Entries Tagged as ''

Chuck is back!

My favorite show, Chuck, returned last night.  I had trouble getting into the plot line because I COULDN’T REMEMBER the last episode from so long ago, but it slowly came back to me.  One thing that struck me was the couple of references to Ronald Reagan, which were poignant because of the current national crisis state.  One of the spies is apparently devoted to Reagan (the father of American spies?  A cold war reference?  I’m not sure.)  At one point, he smashes the glass of his treasured photo frame of Reagan and obtains a secret way out of his terrible dilemma.  That reference really couldn’t have come at a more apt time than last night.

On sex and abstinence…

I’ve thought a lot about sex and abstinence in my life: of course, as a woman and wife, but especially as a mom of two teenagers (19 and 17).  When our family was younger, we were involved in churches where purity (in all matters) was held up as a must for salvation and completely attainable on this earth.  This insistence and expectation of purity on this earth was the curriculum.  I watched many teens of fellow church members simply fall off the earth when facing basic teen moments.  I knew something was wrong and began searching for a better church home.  When my kids were pre-teens, we had transitioned to a church that teaches that humans are not capable of perfection here on this earth and are in need of the grace and love that has already been provided to us in the suffering, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ.  Abstinence no longer became a goal for my kids, but one of many desired end products of a life of grace, forgiveness and thankfulness.  As with any end product, the road needed to be paved with education, self-awareness, planning, prayer and grace.  Ten years ago, I thought that an act of sexual impurity would mean the end of my dreams for my teens; now I’ve removed myself from the center and feel much more prepared to help my kids cope with the inevitable mistakes in life, whatever they might be.  My confidence does not lie in my kids’ ability to remain pure, for if they were capable there would be no need for love and grace in this world.  My confidence lies in the multi-faceted education (scriptural, biological, relational, etc)  they have been given. Above all, my confidence lies in God’s Word, which promises that it will go out into the world and not return empty-handed.  God, alone, is capable of saving my kids…and me.

Economics 101 starts at home

My husband and I drove down to Mankato yesterday to attend Bethany’s Feast of St. Michael and All Angels service and the very funny Theatre Physics.  As we were driving, we read the Sunday paper and listened to the radio.  Economic issues of today loom so large, it is nearly impossible to go a day without wondering where this will all end up.  We discussed the fate of our very meager savings, our home and our retirement funds.  It is tempting to become very discouraged and move into panic mode.   To our benefit, my husband is a grandson of the great depression.  Penny-pinching skills in his family never went out of style; I used to buck it, now I’m very thankful.  We have very little debt, beyond our mortgage.  Our conclusion is that our family sits pretty soundly, barring complete catastrophe.
I’ve been trying to learn something of economics lately.  A friend with an econ degree recommended a few websites and a book.  I find myself remembering my college years at a northern Minnesota teacher’s college.  It also had a good business program, so many of my friends were either education or business majors.  Coming out of the 70’s, I believed that teaching or social sciences was far superior to the study of business (hey, I was very naive). My fellow naivetees (is that a word?) and I would hold friendly arguments as to which was more important, business or serving others.  What my business friends would argue to little avail is the importance of business and what I didn’t realize was how right they were…and still are.  What I also didn’t realize is how closely economics and psychology are related.  I love my human development, psychology and statistics courses.  If I had to do it over again, I would study the économie politique.   Heck, I’m going to study it anyway.

My first thought in all of this mess is that our local economy is relatively strong and is not failing.   I still need groceries, gas, clothing, pet food, driving lessons for my son, college tuition for my daughter.  Unless we all end up with our windows shuttered and shotguns at hand, local economy goes on.  I’ve read commentary that local economy even extends to our local banks, so things would have to be pretty bad for me not to be able to cash my paycheck.  My husband is a teacher, so I think that his job is fairly secure even in a recession.  My job is less so, since I am the assistant of someone working in the financial sector.  Still, our neighbors, friends and business acquaintances still need life insurance, annuities, financial advice, employee benefit plans.  My firm may need me to become creative in marketing to survive, but I don’t expect my job to evaporate anytime soon and if it does I can always go back into teaching. In summary, I don’t believe that Wall Street failure means local economy failure.  Casey Mulligan, of Supply and Demand, write in Wall Street Will Drown Alone:

There was a time when people believed that the Sun and stars revolved around the Earth. Of course, now we know that the Earth is not the center of the universe, or even the center of our little solar system. … President Bush and supporters of the recent massive Wall Street bailout plan still believe Wall Street to be the center of the entire economy.

One thing I do hope for is a return to local and state control of our daily lives.  I don’t believe for a second that this is all leading to the ridiculous theories of a postponed election or plans for a one-world government.  I have to admit, though, that I’m fighting the urge to stockpile food staples and pet food, ala y2k.  Good thing my house is too small for that!

I remember when he was cool…

I remember when David Letterman was so cool you HAD to watch him late at night.  He’d do his charming necktie thing…it’d make me smile every time!  In college, I had a slight crush on him.  Now, he’s a grumpy old man and his latest rant is so off-base, I’m embarrassed for him.  He now believes he’s a news maker AND a king-maker…

“Here’s how it works: you don’t come to see me? You don’t come to see me? Well, we might not see you on Inauguration Day,” Letterman said. 

The importance of doing your job…

Good post at Veith’s blog (focuses on faith and vocation) this morning:  The Candidates’ Day Jobs and the Bailout.   I’m for whatever truly needs some sort of bailout.  I’m not for throwing in, whole-hog, student loans and mortgages.  This plan needs meticulous scrutiny and study…I’m all for suspending the campaign for a couple of weeks.  Set up a three debates mid-October through the end of October.  I think we all know by now who stands for what.

If people doing their jobs (senators being senators) causes them to, as Veith put it, “present themselves as riding in on a white horse, delivering votes, and saving the economy”, then so be it.   I cringe when I think of all the money wasted on campaigns and Americans still remained divided.

The President’s words in last night’s speech concern me, but I also think he shouldn’t have delivered such a sanitized speech.  I would have preferred a McCain-style speech, specifically citing failures and announcing some firings.

America needs a vocal and unabashed leader who won’t spot-check himself in the mirror of polls.  I think I have to go back to Reagan to find someone like that.  Clinton was the king of poll-checking. Obama also strikes me as a poll-checker; McCain does not.

Generation Jones???

I have always thought I was a Baby Boomer and it was weird to be in the same generation as my parents.  A couple of years ago, the term Generation Jones was coined.

They are on MySpace, they make up one third of the audience at You Tube and at I-Tunes, and advertisers love them.

Nope, not teenagers.  Generation Jones.

The “Jonesers” were born between 1954 and 1965, sandwiched in between the Baby Boomers and Generation X.

In the tech world, Jonesers are known as the “early adapters,” the ones with the knowledge and the cash to jump on the latest tech trends.  And that should come as no shock—Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, and Steve Case all come from this generation.

I took the Which Generation Are You quiz today and found out I skew even younger.  I scored 18 on the quiz! Don’t tell my teenagers!
Which Generation Are You?
Do you have your own web page? (1 point)
Have you made a web page for someone else? (2 points)
Do you IM your friends? (1 point)
Do you text your friends? (2 points)
Do you watch videos on YouTube? (1 point)
Do you remix video files from the Internet? (2 points)
Have you paid for and downloaded music from the Internet? (1 point)
Do you know where to download free (illegal) music from the Internet? (2 points)
Do you blog for professional reasons? (1 point)
Do you blog as a way to keep an online diary? (2 points)
Have you visited MySpace at least five times? (1 point)
Do you communicate with friends on Facebook? (2 points)
Do you use email to communicate with your parents? (1 point)
Did you text to communicate with your parents? (2 points)
Do you take photos with your phone? (1 point)
Do you share your photos from your phone with your friends? (2 points)
0-1 point - Baby Boomer

2-6 points - Generation Jones

6- 12 points - Generation X

12 or over - Generation Y

Hat tip to Penelope Trunk’s Brazen Careerist!

What Americans Believe…

I read a commentary on a study released by Baylor’s Institute for Studies of Religion (conducted by Gallup).  This statement intrigued me:  “It …shows that the irreligious and the members of more liberal Protestant denominations, far from being resistant to superstition, tend to be much more likely to believe in the paranormal and in pseudoscience than evangelical Christians.”  Dr. Veith at Cranach also posted on this study and its commentary, Look Who’s Irrational Now , by Mollie Ziegler Hemingway, a regular writer in the Houses of Worship feature in the Wall Street Journal.  Here is the excerpt I am referring to:

“What Americans Really Believe,” a comprehensive new study released by Baylor University yesterday, shows that traditional Christian religion greatly decreases belief in everything from the efficacy of palm readers to the usefulness of astrology. It also shows that the irreligious and the members of more liberal Protestant denominations, far from being resistant to superstition, tend to be much more likely to believe in the paranormal and in pseudoscience than evangelical Christians.

The Gallup Organization, under contract to Baylor’s Institute for Studies of Religion, asked American adults a series of questions to gauge credulity. Do dreams foretell the future? Did ancient advanced civilizations such as Atlantis exist? Can places be haunted? Is it possible to communicate with the dead? Will creatures like Bigfoot and the Loch Ness Monster someday be discovered by science?

The answers were added up to create an index of belief in occult and the paranormal. While 31% of people who never worship expressed strong belief in these things, only 8% of people who attend a house of worship more than once a week did.

Even among Christians, there were disparities. While 36% of those belonging to the United Church of Christ, Sen. Barack Obama’s former denomination, expressed strong beliefs in the paranormal, only 14% of those belonging to the Assemblies of God, Sarah Palin’s former denomination, did. In fact, the more traditional and evangelical the respondent, the less likely he was to believe in, for instance, the possibility of communicating with people who are dead.

Ms. Hemingway is a Christian, but is not an evangelical.  She is a great example of a young confessional Lutheran woman who has creatively continued and excelled in her vocation of writing, while making a fine home for her beautiful daughter and fellow writer/husband.  I recently had the privilege of meeting Mollie and her daughter for lunch when they were in Minneapolis for the RNC convention.  I enjoy her style of writing, because she writes frankly, humorously and with integrity.  As we walked around downtown, it was a joy to speak to her face to face and discuss our lives: she at the beginning of marriage and motherhood and me in the middle stages.  Mollie also writes at a forum, Get Religion,  where journalists discuss how religion is reported in print.   Check her out!

The crown is in my mind…

Wallmonkeys is selling lifesize wall stickeys of Sarah Palin. They sell two versions:

Regular:
Regular version

…and Democrat version.

Democrat version

My problem is I love the Democrat version better than the regular one; is it supposed to be a slam?  I don’t get it.  In Minnesota, those props are pretty normal:  hockey stick, deer or pheasant hunting rifle, lipstick …well maybe not the princess crown, but don’t we girls wear one in our minds…at least some of the time?   Actually, it looks a lot like my Yahoo avatar thingy!

Hat tip to Anne Schroeder of the Shenanigans blog at Politico. com.

I’m 20% for change and 80% for change

Your Issue Profile: 20% Obama, 80% McCain
The results are in, and John McCain is definitely your choice.
You’re probably not surprised. It’s possible you’ve had your eye on McCain for years.

Popular or not, you will likely stick by McCain. For you, it’s a matter of principle.
And besides, there’s something exciting about rooting for the underdog! (ed. note: Umm, he’s not actually the underdog. )

Should You Vote for Obama or McCain?

Which is better for the economy: Obama or McCain?

I’ve heard the theory before that when a Democrat is President, the economy thrives and when a Republican is President, the economy falters.  Up until now, it was my mom (a lifelong Republican business owner) who told me this.  Today I read the same thing in Is History Siding with Obama’s Economic Plan? written by Alan Blinder in the New York Times.
Now, I realize that Professor Blinder is an ardent Obama supporter.  But as I read his article, I see no mention of what - beyond the presidency - accounts for the economic growth.  My guess is that taxes are the missing ingredient; there is only one brief mention of “tax and transfer policies”.

“…if history is a guide, an Obama victory in November would lead to faster economic growth with less inequality, while a McCain victory would lead to slower economic growth with more inequality. Which part of the Obama menu don’t you like?”

I’m not making any statements. I just want to better understand why this happens. Anyone else familiar with this theory?