on the hook for the bill. If such changes sound daunting, it is a sign of how deep we have dug ourselves in. We haven’t yet learned from the banking crisis, and we’re still moving in the wrong direction pretty much across the board."

Eventually, everything is going to go bust, resulting most likely in even greater government control and influence over the markets. And we will quite possibly live to see it. I don't think even Alexander Hamilton would have gone quite this far.

But then again, I'm no expert. After all, America is "too big to fail," right? Follow the links; there's interesting stuff there.