Still Phils Good!

Well, as Amanda deftly inferred from my previous post (and most people probably knew anyhow), the Philadelphia Phillies are the 2008 World Series champions, and I am loving it!

That's right, 28 years without a baseball championship, and 25 years (and 100 sports seasons) without a pro sports championship of any kind came to a stunning halt last night, with the Phillies' 4-3 victory over the Tampa Bay Rays, in the longest World Series game ever - started on Monday night, finished last night after being suspended for almost 2 full days due to the whether.

More importantly, however, is that my favorite of favorite teams gets its first title that I can actually remember (I was 6 months old the only other time the Phillies won the title, that just doesn't count).

I'm putting together a more sportswriter-ish entry that should be up on Peanut Vendors later tonight or tomorrow, but over here I'm just going to lay out some personal reflections.

I'm not sure why I'm a Phillies fan, particularly. Unlike some of my good friends, I don't come from a long line of Phillies fans. In fact, I'm essentially first generation here. My Dad was always a big fan of sports, but not so much connected to any particular team. He (and my Mom) are now Phillies fans because I am, not the other way around. I don't even really know when it started per say. I know that my first real baseball cards were a 1987 Topps Phillies team set, and I also believe that '87 was when I saw my first Phillies game. I just never remember being aware of major league baseball and not being a Phillies fan. I can tell you one thing: I didn't become a Phillies fan because they were good. Despite their great success VERY early in my life, by the time I became aware of them, they were mediocre, on their way to really bad. In that 1987 season, they went 80-82, which was the best they would do in my first 6 seasons as a fan. Then, there was the glorious season of 1993, the last time the Phillies went to the World Series before this season. As much fun as that season was, it ultimately ended in heartache, when "Wild Thing" Mitch WIlliams first blew a massive lead in Game 4 of the series, and then gave up the famed World Series ending home run to Joe Carter in Game 6. After '93, it was back to business as usual, as they went through another 7 straight seasons of losing more games than they lost.

In 2001, the variety of heartache and frustration changed. They went from not good at all, to pretty good, but not quite good enough. I think that's actually more frustrating over an extended period of time. They had winning seasons in 5 of 6 years, typically finishing just a couple games out of the playoffs. Until last year, and the glory of their comeback to win the division over the NY Mets, which was followed by getting swept by the Rockies.

I guess I'm just a glutton for punishment. It's one thing to be a Phillies fan, but for them to be my favorite of favorites? Oh well. I will tell you something though, it all paid off last night. I have nothing against fans of perennially successful teams. (Okay, so that might be a half-truth...) However, I will say I don't think it's possible for, say a Yankees fan, to get the level of joy from a championship that I experienced along with so many Philadelphia fans last night, or that Boston fans experienced in 2004, or that Cubs fans will experience if they manage to win one before the end of time... Repeated success is not a bad thing, but I think it becomes really easy to take it for granted.

Don't get me wrong, I'll take winning over losing any day. But in this moment, at this time, the losing and disappointments along the way, they all serve to make the final victory that much sweeter.

It was worth the wait...

YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

That's all for tonight. I'll try to elaborate tomorrow!

Waiting is the hardest part...

So, it would appear that I chose to commemorate the one year anniversary of the re-launch of this blog with the longest posting drought in it's history. That's just how I roll.

Really, however, I blame the World Series. For most of the last week, I've either been getting ready for, watching, or napping to recover from watching late the night before, the Series. If the weather hadn't intervened, there would be a fair chance that it would be done right now. However, if you're paying attention, you know that Monday night's Game 5 was suspended due to rain, and is just set to resume tonight, in the bottom of the 6th, with the game tied 2-2, and the Phillies holding a 3-1 Series lead. So, assuming that there are no extra innings, the Phillies are either 3.5 innings away from their 2nd World Championship, or 3.5 innings away from a plane ride to Tampa for Game 6 tomorrow night.

I gotta say, I thought the individual tension of the games would be the worst thing ever, in terms of sports fandom, but it hasn't been so much. This wait, however, has been absolutely killer. The series has just been sitting in limbo for almost 48 hours. I can't wait for it to get started, so that the Phillies can either get this done, or at the very least, move on to their second chance to clinch in Game 6. I don't know that I've ever experienced anything quite like this. I suppose the closest equivalent situation in recent World Series history would have been the 11 day delay in the '89 Series between Oakland and San Francisco, which was caused by a major earthquake in the Bay Area just as Game 3 was about to start. That, however, had a couple things that I'm sure made it much different for the fans of those teams. First of all, Game 3 was not a deciding game, and hadn't started. And secondly, a major earthquake in your area does things to take your mind of off sports that a little bit of wind, rain, and cold just doesn't.

So, hopefully this game will get played tonight, and hopefully the Phillies will win and the Series will end. Regardless, I think the return of truly regular blogging on this site may have to wait until the Series comes to a conclusion. Hopefully, that won't be long at all.

Has it been a year already?

In fact, it has. On this day (not this date) last year, this blog was launched. Okay, well, I guess technically it was re-launched, but can you really consider 4 posts in 2 years from the first go-round an actual launch?

Well, regardless of whether this is in fact a launch or a re-launch, the simple fact is that this time has been much more successful than the last, whatever it was. This is post 241, meaning that I posted 240 times in the last year. This represents roughly a 12000 percent increase in my blogging productivity over the prior 2 years.

It occurred to me that it had been a year over the weekend, because it was Homecoming Weekend at Messiah, and I starting posting again after last year's Homecoming, and my 5 year reunion. Oddly enough, this year's Homecoming was the first since my freshman year in 1998 that I did not set foot on the Messiah campus. Not even for the soccer game! I'll give some of you a moment to recover from that particular shock, and then I'll tell you that I have, in fact, not been to a Messiah soccer game yet this year. Are you back up off the floor yet? It's not intentional, it's just worked out that way. I expect that will change before the season ends. Really, my attendance has been gradually slipping since I moved to this house and went from being roughly 5 minutes away from campus, to more like 20. It's more of an effort to go, and since my level of personal connection to the team has been naturally slipping the further I get from my college days, it's just the way things progress.

Anyhow, at the one year anniversary of the blog, I've been reflecting a bit. Shaking the cobwebs off the blog was part of an overall plan to make more productive use of my time. At the centerpiece of that plan was a dramatic cutback in the amount of TV I was watching, with a commitment not to turn the TV on until at least 8 pm on weeknights. The extra time was to be spent reading, blogging, and doing other more productive things. I've tried cutting back on TV before and failed miserably, but a year later, I'm still feeling pretty good. Other than the implied exceptions for things like the NCAA basketball tournament, the Olympics, and Phillies playoff games, I've kept that commitment very well. It seems somewhat ironic that I'm writing about this days after I finally gave in and bought an HDTV (The Phillies are in the World Series, that doesn't happen every day.), but at the same time, it felt good being able to make that purchase knowing I wouldn't be going back to allowing TV to completely dominate my time.

As you've probably noticed, there has been a recent drop-off in my blogging frequency, and my reading is down too. There's a number of factors at play there - a stretch of rather irregular schedules, my initial "honeymoon" period with the Wii, the Phillies playoff run, and a spell of apathy being chief among them. However, I've got a new book pulled out and ready to go, my schedule should return to normal shortly after the World Series, and I anticipate things getting closer to the old norm in the weeks to come.

My continued gratitude to those of you who think it worth your time to come by and read what I have to say on a regular basis! I look forward to what will happen in the next year.

I should be sleeping...

After years of no playoffs, and then one year with a ridiculously quick playoff exit, my beloved Philadelphia Phillies are making a deep playoff run this year, and stand one victory away from their first World Series apperance since 1993. My head and my heart are loving this, and going absolutely nuts right now.

The rest of my body, however, is not so thrilled. The playoffs are not an easy time of year to be an East Coast baseball fan. You see, during the regular season, baseball games typically start at no later than 7:30 pm in the time zone that they are being played. And, due to the way the schedule is set up, eastern teams like the Phillies play about 90% of their games in the Eastern and Central time zones, which means you'll very rarely see a game start much later than 8. And on those rare West Coast swings, none of which occur in the last month of the season, the reality is that each game is only one out of 162, so it's pretty easy to go to bed before or shortly after the 10/10:30 pm EST start time. Couple that with the fact that a regular season 9 inning baseball game typically runs not much more than 3-3 1/4 hours, and it's not at all difficult or physically demanding to be a fan during the regular season.

The playoffs, however, are a different animal. And even in the division series, the Phillies managed to dodge some of this, because there's was not perceived as having the national draw of some of the other series, and thus they were relegated to afternoon/early evening start times. Now that we've hit the NLCS, however, they've got the primetime games. And at this stage of the game, there's a clear national following, and thus the typical 7-7:30 EST start times go out the window in favor of 8:30, which allows the West Coasters a chance to get home (or to the stadium) from work prior to the first pitch. When you couple that with the fact that, due to extended TV intrusions, more micromanaging of the pitching staffs, and a more generally deliberate pace of the game, postseason games tend to last at least a half hour or more longer than their regular season counterparts, it can be a real beast to be both a fan and a productive member of the American workforce.

Take last night, for example. The game started at 8:22. I relocated my viewing location from my basement to my bed at around 9:30. At around 10:30 (about the 6th inning), I became frustrated and turned the game off, thinking I would just go to sleep at this point. But the fan in me took over shortly thereafter, and I followed the game through to its exciting Phillies victory, which occurred after midnight. At that point, all jacked up from the outcome of the game, I exchanged some internet correspondence with some friends of mine whom I knew were in the same condition, and then I finally turned in for maybe 5 hours of sleep prior to the sounding of my alarm. Fortunately I have a conveniently located soda machine at work!

If the Phillies are to win this series, I really need them to do so by winning tomorrow night's game, so I have plenty of time to rest up for the World Series!

When is insurance NOT insurance?

The answer: when Senator Obama is calling the shots.

I think you're all aware that, despite my recent saga in which I explored my political leanings from a big picture perspective, I have done my best to stay largely insulated from the barrage of coverage surrounding the 2008 Presidential election. There are a number of reasons for that. First of all, I already know enough of about one of the major candidates (Senator Obama) to know that I will NOT be voting for him. Secondly, media political coverage generally just makes me simultaneously angry and depressed at the state of politics in America. Thirdly, you don't really learn that much from the standard media coverage anyhow. The fact of the matter is that at some point in the next couple weeks, I will conduct my own thorough examination of Senator McCain's record and proposals and determine whether I can bring myself to vote for him or not - at the present I'm leaning toward yes. If the answer is no, I will then explore the 3rd party candidates that will be available to me, and if I can't vote for any of them, I will spend some time brainstorming the most amusing option for a write-in vote. I trust it won't get that far.

But you can only insulate yourself so much if you aren't willing to forgo all traditional forms of media for months on end. And for the last several weeks, I'd been hearing an ad for Senator Obama with a piece in it that I couldn't believe was actually intended to mean what it said. So finally, this evening, when I got home, I went to Mr. Obama's website and did some quick searching. And there, as one of the points in his health care reform platform was this statement, that his plan would: "Require insurance companies to cover pre-existing conditions so all Americans regardless of their health status or history can get comprehensive benefits at fair and stable premiums."

Since I'm posting about this, you're probably assuming that I disagree with this portion of Mr. Obama's plan. And you would be wrong. I can't disagree or agree with it, because it's complete and utter nonsense. And I don't mean nonsense as in wrong or mistaken, I mean pure gibberish. This is the political equivalent of "goo goo, ga ga".

You CAN'T insure against a pre-existing condition. It's just not logically possible. You can only insure against an event up until the point at which it actually occurs. Once it does occur, all you can do is deal with the consequences. Let's make some real simple comparisons here. This is the equivalent of signing up for a car insurance company to sign you up today and then pay for the accident you had last week. It's the same as buying flood insurance and expecting coverage for damage from the hurricane that came through a month ago. Try going to a life insurance company and taking out a policy on your grandmother who passed away yesterday. The laughter will be good for your agent. If you want milder examples that still illustrate the point, change it to getting flood insurance with the waters already rising towards your house, or getting life insurance for a death row inmate who has a death warrant signed for tomorrow. If something has either already happened, or is a certainty, you can't insure against it - period.

I'm sure you know generally how insurance works, but I'll give a quick refresher anyhow. You go to a company and ask them to agree to cover the expenses if event A happens. The insurance company then crunches the numbers based on the likelihood of event A happening, how much it would cost to cover the expenses, etc and comes back to you with a premium. They are playing the percentages that even if event A happens to you, they'll make more than enough money from those for whom event A does not occur to meet their agreements to you and continue to make a profit. That's why it's more expensive to get homeowner's insurance in a flood, hurricane, earthquake, wildfire, etc zone, because the likelihood of the dreaded event A is much higher. Insurance is all about risk, the more risk the insurance company has to assume, the more you have to pay,m and vice versa. Most people come out on the short end of this deal over time, meaning they pay more in premiums than they ever receive in benefits. This is self-evident, because if it weren't the case, the insurance industry wouldn't exist.

So, if someone with a pre-existing condition A comes and wants insurance to cover the treatment for condition A, the probability of condition A occurring, is of course 100%. So, if the company is required to cover the treatment for condition A, then they are not, in fact, insuring the person against condition A, they are becoming a middle man and providing a payment program from the treatment of condition A. Which makes their costs equal to the cost of the treatment from the provider, plus whatever administrative costs they incur. So, in order to maintain a viable business model, the company has 2 choices: #1 - They can either simply pass the cost of the treatment and their administrative costs over to the customer in the form of premiums that will cover both entirely. Of course, this makes zero sense to the consumer, because they are now paying more for the plan than it would cost them to pay for the treatment. #2 - They can subsidize the cost of paying for this treatment by increasing the premiums of clients who do not have pre-existing conditions, which means that everyone else is now paying for their insurance, plus a portion of the cost of the pre-existing condition payment plan the company has to offer.

So, like I said, I can't agree or disagree with this part of Senator Obama's health care plan, because it's not possible to insure pre-existing conditions. You can call it that all you want, but it isn't what is actually happening. Now, what you could do is require insurance companies to offer payment plans for treatment of pre-existing conditions that are subsidized by the profits from their insurance plans. That's actually possible, and accurately represents what is being required. It's also the same thing as mandating that apple orchards to start to grow oranges and sell them at less than cost using the profits from the apples, which is why no one is ever going to call it what it is, but that's beside the point (sort of). That is, however, a proposal I can agree or disagree with, and not total gibberish. Another proposal that is similar and at least possible is to require insurance companies to insure individuals for treatment of conditions which are made considerably more likely due to a given pre-existing condition. I would disagree with that as well, but again, it's at least something you could do in theory. The same is true of socialized medicine where you just have the government run/pay for everyone's health care.

So, don't be deceived - Senator Obama does not have a plan to insure pre-existing conditions, no matter how often he says it! Oh, and by the way, Senator, another piece of your proposal gives a goal of reducing health care costs for employers. Requiring insurance companies to take on guaranteed new expenses strikes me as counterproductive to that goal. To be fair, having done some corresponding research on Senator McCain's plan, I'm not totally on board with it either. I like the general direction, but I don't think it goes far enough.

In the near future, I will lay out my own solution to the health care issues in this country. Okay, it's not my own, I saw it on TV, but I really liked it! The difference between it and the plans you're going to hear from any national candidate is that it will actually attack the core of the health care problems in this country, rather than just putting a band aid over them by giving people extra money towards their insurance in one fashion or another. And the reason you'll never hear a major candidate run with it? It's not a quick fix, there will be an adjustment period that will be quite painful for a number of people, and there's no way to sugarcoat that fact. Such realities are generally not popular in today's American society, and thus promoting such a policy is not conducive to winning an election.

Back in Detroit...

Well, my trip has come full circle, and I'm sitting in the Detroit airport waiting for my flight home to Harrisburg. It's quite the contrast in experiences really. On Thursday night, I had the enthusiasm of getting my trip started and seeing my friends in front of me, coupled with the excitement of following the Phillies game as they broke out to a nice lead against the Brewers. Today, the trip is sadly behind me, and it's just a dreary Monday morning/afternoon in Detroit, no excitement there. (Though I'm very excited that the Phillies next game will be on Thursday in the NLCS!) That's the thing about trips like this - you look forward to them for months, and then its all over in 3 days.

Yesterday was a good way to spend the last full day of the trip. I joined Tim and Amanda at their church, and got to put some faces to a few names I'd "met" over on their blog. After church, it was a typical lazy Sunday afternoon of napping, following football games and fantasy teams, and following along as the Phillies clinched their NLDS with a win over the Brewers. (Okay, so the last part isn't exactly "typical", but it was freakin' AWESOME!). In the evening, I broke out the Wii, and Tim and I engaged in some tennis, and some serious Mario Kart action. Amanda has those pictures, maybe they will make it up onto their blog at some point. Although, they just got rid of me in time for another house guest, as Amanda's Dad is out for a visit, so I wouldn't put that on her right away :-) Nathan was quite the enthusiastic fan of our Wii activities.

Then it was off to bed, and up this morning for goodbyes and the ride to the airport. Nathan, in his sweet toddler way, did his best to make leaving as hard on me as possible. I've given Amanda some mock grief in the past for bragging on how adorable her son is, but it is only that, mock grief. Nathan might not be the cutest kid EVER, but he's got to be a finalist for the honor, especially since he's got such a sweet personality on top of his adorable appearance:-) Tim, Amanda, whatever you're doing, keep it up!

But, much as I would have liked to stay, I had to be on my way. The flight from South Bend definitely set a few records for me and commercial flights. It was definitely the smallest plane (exterior prop engines, and it seated 34, I believe, the very definition of a puddle-jumper), and also the shortest flight (about 40 minutes). I believe it was also the first time I've boarded a commercial plane in the US by walking out to the plane and climbing the ladder into the door, rather than through a standard tunnel gate. I could be wrong about that though, I'm having vague recollections of doing that on a flight out of Harrisburg. Then, once I got into Detroit, I got to do a couple laps of the concourse. My boarding pass said the flight was at B-15, and there wasn't anything to check right near where I got off the plane. The first place I saw to check was having issues and the board where the Harrisburg departures should have been wasn't working. When I got almost to my gate, I looked up and the only Harrisburg flight listed was for C-16, which was right next to where I had come from, so I turned around and started walking back. Then, it occurred to me that the departure time for that flight might have been much earlier than my flight, so at the next opportunity I looked at departures again, and there were 2 Harrisburg flights listed on that one, an earlier one that had been delayed (which was the C-16 flight) and my flight, which was in fact listed as B-15, so I turned around again.

So, here I sit back at B-15, with probably another 90 minutes before I can get on my last flight. While I'm sad to see my trip end, I am looking forward to getting back to my house, my dog, and my own bed. Going back to work tomorrow is another story, but I'm sure I'll survive :-)

Waking up the echoes...

Well, I certainly won't say it was the purpose for this trip, but perhaps the initial inspiration for the trip was the chance to catch a football game at Notre Dame Stadium, and that is what I did today. I dragged Tim along as well, and I think he enjoyed himself despite being neither a Notre Dame fan in general, nor a particularly big fan of American football, in general. We made the 15-20 minute walk from the Ritter house to Notre Dame. (This, by the way, is easily the best form of transportation to a major sporting event. Now I just need to go about making friends that live within walking distance of all the major venues I'd like to attend events at...) Tim was also quite helpful in knowing how to get around the campus. We didn't do a ton of touring, but the first obligatory stop was the fabled Golden Dome:

Due to our location and the timing of our arrival, we stumbled upon the assembly point from which the Notre Dame marching band, guard, cheerleaders, etc, started their trek to the stadium:

While I am a Notre Dame fan, and a serious sports fan in general, and certainly appreciate the college football history that's represented on the Notre Dame campus, I don't typically find myself getting crazy nostaglic about venues and such as it relates to sports. However, as we were heading on into the stadium, the band was also marching along, and when they launched into the Notre Dame Victory March there in the shadow of the Dome, I have to admit, I had a bit of a moment. It was really pretty awesome. And then, right outside the stadium, the band nearly ran over us. Well, not really, but somehow we had found ourselves in front of them and in their path, and the security personnel clearing the way for them yelled at us to move. Our seats were in the end zone, at the very top of the lower level. Prior to the expansion back in the mid-90s, we would have been about 1 row from the top of the stadium. Still, a very nice view, and I had another bit of a moment as the Irish came out of the tunnel through the band to the Victory March.
It was an absolutely incredible fall day for a football game. Bright, clear skies, and temperatures in the mid 60s. It felt much warmer than that inside the stadium with the sun beating down on us and thousands of people pressed around us yelling and such. Tim and I both came back with some sunburn (who thinks about packing sunscreen for a trip to Indiana in October?) There were two unused seats next to us, which was quite useful. Most of the stadium is bleacher seating, and at least in the lower level, the amount of space allowed per person on the benches was not allocated with the size of the average modern day American in mind, if you catch my drift. Tim and I were appropriately sized for these seat widths, but there were many in our row who were not. Anyhow, it was a great day for the game, and the game wound up being pretty exciting, after looking like a ND blowout, and still wound up with the favorable result.
On the way out, we got a good look at the famous "Touchdown Jesus". This mural is actually partially visible from inside the stadium, but we were sitting with our backs to it.
After the game, we made our way back to the Ritter house, eager to just have a chance to sit down again in a chair that had a back to it. So, all in all, a great experience and one I'd be very excited to repeat in the future.

That being said, Notre Dame could have lost by 50, and I still would have had my entire trip made for me today. One of Nathan's favorite phrases these days is "Amazing" followed by either Mommy or Daddy, depending on which parent he's sucking up to at the moment :) During dinner, I received an "Amazing Scott", for the absolute highlight of my day. That little train was the best money I've spent on this trip :)

The trip thus far

Yesterday we went up to St. Joseph, Michigan, which is on the shore of Lake Michigan. Here are some of the visual highlights:

Nathan enjoying a hot dog

Nathan seemed to think he was the sand inspector

Taking a break on a convenient log

Afterwards, we headed back home and had a pretty relaxing evening: a little fall snack of fresh apples, peanut butter, cheese, and apple cider, dinner at Steak and Shake, and just lounging around for the most part. This morning, Tim put together an excellent breakfast, and prior to that, I gave Nathan the train I brought for him. That's right, I'm not above bribing my friends' children for their affections :-) Actually, in Nathan's case, I really didn't have to, this was just a bonus. The train was a hit, however:

This afternoon, Tim and I will set out on foot and make the arduous (1 mile) trek to Notre Dame Stadium for the Notre Dame v. Stanford football game. It looks like we're going to have an absolutely beautiful fall day for the game, much as we had yesterday. This is obviously my first Notre Dame game, and really the first football game I've attended at a level above high school, so I'm pretty excited about it. More pictures to come, I'm sure.

Safely in South Bend

Well, I made it safely to South Bend last night, as I'm sure you all assumed. Well, all of you except Tim and Amanda, they didn't have to assume, they were there :-)

Not much has happened between when my plane landed last night around 8:35 and now. Rumor has it we are making a trip to the beach today, though I think given the forecast for weather in the low 60s that we'll really just be admiring the beach. And my Notre Dame tickets are safely here, so I'm definitely looking forward to tomorrow.

Checking in from Detroit

Well, leg 1 of the journey is complete and I'm sitting at my gate in Detroit, waiting for my flight to South Bend. Actually, the taxi from the runway to the gate was so long I thought maybe my itinerary had been changed and we were just going to taxi to South Bend... Anyhow, flight one was uneventful, which is all good. I'm pretty sure I'm about to get on the smallest plane I've ever flown in commercially. I'm in row 5, which I believe puts me in the front half of the plane, but just barely.

In Harrisburg I was once again amused by a common air traveller tendancy - the seeming need to get in the boarding line the second that they announce any kind of boarding. It's really quite comical, if you ask me. Here we are, everyone nicely seated, all of us with tickets that have our seat number clearly printed on them. And the second they announce pre-boarding, everyone, except for a select few (myself included) jumps up from their (reasonably) comfortable seats to stand in line. I, on the other hand, collected my things and moved down to the end of my row so I would be ready for when they actually called for me to board. There were people that probably stood in line with their luggage for a good 10 minutes before they were able to board. And the funny part about this was, my seat was in the back half of the plane, which they board first, so when they called for my rows, I walked right over and was able to board, ahead of about 1/3 of the people who had been standing in line the whole time.

I'm not sure I understand the nature of this particular phenomenon, other than maybe the thought that getting in line to get on the plane makes you feel like you're going somewhere, even though you really aren't. I do know there are also some people with these monstrous carry-ons who want to get first dibs at the overhead bin space. For my part, I think I'll continue to carry-on small luggage, and to trade that minor psychological lift for the comfort of 5-10 extra minutes in my seat.

Waiting...

Okay, so I was wrong and yesterday's post wasn't my last from PA for a couple days. But I'm currently in the Harrisburg Airport, so officially, I'm on my trip, and this one really shouldn't count...

I just have to take the opportunity to declare how much I LOVE flying out of Harrisburg as opposed to the other "local" options. For a point of reference, I left work at 2:30, pulled out of the parking garage at 2:40, parked in the airport lot and caught the parking shuttle at 3:00, and was past security and at my gate at 3:20, all without the slightest bit of stress or aggravation. To top it all off, I'm able to tell you about this now using FREE wireless, as opposed to the jerks at BWI and JFK who want to charge for it. If recent history holds true, I'll be at my house within an hour of the time my plane lands coming back, as well.

Anyhow, the plane I'm taking to Detroit is here and unloading, so it looks like we'll be boarding close to on time, and I should be fully on my way in another 40 minutes or so. Maybe I'll check in from Detroit as well, if the powers that be at that airport aren't money grubbing wireless charging for jerks.

Prepping for South Bend...

Well, this will probably be my last post from PA for a few days. This time tomorrow, I should be sitting in the airport in Detroit waiting to board my flight to South Bend, Indiana for my weekend visit with my dear friends Tim and Amanda. I'm checked in for my flight (ah, the glory of the internet), I'm almost totally packed, and I'm excited to get on my way after a slightly shortened work day tomorrow. This trip has been officially on the calendar for 8 months, so it's hard to believe that it's finally here. There's been a snafu here and there, most recently something of a fiasco trying to get my tickets for Saturday's Notre Dame football game to the right place. That, however, was happily resolved this afternoon, and they are waiting for me in South Bend.

I am sure that I will check in a time or two this weekend with stories and pictures. Hilarity always seems to ensue when we get together, and of course, there's an adorable toddler in the mix now as well.

Name that movie II

I had a number of my favorite movie quotes rolling around in my head at work today. That, coupled with my pledge to return to carefree, happy days of blogging following the "pariah" series has led me to believe it is time for a second "Name that Movie" quiz. You know the drill...

#1 - Oh, I forgot. You were sick the day they taught law at law school.

#2 - Look, it's not in my nature to be mysterious. But I can't talk about it and I can't talk about why.

#3 - "Hey, Frisbee, far out!" "What was the meaning of that?" "It was right in front of him."

#4 - "Try not to sing anything that reminds them they're in prison." "You think they forgot?"

#5 - "You could be crippled for the rest of your life." "I was crippled for the rest of my life. I got better. He made me better. Hell, you made me better"

#6 - " You know it's funny what a young man recollects? 'Cause I don't remember bein' born. I don't recall what I got for my first Christmas and I don't know when I went on my first outdoor picnic. But I do remember the first time I heard the sweetest voice in the wide world. "

#7 - "Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side, kid"

Okay, that's enough for this time.

Why I'm a political pariah - Wrapping it all up

Okay, so when I said "tomorrow", what I really meant was "next week". I need to get this done so I can go back to the carefree, happy days of blogging I used to know.


Anyhow, when I last wrote, I said that the aim of both Christian right and left to "legislate God's kingdom to earth" was flawed on its face, and self-defeating. Let me expand on this point. Laws are designed to modify behavior, and while I don't go as far as some of my like-minded political brethren, you have to acknowledge that law is generally coercive. However, laws are powerless to change hearts, which is the true shift needed to effect the kind of kingdom that both Christian left and right seek. The New Testament screams it loud and clear - the Old Testament law was powerless to eliminate sin. Why then, should we suppose that human laws would be any more successful than God's law was with these particular aims?

Laws treat symptoms, and leave the disease running around unchecked. As noble as the Christian left's ideal of creating more financial equity is, taking from the rich and giving to the poor does not address the human problem of greed. In fact, in my opinion, it compounds the problem, because in my experience, when you take something from someone that they don't want to give up, they just cling tighter to the rest of their stuff. And the right's desire to legislate certain personal moral issues (prayer in public schools, etc) is also self-defeating, because forcing someone to do something they have no desire to do on their own is more likely to push them away than draw them towards it.

While I don't think the church should completely shy away from the political discussion, I have to admit I often look around and see politics as something of a red herring (much like communism - a cookie to the person who gets that reference) that the enemy uses to distract the church from its real mission. Let me flesh this out a bit. The example I come back to most often on this is abortion. Let me be completely clear before I start - I am against abortion, or at least abortion as birth control. I absolutely think it should be illegal. All of that being said, there's something I often wonder. I wonder what the abortion rate in this country would look like if the Church and its members had spent all the time, money, effort, etc that have gone into the political quest (which to date has been fruitless) to re-criminalize abortion and instead used it to minister to teenage mothers, to sponsor and promote adoptions, and to generally care for those who find themselves in the situation of an unplanned pregnancy. Let me be equally clear - I know there are plenty of people who do this, and many who do so along with their efforts in the political arena. However, it's undeniable that a lot of Christian resources have gone into the political fight. What would that look like? I can only speculate, but I have to think abortion would be viewed differently in this country. I can almost guarantee one thing however, and that's that "evangelicals" who oppose abortion would be viewed in a much different light. The end result of all our strivings in the political arena has largely been a kick to the air, wasted resources, and the creation of a very negative caricature of people of faith who oppose abortion. The same can be said of the Christian left - what if the money, time, and effort devoted to pursuing the cause of the poor in the political realm was spent actually caring for the poor (again, of course there are people who do this, and who do both).

I will say, however, that I have a special concern about the aim of the left towards government wealth redistribution. While I believe that the church in Acts where there were no needy people is the ideal, I have to also note two things. #1 - The government certainly had no part in making that happen, and #2 - it wasn't even a mandate with in the church, it was something the people chose to pursue. Remember Ananias and Sapphria? The story makes it clear that their sin was not in holding money back for themselves, but in lying about it to gain favor from the people. With that being said, I have to come back to the "two kingdom" piece. Creating a bigger government with higher taxes by definition takes resources from God's kingdom and hands them over to man's kingdom. I have no problem with the church coming alongside the government and working with it where our interests align, but I have a serious hesitation towards willingly handing over our resources to them for those purposes. A secular government has no mandate to maintain the priorities of the church for which those resources were given, and isn't likely to give them back if those priorities change. Jesus told his followers to feed and clothe the poor, and I just don't see that He had in mind for us to abdicate that responsibility to the government.

"Give to Caeser what is Caeser's, and to God what is God's". Well, in today's world, we have a say in just how much Caeser demands. To me, it just seems right that, as citizen's of God's kingdom, we should elect to have Caeser demand as little as possible, so that we have more left over to give to God.

Why I'm a politcal pariah - Kingdom Confusion

Disclaimer: Up until now, I've used the terms left and right to refer generally to those sides of the politcal spectrum, as traditionally defined, and as a whole. As I begin to land this plane, I'm turning my focus specifically to Christian politics. So, when I use the terms left and right, there will be an implied "Christian" in front of them, to make that distinct. I suppose I could just right that everywhere, and it would probably take less time than this disclaimer has taken, but that's just not how I roll.

Disclaimer #2: I'm fully aware that there will be some generalizations within the contents of this post.

So, reaching back, I discussed the two kingdom idea - that we as Christians are citizens of God's kingdom, as well as whatever earthly kingdom they happen to dwell in. I also stated that we are supposed to be citizens of God's kingdom first, and of our earthly kingdom second. However, as I also mentioned, since Biblical times, government has developed and evolved to the point where in many countries, everyday, ordinary people (and by extension, everyday, ordinary Christians) have a level of participation and influence in their earthly kingdom in a way that was just not a Biblical reality.

One result of this, at least as I see it, has been what I will dubb "Kingdom Confusion" - that is, a blurring of the lines between God's kingdom and man's kingdom, which comes about as people of faith are given the opportunity to express their ideals and beliefs via their vote. This phenomenon did not exist in Biblical times. God's kingdom and man's kingdom were either clearly one (as with the nation of Israel in much of the Old Testament), or clearly and obviously distinct (as with the Roman Empire in the New Testament).

What kingdom confusion really winds up being at its core is Christians trying to set up their earthly kingdom in the pattern of the heavenly one, or at least their picture of it. (As I've learned recently, one of the somewhat frustrating things about Jesus was that for all that he talked about the kingdom, he never clearly defined it, but that's an aside). That's a noble idea, at least on its face. The problem with it, however, is that, as I said, the kingdom of God isn't exactly well spelled out in Scripture, and as such, as humans, we have a pretty hard time agreeing on what the kingdom should look like. And unfortunately, rather than really examining the Scriptures and carving our own path, we have, for the most part, allowed ourselves to be forced into one of the two traditional sides, left and right, based on our view of Scripture.

The right tends to focus on setting up God's kingdom from a perspective of personal and individual responsibility, its signature issues being more those of personal morality. The left, on the other hand, tends to look at setting up God's kingdom from a perspective of collective responsibility, the signature issues being those of equality and provision for the poor.

I said "the problem" earlier, but there's really at least 2 problems, and the second problem is actually much more significant. The second problem is that, as I see it, trying to legislate God's kingdom to earth via the mechanisms of a secular government is a task that is flawed on its face, and self-defeating, in my opinion. This is an opinion I shall cover in more detail tomorrow (cross your fingers) in what should be my final post (keep them crossed) on this subject.

Checking back in

This "Why I'm a Politcal Pariah" series has been the slowest developing set of posts ever, and I apologize for that. To be honest, I'm a bit surprised I got two installments done last week. You see, lately, it seems like whenever the climate starts to change in the spring and fall, my sinuses go crazy, and I woke up on Monday all clogged up and not feeling very good at all. I fought through it, fortunately mainly only had to go to work and then come home with little planned in the evenings for most of the week, and so was able to squeeze out a few blog entries. By the time I was mostly feeling better, it was Thursday and I needed to set myself to cleaning the house and making other preparations for the visit of my cousins from California on Saturday afternoon. They have 6 kids (7th on the way), the oldest being like 13 or 14, youngest being 2 1/2, so there were preparations. It was a relatively short visit, and it was a beautiful day so we were able to take advantage of the playground and pavilion adjacent to my development. Poor Chaser went absolutely bonkers while being kept in his crate with all the people running around the house, however.

I spent most of last evening just chilling out, and then was captivated by sports this afternoon (primarily the Ryder Cup, which I blogged about over on Peanut Vendors, but also the Phillies playing to bolster their playoff hopes, and Week 3 of the NFL. It was actually a very nice weekend as a followup to a week of feeling under the weather. A few things to do, but overall very calm and relaxing.

I have every intention of wrapping up my "pariah" postings with one or two more posts early this week. We'll see how it goes. I am going somewhere with this, trust me!

Some clarification

I think I ran around in circles a bit, and also dwelt only on a "left" issue in my last post, so I wanted to make an effort to say things a bit more simply.

What will follow is a series of statement pairs. The first statement in each pair is a moral judgment, the second a political view that corresponds to it:

"I believe everyone should have access to basic healthcare" and "I believe that the government should provide basic health care for everyone"
"I believe everyone should worship and pray to the Christian God" and "I believe that the government should sponsor worship and prayer at public schools and other government functions and facilities"
"I believe those who have been blessed with wealth should give to those less fortunate" and "I believe the government should tax those who have been blessed with wealth and give that money to the less fortunate"
"I believe that children shouldn't be exposed to violent television and video games " and "I believe the government should make sure children don't have access to violent TV programs and video games"

I hope you can see how, while the 2nd statement is always one that can follow from the first, none of the political views are mandated by the moral judgment. The 2nd statements are solutions someone might favor for the moral problem, and you can favor a different solution without starting from a different moral judgment.

Why I'm a political pariah - Moral vs. political issues

One of my pet peeves is how often political issues are framed as moral issues. I also believe this is one of the reasons why politics is so divisive even within the church. One would assume (though this is not always the case) that Christians should share a relatively similar moral base, so when our politics differ, it can be a significant barrier, because we assume this points to some massive gap in morality. However, political issues and moral issues are not the same thing, at least not by definition, and therefore two people with very similar moral fibers can arrive at different political conclusions. It happens, all the time.

Before I go much further, let me be clear that some political issues are, in fact, moral issues. The best examples I can come up with would be those of crime and punishment (capital punishment being the most noteworthy), abortion, and war. These sorts of issues, not surprisingly, fall around the most basis function of government - to protect the lives of it's citizens.

Many other political issues, however, are not, in fact, moral issues, but rather, they are debates about how to best solve moral questions - or better yet - what the role of government is in dealing with these moral issues. So, on these issues, what you generally wind with is two sides grasping for a moral high ground (which doesn't exist if there's not a moral question at stake), and serving to make the issue that much more heated and divisive.

The best example I can use to make the distinction is on issues of social programs and welfare. The moral question at issue is that of our collective responsibility to deal with poverty and help the poor. The political issues all stem from questions regarding what the government's role in helping the poor is. A person with a deep personal concern and a heart for the poor can easily be found on either side of the spectrum on these issues - the difference is not in their concern for the moral problem, but in their view on what the best solution is. That's not, however, how the issue is allowed to be framed. The debate is often allowed to drift to being about IF we're going to care for the poor, not how. Nothing frustrates me more than to hear someone say they are starting to "lean left" on social issues, when upon further review all they are really saying is that they've become more concerned about the plight of the poor and disaffected. Now, none of this is to say that there aren't people who are against welfare and social programs and actually DON'T have any concern for the poor, but your political stance on this issue just isn't enough information define your moral view.

This is why I'm not a fan of terms like "compassionate conservatism" - the qualifier suggests rather strongly that conservatism on its own is somehow devoid of compassion. It just plays into prior negative stereotypes, and further frames debate as a moral one rather than a political one.

You can hold a belief regarding a moral issue without believing it's the government's role to enforce said belief - it's not inconsistent. I think, in general, we'd find political debate much less rancorous if we did a better job of making these kind of distinctions.

It's not my fault!

Seriously, I wasn't being a tease by promising a new post in my "Why I'm a political pariah" series for yesterday. I came home yesterday having run my thoughts over in my head on the bus ride home, all kinds of prepared. I got home, took care of the dog, sat down at the computer all ready to type, and there was no internet. That's right, once again, I didn't have service. And, as I found out today, it was once again the result of idiots who were doing utility work and dug indiscriminately, cutting my line somewhere. Unlike last time, the severed cable was not left poking up above the ground, so we don't know where it was cut. The Verizon tech ran a temporary line across the yard, which will keep me functioning until they can get out here and bury a new permanent line. So, I should be good to go, at least until the mowers come...

Look for the new "pariah" post later this evening.