Students, Faculty, and Public Officials at Princeton University are currently taking part in a "Filibuster Frist" rally on campus at Princeton - as I write it's about to enter its 77th hour.
You can get updates and photos of the filibuster here: Filibuster Frist.
The filibuster is primarily being done by students, but Rep. Rush Holt has participated, several members of the faculty have participated, and maybe most notably Frank Wilczek is scheduled to participate tonight (see site for details).
Frist is a 1974 graduate of Princeton and the filibuster is taking place outside of the Frist Campus Center, a building sponsored by the Senate Majority Leader's family.
Friday, April 29, 2005
Who's Listening to You?
Wiretaps in U.S. jump 19 percent in 2004
This is a rather perfunctory article about a startling rise in authorized government wiretapping into our privacy.
But there are a few nuggets of info which are definite causes of concern:
"...court records which also showed that not a single application was denied."
"The numbers, released Thursday, do not include court orders for terror-related investigations under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act..."
Makes me wonder if the requests are even being examined before rubber-stamping approval...it also makes me wonder about the rate of increase of non-authorized wiretaps...
This is a rather perfunctory article about a startling rise in authorized government wiretapping into our privacy.
But there are a few nuggets of info which are definite causes of concern:
"...court records which also showed that not a single application was denied."
"The numbers, released Thursday, do not include court orders for terror-related investigations under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act..."
Makes me wonder if the requests are even being examined before rubber-stamping approval...it also makes me wonder about the rate of increase of non-authorized wiretaps...
Thursday, April 28, 2005
People v. Harlan NOT People v. Bible...
On March 28, the Colorado Supreme Court overturned a sentence of death (People v. Harlan) – the Court ruling that because certain jury members had brought a Bible into jury deliberations in order to encourage a vote for capital punishment, the convicted murderer was prejudiced in sentencing.
What followed was a mainstream media blitz decrying a “Bible-banning”, etc. aimed at stirring up controversy among religious right-wing political segments, sell papers and increase circulations.
What gets lost in the “religious” reactionaries outrage is simply this:
The Court was right.
Make no mistake, I am a Christian. Yet I have no problem saying this court was correct in its holding – why, because I don’t have an agenda to propagandize for, to raise funds for, etc. Look, we don’t always understand it, and we may not always like it, but what our judges are supposed to do is look at a set of facts, look at the law that relates to those facts, and apply that law to those facts. They should be blind to public response, public outcry, political ramifications, etc. It is not an easy job, to disengage yourself and simply ask the question, “what is the law of this state” and take that answer and coldly apply the law to the facts of an individual controversy or criminal proceeding. I would certainly hope that our judges and justices never concern themselves with a political fall-out – that is not their roll. The fall out should be handled by the legislature. In this case specifically, if there is a public outcry about this in Colorado, the Colorado legislature needs to go change the state law to make an exception for Bibles or scripture in the jury room. If that statute would violate a provision of the Colorado state constitution, then the legislature needs to take an amendment to the constitution to the people. That is how our system is supposed to work. It is not these jurists “fault” for following the law if that law proves unpopular. It is their job to apply the law. Coldly.
I want to look at this case – and debunk the notion that it is a glaring example of the “activist courts” or that it is in any way an attack on Christianity or the Bible. First, a general description of the majority opinion – it begins with a summary of earlier dispositions of the varied decisions and appeals of the case. Then it sets forth the facts of the case. There is a discussion of whether the Court has jurisdiction to hear an appeal from the State (which I will skip). Then there is the analysis of the ‘Bible Motion’ – which is what I’ll focus on.
The Colorado Supreme Court had previously affirmed Harlan’s death penalty in 2000 on issues not related to the ‘Bible Motion’. In that opinion, the Court “expressed particular concern about the voir dire that resulted in the jury’s selection.” But the death penalty was upheld and sent back for further actions on other matters. At that point the ‘Bible Motion’ went before the trial court and that judge found that “Colorado’s legal standards require reversal of the jury’s death sentence verdict in this case.”
In discussing the facts, the court noted, even stressed, the strict jury instructions given to this jury due to some external factors. Those external factors forced this jury to be sequestered, and even more, and more rigid instructions were given. Without quoting all of those instructions, the jist of it was that the jurors were not allowed to consult or discuss the case with anyone or anything outside of the evidence and law presented at trial. It was later established through juror interviews and a hearing before the trial court that about five jurors had studied the Bible and made notes and such on a Friday night, brought at least one Bible and those notes into the jury deliberations and that information was discussed prior to the sentencing – and later in the day the jury reached the required unanimous decision required to impose the death penalty.
Colorado Rule of Evidence 606(b) strongly disfavors any impeaching of a verdict due to juror testimony. It is “designed to promote the finality of verdicts, shield verdicts from impeachment, and protect jurors from harassment and coercion.” In fact, it prohibits any testimony of jurors as to any statements during deliberations, or any discussion of anything in any other juror’s mind or emotions or concerning their mental processes. It does contain one exception, “a juror may testify on the question of whether extraneous prejudicial information was improperly brought into the jurors’ attention or whether any outside influence was improperly brought to bear upon any juror.”
The Court relied upon two cases in coming to its decision relating the facts of this case to Colorado law, Wiser v. People, 732 P.2d 1139 (Colo. 1987), and People v. Wadle, 97 P.3d 932 (Colo. 2004). These cases establish a two-part test: -1- a court must make a determination that extraneous information was improperly before the jury; and –2- based on an objective, “reasonable juror” standard, make a determination whether the extraneous information posed a reasonable possibility of prejudice to the defendant. As to the first part of the test, Wiser and Wadle state that any information that is not properly received into evidence or included in the court’s instructions is extraneous to the case and improper for juror consideration. In Wiser it was held improper for a juror to consult a dictionary. In Wadle it was held improper for a juror to conduct internet research which was used in the jury room. It was also held that the extraneous information may be improper whether or not it involved deliberate juror misconduct (specifically ignoring a court instruction). This portion of the test, determining if extraneous information was improperly before the jury, is strictly limited by CRE 606(b). “The court may not take into account testimony regarding the jury’s deliberations, a juror’s mental processes leading to his or her decision, or whether the extraneous information actually swayed any of the particular juror’s votes.” Even with a finding of the first test, the verdict/sentence can only be reversed if it is found the defendant has been prejudiced. Colorado adopts a “objective test” for ascertaining prejudice. Under this test, a court cannot consider evidence of actual impact upon specific jurors in a particular case, but the relevant question is whether there is a reasonable possibility that the extraneous information would influence a reasonable juror to the detriment of the defendant. Wiser and Wadle consider several factors in determining whether improper introduction of extraneous material to the jury room created a reasonable possibility that the defendant was prejudiced. This list is not a formal test, nor exhaustive, but is one way to determine if prejudice existed. Each of these factors are considered appropriate under the CRE 606(b) exception: -1- how the information relates to the case; -2- how authoritative is the source; -3- whether a juror initiated the search for the extraneous information; -4- whether the information obtained by one juror was brought to the attention of anther juror; -5- whether the information was presented before the jury reached a unanimous verdict; and –6- whether the information would be likely to influence a typical juror to the detriment of the defendant.
It is reasonably evident from the trial court record that the Bible and study notes were brought into the jury room, and discussed. There is some dispute in the opinion about that – but that does not seem to be the dispute in this thread. I think that essentially everyone is conceding that the info was brought in, but that it should not be considered improper – so I’m going to skip this part, and assume we can all agree that there were extraneous materials in the jury room discussed by the jurors.
So, turning to the prejudice inquiry, Colorado has a four-step process to determine if the death penalty is used. The first three steps are: -1- prosecution must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that one aggravating factor exists; -2- each juror must consider whether any mitigating factors exist; and –3- the jury must unanimously decide whether any aggravating factors outweighs the mitigating evidence. If –3- is met, then the fourth step is reached – the jury must find that it is convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that death is the appropriate sentence, its verdict must be unanimous, and its imposition of the death penalty must not be influenced by passion, prejudice, or any other arbitrary factor. The court then turns to the factors above to determine of the extraneous material was prejudicial.
Related to critical issues – the written material was directly related to the ultimate issue before the jury.
Degree of authority – The Bible and other religious documents are considered codes of law in many contemporary communities from which Colorado jurors are drawn. (The court then examines the passages in question.) “There can be little doubt that the Bible, including these two texts, is more authoritative to many typical citizens than the internet.”
How information acquired – independent, no authorization from the trial court.
Information shared – it was determined at least one juror showed the information to at least one other and potentially involved other jurors.
Presented before jury reached unanimous verdit – determined it was done before sentencing verdict.
Could a typical juror have been influenced – not a question of if the jury’s decision here turned upon the introduction of extraneous material, but whether a typical Colorado juror could be influenced to vote due to the unauthorized material. It was determined it could. (How much more persuasive to a typical Colorado juror is a Biblical text as opposed other materials?) A religious text mandating the death penalty meets the Wiser and Wadle standard of extraneous information creating a reasonable possibility that a typical juror could be influenced in voting on the verdict.
“We do not hold that an individual juror may not rely on and discuss with the other jurors during deliberation his or her religious upbringing, education, and beliefs in making the extremely difficult “reasoned judgment” and “moral decision” he or she is called upon to make in the fourth step of the penalty phase under Colorado law.” “We expect jurors to bring their backgrounds and beliefs to bear on their deliberations but to give ultimate consideration only to the facts admitted and the law instructed.”
Due to these considerations, it can be concluded, “Harlan’s death sentence may have been imposed under the influence of passion, prejudice, or other arbitrary factors – the use of an unauthorized extraneous text requiring the death penalty for the crime of murder.”
There is a dissent. I encourage you to read it, I won’t comment on it as much, but I do want to note one thing. The dissent advocates using a subjective standard. This point seems contrary to Colorado law as stated in the majority opinion (specifically that Colorado adopts an objective standard).
I would hope that it can be seen that when the opinion itself is examined, instead of only the headlines so many rely upon, that the Colorado law is related directly related to the introduction of unauthorized materials by certain jury members. Colorado itself has made the same decisions with a dictionary and internet materials involved. In this case, it was a Bible and Biblical passages, and the Court notes specifically that is can be assumed that the Bible would carry more authority than the other sources. No Bible-banning involved.
I encourage you to read the decision if you are interested.
What followed was a mainstream media blitz decrying a “Bible-banning”, etc. aimed at stirring up controversy among religious right-wing political segments, sell papers and increase circulations.
What gets lost in the “religious” reactionaries outrage is simply this:
The Court was right.
Make no mistake, I am a Christian. Yet I have no problem saying this court was correct in its holding – why, because I don’t have an agenda to propagandize for, to raise funds for, etc. Look, we don’t always understand it, and we may not always like it, but what our judges are supposed to do is look at a set of facts, look at the law that relates to those facts, and apply that law to those facts. They should be blind to public response, public outcry, political ramifications, etc. It is not an easy job, to disengage yourself and simply ask the question, “what is the law of this state” and take that answer and coldly apply the law to the facts of an individual controversy or criminal proceeding. I would certainly hope that our judges and justices never concern themselves with a political fall-out – that is not their roll. The fall out should be handled by the legislature. In this case specifically, if there is a public outcry about this in Colorado, the Colorado legislature needs to go change the state law to make an exception for Bibles or scripture in the jury room. If that statute would violate a provision of the Colorado state constitution, then the legislature needs to take an amendment to the constitution to the people. That is how our system is supposed to work. It is not these jurists “fault” for following the law if that law proves unpopular. It is their job to apply the law. Coldly.
I want to look at this case – and debunk the notion that it is a glaring example of the “activist courts” or that it is in any way an attack on Christianity or the Bible. First, a general description of the majority opinion – it begins with a summary of earlier dispositions of the varied decisions and appeals of the case. Then it sets forth the facts of the case. There is a discussion of whether the Court has jurisdiction to hear an appeal from the State (which I will skip). Then there is the analysis of the ‘Bible Motion’ – which is what I’ll focus on.
The Colorado Supreme Court had previously affirmed Harlan’s death penalty in 2000 on issues not related to the ‘Bible Motion’. In that opinion, the Court “expressed particular concern about the voir dire that resulted in the jury’s selection.” But the death penalty was upheld and sent back for further actions on other matters. At that point the ‘Bible Motion’ went before the trial court and that judge found that “Colorado’s legal standards require reversal of the jury’s death sentence verdict in this case.”
In discussing the facts, the court noted, even stressed, the strict jury instructions given to this jury due to some external factors. Those external factors forced this jury to be sequestered, and even more, and more rigid instructions were given. Without quoting all of those instructions, the jist of it was that the jurors were not allowed to consult or discuss the case with anyone or anything outside of the evidence and law presented at trial. It was later established through juror interviews and a hearing before the trial court that about five jurors had studied the Bible and made notes and such on a Friday night, brought at least one Bible and those notes into the jury deliberations and that information was discussed prior to the sentencing – and later in the day the jury reached the required unanimous decision required to impose the death penalty.
Colorado Rule of Evidence 606(b) strongly disfavors any impeaching of a verdict due to juror testimony. It is “designed to promote the finality of verdicts, shield verdicts from impeachment, and protect jurors from harassment and coercion.” In fact, it prohibits any testimony of jurors as to any statements during deliberations, or any discussion of anything in any other juror’s mind or emotions or concerning their mental processes. It does contain one exception, “a juror may testify on the question of whether extraneous prejudicial information was improperly brought into the jurors’ attention or whether any outside influence was improperly brought to bear upon any juror.”
The Court relied upon two cases in coming to its decision relating the facts of this case to Colorado law, Wiser v. People, 732 P.2d 1139 (Colo. 1987), and People v. Wadle, 97 P.3d 932 (Colo. 2004). These cases establish a two-part test: -1- a court must make a determination that extraneous information was improperly before the jury; and –2- based on an objective, “reasonable juror” standard, make a determination whether the extraneous information posed a reasonable possibility of prejudice to the defendant. As to the first part of the test, Wiser and Wadle state that any information that is not properly received into evidence or included in the court’s instructions is extraneous to the case and improper for juror consideration. In Wiser it was held improper for a juror to consult a dictionary. In Wadle it was held improper for a juror to conduct internet research which was used in the jury room. It was also held that the extraneous information may be improper whether or not it involved deliberate juror misconduct (specifically ignoring a court instruction). This portion of the test, determining if extraneous information was improperly before the jury, is strictly limited by CRE 606(b). “The court may not take into account testimony regarding the jury’s deliberations, a juror’s mental processes leading to his or her decision, or whether the extraneous information actually swayed any of the particular juror’s votes.” Even with a finding of the first test, the verdict/sentence can only be reversed if it is found the defendant has been prejudiced. Colorado adopts a “objective test” for ascertaining prejudice. Under this test, a court cannot consider evidence of actual impact upon specific jurors in a particular case, but the relevant question is whether there is a reasonable possibility that the extraneous information would influence a reasonable juror to the detriment of the defendant. Wiser and Wadle consider several factors in determining whether improper introduction of extraneous material to the jury room created a reasonable possibility that the defendant was prejudiced. This list is not a formal test, nor exhaustive, but is one way to determine if prejudice existed. Each of these factors are considered appropriate under the CRE 606(b) exception: -1- how the information relates to the case; -2- how authoritative is the source; -3- whether a juror initiated the search for the extraneous information; -4- whether the information obtained by one juror was brought to the attention of anther juror; -5- whether the information was presented before the jury reached a unanimous verdict; and –6- whether the information would be likely to influence a typical juror to the detriment of the defendant.
It is reasonably evident from the trial court record that the Bible and study notes were brought into the jury room, and discussed. There is some dispute in the opinion about that – but that does not seem to be the dispute in this thread. I think that essentially everyone is conceding that the info was brought in, but that it should not be considered improper – so I’m going to skip this part, and assume we can all agree that there were extraneous materials in the jury room discussed by the jurors.
So, turning to the prejudice inquiry, Colorado has a four-step process to determine if the death penalty is used. The first three steps are: -1- prosecution must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that one aggravating factor exists; -2- each juror must consider whether any mitigating factors exist; and –3- the jury must unanimously decide whether any aggravating factors outweighs the mitigating evidence. If –3- is met, then the fourth step is reached – the jury must find that it is convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that death is the appropriate sentence, its verdict must be unanimous, and its imposition of the death penalty must not be influenced by passion, prejudice, or any other arbitrary factor. The court then turns to the factors above to determine of the extraneous material was prejudicial.
Related to critical issues – the written material was directly related to the ultimate issue before the jury.
Degree of authority – The Bible and other religious documents are considered codes of law in many contemporary communities from which Colorado jurors are drawn. (The court then examines the passages in question.) “There can be little doubt that the Bible, including these two texts, is more authoritative to many typical citizens than the internet.”
How information acquired – independent, no authorization from the trial court.
Information shared – it was determined at least one juror showed the information to at least one other and potentially involved other jurors.
Presented before jury reached unanimous verdit – determined it was done before sentencing verdict.
Could a typical juror have been influenced – not a question of if the jury’s decision here turned upon the introduction of extraneous material, but whether a typical Colorado juror could be influenced to vote due to the unauthorized material. It was determined it could. (How much more persuasive to a typical Colorado juror is a Biblical text as opposed other materials?) A religious text mandating the death penalty meets the Wiser and Wadle standard of extraneous information creating a reasonable possibility that a typical juror could be influenced in voting on the verdict.
“We do not hold that an individual juror may not rely on and discuss with the other jurors during deliberation his or her religious upbringing, education, and beliefs in making the extremely difficult “reasoned judgment” and “moral decision” he or she is called upon to make in the fourth step of the penalty phase under Colorado law.” “We expect jurors to bring their backgrounds and beliefs to bear on their deliberations but to give ultimate consideration only to the facts admitted and the law instructed.”
Due to these considerations, it can be concluded, “Harlan’s death sentence may have been imposed under the influence of passion, prejudice, or other arbitrary factors – the use of an unauthorized extraneous text requiring the death penalty for the crime of murder.”
There is a dissent. I encourage you to read it, I won’t comment on it as much, but I do want to note one thing. The dissent advocates using a subjective standard. This point seems contrary to Colorado law as stated in the majority opinion (specifically that Colorado adopts an objective standard).
I would hope that it can be seen that when the opinion itself is examined, instead of only the headlines so many rely upon, that the Colorado law is related directly related to the introduction of unauthorized materials by certain jury members. Colorado itself has made the same decisions with a dictionary and internet materials involved. In this case, it was a Bible and Biblical passages, and the Court notes specifically that is can be assumed that the Bible would carry more authority than the other sources. No Bible-banning involved.
I encourage you to read the decision if you are interested.
Sunday, February 20, 2005
Extraordinary Times
I know...long time since I've posted. I'll try to keep this up better going forward.
Back on Wednesday, October 27, 2004, I logged a post I entitled "Extraordinary Times". It was about how sometimes I lose sight of the blessings that God surrounds me with because I make them everyday. Those thoughts sprung from the baptism of a man at our church. I highly recommend that anyone reading this jump back to that post and read it. That man was in Houston being treated for cancer, and spoke no English. Go read that post...
Today, God shared with us another extraordinary moment that left my wife and I in tears. After the lesson this morning, several people came forward (including one lady desiring to be baptized and her friend that had been studing the Bible with her). There was also a group of three ladies that came down together - two asking to be baptized, the third a translator.
It turns out that the gentleman who was baptized at our church back in October had lost his battle with cancer, and had passed on to be with God. But here were his wife and daughter, who had sat in on his Bible studies with our minister, choosing to put Christ on in baptism. Their lives had been touched through those studies, and through the example of their husband/father who had committed his life to Christ, and spend the final months of his life in God - and ministering to them - as much as they to him. So, they had made the trip back to Houston from southwest Texas to be baptized at our church by our minster, just as he had. The wife/mother spoke no English, so the confession and baptizm was again interpreted. It was such an amazing time - and truly showed that God indeed can do anything, far above what we could even ask or imagine. It brought much of our body to tears, and it showed us once again, that God is alive...working...and blessing us with extraordinary glimpses of Him.
Back on Wednesday, October 27, 2004, I logged a post I entitled "Extraordinary Times". It was about how sometimes I lose sight of the blessings that God surrounds me with because I make them everyday. Those thoughts sprung from the baptism of a man at our church. I highly recommend that anyone reading this jump back to that post and read it. That man was in Houston being treated for cancer, and spoke no English. Go read that post...
Today, God shared with us another extraordinary moment that left my wife and I in tears. After the lesson this morning, several people came forward (including one lady desiring to be baptized and her friend that had been studing the Bible with her). There was also a group of three ladies that came down together - two asking to be baptized, the third a translator.
It turns out that the gentleman who was baptized at our church back in October had lost his battle with cancer, and had passed on to be with God. But here were his wife and daughter, who had sat in on his Bible studies with our minister, choosing to put Christ on in baptism. Their lives had been touched through those studies, and through the example of their husband/father who had committed his life to Christ, and spend the final months of his life in God - and ministering to them - as much as they to him. So, they had made the trip back to Houston from southwest Texas to be baptized at our church by our minster, just as he had. The wife/mother spoke no English, so the confession and baptizm was again interpreted. It was such an amazing time - and truly showed that God indeed can do anything, far above what we could even ask or imagine. It brought much of our body to tears, and it showed us once again, that God is alive...working...and blessing us with extraordinary glimpses of Him.
Wednesday, December 29, 2004
Bue Kismus
Hope that you and your's had a wonderful holiday season. Obviously I haven't posted in a long while, primarily due to the holidays.
We had a really wonderful week for Christmas - we even had a snow while in Dallas on Wednesday that gave us more of a seasonal feel. And Noah received so many wonderful toys and books and clothes. We've been packing up loads of older stuff to take down to goodwill to make room.
One small anecdote from our Christmas season. On Dec. 17th Shana had to go up to Dallas, so Noah and I had a boys weekend together. That Friday night, I decided to take him up to Hermann Park to see the Holiday Festival of Lights display. On our way in I had the Christmas music station on, and while we were parking, Elvis' Blue Christmas was playing. When I got Noah out of the car and he and I were walking up to the park Noah was singing/shouting over and over:
Bu-bu-bue Kismus
He really couldn't say blue or Christmas...but it is one of my best memories of Christmas 2004!!!
We had a really wonderful week for Christmas - we even had a snow while in Dallas on Wednesday that gave us more of a seasonal feel. And Noah received so many wonderful toys and books and clothes. We've been packing up loads of older stuff to take down to goodwill to make room.
One small anecdote from our Christmas season. On Dec. 17th Shana had to go up to Dallas, so Noah and I had a boys weekend together. That Friday night, I decided to take him up to Hermann Park to see the Holiday Festival of Lights display. On our way in I had the Christmas music station on, and while we were parking, Elvis' Blue Christmas was playing. When I got Noah out of the car and he and I were walking up to the park Noah was singing/shouting over and over:
Bu-bu-bue Kismus
He really couldn't say blue or Christmas...but it is one of my best memories of Christmas 2004!!!
Thursday, December 16, 2004
Barnes Foundation on the Move
Judge authorizes major art collection move to downtown Philadelphia
This Times story (from the International Herald Tribune) is really interesting reading to get some of the back story behind this move:
In a ruling much anticipated by members of the philanthropic community across the United States, a Pennsylvania court has ruled that the private art collection owned by the Barnes Foundation - said by some to the most valuable in the country worth somewhere between $6.5 and $30 billion - may be moved from its current home in suburban Merion, PA to a new location in downtown Philadelphia. Albert Barnes, who died in 1951, had specified that his collection was to remain in Merion, and was to be displayed in a particular fashion, but the court essentially overruled his intentions in the name of preserving the Foundation and the integrity of the collection over the long term. In a press release the Foundations' Board of Trustees expressed "great excitement" over the ruling, which was also applauded by Pennsylvania governor Ed Rendell. A group of Barnes Foundation art students who had sought to block the move may yet appeal. The President of the Foundation Board offers his perspective on the move and the circumstances of the Foundation here [PDF]. A 2002 summary of the Foundation's original petition to move is online here. The New York Times has more.
This Times story (from the International Herald Tribune) is really interesting reading to get some of the back story behind this move:
"Barnes would never have imagined the constraints the foundation is currently facing." He had described the foundation as a place for "plain people, that is men and women who gain their livelihood by daily toil," she said. By moving the collection from an affluent suburb to downtown Philadelphia, she said, more of those "plain people" will be able to enjoy the art.
Tuesday, December 07, 2004
What Happened to the Dollar? II
More today with the print edition of the Economist going on-line:
The Disappearing Dollar
Many American policymakers talk as though it is better to rely entirely on a falling dollar to solve, somehow, all their problems. Conceivably, it could happen—but such a one-sided remedy would most likely be far more painful than they imagine. America's challenge is not just to reduce its current-account deficit to a level which foreigners are happy to finance by buying more dollar assets, but also to persuade existing foreign creditors to hang on to their vast stock of dollar assets, estimated at almost $11 trillion. A fall in the dollar sufficient to close the current-account deficit might destroy its safe-haven status. If the dollar falls by another 30%, as some predict, it would amount to the biggest default in history: not a conventional default on debt service, but default by stealth, wiping trillions off the value of foreigners' dollar assets.
The dollar's loss of reserve-currency status would lead America's creditors to start cashing those cheques—and what an awful lot of cheques there are to cash. As that process gathered pace, the dollar could tumble further and further. American bond yields (long-term interest rates) would soar, quite likely causing a deep recession. Americans who favour a weak dollar should be careful what they wish for. Cutting the budget deficit looks cheap at the price.
The Passing of the Buck?
Mr Greenspan may not be the only central banker to have become bearish on the dollar. Markets have been rattled by concerns that foreign central banks might reduce their holdings of American Treasury bonds. Last week, officials at the central banks of both Russia and Indonesia said that their banks were considering reducing the share of dollars in their reserves. Even more alarming were reports that China's central bank, the second-biggest holder (after Japan) of foreign-exchange reserves, may have trimmed its purchases of American Treasury bonds.
The current-account deficit is now being financed by foreign central banks and short-term money. In the year to mid-2004, foreign central banks financed as much as three-fifths of America's deficit. The recent purchase of reserves by central banks is unprecedented. Global foreign-exchange reserves (65%, remember, are denominated in dollars) have risen by $1 trillion in just 18 months. The previous addition of $1 trillion to official reserves took a decade. These purchases of dollars have nothing to do with the prospective returns in America, but are aimed at holding down the currencies of the purchasing countries.
The dollar did indeed fall sharply in the late 1980s, but with few ill effects on the economy. So why worry more now? One good reason is that the current-account deficit, currently running at close to 6% of GDP, is almost twice as big as at its peak in the late 1980s, and on current policies it will keep widening. Second, in the 1980s America was still a net foreign creditor. Today it has net foreign liabilities and these are expected to reach $3.3 trillion, or 28% of GDP, by the end of 2004.
In any case, the current-account deficit cannot be corrected by a fall in the dollar alone: domestic saving also needs to rise. The best way would be for the government to cut its budget deficit. That would reduce America's need to borrow from abroad, and so mitigate the fall in the dollar and rise in bond yields that will otherwise be demanded by investors. If combined with stronger growth abroad, then the current-account deficit could slowly shrink. America's growth would be depressed by tax increases or spending cuts, but there would be no need for recession. If, on the other hand, the government fails to cut its budget deficit, the dollar will fall more sharply and bond yields will rise. America's housing bubble might then burst and consumer spending would certainly slow sharply.
Exchange rates against the Dollar
These are not positive signs. It's a good thing that our government is focused on tackling these difficult problems...oh, wait...
The Disappearing Dollar
Many American policymakers talk as though it is better to rely entirely on a falling dollar to solve, somehow, all their problems. Conceivably, it could happen—but such a one-sided remedy would most likely be far more painful than they imagine. America's challenge is not just to reduce its current-account deficit to a level which foreigners are happy to finance by buying more dollar assets, but also to persuade existing foreign creditors to hang on to their vast stock of dollar assets, estimated at almost $11 trillion. A fall in the dollar sufficient to close the current-account deficit might destroy its safe-haven status. If the dollar falls by another 30%, as some predict, it would amount to the biggest default in history: not a conventional default on debt service, but default by stealth, wiping trillions off the value of foreigners' dollar assets.
The dollar's loss of reserve-currency status would lead America's creditors to start cashing those cheques—and what an awful lot of cheques there are to cash. As that process gathered pace, the dollar could tumble further and further. American bond yields (long-term interest rates) would soar, quite likely causing a deep recession. Americans who favour a weak dollar should be careful what they wish for. Cutting the budget deficit looks cheap at the price.
The Passing of the Buck?
Mr Greenspan may not be the only central banker to have become bearish on the dollar. Markets have been rattled by concerns that foreign central banks might reduce their holdings of American Treasury bonds. Last week, officials at the central banks of both Russia and Indonesia said that their banks were considering reducing the share of dollars in their reserves. Even more alarming were reports that China's central bank, the second-biggest holder (after Japan) of foreign-exchange reserves, may have trimmed its purchases of American Treasury bonds.
The current-account deficit is now being financed by foreign central banks and short-term money. In the year to mid-2004, foreign central banks financed as much as three-fifths of America's deficit. The recent purchase of reserves by central banks is unprecedented. Global foreign-exchange reserves (65%, remember, are denominated in dollars) have risen by $1 trillion in just 18 months. The previous addition of $1 trillion to official reserves took a decade. These purchases of dollars have nothing to do with the prospective returns in America, but are aimed at holding down the currencies of the purchasing countries.
The dollar did indeed fall sharply in the late 1980s, but with few ill effects on the economy. So why worry more now? One good reason is that the current-account deficit, currently running at close to 6% of GDP, is almost twice as big as at its peak in the late 1980s, and on current policies it will keep widening. Second, in the 1980s America was still a net foreign creditor. Today it has net foreign liabilities and these are expected to reach $3.3 trillion, or 28% of GDP, by the end of 2004.
In any case, the current-account deficit cannot be corrected by a fall in the dollar alone: domestic saving also needs to rise. The best way would be for the government to cut its budget deficit. That would reduce America's need to borrow from abroad, and so mitigate the fall in the dollar and rise in bond yields that will otherwise be demanded by investors. If combined with stronger growth abroad, then the current-account deficit could slowly shrink. America's growth would be depressed by tax increases or spending cuts, but there would be no need for recession. If, on the other hand, the government fails to cut its budget deficit, the dollar will fall more sharply and bond yields will rise. America's housing bubble might then burst and consumer spending would certainly slow sharply.
Exchange rates against the Dollar
These are not positive signs. It's a good thing that our government is focused on tackling these difficult problems...oh, wait...
Monday, December 06, 2004
What Happened to the Dollar?
American monetary policy has been getting a lot of mainstream press of late due to the falling dollar. This is unusal, because monetary policy is geneally not something that the average 'current events follower' would care about. But that seems to have changed a bit of late. Now, I'm not an economist - nor did I stay in a Holiday Inn Express last night - but I have been doing some reading of late due to the increasing oil prices and decreasing dollar, and what I read is not exactly encouraging.
Let's start with the following articles:
The Dollar's Demise
It does not help when the chairman of your central bank, Alan Greenspan, ..., has said the day before that the dollar seems likely to fall: “Given the size of the current-account deficit, a diminished appetite for adding to dollar balances must occur at some point,” were his exact words. The foreign-exchange market immediately decided that it was sated, and the dollar fell to another record low against the euro.
At the heart of the central banks’ calculations is a trade-off: intervening to keep your currency down can be costly, but it is good for exports. Though the costs of intervention are hard to quantify, they are potentially big. Because the domestic money supply is expanded—those dollars must be paid for with something—it can cause inflation (though this can be neutralised through “sterilisation”, ie, bond sales). But the big potential cost is in amassing a huge stash of dollars with precious little exit strategy. Quite simply, Asian central banks now own too many of them to exit en masse, for their exit would cause the dollar to crash and American interest rates to soar, which would cause huge losses on their holdings of Treasuries.
And what will then happen to the dollar? It is hard to imagine its hegemony remaining unchallenged when so many will have lost so much. And doubly so given that America has abused the dollar’s reserve-currency role so egregiously that its finances now look more like those of a banana republic than an economic superpower.
Folks - that's The Economist, as reputable and high-end as objective media comes. And they used a term like 'banana republic'.
Economic `Armageddon' Predicted
Stephen Roach, the chief economist at investment banking giant Morgan Stanley, has a public reputation for being bearish. But you should hear what he's saying in private. Roach met select groups of fund managers downtown last week, including a group at Fidelity. His prediction: America has no better than a 10 percent chance of avoiding economic ``armageddon.''
In a nutshell, Roach's argument is that America's record trade deficit means the dollar will keep falling. To keep foreigners buying T-bills and prevent a resulting rise in inflation, Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan will be forced to raise interest rates further and faster than he wants. The result: U.S. consumers, who are in debt up to their eyeballs, will get pounded. Less a case of ``Armageddon,'' maybe, than of a ``Perfect Storm.'' To finance its current account deficit with the rest of the world, he said, America has to import $2.6 billion in cash. Every working day. That is an amazing 80 percent of the entire world's net savings. Sustainable? Hardly.
Yes, that's the chief economist at Morgan Stanley - long time bastion of American capitalism.
Being John Snow
The market scoffed at Snow. As he spoke, the dollar plunged to a new record low against the euro. Snow's performance worsened during question time. When an audience member had the temerity to ask why Snow persisted in discussing the strong dollar policy while the greenback was plummeting, he simply responded "because it's our policy." Challenged again, he reiterated: "The policy is the policy."
Snow is the Treasury Secretary.
Economic Crisis a Question of When, Not If
"So if you ask the question do we look like Argentina, the answer is a whole lot more than anyone is quite willing to admit at this point. We've become a banana republic."
Krugman is an Professor of Economics at Princeton.
Wow - the falling dollar looks to hold a lot of problems. My understanding is that there is two general schools of thought about the falling $:
1. It is good for the economy in the short term - because a weak $ and stronger foreign currencies mean that our trade deficit goes down. Suddenly, foreign products are more expensive, domestic products are cheaper which means that, on whole, we import less and export more. Because of the $'s weakness, Europe and Asia want to buy our products, not sell their products to us in $. What does that mean - well it could mean lower trade deficits, more exports, and more jobs here in the states.
2. It is bad for the economy, period - because a weak $ means higher inflation (because there are not as many cheap, foreign products in the market). Higher inflation means either prices are going up across the board, or the Fed has to raise intrest rates to control inflation - which means that debt becomes more and more expensive - which kills US households because, in general, we live in so much debt, and kills US lendors due to the potential of more defaults due to a sluggish economy paired with expensive debt.
An overriding concern in the Good/Bad debate is that the $ is propped up by so much foreign investment. As one of the articles pointed out - 2.6 billion per DAY. That's an unbelieveable rate. What happens if China decides to stop buying US dollars or US Treasuries? Or - worse - start selling. Of coure, the counter argument is that they can't. Europe and especially Asia has so much invested in the US that to see the dollar tank or Treasuries tank would mean huge losses for them. So they hold on, or buy more...but at what point does the United States become beholden to those foreign investors?
Maybe now? "One China" Policy Stabilizes Asia-Pacific Region, Powell Says
This is pretty scary stuff overall. There are so many variables - but a weak dollar presents a MYRIAD of long-term problems. These are real issues that are going to have to be addressed sooner or later. Unfortunately, our short-term driven "leaders" (I call them that only for lack of a better word) refuse to take the bold steps it takes to actually improve the fundamentals affecting our monetary policy. (I direct you back to my 8:42am post of October 18, 2004 - Fiscal Gap Estimated as high as $72 Trillion.) Until then - we creep every closer to the brink of an economic disaster, and the only way to avoid it is allow foreign investors to prop up the US dollar - which presents it's own frightening questions.
Let's start with the following articles:
The Dollar's Demise
It does not help when the chairman of your central bank, Alan Greenspan, ..., has said the day before that the dollar seems likely to fall: “Given the size of the current-account deficit, a diminished appetite for adding to dollar balances must occur at some point,” were his exact words. The foreign-exchange market immediately decided that it was sated, and the dollar fell to another record low against the euro.
At the heart of the central banks’ calculations is a trade-off: intervening to keep your currency down can be costly, but it is good for exports. Though the costs of intervention are hard to quantify, they are potentially big. Because the domestic money supply is expanded—those dollars must be paid for with something—it can cause inflation (though this can be neutralised through “sterilisation”, ie, bond sales). But the big potential cost is in amassing a huge stash of dollars with precious little exit strategy. Quite simply, Asian central banks now own too many of them to exit en masse, for their exit would cause the dollar to crash and American interest rates to soar, which would cause huge losses on their holdings of Treasuries.
And what will then happen to the dollar? It is hard to imagine its hegemony remaining unchallenged when so many will have lost so much. And doubly so given that America has abused the dollar’s reserve-currency role so egregiously that its finances now look more like those of a banana republic than an economic superpower.
Folks - that's The Economist, as reputable and high-end as objective media comes. And they used a term like 'banana republic'.
Economic `Armageddon' Predicted
Stephen Roach, the chief economist at investment banking giant Morgan Stanley, has a public reputation for being bearish. But you should hear what he's saying in private. Roach met select groups of fund managers downtown last week, including a group at Fidelity. His prediction: America has no better than a 10 percent chance of avoiding economic ``armageddon.''
In a nutshell, Roach's argument is that America's record trade deficit means the dollar will keep falling. To keep foreigners buying T-bills and prevent a resulting rise in inflation, Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan will be forced to raise interest rates further and faster than he wants. The result: U.S. consumers, who are in debt up to their eyeballs, will get pounded. Less a case of ``Armageddon,'' maybe, than of a ``Perfect Storm.'' To finance its current account deficit with the rest of the world, he said, America has to import $2.6 billion in cash. Every working day. That is an amazing 80 percent of the entire world's net savings. Sustainable? Hardly.
Yes, that's the chief economist at Morgan Stanley - long time bastion of American capitalism.
Being John Snow
The market scoffed at Snow. As he spoke, the dollar plunged to a new record low against the euro. Snow's performance worsened during question time. When an audience member had the temerity to ask why Snow persisted in discussing the strong dollar policy while the greenback was plummeting, he simply responded "because it's our policy." Challenged again, he reiterated: "The policy is the policy."
Snow is the Treasury Secretary.
Economic Crisis a Question of When, Not If
"So if you ask the question do we look like Argentina, the answer is a whole lot more than anyone is quite willing to admit at this point. We've become a banana republic."
Krugman is an Professor of Economics at Princeton.
Wow - the falling dollar looks to hold a lot of problems. My understanding is that there is two general schools of thought about the falling $:
1. It is good for the economy in the short term - because a weak $ and stronger foreign currencies mean that our trade deficit goes down. Suddenly, foreign products are more expensive, domestic products are cheaper which means that, on whole, we import less and export more. Because of the $'s weakness, Europe and Asia want to buy our products, not sell their products to us in $. What does that mean - well it could mean lower trade deficits, more exports, and more jobs here in the states.
2. It is bad for the economy, period - because a weak $ means higher inflation (because there are not as many cheap, foreign products in the market). Higher inflation means either prices are going up across the board, or the Fed has to raise intrest rates to control inflation - which means that debt becomes more and more expensive - which kills US households because, in general, we live in so much debt, and kills US lendors due to the potential of more defaults due to a sluggish economy paired with expensive debt.
An overriding concern in the Good/Bad debate is that the $ is propped up by so much foreign investment. As one of the articles pointed out - 2.6 billion per DAY. That's an unbelieveable rate. What happens if China decides to stop buying US dollars or US Treasuries? Or - worse - start selling. Of coure, the counter argument is that they can't. Europe and especially Asia has so much invested in the US that to see the dollar tank or Treasuries tank would mean huge losses for them. So they hold on, or buy more...but at what point does the United States become beholden to those foreign investors?
Maybe now? "One China" Policy Stabilizes Asia-Pacific Region, Powell Says
This is pretty scary stuff overall. There are so many variables - but a weak dollar presents a MYRIAD of long-term problems. These are real issues that are going to have to be addressed sooner or later. Unfortunately, our short-term driven "leaders" (I call them that only for lack of a better word) refuse to take the bold steps it takes to actually improve the fundamentals affecting our monetary policy. (I direct you back to my 8:42am post of October 18, 2004 - Fiscal Gap Estimated as high as $72 Trillion.) Until then - we creep every closer to the brink of an economic disaster, and the only way to avoid it is allow foreign investors to prop up the US dollar - which presents it's own frightening questions.
Monday, November 29, 2004
Medical Marijuana or State's Rights?
From Jurist Paper Chase - Monday, November 29, 3:15:
The US Supreme Court heard arguments Monday in Ashcroft v. Raich (case summary from Duke Law School), a California case involving the use of marijuana as a legitimate medical treatment. The court is considering whether sick people in the eleven states which recognize medical marijuana can get around general federal laws which ban the drug. The Bush administration is arguing Congress has not found any acceptable medical use for marijuana and that by allowing such treatment, the government will be unable to eradicate drug trafficking and its related social harms. Paul Clement, the Bush administration's top court lawyer, argued before the court today that medical use of marijuana is potentially subjecting many people to health dangers. Raich's attorney countered by saying his clients are law-abiding citizens who need marijuana to survive. Justice Stephen Breyer said supporters of medical marijuana should take their fight to federal drug regulators before coming to the Supreme Court while other justices repeatedly referred to America's drug addiction problems. The case is an appeal from a decision [PDF] by the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit which ruled against the government and found federal prosecution of medical marijuana users to be unconstitutional if the marijuana is not sold, transported across state lines or used for non-medicinal purposes. The Supreme Court ruled three years ago that the government could prosecute distributors of medical marijuana. The case is Ashcroft v. Raich, 03-1454. The Raich plaintiffs legal team has created an extensive website about the case and the isues it raises. AP has more.
This case is very interesting due to the federalism problem it presents the court. In a very broad overview - generally you would expect more liberal justices to sway in favor of medical marijuana and more conservative justices to sway against. This case, however, provides a twist: in general more conservative justices stand up for state's rights - which would allow the states to make the determination of medical marijuana use at a local level. More liberal justices would support the federal government's right under the Commerce clause to ban drugs as a national problem. So there is a real juxtaposition. Chief Justice Rehnquist is a federalism specialist - and his court has been specifically known for its willingness to address federalism issues. Rehnquist is still not present on the bench - but is still participating in decisions using transcripts, etc. This case is such an interesting question - even three very conservative states which do not allow legalized medical marijuana - Alabama, Mississippi, and Louisiana - filed friend of the court brief in support of the defendents in these cases saying that while they do not agree with legalized drug use - they feel it is a question to be decided on a state level - not at a federal level.
Based on the reports of the oral arguments, it sounds as if the court is going to be unwilling to let this loophole in the criminalization of drugs. But is should be a great opinion to read this summer.
More from CNN.com:
Supreme Court weighs Marijuana as Medicine
Medical marijuana case tests Congress' power
The US Supreme Court heard arguments Monday in Ashcroft v. Raich (case summary from Duke Law School), a California case involving the use of marijuana as a legitimate medical treatment. The court is considering whether sick people in the eleven states which recognize medical marijuana can get around general federal laws which ban the drug. The Bush administration is arguing Congress has not found any acceptable medical use for marijuana and that by allowing such treatment, the government will be unable to eradicate drug trafficking and its related social harms. Paul Clement, the Bush administration's top court lawyer, argued before the court today that medical use of marijuana is potentially subjecting many people to health dangers. Raich's attorney countered by saying his clients are law-abiding citizens who need marijuana to survive. Justice Stephen Breyer said supporters of medical marijuana should take their fight to federal drug regulators before coming to the Supreme Court while other justices repeatedly referred to America's drug addiction problems. The case is an appeal from a decision [PDF] by the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit which ruled against the government and found federal prosecution of medical marijuana users to be unconstitutional if the marijuana is not sold, transported across state lines or used for non-medicinal purposes. The Supreme Court ruled three years ago that the government could prosecute distributors of medical marijuana. The case is Ashcroft v. Raich, 03-1454. The Raich plaintiffs legal team has created an extensive website about the case and the isues it raises. AP has more.
This case is very interesting due to the federalism problem it presents the court. In a very broad overview - generally you would expect more liberal justices to sway in favor of medical marijuana and more conservative justices to sway against. This case, however, provides a twist: in general more conservative justices stand up for state's rights - which would allow the states to make the determination of medical marijuana use at a local level. More liberal justices would support the federal government's right under the Commerce clause to ban drugs as a national problem. So there is a real juxtaposition. Chief Justice Rehnquist is a federalism specialist - and his court has been specifically known for its willingness to address federalism issues. Rehnquist is still not present on the bench - but is still participating in decisions using transcripts, etc. This case is such an interesting question - even three very conservative states which do not allow legalized medical marijuana - Alabama, Mississippi, and Louisiana - filed friend of the court brief in support of the defendents in these cases saying that while they do not agree with legalized drug use - they feel it is a question to be decided on a state level - not at a federal level.
Based on the reports of the oral arguments, it sounds as if the court is going to be unwilling to let this loophole in the criminalization of drugs. But is should be a great opinion to read this summer.
More from CNN.com:
Supreme Court weighs Marijuana as Medicine
Medical marijuana case tests Congress' power
Sunday, November 28, 2004
Clinton Presidential Center
Happy Thanksgiving and Happy Holidays!!!
I haven't been able to post as much of late. I've been spending most of my waking free time writing a paper or prepping for my final coming up. In addition, the holiday time has been very hectic for the family, so I haven't had the time to sit down and crank anything out.
We spent the Thanksgiving holiday in Arkansas with family. Since we were reasonably close, Shana and I decided to take Wednesday morning, November 24, 2004 to drive over to Little Rock and visit the William J. Clinton Presidential Center and Park. The Clinton Presidential library was dedicated on Thursday, Nov. 18 - and I had been reading quite a bit about it in the lead up so we were excited at the opportunity to visit. This was the first Presidential Library complex that either of us had visited.
To start with, it is much smaller than what I expected. Now, the location is beautiful, just on the bank of the Arkansas river, bordering on Little Rock's downtown. Several of the architectural reviews of the building I had read had described it as either a "metaphor for a Bridge to the 21st Century" or a "trailer park home". Personally, we felt it looked much like a railroad car - boxy and rectangular, and much smaller than expected. When you get into the building, however, you are struck by how much room there really is - either the outside is very deceptive, or the interior's design makes an excellent use of the space, there is more to see than would be expected.
After you arrive, clear security and pay your fee, the initial display on the ground floor deals with the Secret Service and the Presidential Limosuine. From there you proceed up a flight of steps to the second level. There you find a display related to the 1992 election - the Comeback Kid, Perot, etc. Looking back, it's almost hard to remember, but Clinton's election that year was an absolute stunner...kind of a shock the world type of moment. As popular as he was to become, and as much as he was to accomplish in office, it's strange to think this was a guy who came - almost - out of no where to win the nomination, then unseat a relatively popular sitting President. An election for the history books truly.
There is a video presentation of the 'Clinton Story' - telling an overview from birth to declaring his candidacy on Oct. 1, 1991 to the White House to the present. It's pretty neat, and has several goosebump-type moments (it got a little dusty in there, if you know what I mean), but much of the info was in My Life, if you've had a chance to read that.
From the video, you move over to the first display - a recreation of the Cabinet Room. This was actually one of the most interesting parts of the entire Center. In fact, on the drive home, Shana and I both agreed that the Cabinet room was the "best" or our favorite part of the Center. The room is recreated in detail, and inset into the Cabinet table were interactive touch-activated computers that enabled you to sit in the same chairs that Clinton or his officials sat in and read detailed histories of the Administration and very interesting timelines of three of the more interesting and challenging decisions that were made by the Admin - Welfare Reform, Kosovo and the Budget Crisis. A really informative and interesting set up. The Cabinet Room was added to the White House by Teddy Roosevelt and in Clinton's term included portraits of TR, Thomas Jefferson and Abraham Lincoln.
Outside the Cabinet Room, there is an enormous video wall dedicated to the 1992 Inaguration - one great quote from that speech:
Next there is a small wall dedicated to the State of the Nation under Clinton - statistics related to Employment, Crime, Education, AIDS, Police, Technology and Health Care are listed and visually displayed.
The rest of the second level is a long room - the outside walls are dedicated to kiosks related to specific issues important within Clinton's two terms in office:
The Economy
Making Communities Safer (Crime)
Protecting the Earth (Environment)
First Lady
Global Community (World Leaders, etc.)
Making Peace (Mideast, Ireland, etc.)
Prosperity Abroad (America's ecomomic involvement overseas)
Preparing for New Threats (WTC1 and terrorism)
Fight for Power (Impeachment)
Science & Technology
One America (Race Relations)
Learning for a Lifetime (Education)
Putting People First (Health Care and Welfare Reform)
In the center of this narrow room is a series of eight small walls with displays on each side - one side was a rundown of world, domestic and economic event during each of Clinton's eight years in office. Included in this was the President's daily schedule for every day in office - pretty cool. The other side was dedicated to various things - the State of the Union address, with 'in-progress' drafts with notes to the final speeches; and Letters to and from the President and First lady from the likes of Fred Rogers, Mother Teresa, the Dali Lama, Paul Newman, etc. Some were funny, some really touching. It was a really nice display.
Next, up another flight of stairs to the third level. This level is open in the center - so you can look down upon the 2d level (similar to a mall), with displays only on the outside walls. Along one wall you see displays dedicated to State Events at the White House, State Gifts given to Clinton during his time in office, Making the White House home for the Clinton's, Holidays at the White House, public gifts to the Clinton's, etc. The other side contains personal memorabelia of Bill, Hillary and Chealsea from birth to present, including Chealsea's birth announcement, items from Clinton's failed bid for Congress, Democratic Nat'l Convention speeches in 1980, 1984 and 1988, among other things.
Finally, on the third level is the exact replication of the Oval Office. Unfortunately, you can't walk through, but they have windows in, and you can step into the doorway. It is interesting to see what the office looks like in 'real-life' and how connected and dedicated to history Clinton had it - almost everything in the office had some historical connection.
It was a really intersting couple of hours - definately worth the trip and the $7 entry fee. If you are interested in history, specifically Presidential history, it's an absolute bargain.
I was and am a big fan of Bill Clinton. In my mind, he is the embodiment of the American Story. A poor boy, single mom, raised in large part by family from a tiny town in one of the smallest, ruralest states in the nation - becomes the President - the Leader of the Free World, not through connections or family name or money. But through hard work, committment to a cause, and a dedication to public service. I am not ashamed to list Bill Clinton as a hero. Sure, the man has many flaws - and Shana and I discussed how revered and honored this great President really would have been if he only could have controlled himself. He embarrased himself, his family and in some ways, his supporters. And his Presidency will be forever somewhat tainted because of that - there is no question. But all that given, Bill Clinton had a dream of one day making America a better place for the next generation - and he made that dream into reality. Flaws or no flaws. That's pretty incredible, and it is something that I admire more than I can put into words.
There were certain words or phrases that stood out in our tour of the Clinton Center, either because they were used over and over, or because each display tended to whisper or shout them:
Optimism, Prayer, Change, Peace, Respect, and finally and most of all -
A More Perfect Union
That is a great legacy, if you ask me.
I haven't been able to post as much of late. I've been spending most of my waking free time writing a paper or prepping for my final coming up. In addition, the holiday time has been very hectic for the family, so I haven't had the time to sit down and crank anything out.
We spent the Thanksgiving holiday in Arkansas with family. Since we were reasonably close, Shana and I decided to take Wednesday morning, November 24, 2004 to drive over to Little Rock and visit the William J. Clinton Presidential Center and Park. The Clinton Presidential library was dedicated on Thursday, Nov. 18 - and I had been reading quite a bit about it in the lead up so we were excited at the opportunity to visit. This was the first Presidential Library complex that either of us had visited.
To start with, it is much smaller than what I expected. Now, the location is beautiful, just on the bank of the Arkansas river, bordering on Little Rock's downtown. Several of the architectural reviews of the building I had read had described it as either a "metaphor for a Bridge to the 21st Century" or a "trailer park home". Personally, we felt it looked much like a railroad car - boxy and rectangular, and much smaller than expected. When you get into the building, however, you are struck by how much room there really is - either the outside is very deceptive, or the interior's design makes an excellent use of the space, there is more to see than would be expected.
After you arrive, clear security and pay your fee, the initial display on the ground floor deals with the Secret Service and the Presidential Limosuine. From there you proceed up a flight of steps to the second level. There you find a display related to the 1992 election - the Comeback Kid, Perot, etc. Looking back, it's almost hard to remember, but Clinton's election that year was an absolute stunner...kind of a shock the world type of moment. As popular as he was to become, and as much as he was to accomplish in office, it's strange to think this was a guy who came - almost - out of no where to win the nomination, then unseat a relatively popular sitting President. An election for the history books truly.
There is a video presentation of the 'Clinton Story' - telling an overview from birth to declaring his candidacy on Oct. 1, 1991 to the White House to the present. It's pretty neat, and has several goosebump-type moments (it got a little dusty in there, if you know what I mean), but much of the info was in My Life, if you've had a chance to read that.
From the video, you move over to the first display - a recreation of the Cabinet Room. This was actually one of the most interesting parts of the entire Center. In fact, on the drive home, Shana and I both agreed that the Cabinet room was the "best" or our favorite part of the Center. The room is recreated in detail, and inset into the Cabinet table were interactive touch-activated computers that enabled you to sit in the same chairs that Clinton or his officials sat in and read detailed histories of the Administration and very interesting timelines of three of the more interesting and challenging decisions that were made by the Admin - Welfare Reform, Kosovo and the Budget Crisis. A really informative and interesting set up. The Cabinet Room was added to the White House by Teddy Roosevelt and in Clinton's term included portraits of TR, Thomas Jefferson and Abraham Lincoln.
Outside the Cabinet Room, there is an enormous video wall dedicated to the 1992 Inaguration - one great quote from that speech:
There is nothing wrong with America that cannot be fixed by what is right with America.
Bill Clinton - Jan. 21, 1993 - 1st Presidential Inaguration Speech
Next there is a small wall dedicated to the State of the Nation under Clinton - statistics related to Employment, Crime, Education, AIDS, Police, Technology and Health Care are listed and visually displayed.
The rest of the second level is a long room - the outside walls are dedicated to kiosks related to specific issues important within Clinton's two terms in office:
The Economy
Making Communities Safer (Crime)
Protecting the Earth (Environment)
First Lady
Global Community (World Leaders, etc.)
Making Peace (Mideast, Ireland, etc.)
Prosperity Abroad (America's ecomomic involvement overseas)
Preparing for New Threats (WTC1 and terrorism)
Fight for Power (Impeachment)
Science & Technology
One America (Race Relations)
Learning for a Lifetime (Education)
Putting People First (Health Care and Welfare Reform)
In the center of this narrow room is a series of eight small walls with displays on each side - one side was a rundown of world, domestic and economic event during each of Clinton's eight years in office. Included in this was the President's daily schedule for every day in office - pretty cool. The other side was dedicated to various things - the State of the Union address, with 'in-progress' drafts with notes to the final speeches; and Letters to and from the President and First lady from the likes of Fred Rogers, Mother Teresa, the Dali Lama, Paul Newman, etc. Some were funny, some really touching. It was a really nice display.
Next, up another flight of stairs to the third level. This level is open in the center - so you can look down upon the 2d level (similar to a mall), with displays only on the outside walls. Along one wall you see displays dedicated to State Events at the White House, State Gifts given to Clinton during his time in office, Making the White House home for the Clinton's, Holidays at the White House, public gifts to the Clinton's, etc. The other side contains personal memorabelia of Bill, Hillary and Chealsea from birth to present, including Chealsea's birth announcement, items from Clinton's failed bid for Congress, Democratic Nat'l Convention speeches in 1980, 1984 and 1988, among other things.
Finally, on the third level is the exact replication of the Oval Office. Unfortunately, you can't walk through, but they have windows in, and you can step into the doorway. It is interesting to see what the office looks like in 'real-life' and how connected and dedicated to history Clinton had it - almost everything in the office had some historical connection.
It was a really intersting couple of hours - definately worth the trip and the $7 entry fee. If you are interested in history, specifically Presidential history, it's an absolute bargain.
I was and am a big fan of Bill Clinton. In my mind, he is the embodiment of the American Story. A poor boy, single mom, raised in large part by family from a tiny town in one of the smallest, ruralest states in the nation - becomes the President - the Leader of the Free World, not through connections or family name or money. But through hard work, committment to a cause, and a dedication to public service. I am not ashamed to list Bill Clinton as a hero. Sure, the man has many flaws - and Shana and I discussed how revered and honored this great President really would have been if he only could have controlled himself. He embarrased himself, his family and in some ways, his supporters. And his Presidency will be forever somewhat tainted because of that - there is no question. But all that given, Bill Clinton had a dream of one day making America a better place for the next generation - and he made that dream into reality. Flaws or no flaws. That's pretty incredible, and it is something that I admire more than I can put into words.
There were certain words or phrases that stood out in our tour of the Clinton Center, either because they were used over and over, or because each display tended to whisper or shout them:
Optimism, Prayer, Change, Peace, Respect, and finally and most of all -
A More Perfect Union
That is a great legacy, if you ask me.
Wednesday, November 17, 2004
Ball. Game.
I rock my son almost every evening. He's almost two now, right at 21 months, so I know that this time is quickly coming to an end, but I love it - without a doubt my favorite time of the day. We've got a routine.
Either Shana or I will give him a bath, change his diaper and put his PJs on. But then, I get to rock him and put him in bed. He and I go through the same routine pretty much every night:
We read two regular books together in the rocking chair. They can be anything, tonight it was Grover Dresses Himself and Hungry Little Caterpillar.
Then we read our three night-night books - first New Baby's Prayers, then Sweet Dreams, and finally Pat the Bunny Sleepy Bunny. Then we put our hands together and say a prayer, and turn the lamp out.
Then while he snuggles against my chest, I rock him and sing four songs. (Yes, it's the same three books and four songs in the same order each night. I'm compulsive like that...) I sing Jesus Loves Me, Take Me Out to the Ballgame, Jesus Loves the Little Children, and the Star Spangled Banner while we rock together. Yes, I know - those are odd choices for night-night songs. I'm not exactly sure how it happened - the church songs, okay that makes sense and I know I added Take Me Out to the Ballgame in the middle of the baseball season. I remember thinking about wanting to make sure that as Noah grows up I instill in him the right kind (my kind) of patriotism - and I guess that's how the national anthem got thrown in. But somehow this is what has evolved, and it's been this same routine for about six months now.
Suddenly, over the past three or four days, Take Me Out to the Ballgame has become Noah's favorite. It's become a request. I always sing it twice, once with - root, root, root for the home team; once with - root, root, root for the Astros. Between the verses he's taken to saying, "ball game, ball game, ball game" to let me know he wants me to sing it again. Of course, his daddy is stubborn, so after I finish the second time, I move on to Jesus Loves the Little Children. Noah just been continuing to say, "ball game, ball game, ball game" for a while, then gives up when he realizes I'm not going to start singing it again. But tonight, he was a little more adamant. After insisting for a bit while I continued on with the next song. Well, he finally couldn't take it any more. He sat up, looked me dead in the eyes and said firmly, "BALL. ... GAME." I couldn't help but laugh.
And I couldn't help but think - That's my boy!!!
Either Shana or I will give him a bath, change his diaper and put his PJs on. But then, I get to rock him and put him in bed. He and I go through the same routine pretty much every night:
We read two regular books together in the rocking chair. They can be anything, tonight it was Grover Dresses Himself and Hungry Little Caterpillar.
Then we read our three night-night books - first New Baby's Prayers, then Sweet Dreams, and finally Pat the Bunny Sleepy Bunny. Then we put our hands together and say a prayer, and turn the lamp out.
Then while he snuggles against my chest, I rock him and sing four songs. (Yes, it's the same three books and four songs in the same order each night. I'm compulsive like that...) I sing Jesus Loves Me, Take Me Out to the Ballgame, Jesus Loves the Little Children, and the Star Spangled Banner while we rock together. Yes, I know - those are odd choices for night-night songs. I'm not exactly sure how it happened - the church songs, okay that makes sense and I know I added Take Me Out to the Ballgame in the middle of the baseball season. I remember thinking about wanting to make sure that as Noah grows up I instill in him the right kind (my kind) of patriotism - and I guess that's how the national anthem got thrown in. But somehow this is what has evolved, and it's been this same routine for about six months now.
Suddenly, over the past three or four days, Take Me Out to the Ballgame has become Noah's favorite. It's become a request. I always sing it twice, once with - root, root, root for the home team; once with - root, root, root for the Astros. Between the verses he's taken to saying, "ball game, ball game, ball game" to let me know he wants me to sing it again. Of course, his daddy is stubborn, so after I finish the second time, I move on to Jesus Loves the Little Children. Noah just been continuing to say, "ball game, ball game, ball game" for a while, then gives up when he realizes I'm not going to start singing it again. But tonight, he was a little more adamant. After insisting for a bit while I continued on with the next song. Well, he finally couldn't take it any more. He sat up, looked me dead in the eyes and said firmly, "BALL. ... GAME." I couldn't help but laugh.
And I couldn't help but think - That's my boy!!!
Tuesday, November 16, 2004
MLS Playoff Update III
2004 MLS Cup Champions - DC United
United defeated the Kansas City Wizards 3:2 to win their fourth MLS Cup in club history. DC was led by Cup MVP Alecko Eskandarian who scored two goals in a 5 minute period of the first half.
KC opened the scoring with Jose Burciaga Jr. scoring from distance in the 6th minute of the match. But then Eskandarian put DC on his back, scoring in the 19th and 23rd - that was followed by a KC own goal in the 26th to give United 3 goals in 7 minutes and a 3:1 lead. The Wizards' Josh Wolff got one back, scoring on a penalty kick in the 58th minute, following a handball in the box, and red-card ejection to United midfielder Dema Kovalenko. KC was hoping to level with the man advantage, but DC was able to make the one goal lead stand up the final 30 minutes of the match.
Great season for DC - rookie coach, 14 year old #1 draft pick, and the MLS Cup.
Now MLS immediately begins preperation for the 2005 season - it's 10th Anniversary. 2005 will see "re-branding" of one team (FC Dallas) and the addition of two expansion clubs - CD Chivas USA (Los Angeles) and ReAL Salt Lake. Friday, November 19th at 3:00 is the MLS Expansion Draft (live on ESPNews) where the new clubs will be able to draft 'unprotected players' from the current ten teams' rosters.
MLS also announced this weekend that the 2005 MLS Cup would be played in Frisco, Tx at the brand new home of FC Dallas (the former Dallas Burn). As an FC Dallas season ticket holder - I will see what I can do to get tickets for anyone interested.
United defeated the Kansas City Wizards 3:2 to win their fourth MLS Cup in club history. DC was led by Cup MVP Alecko Eskandarian who scored two goals in a 5 minute period of the first half.
KC opened the scoring with Jose Burciaga Jr. scoring from distance in the 6th minute of the match. But then Eskandarian put DC on his back, scoring in the 19th and 23rd - that was followed by a KC own goal in the 26th to give United 3 goals in 7 minutes and a 3:1 lead. The Wizards' Josh Wolff got one back, scoring on a penalty kick in the 58th minute, following a handball in the box, and red-card ejection to United midfielder Dema Kovalenko. KC was hoping to level with the man advantage, but DC was able to make the one goal lead stand up the final 30 minutes of the match.
Great season for DC - rookie coach, 14 year old #1 draft pick, and the MLS Cup.
Now MLS immediately begins preperation for the 2005 season - it's 10th Anniversary. 2005 will see "re-branding" of one team (FC Dallas) and the addition of two expansion clubs - CD Chivas USA (Los Angeles) and ReAL Salt Lake. Friday, November 19th at 3:00 is the MLS Expansion Draft (live on ESPNews) where the new clubs will be able to draft 'unprotected players' from the current ten teams' rosters.
MLS also announced this weekend that the 2005 MLS Cup would be played in Frisco, Tx at the brand new home of FC Dallas (the former Dallas Burn). As an FC Dallas season ticket holder - I will see what I can do to get tickets for anyone interested.
Tuesday, November 09, 2004
Symptoms and Disease
I’ve written this phrase twice in the last few weeks – symptoms and disease - discussing some political topics with friends and acquaintances.
As I have been thinking about this more throughout the past few days, I think that this is a pretty basic difference between a conservative political view and a progressive political view. (I’m going to be generalizing. I realize that not every conservative or progressive would fall within the box I’m going to draw, but I think it’s fair to say that “most” would.)
It seems to me, the general conservative philosophy is that issues such as abortion, gun crime, homosexual marriage, terrorism, education, etc. are the actual problems with society and can be fixed directly. To me, the progressive philosophy (at least, my philosophy) is that these issues are merely by-products of the real problems within our society/culture. I think that the conservative agenda is full of “quick-win” “short-term” thinking – that does absolutely nothing to actually address the real problems. For example, the conservative viewpoint – “let’s overturn Roe v. Wade and ban all abortions”. I have a real problem with that philosophy. Why? Is it because I support abortions and wish there were more? Of course not. It’s because if that is your answer, you’re still left with women who go get abortions in illegal ways. You have refused to address the real issues, which create the demand for abortion. Conservatives don’t want to address those issues, because they are difficult, they are long-term, and they are expensive. What are those “real” issues? Unemployment, lack of a living wage, lack of affordable health care, the devaluation of life (especially the life of the poor and minority) in our country, lack of community, lack of support networks for single mothers, the inability to provide for a family on one salary, so a father works two jobs and therefore isn’t home to provide direction for his kids, the lack of supportive educational systems, urban planning, etc., etc., etc. On and on goes the cycle. To me – those are the problems that need to be addressed to really reduce abortion in our nation. Will it be hard to do? Yep. Will it take longer than “overturn Roe v. Wade”? Yep. Will it cost more? Yep. But – and this is key – will it go to the heart of the problem? Yep. That is what needs to be done.
I feel that the other issues are approached in similar ways from a conservative perspective. If you oppose gay marriage, the easy out is to push for a Constitutional Amendment – then you don’t have to address more difficult questions of community and civil rights. If you advocate gun ownership, the easy out is to push for less regulation and more education and training instead of addressing the issue of prevalent violence in our culture – especially the poor inner-city areas, and the devaluation of poor and minority lives through an inequitable capital punishment system. To fight terrorists, the easy answer is to send a corps of marines into Fallujah – but then you create five new terrorist volunteers to replace each one that you killed in the battle. Instead the harder, longer road is to address the issues which are developing kids into terrorists – devaluation of life, enforcement of a western culture upon an eastern culture that resists those changes, the rape of the lands and resources of poor and non-white cultures. To improve education, it’s much easier to pin funding on districts teaching to tests than to actually address the difficult issues of malnutrition, single parent homes, latch-key kids, urban planning, white-flight, a culture where education means little to an inner-city kid because what hope does he have to use that education.
Personally, a short-term victory means little to nothing to me if I’m treating, or more likely hiding, a symptom and ignoring the disease. I'd prefer to reduce and/or completely end abortions in the United States. But overturning Roe v. Wade doesn’t end it. It is so much more important to end the vicious cycles that actually push women to decide on abortion. Until you’ve done that, you’ve done nothing.
The conservatives in this country can sit back and pop the top of a bottle of expensive champagne (which they can afford with all those “blessed” tax cuts) if Bush can push through a few justices conservative enough to overturn Roe v. Wade. And then they can rest back on their laurels and think about what a more “moral” America they live in, while all the poor girls - whose boyfriends refused to marry them because he doesn’t have a job and can’t support a family; who can’t afford pre-natal care because their $5.25 an hour job doesn’t provide health care; because they’ve lived with the reality of a teen-age mom, no-dad, having dropped out of school because they had to work to help pay for rent; who have no female role models or mentors; have no way to provide for child-care because they still have to work that minimum wage job to get by; who has seen their friends turn to prostitution; who see and live this stuff every day, every day of their lives – they are going to go find a way to have an abortion anyway.
But at least the “moral conservatives” get to celebrate their “victory”. But it’s a hollow, cold victory. It’s no victory at all, if you ask me.
As I have been thinking about this more throughout the past few days, I think that this is a pretty basic difference between a conservative political view and a progressive political view. (I’m going to be generalizing. I realize that not every conservative or progressive would fall within the box I’m going to draw, but I think it’s fair to say that “most” would.)
It seems to me, the general conservative philosophy is that issues such as abortion, gun crime, homosexual marriage, terrorism, education, etc. are the actual problems with society and can be fixed directly. To me, the progressive philosophy (at least, my philosophy) is that these issues are merely by-products of the real problems within our society/culture. I think that the conservative agenda is full of “quick-win” “short-term” thinking – that does absolutely nothing to actually address the real problems. For example, the conservative viewpoint – “let’s overturn Roe v. Wade and ban all abortions”. I have a real problem with that philosophy. Why? Is it because I support abortions and wish there were more? Of course not. It’s because if that is your answer, you’re still left with women who go get abortions in illegal ways. You have refused to address the real issues, which create the demand for abortion. Conservatives don’t want to address those issues, because they are difficult, they are long-term, and they are expensive. What are those “real” issues? Unemployment, lack of a living wage, lack of affordable health care, the devaluation of life (especially the life of the poor and minority) in our country, lack of community, lack of support networks for single mothers, the inability to provide for a family on one salary, so a father works two jobs and therefore isn’t home to provide direction for his kids, the lack of supportive educational systems, urban planning, etc., etc., etc. On and on goes the cycle. To me – those are the problems that need to be addressed to really reduce abortion in our nation. Will it be hard to do? Yep. Will it take longer than “overturn Roe v. Wade”? Yep. Will it cost more? Yep. But – and this is key – will it go to the heart of the problem? Yep. That is what needs to be done.
I feel that the other issues are approached in similar ways from a conservative perspective. If you oppose gay marriage, the easy out is to push for a Constitutional Amendment – then you don’t have to address more difficult questions of community and civil rights. If you advocate gun ownership, the easy out is to push for less regulation and more education and training instead of addressing the issue of prevalent violence in our culture – especially the poor inner-city areas, and the devaluation of poor and minority lives through an inequitable capital punishment system. To fight terrorists, the easy answer is to send a corps of marines into Fallujah – but then you create five new terrorist volunteers to replace each one that you killed in the battle. Instead the harder, longer road is to address the issues which are developing kids into terrorists – devaluation of life, enforcement of a western culture upon an eastern culture that resists those changes, the rape of the lands and resources of poor and non-white cultures. To improve education, it’s much easier to pin funding on districts teaching to tests than to actually address the difficult issues of malnutrition, single parent homes, latch-key kids, urban planning, white-flight, a culture where education means little to an inner-city kid because what hope does he have to use that education.
Personally, a short-term victory means little to nothing to me if I’m treating, or more likely hiding, a symptom and ignoring the disease. I'd prefer to reduce and/or completely end abortions in the United States. But overturning Roe v. Wade doesn’t end it. It is so much more important to end the vicious cycles that actually push women to decide on abortion. Until you’ve done that, you’ve done nothing.
The conservatives in this country can sit back and pop the top of a bottle of expensive champagne (which they can afford with all those “blessed” tax cuts) if Bush can push through a few justices conservative enough to overturn Roe v. Wade. And then they can rest back on their laurels and think about what a more “moral” America they live in, while all the poor girls - whose boyfriends refused to marry them because he doesn’t have a job and can’t support a family; who can’t afford pre-natal care because their $5.25 an hour job doesn’t provide health care; because they’ve lived with the reality of a teen-age mom, no-dad, having dropped out of school because they had to work to help pay for rent; who have no female role models or mentors; have no way to provide for child-care because they still have to work that minimum wage job to get by; who has seen their friends turn to prostitution; who see and live this stuff every day, every day of their lives – they are going to go find a way to have an abortion anyway.
But at least the “moral conservatives” get to celebrate their “victory”. But it’s a hollow, cold victory. It’s no victory at all, if you ask me.
The Wit and Wisdom of TR
I have come to really admire a lot about Teddy Roosevelt. I'm sure that there are a hundred things which I wouldn't agree with him, but I'd consider him much of what I'm looking for in a leader of our nation. A true Progressive. I was recently looking at some quotes by TR, and I thought I'd share some here (my favorites in bold):
To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.
– Theodore Roosevelt
To waste, to destroy, our natural resources, to skin and exhaust the land instead of using it so as to increase its usefulness, will result in undermining in the days of our children the very prosperity which we ought by right to hand down to them amplified and developed.
– Theodore Roosevelt, Seventh Annual Message to U.S. Congress (December 3, 1907)
Unrestrained greed means the ruin of the great woods and the drying up of the sources of the rivers.
– Theodore Roosevelt, on clear-cutting of forests, while governor of New York, quoted in his biography Theodore Rex by Edmund Morris (2001)
We demand that big business give the people a square deal; in return we must insist that when anyone engaged in big business honestly endeavors to do right he shall himself be given a square deal.
– Theodore Roosevelt
Whenever you are asked if you can do a job, tell 'em, "Certainly, I can!" Then get busy and find out how to do it.
– Theodore Roosevelt
Those who oppose all reform will do well to remember that ruin in its worst form is inevitable if our national life brings us nothing better than swollen fortunes for the few and the triumph in both politics and business of a sordid and selfish materialism.
– Theodore Roosevelt, speech at Osawatomie, Kansas, "The New Nationalism" (August 31, 1910)
The true friend of property, the true conservative, is he who insists that property shall be the servant and not the master of the commonwealth; who insists that the creature of man's making shall be the servant and not the master of the man who made it. The citizens of the United States must effectively control the mighty commercial forces which they have themselves called into being.
– Theodore Roosevelt, speech at Osawatomie, Kansas, "The New Nationalism" (August 31, 1910)
The one thing I want to leave my children is an honorable name.
– Theodore Roosevelt
The only man who never makes a mistake is the man who never does anything.
– Theodore Roosevelt
The nation behaves well if it treats the natural resources as assets which it must turn over to the next generation increased, and not impaired, in value.
– Theodore Roosevelt
The old parties are husks, with no real soul within either, divided on artificial lines, boss-ridden and privilege-controlled, each a jumble of incongruous elements, and neither daring to speak out wisely and fearlessly on what should be said on the vital issues of the day.
– Theodore Roosevelt, speech at the Progressive Party Convention, Chicago, Illinois (August 6, 1912)
The most important single ingredient in the formula of success is knowing how to get along with people.
– Theodore Roosevelt
The men of wealth who today are trying to prevent the regulation and control of their business in the interest of the public by the proper government authorities will not succeed, in my judgment, in checking the progress of the movement. But if they did succeed they would find that they had sown the wind and would surely reap the whirlwind, for they would ultimately provoke the violent excesses which accompany a reform coming by convulsion instead of by steady and natural growth.
– Theodore Roosevelt, speech, "The Man With The Muck Rake" (April 15, 1906)
The first requisite of a good citizen in this republic of ours is that he shall be able and willing to pull his weight.
– Theodore Roosevelt, speech at New York City (November 11, 1902)
The government is us; we are the government, you and I.
– Theodore Roosevelt, speech at Asheville, North Carolina (September 9, 1902)
The absence of effective State, and, especially, national, restraint upon unfair money-getting has tended to create a small class of enormously wealthy and economically powerful men, whose chief object is to hold and increase their power. The prime need is to change the conditions which enable these men to accumulate power which is not for the general welfare that they should hold or exercise. We grudge no man a fortune which represents his own power and sagacity, when exercised with entire regard to the welfare of his fellows.
– Theodore Roosevelt, speech at Osawatomie, Kansas, "The New Nationalism" (August 31, 1910)
Probably the greatest harm done by vast wealth is the harm that we of moderate means do ourselves when we let the vices of envy and hatred enter deep into our own natures.
– Theodore Roosevelt, speech at Providence, Rhode Island (August 23, 1902)
One of the fundamental necessities in a representative government such as ours is to make certain that the men to whom the people delegate their power shall serve the people by whom they are elected, and not the special interests. I believe that every national officer, elected or appointed, should be forbidden to perform any service or receive any compensation, directly or indirectly, from interstate corporations; and a similar provision could not fail to be useful within the States.
– Theodore Roosevelt, speech at Osawatomie, Kansas, "The New Nationalism" (August 31, 1910)
No man is above the law and no man is below it; nor do we ask any man's permission when we require him to obey it. Obedience to the law is demanded as a right; not asked as a favor.
– Theodore Roosevelt (December 7, 1903)
No man can be a good citizen unless he has a wage more than sufficient to cover the bare cost of living, and hours of labor short enough so that after his day's work is done he will have time and energy to bear his share in the management of the community, to help in carrying the general load. We keep countless men from being good citizens by the conditions of life with which we surround them. We need comprehensive workmen's compensation acts, both State and national laws to regulate child labor and work for women, and, especially, we need in our common schools not merely education in booklearning, but also practical training for daily life and work. We need to enforce better sanitary conditions for our workers and to extend the use of safety appliances for our workers in industry and commerce, both within and between the States.
– Theodore Roosevelt, speech at Osawatomie, Kansas, "The New Nationalism" (August 31, 1910)
It is essential that there should be organization of labor. This is an era of organization. Capital organizes and therefore labor must organize.
– Theodore Roosevelt, speech at Milwaukee, Wisconsin (October 14, 1912)
It is hard to fail, but it is worse never to have tried to succeed. In this life we get nothing save by effort.
– Theodore Roosevelt
It is better to be faithful than famous.
– Theodore Roosevelt
In name we had the Declaration of Independence in 1776; but we gave the lie by our acts to the words of the Declaration of Independence until 1865; and words count for nothing except in so far as they represent acts.
– Theodore Roosevelt, speech at Osawatomie, Kansas, "The New Nationalism" (August 31, 1910)
In any moment of decision, the best thing you can do is the right thing. The worst thing you can do is nothing.
– Theodore Roosevelt
I am only an average man but, by George, I work harder at it than the average man.
– Theodore Roosevelt
I believe that the officers, and, especially, the directors, of corporations should be held personally responsible when any corporation breaks the law.
– Theodore Roosevelt, speech at Osawatomie, Kansas, "The New Nationalism" (August 31, 1910)
I care not what others think of what I do, but I care very much about what I think of what I do. That is character!
– Theodore Roosevelt
I have always been fond of the West African proverb: "Speak softly and carry a big stick; you will go far."
– Theodore Roosevelt
Every reform movement has a lunatic fringe.
– Theodore Roosevelt (1913)
Don't hit at all if it is honorably possible to avoid hitting; but never hit soft.
– Theodore Roosevelt
A man who is good enough to shed his blood for his country is good enough to be given a square deal afterwards.
– Theodore Roosevelt, speech at Springfield, Illinois (July 4, 1903)
A typical vice of American politics is the avoidance of saying anything real on real issues.
– Theodore Roosevelt
Americanism is a question of principle, of purpose, of idealism, or character; it is not a matter of birthplace or creed or line of descent.
– Theodore Roosevelt, speech at Washington, DC (1909)
To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.
– Theodore Roosevelt
To waste, to destroy, our natural resources, to skin and exhaust the land instead of using it so as to increase its usefulness, will result in undermining in the days of our children the very prosperity which we ought by right to hand down to them amplified and developed.
– Theodore Roosevelt, Seventh Annual Message to U.S. Congress (December 3, 1907)
Unrestrained greed means the ruin of the great woods and the drying up of the sources of the rivers.
– Theodore Roosevelt, on clear-cutting of forests, while governor of New York, quoted in his biography Theodore Rex by Edmund Morris (2001)
We demand that big business give the people a square deal; in return we must insist that when anyone engaged in big business honestly endeavors to do right he shall himself be given a square deal.
– Theodore Roosevelt
Whenever you are asked if you can do a job, tell 'em, "Certainly, I can!" Then get busy and find out how to do it.
– Theodore Roosevelt
Those who oppose all reform will do well to remember that ruin in its worst form is inevitable if our national life brings us nothing better than swollen fortunes for the few and the triumph in both politics and business of a sordid and selfish materialism.
– Theodore Roosevelt, speech at Osawatomie, Kansas, "The New Nationalism" (August 31, 1910)
The true friend of property, the true conservative, is he who insists that property shall be the servant and not the master of the commonwealth; who insists that the creature of man's making shall be the servant and not the master of the man who made it. The citizens of the United States must effectively control the mighty commercial forces which they have themselves called into being.
– Theodore Roosevelt, speech at Osawatomie, Kansas, "The New Nationalism" (August 31, 1910)
The one thing I want to leave my children is an honorable name.
– Theodore Roosevelt
The only man who never makes a mistake is the man who never does anything.
– Theodore Roosevelt
The nation behaves well if it treats the natural resources as assets which it must turn over to the next generation increased, and not impaired, in value.
– Theodore Roosevelt
The old parties are husks, with no real soul within either, divided on artificial lines, boss-ridden and privilege-controlled, each a jumble of incongruous elements, and neither daring to speak out wisely and fearlessly on what should be said on the vital issues of the day.
– Theodore Roosevelt, speech at the Progressive Party Convention, Chicago, Illinois (August 6, 1912)
The most important single ingredient in the formula of success is knowing how to get along with people.
– Theodore Roosevelt
The men of wealth who today are trying to prevent the regulation and control of their business in the interest of the public by the proper government authorities will not succeed, in my judgment, in checking the progress of the movement. But if they did succeed they would find that they had sown the wind and would surely reap the whirlwind, for they would ultimately provoke the violent excesses which accompany a reform coming by convulsion instead of by steady and natural growth.
– Theodore Roosevelt, speech, "The Man With The Muck Rake" (April 15, 1906)
The first requisite of a good citizen in this republic of ours is that he shall be able and willing to pull his weight.
– Theodore Roosevelt, speech at New York City (November 11, 1902)
The government is us; we are the government, you and I.
– Theodore Roosevelt, speech at Asheville, North Carolina (September 9, 1902)
The absence of effective State, and, especially, national, restraint upon unfair money-getting has tended to create a small class of enormously wealthy and economically powerful men, whose chief object is to hold and increase their power. The prime need is to change the conditions which enable these men to accumulate power which is not for the general welfare that they should hold or exercise. We grudge no man a fortune which represents his own power and sagacity, when exercised with entire regard to the welfare of his fellows.
– Theodore Roosevelt, speech at Osawatomie, Kansas, "The New Nationalism" (August 31, 1910)
Probably the greatest harm done by vast wealth is the harm that we of moderate means do ourselves when we let the vices of envy and hatred enter deep into our own natures.
– Theodore Roosevelt, speech at Providence, Rhode Island (August 23, 1902)
One of the fundamental necessities in a representative government such as ours is to make certain that the men to whom the people delegate their power shall serve the people by whom they are elected, and not the special interests. I believe that every national officer, elected or appointed, should be forbidden to perform any service or receive any compensation, directly or indirectly, from interstate corporations; and a similar provision could not fail to be useful within the States.
– Theodore Roosevelt, speech at Osawatomie, Kansas, "The New Nationalism" (August 31, 1910)
No man is above the law and no man is below it; nor do we ask any man's permission when we require him to obey it. Obedience to the law is demanded as a right; not asked as a favor.
– Theodore Roosevelt (December 7, 1903)
No man can be a good citizen unless he has a wage more than sufficient to cover the bare cost of living, and hours of labor short enough so that after his day's work is done he will have time and energy to bear his share in the management of the community, to help in carrying the general load. We keep countless men from being good citizens by the conditions of life with which we surround them. We need comprehensive workmen's compensation acts, both State and national laws to regulate child labor and work for women, and, especially, we need in our common schools not merely education in booklearning, but also practical training for daily life and work. We need to enforce better sanitary conditions for our workers and to extend the use of safety appliances for our workers in industry and commerce, both within and between the States.
– Theodore Roosevelt, speech at Osawatomie, Kansas, "The New Nationalism" (August 31, 1910)
It is essential that there should be organization of labor. This is an era of organization. Capital organizes and therefore labor must organize.
– Theodore Roosevelt, speech at Milwaukee, Wisconsin (October 14, 1912)
It is hard to fail, but it is worse never to have tried to succeed. In this life we get nothing save by effort.
– Theodore Roosevelt
It is better to be faithful than famous.
– Theodore Roosevelt
In name we had the Declaration of Independence in 1776; but we gave the lie by our acts to the words of the Declaration of Independence until 1865; and words count for nothing except in so far as they represent acts.
– Theodore Roosevelt, speech at Osawatomie, Kansas, "The New Nationalism" (August 31, 1910)
In any moment of decision, the best thing you can do is the right thing. The worst thing you can do is nothing.
– Theodore Roosevelt
I am only an average man but, by George, I work harder at it than the average man.
– Theodore Roosevelt
I believe that the officers, and, especially, the directors, of corporations should be held personally responsible when any corporation breaks the law.
– Theodore Roosevelt, speech at Osawatomie, Kansas, "The New Nationalism" (August 31, 1910)
I care not what others think of what I do, but I care very much about what I think of what I do. That is character!
– Theodore Roosevelt
I have always been fond of the West African proverb: "Speak softly and carry a big stick; you will go far."
– Theodore Roosevelt
Every reform movement has a lunatic fringe.
– Theodore Roosevelt (1913)
Don't hit at all if it is honorably possible to avoid hitting; but never hit soft.
– Theodore Roosevelt
A man who is good enough to shed his blood for his country is good enough to be given a square deal afterwards.
– Theodore Roosevelt, speech at Springfield, Illinois (July 4, 1903)
A typical vice of American politics is the avoidance of saying anything real on real issues.
– Theodore Roosevelt
Americanism is a question of principle, of purpose, of idealism, or character; it is not a matter of birthplace or creed or line of descent.
– Theodore Roosevelt, speech at Washington, DC (1909)
Monday, November 08, 2004
MLS Playoff Update II
Well, MLS Cup 2004 is set, and will see the Kansas City Revolution v. DC United. KC is seeking its first MLS Cup since 2000 when they surprised the league with a dominating defensive performance leading them to the only MLS Cup in club history. DC is seeking their first Cup since 1999, after the United dynasty opened MLS with three titles in the first four years of the league.
The Wizards defeated the LA Galaxy 2-0 at home in Arrowhead Stadium, Friday night. Houston native Davy Arnaud scored the brace which was enough to put KC over the top on the evening. More of the typical suffocating defense from the Wizard back-line make the two goals stand up and send the team to the Home Depot Center in LA for the Cup Final on Sunday.
United held on to defeat the New England Revolution 4-3 on penalty kicks after seeing the score leveled at 3-3 after full time and a thirty minute 'golden-goal' overtime period. Regular time saw an exciting, attacking match for 90 minutes, with the Revs pulling back from a goal down three times. Alecko Eskandarian opending scoring in the 11th minute, with a cracker of a goal - and the DC home crowd was still celebrating when poacher Taylor Twellman found the back of the net to level the match at 1-1 on 17. DC United stuck back quickly themselves behind their two grizzled veterans - Earnie Stewart assisting on Jamie Moreno's goal in the 21st. Just before the halftime break the Revs caught a break, with a DC defender caught with a handball in the box. Steve Ralston coolly buried the penalty kick for an even 2-2 half-time score. In the second-half, Argentinian Christian Gomez sent United to thier third lead with a beautiful header across the goal mouth in the 67th minute. And with time winding down - and the DC crowd wild in anticipation of the chance at the Cup - Pat Noonan scored off a corner kick to draw up the match with only 5 mintues to full time. No goals were scored during the extra time, so the match would be decided by penalties. Rev 'keeper Matt Reis saved the first United effort from Ben Olsen, to give the Revs the immediate advantage, but Ralston, who had buried a penalty earlier in the match, hit the crossbar after beating the goalkeeper to earase the advantage. A series of goals followed - including a beautiful bending shot to the corner by 15-year-old sensation Freddy Adu - until on the sixth round of kicks. DC's Brian Carroll hit his penalty, and rookie-of-the-year candidate Clint Dempsey (whose dad I met about a year ago over breakfast in an English pub here in Houston watching the English Premier League, before he was drafted by MLS) saw his strike saved by Nick Rimando - which sent DC on to their first shot at the Cup in five years. It was a bit undeserved for Dempsey - whose energetic play had led NE for much of the match.
So - on Sunday, November 14th at 2:30 Central (LIVE on ABC) - the MLS Cup will see KC v. DC. Both teams are riding hot streaks, both teams closed the season strong, both teams will be playing at full strength. Both teams play an attractive 3-5-2 creating numerous chances, combined with solid defense. Neither team 'should' have made it this far (KC with injury concerns, and DC with such a young team and a first year head coach). I have felt for some time the the Wizards are the team of destiny this season, having overcome so many obstacles yet retaining such a high level of play. KC are also the 2004 US Open Cup champion. DC will battle, and Adu will get a goal - but the Wizards will come away with the Cup. Prediction: KC 2:1 DC
The Wizards defeated the LA Galaxy 2-0 at home in Arrowhead Stadium, Friday night. Houston native Davy Arnaud scored the brace which was enough to put KC over the top on the evening. More of the typical suffocating defense from the Wizard back-line make the two goals stand up and send the team to the Home Depot Center in LA for the Cup Final on Sunday.
United held on to defeat the New England Revolution 4-3 on penalty kicks after seeing the score leveled at 3-3 after full time and a thirty minute 'golden-goal' overtime period. Regular time saw an exciting, attacking match for 90 minutes, with the Revs pulling back from a goal down three times. Alecko Eskandarian opending scoring in the 11th minute, with a cracker of a goal - and the DC home crowd was still celebrating when poacher Taylor Twellman found the back of the net to level the match at 1-1 on 17. DC United stuck back quickly themselves behind their two grizzled veterans - Earnie Stewart assisting on Jamie Moreno's goal in the 21st. Just before the halftime break the Revs caught a break, with a DC defender caught with a handball in the box. Steve Ralston coolly buried the penalty kick for an even 2-2 half-time score. In the second-half, Argentinian Christian Gomez sent United to thier third lead with a beautiful header across the goal mouth in the 67th minute. And with time winding down - and the DC crowd wild in anticipation of the chance at the Cup - Pat Noonan scored off a corner kick to draw up the match with only 5 mintues to full time. No goals were scored during the extra time, so the match would be decided by penalties. Rev 'keeper Matt Reis saved the first United effort from Ben Olsen, to give the Revs the immediate advantage, but Ralston, who had buried a penalty earlier in the match, hit the crossbar after beating the goalkeeper to earase the advantage. A series of goals followed - including a beautiful bending shot to the corner by 15-year-old sensation Freddy Adu - until on the sixth round of kicks. DC's Brian Carroll hit his penalty, and rookie-of-the-year candidate Clint Dempsey (whose dad I met about a year ago over breakfast in an English pub here in Houston watching the English Premier League, before he was drafted by MLS) saw his strike saved by Nick Rimando - which sent DC on to their first shot at the Cup in five years. It was a bit undeserved for Dempsey - whose energetic play had led NE for much of the match.
So - on Sunday, November 14th at 2:30 Central (LIVE on ABC) - the MLS Cup will see KC v. DC. Both teams are riding hot streaks, both teams closed the season strong, both teams will be playing at full strength. Both teams play an attractive 3-5-2 creating numerous chances, combined with solid defense. Neither team 'should' have made it this far (KC with injury concerns, and DC with such a young team and a first year head coach). I have felt for some time the the Wizards are the team of destiny this season, having overcome so many obstacles yet retaining such a high level of play. KC are also the 2004 US Open Cup champion. DC will battle, and Adu will get a goal - but the Wizards will come away with the Cup. Prediction: KC 2:1 DC
Friday, November 05, 2004
It's really all too easy...
Texas published the list of those who passed the July 2004 Bar Exam yesterday - and Shana passed! We are both just thrilled.
Personally, I never felt it was in doubt, but she had been nervous about actually seeing the results nonetheless. Probably a large part of that concern is the way that Texas publishes the results. They set a date, and the names of everyone who passed are published on a website. So anyone who knew you were taking the exam can search to see if you passed or not - so there is a fair amount of public pressure in the procedure.
This was a difficult summer for us, due to her concentration and study for the exam. I am so thankful that God blessed her to get through the grueling two month long study ordeal; with the discipline, ability and knowledge to pass the exam; and most of all to NEVER HAVE TO GO THROUGH THAT AGAIN!!! The bar exam is as much about attrition as it is about a testing of legal knowledge - and she persevered.
She will be sworn in at a formal ceremony in Austin, TX on November 15.
Top 5% of her class, Magna Cum Laude, Law Review and now member of the Texas bar. Congratulations to Shana, or should I say, counselor!!!
Personally, I never felt it was in doubt, but she had been nervous about actually seeing the results nonetheless. Probably a large part of that concern is the way that Texas publishes the results. They set a date, and the names of everyone who passed are published on a website. So anyone who knew you were taking the exam can search to see if you passed or not - so there is a fair amount of public pressure in the procedure.
This was a difficult summer for us, due to her concentration and study for the exam. I am so thankful that God blessed her to get through the grueling two month long study ordeal; with the discipline, ability and knowledge to pass the exam; and most of all to NEVER HAVE TO GO THROUGH THAT AGAIN!!! The bar exam is as much about attrition as it is about a testing of legal knowledge - and she persevered.
She will be sworn in at a formal ceremony in Austin, TX on November 15.
Top 5% of her class, Magna Cum Laude, Law Review and now member of the Texas bar. Congratulations to Shana, or should I say, counselor!!!
Thursday, November 04, 2004
"Lazarus ... remains unseen outside the gate"
I hate to just rip off another blog, but I'm going to do it anyway. There are a handful of blogs I read regularly, and Mike Cope's is one of them. He had a moving post on Tue, Nov. 2. It is a piece written by Larry James. James is the former minister at the East Richardson Church of Christ in Dallas and is now Executive Director of Central Dallas Ministries. I searched and searched, and couldn't find the text of this writing directly, so - not knowing the legal ramifications - I'm going to copy it here, with a link to Mike Cope's blog that you can go do directly if you wish. (I certainly hope that I'm not offending either Mr. Cope or Mr. James by copying this here, but I was so moved by the writing, I wanted to share it.)
While it is certainly true that the particular issues associated with injustice in this culture may leave much room for debate, compromise and new agreements and partnerships leading to various solutions, the bedrock theological values clearly and consistently espoused by the witness of Scripture and a significant and influential slice of Christian history refuses to let one comfortably "off the hook" so to speak! Whether one turns to the Law of Moses, the wisdom literature of Israel, the books of history or the prophets, throughout the Hebrew bible one is confronted again and again with the clear outlines of what a just, compassionate and true community culture would look and function like.
Approaching the life of Jesus, the message becomes even clearer. For the sake of this reflection there seems to be no need to rehearse the long list of texts that address this divine mandate. The Messiahship of Jesus is largely defined by a radical, demanding commitment to the values of the Jubilee Year (Luke 4:14ff). Whether one considers the basis of eternal judgment as defined by Jesus (Matthew 25:31-46; Luke 16:19ff) or the consistency of his rabbinic teaching (scan the entire book of Luke!), it is very clear that the issues of compassion, fairness, adequate provision and justice filled his agenda. The early church definitely got this point (Acts 2, 4; James; Paul's work on behalf of the poor in Jerusalem; et al).
Taking its cue from these sacred texts the history of the church is replete with advocates, reformers and community developers who press hard against the various forces of injustice within society and at times within the church itself. God's messengers throughout history have understood the connections between the revelation of God and the reality of life for the poor, the oppressed and the marginalized.
Two undeniable aspects of this struggle for me involve the opportunities presented by life in a post-modern democratic society and the drifting irrelevance of the church, as we know it.
Freedom and the democratic opportunity to craft a truly compassionate community/societal response beyond sound bit rhetoric to pressing contemporary challenges (such as poverty, access to and disparities around health and wellness, livable wages and the results of inadequate skills for marketplace realities, child care, affordable housing and homelessness) hold out great hope and almost endless possibilities. Yet, we are failing miserably in each of these areas. The powerful engines of freedom, choice and democracy currently serve the rich, the healthy and those with access to wellness methodologies, the fully employed, the secure families and the well-housed to the obvious neglect of those left far, far behind.
In a world of opportunity, now plagued by freedom's failures, the church is largely silent as it stands mute like a shallow wading pool reflecting the values of a democratic society that systematically crushes the poor and the marginalized while waving the flags of a rabid patriotism. Ironically, at a time when the church's influence appears to be growing in the public square (even if its membership is declining in real numbers), its prophetic, practical voice comes off muted and shrill. Where is the prophetic word today from the pulpits of Dallas? Who is there to speak a clear word of undeniable truth to power today in a state whose 78th legislature pillaged the poor of the few remaining benefits they could take advantage of? Is there a place for repentance, for fasting beyond the gimmicks of the latest spiritual growth regimen? Where is the biblical understanding that would drive a truly discipled people to their knees because of the suffering of the poor, the imprisoned, the naked, the sick and the stranger? Where are the prophets who would boldly challenge the court of American Royalty?
Today democracy and religion engage in a bizarre dance. The dance hall is brightly lighted. Smoke and mirrors complement the environment to cover a reality that is just out of view by design. The clerics dance with the one who invited them in hopes of securing new funds while creating a truly Christian nation to the glory of God! All the while the numbers of the dispossessed grow. The suffering continues. Important subjects such as programmatic scale in the face of the overwhelming numbers or the efficiency of comprehensive public policy strategies never arises in any of the significant conversations and, thus, is never achieved. The night of celebration ends in prayer and everyone returns home full, honored and satisfied . . . except for Lazarus who remains unseen outside the gate.
-Larry James
While it is certainly true that the particular issues associated with injustice in this culture may leave much room for debate, compromise and new agreements and partnerships leading to various solutions, the bedrock theological values clearly and consistently espoused by the witness of Scripture and a significant and influential slice of Christian history refuses to let one comfortably "off the hook" so to speak! Whether one turns to the Law of Moses, the wisdom literature of Israel, the books of history or the prophets, throughout the Hebrew bible one is confronted again and again with the clear outlines of what a just, compassionate and true community culture would look and function like.
Approaching the life of Jesus, the message becomes even clearer. For the sake of this reflection there seems to be no need to rehearse the long list of texts that address this divine mandate. The Messiahship of Jesus is largely defined by a radical, demanding commitment to the values of the Jubilee Year (Luke 4:14ff). Whether one considers the basis of eternal judgment as defined by Jesus (Matthew 25:31-46; Luke 16:19ff) or the consistency of his rabbinic teaching (scan the entire book of Luke!), it is very clear that the issues of compassion, fairness, adequate provision and justice filled his agenda. The early church definitely got this point (Acts 2, 4; James; Paul's work on behalf of the poor in Jerusalem; et al).
Taking its cue from these sacred texts the history of the church is replete with advocates, reformers and community developers who press hard against the various forces of injustice within society and at times within the church itself. God's messengers throughout history have understood the connections between the revelation of God and the reality of life for the poor, the oppressed and the marginalized.
Two undeniable aspects of this struggle for me involve the opportunities presented by life in a post-modern democratic society and the drifting irrelevance of the church, as we know it.
Freedom and the democratic opportunity to craft a truly compassionate community/societal response beyond sound bit rhetoric to pressing contemporary challenges (such as poverty, access to and disparities around health and wellness, livable wages and the results of inadequate skills for marketplace realities, child care, affordable housing and homelessness) hold out great hope and almost endless possibilities. Yet, we are failing miserably in each of these areas. The powerful engines of freedom, choice and democracy currently serve the rich, the healthy and those with access to wellness methodologies, the fully employed, the secure families and the well-housed to the obvious neglect of those left far, far behind.
In a world of opportunity, now plagued by freedom's failures, the church is largely silent as it stands mute like a shallow wading pool reflecting the values of a democratic society that systematically crushes the poor and the marginalized while waving the flags of a rabid patriotism. Ironically, at a time when the church's influence appears to be growing in the public square (even if its membership is declining in real numbers), its prophetic, practical voice comes off muted and shrill. Where is the prophetic word today from the pulpits of Dallas? Who is there to speak a clear word of undeniable truth to power today in a state whose 78th legislature pillaged the poor of the few remaining benefits they could take advantage of? Is there a place for repentance, for fasting beyond the gimmicks of the latest spiritual growth regimen? Where is the biblical understanding that would drive a truly discipled people to their knees because of the suffering of the poor, the imprisoned, the naked, the sick and the stranger? Where are the prophets who would boldly challenge the court of American Royalty?
Today democracy and religion engage in a bizarre dance. The dance hall is brightly lighted. Smoke and mirrors complement the environment to cover a reality that is just out of view by design. The clerics dance with the one who invited them in hopes of securing new funds while creating a truly Christian nation to the glory of God! All the while the numbers of the dispossessed grow. The suffering continues. Important subjects such as programmatic scale in the face of the overwhelming numbers or the efficiency of comprehensive public policy strategies never arises in any of the significant conversations and, thus, is never achieved. The night of celebration ends in prayer and everyone returns home full, honored and satisfied . . . except for Lazarus who remains unseen outside the gate.
-Larry James
Wednesday, November 03, 2004
The People have Spoken...
(should we listen?!?)
Bush 286:252 Kerry
If you look below, I was off a bit in my forecasting. The following states came in against my expectations:
Bush won NM and OH (which made all the difference)
Kerry won WI
Shana and I spent the evening glued to the TV and internet. This was my first "on-line" election, and I have to admit to being quite the geek - I was monitoring individual county results in Florida and Ohio all evening, to the point where Shana had to stop me from talking back to the commentators on TV who obviously hadn't seen that Dade county had started to report results when he stated that they didn't know if the more pro-Kerry South Florida had were in the numbers they were discussing.
Another peaceful election is behind us. I am struck by how far to the right the Amercian voting populace really is. I probably shouldn't be surprised, but frankly, I am. Not that W. was re-elected, I had guessed at that for quite a while. But I was surprised at how big a victory it was, and the coat-tails bringing expansion of Republican control of the Senate and House and the overwhelming approveal of anti-gay marriage/benefit propositions in 11 states.
I know people who feel thier faith in the American people was restored last night...and I know people who were terrified by and disappointed in with the American people last night.
Share your reaction to the results or how you watched the election in the comments if you wish.
I pray that God continue to bless America, One Nation Under God.
Bush 286:252 Kerry
If you look below, I was off a bit in my forecasting. The following states came in against my expectations:
Bush won NM and OH (which made all the difference)
Kerry won WI
Shana and I spent the evening glued to the TV and internet. This was my first "on-line" election, and I have to admit to being quite the geek - I was monitoring individual county results in Florida and Ohio all evening, to the point where Shana had to stop me from talking back to the commentators on TV who obviously hadn't seen that Dade county had started to report results when he stated that they didn't know if the more pro-Kerry South Florida had were in the numbers they were discussing.
Another peaceful election is behind us. I am struck by how far to the right the Amercian voting populace really is. I probably shouldn't be surprised, but frankly, I am. Not that W. was re-elected, I had guessed at that for quite a while. But I was surprised at how big a victory it was, and the coat-tails bringing expansion of Republican control of the Senate and House and the overwhelming approveal of anti-gay marriage/benefit propositions in 11 states.
I know people who feel thier faith in the American people was restored last night...and I know people who were terrified by and disappointed in with the American people last night.
Share your reaction to the results or how you watched the election in the comments if you wish.
I pray that God continue to bless America, One Nation Under God.
Tuesday, November 02, 2004
Election Day in America
I got my vote in! How about you?
Shana and I got in line at our polling place at about 6:50 am. We were about 40-50th in line at that point, but it flowed pretty quickly. I voted at 7:30am - so it was only about a 40 minute wait (much shorter, I'm guessing, that the wait after work would have been).
We are fortunate enough to have possibly the finest polling location in all of the United States. We vote at a little bed and breakfast about 6 blocks away from where we live. It is a georgous old home that is beautifully decorated. This morning, for us early risers, the bed and breakfast had out complimentary doughnuts and coffee which was welcome with our wait in the wet, chilly weather. I feel like we are 'pampered' voters. I read a humorous list of advice to voters last week that noted if you don't know where your polling precinct is located, look for the oldest, darkest, grungiest building in your neighborhood - that's probably it. Fortunately for us, we get a little luxury in the voting process.
The ballot was quite long - with most of the offices being run unopposed. There were three city propositions on the ballot as well. We use an e-slate electronic voting system, and for as long as the ballot was, the job was finished quickly and easily.
I caught the weather before heading out this morning - and I'm a bit concerned. It looked like Florida was going to be clear, which is positive, but it looked like there would be rain all across Michigan, Ohio and Pennsylvania. That worries me. I just hope that the voters up there get up and get out and get their vote in.
I love election day. I saw Tom Brokaw on MSNBC last night, and he made the comment that as polarized as America is right now, it is a beautiful thing that we are making huge decisions on war, homeland security, economy, healthcare and other value issues - with no tanks in the streets, no guerrillas strongarming, etc. I thought that was such a good point that we all just take for granted. I thank God for the wisdom and foresight that he instilled into the founders of our nation, that they were able to create a system in which we can peacefully transfer power according to the will of massive corporations...sorry, I mean the will of the people. :) I truly thank God that I am an American. Today is a great day - today American can take a step, even if a baby step, forward to being a better country for our grandchildren than it is for us. What a wonderful system.
Shana and I got in line at our polling place at about 6:50 am. We were about 40-50th in line at that point, but it flowed pretty quickly. I voted at 7:30am - so it was only about a 40 minute wait (much shorter, I'm guessing, that the wait after work would have been).
We are fortunate enough to have possibly the finest polling location in all of the United States. We vote at a little bed and breakfast about 6 blocks away from where we live. It is a georgous old home that is beautifully decorated. This morning, for us early risers, the bed and breakfast had out complimentary doughnuts and coffee which was welcome with our wait in the wet, chilly weather. I feel like we are 'pampered' voters. I read a humorous list of advice to voters last week that noted if you don't know where your polling precinct is located, look for the oldest, darkest, grungiest building in your neighborhood - that's probably it. Fortunately for us, we get a little luxury in the voting process.
The ballot was quite long - with most of the offices being run unopposed. There were three city propositions on the ballot as well. We use an e-slate electronic voting system, and for as long as the ballot was, the job was finished quickly and easily.
I caught the weather before heading out this morning - and I'm a bit concerned. It looked like Florida was going to be clear, which is positive, but it looked like there would be rain all across Michigan, Ohio and Pennsylvania. That worries me. I just hope that the voters up there get up and get out and get their vote in.
I love election day. I saw Tom Brokaw on MSNBC last night, and he made the comment that as polarized as America is right now, it is a beautiful thing that we are making huge decisions on war, homeland security, economy, healthcare and other value issues - with no tanks in the streets, no guerrillas strongarming, etc. I thought that was such a good point that we all just take for granted. I thank God for the wisdom and foresight that he instilled into the founders of our nation, that they were able to create a system in which we can peacefully transfer power according to the will of massive corporations...sorry, I mean the will of the people. :) I truly thank God that I am an American. Today is a great day - today American can take a step, even if a baby step, forward to being a better country for our grandchildren than it is for us. What a wonderful system.
Monday, November 01, 2004
MLS Playoff Update
Well - I was right on my first round MLS playoff predictions - in one out of four series. Ouch.
In the East, the New England Revolution defeated the Supporter's Shield winning Columbus Crew by a 2-1 aggregate score. DC United defeated Metrostars 4-0 on aggregate.
Out West, #1 seed Kansas City Wizards came from behind to pull out a 3-2 aggregate victory over the defending champion San Jose Earthquakes. In the other matchup, the Los Angeles Galaxy prevailed over the Colorado Rapids 2-1 aggregate.
So, we have the Revs travelling to DC for the Eastern Conference final. It's a one off match, winner to the MLS Cup. The Revs have been really down in 2004, but a final push got them into the playoffs, and they sent off the #1 seed, who hadn't seen a loss since June. United rolled over Metros and is in fine form. But that victory was very costly with key contributor Dema Kovelenko and MLS First XI and New Zealand International defender Ryan Nelson being suspended for the Conference Final due to yellow card accumulation. Those losses will be difficult for DC to overcome and in the end, I think it will prove their undoing. Prediction: DC 0:1 NE (TV = FoxSportsWorld, HDNet, Direct Kick; Sat. Nov. 6, 6:00 Central)
The LA Galaxy go on the road to face the Wizards, where they were 0-1-1 in 2004. This should be an interesting matchup between the #1 and #2 seeds. These were the two best teams in teh conference all year, and both are playing well down the stretch. To me, this matchup is really a pick 'em, but I give the edge to KC because they feel like the team of destiny this year. Overcoming injury to last season's MLS MVP (Preki), last season's leading scorer (Simutekov) and a regular U.S. International (Klein), this squad has just kept getting results week after week. Playing at home should be the edge they need to get the result that will take them to MLS Cup. Prediction: KC 2:1 LA (TV = FoxSportsWorld, HDNet, Direct Kick; Fri. Nov. 5, 6:30 Central)
In the East, the New England Revolution defeated the Supporter's Shield winning Columbus Crew by a 2-1 aggregate score. DC United defeated Metrostars 4-0 on aggregate.
Out West, #1 seed Kansas City Wizards came from behind to pull out a 3-2 aggregate victory over the defending champion San Jose Earthquakes. In the other matchup, the Los Angeles Galaxy prevailed over the Colorado Rapids 2-1 aggregate.
So, we have the Revs travelling to DC for the Eastern Conference final. It's a one off match, winner to the MLS Cup. The Revs have been really down in 2004, but a final push got them into the playoffs, and they sent off the #1 seed, who hadn't seen a loss since June. United rolled over Metros and is in fine form. But that victory was very costly with key contributor Dema Kovelenko and MLS First XI and New Zealand International defender Ryan Nelson being suspended for the Conference Final due to yellow card accumulation. Those losses will be difficult for DC to overcome and in the end, I think it will prove their undoing. Prediction: DC 0:1 NE (TV = FoxSportsWorld, HDNet, Direct Kick; Sat. Nov. 6, 6:00 Central)
The LA Galaxy go on the road to face the Wizards, where they were 0-1-1 in 2004. This should be an interesting matchup between the #1 and #2 seeds. These were the two best teams in teh conference all year, and both are playing well down the stretch. To me, this matchup is really a pick 'em, but I give the edge to KC because they feel like the team of destiny this year. Overcoming injury to last season's MLS MVP (Preki), last season's leading scorer (Simutekov) and a regular U.S. International (Klein), this squad has just kept getting results week after week. Playing at home should be the edge they need to get the result that will take them to MLS Cup. Prediction: KC 2:1 LA (TV = FoxSportsWorld, HDNet, Direct Kick; Fri. Nov. 5, 6:30 Central)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
