Here It Comes

It's the first week of December and it's almost here: Christmas, the holiday of holidays. I think back to a little over a month ago when the flowers on my balcony did not stand as tall and sturdy as they once did. Their petals were ever so subtly cast downwards as if to suggest a curtsy of their soon coming departure. At the time, I sighed heavily at the sign of summer's close and raised my head to the sky, narrowing my eyes in the glare of an Indian October sun. With hands on my hips, I audibly launched a terse memo to God: "Another holiday season is on its way. Same help needed!"

Why the exasperated plea?

Three words say it all: Divorced With Children.

Nine years ago, my divorce was finalized and though it would be nice to say that sharing our children over the holidays has become easier with each passing year, I'm not able to give that report.

Certainly, my ex-husband and I get along better than most divorcees, but even that fact has never softened the frustrations each holiday brings. I am remarried now, so not only do I have to accommodate my children's holiday schedule in light of their various blood relatives; I also have my second husband's family to incorporate as well. It's amazing but somehow all of us manage to make the chaos work and yet, without fail, I find myself dealing with depression at the close of what should be a jubilant season. 

I always feel like my efforts come up short and then I feel guilty for being sad because I know from living through my own parent's divorce that the holidays could be so much worse. 

With each pang I think, 'This is probably why my parents fought so much. Anger numbs you' and with that thought, I have to resist the urge to look for an excuse to pick a fight with my ex so I too can numb out from the sadness of our reality. 

Admittedly, there are times when I give in to the urge for battle. That happens for both of us on occasion but fortunately, our explosive confrontations are few and far between. We are quick to forgive, forget and move forward for the sake of the children.

I've noticed our efforts for peace increase between the months of October and January: like Homeland Security Code Orange, we are diligent to take every precaution possible in hopes of not tripping a nuclear trigger of insult and misunderstanding. I, for one, find myself exhausted when January arrives; which makes the doldrums of February look like a welcomed get-away vacation.

No, I'm not ashamed to admit it; I need supernatural power to fill the gaps of my human inadequacies. Fortunately, I believe in a God who promises that His strength is made perfect through my weakness and right now, I have no choice but to count on Him because Christmas is coming fast. 

The Red and Blue Divisions of Faith

As Election Day drew near, a tangible mood of frenzied dread filled the air for many Christians, whether politically red or blue. Who would win, Barack Obama or John McCain, and what would it mean, not only for the country, but also for the theology they each represented?

Voters made their decision on November 4th 2008 and Obama triumphed with a landslide collection of 364 electoral votes to McCain's 162; including a well-defined lead in the popular voice (53% to 46%). The new President-Elect responded with a rousing proclamation stating: "Change has come to America". He called on all citizens to join together in a new spirit of patriotism, responsibility, service and sacrifice. For certain, there were tears of both joy and bitterness being shed that night. 

Why were emotions so divergent among Christians throughout this historical election? Could the crux of the reason exist, not in the embedment of faith, but in the recognition that authority of moral demarcation had been symbolically wrested away from conservative Christianity and into the hands of those representing religiously liberal ideals?

Christians have always had their internal disagreements but the lack of unity they currently face is highly troublesome, mainly because it poses to be yet another excuse for further fragmentation of the Body of Christ. The entire presidential campaign of 2008 supplied plenty of provocation towards this hazard. It was a political crusade fraught with hateful rants and fearful predictions aimed at vilifying both candidates and their supporters. Each side of the Christian divide unabashedly launched slanderous declarations against the other in a struggle over who might gain the political ability to sanction righteousness. Evangelicals cited Obama as the anti-Christ while religious Democrats tagged their voting counterparts as a pack of ignorant racists. The fear of homegrown terrorism and financial ruin succeeded in fueling the flames of angst and anger, which strengthened defiance on both peripheries.

For those who have married their extreme political viewpoints to their theological tenets, it would be beneficial for them to take a moment and consider the implication of this union but alas; self-analysis has never been the hallmark of any Christian sect. 

Sifted by colors of creed, the Red Believer and the Blue Believer each carry their own version of what it means to live out a life aimed at reflecting an authentic representation of Christ. This mission begets a moral code of identifiable behaviors destined to impact the systems of society, which in turn are overseen by the elected government. Therefore, it is inevitable that faith and politics will eventually have to contend with one another. The concept of Separation of Church and State, as devised by Thomas Jefferson, was not a denial of the interdependence upon the two institutions but rather an attempt to give clear definition to the role each should play within society so that through those roles, they could properly function. The ability to assign institutional definitions is where the power struggle lies. 

In general, for the Red Christian, a moral government is one that protects innocent life, sacred traditions and self-sufficient success. For the Blue Christian, a moral government is one that provides peace, tolerance and equality for all. 

Throughout the 1980's, conservative believers occupied the high ethical ground of right and wrong for American society and camped out on that land for almost a full decade. They were known as the Moral Majority and even after their disestablishment in 1989, their namesake continued to be a way in which to define voters who adhered to evangelical politics. 

Now here we are, almost 20 years later, and the politically religious landscape is quite different. Fortunately, there are faithful followers from both sides of the political spectrum who have identified the need to set aside their own social agendas in hopes of encouraging a unifying perspective during these divisive times. John Piper is one such voice that has stated: "A prophetic perspective is what the church needs. What I mean is, we don't live for politics. We don't base our confidence about the future on whoever gets elected... There is a kind of voting, a kind of politic, and a kind of advocacy, which is not investing our whole selves into it... God puts kings up and takes kings down and God can turn this for good no matter who gets elected."

Though the desire to unify is merely one step upon a long pilgrimage towards spiritual reconciliation between the Red and the Blue, it is a worthy step to acknowledge and cultivate. Walking it out, in love, is not only the answer to healing the cuts within the Body of Christ; it is also the best representation of a life authentically lived for God. 

U.S. Tax System Explained With Beer

A brilliant explanation of the US tax system using actual percentages, the impact of a tax cut, and the public reaction that anyone should be able to understand.

Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:

The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.

The fifth would pay $1.

The sixth would pay $3.

The seventh would pay $7.

The eighth would pay $12.

The ninth would pay $18.

The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.

So, that’s what they decided to do. The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve. “Since you are all such good customers,” he said, “I’m going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20. “Drinks for the ten now cost just $80.

The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes, so the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. But what about the other six men - the paying customers? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his ‘fair share?’

They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody’s share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer. So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man’s bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay.

And so -

The fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings).

The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33%savings).

The seventh now pay $5 instead of $7 (28%savings).

The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% savings).

The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 ( 22% savings).

The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings).

Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings.

“I only got a dollar out of the $20,”declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man,” but he got $10!”

“Yeah, that’s right,” exclaimed the fifth man. “I only saved a dollar, too. It’s unfair that he got ten times more than I!”

“That’s true!!” shouted the seventh man. “Why should he get $10 back when I got only two? The wealthy get all the breaks!”

“Wait a minute,” yelled the first four men in unison. “We didn’t get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!”

The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up. The next night the tenth man didn’t show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn’t have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!

And that, boys and girls, journalists and college professors, is how our tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.

David R. Kamerschen, Ph.D.
Professor of Economics
University of Georgia

Reviewing Through the Storm

Through the Storm is a uniquely written composition penned by Lynne Spears, the mother of international superstar, Britney Spears. 

I call it a unique composition because, regardless of the author's intent, the book borrows from various literary genres resulting in an undefined category of its own. As such, it functions, not only as an autobiography, but also as a familial diary, an insider's memoir, a spiritual treatise, a self-help essay, a personal confession and even at times, a survivor's eulogy. Due to this curious amalgam, Through the Storm carries a chorus of voices which generalizes the demographic and gives the impression that Ms. Spears never made a definite decision as to whom she was writing. 

There are moments when the author directly tries to reach women like me: a wife and mother who hopes to avoid the pitfalls of indulging her children without crushing their inner potential; but then, all of a sudden, the narrative alters its aim and begins coaching the victimized woman of abuse and then switches again to, seemingly, beseech understanding from a future familial descendant. 

I felt like my identity was changing along with her focus which quite often left me feeling confused and disconnected from the narrative. I literally would have to shake my head and tell myself: Oh wait, I'm no longer the Christian woman looking for proof that Lynne is really a sister in Christ, I'm now one of those nosey tabloid readers who wants to hear the inside scoop on what Britney was really doing behind the scenes.  This constant shift in audience-focus disjointed her story, but that's not to say I wouldn't recommend the book to others. Lynne's perspective is far too interesting and insightful for people to pass up just because of something as trivial as faulty audience development. 

Through the Storm is a candidly raw, transparently hopeful, and victorious lesson for everyone to embrace. Overall, I say kudos to Lynne Spears.

May I Call You Crow?

I just finished taking a shower to wash away all of the nervous sweat I accumulated on my body after watching the Vice Presidential debate. It wasn't a train wreck per se, but it was disconcerting to watch a plebeian try to take on an aristocrat who tried to act like a plebeian being attacked by an aristocrat who was cloaked in plebeian charm. Are you confused? Who wasn't?

Biden forgot he was in a silk suit as he invited America to walk over with him to the Home Depot... you know, the one he supposedly frequents. And who coached him to talk so fast? The only time he slowed down was to emphasize disparaging remarks about McCain directly into the camera... repetitively. All that other less important stuff, like policy peppered with big numbers, came rushing out of his mouth in a mass exodus.

Then there was Palin who caused me to cringe the moment she firmly asked the Senator: "May I call you Joe?" Bold, yes, good choice, no-siree. It was a debate, not a back-yard picnic. When that happened at the top of the show I thought, "Oh, boy, this is going to be uncomfortable to watch." And uncomfortable it certainly was! Someone needed to tell Palin that a tough tone on its own does not a good sentence make. But there she was, launching forceful witticisms and campaign slogans back in Biden's face as if to suggest a superior point had been made. 

It's a shame to say, but the most admirable performance in the debate came from the mediator, Gwen Ifill. Her questions and comments were spot on and despite predictions, I didn't sense an ounce of bias in favor of the Obama / Biden ticket. In fact, I thought she seemed to extend an obvious tilt of graciousness towards Palin at certain moments in the debate when she could have otherwise thrust a devastating inquest. 

Like the numerous times when Palin ignored the question Ifill asked and threw her own topic on the table for discussion instead. The first time that happened, Ifill made a pointed remark about it, but subsequent repetitions of the same snub from Palin were otherwise left unchallenged. Now, don't get me wrong, I'm not necessarily holding Palin in complete contempt for her routine of topical-hijacking. I'm sure she was just trying to prove that she refuses to cave in to the regiment of "politics as usual" but my point is this: Sarah Palin is lucky Gwen Ifill didn't make a huge issue out of it and call her to task right then and there on national T.V. I think we need to give Ifill the monicker of Gracious Gwen from here on out. 

As for dear Joe, I have got to say, I walked away from the debate liking the guy! How the hell did THAT happen? If the stars should align just right and he doesn't become the next VP, he definitely needs to go into acting. He's got a likable personality, regardless of the bunk that falls out of his mouth, and it's for this reason alone that I'm beginning to think Obama and Biden are going to win. I just don't see America giving up on the professional purveyors of sophisticated politics. To put it in Wasillian terms: those boys have got too much spit and shine on their side not to win.

There's no getting around it, we're a country who likes to be dazzled. We would much rather elect a platitude of change instead of actually suffering through the genuine alterations that have to be made in order for change to take root. We'll take the glamour of trendy ethics wrapped in Hollywood posh over the grime of moral principle covered in Old Fashioned work any day of the week!

Even I, a strong supporter of the McCain /Palin ticket, had to turn off the debate 15 minutes before it was finished out of sheer tedium over hearing the word "maverick" for the 100th time. If I couldn't hang in there and listen through that final burst of assertive energy from my own VP candidate, then how the heck could anyone else sit through it and be moved? 

I can't wait to wake up tomorrow and read what the pundits have to say. I thought Palin made a good gameplay when she halted the "he said she said" sling- fest by suggesting they let the analysts sort through the records for them. It'll be interesting to see who got their information right and who tripped up on the facts. 

Dollars to donuts, I bet someone will have to eat crow.

 

Short and Sweet

I want to tell you about my relationship with my sister, Megan. 

Growing up, the only thing we shared in common was our mom. We had different fathers, different personalities, different types of friends, and different outlooks on life. The core of these differences could be summed up by this short comparative list:

Cara ------------ Megan

intense................   calm

methodical..........  unstructured

analytical............   emotional

argumentative....  agreeable

ideological..........  relational

complicated........  straightforward  

When I invited her to read my first post, she responded by telling me that she enjoyed it but couldn't understand why I had to use so many words to write it. She made the same kind of observation on my last post. She said: 

"You should have just written: Vote for McCain... Obama is stupid."

That's my sister. She cuts through the barrage of verbal excessiveness and zeros in on the central tag-line. Nothing fancy, nothing contrived, just plain and to-the-point. 

 

That's why I'm so glad she's my sister. Everybody needs a person in their life who is completely different than they are. The contrast makes you own-up to your own crap, if you let it. 

As the two of us have gotten older, our love for one another has outfaced our obvious differences and for this, I am very thankful. I have benefitted greatly from allowing her list of traits to soften the effects of mine and I think she would say that there has been some positive transference from mine to hers as well. 

Hold on, who am I kidding. What she would actually say is something like this: 

"I'm stronger... you're nicer."

And that's the truth, short and sweet. 

High Holy Moly Days

Oh can't you see the God Print in the plummeting of the Dow? It could have been any number but it was 777 (God repeating himself three times, like a divine exclamation point)... AND it happened on Rosh Hashanah, the start of the High Holy Days which calls people to repentance! Oh, that Yahweh, ever the deft poet of irony. So the question is this, are we going to "turn from our wicked ways" and allow this machine of greed to crash and burn on its own or are we going to prop it up with yet another monetary crutch and continue to hobble on down the path of self-serving materialism until the crutch breaks for good and leaves us all vulnerably splayed for the vultures to feast upon? My guess is we'll end up with a stick and some birds.

 When will we ever learn? Unscrupulous Materialism was like milk in a saucer for both the Fat Cats and Main Street Pussies to lap up at will. But who put the saucer out there?  It sure as hello-dolly wasn't the Republicans! The current economic disaster is the result of that liberal paragon Barney Frank and his fellow well-intended clan of goofs (Barak Obama being a card carrying member). These guys were the dopes who strong-armed big lenders into handing out loans to high-risk borrowers in the first place! Don't these guys know that their utopian fantasies can only exist in college assigned essays and pot incensed dorm rooms? The only thing I fault the Republicans for is their lack-of-sack in standing up to the malfeasant political decisions of socialist democrats. But hey, there's always the chance I could be wrong. Perhaps Obama gets elected and successfully transforms this country into a bunch of teat-supping institutions from cradle to grave without ever the nation missing a meal. I mean, there are so many examples in history that prove such a thing is possible... right? Yeah... I thought not.