November 2008 Archives

Civic Literary Quiz

| | Comments (1)

ISI has a new Civic Literacy Quiz. I got a 93.94% (31 out of 33). I seem to remember getting a much lower score on previous years' quizzes.

Anyway, by coincidence, I scored the same as TSO and Bill White and we all got #33 wrong. My other mistake was 7, which is frustrating because I know where it's from, but I thought he was quoting....

Take the quiz, and then maybe lets start a petition that nobody who fails should be allowed to vote, or, even more importantly, hold elected office.

Bookmark and Share

Sweatshop Free Crafting and Art

|

by Mama-Lu

Wandering around the aisles of craft stores dreaming of projects used to be my idea of a great afternoon out. When I decided to chase the sweatshop-free dream, suddenly the aisles went from tempting to depressing.

It would be so easy to snatch up lots of fun, cheap supplies and create items for sale, but the "Made in China" label puts a damper on those ideas. In the end that's a good thing. I do not need a reason to buy more stuff, and buying things that might be more expensive keeps my purchases limited. The real temptation is to increase my Etsy shop profit by using sweatshop products. At the same time, every time I type "This is a sweatshop free product" it makes me feel like I can make a difference.

Honestly, yarn sources are not too bad. Beads for rosaries on the other hand is a little tricky. I did find beautiful beads from fair trade sources like Happy Mango Beads and Kazuri West, but these would send the cost of a rosary well beyond my price range. I could also buy from the Czech Republic, since they make beautiful beads and as members of the EU have trust worthy labor laws. In the end I ordered from American Woodcrafters Supply Co.

I am still a long way from being sweatshop-free in everything, but crafting is one area I am doing pretty well, even for the kids. Despite the distance I still have to travel, the more labels I read, the more committed I am to doing better.

Bookmark and Share

One for the wife

|

"Outliers" guy on radio show.

Bookmark and Share

Awesome

|
In the wee morning hours of Sunday, September 7, 2008, a reader on the website of the South Florida Sun-Sentinel browsed an old article on the 2002 bankruptcy of United Airlines. With hardly any other traffic on the site, that single hit moved the article into the "Popular Stories" list of the paper's business section. Soon after, Google News scanned the site and saw the article, but since it didn't find a 2002 dateline, it interpreted the article as new and added it to its index. Google News users began reading the story within minutes, and by Monday morning the "news" had been picked up by Bloomberg, a top news service for traders. When investors falsely believed the article referred to a new bankruptcy, stock for the airline fell by 70 percent in fifteen minutes, dropping the value of United Airlines by a billion dollars before NASDAQ froze trading.


The stock eventually regained most of its value, but legal action may result from the mix-up, and both Google and the news organizations involved are pointing fingers in the other direction. Google claims that human readers and its program Googlebot alike had no way to discern the date of the story, while a spokesman for the Sun-Sentinel argues that details from the story make clear that it refers to events from 2002--indicating that nobody who passed along the story actually took the trouble to read it.


Dear any company who has gone bankrupt in the past decade,

Please deposit $1,000,000 in my account or I will begin reading online articles about your bankruptcy on the websites of small town newspapers.

Very sincerely yours,

Somebody who is not Papa-Lu


More seriously, I'm all for the Google overlords -- who have algorithmatized news and even, to an extent, culture -- taking one in the arse, so I hope they have to pay big for this. My feelings about Bloomberg are ambivalent, but as a rule, companies ought to be held accountable for their algorithms.

Bookmark and Share

After the Smart Martha Seminar

|

by Mama-Lu

A few weeks back I posted that I would be attending a Smart Martha Seminar. Last Saturday, I did.

As I expected, there were no earth shattering revelations, but I left highly motivated and validated. I can admit skepticism now (three boys, a clean house and sanity? in this lifetime? right), because the seminar really was useful. It was nice to share problems most mothers face in a positive "what can we do about it without going crazy" kind of way. Plus I got some new ideas.

So, now what have I done? That afternoon, I came home and asked Chris to finish building our compost bins. Then we shredded a month's worth of the Wall Street Journal. It felt great! I also started removing all toys from the boys' room. This project stalled because we have some sickies here.

I have a whole list of other projects to tackle. It's pretty much the same list I had before the seminar. This was just a good push in the right direction. Next on the list is signing up for adoration.

Since the seminar, I've been wondering what other attendees have done. It occured to me that if I am using this blog to crow, others could too, maybe every Friday. If you have a Martha or Mary victory to brag about leave it in the comments.

Here's to happy homes!

Bookmark and Share

Another deathblow to my childhood

|

The WSJ yesterday had a depressing story about the baseball card industry. In order to reverse a decline in sales, card companies are including ever creepier relics as "chase cards" -- big ticket prizes that entice collectors to keep buying packs.

I blogged once a long time ago about how bizaare relic cards are (money quote: "Yes kids, for months worth of your hard-earned lawn-mowing money you can purchase a shred of lycra which caressed the rear end of your favorite second baseman/left fielder."), and it seems it's gotten even creepier. It seems some card companies have upped the ante, moving from second class to first class relics:

Ms. Artusa, a baseball-card collector since the 1970s, found something unusual in one pack -- a scratch-off code that pointed her to a Web site. The site told her she had won something too delicate to include in a regular pack: a single strand of hair from the head of Abraham Lincoln.

Click through and you'll see the article is not dated April 1st.

For a long time now, the baseball card industry hasn't been about baseball and this is further proof:

The industry has since streamlined, but "the good old days of building a set, one 15-card pack at a time, are pretty much over," Mr. Kelnhofer says. While cheaper packs today go for around $2, he says, "the card makers' survival is predicated on attracting and keeping the collectors who make the big-ticket purchases."


Those are people like Ms. Artusa, who got the Lincoln hair. The night she and her husband came across their prize, they were going through a case priced at $1,800 and containing 192 packs of baseball cards.

What is this but legalized gambling?

Bookmark and Share

Catching Up

|

Some good recent-ish reads:

  • 2 from the Claremont Review: "The Audacity of Barack Obama" -- a fairly balance view of Obama's governing and legal philosophies; and "Reforming Big Government" -- a sober assessment of the here-to-stay welfare state:


    Supply-side tax cuts did little to necessitate or even facilitate reducing the welfare state, and there is no reason to believe an explicit campaign for that goal will succeed where Barry Goldwater's failed. Given all that, conservatives need to weigh the costs and benefits of putting liberals' minds at ease by explicitly renouncing the war against the welfare state, the one that's barely being waged and steadily being lost. They could do so by making clear that America will and should have a welfare state, and that the withering away of the welfare state is not the goal of the conservative project, not even in the distant future. What libertarians will regard as a capitulation to statism is better understood as conceding ground conservatives have been losing for 75 years and have no imaginable prospect of regaining.

  • Rathering than listing them all, I'll just tell you to read everything John Zmirak writes at Inside Catholic (yo, Deal, add author archive links!)

  • Remember way back in... January 2008, when Ron Paul was widely dismissed as a nutjob for wanting to put the US back on the gold standard? Well, those loonies at the Wall Street Journal have given prime opinion real estate not once but twice to that fringe idea. Now, I'm not saying I'm a goldbug, but I'm not goign to hold my breath that many gold advocates will be acknowledging that Paul was out front on this.

That's all for now.I have many more I'll try to get around to in the next few days.

Bookmark and Share

Great Excuse, Last Year

|
"I think maybe we underestimated how prepared you have to be, how ready you have to be, especially in a five-game series," Dempster said. "It's like a short heavyweight bout. Ding, the bell is ringing, you've got to go."


The Cubs were knocked out quickly. Dempster also suggested the players were overconfident because of their great home record at Wrigley Field throughout the season.

"It almost felt like it was just going to be a given that we win Games 1 and 2 and move on and go from there," he said. "You've still got to play the games. You've got to put the uniform on and go out there and compete. If anything, we've learned that."

This would be a reasonable explanation for getting swept by Arizona in 2007. Alas, Dempster is talking about this year's sweep at the hand of the Dodgers. So much for the importance of "playoff experience."

Bookmark and Share

Sunday Morning Conversation

|

[Puliing out of the Church parking lot]

4yo: Poppy, you don't have to worry. The world is never ever going to end.

Poppy: Why do you say that?

4yo: Because shooting stars only shoot at night, so they can't destroy the world.

[10 minutes of continuous conversation on the end of the world and the resurrection of the body later]

4yo: Poppy, why do some animals die and stay on the ground until they rot away?

Poppy: Animals don't bury their dead, only humans do.

4yo: Do animals not like digging holes? I like digging holes.

Bookmark and Share

Fair Trade Coffee

|

by Mama-Lu

There's fair trade coffee and then there's fair trade coffee.

In our house we do not use "Fair Trade Certified" coffee beans. "Fair Trade Certified" is a relatively new group of programs and they have their flaws. The most significant one being the cost to certify. Farmers have to pay inspectors to certify their farms, and the same goes for organic certification. So the farmer sees even less of his already small profits.

Instead we prefer to buy from small roasteries whose buyers investigate the farms themselves as part of the purchasing process. There is no extra cost for this, and the roasteries or buyers also get a chance to see in what way they might build up the communities in which the farms are located.

Here in Champaign, our own local Columbia Street Roastery is doing just that. So not only are we buying fair trade, but we are also supporting local business. It's a win-win. There are many other roasteries with practices like this; it just takes a little poking to find out what the companies values are.

Bookmark and Share

Apolonio Latar on the Creed

|
The first word of the creed is "I," the person who has been united to Christ to be at the center of the human drama. To say the creed awakens our senses towards the wondrous exchange of the divine and the human, to the merciful tenderness of God. Life is not a tragedy but a romantic comedy.

He goes on, and it's wonderful to read.

Bookmark and Share

Answering his own question

|

James Surowiecki, financial writer for The New Yorker, is usually pretty good, but he must be playing dumb here.

What, exactly, is wrong with the "Hope for Homeowners" program that Congress enacted this summer? The program was intended to allow homeowners to trade out of their adjustable-rate mortgages into thirty-year fixed-loan, F.H.A.-insured mortgages at what were supposed to be lower rates. The Congressional Budget Office's initial projections were that almost half a million homeowners would use the plan. But in its first two weeks of existence--as with everything else, the plan took inordinately long to put in place, and didn't go into effect until October 1st--only forty-two people applied for help. And the government's now saying they think only thirteen thousand people are going to use the program in the first year.


Some of the shortfall appears to be due to borrowers waiting to see if the government will come up with a better plan, but the biggest problem appears to be that lenders aren't all that willing to take part in the program...

I'm not sure I understand the calculations that underlie the original lenders' hostility to the plan: isn't a guaranteed return of seventy to eighty per cent of the original loan better than the ever-increasing risk that you'll have to foreclose on a sizeable percentage of these properties? But what I really don't understand is why the C.B.O. thought four hundred thousand homeowners would end up using this program, when the real number appears to be less than a tenth of that. Didn't anybody talk to lenders before they wrote the bill and came up with this plan?

Is the following scenario that hard to imagine?

"Gee of course, Mr. Bernanke, we'll cooperate with whatever plan you'll come up with! Write down the debt? Oh, of course, we'd love to do that! I'm sure, oh golly, hundreds of thousands of borrowers will take advantage of such a generous program. We will market it as vigorously as we can and we certainly will not sit on our hands and wait for you to overreact to the next market hiccup and buy all of this junk from us."

How can Surowiecki suggest that borrowers are holding out for something better and not think the banks are, too? Is Joe the Plumber seriously more likely to play the government than, oh, say, Fannie Mae?

And to the extent the lenders are going to participate in this program, isn't it rational for them to hold off as long as humanly possible before offering to refinance any individual homeowner's loan? Let's say you're holding the $300,000 mortgage on this one bedroom shack in Compton, CA. The most rational thing for you to do would be to go on collecting that $3,000 mortgage check every month as long as you can. Say the buyer shows signs of stress by missing a payment, or deaulting on one of the credit cards he holds -- then you swoop in and try to renegotiate the terms.

One major problem with the government interventions thus far is that they have tended to assume a level of good faith by institutions that have committed fraud and negligence at every step of the process.

Speaking of which, I hope everyody reads Michael Lewis' Portfolio piece that tells the history of the subprime fiasco from the perspective of some guys who saw it coming.

Bookmark and Share

Fair Trade

|

by Mama-Lu

October was Fair Trade month. All month I meant to put something up here about my thoughts on fair trade. Better late then never!

For some time I have been making a concerted effort to only purchase items that are sweat-shop/abuse free. The idea started with a simple question from our eldest, at the time 3 years old, "Who made my shoes?" The shoes came from Target and were made in China. My response was, "People working in a factory in China." The conversation continued with requests from him to visit China and see the factory where the shoes were made. Then we moved on, but in my mind I could not stop thinking about the "who" and the conditions under which that person worked.

In thinking about this person who suffered unknown injustices to make a pair of cheap shoes for my son, I felt complicit in their abuse. The obvious next step was to avoid this in the future. The question was and is, "How?"

So far, it has not been possible for me. Despite high ideals, I have all kinds of loop-holes and exceptions. Abuse of persons in the third world is frightenly common in our ordinary life. In our house two simple, yet significant, steps reduce participation in that abuse. First, we buy second hand as much as possible. The item's origin might have been a sweatshop, but our money is not supporting systemic abuse. Second we buy fair trade coffee and cocoa/chocolate. Coffee and cocoa are widely sold at prices that cannot support even remotely just practices. A few extra dollars for these luxuries prevents our money from driving a farmer deeper into debt or supporting the routine kidnapping of boys for labor.

These steps are not going to change the world, but they can bring about solidarity. We cannot avoid every level of abuse in our society. It is barely possible to avoid the abuses we are aware of let alone the ones of which we never even hear. Yet giving up and saying there is nothing that can be done is not an option for a person of conscience. Something must be done; something that says "I will not participate in the suffering of my brothers and sisters." These things are our small way of saying that. Hopefully, we will grow toward greater solidarity as we relearn how to shop.

Dorothy Day explained this much better than I ever could. I will try to locate her words on the subject and share them here, but until then I have a few more things to say on this subject, which I will save for another day.

Bookmark and Share

[... 5 AM, Lu-household]

2 year old: POPPYYYYYYYYYY!! POPPYYYYYYYYYY!!

Poppy: [Poppy scrambles out of bed, being careful not to strain his injured knee, and rushes to child's bedside.] What's the matter pumpkin?

2yo: Poppy, can you spread out my blankets?

Bookmark and Share

My little chain gang

|

What do you do when you little punks angels spend their quiet time dumping almost out every box of toys and clothes in their closet?

Why, you send them outside with rakes to work it off.

leaves.JPG

Good job boys!

Bookmark and Share

So long!

|
Soon after becoming vice-president, Cheney plucked out of obscurity and brought back to government two men, John Poindexter and Elliott Abrams, still under a shadow from having been charged with various crimes in the Iran-contra prosecutions. Poindexter became the projector of Total Information Awareness--a War on Terror idea rejected by Congress, which would have encouraged Americans to spy on their neighbors--while Abrams was made an adviser on Middle East policy and then adviser for global democracy strategy. Poindexter would resign in 2003 over the scuttling of his fantastic proposal that the military run an on-line betting service to reward persons who correctly forecast future terrorist acts, coups, and assassinations. Abrams stayed with Middle East policy and in 2006 secured a declaration of American support for the Israeli bombing and invasion of Lebanon. A zeal that touched the brink of recklessness had always belonged to the public characters of both men.

Look, Barack Obama was no doubt an unaccepable choice for president, but come on, who's going to miss these guys?

Bookmark and Share

Priestly Pop

|
There are drawbacks to turning priests into pop stars. Because they need to stay close to their congregations, the Priests won't be doing a typical promotional concert tour. But Father O'Hagan says his parishioners have pledged to support his new mission. "They have assured me if they go a couple days without Mass, they're not going to lose the faith," he says.


But there are also upsides for music executives accustomed to dealing with rock-star antics. "Why do most guys get into this? To get a chick and behave as badly as they possibly can," Mr. Raphael says. "These guys have already passed up on that side of life."

Bookmark and Share

Champaign Burned

|

or

"Why my son was late to his Friday morning art class"

or

"Because traffic downtown isn't bad enough"

The Metropolitan Building, a 130+ year-old building in downtown Champaign (across the street from 02, kitty corner from Jim Gould's, caught fire early this morning, collapsing just after firefighters arrived, damaging several nearby buildings and causing a major PITA for those of us trying to navigate downtown.

The News-Gazette has a neato slide-show and this Picasa website has some more.

The building was being renovated and no injuries seem to have been reported.


View Larger Map

Bookmark and Share

Sew? Knit? Crochet? You can help!

|

If you've already started your Christmas shopping, get your Christmas giving started too.

"Mama to Mama is honored to introduce our first project. The Caps to Cap-Haitien Project: A Partnership with Konbit Sante, will initially provide newborn jersey caps to be distributed in Safe Birthing Kits in northern Haiti."

Links for more information:
Mama to Mama
Konbit Sante
More on the desperate situation in Haiti

If you do not have the skills or the time to make a hat, please take a second to spread the word -- blog, twitter, email, or just talk about it. You can keep talking about it all month long; the deadline for hats is Decembe 10th.

This is a fabulous project that will help people who are truly in need.

Bookmark and Share

Trifecta

|

Me: "Lord Byron famously proclaimed that lobster salad, served with champagne, was the only thing a woman should be seen eating."

She: I hate lobster

Me: You're not a big fan of champagne either.

She: And I don't really like Byron.

The review is actually pretty interesting.

The most gripping moments in Barbe-Nicole's saga occur in 1814 as Russian troops, retreating from battlefield defeat at the hands of Napoleon's armies, threatened to overrun Reims, where the family's then-flailing business was based. Ordering workmen to seal the entrance to her cellars, the widow hoped to prevent the soldiers from raiding her wines, especially those made in 1811, the year of a legendary grape harvest. The cellars were not looted, as it turned out; the soldiers mostly bought the wine, spreading the word of its nectar-like qualities when they returned east. "Today they drink," she said. "Tomorrow they will pay!"
Bookmark and Share

Unity!

|

The great uniter has apparently asked this guy to be his chief of staff -- ie, his presidential gatekeeper, one of the most powerful people in his inner circle.

That night, on the northwest side, Rahm Emanuel was elected to Congress. A former Clinton whiz kid who'd gotten his start as a fundraiser for Mayor Richard M. Daley, Emanuel was connected -- in the three years after leaving the White House (where he'd helped push through NAFTA), he earned $16 million putting together Wall Street mergers. He was also zealously partisan. He had once owned a consulting business devoted to finding skeletons in Republican closets. At a Clinton victory dinner in Little Rock in 1992, Emanuel celebrated by reciting a hoped-for necrology of Democrats who had "f***ed" the president-elect. After every name, he stabbed a steak knife into a table and screamed, "Dead man!"

[...]

When Emanuel took the job [getting more Democrats elected to Cognress], he never expected to win, but he knew a president's party usually loses seats in the sixth year of his term, and he figured if he could pick up 10 or 12, he'd be rewarded with a leadership position, a step toward his goal of becoming speaker of the House. (He is now chairman of the Democratic Caucus, the fourth-ranking post in the House.) If he makes it, C-SPAN may have to institute a seven-second delay. On Election Night, 10 minutes after CNN called the House for the Democrats, Emanuel climbed up on a table in DCCC headquarters and addressed his cheering, victory-starved staff, celebrating the party's biggest win since 1992. He wanted to wrap up the campaign with a message for the Republicans.

"Since my kids are gone, I can say it," he shouted. "They can go f*** themselves!"

"Change has come to America..."

Bookmark and Share

Hurry, Hurry, Hurry

|

This is Mama-Lu. Chris usually edits my posts so please excuse any problems and the absence of my special font color. I'll have him fix it when he get home tonight [fixed--ed]. Since these are time sensitive and I forgot before he left, I'm flying solo.

  1. Time is almost up to register for the Smart Martha Seminar taking place at St. Matthew's in Champaign on November 15th. Learn new ideas about having a faith-filled family and managing your house. Plus, spend the day with other women who are trying figure these things out too.


    For more info, visit the Smart Martha website, and to register go to our parish website

    I've heard good things!

  2. Scoot on over to Seaside Tales for a chance to win one of my duck puppets. Enter by Friday!

Bookmark and Share

While you mourn (and I imagine most of my readers are mourning), here's something to cheer you up: Al Franken, Limbaugh of the left, lost his senate bid by less than 700 votes. Congratulations to all the various Yorks for doing their job!

Bookmark and Share

Let's talk about something else

| | Comments (2)

For all you ladies who grew up watching The Sound of Music and wanting to find your very own Captain Von Trapp, you probably don't want to read this review of Christopher Plummer's memoir. I did learn, however, that his daughter is "Honey-Bunny" from Pulp Fiction and the axe murderer in So I Married and Axe Murderer.

Also, this one's for Brandon: "A 65th Birthday Tribute to Joni Mitchell."

Bookmark and Share

My stupid, stupid county

|

We had three proposed tax hikes on the ballot this year. A property tax increase to fund county forest preservation, a property tax increase to fund township services to very poor folks and a sales tax increase to fund school buildings. I voted for the first two and against the last (shame on them for proposing a regressive sales tax to fund schools).

Well, none of them passed, which is not too surprising since who the hell really wants to pay more taxes? But what gets me is that the first two were landslides, 2-1 in the case of the township tax, while the school tax came within 300 votes of passing. It just goes to show that some people will vote for anything, even increasing the tax burden on the poorest citizens, in the name of education.

Bookmark and Share

None of the above

| | Comments (7)

I should know better than to start an election series so close to election day. Due to being out of time, I'll have to condense my thoughts.

For the sake of brevity (ha!), I'm going to set aside a whole host of issues and look narrowly at issues related to respect for human life. This is in a sense unsatisfying because both candidates have a whole host of stances that are destructive of society and culture, both here and abroad, but I think it works out because they in a sense cancel each other out.

While I think a vote for Barack Obama is morally indefensible for anybody who believes that an embryo is a human being deserving of legal protection, we should not be too quick to support John McCain. For starters, McCain supports embryonic stem cell research, which, last I checked, involves the direct killing of innocent human beings. Of course, Obama supports the direct killing of more innocent humans by his support for abortion, but this is not how the debate has been portrayed by Catholics. We're hearing that Obama supports an intrinsic evil and must be opposed, without reference to McCain's similar problem. I think that is a grave disservice to embryonic human life and is hurting the prolife witness. Analogize this to any other issue -- "McCain supports exterminating Hispanics, but Obame wants to get rid of Hispanics andJews, so obviously we have to support McCain." To the extent that Catholics are not speaking out against McCain's support for ESC research, they are injuring the prolife movement.

Furthermore, although McCain has a decent voting record when it comes to abortion, Rick Santorum, who fought honorably for the unborn when he was a senator, publicly stated last year that John McCain, behind closed Senate doors, opposed prioritizing prolife bills and amendments. Again, that's not nearly as bad as Barack Obama -- who couldn't even bring himself to support medical treatment for babies who accidentally get born because he didn't want to undermine Roe v. Wade -- but it's hardly cause for cheer.

Finally, the dream of most prolifers, myself included, is getting those five votes on the Supreme Court. "We're just one vote away!" That's true, and while the prospect of having Roe v. Wade finally overturned is tantalizing, it's hard to imagine that McCain would have a better record than, say, Ronald Reagan, who, if you count Bork, was only 50% on his Supreme Court picks in terms of their votes on abortion. Once again, we have to believe that McCain's picks are more likely to be pro-life than Obama's, but we're dealing with contingencies here, not facts, and similar contingencies have historically not worked out in our favor.

If you're going to credibly defend a vote for John McCain, it can't be on broad philosophical grounds, because there's just not much there. I think it has to be on very narrow political grounds: the Mexico City policy and the Freedom of Choice Act. Nobody doubts that President Obama, like Clinton before him, would overturn the Mexico City policy, which prohibits government agencies from making abortion one of America's few remaining exports. And he has already stated he would sign the Freedom of Choice Act, which would strip away even more legal protection from the unborn. Those two policies are, I think, decisive in making McCain "better" than Obama on abortion. But is this impact enough to justify voting for McCain, a man who supports the direct killing of human embryos?

Archbishop Charles Chaput put it wonderfully a few months back in a piece on the primacy of abortion. He said something to the effect that if we are going to vote for a candidate that supports legal abortion, we have to have a reason good enough to tell the unborn to their face on Judgment Day. Again, while it's clear that this rules out voting for Obama, I have a hard time envisioning meeting not the victims of abortion, but the victims of embryo destructive research and saying, "I supported a man who favored your death in order to stop a few abortions. Besides, the other guy had no value for your life either. I could have fought and denounced both candidates, but I decided to downplay your plight to serve other noble ends." It's not that I don't think I'd be in a sense justifiable, I just don't think I'd have taken the highest road.

I have trouble with the fact that if I want to vote for one of the major party candidates, I have to perform the grimmest of calculations: take x amount of unjust wars McCain is likely to start, subtract out the 1.5 million abortions per year that he oppposes (but can't really do much about except appoint the right judges, which is at best a 50% shot -- Souter! Kennedy! O'Connor! Stevens!) but add back in all of the frozen embryonic humans he wants to cannibalize for research. And where does that get us? Are we Catholics really transforming society by thinking like that?

I am truly thankful that I don't have to perform that calculation. Living in Illinois, which will go for Obama by about 60%, I'm happy to "waste" my vote on a third party candidate. Chuck Baldwin of the Constitution Party opposes abortion and embryonic stem research and invading harmless countries. He has some policies I dislike, but none that, as far as I can tell, lead to the direct killing of the innocent.

For those of you who live in a state that matters, I pray for you and ask you to pray for wisdom, prudence and discernment.

Bookmark and Share

He knows me, he really knows me

| | Comments (2)

4yo: "Poppy, you should get a job selling animals! I bet you could make a lot of money and you'll get rich and then you can buy lots of shiny, expensive things. And lots of BEER!"

Bookmark and Share

Pages

Mama-Lu's Etsy Shop

About this Archive

This page is an archive of entries from November 2008 listed from newest to oldest.

October 2008 is the previous archive.

December 2008 is the next archive.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.