Yearly Archives: 2008

Getting Rid of the Hiccups

After we ate yesterday at Dog & Suds, Pam got the hiccups. And it reminded me.

I was probably in fourth grade at the time. Some TV show–it might have been Candid Camera–sent someone around asking people, “How do you get rid of the hiccups?”

One person said, “I think of seven bald-headed men.”

Sounds silly, but: it worked me me. I kid you not. I would start thinking about bald guys in our church, and the hiccups would go away. I didn’t even need to reach seven.

I’m serious. This worked for me. For years.

Share Button
Comments Off on Getting Rid of the Hiccups

The Other Siblings

Republican family values can be interesting sometimes. We have Joe Biden, who traveled home every night from Washington. And we have John McCain, who has been largely absent from his kids’ lives. But the Republican is the “family values” person.

Cindy McCain likes to call herself an only child, and she was the sole inheritor of her father’s beer fortune. But she actually has two half-sisters, one from her father’s first marriage and one from her mother’s first marriage.

Cindy’s father died in 2000. He left his other daughter, Kathleen Portalski, $10,000. Meanwhile, Cindy got a couple hundred million dollars. She was not only disinherited, but Cindy won’t even acknowledge her existance. Even at the funeral, in her eulogy, Cindy told the crowd she was “his only child.” While Kathleen sat nearby, dumbfounded.

Would Cindy want her family of blended children to treat each other that way? I can’t imagine Pam and her half-sister treating each other that way. They don’t even like being called half-sisters, and will probably chew me out for mentioning it. They are sisters in every way.

Aren’t these legitimate concerns for a Christian to raise?

There are so many ways in which I think Cindy McCain is great. And yet…if you insist on seeing the world (and politics) only in black and white, there’s a lot you must ignore. Life and people are messy.

Share Button
Comments Off on The Other Siblings

Swampland’s Live Blog

You must read the transcript of the Swampland live-blog of the debate, by reporters Karen Tumulty, Michael Grunwald, and James Poniewozik. It’s hysterical. They started a half hour before the debate started, and continued to the end, injecting snide little comments throughout. Here are snippets:

  • Poniewozik: “Staffer who gave Obama the current price of gas in Nashville gets a little something extra in his paycheck this week.
  • Tumulty: “It really is feeling like Short Attentin Span Theater.”
  • Poniewozik: “What does Soledad O’Brien think about again being consigned to undecided-voter-panel hell in Columbus again?
  • Tumulty: “What’s with the stools. Is this “Cheers”?
  • Poniewozik: “There will be an acoustic guitar segment.”
  • Grunwald: “It’s like they take turns delivering their stump speeches.”
  • Poniewozik: “Somewhere, Bill Clinton is throwing things at the TV.”
  • Tumulty: “I’m very distracted by McCain standing behind Obama and looking really, really mad.”
  • Grunwald: “This format sucks. It’s just side-by-side stump speeches with human props.”
  • Poniewozik: “Congratulations, Commission on Presidential Debates! You managed to take an encounter with real Americans and drain it of any possible human interest!”
Share Button
Comments Off on Swampland’s Live Blog

Thoughts on Debate 2

Some of my reactions to last night’s second presidential debate:

  • BORING!
  • Debates seem to sap every ounce of charisma out of Obama.
  • I found myself terribly annoyed at both of them for ignoring the agreed-upon time structures. They both see themselves as above the rules.
  • Once, when Brokaw admonished them about following the time limits, Obama said he was just trying to keep up with McCain. Which is a totally leaderless way of whining, “He started it!”
  • I fell asleep halfway through.
  • I guess they did deal with issues, just in a droning kind of way.
  • Where’s the witty, smiling, happy warrior McCain of 2000?
  • Obama continually used up all his time, and then would say, “I’d like to make one more point.” Really annoying.
  • Toward the end, I thought McCain was launching into another tedious “preconditions” rant. (Jesus said that when you have problems with someone, you go talk to them. I apply that view to international relations, which is why I’m in line with Obama on this. Talking is better than pouting.)
  • McCain could take shots and just brush them off. But Obama was defensive, wanting to correct every perceived misstatement. As I said before: chill, dude.
  • On Morning Joe this morning, they were lamenting that there wasn’t a baseball game they could switch to.
  • People are making too much over McCain’s “that one” statement. In such a dull debate, it’s hard finding something to talk about.
  • I found McCain’s answers easier to follow than Obama’s. But when I didn’t drift off, I liked Obama’s answers.
  • McCain really really dislikes Obama.
  • They both worked hard at contriving empathy for voters and for the people asking questions. I think we all saw through it. Obama and McCain didn’t truly “feel your pain.”
  • Okay, John, we got it: you’re a maverick. Jolly.
  • They’re saying Obama won because he didn’t lose. Maybe so. But he was somewhat diminished in my eyes. No great vision or hint of charisma (unlike the first debate).
  • Michael Scherer notes that, “The key to the classic McCain town hall is that McCain is having fun. He did not appear to be having fun tonight.”
  • McCain seemed to disappear real soon after the debate ended, while Obama stuck around. What’s with that?
Share Button
2 Comments

Is This Really a Deterrent?

liquorladies500.jpg

I mean, really. How many men would give up drinking if “faced” with a threat like this? Or maybe the men of the early 1900s were more character-driven.

Share Button
2 Comments

God on the Internet

Wanna be stretched?

An Alabama pastor, while attending the Innovate Conference in Granger, Ind., felt it was important to baptize one of his parishioners NOW. Not to wait until he returned to Alabama. So he conducted a baptism over the internet, with live video. Five days later, that girl died suddenly of an aortic aneurysm.

Tim Stevens, a pastor at Granger Community Church, tells about the baptism on his blog, and you can watch a video of the baptism. It gave me goosebumps.

Get used to this kind of thing happening. Imagine:

  • A pastor conducting a wedding over the internet, though he and the couple are in different states (or continents!).
  • Using the internet to dedicate the child of missionaries from your church who are serving overseas (as the entire congregation watches on a big screen).
  • Accepting new members into your church over the internet.

I’m sure the advent of radio preaching drew criticisms that people were substituting the radio for actual church attendance. Likewise with TV preaching. While we can agree that gathering with other believers is what God fully desires, it’s also true that radio and TV have reached a lot of people for Christ–people who, otherwise, might never have heard the Gospel.

Now we have podcasts and video streaming of church services, so people can “attend church” at their convenience. Nurses and policemen who work Sunday mornings can download a video of the service and watch it when they can. This is a good thing.

We also have multicasting–a pastor’s message is beamed to churches in several other locations. Last October, Pam and I attended a church where the message was being seen in several locations in that facility (including their own coffee cafe).

You can argue all you want about how “This isn’t what God intended.” But though I’ll always prefer the face-to-face, I have difficulty seeing technological tools as being anti-biblical.

The Apostle Paul himself was high-tech, for his day. He used letters to instruct, admonish, and encourage. He couldn’t be there in person, so he wrote letters. Letters which were multicasted from town to town, millennium to millennium. Jesus never wrote letters (that we know of). But we believe Paul’s letters were divinely inspired.

So why can’t God, likewise, be totally present in that internet baptism?

Share Button
Comments Off on God on the Internet

My View of the Debate

The pundits are going gaga over Sarah Palin’s performance, as if she charmed the socks off of voters with her folksiness. I find this terribly condescending. The coastal pundits think we heartlanders are a bunch of shallow hicks who swoon over someone who drops betcha, doggone, and darn into speech. We fell for a down-home-talkin’ fellow in 2000. Give us credit for looking a tad deeper this time.

Here is the debate I saw:

  • Sarah Palin held her own. She acquitted herself well, and redeemed her interviews with Couric and Gibson.
  • She’s feisty and likable.
  • Biden and Palin kept the debate civil and respectful. None of McCain’s demeanor from the first debate.
  • I felt Palin was downright (there, a folksy term) rude. The way she ignored Gwen Ifill’s questions and talked about whatever she wanted to talk about.
  • I found Biden much easier to understand. His answers were more nuanced, more complex–yet more comprehensible. Palin just rambled with talking points, and often, when she finished, I had no real idea what she said. And I’m not a dumb guy. But heck, she was just so doggone charmin’, weren’t she?
  • I was impressed with Biden. Of course, I was before.
  • Interesting how Biden didn’t correct her for naming the general “McLellan,” when his real name is McKiernan. He went out of his way not to attack her. He was walking a tightrope of sorts, and I’m sure it wasn’t comfortable for him.
  • I appreciated Biden’s strong attack on the way Cheney has abused his VP powers, and Palin’s desire to increase VP powers sent chills up my spine.
  • I didn’t care for the way Biden kept repeating the same lines. Hey, I got it the first time.
  • Liked his comeback about McCain being a maverick on some things, but not on issues that really mattered. Though he has, indeed, gone against the administration on issues I consider important (like Iraq, torture, and climate change).
  • I’m comforted that both candidates believe global warming is for real, and want to do something about it.
  • Palin sounded like Mark McGwire, saying he wasn’t there to talk about the past. That worked well for McGwire.
  • At one point, they seemed in a contest to see who could say “middle class” the most.
  • Palin kept talking about “victory” and “winning” in Iraq. This isn’t the type of war you “win.” I found her use of such words very naive.
  • Can’t she learn to say “nuclear” right (instead of adopting Bush’s pronunciation of nucular)?
  • I thought she did great on the questions surrounding gay rights and the traditional family. She and Biden held the same view. Yes, it’s possible for a conservative Christian to believe that homosexuality is sin, while at the same time, as a citizen of a pluralistic secular country, favoring full civil rights for gay couples. But I don’t suppose James Dobson was too happy about it.
  • If, at the beginning, Biden had told her “No, you can’t call me Joe. It’s Senator Biden,” then she couldn’t have used her “Say it ain’t so, Joe” lines. Clever that she got permission ahead of time.
  • Biden, to my memory, never attempted any gimmicky lines.
  • Both came across as plain-folks types, the kind you would enjoy having over for dinner.
  • It’s pretty clear: Biden knows the issues inside and out.
  • Regarding that question about what campaign promises they would need to forgo in light of the budget crisis (the same question Jim Lehrer asked in vain): Biden answered it well, while Palin seemed to insist that there wasn’t anything they would cut. Hmmmm.

While the pundits seem to be giving Palin a win, polls of average Joes show a preference for Biden. People are looking much deeper than the Elite Joes think they are. From the post-debate polls, looks like more undecideds broke for Obama than for McCain.

But yet, Palin definitely helped herself and the campaign with her debate performance. Expectations were so low that, as long as she didn’t collapse in tears, she would be declared the winner.

Share Button
2 Comments

Time Live-Blogs the Debate

Time has been running live blogging of the debates by some of their crack correspondents. Tonight it was Karen Tumulty (whom I love), Jim Poniewozik, and Michael Grunwald. I love Karen Tumulty’s writing on the Swampland blog; she’s very funny.

Their running commentary is great, and highly irreverent. Poniewozik, in his closing comment, said, “By the negative frame in which this debate was set, both candidates succeeded at not doing what they needed not to do. Or something like that.”

It’s really fun to read. You should check it out.

Share Button
Comments Off on Time Live-Blogs the Debate

The Tin Caps? What’s That About?

tincaps.jpgFort Wayne, in its infinite wisdom, decided to get rid of its semi-pro baseball stadium, which is still fairly new, is very attractive, and has abundant, accessible parking. A new stadium is being constructed in what’s being called Harrison Square. This is Fort Wayne’s version of “Save the Downtown,” a move which is succeeding in cities across the country…NOT.

In addition, the Fort Wayne Wizards will get a new name. The public was invited to submit ideas. Today they announced the winner:

Fort Wayne Tin Caps.

Say…what?

The name supposedly honors Johnny Appleseed, who is buried in Fort Wayne. I’m not sure how it does that. Right now, 91% of people polled online dislike the name.

At MinistryCOM, one workshop leader, a designer, told of another designer who always gives clients a “goat”–one bad logo or design, along with the good ones. This guy called him up and frantically said, “They selected the goat!”

I think that’s what happened here. Someone facetiously submitted the name “Tin Caps,” and they chose the goat.

Here are some other goats that were submitted, all of which I prefer to the Tin Caps:

  • Fort Wayne Mighty Gherkins
  • Fort Wayne.comPadres (they’re a minor league team of the San Diego Padres)
  • Harrison SquarePants.
  • Hoosier Daddies

Just imagine all the fun we could have had with Hoosier Daddies? There could be a variety of special promotions–Hoosier Mamma day (mothers come half-price), Hoosier Cell Phone Provider, Hoosier High School, Hoosier Favorite Pizza Place, etc.

Share Button
1 Comment

Tucking

At MinistryCOM, I was different from most of the other speakers and workshop leaders in one key way:

I tucked in my shirt.

There is a certain cool factor in not tucking in your shirt. I don’t have it, and don’t know how to get it. I sit here typing with my shirt properly tucked in. Hopeless.

On the other hand, consider Tip Number 5 from Guy Kawasaki’s “11 Public-Speaking Pointers“:

Overdress. My father was a politician in Hawaii. When I started speaking, he gave me this advice: Never dress beneath the level of the audience. That is, if they’re wearing suits, you should wear a suit. To underdress is to communicate, “I’m smarter/richer/more powerful than you. I can’t take you seriously, and there’s nothing you can do about it.” This is hardly the way to get an audience to like you.

On the other hand (says Tevye the Milkman), Tip Number 4 is “Understand the Audience.” And the audience at MinistryCOM consists largely of laid-back, unpretentious, tech-savvy, often irreverent laypersons. The untucked shirt befits them.

Share Button
Comments Off on Tucking

Receive Posts by Email

If you subscribe to my Feedburner feed, you'll automatically receive new posts by email. Very convenient.

Categories

Facebook

Monthly Archives