Luther on marriage

When I stare at the shelves of our bursting church library, the words "stuff and fluff" come to mind. So I check out a volume of Martin Luther, a man who wrote and opined on every imaginable topic. This week I'm looking at Luther's Works, v. 45, "A Christian in Society, v. 2," Fortress Press, 1962 (in 55 volumes). The editor writes: "The edition is intended primarily for the reader whose knowledge of late medieval Latin and 16th century German is too small to permit him to work with Luther in the original languages." Well, that would certainly be me!

Even translated into 1960s English, Luther's works are a challenge. This volume starts out discussing marriage. And it is clear that it applies to today's battles in the ELCA on gay marriage, although that topic would have never come up in Luther's day. In fact, it wouldn't have been imagined even 30 years ago as a serious topic in churches. Yet, we had a guest Lutheran pastor at our church this month (not in the pulpit, but in a Bible study) who believes one can set aside the clear passage in Romans about homosexuality. But I digress. I think Luther's introduction to the topic of marriage is worth the whole book. You can disagree if you wish, but you can't say the man didn't have a way with words.

"How I dread preaching on the estate of marriage! I am reluctant to do it because I am afraid if I once get really involved in the subject it will make a lot of work for me and for others. The shameful confusion wrought by the accursed papal law has occasioned so much distress, and the lax authority of both the spiritual and the temporal swords has given rise to so many dreadful abuses and false situations, that I would much prefer neither to look into the matter nor to hear of it. But timidity is no help in an emergency [there is a foot note here, but to something in German]; I must proceed. I must try to instruct poor bewildered consciences, and take up the matter boldly."

That must be how Lutheran pastors feel today, torn and tossed from pillar to post, wanting to follow God's word, but pressured by colleagues, psychologists, social workers, the media, synod meetings and parishioners to find a different path.

Impediments for marriage

Luther, after touching lightly on male and female and what "fruitful and multiply" means, goes on to say that the Pope and canon law has thought up 18 reasons for preventing or dissolving marriage, whereas Scripture only has three (Matthew 19), all concerning eunuchs. In Luther's mind, money is the only reason these rules have been put in place; even if God hasn't forbid it, you will not be permitted to marry who you wish unless you have the money. He has some colorful descriptions of these impediments and their enforcers: "enmeshed in a spiderweb of human commands and vows," "locked up behind a mass of iron bolts and bars," "the devil's monkey tricks," "any can be rescinded with gold and silver," "offering for sale women who have never been their own," "ecclesiastical tyrants," "hucksters," "foolishness," "fanciful deception," "it rains fools upon fools," and "big fools."

I don't know how impediments to marriage have changed over the last four centuries. These days Christians are just happy if the first kid can walk down the aisle at the wedding! But I know that if a divorced Protestant (or person of any or no faith) wants to convert to Roman Catholicism, she needs to have her prior marriages annulled and those of her current husband--they are impediments even for becoming a Catholic. These are the 18 (beyond Scripture) Luther mentioned in the 16th century, nearly all of which he condemned: 1) blood relationship up to the third and fourth degrees of consanguinity; 2) affinity through marriage up to four degrees; 3) a spiritual relationship where the man may have baptised or confirmed a woman--complex list of relations here; 4) legal kinship of an adopted person; 5) unbelief, and Luther says, "There are plenty of Christians--and indeed the greater part of them--who are worse in their secret unbelief than any Jew, heathen, Turk, or heretic;" 6) a crime, "sins and crimes should be punished, but with other penalties, not by forbidding marriage;" 7) public decorum or respectability--if the fiancee should die, the man can't marry any relative of hers up to the fourth degree because it's not decent; 8) vow of chastity--he suggests taking a vow to bite off your own nose, because that would be easier to keep; 9) error--married the wrong wife, like Leah and Rachel mix-up; 10) condition of servitude--the woman is a serf; 11) holy orders--St. Paul commanded that church leaders be married exposes this folly, he says; 12) coercion--you should not allow yourself to be coerced into injuring your neighbor; 13) betrothal--engaged but takes another wife--here Luther suggests the man belongs to the first, and not the second woman, (unless there are children) therefore he was incapable of promising something that belonged to someone else; 14) unfit for marriage, lots of laws about this he says, but gives no details; 15) episcopal prohibition; 16) restricted times; 17) custom; 18) defective eyesight and hearing.

And he concludes (part one) with, "It is a dirty rotten business that a bishop should forbid me a wife or specify the times when I may marry, or that a blind and dumb person should not be allowed to enter into wedlock."

And adults can?

I've been seeing some pretty far fetched political ads based on nothing but hope and change. But a lot of people are falling for them.

"An American Psychological Assn. task force has recommended limits, citing research that shows that kids under the age of 8 can’t critically comprehend TV ad messages and that they’re prone to accept advertiser messages as truthful, accurate, and unbiased. (Reported in Business Week)"

Don't question Obama's faith

There are lots of reasons not to support Barack Obama, but I'm sure sick of the back biting and sniping that he's a Muslim, or that you don't like his pastor at Trinity United Church of Christ. If you can't call Obama a Christian just because his father grew up in a Muslim community in Africa, then I guess you can't call Bobby Jindal a Christian because his family members were Hindu. Conversion, changed lives, and obedience are what Christianity is all about. Read his testimony. Yes, it's for a main-line Protestant audience, and that always sounds different than "Jesus died on the cross for my sins, alleluia," but we don't judge someone's relationship with God--that's for God to decide. There are no goats in heaven, only sheep, and Jesus knows each one. So if you are conservative and you call yourself a Christian, time to get your own house in order, prepare your own witness in case you're asked, and look at the issues.

Obama on student debt

Have you ever analyzed one of those loosey-goosey MSM articles on student loans and debt or tried to figure out a campaign outrage portrayed in an ad? They never figure what it would cost student XYZ to live if she wasn't going to school but was borrowing money to live. Have you noticed that too?

In February 2006 I blogged about student loans way back when Obama's mama was going to school:

The headline for the USA Today article is: "Students suffocate under tens of thousands in loans." So I went into one of those "Money was worth" such-and-so many years ago sites, and discovered that the $10,600 debt for a public college today (the average according to Block) would have been about $2,500 in 1975, or $1,725 in 1961 when I graduated.

So, ask your mother or grandmother if she felt "suffocated" by debt when she finished college. Yes, 1961 attitudes toward money were different. We didn't have cell phones, broad band, or cable TV to pay for. Eating out was for special occasions a few times a year. (Cut those 4 things out of your budget and see if you don't have enough to pay off a loan.) And most importantly, people got married before they decided to "save money" by living together. Marriage broadened their base of family support from two families instead of one.

I'm sure there's more to it, but debt is debt. You borrow it; you pay it back.

The Prescription Drug Plan

Guest blogger today is Murray (aka Jack). I do not use this plan. This is his experience and actual correspondence trying to get answers from the FDA about foreign supplied prescription drugs. NB

----------

When the Prescription Drug Plan bill was being passed our government emphasized that it was against the law for people to purchase their drugs from outside the United States. In fact, just to prove their point, they started confiscating foreign drugs coming through the U.S. postal system. The Food and Drug Administration backed our legislators by declaring that the FDA could not assure anyone that drugs from other countries were safe. This was declared despite the fact that Canada had a better track record for drug safety than the U.S.

When I got my first shipment of drugs this year from my Prescription Plan Provider, lo and behold, they came from India. Now, how can that be? I thought. What's going on here? Does the law regarding foreign drug purchases only apply to individuals and not retailers and insurance companies? Are the drugs I would purchase be suspect, but somehow the drugs the retailers purchase would be safe? Anyway, I thought I would just ask the FDA what was going on. I would ask my congressman but he won't answer. Below are copies of my correspondence with the FDA :

Name: Jack Warner
E-Mail: Vivid@aol.com

The law states that it is illegal for me to purchase drugs from other countries because they may be unsafe. I just received my first shipment of drugs from my current Prescription D plan. The drugs came from India. Isn't this illegal? Isn't my Prescription D plan providers subject to the same law as I am?
Jack

FDA Response:

Jack,
Thank you for writing the Division of Drug Information, in the FDA's Center for Drug Evaluation and Research.

The prescription drugs provided by your insurance plan should be approved for use in the U.S. FDA approved drug products do not have to be manufactured here in the U.S. but as part of the approval process we inspect the manufacturing facility to ensure product quality. If you were to purchase drug products outside the U.S. from unknown sources you would not know under what conditions the drug is manufactured.

Best Regards,

BD
Division of Drug Information
Center for Drug Evaluation and Research
Food and Drug Administration

So they are implying that the drugs from India I received from my Plan are safe even though they don't know what the drugs are or what manufacturing facility they came from! Silly ole me thought they would want to know this before making such a statement. And as far as I'm concerned they did come from an unknown source. Anyway I fired this back at them:

From: Vivid@aol.com
Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2008 6:27 AM
To: CDER DRUG INFO
Subject: Re: DrugInfo Comment Form FDA/CDER Site

So are you telling me that it's OK for me to purchase my drugs from another country as long as it's from a "known" source? A source that has been approved by the FDA? If so, how do I find these known approved sources?

How do I know for sure if the drugs that my insurance company is providing came from an FDA approved source? The drugs came from Zydus in India.

Jack

FDA Response:

Jack,
We don't approve manufacturing facilities. We inspect them to ensure compliance with good manufacturing practices. We inspect facilities of companies that have an approved application for their drug. You can look up your drug on our Drugs@FDA website, http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cder/drugsatfda/index.cfm

Best Regards,

BD
Division of Drug Information
Center for Drug Evaluation and Research
Food and Drug Administration

Now tell me, did the FDA dance around my questions? Ole BD could run for senator. I mean, he says inspect and I said approved ... big deal. He still didn't tell me whether or not drugs coming from Zydus in India were safe. Maybe after I die from them he will fess up! The web site he recommends only tells you what drugs have been approved and not what manufacturers have been inspected and cleared. So I sent the FDA this:

From:Vivid@aol.com
Sent: Friday, February 22, 2008 6:27 AM
To: CDER DRUG INFO
Subject: Re: DrugInfo Comment Form FDA/CDER Site

Has the FDA ever inspected the Zydus plant in India regarding the safe production of drugs that they ship to the United States? My Prescription D insurance company uses that source to supply me with my drugs. How else will I know if my drugs are safe unless you tell me?

Jack

FDA response:

Dear Jack:

Thank you for your message to the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER), one of the five centers within the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

We do not have that information publicly available. If you are interested, the findings for each company's inspection can be found on their Establishment Inspection Report (EIR). You can request the company's EIR through the FDA's Freedom of information Office (FOI). These reports are not prepared specifically for public distribution, but are available upon a U.S. Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request. You can find out more about this option and how to make an FOI request at http://www.fda.gov/foi/foia2.htm.

Sincerely,

Division of Drug Information

D202D

This communication is consistent with 21 CFR 10.85 (k) and constitutes an informal communication that represents our best judgment at this time but does not constitute an advisory opinion, does not necessarily represent the formal position of FDA, and does not bind or otherwise obligate or commit the agency to the views expressed.

So there you have it. The FDA, the consumer's friend, is not interested in where my drugs come from, is not concerned if they are safe and will not tell me if they have inspected the plant where they are produced. They tell me to research that myself and tell me to fill out a form and send it to the manufacturer to find out if the FDA has ever inspected them. Yeah right!

These are the same people that we are depending on to insure the drugs we take are safe! They can be trusted like you and I trust Congress to stop earmarks. Who are we supposed to turn to if we think our drugs are suspect? They never even asked me what the drugs were that I was concerned about and you can bet that they never checked out Zydus. I guess my Prescription D plan can send me drugs from anywhere when drug importation is supposed to be against the law.

---------------
Here's an article in the Washington Post on this topic.

Companies based in India were bit players in the American drug market 10 years ago, selling just eight generic drugs here. Today, almost 350 varieties and strengths of antidepressants, heart medicines, antibiotics and other drugs purchased by American consumers are made by Indian manufacturers.

Five years ago, Chinese drugmakers exported about $300 million worth of products to the United States. Eager to meet Americans' demand for lower-cost medicines, they, too, have expanded rapidly. Last year, they sold more than $675 million in pharmaceutical ingredients and products in the U.S. market.

Now take a look at the inspections numbers and read this recent letter from the FDA to the Mayor of Duluth.

Remember Fido and Fluffy and the lead in the dental materials. Follow Murray's example and write your representative and the FDA.

The white guilt that will elect Obama

It's not about 18-19th century slavery and reparations; we've killed more Africans just by taking DDT off the market than were lost in the transatlantic slave trade. It's not about the Civil Rights movement--the Gen-X and Gen-Y kids (who don't turn out in huge numbers to vote) just blow off those required February Black History Month units. It's not even about failed programs floated by liberal boomers in the inner cities since the 1960s.

No, mainstream Americans don't even perceive Obama as black, except maybe as a poster child or a symbol. Obama is light skinned, grew up with white relatives and friends in white neighborhoods, talks and walks white, has an Ivy League education, and doesn't grab his crotch when performing. He's the anti-hip hopper. He's the anti-Jesse and Al. He's 100% acceptable and sanitized for the white, middle class voter.

But we in the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th quintiles do have a lot of guilt--about having so much. Even our poor have a lot. I worked at the food pantry this week--I can't tell you the number of cell phone ring tones, i-pods, and Bluetooth contraptions strapped to ears I saw among the people waiting for 3 days of food. The artificial nails and hair extensions. Of the 70+ clients we served (end of the month), only 2 or 3 people were on foot--one guy was on a bike. And 3 days of food in 2008 has to be five times more food than we gave in the early 80s when I first started to work there. We were passing out as many bananas as they could eat, bags and bags of fresh lettuce mixes (costs about $3 a bag where I shop), low fat yogurt packs, as much bread as they could carry, and 10 lb. sacks of potatoes. Almost no one would accept rice, beans, peanut butter or applesauce--said they had plenty of that. The first 10-12 families even got large Harry and David gift boxes loaded with fruit, cheese and chocolates.

No, it's the theme of hope and change that appeals to our over-consuming voters--whites and blacks, Republicans and Democrats, young and old (but probably mostly the young who have grown up with the abundance we older Americans thought would solve problems). It doesn't hurt that Obama is young and handsome, because we overweight, pre-diabetic Americans are hooked on slender good looks. Hillary is chunky, McCain is overweight.

We have a serious spiritual problem in the USA--even the purpose driven Rick Warren who came to power, wealth and renown preaching the cross of Jesus Christ has abandoned us for greener pastures in Africa and Asia. American religious leaders don't know what to do with an overfed, over-leisured, over-educated parish. So they focus on gaps in wealth, health care and schools, but not the one between God and man. And pardon my language, but God forbid they should preach from the Bible what is really meant in those passages about wealth! But the people know. Yes. Deep down. They know there must be something more. And if a Messiah comes along who says all the right biblical phrases, hey, they'll follow. I just hope he knows that Good Friday follows the adoration and singing of Palm Sunday. Because if he can't deliver. . . things will get nasty.

What's eating you now?

Our local Channel 10 provided a very interesting investigative report last night about dental implants, caps and crowns. Did you know that is one more "American product" that goes in your body that has been outsourced to China? These things are cemented to your teeth. There is NO safe level of lead for the human body, but after testing the work of 8 different labs that used Chinese suppliers, Channel 10 found one lab whose products contained lead--off the charts for safety and exposure for humans. There are 300 commercial dental labs in Ohio. Even if your dentist is making the crowns and caps himself--he's getting the material from one of these labs. They do not have to register with the FDA unless they have overseas operations. And 46 other states don't either. Dentists who use the foreign made material do so because it is 1/10th the cost of U.S. made.

Personally, I don't care what the CDC and FDA say about their complex guidelines, I know China doesn't have or doesn't respect contract law in its culture or background. It has penal law. Your commercial contract isn't worth the paper it's printed on--assuming these things are still on paper. If American companies chose to do business there, they'd better be ready to send over a small army of American trained inspectors and plant foremen to protect the American consumer, which would considerably add to the cost.

And how smart is this? The FDA doesn't enforce its own guidelines for foreign made dental work according the Channel 10's research; that is left to the Border Patrol--you know, those overworked, understaffed folks who also have to protect us from Mexican peasants infiltrating and Asian stowaways in ship containers.

The story was also in today's Columbus Dispatch.

Thank you, channel 10, for this research. But don't you wonder where the peer reviewed medical researchers are? Are they all working on poverty gap stories on government grants? And where are the legislators who pass our laws and supposedly require oversight for safety? Frankly, I think they need to get the lead out of some of their hearings on baseball players and talk show hosts, and start asking some tough questions about our food and medical products from China and drugs that come from India to be sold to our seniors on the government prescription drug plan.

Remember what happened to Fido and Fluffy!

Here's depressing news

A new study published in PLoS Medicine questions the efficacy of the new generation antidepressant drugs such as fluoxetine (Prozac), venlafaxine (Effexor), nefazodone (Serzone), and paroxetine (Seroxat / Paxil). The study was done in the UK. In a meta-analysis, once the unpublished studies were included, the improvement in depression among those receiving the trial drug, as compared to those receiving placebos, was not clinically significant in mildly depressed patients or even in most patients who suffer from very severe depression. "The benefit only seemed to be clinically meaningful for a small group of patients who were the most extremely depressed to start out with. This improvement seemed to come about because these patients did not respond as well as less depressed patients to placebo, rather than responding better to the drug." (News release)

The authors used the data sets from the FDA used in the clinical trials.

Note: If you go to the original article (see link above) and scroll down on the first page, there is an editor's summary in a blue box--much easier to read than the whole article.

This is not the way to win friends at Ohio State!

I noticed this little blurb in my OSU Today

"The [Obama] event is expected to attract thousands of visitors to campus on Wednesday. Many spaces that are usually available for staff parking around St. John Arena will be reserved for event parking. Those individuals should consider planning to arrive early or seek alternate campus parking options."

A parking hang tag at Ohio State is called a hunting license even on good days when no messianic figure is visiting. And the weather is miserable.

On the sixth day, God created animals

and said to the dog

'Sit all day by the door of your house and bark at anyone who comes in or walks past. For this, I will give you a life span of twenty years.'

The dog said: 'That's a long time to be barking. How about only ten years and I'll give you back the other ten?'

So God agreed.

Then God created the monkey and said:

'Entertain people, do tricks, and make them laugh. For this, I'll give you a twenty-year life span.'

The monkey said: 'Monkey tricks for twenty years? That's a pretty long time to perform. How about I give you back ten like the Dog did?'

And God agreed.

Then God created the cow and said:

'You must go into the field with the farmer all day long and suffer under the sun, have calves and give milk to support the farmer's family. For this, I will give you a life span of sixty years.'

The cow said: 'That's kind of a tough life you want me to live for sixty years. How about twenty and I'll give back the other forty?'

And God agreed again.

Then finally, God created man and said:

'Eat, sleep, play, marry and enjoy your life. For this, I'll give you twenty years.'

But man said: 'Only twenty years? Could you possibly give me my twenty, the forty the cow gave back, the ten the monkey gave back, and the ten
the dog gave back; that makes eighty, okay?'

'Okay,' said God, 'You asked for it.'

So that is why for our first twenty years we eat, sleep, play and enjoy ourselves. For the next forty years we slave in the sun to support our family. For the next ten years we do monkey tricks to entertain the grandchildren. And for the last ten years we sit on the front porch and bark at everyone.

Life has now been explained to you.

There is no need to thank me for this valuable information. I'm doing it as a public service.

[My husband's high school friend, Mickey, sent this--I assume it's going around the Internet. I modified the days to fit the Genesis story.]

How deep is shallow?

Sometimes I'm embarrassed for my sex. A "journalist" for the WSJ, Laura Meckler, and her "source" for her completely anecdotal analysis of the McCain campaign in Ohio, Marilyn Cameron, causes me to think it was a mistake to encourage women to leave the home for the workforce in the 1970s. I've come to expect the WSJ news articles (not the editorial page) to be more liberal than the NYT, but this was so shallow you could actually see the bottom. "In Ohio the economy rules," Feb. 27, 2008

Here's how the story goes--completely hung on the recent (since 2001) experiences of Marilyn Cameron, Ohioan, 65 years old, retired nurse.

1. She's thinking of voting Democratic for the first time since JFK. The article identifies her as 65. Maybe they talked about it in her high school civics class (she would have been 17 when JFK was elected in 1960), but the law wasn't changed until 1971, in response to the VietNam war protests. Neither Meckler or Cameron seemed to realize this--and Meckler was rushing for a deadline and apparently WSJ didn't give her a password and had no way to log on and check the details.

2. Cameron's husband worked for 34 years for the same company and took a buy out in 2001 at age 56. She worked as a nurse and had the benefits. What a sweet deal! Job security for 34 years. And a buy out!! How tough can life get? Did he invest his buy out in stocks or mutual funds and try out something he'd always wanted to do? Or did he buy a new model car or boat? Don't know; doesn't say. Did he sit around and complain with his buddies at the bar, or did he go out and get another job? Don't know; doesn't say. My husband took a buy out (by choice) in 1994 and started his own company, and was never happier, and also never made as much money as he did when he was a partner in a larger firm. We cut all expenses to the bone, didn't go out to eat for a year, and drove his old Nissan until it fell apart. We used my employee benefits.

3. Cameron's daughter is "one pay check away from mortgage foreclosure." So? For the 18 years before our children left home and I went back to work full time, we used every paycheck down to the last penny. We did have a small savings account--not the three months salary that all experts recommend, but we could have covered one mortgage payment. It's called, "planning for emergencies," Ms. Meckler--look it up.

4. Ms. Cameron wanted to retire when she was 64, and "had to withdraw $15,000 from her 401K to pay off bills including $580 a month for health insurance until she qualified for Medicare." This whine hurts my ears! She retires early, and instead of being thankful she could COBRA until eligible for government health insurance, she's a cry baby that she had to use her own money to pay her own bills! I'm guessing she also got Social Security, since she apparently wasn't a state employee in Ohio like me (I'm just waiting for some illegal to try to get SS on my number!)

5. Eleven of her twelve grandchildren have health insurance, but ONE doesn't!! Hello! Young people can accept or reject their employer's health plan. When our kids first left home we were either badgering them to get on a plan or we were taking out short term policies on them. Even 40 year olds turn down health insurance--some people think nothing can happen to them and life style is more important than health plans. Ms. Cameron may have one of those in her family--and I'd say she's darn lucky only ONE isn't insured.

6. Buried at the bottom of the article, where the common sense always appears in the WSJ, is a quote from Ms. Cameron's son, who has a different last name. He is a financial analyst living in Norwalk (so apparently her kids went to college--I'm surprised she didn't complain about paying for college in the 80s). He's the only one who makes sense. "When the government gets its fiscal house in order" things will improve, he says. "Spending is out of control." He also thinks good old mom will NOT vote Democratic.

Remember to cite your sources

or you might get an e-mail from me. Here's a note I sent to a Christian web site.

[the information on your website matches] the text of David Fuller's biography of John Huss in the book, "Valiant for the truth; a treasury of evangelical writings," compiled and edited by David Otis Fuller, McGraw-Hill, 1961, pp.79-81. I think you have incorrectly cited your sources. You have used, word for word, approximately 9 paragraphs, from these pages, and thus, the material should be in quotes, and the book cited, not just the author. Or you need to rewrite the information using your own words, and still site him as a source. Because of U.S. copyright law, which means McGraw Hill owns the way this particular history was put together by Dr. Fuller, you are in violation of the law. That is not a good Christian witness. It's called stealing in the vernacular. I'm sure God forgives, because He probably knows you didn't learn how to properly cite your sources or use research appropriately when you were in school, but a sharp eyed lawyer for a large publishing firm with deep pockets might not be so forgiving. If I found it in 2 seconds using google, so will someone else. The magazine article is also not correctly cited, but I don't have that in front of me. The Book of Martyrs is available in many editions and is probably public domain, and I'm not up on how to cite that, but you'd be safe citing the edition you used.

Don't worry about the polar bears

Do worry about the Jolly Green Giants Marxists taking us hostage by this bogus registering them as endangered. The globe, at least this year, is not getting warmer, it's getting colder. Ask anyone in Wisconsin or northern Illinois where they've had record snowfalls. And that record may only last one year, and it may mean nothing, but it does mean that panels of UN flunkies and Al Gore don't control it.

"Over the past year, anecdotal evidence for a cooling planet has exploded. China has its coldest winter in 100 years. Baghdad sees its first snow in all recorded history. North America has the most snowcover in 50 years, with places like Wisconsin the highest since record-keeping began. Record levels of Antarctic sea ice, record cold in Minnesota, Texas, Florida, Mexico, Australia, Iran, Greece, South Africa, Greenland, Argentina, Chile -- the list goes on and on." DailyTech Blog

4670

At the food pantry

The weather is nasty today, so I'm hitching a ride down town to work at the Lutheran Social Services food pantry. Catch you later.

4669

Automobile reviews for dog lovers

There's no end to helpful information on the internet. Here's DogCars.com which reviews cars and their dog-friendly features. My favorite, a Dodge Caravan. It got a 5 paw review (best). And I don't even have a dog!

"One of the problems I’ve seen with many of the vehicles I’ve driven is that the manufacturers have traded cargo space for passenger space. Third-row seats that are hard to get rid of and second rows that don’t fold flat seem more common than ever. Swell for the folks hauling little Susie and all her Brownie troop friends, but hell for those of use who are trying to ditch the seats (cup holders, DVD players, etc.) and make room for Rover.

Nothing I’ve yet seen handles this challenge as well as the Stow ‘N Go seats in the Dodge and Chrysler minivans. You can go from having a seven-passenger van to having a wide-open cargo van in less than five minutes. You can have some seats but not others. The seats disappear into the floorboards in so many different ways and so easily that even I, with my minivan ennui, was impressed beyond all measure. The seats you don’t stow? Pull up the floorboards in front of them and … more there’s cargo room underneath!"

My brother has one of these--really a neat car. Maybe my next van. . .

Kids are swearing more

Now, where do you suppose they learned it? Timothy Jay says teenagers use 80-90 swear words a day. I saw Melanie Glover's Sacramento Bee article in the Columbus Dispatch. I didn't swear as a child; still don't. My parents didn't; my friends didn't. My own kids learn to swear and cuss on the playground in grade school.

From the blogs I read by women, I'm guessing that today children are learning to cuss and swear from their mommies, if she gets off her cell phone long enough to yell at them in the back seat of the SUV. Even Christian moms seem to think that "being real" is a better witness than being modest or well-spoken.

The inequality myth

Wall Street Journal's Carol Hymowitz again trots out the old saw that women with the same level of education earn 20-25% less than a man and the glass ceiling is turning to steel. Here. I know from our stock annual reports that there are darn few women on the boards of major corporations. But ask yourself, is it diversity if they are just smaller or darker versions of the good old boys who are already on the board? When they get to that point in power, prestige and income, just what would they be bringing to the table that would benefit women and minorities on their way up--people who went to college with a GED or after military service or who attended a junior college and lived at home before transferring? Now that would be true diversity. If they aren't representing me, the investor, then why would they be on the board? What did an expensive Ivy League education get Mama Obama? She's raising her kids and supporting her husband's career! What woman in her right mind would give up that to sell plastics or mine coal from the office board room?

But Hymowitz's statistics (supplied I think by Catalyst) lie anyway, the value of diversity aside. They are not adjusting for the right variables. Thirty five years ago claiming "same education" might have made sense; today it doesn't. They need to be looking at women who

first and foremost are married, because most top male executives are--today marriage is the big divider between getting by and doing well

have a spouse who manages the home, the nanny and the housekeeper

have a spouse willing to chauffer the children to sports and activities, take the pets to the vet, serve on the school committees, meet with the teachers, make all the appointments for doctor, dentist and hair cuts, hire and supervise the lawn service, oversee the nutritional needs of the household, and help out mom and dad at the retirement home

who are willing to work 60-80 hours a week

who spend hundreds of hours a year on the Bluetooth while sitting in airports, sleeping in first class on airplanes

who are willing to have no personal relationships with other women, or maybe occasional casual sex with lower ranked male colleagues

who are willing to endure the long commute from the fashionable suburban McMansion

who can, and this is critical, show that they have never bumped anyone better qualified out of line because of affirmative action or need for diversity in the company (which brings huge resentment with networking colleagues whether or not they admit it)

I'm at risk

of sounding like Mama Obama, but I'm not proud of my country when I experience our entertainment industry, which seems to define us around the world--TV and film and popular music. I walked through the living room in time to hear Jon Stewart making Hitler jokes at the Academy Awards last night, and left in disgust. My husband and I disagree on how to waste time. I went back to reading blogs. Molly Willow of the Columbus Dispatch didn't mention it--just said he was better than last year. That must have been excrutiating or her decency meter is screwed up.

Three of the best ensemble casts you'll ever see are found on the sets and story-lines of Ugly Betty, House, and Boston Legal. However, they are so anti-Christian and left leaning, I've stopped watching them. The assaults on sexual morality in Ugly Betty became very predictable even while clever and "fresh," gay jokes having been pushed aside for transexual. On Boston Legal, only the partner with dementia is allowed to make a conservative or sensible, practical comment. And B.L. isn't even subtle about bimbo women lawyers. I've lost track (haven't watched in about 2 years) of the female actors, each with fabulous looks and ever more plunging blouses and unbuttoned shirts--they were furniture designed to enhance the male leads.

Dr. House? He thinks people who talk to God are religious, but those who hear God's voice are crazy. As though Hugh Laurie would know God if he stepped out from behind a burning bush. Yes, Michelle, there are times we aren't proud of our country either.

Why is she always late? Monday Memories

It's Monday--the schedule shows lots of meetings. You're tapping your fingers watching the second hand of the clock, wishing the chair would get this show on the road. But they're waiting for the late comers. Why is that? I answered this puzzling question here.

Monday Memories

The lawyers are lining up as you read

Newt warned of this in a WSJ column a while back, and here's another from Feb. 11. Not that the Dems would listen, but Newt urged them to let Michigan and Florida have their say (they were smacked down and thrown out of the selection process for flexing too much independence) to avoid this possible fight. The nightmare of "super-delegates," one of whom is Bill Clinton, and other powerful rich Dems wiping out the little guy, is not a pretty picture. I hope that security patrol around Obama is pretty secure--messing with the Clinton machine has been dangerous for life, limb, career and reputation since their Arkansas days.

"For over seven years the Democratic Party has fulminated against the Electoral College system that gave George W. Bush the presidency over popular-vote winner Al Gore in 2000. But they have designed a Rube Goldberg nominating process that could easily produce a result much like the Electoral College result in 2000: a winner of the delegate count, and thus the nominee, over the candidate favored by a majority of the party's primary voters. . .

Would the U.S. Supreme Court even take the case after having been excoriated for years by liberals for daring to restore order in the Florida vote-counting in 2000? And, would Justices John Paul Stevens, David Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer, the dissenters in Bush v. Gore, feel as strongly about not intervening if Sen. Obama was fighting against an effort to change a presidential election by changing the rules after the fact? Will there be a brief filed by Floridians who didn't vote in their state's primary because the party had decided, and the candidates had agreed, that the results wouldn't count?" -- Theodore B. (Ted) Olson

(HT Doyle)

Also, the two drawings of the candidates in the WSJ article are the ones used most frequently, however, don't you think Hillary looks much younger--maybe by 20 years--and Barack looks much darker and older, maybe by 10 years and one additional black grandparent? Is this Wall Street Journal's way to influence the selection/election, and just who will be influenced by this subtle tweaking of features? Women? Blacks? Republicans? Artistic readers?

Obama