While everyone is watching either Sarah Palin on Fox News or Chris Matthews on CNBC, I decided to write my own review of President Obama's speech. I considered leaving off my four pages of notes in order to switch channels to watch Psych, but then I remembered that I am waiting for Neil to watch all of the new shows. USA network has the best shows on TV this year, except for Lost. Thank goodness their winter premier wasn't preempted by the President.
My opinion on President Obama's speech is as follows: I watched Obama's speech during the Kerry/Edwards' Democratic National Convention and I believed him. I was ready to vote for him instead of either of the candidates. That first national speech propelled Obama to popularity despite his relatively recent entrance into national politics. Tonight's speech was as close a repeat of that performance as Obama could get. Except it was better because his ideas have been tempered by this thing called "work experience."
I expected to hear someone shout "He's lying," but Obama learned from that experience. Apparently, Obama decided that someone might actually have the guts to call him out. And that guy, what's his name, decided that maybe the publicity he garnered wasn't as great as he thought it would be.
Obama could sell the proverbial bridge in Brooklyn. Giving his proposals more than a superficial review is difficult and time-consuming. We have to ask ourselves what the reasoning is behind his choice of words, do his ideas divert more power to the federal government, do they follow the reasoning that the federal government knows more than it's citizens do and should, therefore, make decisions for them, is his "third way," this path of enlightenment and of goodwill toward men more than words?
Here are a few points that stuck out to me:
1) The partisanship and pettiness that keeps Washington from solving problems. This is pretty close to a direct quote. The problem I find is that I'm pretty sure the Democratic majority nullifies any vote by the Republicans in an attempt to stop it. Our Republican officials in Washington can scream "No" all they want, they can vote against something (as in healthcare) but it can't stop the Democrats. This means that the partisanship and pettiness comes from either the American people who do not want this version of health care reform or from the Dems in Congress.
2) "The American people need a government that matches their decency." Absolutely! Obama discussed at length the name calling going on in Washington. Especially to the point of name-calling aimed at the People. Will it end?
3) I get the fee on the big banks, but that will trickle down to the individuals who do business with those banks. When people leave en masse those larger banks for a small bank with no fee, is the government going to give up the income from that fee or will they assess the fee on ever smaller institutions to make it up? I understand the outrage against these banks after the housing and lending crisis, but could we not also point out the role of individual members of the government machine that took part in this? Big banks were on Obama's hit list tonight. As was big everything: big-insurance, big-oil, big-business. Is it the right thing to do for this country for the federal government to decide who can operate a business here? Is it possible to find a healthcare solution that protects people from the worst practices of insurance companies but that does not turn big-insurance over to the Federal government's domain? Does the current bill ensure an actual free market solution that would allow the market to punish the insurance companies rather than granting more power to the federal government? Could we allow states to administer health care plans so that people could vote with their feet, moving to a state that provides the program that they prefer? By the way, the latest version of Obamacare did not leave me asking what's in it for me. How offensive. Obama might not have stooped to name-calling, but surely he was suggesting that those who oppose health care are selfish. I am thinking of a plan to send to Obama. If you have any suggestions, send them my way. I'll give you your props somewhere. It's not healthcare reform I'm opposed to; it's this current version of it!
4) Tax cuts. How many times did Obama say that phrase tonight? I thought he was a liberal. I never knew the liberals were in favor of tax cuts. It sounds like a great idea. Business as the engine of job creation and the tax cuts from small businesses received great applause from everyone. Wal-Mart, a company that employs how many people, with insurance, and offers low prices, doesn't deserve a tax cut, though? They're not doing enough to stimulate job growth and the economy? It's because they run main street businesses out of business. It's not possible to compete with China, and I'm sure at least a few things in Wal-Mart come from China. What if the federal government leveled the playing field for small businesses? Made their insurance costs less expensive? Gave them tax credits to hire new employees? Decreased their tax burden and the capital gains tax for those who finance them? Would all of this help the small business owner to compete with Wal-Mart? What about unions? How can small business compete with unions? Will the federal government allow these businesses that produce green jobs or keep their jobs in the US to benefit from the tax break to operate outside the jurisdiction of unions? I noticed that Obama only once mentioned Labor tonight.
5) Hard decisions on opening new offshore areas for drilling. Sarah Palin, what? Did Obama mean that? Also, is he going to give incentives to these new green manufacturing plants but saddle the owners with union requirements? We cannot compete with China (my new favorite country) with the saddlebags of union, tax, and legal requirements that businesses have to carry.
6) Education: As someone who regularly considers homeschooling my children, I agree that something needs to be done to improve education. There are amazing teachers and administrators out there, but there are those who are less than desirable. It makes sense to me that a national effort on reforming education would allow for the greatest of efficiency and information to be utilized. Let's not reinvent the wheel here in every school across the country. Two phrases come to mind: "problem-focused learning" and "truth from the facts." What are the actual best practices when it comes to education? How can we make plans that meet the needs of all students regardless of their ethnic or socio-economic background? Or just like China is attempting with the revitalization of their economy, is it possible for the federal government to frame the forest and to allow the trees to grow into their own shape? Isn't that what we have now? Surely we can find a school that works, transplant the exact model to a school in a different region, with students from similar socio-economic backgrounds, to see if the same results are achieved.
7) Are people so stupid that they can't figure out that their children are obese? Do they require intervention by the federal government? When the federal government pays for your healthcare, they can control what you put into your mouth because they will foot the bill for your diabetes medicines, etc. Does the federal government realize that poorly educated people who are obese might be too busy to cook at home or to exercise regularly? Will Obama's attempt to help the middle class family lead to France's 35 hour work week and mandatory month of paid vacation? How does that fit in with helping small business to generate jobs?
8) The war in Iraq will be over in 8 months! "Support for the elections," etc, will constitute a peace-keeping force stationed at and around the new American mega-embassy in Iraq. My guess is that the remainder of the troops will come home to rest for a year before they head to Afghanistan. I think Neil fielded more traumas in his FOB than any similar bases in Iraq, combined. I might be exaggerating, but not by much, so Obama seems to be right: the war in Iraq is drawing to a close. What happens when the majority of our forces pull out is left to be seen. Iran and Pakistan loom over the horizon. Did you notice the absense of applause from the military brass when Obama mentioned the end of the war and gays in the military?
9) I wonder why the bipartisan fiscal commission idea received no applause, even though Obama seemed to expect it, and was blocked yesterday by the Senate? What was wrong with the idea, and why did it take an Executive Order to make it happen? Transparency would be nice.
10) Massachusetts last week was not an example of campaign fever starting early.
11) Is our current state of unrest equivalent to the transformative moments in our nation's history? If so, how do we know which way to go from here? If everyone can make convincing arguments, how do we know who is telling the truth and who knows best?
12) Those who abide by our law should be protected by it. Notice that unlawful enemy combatants, regardless of whether they are Mirandized or give a forced confession, are not entitled to the same protection as our law-abiding soldiers, airmen, sailors and marines should receive in carrying out this war. A busted face delivered in the course of war does not constitute torture or assault anymore than being a community organizer and professor constitutes sufficient experience to be the head of the free world.
Wednesday, January 27, 2010
Thursday, January 21, 2010
A glimmer of hope
There was a paradigm shift in our country after Tuesday's special election in Massachusetts. The Democrats in power, regardless of whether their power is exhibited at the Capitol or the Whitehouse, undoubtedly see something new on their horizon. Chris Dodd and Harry Reid were just the first casualties on the "Say Yes to the (proverbial) Dress" agenda. Either the Dems will continue to push forward their plans for health care, cap and trade, and some little publicized idea of using the FCC to create "net neutrality," or they will abort the mission to preserve their own power. Or, gasp, they will abort the mission because they realize that the majority of their constituents do not want this version of health care reform. From what little I read on Wednesday, "Triangulation" was the word of the day in Washington.
The media might not report on the idea that these election results were a referendum on the policies and programs in the works in Washington; either they do not want it to be so or else they are incorrectly interpretting the results. Whatever the case, if the news broadcasts on the Big 3 had any legitimacy before, it does not remain after this. The issues were at the heart of this election. Traditional party lines meant nothing on Tuesday. You have all seen the poll numbers on Independent turn out. It is increasingly apparent that, in general, name-calling in the political sphere, specifically the terms "racist," "sexist," and "stupid" are more a function of the age and disposition of the individual making the remarks, or even a measure of their desperate plight, rather than a viable topic of debate. Of course it is one thing to generalize that someone is a sexist. It is another thing to have actual evidence. For example, some nutjob wrote a piece comparing the election to being date-raped. Does he have a daughter, mother or sister? How insensitive could someone be? (At this point, please don't worry that I have overlooked Brown's comments at his acceptance speech-I will get to that.)
It is not possible that an informed people would elect an ex-trouser-dropping Cosmo model over a seemingly solid, respectable, and experienced candidate who, as someone whose current or previous job entailed being tough on crime, happened not to garner the endorsement of any police unions. That is unless they voted on the issues. Having to choose between these two clowns was a false choice for the entire constituency. In the great, highly educated, prosperous state of Massachusetts, we could not find two suitable candidates willing to answer the call? I knew nothing about Brown before the election except that he would pose a threat to the health care vote. That was enough for me. However, visions of op-ed caricatures, SNL sketches and Jon Stewart comedy bits of Bush 43 came to mind as I watched Brown offer his daughters to the national TV audience. Was this the best we can do? No one in their right mind would vote for this joker, so it's my opinion that this election had to be a vote against Obama's plans as carried out by Reed and Pelosi rather than a vote for Brown.
Apparently there is a poll out there showing the people identified with the Tea Party Movement by a larger percentage than they did the Republican Party. Is their any question as to why? It's called disenfranchisement. If I lived in MA, the only thing that would have gotten me to the polls on Tuesday would have been to vote against the spending plans in Washington. By supporting sub-par candidates, the Republican party is essentially helping the Democrat party accomplish their goals.
Am I a member of the "Party of No?" I cannot say it forcefully enough without resorting to $%&* words.
Current health care reform plan-No
Current plans to create environmental sustainability-No
Controlling the media via non-elected bureaucrats-No
TARP and Stimulus-No
(Just fyi, I was never for TARP. Ever. Ask Neil. He thought I was kind of off my rocker for being too conservative.)
Using a politically-biased court to overturn the voice of the people-No
The only good thing to come out of Tuesday's election was that Washington will be forced to reconsider their next steps. People all over this country are hopeful that their voice will be heard and it will make a difference...in November. Please, please, for the love of Pete, Republicans at the local levels: start now to find viable candidates.
The media might not report on the idea that these election results were a referendum on the policies and programs in the works in Washington; either they do not want it to be so or else they are incorrectly interpretting the results. Whatever the case, if the news broadcasts on the Big 3 had any legitimacy before, it does not remain after this. The issues were at the heart of this election. Traditional party lines meant nothing on Tuesday. You have all seen the poll numbers on Independent turn out. It is increasingly apparent that, in general, name-calling in the political sphere, specifically the terms "racist," "sexist," and "stupid" are more a function of the age and disposition of the individual making the remarks, or even a measure of their desperate plight, rather than a viable topic of debate. Of course it is one thing to generalize that someone is a sexist. It is another thing to have actual evidence. For example, some nutjob wrote a piece comparing the election to being date-raped. Does he have a daughter, mother or sister? How insensitive could someone be? (At this point, please don't worry that I have overlooked Brown's comments at his acceptance speech-I will get to that.)
It is not possible that an informed people would elect an ex-trouser-dropping Cosmo model over a seemingly solid, respectable, and experienced candidate who, as someone whose current or previous job entailed being tough on crime, happened not to garner the endorsement of any police unions. That is unless they voted on the issues. Having to choose between these two clowns was a false choice for the entire constituency. In the great, highly educated, prosperous state of Massachusetts, we could not find two suitable candidates willing to answer the call? I knew nothing about Brown before the election except that he would pose a threat to the health care vote. That was enough for me. However, visions of op-ed caricatures, SNL sketches and Jon Stewart comedy bits of Bush 43 came to mind as I watched Brown offer his daughters to the national TV audience. Was this the best we can do? No one in their right mind would vote for this joker, so it's my opinion that this election had to be a vote against Obama's plans as carried out by Reed and Pelosi rather than a vote for Brown.
Apparently there is a poll out there showing the people identified with the Tea Party Movement by a larger percentage than they did the Republican Party. Is their any question as to why? It's called disenfranchisement. If I lived in MA, the only thing that would have gotten me to the polls on Tuesday would have been to vote against the spending plans in Washington. By supporting sub-par candidates, the Republican party is essentially helping the Democrat party accomplish their goals.
Am I a member of the "Party of No?" I cannot say it forcefully enough without resorting to $%&* words.
Current health care reform plan-No
Current plans to create environmental sustainability-No
Controlling the media via non-elected bureaucrats-No
TARP and Stimulus-No
(Just fyi, I was never for TARP. Ever. Ask Neil. He thought I was kind of off my rocker for being too conservative.)
Using a politically-biased court to overturn the voice of the people-No
The only good thing to come out of Tuesday's election was that Washington will be forced to reconsider their next steps. People all over this country are hopeful that their voice will be heard and it will make a difference...in November. Please, please, for the love of Pete, Republicans at the local levels: start now to find viable candidates.
Wednesday, January 20, 2010
My favorite things
While I was editing my post about Dan Brown's newest novel, I realized that I use my blog to criticize too many things. After reading my blog, you might surmise that the only things I really love are my husband and gourmet tortillas. And sometimes my kids.
It is true that I am bossy and kind of a know-it-all; I try to suppress those instincts, but I'm not often successful. The most unfortunate aspect of being a know-it-all is that sometimes I really do not know what I am talking about, even when I think that I do. This trait is useful when I have to take care of four kids by myself. It's not so fabulous when I want to sound intelligent. Or humble. Or teachable.
Here is what I love:
1) Audrey makes faces at me. She randomly looks up at me with a silly face. She also loves to blow kisses at me. She calls me "Mama mia" and I call her "Audrey mia." Harry Potter is her imaginary friend. Nick Jonas was her first imaginary friend. She has good taste.
2) Zach is curious. Sometimes he wonders why brothers can't marry their sisters. (Yeah, I told him the reason is because their kids would be sick. How do you explain genetic issues arising from in-breeding to a five-year old?) Sometimes he wants to know what the king of the ocean is, or the lake, or a different ocean. Or what happens when you sprain your ankle. How do you use crutches? What happens if you forget to put your crutch down when you take a step? He has a crush on a girl named Eva from his class. He is already betrothed to a girl named Josie. At least, Josie is convinced that she is going to marry him and have babies. Josie is 4. And slightly precocious. And pretty adorable, too. Zach thinks he might marry her so that he can inherit her four brothers.
3) Ainsley is graceful and has been ever since she was a toddler. She is one of those few fortunate souls who can spread their arms in a pose and have their hands end up in the most beautiful position. (Whereas I have spent countless hours looking at my hands and feet while I do step aerobics to make sure that they are doing what the instructors' do.) Ainsley has self-confidence and is very affectionate. She is a fast reader and has determination to match Neil's. It just has to be her idea and what she wants to do.
4) Sydney is beautiful and smart. She talks about computer hackers and anti-virus software, irony, and basketball all in one conversation. Sydney is not a sprinter but she can run like a gazelle if she is given the space. She enjoys climbing trees. She likes to hang out for hours in the top of the two-story magnolia tree in our backyard. Sydney makes her free throws and lay ups as often as the boys do in basketball practice even though she is not nearly as adept at using her fast-twitch muscles as they are. She gets that from me. Syd plays the cello and the piano. She is currently teaching herself "Oh Come All Ye Faithful" on the piano.
5) I love having a washer and dryer upstairs. It makes doing laundry much easier. You wouldn't know that by the pile of laundry on the hallway floor right now. Sorry. It will be gone before Neil gets home.
6) I love shopping with my grandmother. We've been good shopping buddies since I was in fifth grade.
7) I love to catch up with my friends on Facebook. It is beautiful for me to see the wonderful ways their lives have turned out. They are all such great people!
8) I love my parents and in-laws. They each bring meaning to my life, all in different ways.
9) I love my husband. He is the best friend I've ever had. I am looking forward to relearning what it's like to be married. What do people do with so much free time? I could guess, but that would be TMI.
10) I love little babies. They make my heart rate drop. I could hold babies all day long. Whining eighteen month olds, not so much.
11) I love to read. My super hero power is speed reading. My claim to fame is that I read the final Harry Potter book in it's entirety in one day. I bought it at 0800 and finished by 0200 that night. I also read the entire Twilight series, all four books, in five days. This is what I do when I don't feel like doing anything. Now that Neil is coming home, I might have to find the discipline to do things I don't want to do instead of reading a book: sweeping out the garage, cleaning out the computer closet, cleaning my room. Shhh, don't tell Neil.
12) I love Coke in a glass bottle. Who doesn't? It's always worth the calories, except for right now when I am trying to get ready for Neil to come home. I do love my husband more than bottled Coke. I just have to remind myself of that sometimes.
13) I love laptop computers with wireless internet. Especially our Apple. (Sorry Dan.) It is the ultimate in luxury. And laziness.
14) I love taking pictures with my wide angle lens. I enjoy editing the pics to change the color, etc.
15) I love beautiful clothes. I wish I dressed like a chic business woman every day. Today I have been wearing my workout clothes all day. Not quite so chic.
16) I love having a suntan. I am meant to have a tan. I can get an amazing tan even when I wear SPF 30. I have never used a tanning bed.
17) I enjoy running. I prefer to run outside because my mind is a little less A-D-D than when I am on a treadmill. Good music is a must. I won't say I love running because really I'd rather be reading about Edward Cullen or Mr Darcy.
18) I enjoy step aerobics. It's kind of like dancing. It's less tedious than running on a treadmill.
19) I love the song "Eye of the Tiger" by Survivor. It's the song from Rocky. They played it every year at Camp Ozark on the way to the Final Challenge-the big sporting event. I can remember walking down the big hill to the song. To this day I run faster when I hear that song. Who doesn't? My kids like the song, too, and pretend to play Rock Band to it in the car. They pretend to play the drum, cello, electric guitar, and violin.
20) I loved Camp Ozark. I am me because of the time I spent there. First and foremost it taught me an appreciation for older boys. In all of the years I spent at Ozark, I had three friends that were boys, while everyone else there seemed to have boyfriends. Instead I spent all of my time hanging out with the good looking college-age boys who were counselors. At Ozark, there were dances all the time and the counselors were not allowed to dance with one another. So, the second thing I learned at Ozark was how to dance. What could be better than two weeks spent dancing with college boys? In fact, one of my favorite counselors was still running around A&M while I was there. He was all, "You're getting what? Married?" I did learn a thing or two about Jesus. And did some hard things, like swing from a rope between two trees and shoot skeet. And was introduced to Build a Mountain. And tore my ACL going over a hurdle in front of two hundred people. They all thought I was crying because I was embarrassed about falling in public. As if.
21) I loved being in Drama. I loved the magic of the theater. I didn't love running over my toes with a full-size set on metal rails. As a freshman in high school I heard a boy named Edward sing and decided right then that we would be friends. Of course I couldn't say "no" when he asked me to do drama with him my senior year. I had no idea what I had signed up for, but I loved it more than anything I did in high school. Somehow I ended up in charge of the boys' dressing room. I remember being pulled into the dressing room while they all ran around in their tightie-whities. I had the good sense to close my eyes and run for the door while I laughed my head off. I wish I knew what Edward was doing now.
22) I love being warm. It keeps me in bed longer than is needful in the mornings.
23) I love to sleep and when I can't sleep, to daydream. I make up novels in my head. And eventually I fall asleep.
24) I love Milk Duds, Hot Tamales, Chocolate Chip cookies, Peanut M&Ms, and Oreos with milk. Thankfully I love my husband more than candy, so I've been laying off of it. For the most part, I don't love ice cream. I do enjoy Baskin Robbins, but only Mint Chocolate Chip and Chocolate Sundaes with nuts and hot fudge sauce. Who can justify that many calories more than once a year? Donuts. Shipley's. They are Kryptonite.
25) I love Jane Austen. How did someone with such relatively limited life experience write such amazing books? She is the Gold Standard.
26) I love Luby's Restaurant. Comfort food on so many levels. As is Guadalajara's. Really, there are 5 Mexican food restaurants across Houston and San Antonio that I cannot live without.
27) I love fast cars and loud music. And open roads.
28) I enjoy Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh. I know, I'm a hater.
29) I love to write more than I ever thought that I would. I can remember learning to write in seventh grade. The teacher made up skip lines for editing and revising. We had to highlight the beginning of each sentence to make sure they didn't all start with "I". Strunk and White makes sense to me now. In tenth grade, I could spout it back to my teacher, but I had no idea what I was talking about. Writing my blog is one of my few hobbies. Reading is not quite a hobby, but more of a time-wasting, reality-escaping pursuit.
30) I enjoy correct grammar. I enjoy linguistics. If I had taken Linguistics in English before I took it in Spanish, I would have had a 3.75 gpa in college. (3.746 doesn't sound as impressive.) This isn't to say that my grammar is always correct. It is easier to read someone else's writing and see where they could have chosen a different word or placement or verb tense. This is an example of where I don't know as much as I like to believe.
31) I enjoy learning. I loved studying languages in college. I specifically enjoyed learning about other cultures, different lands, their geography and history. I got good grades in college because I studied what I loved. What to do from there? More school?
32) Lastly, I enjoyed learning to analyze poetry in college. I do not read poetry for pleasure. In fact, I think I wrote a poem in high school entitled "Poetry is for Fruits." Nice, I know. You wonder now, as do I, how I ever graduated. I attempted to do research in college because I thought that would teach me how to critically think about and analyze information or ideas. Unfortunately, I didn't learn much doing this research except that some of the kids professors changed the numbers so that their research worked into the paradigm they had suggested. Luckily for me, I saved one semester of French poetry and two semesters of Spanish poetry for my Senior year. That is where I learned how to think outside of the box. That is where I learned to analyze, to make associations, to let my mind wander until I found something that made sense. The way that I read scripture comes from reading poetry. I ponder what I'm reading and then I try to think of places where I've read that phrase before or read about the same principle. Then I try to find a way that they relate. This also influences the crazy ideas that I come up with on my blog.
Thanks for reading about the things that I love. I hope to sound less cynical and mean-spirited.
Also, my book du jour is China's Megatrends: 8 Pillars for a New Society. I am learning about how the Chinese people view their government, economic system and society in relation to where they have been and where they will head in the future. I can't decide if they are selling "China Kool-Aid" or if it actually makes sense. I think for a moment that it makes sense and then I remember the National Geographic Article I read about all of these problems with human rights violations, poverty, unemployment, and environmental issues. How can these facts be compatible? The author makes a good point when he says that China has come farther in a shorter amount of time than any other superpower in history. Or than any other developing nation, for that matter. So maybe we shouldn't look at China through the lens of our two hundred years of evolution, policitally and economically. It is similar to looking at the conquistadors worldview through the lens of our global community. What had we done in the first thirty years after the Revolutionary War, or even the Civil War? Compared to China since 1977, not much.
It is true that I am bossy and kind of a know-it-all; I try to suppress those instincts, but I'm not often successful. The most unfortunate aspect of being a know-it-all is that sometimes I really do not know what I am talking about, even when I think that I do. This trait is useful when I have to take care of four kids by myself. It's not so fabulous when I want to sound intelligent. Or humble. Or teachable.
Here is what I love:
1) Audrey makes faces at me. She randomly looks up at me with a silly face. She also loves to blow kisses at me. She calls me "Mama mia" and I call her "Audrey mia." Harry Potter is her imaginary friend. Nick Jonas was her first imaginary friend. She has good taste.
2) Zach is curious. Sometimes he wonders why brothers can't marry their sisters. (Yeah, I told him the reason is because their kids would be sick. How do you explain genetic issues arising from in-breeding to a five-year old?) Sometimes he wants to know what the king of the ocean is, or the lake, or a different ocean. Or what happens when you sprain your ankle. How do you use crutches? What happens if you forget to put your crutch down when you take a step? He has a crush on a girl named Eva from his class. He is already betrothed to a girl named Josie. At least, Josie is convinced that she is going to marry him and have babies. Josie is 4. And slightly precocious. And pretty adorable, too. Zach thinks he might marry her so that he can inherit her four brothers.
3) Ainsley is graceful and has been ever since she was a toddler. She is one of those few fortunate souls who can spread their arms in a pose and have their hands end up in the most beautiful position. (Whereas I have spent countless hours looking at my hands and feet while I do step aerobics to make sure that they are doing what the instructors' do.) Ainsley has self-confidence and is very affectionate. She is a fast reader and has determination to match Neil's. It just has to be her idea and what she wants to do.
4) Sydney is beautiful and smart. She talks about computer hackers and anti-virus software, irony, and basketball all in one conversation. Sydney is not a sprinter but she can run like a gazelle if she is given the space. She enjoys climbing trees. She likes to hang out for hours in the top of the two-story magnolia tree in our backyard. Sydney makes her free throws and lay ups as often as the boys do in basketball practice even though she is not nearly as adept at using her fast-twitch muscles as they are. She gets that from me. Syd plays the cello and the piano. She is currently teaching herself "Oh Come All Ye Faithful" on the piano.
5) I love having a washer and dryer upstairs. It makes doing laundry much easier. You wouldn't know that by the pile of laundry on the hallway floor right now. Sorry. It will be gone before Neil gets home.
6) I love shopping with my grandmother. We've been good shopping buddies since I was in fifth grade.
7) I love to catch up with my friends on Facebook. It is beautiful for me to see the wonderful ways their lives have turned out. They are all such great people!
8) I love my parents and in-laws. They each bring meaning to my life, all in different ways.
9) I love my husband. He is the best friend I've ever had. I am looking forward to relearning what it's like to be married. What do people do with so much free time? I could guess, but that would be TMI.
10) I love little babies. They make my heart rate drop. I could hold babies all day long. Whining eighteen month olds, not so much.
11) I love to read. My super hero power is speed reading. My claim to fame is that I read the final Harry Potter book in it's entirety in one day. I bought it at 0800 and finished by 0200 that night. I also read the entire Twilight series, all four books, in five days. This is what I do when I don't feel like doing anything. Now that Neil is coming home, I might have to find the discipline to do things I don't want to do instead of reading a book: sweeping out the garage, cleaning out the computer closet, cleaning my room. Shhh, don't tell Neil.
12) I love Coke in a glass bottle. Who doesn't? It's always worth the calories, except for right now when I am trying to get ready for Neil to come home. I do love my husband more than bottled Coke. I just have to remind myself of that sometimes.
13) I love laptop computers with wireless internet. Especially our Apple. (Sorry Dan.) It is the ultimate in luxury. And laziness.
14) I love taking pictures with my wide angle lens. I enjoy editing the pics to change the color, etc.
15) I love beautiful clothes. I wish I dressed like a chic business woman every day. Today I have been wearing my workout clothes all day. Not quite so chic.
16) I love having a suntan. I am meant to have a tan. I can get an amazing tan even when I wear SPF 30. I have never used a tanning bed.
17) I enjoy running. I prefer to run outside because my mind is a little less A-D-D than when I am on a treadmill. Good music is a must. I won't say I love running because really I'd rather be reading about Edward Cullen or Mr Darcy.
18) I enjoy step aerobics. It's kind of like dancing. It's less tedious than running on a treadmill.
19) I love the song "Eye of the Tiger" by Survivor. It's the song from Rocky. They played it every year at Camp Ozark on the way to the Final Challenge-the big sporting event. I can remember walking down the big hill to the song. To this day I run faster when I hear that song. Who doesn't? My kids like the song, too, and pretend to play Rock Band to it in the car. They pretend to play the drum, cello, electric guitar, and violin.
20) I loved Camp Ozark. I am me because of the time I spent there. First and foremost it taught me an appreciation for older boys. In all of the years I spent at Ozark, I had three friends that were boys, while everyone else there seemed to have boyfriends. Instead I spent all of my time hanging out with the good looking college-age boys who were counselors. At Ozark, there were dances all the time and the counselors were not allowed to dance with one another. So, the second thing I learned at Ozark was how to dance. What could be better than two weeks spent dancing with college boys? In fact, one of my favorite counselors was still running around A&M while I was there. He was all, "You're getting what? Married?" I did learn a thing or two about Jesus. And did some hard things, like swing from a rope between two trees and shoot skeet. And was introduced to Build a Mountain. And tore my ACL going over a hurdle in front of two hundred people. They all thought I was crying because I was embarrassed about falling in public. As if.
21) I loved being in Drama. I loved the magic of the theater. I didn't love running over my toes with a full-size set on metal rails. As a freshman in high school I heard a boy named Edward sing and decided right then that we would be friends. Of course I couldn't say "no" when he asked me to do drama with him my senior year. I had no idea what I had signed up for, but I loved it more than anything I did in high school. Somehow I ended up in charge of the boys' dressing room. I remember being pulled into the dressing room while they all ran around in their tightie-whities. I had the good sense to close my eyes and run for the door while I laughed my head off. I wish I knew what Edward was doing now.
22) I love being warm. It keeps me in bed longer than is needful in the mornings.
23) I love to sleep and when I can't sleep, to daydream. I make up novels in my head. And eventually I fall asleep.
24) I love Milk Duds, Hot Tamales, Chocolate Chip cookies, Peanut M&Ms, and Oreos with milk. Thankfully I love my husband more than candy, so I've been laying off of it. For the most part, I don't love ice cream. I do enjoy Baskin Robbins, but only Mint Chocolate Chip and Chocolate Sundaes with nuts and hot fudge sauce. Who can justify that many calories more than once a year? Donuts. Shipley's. They are Kryptonite.
25) I love Jane Austen. How did someone with such relatively limited life experience write such amazing books? She is the Gold Standard.
26) I love Luby's Restaurant. Comfort food on so many levels. As is Guadalajara's. Really, there are 5 Mexican food restaurants across Houston and San Antonio that I cannot live without.
27) I love fast cars and loud music. And open roads.
28) I enjoy Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh. I know, I'm a hater.
29) I love to write more than I ever thought that I would. I can remember learning to write in seventh grade. The teacher made up skip lines for editing and revising. We had to highlight the beginning of each sentence to make sure they didn't all start with "I". Strunk and White makes sense to me now. In tenth grade, I could spout it back to my teacher, but I had no idea what I was talking about. Writing my blog is one of my few hobbies. Reading is not quite a hobby, but more of a time-wasting, reality-escaping pursuit.
30) I enjoy correct grammar. I enjoy linguistics. If I had taken Linguistics in English before I took it in Spanish, I would have had a 3.75 gpa in college. (3.746 doesn't sound as impressive.) This isn't to say that my grammar is always correct. It is easier to read someone else's writing and see where they could have chosen a different word or placement or verb tense. This is an example of where I don't know as much as I like to believe.
31) I enjoy learning. I loved studying languages in college. I specifically enjoyed learning about other cultures, different lands, their geography and history. I got good grades in college because I studied what I loved. What to do from there? More school?
32) Lastly, I enjoyed learning to analyze poetry in college. I do not read poetry for pleasure. In fact, I think I wrote a poem in high school entitled "Poetry is for Fruits." Nice, I know. You wonder now, as do I, how I ever graduated. I attempted to do research in college because I thought that would teach me how to critically think about and analyze information or ideas. Unfortunately, I didn't learn much doing this research except that some of the kids professors changed the numbers so that their research worked into the paradigm they had suggested. Luckily for me, I saved one semester of French poetry and two semesters of Spanish poetry for my Senior year. That is where I learned how to think outside of the box. That is where I learned to analyze, to make associations, to let my mind wander until I found something that made sense. The way that I read scripture comes from reading poetry. I ponder what I'm reading and then I try to think of places where I've read that phrase before or read about the same principle. Then I try to find a way that they relate. This also influences the crazy ideas that I come up with on my blog.
Thanks for reading about the things that I love. I hope to sound less cynical and mean-spirited.
Also, my book du jour is China's Megatrends: 8 Pillars for a New Society. I am learning about how the Chinese people view their government, economic system and society in relation to where they have been and where they will head in the future. I can't decide if they are selling "China Kool-Aid" or if it actually makes sense. I think for a moment that it makes sense and then I remember the National Geographic Article I read about all of these problems with human rights violations, poverty, unemployment, and environmental issues. How can these facts be compatible? The author makes a good point when he says that China has come farther in a shorter amount of time than any other superpower in history. Or than any other developing nation, for that matter. So maybe we shouldn't look at China through the lens of our two hundred years of evolution, policitally and economically. It is similar to looking at the conquistadors worldview through the lens of our global community. What had we done in the first thirty years after the Revolutionary War, or even the Civil War? Compared to China since 1977, not much.
Friday, January 15, 2010
Vacay in Texas-Part II
The day after Christmas, I drove the kids to College Station to visit Neil's family. We had a wonderful time with Tom and Ann, Kellie and Tom, their boys, and Kristen. We laughed a lot over the course of the week.
I've decided that Kristen could be locked in a white square room with nothing but a spoon, and she would somehow end up with a story that would leave me rolling on the floor, laughing. Either more funny things happen to her than to other people or she is a just a tremendous story teller. It was sad to see her head back to Utah! I wish that she would come to live with me.
Tom and Ann surprised the older kids with a few days at Winter Camp. Syd, Ainsley, and Zach spent the better part of two days at the recently built ice rink in College Station. Did you know that A&M has a hockey team? Neither did I, but they practice at this rink. The kids got skating lessons, played in the snow, went tubing on the ice, played ice baseball (with tennis balls and tennis rackets), and, basically, wore themselves out. I enjoyed the peace and quiet as well as a pedicure and lunch with Ann and Kris. Merry Christmas to me.
On New Year's Eve and New Year's Day, Ann planned a fireworks extravaganza for the kids in the backyard! Sparklers, Roman Candles, and some flower looking fireworks were so much fun for the kids. (Apparently Ann tells people all the time that the secret to raising two sons to become surgeons is to let them play with knives and matches. No one believes that she's telling the truth. Only, of course, the boys did this all without her.) So we've had the early introduction to pyrotechnics. My kids enjoyed pretending that their sparklers were wands the Disney stars use to make the Mickey Mouse ears on the Disney commercials.
I didn't get as much sleep as I did in Houston, but I relished the experience of travelling without an infant. Wow, I'd forgotten how easy life is when you put someone in a strange bed and they still manage to fall asleep. Zach and Audrey ended up in my twin bed a few times, so I switched to sleeping on the trundle. It was much more comfortable than contorting around Zach's legs and having Audrey push me off the side of the bed.
After a week in College Station, we travelled back to Houston to see Sam and Dan, Mom and Mamaw before we left for North Carolina. The plane trip home was great, again, and we were back to the grind of getting up for school the next morning. We missed visiting with my dad because he was terribly ill the entire three weeks. Poor guy.
On a separate note, my thoughts and prayers go out to the people of Haiti, their leaders, and the world community that is attempting to render aid. Please bear with yet another personal example of how my faith in Christ affects my worldview. After listening to some reports today about the statistical benefits of giving a poor country money and of micro-aid in the form of private charities, I am reminded of my friend, James, who served a mission in Haiti back in the day. I hope that his friends are well and are receiving the help that they need.
Apparently giving money to the federal branch of government in a developing nation does not automatically decrease widespread poverty or provide a measurable increase in quality of life for it's citizens. And if private charities cannot adequately meet this immense need, then leading people to Christ, teaching them the practical applications of His gospel, are a way to fill that gap.
That is not to say that we should quit the practice of providing aid to developing nations. The economic and moral issues surrounding that practice are above my pay grade to question. It is also not to say that private charities on the ground in Haiti are insignificant in either their presence or the scope of good that they do. My point is that when all else fails, the love of God will never fail them.
You might question how I can say that when more than fifty thousand people have died. Is there a purpose behind human suffering? A reason for a loss of such magnitude? How can I speak of God's love amidst this tragic course of events? Perspective and hope. We should look at events from a broader perspective than usual. The means to ease human suffering, and to ultimately overcome it, were provided before the world began.
We lived in heaven before we were born. God is the Father of our spirits as well as our bodies. The Old Testament tells us that He knew us before He formed us in our mother's womb. We knew Jesus Christ and we knew of His mission in mortality. The ability to overcome death and to reunite loved ones with their Father in a place of perfect joy was the result of His Atonement, His suffering in our behalf and His resurrection. Death is not the tragic end for the people of Haiti any more than it is for me. It is beyond sad, but their bodies will go the way of all the earth and their spirits will rise to meet God. For myself and for the families left behind in Haiti, I hope for the thing I cannot see: a home in that heaven where my Father is waiting for me.
I've decided that Kristen could be locked in a white square room with nothing but a spoon, and she would somehow end up with a story that would leave me rolling on the floor, laughing. Either more funny things happen to her than to other people or she is a just a tremendous story teller. It was sad to see her head back to Utah! I wish that she would come to live with me.
Tom and Ann surprised the older kids with a few days at Winter Camp. Syd, Ainsley, and Zach spent the better part of two days at the recently built ice rink in College Station. Did you know that A&M has a hockey team? Neither did I, but they practice at this rink. The kids got skating lessons, played in the snow, went tubing on the ice, played ice baseball (with tennis balls and tennis rackets), and, basically, wore themselves out. I enjoyed the peace and quiet as well as a pedicure and lunch with Ann and Kris. Merry Christmas to me.
On New Year's Eve and New Year's Day, Ann planned a fireworks extravaganza for the kids in the backyard! Sparklers, Roman Candles, and some flower looking fireworks were so much fun for the kids. (Apparently Ann tells people all the time that the secret to raising two sons to become surgeons is to let them play with knives and matches. No one believes that she's telling the truth. Only, of course, the boys did this all without her.) So we've had the early introduction to pyrotechnics. My kids enjoyed pretending that their sparklers were wands the Disney stars use to make the Mickey Mouse ears on the Disney commercials.
I didn't get as much sleep as I did in Houston, but I relished the experience of travelling without an infant. Wow, I'd forgotten how easy life is when you put someone in a strange bed and they still manage to fall asleep. Zach and Audrey ended up in my twin bed a few times, so I switched to sleeping on the trundle. It was much more comfortable than contorting around Zach's legs and having Audrey push me off the side of the bed.
After a week in College Station, we travelled back to Houston to see Sam and Dan, Mom and Mamaw before we left for North Carolina. The plane trip home was great, again, and we were back to the grind of getting up for school the next morning. We missed visiting with my dad because he was terribly ill the entire three weeks. Poor guy.
On a separate note, my thoughts and prayers go out to the people of Haiti, their leaders, and the world community that is attempting to render aid. Please bear with yet another personal example of how my faith in Christ affects my worldview. After listening to some reports today about the statistical benefits of giving a poor country money and of micro-aid in the form of private charities, I am reminded of my friend, James, who served a mission in Haiti back in the day. I hope that his friends are well and are receiving the help that they need.
Apparently giving money to the federal branch of government in a developing nation does not automatically decrease widespread poverty or provide a measurable increase in quality of life for it's citizens. And if private charities cannot adequately meet this immense need, then leading people to Christ, teaching them the practical applications of His gospel, are a way to fill that gap.
That is not to say that we should quit the practice of providing aid to developing nations. The economic and moral issues surrounding that practice are above my pay grade to question. It is also not to say that private charities on the ground in Haiti are insignificant in either their presence or the scope of good that they do. My point is that when all else fails, the love of God will never fail them.
You might question how I can say that when more than fifty thousand people have died. Is there a purpose behind human suffering? A reason for a loss of such magnitude? How can I speak of God's love amidst this tragic course of events? Perspective and hope. We should look at events from a broader perspective than usual. The means to ease human suffering, and to ultimately overcome it, were provided before the world began.
We lived in heaven before we were born. God is the Father of our spirits as well as our bodies. The Old Testament tells us that He knew us before He formed us in our mother's womb. We knew Jesus Christ and we knew of His mission in mortality. The ability to overcome death and to reunite loved ones with their Father in a place of perfect joy was the result of His Atonement, His suffering in our behalf and His resurrection. Death is not the tragic end for the people of Haiti any more than it is for me. It is beyond sad, but their bodies will go the way of all the earth and their spirits will rise to meet God. For myself and for the families left behind in Haiti, I hope for the thing I cannot see: a home in that heaven where my Father is waiting for me.
Monday, January 11, 2010
Vacay in Texas-Part I
We had a wonderful trip to Texas over the holidays. I managed to keep it a secret from the kids until the morning we left. Watching the kids' faces as I explained the packed suitcases brought tears to my eyes. They screamed and cried and jumped around. I plan to do the same thing when it's time for Neil to come home.
I was as excited to visit Texas as they were; I had begun to miss Texas with this ache inside my heart. I miss the wide open spaces, the exact shade of sky blue that isn't the same anywhere else, the tortillas and salsa, the rocks in the road-side cliffs in the Hill Country, the familiarity of it all, even in places I don't live, such as Austin. I especially missed HEB, although I didn't actually go grocery shopping. It's not vacation if you have to grocery shop. (That's probably why I loved Disney World: no cleaning, no grocery shopping, and no dishes. What more could I need? Only my husband.)
I realized as I drove around San Antonio that I was grateful not to live there without Neil. Looking for him everywhere, never to see him. I would have gone crazy with grief. It was hard enough for the few days I was there. It would kill me to be up at BAMC on a regular basis without getting to see him. It is much better to be somewhere that I never expect to see him. I'm rarely at the hospital here, so I don't think about dropping by his office to say hi. He never went for runs around this neighborhood, so I don't look for him as I drive past men jogging on the road...
While we were in San Antonio, we went to visit friends and the girls' school. It was a fun afternoon for Sydney to hang out at the 5th grade winter party with her old friends. At Hardy Oak, in the 5th grade, the official class parties are grade-wide celebrations instead. Having girl after girl run up screaming and hugging Sydney filled her "love bucket." Ainsley's three best friends ended up in the same homeroom this year, of course, so their teacher lovingly added Ainsley to their afternoon of watching a movie and going to recess. Even Zach's best friend from pre-school was there at Hardy Oak, so he got to say "hi." On the flip side, it was good for Sydney to see the drama that she would be involved in if she were there. It was a good reminder that the grass is not always greener.
It was wonderful to see my family and friends! My mom and grandmother really took care of me and the kids. I didn't cook once and got to sleep in every day! They figured the break was the best present they could give me, and they were right.
We had quite the adventure ice skating with my mom at the Galleria. I have dreams where my mom's arm still hurts. Who knew ice skating was so dangerous? Oh wait, I did.
I was wishing for helmets for my kids, especially Zach, as he skated around. I hated wearing a helmet when I was a kid, but I was going nuts worrying about Zach skating too fast, falling on his back, and cracking his head on the ice. That is because I saw a kid Sydney's age do that exact thing five minutes after we started skating. Zach loved skating! He was doing spins and figuring out fun ways to come to a stop.
Audrey honestly cried the entire first hour we skated. She only stopped the tears when I said that we were fixing to get off the ice for a break. When we got back on, she didn't cry again. I held one of her hands the whole time and one hand slid along the wall for balance. It was slow-going around the ice, but surprisingly the time fled by. I'm not sure how we were there for two hours.
Ainsley did not enjoy the first hour and thought I was torturing her, but then my mom took her the second hour and showed her how to skate without falling. She felt proud that she skated around, not holding onto the wall, and didn't fall. She overcame her fear and realized that it felt good. Thanks, grandma!
Sydney, of course, was a natural. No fear and, somehow, she already knew how to do it. Probably the rollerblades that are somewhere in our garage at this point. She skated around and around, punching the people that accidentally grabbed onto her as they fell. I'm not kidding. When someone attempted to grab onto her to keep from falling, she would punch them in the arm and tell them to keep their hands off her. I think she even called them names. Can you imagine watching that? I wish I had seen it because she felt so tough, but her arms are as big around as an English cucumber. It would have been good for a smile at least.
We spent Christmas Eve with my cousins Travis and Courtney, their boys, and Courtney's family. I can see Zach and the twins, Brock and Hunter, making mischief in a few years. I know Neil will want to plan hunting trips with the boys!
Christmas was wonderful. We enjoyed spending time with my mom's friend, Randy, and Samantha's in-laws, the Braden's. It made for such a festive afternoon!
More to follow on our trip to College Station next time!
I was as excited to visit Texas as they were; I had begun to miss Texas with this ache inside my heart. I miss the wide open spaces, the exact shade of sky blue that isn't the same anywhere else, the tortillas and salsa, the rocks in the road-side cliffs in the Hill Country, the familiarity of it all, even in places I don't live, such as Austin. I especially missed HEB, although I didn't actually go grocery shopping. It's not vacation if you have to grocery shop. (That's probably why I loved Disney World: no cleaning, no grocery shopping, and no dishes. What more could I need? Only my husband.)
I realized as I drove around San Antonio that I was grateful not to live there without Neil. Looking for him everywhere, never to see him. I would have gone crazy with grief. It was hard enough for the few days I was there. It would kill me to be up at BAMC on a regular basis without getting to see him. It is much better to be somewhere that I never expect to see him. I'm rarely at the hospital here, so I don't think about dropping by his office to say hi. He never went for runs around this neighborhood, so I don't look for him as I drive past men jogging on the road...
While we were in San Antonio, we went to visit friends and the girls' school. It was a fun afternoon for Sydney to hang out at the 5th grade winter party with her old friends. At Hardy Oak, in the 5th grade, the official class parties are grade-wide celebrations instead. Having girl after girl run up screaming and hugging Sydney filled her "love bucket." Ainsley's three best friends ended up in the same homeroom this year, of course, so their teacher lovingly added Ainsley to their afternoon of watching a movie and going to recess. Even Zach's best friend from pre-school was there at Hardy Oak, so he got to say "hi." On the flip side, it was good for Sydney to see the drama that she would be involved in if she were there. It was a good reminder that the grass is not always greener.
It was wonderful to see my family and friends! My mom and grandmother really took care of me and the kids. I didn't cook once and got to sleep in every day! They figured the break was the best present they could give me, and they were right.
We had quite the adventure ice skating with my mom at the Galleria. I have dreams where my mom's arm still hurts. Who knew ice skating was so dangerous? Oh wait, I did.
I was wishing for helmets for my kids, especially Zach, as he skated around. I hated wearing a helmet when I was a kid, but I was going nuts worrying about Zach skating too fast, falling on his back, and cracking his head on the ice. That is because I saw a kid Sydney's age do that exact thing five minutes after we started skating. Zach loved skating! He was doing spins and figuring out fun ways to come to a stop.
Audrey honestly cried the entire first hour we skated. She only stopped the tears when I said that we were fixing to get off the ice for a break. When we got back on, she didn't cry again. I held one of her hands the whole time and one hand slid along the wall for balance. It was slow-going around the ice, but surprisingly the time fled by. I'm not sure how we were there for two hours.
Ainsley did not enjoy the first hour and thought I was torturing her, but then my mom took her the second hour and showed her how to skate without falling. She felt proud that she skated around, not holding onto the wall, and didn't fall. She overcame her fear and realized that it felt good. Thanks, grandma!
Sydney, of course, was a natural. No fear and, somehow, she already knew how to do it. Probably the rollerblades that are somewhere in our garage at this point. She skated around and around, punching the people that accidentally grabbed onto her as they fell. I'm not kidding. When someone attempted to grab onto her to keep from falling, she would punch them in the arm and tell them to keep their hands off her. I think she even called them names. Can you imagine watching that? I wish I had seen it because she felt so tough, but her arms are as big around as an English cucumber. It would have been good for a smile at least.
We spent Christmas Eve with my cousins Travis and Courtney, their boys, and Courtney's family. I can see Zach and the twins, Brock and Hunter, making mischief in a few years. I know Neil will want to plan hunting trips with the boys!
Christmas was wonderful. We enjoyed spending time with my mom's friend, Randy, and Samantha's in-laws, the Braden's. It made for such a festive afternoon!
More to follow on our trip to College Station next time!
Friday, January 8, 2010
Dan Brown's book: what I think about the LDS references
After three weeks of vacation in Texas, there is a lot on my mind that I would like to write about. It's hard to know where to begin.
My mom let me borrow her copy of Dan Brown's The Lost Symbol. (I cannot figure out how to underline on my blog-sorry.) If you did not read my previous post about Dan Brown, you should read it now. If you haven't read the book yet, I will spoil the surprise for you in this post. Consider yourself warned. Note that I do not say "ending" here; after the conflict is resolved, Brown spends another billion pages describing architecture and building a romantic interest for the main character. Did anyone care by that point?
I am not going to eat crow about my prediction; I wasn't exactly right, but, for a blind guess, I was pretty close. This is my favorite of Brown's books because it is the least cynical and the least destructive. However, I was disappointed to be reading through a particularly suspenseful section when Brown stops all forward progress of the book to explain the architecture of the building where the bad guy was chasing them. Really. Who gives a flip? I enjoy art history as much as the next girl, but at this point in the novel, I want to know what happens with the freakshow tattoo guy, or at least the freakshow CIA lady, not more about Doric columns.
My other thought on the book is while I did not guess who the bad guy was for a while, hasn't a spoiled son taking revenge on his father been done before? Even backwards, as in, "I am your father, Luke." I am pretty sure I read this bad-guy's psych eval in the last Vince Flynn novel. He was describing some nutjob politician with a victim complex, etc. Couldn't the masterful Dan Brown come up with something better than how an entitled, drug-doing, prison-rotting, and abandoned son chooses the dark side? At least in this novel, the bad guy openly admits to having chosen the side of evil. His afterlife is interesting, although flawed, I think.
You might be surprised that I would like this book after reading his references to my church. The first reference is followed by Langdon's conclusion that a large group of people who believes in something does not prove it's validity. His conclusion, not spoken aloud, but rather part of his thought process, is written in italics. Either Langdon felt very strongly about this idea or Brown wanted to reinforce his opinion. Why did Brown single out one church to prove this point? Could not the same thing be said about the Catholic Church, the Bible, or all of Christianity? How about Islam? Was Brown seriously trying to question the validity of all organized religion or just the LDS church? In all honesty, it does not matter what Brown's motivation was because he is right.
I do not belong to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints because 13+million other people on this earth agree with it's theology. I do not believe in the reality of God and His Son, Jesus Christ, because it is a tradition or because so many other millions of people couldn't be wrong. I do not believe in the validity of Joseph Smith's claims and teachings, the scripture he translated solely because other people believe the same way. Ditto with the Bible. On a personal level, if you know me well enough, you know that I do not often take the expected, easy or well-travelled road. I make my own choices and I choose to believe in Christ and to act accordingly. How would anyone whose seed of faith was buried so shallow or who lacked substantial roots resulting from taking someone else's word for it withstand the scorching heat that comes into the lives of all of us? My thought on Brown's statement is this: our salvation does not depend on the knowledge and faith of others. While I understand that a belief in Christ is part of my heritage, exercising faith in Christ is a conscious decision each Christian must make, sometimes on a daily basis.
At an institutional level, I am fortunate to belong to a church that does not take it's scriptural precedent, it's history, it's organization, or it's source of doctrine from any other source than Christ, who is, as He should be, the head of our church. This is not the place for an in depth discussion of my faith in Christ or doctrinal teachings of my church. Please refer to www.mormon.org or even to Neil's blog, www.neilonthemoon.blogspot.com. I am only commenting on this in relation to Dan Brown's books.
I do not worry what crazy, if possibly true, ideas Brown comes up with because my understanding of the nature of God, His Son, and their plan for us does not depend on the knowledge given to previous dispensations, or periods of time. Each dispensation is given that knowledge anew. For example, Adam, Moses, Noah, and Abraham lived in different dispensations, and they each testified and taught the Lord's will as a result of their personal experiences with Him.
Finally, it is the message of the Book of Mormon, as well as what I teach my own children, there will come a time when every one of us will need to sincerely and fervently pray to their Eternal Father for a witness that what they have been taught is true. Christ is the only intercessor we need. If we depend on our personal experience with the Lord for a witness of truth, we do not depend on man. I believe in the reality of God and His Son Jesus Christ because I have prayed and have received the confirmation of the Holy Ghost in my mind and in my heart. It makes sense to my mind as well as speaks to my heart. I have also seen His hand in my life and in the lives of those around me.
The second reference to our church was about Baptisms for the dead. Brown mistakenly calls it "baptism of the dead." It's only semantics, but there is a huge difference in connotation and actual function. In this chapter, Langdon considers the ramifications of religious rites taken out of context and without proper initiation or understanding. Again, he is right. I barely remember my sorority initiation, but I do vividly remember hearing about another sorority whose initiation involved a coffin, much like the Masons in Brown's book. Who knows what they did with those coffins, but I did not want to find out.
Similarly, people who would like to worship in one of the beautiful temples built by our church must be 12 years of age and living according to our church's standard for membership to perform baptisms for the dead, and for more worship opportunities and temple marriage, membership of one year is required. While there is nothing like the eerie initiation scenes of the Masons that Brown describes in his book, doing temple work, at the very least, will not make as much sense and will not be as profound without prior knowledge and understanding of our beliefs and a desire to be there, demonstrated by a high level of commitment shown by living a Christ-like life of honesty, chastity, love and kindness, service, and abstaining from habit-forming and destructive foods, drinks, and medicines.
While I have much more to say about this book, I will close by saying that one of the concepts in the book, Noetic Science, is interesting. There is an entire discussion in the book about how truths appear to be re-learned or remembered rather than taught. How civilizations all over the world, throughout all generations of time, happen to have similar concepts of science, our place in the universe, creation. (For example, Joseph Smith and some guy in 300-ish BC both taught that matter cannot be created. Some pretty notable modern scientists teach this, too; I just don't know who they are. That's what happens when you learn Physics and Chemistry from Wikipedia. Just kidding-I read a textbook or two once upon a time.) If you are LDS, this paragraph in the book will sound extremely familiar to you.
Finally, you know you've made it into pop-culture when Dan Brown is referencing your organization right up there with Twitter and iPhones. I really did like this book; the ending surprised me more than anything else in the book. How beautiful and refreshing is it that hope was actually the result of 500 pages of madness and evil? And did I mention the architecture and art history lessons thrown in there?
My mom let me borrow her copy of Dan Brown's The Lost Symbol. (I cannot figure out how to underline on my blog-sorry.) If you did not read my previous post about Dan Brown, you should read it now. If you haven't read the book yet, I will spoil the surprise for you in this post. Consider yourself warned. Note that I do not say "ending" here; after the conflict is resolved, Brown spends another billion pages describing architecture and building a romantic interest for the main character. Did anyone care by that point?
I am not going to eat crow about my prediction; I wasn't exactly right, but, for a blind guess, I was pretty close. This is my favorite of Brown's books because it is the least cynical and the least destructive. However, I was disappointed to be reading through a particularly suspenseful section when Brown stops all forward progress of the book to explain the architecture of the building where the bad guy was chasing them. Really. Who gives a flip? I enjoy art history as much as the next girl, but at this point in the novel, I want to know what happens with the freakshow tattoo guy, or at least the freakshow CIA lady, not more about Doric columns.
My other thought on the book is while I did not guess who the bad guy was for a while, hasn't a spoiled son taking revenge on his father been done before? Even backwards, as in, "I am your father, Luke." I am pretty sure I read this bad-guy's psych eval in the last Vince Flynn novel. He was describing some nutjob politician with a victim complex, etc. Couldn't the masterful Dan Brown come up with something better than how an entitled, drug-doing, prison-rotting, and abandoned son chooses the dark side? At least in this novel, the bad guy openly admits to having chosen the side of evil. His afterlife is interesting, although flawed, I think.
You might be surprised that I would like this book after reading his references to my church. The first reference is followed by Langdon's conclusion that a large group of people who believes in something does not prove it's validity. His conclusion, not spoken aloud, but rather part of his thought process, is written in italics. Either Langdon felt very strongly about this idea or Brown wanted to reinforce his opinion. Why did Brown single out one church to prove this point? Could not the same thing be said about the Catholic Church, the Bible, or all of Christianity? How about Islam? Was Brown seriously trying to question the validity of all organized religion or just the LDS church? In all honesty, it does not matter what Brown's motivation was because he is right.
I do not belong to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints because 13+million other people on this earth agree with it's theology. I do not believe in the reality of God and His Son, Jesus Christ, because it is a tradition or because so many other millions of people couldn't be wrong. I do not believe in the validity of Joseph Smith's claims and teachings, the scripture he translated solely because other people believe the same way. Ditto with the Bible. On a personal level, if you know me well enough, you know that I do not often take the expected, easy or well-travelled road. I make my own choices and I choose to believe in Christ and to act accordingly. How would anyone whose seed of faith was buried so shallow or who lacked substantial roots resulting from taking someone else's word for it withstand the scorching heat that comes into the lives of all of us? My thought on Brown's statement is this: our salvation does not depend on the knowledge and faith of others. While I understand that a belief in Christ is part of my heritage, exercising faith in Christ is a conscious decision each Christian must make, sometimes on a daily basis.
At an institutional level, I am fortunate to belong to a church that does not take it's scriptural precedent, it's history, it's organization, or it's source of doctrine from any other source than Christ, who is, as He should be, the head of our church. This is not the place for an in depth discussion of my faith in Christ or doctrinal teachings of my church. Please refer to www.mormon.org or even to Neil's blog, www.neilonthemoon.blogspot.com. I am only commenting on this in relation to Dan Brown's books.
I do not worry what crazy, if possibly true, ideas Brown comes up with because my understanding of the nature of God, His Son, and their plan for us does not depend on the knowledge given to previous dispensations, or periods of time. Each dispensation is given that knowledge anew. For example, Adam, Moses, Noah, and Abraham lived in different dispensations, and they each testified and taught the Lord's will as a result of their personal experiences with Him.
Finally, it is the message of the Book of Mormon, as well as what I teach my own children, there will come a time when every one of us will need to sincerely and fervently pray to their Eternal Father for a witness that what they have been taught is true. Christ is the only intercessor we need. If we depend on our personal experience with the Lord for a witness of truth, we do not depend on man. I believe in the reality of God and His Son Jesus Christ because I have prayed and have received the confirmation of the Holy Ghost in my mind and in my heart. It makes sense to my mind as well as speaks to my heart. I have also seen His hand in my life and in the lives of those around me.
The second reference to our church was about Baptisms for the dead. Brown mistakenly calls it "baptism of the dead." It's only semantics, but there is a huge difference in connotation and actual function. In this chapter, Langdon considers the ramifications of religious rites taken out of context and without proper initiation or understanding. Again, he is right. I barely remember my sorority initiation, but I do vividly remember hearing about another sorority whose initiation involved a coffin, much like the Masons in Brown's book. Who knows what they did with those coffins, but I did not want to find out.
Similarly, people who would like to worship in one of the beautiful temples built by our church must be 12 years of age and living according to our church's standard for membership to perform baptisms for the dead, and for more worship opportunities and temple marriage, membership of one year is required. While there is nothing like the eerie initiation scenes of the Masons that Brown describes in his book, doing temple work, at the very least, will not make as much sense and will not be as profound without prior knowledge and understanding of our beliefs and a desire to be there, demonstrated by a high level of commitment shown by living a Christ-like life of honesty, chastity, love and kindness, service, and abstaining from habit-forming and destructive foods, drinks, and medicines.
While I have much more to say about this book, I will close by saying that one of the concepts in the book, Noetic Science, is interesting. There is an entire discussion in the book about how truths appear to be re-learned or remembered rather than taught. How civilizations all over the world, throughout all generations of time, happen to have similar concepts of science, our place in the universe, creation. (For example, Joseph Smith and some guy in 300-ish BC both taught that matter cannot be created. Some pretty notable modern scientists teach this, too; I just don't know who they are. That's what happens when you learn Physics and Chemistry from Wikipedia. Just kidding-I read a textbook or two once upon a time.) If you are LDS, this paragraph in the book will sound extremely familiar to you.
Finally, you know you've made it into pop-culture when Dan Brown is referencing your organization right up there with Twitter and iPhones. I really did like this book; the ending surprised me more than anything else in the book. How beautiful and refreshing is it that hope was actually the result of 500 pages of madness and evil? And did I mention the architecture and art history lessons thrown in there?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
