Sunday, November 28, 2010

Andrew Refudiates Himself

This week, among the many wondrous, logic-free emanations from the towering intellect that is Andrew Sullivan, we find this post:

How Many Likudniks Can You Quote In One Article?

Amusingly, the post contains the following two phrases:
There is not a single quote from a single Palestinian in the entire piece
There is one - count it, one - quote from the Palestinians
I guess the Atlantic's blog software does not include a "preview" function, or else Andrew just doesn't read what he writes before posting it.

Saturday, November 20, 2010

Why Willow Palin Might Be "Homophobic" - Exhibit A

This week Andrew Sullivan goes after 16-year-old Willow Palin, who had the audacity to call someone a "faggot" on Facebook.

Take a moment to digest the earth-shattering news that teenagers call each other "faggots." OH THE HUMANITY!

Have you collected yourself now? Ready to read on? While I don't condone the use of "gay" or "faggot" as casual insults, it is unfortunately very common. Andrew, however, suggests that young Willow, by the use of these terms, might cause young homosexuals to commit suicide.

Seriously? When Christopher Hitchens called Andrew a "lesbian" on national TV, I don't recall him suggesting that this would motivate young lesbians to kill themselves; rather he suggested that some people need to get a sense of humor.

Also, I seem to recall Obama denigrating his bowling performance as worthy of the "Special Olympics," and Rahm Emanuel's use of "retarded" as a pejorative, but Andrew's concern apparently does not extend to the possibility of suicidal ideation in the cognitively impaired.

May I suggest that Andrew needs to get a grip? For an adult Harvard graduate to attack a sixteen-year-old girl in this way is truly demented, no matter who the girl's mother is.

If Willow Palin is "homophobic" it is surely the result of encounters with people like Andrew Sullivan. Who wouldn't be afraid of someone that behaves this way?

Saturday, November 13, 2010

Irony, thy name is Andrew Sullivan

Andrew Sullivan illustrates his oblivousness and complete lack of self-awareness this week, with a post entitled "Bush And The Right: The Dysfunctional Slobber". Yes, he actually accused someone else of "slobbering" over a political figure.

Bush And The Right: The Dysfunctional Slobber
"The interview encapsulates the conservative incoherence of the past ten years. Their partisanship made them - for the most part - blind to Bush's attack on real conservatism in his presidency. The fiscal catastrophe, the "deficits-don't-matter" lunacy, the off-budget nation-building endless wars, the budget-busting Medicare entitlement, the executive power supremacy, the descent into war crimes: all of this violated core conservative principles, and, even now, the alleged guardian of such principles, Rush Limbaugh, slobbers pathetically in front of a president he should have been debunking from the get-go."
Now I don't really disagree with all the points Andrew makes about Bush, but this is coming from a man who repeatedly informs us that Obama is the right man for our time, that we are lucky to have him, that he uses "political jiujitsu" on his insane "Christianist" opponents, that Obama should cause us to "Know Hope." Speaking of "slobbering pathetically," Andrew,
"He gets the mood. And seriously: he's obviously up to the job. That was as competent a presser as I've seen in my years covering politics, and light years better than his predecessor's.
I said it in the campaign and I'll say it again. He has flaws; he deserves pushback; he needs criticism. But we're lucky to have him right now, in my fallible judgment. Extremely lucky."
"My belief in 2008 was that Obama represented the best practical way forward. And although I'm going to criticize him when warranted, I stand by that 1000 percent. We're lucky to have him. "
"As I've said repeatedly for the last two years, we're lucky to have him."
"Imagine the narrative shift if this bill is passed. Obama will not have imposed this monstrosity on the country from on high; he will have ground it through the bloggers, and the pundits will declare a resurrection. The narrative will be about his persistence and his grit, rather than his near-divinity and his authority. And suddenly it will appear — lo! — as if this lone figure has not just rescued the US economy from the abyss, but also passed the biggest piece of social legislation in decades.

There is only one story better than Icarus falling to earth; and it’s Icarus getting back up and putting on some shades. The media will fall for it. The public will merely notice that the guy can come back and fight. Even when they don’t always agree with such a figure on the issues, they can admire him."


Saturday, October 16, 2010

Andrew Sullivan's Hypocrisy (again)

Once again we explore the subject of Andrew Sullivan's double standards. This time the subject is conservative attacks on the Ivy League. He quotes Jonah Goldberg trying to explain why conservatives distrust political figures with elite educations. I would summarize Jonah as saying that conservatives do not resent high-end educational achievement in itself, but the mindset which too often accompanies it, of "I know more than you about what you what should do, and what I know should be encoded in the laws by which you are governed."

On this blog I have previously examined Andrew's views on Ivy League education, in a post questioning whether he is a misogynist. His own opinions vary widely depending on the person in question. For David Cameron, elite educational background is good. For Elena Kagan, it is bad, or at least not a positive attribute. In his most recent post, quoted from David Frum and linked above, it seems to be good again, as "they [conservatives] only mean to indict such members as disagree with them." I think that accurately sums up Andrew's position as well, except that his "indictments" seem also to be based in gender.

Sunday, October 10, 2010

Halloween cards, or something wicked this way shuffles...

I see that I have been neglecting my pitiful blog again. Well, just in time for Halloween (since I probably won't post again before that), here is a picture of some of the cards I made yesterday. Scary! But I won't frighten you with tales of even scarier things...

Sunday, September 12, 2010

9/11 and the Truman Show

Nine years on, it is still hard to describe the effect that September 11 had on me.

The only analogy that comes close is "The Truman Show", a movie where the main character grew up believing that he was leading a normal life, only to find out that his whole world was constructed as the set of a reality television show. I think that when he discovered the truth, it must have been similar to how I felt on that day.

It was as if my life up to that point had been a pleasant illusion, where crazy people in distant lands went around screaming "Death to America," but never really did anything about it, because our government was strong and could keep us safe.

The thing that was most shocking for me was that the people who died in the World Trade Center were mostly just drones like me, sitting in cubicles, checking their email, doing and thinking the same kinds of things that I did every day. In an instant everything was transformed for them into a world of fire and death.

I naively thought that our government would avenge their deaths, that we would quickly find and destroy our enemies. All too soon, I realized that September 11 was just another "crisis" that could not be allowed to go to waste, that petty party allegiances were far more important to our "representatives" than uniting as one behind this life-or-death mission. The legitimate goals of our military were subordinated to a twisted political correctness and a "battle for hearts and minds."

"Islam is a religion of peace," we were told repeatedly, until it became a running joke. After every subsequent security breach, we were assured that there was no indication that the perpetrators were motivated by Islamic beliefs. Surrounded as we were by images of barbarism, of so-called moderate Muslims dancing in the streets to celebrate our misfortune, I came to despise the mealy-mouthed posturing of our leaders and the media, and to distrust them entirely. Sadly, nothing since has served to change my new opinion of reality.

Sometimes I think I just want my world back the way it was. I don't know if I am better off for discovering the truth. I love my country but I fear what the future holds for me and my children.

Saturday, July 17, 2010

If Andrew Sullivan Wants To Do It, It Must Not Be A Sin, Ctd.

It's time for another episode in the long-running series, "If Andrew Sullivan wants to do it, it must not be a sin!"

Andrew's latest examination of quaint, outdated, restrictive Christianist beliefs delves into the question of monogamy.

Yes, that's right, even though he is now married, he seeks to justify the promiscuous lifestyle he desires. Perhaps in restrospect, all those Christianists weren't so silly, thinking that "marriage equality" might pose a threat to traditional mores.

The jist of his argument is that there is no evolutionary basis for monogamy. Might there be other behaviors whose prohibition would appear to have no evolutionary basis? For instance, if I am starving, would it not benefit me to kill and eat my neighbor? If someone else's property would make me happy, should I not steal it and then lie about the theft? If I am able to control another person, why should I not force him to labor for me, to preserve my own energy? Since children are generally free of disease, shouldn't I have sex with them instead of other adults?

Whether or not you are an adherent of any religion, all of these seem abhorrent and disturbing. The notion that because monogamy is "unnatural", it is to be disdained, is equally so.

The foundations of modern-day civilization are based on an ethic of striving for moral purity, whatever its origins. To undermine the value of such an ethic is to invite the destruction of society as we know it.

I suppose one could argue that it's only sex, and if Andrew's husband is OK with an "open relationship," it is none of my business. I just wish that he would refrain from propagating his novel philosophies on his website, where many unhappy spouses will undoubtedly grasp them as an excuse to justify their own infidelity.

Edit: a commenter has requested links to the relevant Sullivan posts, this one contains links to several of them.

Saturday, June 19, 2010

The Odd Lies of Andrew Sullivan, Ctd.

Alert the media!  Mercede Johnston (Levi Johnston's sister) has a new blog! Levi, you will recall, is the baby-daddy of Tripp, the infant son of Bristol Palin. Andrew Sullivan, naturally, has gone over every post with a fine-tooth comb, looking for confirmation of his interesting theories of Trig's parentage.

So far, no success. But he did find this! Independent confirmation that Sarah Palin called her son a retard!

Except, there is no "independent confirmation" of anything except that Mercede says that Levi says that Sarah Palin said that. In other words, she said, he said, she said. I sent an email to Andrew:

I realize that you take every opportunity to criticize Sarah Palin, but what you have said in this post is just not true:

"So we now have independent confirmation that Palin, ... referred to her own Down Syndrome son - literally - as "retarded" in front of him at home."

I agree that the kerfuffle over Rahm Emanuel's use of the word was stupid and unnecessary, although I very much dislike the use of "retard", "retarded", or "short bus" as an insult, since these are descriptive of a disabling medical condition, like "crip" or "spaz".

However, "independent confirmation" would imply that Mercede herself heard Palin call Trig "retarded" (which in itself is not inappropriate, my 24-year-old son is also retarded and I describe him that way to strangers so that they will have an idea how they can interact and converse with him when they meet him for the first time).

What Mercede said in her blog post was, AS YOU DIRECTLY QUOTED, "No I have not personally heard her use that term, but I do remember my brother twice coming home and telling me about it." So what you have is "independent confirmation" that Levi said that Sarah used the term, and nothing more. Whether you believe Levi is a reliable source or not is irrelevant. The assertion by Mercede that her brother said it does not rise to the level of "independent confirmation" by Mercede (whose reliability as a source, as someone also hostile to Palin, could also be questioned).

I have given you somewhat of a pass on Palin coverage, as some of your fears seem justified, but I really think you should update this post to remove the phrase "independent confirmation." It is false and unfair as originally posted.
I am eagerly awaiting Andrew's retraction, as we all know that he is a scrupulously fair "journalist" in matters related to Sarah Palin.

Sunday, May 16, 2010


We have a cat that we adopted as a young kitten from a farm family with which we are acquainted. He was neutered at about four months of age but never adapted well to being an indoor cat. In spite of being neutered he was always urinating on our belongings and trying to get outside. We finally gave up & let him go out whenever he wants. He will probably be killed by a car eventually but better a shortened, happy life than a miserable, confined life of resentment towards us for restricting his freedom.

Anyway, he has become a mighty hunter in the course of his outdoor sojourns. He will frequently bring a dead bird or mouse and leave it on our back steps as sort of a gift to us. This would be fine and we would appreciate it in the spirit in which it was intended, except for the fact that we let our dogs out the back door every morning. If Mr. Toto has left a gift it is inevitably brought inside by one of the dogs. I can usually tell by their furtive countenance upon reentering the house, but my husband is not always so attentive to their moods. Once in the house, Toto's gift will be shared between the members of our little menagerie for recreational purposes until one of the fun-killing humans discovers it and throws it in the trash.

Recently Mr. Toto has taken to killing baby bunnies. He also seems to enjoy eviscerating them. It is a macabre business indeed to pry the still-warm and bloody corpse of what was once a cute and fluffy baby rabbit from the jaws of our canine friends. At one time I would have been mortified by even the thought of this, but apparently I have become rather hardened. At this time my only goal is to prevent fur and blood from getting on the carpets. I do feel rather sad about the killings but our neighborhood has an abundance of fertile Leporidae, so I doubt they will be missed.

Saturday, May 15, 2010

Is Andrew Sullivan a Misogynist?

As my readers know, I am a faithful reader of Andrew Sullivan. Not because I agree with him, mind you, but because I am fascinated with the mental gyrations he undertakes to justify his somewhat flexible positions.

Sullivan is notorious for his conspiracy theories about the birth of Trig Palin. He has now gained additional notoriety for his insistence that Elena Kagan publicly declare her sexual preference (or "emotional orientation" as he now describes it).

To use one of Sullivan's favorite phrases, "in my view," Andrew is highly suspicious of powerful, authoritative women. I can't understand what else would motivate his dislike of Hillary Clinton, Sarah Palin, and now Elena Kagan. I do, however, expect his view of Kagan will evolve into affection and admiration once it becomes clear that Obama (who can do no wrong Link) fully supports her.

To illustrate my "view", I here provide examples of Andrew's double standard concerning women, education, and elitism.
This post of his included the notorious "softball" picture of Kagan: Link.
"... where has she experienced the brunt of the law on ordinary people, as the president has described one of his criteria for the court? I guess if you regard Larry Tribe and Charles Ogletree as victims of the world, you could make a case for her empathy. But apart from that? Not much that I can see.

Where is the struggle in her life story...? The NYT is very keen to let us know that the Upper West Side where she grew up was not as tony as it is today. Er, that's about it. ... Not a single anecdote in her life-story would be out of place in a Rhodes Scholar application - and I mean that as damning."

On the other hand, here is a post of his commenting on David Cameron, the newly elected UK prime minister: Link
"And here is where he reminds me a little of Obama. Class in Britain is what race is in America. Cameron never denied his past and even engaged in some of its more obnoxious practices. But he loves his country, and endured great prejudice, as well as great privilege, because of his class. Yes, Etonians can be victims too. He both owned his identity - all of it - and yet sought to transcend it."
I notice a bit of a difference there in his views; what could possibly account for that?

And here, he comments on Sarah Palin's educational background: Link
"Memo to Kristol: you may think Palin is sophisticated enough to grasp the high-level fantasies and abstractions that you have devised in your own head to defend the indefensible. But she isn't, buddy. She has a degree in sports journalism from the University of Idaho, and went to several colleges in several years. She thinks Leo Strauss is a brand of jeans. She doesn't have a clue what she's talking about. Remember: she doesn't know what the Bush Doctrine is and heard about the surge 'on the news'.

This is your lipsticked pitbull, buddy. Own it. And all the immense incuriosity, minimal education, and fact-resistant ambition that comes with it." 
How can we explain Andrew Sullivan's diverse opinions on "elitism", class, and educational background? I leave this as an open question for the reader to contemplate.

Here is a picture of Andrew Sullivan arranging flowers. Because "in my view," all men who arrange flowers are gay, and all men who are gay arrange flowers - just as Andrew seems to believe that all women who play softball are lesbians, and all women who are lesbians play softball. Not that Andrew or I believe in stereotyping homosexuals or anything.

Where's that rope again?

Sunday, May 2, 2010


In the Midwest, ticks can be a problem for dog owners during the months from April until late October. They are disgusting little creatures which fasten themselves to your dog, and then feed on its blood until they become so bloated they can no longer hold on. At that point they fall off, and drag their nasty, swollen bodies across the floor until you find them or they are able to hide under your furniture.

The current state of the federal government reminds me of a giant tick. A tick does not have the goal of killing its host, but a large tick on a small animal can cause severe damage due to its consumption of the host's very life-blood. In such a way our government is now sucking the life-blood out of our nation's economy, as in my illustration:

New insight from Andrew Sullivan

Today Andrew Sullivan employs the title, "Sacrificing Freedom to Gain More" with a link to a post by Hilary Bok Enhancing Freedom By Government Regulations.

The gist of her argument is that the safety and security afforded us by governmental control of certain areas of our lives increases our "freedom" despite its restriction of personal choice. Her example is traffic laws, which serve to make our collective driving experience safer and easier.

Disregarding the Orwellian notion that restrictions make us freer, the "traffic laws" example is most unfortunate, considering recent studies of the elimination of traffic regulations in certain areas. See this article, for example:

Link to article

Andrew Sullivan's leftward slide is not news to anyone who reads him regularly, but his latest epiphany that governmental restrictions increase liberty is, to put it kindly, "eccentric".

I view governmental mandates and intrusion into my personal health decisions somewhat differently.

As Samuel Adams once said, "If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”

Crouch down, Andrew, and lick the hand that grants you the "right" to purchase health insurance, which, should you choose not to exercise it, will earn you a penalty from the IRS. Thankfully Andrew is not yet one of our countrymen, lest we should have to disown him and his refreshing new notions of "liberty".

Saturday, April 3, 2010

The Bad Thing

I believe that every person has a "bad thing" that they hide from the rest of the world, something so awful that their own mother would hate them, if they were to reveal it.

I claim ownership of many "bad things" although I would rather not confess them here.

Whether your "bad thing" be sexual acts or thoughts, gambling, drug or alcohol abuse, racism, dishonesty, or any other sin, God assures us that the grace attributed to us through faith in Christ's sacrifice on the cross is sufficient for our atonement.

We are also told that even without the "bad things" in our lives, our righteous works are sorely lacking. Only grace can cover our sin - our good works are "filthy rags" in God's eyes.

If today you are afraid of death, I present here an easy solution. Receiving God's grace and forgiveness does not require you to stop sinning, for we as human beings are incapable of that, and our Creator is fully aware of our sinful nature. You and I need only to confess our helplessness in the face of temptation, and acknowledge before God that we accept Jesus' suffering as atonement for our sin.

I hope that my readers have a blessed Easter and spend a few moments contemplating the rolling away of the stone from the tomb where he was laid, and the rending of the curtain in the Temple separating worshipers from the Holy of Holies.

2010 Easter Art

Here is my Easter art for this year. There is a fuzzy yellow ducky with a pink basket full of colored eggs, standing in front the silhouette of a cross, framed by a dramatic sunet scene (a picture I took at "our" lake a few years ago, where the sunsets were often epic).

The ducky represents the lack of religion or the lightweight religiosity of the usual observance of Easter in the modern world. He is captured by the vision of the cross, which gives Easter its true meaning to believers in Christ.

If you are a non-believer, please take a minute to contemplate the meaning of the cross. Jesus surrendered himself voluntarily to its suffering and did not ask God to spare him. He experienced death as separation from God, a profound spiritual agony that we cannot begin to comprehend. And he did it for each one of us weak and fallible human beings who would follow in his footsteps, in order to grant us freedom from death and condemnation.

Thank you Lord, for sending your Son to endure this sacrifice in my place.

Saturday, March 20, 2010

Tired of winter

Today is the first day of Spring but our local temperature is in the 20's.

Yesterday it was cloudy all day and it snowed for several hours :-(

I am only 48 but I am developing a strong aversion to cold weather. My best friend is in her 60's and she is always asking me when we are going "cold camping" again. I am thinking my answer will be "Never" even though we camped out a few years ago when it was five below zero. That may eventually be worthy of another blog-post but I don't have time to describe the specific miseries here.

I like to think of myself as a serious outdoors-person so I have clothing and gear appropriate for almost any conditions. My slogan was, "There is no such thing as bad weather, only bad clothes." At one time I was an obsessive gear-head with much more disposable income than I have now, so my wardrobe comprises such items as Patagonia heavy weight fleece pants, Primaloft insulated long underwear, boots rated at 65 below zero, and battery-powered socks. I just can't summon the energy to find and put on all of these layers for anything more strenuous than lying on the couch in front of the TV.

Anyhoo, today seems like one of those days where couch-lying is indicated. Here is a picture of our lovely spring weather.

Saturday, March 13, 2010

St Patrick's Day and other news

Well I don't know how well I have been doing in regard to the goal I set for myself in my last post, but I still feel that it is a worthy and important endeavor for me.

I find that I am feeling more energetic as the days lengthen and we see more daylight. It has been cloudy in Omaha recently, but we have seen a few sunny days. The snow that blanketed our yard has vanished at an almost miraculous rate and we are left with flat, dead grass in its place.

My husband and I have made several trips to Lake Manawa with our two doggies to get some much needed fresh air and exercise. We are eagerly awaiting the breakup of the ice there as this usually heralds the arrival of the annual bald eagle migration. At that lake I have seen as many as a dozen eagles out on the edge of the ice, dining on fish that have perished during the winter.

We saw a couple of eagles last Saturday but of course I did not have my camera. We visited again on Sunday and I got a picture of what I believe to be a red-tailed hawk. The raptors we have seen so far looked very "scruffy" with tattered and discolored feathers.

I am looking forward to Saint Patrick's Day as we are allowed to dress casually at work, and I have made cards for my employees and co-workers. It has been my habit to make mini-cards for every significant holiday and I wonder if there would be a lot of disappointed feelings if I ever quit doing this! I enjoy doing these cards and I hope that everyone appreciates them. Of course they like it more if I also bring treats of some kind, it seems that everyone likes to observe special occasions with food.

Sunday, March 7, 2010

Ms. Sparrow, Tear Down That Wall

I went to a memorial service today for a person to whom I was once very close, but from whom I had become alienated over the last few years. Her sudden death gave me a lot to think about.

I am a very introverted person, and prefer to keep most of my deepest feelings to myself. In the past I have opened myself up fully to at most two or three friends. In the end it was too frightening for me to sustain that level of intimacy, and I eventually erected emotional walls to "protect" myself from these people, even though I had no reason to believe that they would hurt or betray me.

Our existence as human beings can be very lonely at times. We both crave and fear true intimacy. We long to be emotionally "naked" with our loved ones but are too afraid to appear before them without the costumes and masks that keep us at a safe distance, lest we be rejected for some reason.

It is especially good for Christians to have someone to whom we are totally accountable for our thoughts and behavior. If we are unable to be completely open with another person, it is much more difficult to be honest with ourselves and with God.

I am setting a goal for myself to shed some of the protective layers within which I have hidden myself, at least in my two closest relationships. My fear of betrayal and pain has also kept me from experiencing the true love and joy that I need to survive. This is a price that I am no longer willing to pay.

Sunday, February 28, 2010

The Political is Personal - Andrew Sullivan

I read Andrew Sullivan daily, an admittedly odd habit for a Christian conservative. Back in the day, he was an eloquent supporter of the war on terrorism and the war in Iraq. Now he is one of the most radical and influential denouncers of these wars and the techniques used in their execution.

Something happened to Andrew a few years ago that caused him to turn against George W. Bush. I give no credence to the rumors of "Aids Dementia" or "Testosterone Psychosis" favored by some of the uglier sectors of the blogosphere.

I think the reason for Andrew's change of heart was much simpler - he fell in love. His husband Aaron is at least marginally part of the artistic community - Andrew has posted links indicating that he is an actor. I know very little about Aaron, but I do know that the artistic community is unrepentantly leftist and rabidly anti-war and anti-Bush.

I have personal experience with this kind of transformation. I was a small government pro-life conservative for many years before I met my own husband. He was raised in a politically active, Democratic family. After we got to know each other and began discussing our political philosophies, my then-future husband came to embrace my views even more strongly than I did.

I suspect that something similar happened to Andrew. He has always opposed some aspects of conservative philosophy, such as denial of gay rights. Therefore, some leftist positions were therefore easy for him to adopt. But the exposition of "torture", i.e. Abu Ghraib and the use of waterboarding, seemed to ignite his fury towards Republicans. I personally believe that torture is wrong except in extreme circumstances. Perhaps there were occasions when our military and intelligence personnel went too far and abused prisoners unnecessarily. Since we were and are at war, I am inclined to overlook these instances as anecdotal.

His pursuit of "Trig Trutherism" is very strange. That, and his hatred of Hillary Clinton, makes me wonder if there is something in him that is very anti-woman. I don't really have an opinion of Sarah Palin as a political figure but I think her treatment by the media has been unfair. I also think that Andrew has a big blind spot for Obama's shortcomings, possibly because he finds Obama to be an attractive man. Andrew never seems to find fault with Obama and demonizes his opponents as "nihilists" and "Christianists". I emailed Andrew about his support for health care reform, which I see as a dangerous threat to individal freedoms. He responded in a very pleasant manner but expressed no concern that such reform conflicted with "conservative" principles.

Blah, blah, blah. I could go on but I think my point could best be summarized as, Andrew was converted to leftism by his love for a specific leftist person.

Politics, Religion, Freedom

Since I have been the beneficiary of an Instalanche (thanks, Professor Reynolds) I thought I should try to post something substantive and meaningful. So why not take on the contentious topic of politics and religion.

Some believe that people of faith should not participate in the political sphere, or that those who do should put aside their foundational beliefs when crafting legislation. This is ridiculous, political figures cannot and should not be expected to disregard their basic moral principles upon election.

However, a Mike Huckabee type preference for revising our Constitution to conform it more to Biblical guidelines, is also anathema to our system of constitutional governance. Issues involving ethics and morality, such as the death penalty, same sex marriage, abortion, also exist outside of the framework of religion.

I am wishy-washy on the subject of gay marriage, in that I believe homosexual behavior is a sin as defined by my Christian faith, but it is difficult to argue that same sex couples should be denied the financial and civil benefits of marriage. I also waver on the death penalty, as it has been conclusively demonstrated that our justice system is capable of executing innocent people.

In summary, it is always better for government to have less power, the further it is from the people's direct representation. I believe that cities, counties and states should have the power, through democratically elected representatives, to control those facets of life not directly addressed in the Constitution. I fear the power of a federal Leviathan, whose interest in "health" may eventually claim authority to dictate and interfere with details of our private lives, such as dietary choices, physical fitness, smoking, drinking, BMI, etc. There is a legitimate public interest in controlling sexually transmitted disease, but I don't like public schools describing specific sexual practices. I resent public employees' unions, which seem to exist only to elevate their members above the citizens they supposedly work for. Law, jurisprudence, and governmental authority, whether based on religious or non-religious principles, should always err on the side of increasing, rather than limiting, individual liberties.

Saturday, February 27, 2010

Obama vs Karloff Death Stare

Over on Althouse there is a post about Rush Limbaugh comparing Obama at the health care summit to Boris Karloff Is this a fair description of the way Obama looked?.

Chip Ahoy must be busy today since I can't find his response to this challenge in the thread. Well I had to give it a shot myself so here are my results, I don't think Rush was being unfair.

Sunday, February 21, 2010

Sunday Tilapia Recipe

This morning when I first woke up I thought it was Monday morning! Imagine my happiness when I realized it was actually Sunday. Monday will be a big day at work, I need to bring a cake for an employee's big milestone anniversary. It is ordered and I will pick it up later, but when I woke up I thought I had forgotten to do this.

I am cooking a pork roast although my likely dinner guest would prefer pan fried tilapia fillets. And so I leave you with my recipe for tilapia:

1 lb. tilapia fillets
1/2 cup milk
1 egg
1/2 cup flour
1/2 cup mashed potato flakes
1/4 cup grated parmesan cheese
Italian seasoning
coarse ground pepper
Olive oil for frying

Mix flour, potato flakes, cheese & spices in plastic bag. Beat egg & milk in medium bowl. Dip fillets in egg/milk mixture.

Dredge fillets in flour mix. Fry in hot olive oil until browned & flaky.

Serve with lemon wedges. Enjoy!

Sunday, February 14, 2010

Negligent Blogger Syndrome

I have not posted here for over a year. I didn't have many readers anyway so I doubt if anyone noticed. A lot has happened since my last post. We have sold our business and consequently have more free time. 2009 was the first summer in years that I did not work seven days a week.

We miss being around all of the wonderful people we met running a tiny store in the country. Our lake had a devastating fish kill as a result of a powerful storm, and the resulting decline in fishing quality made me quite depressed for a while, as the successful fishing activity used to be one of the highlights of my life. It is difficult to describe what it means to have your "own" lake that you know like the back of your hand, where you can walk a few yards out of your front door any time of the day, and know what you can catch and where, and the right bait to use, and then to lose it all in an instant.

My fishing life has just not been the same since! Anyway, I can't really commit to becoming a regular or consistent blogger, I just don't have the right motivation. Happy Valentine's Day to anyone who happens to read this.