Thu - March 27, 2008
Review - The Truth of the Cross by R.C. Sproul
Bias disclaimer: Though I received
this copy of the book as a gift from Nathaniel, I will be receiving another
Reformation Trust book for free in exchange for reviewing this one (as part of
their Blog for a Free Book
promotion).
There is probably no other author who has had such a profound effect on my theology as R.C. Sproul (to be honest, this may present a more serious bias than getting the book for free). His Essential Truths of the Christian Faith was a formative book for me - my first real introduction to the world of theology. R.C. has a way of taking some of the more difficult theological concepts and explaining them so that anyone can not only understand, but see how exciting and wonderful it is to learn more about the amazing God we serve.
This latest book, as one would expect, is no exception to that. It is a very typical R.C. Sproul book - in a good way - in that its direct, concise, and easy to read. I finished off the entire book in about a week and a half, and that was with highlighting and note taking. The Truth of the Cross examines Christ's death on the cross from several different biblical angles - God's Justice, Christ as our Ransom, Christ as our Substitute, the exchange of Christ's blessedness for our cursedness, etc. In each he explains why the Cross is a necessary part of Christianity, and expounds the glory of the Atonement.
This book seems to be an answer to the ongoing controversy over penal substitutionary atonement. There are many in our age who find the idea that God punished His Son on our behalf repellant. They claim it makes God sound primitive and petty - that He would need to be placated, or that He would unjustly punish someone else in our place. While the Truth of The Cross definitely answers these charges, you need not be aware of the modern debate to enjoy it (I'm only tangentially aware of it, and yet I still enjoyed the book).
It also should be somewhat clear from the subject matter, that people who are more well-versed in theology will find this book mostly a review. That is not to imply that its not worth reading or that you won't find new insights, but if you've studied theology at length and don't know anything about the Cross.... well, "UR doin it wrong" (as the lolcats say). If, however, you or someone you know is new to Christianity or hasn't really studied the Cross in depth, then this would be a perfect introduction.
For me, it was mostly a review, but one very worth the time it took to read. There is truly nothing more important than the Cross, and we can never have studied it too in depth. It's also a great asset to have such a succinct summary of biblical categories for the Cross in my library. I'm sure this book will serve as a nice reminder if I want to review a specific aspect of redemption (to that end, I do wish he had included an appendix or something of Bible verses for future study on each topic).
However, one insight in chapter 7 (The Suffering Servant) really jumped out at me, and I don't think I had thought about it before. R.C. first talks about how we often get things wrong by focusing on the externals - man looks at a person's actions, but God looks at his heart. He notes the many incorrect assessments of the Cross by the people who were there as eyewitnesses - the soldiers view Him as another criminal, the Pharisees and the thief mock Him by saying that He saved others but can't save Himself, the people see Him as being punished by God, even the disciples see this as the crushing defeat of their Lord. Clearly, looking at the Cross from the outside, or from the simple historical details, doesn't lead to understanding its cosmic significance.
But then R.C. takes a close look at Isaiah 53, and specifically v. 4-5: "Surely he has borne our griefs and carried our sorrows; yet we esteemed him stricken, smitten by God, and afflicted. But he was wounded for our transgressions; he was crushed for our iniquities; upon him was the chastisement that brought us peace, and with his stripes we are healed." (emphasis mine) The interesting thing here is that the crowds that saw Christ as being punished by God actually got it right! He WAS being punished by God, and even for the sake of sin. What they missed was that Christ was not being punished for HIS sin - He was being punished for THEIR sin. This is precisely what Isaiah is teaching in this verse - a remarkable example of how the Old Testament taught the Atonement (including precise specifics) hundreds of years before Christ was even born.
Apart from the content of the book, the printing of the book is high quality which is encouraging since its the first book I've seen from Ligonier's new Reformation Trust imprint. It's a hardcover book, sort of like the old Soli Deo Gloria ones where it has no dust jacket, but the cover is printed with all of the nice artwork and such. I MUCH prefer hardcovers like this, as I always find dust jackets so easily lost/torn/etc and yet these hardcovers look nice (sometimes dust jacket hardcovers are so ugly and plain w/o the dust jacket). It's also a surprisingly small book - a little over 7" tall, which isn't clear from the photos online.
All in all, its a quality book and a good overview of the essentials surrounding the Atonement and the Cross. I recommend it - 4 out of 5 stars.
There is probably no other author who has had such a profound effect on my theology as R.C. Sproul (to be honest, this may present a more serious bias than getting the book for free). His Essential Truths of the Christian Faith was a formative book for me - my first real introduction to the world of theology. R.C. has a way of taking some of the more difficult theological concepts and explaining them so that anyone can not only understand, but see how exciting and wonderful it is to learn more about the amazing God we serve.
This latest book, as one would expect, is no exception to that. It is a very typical R.C. Sproul book - in a good way - in that its direct, concise, and easy to read. I finished off the entire book in about a week and a half, and that was with highlighting and note taking. The Truth of the Cross examines Christ's death on the cross from several different biblical angles - God's Justice, Christ as our Ransom, Christ as our Substitute, the exchange of Christ's blessedness for our cursedness, etc. In each he explains why the Cross is a necessary part of Christianity, and expounds the glory of the Atonement.
This book seems to be an answer to the ongoing controversy over penal substitutionary atonement. There are many in our age who find the idea that God punished His Son on our behalf repellant. They claim it makes God sound primitive and petty - that He would need to be placated, or that He would unjustly punish someone else in our place. While the Truth of The Cross definitely answers these charges, you need not be aware of the modern debate to enjoy it (I'm only tangentially aware of it, and yet I still enjoyed the book).
It also should be somewhat clear from the subject matter, that people who are more well-versed in theology will find this book mostly a review. That is not to imply that its not worth reading or that you won't find new insights, but if you've studied theology at length and don't know anything about the Cross.... well, "UR doin it wrong" (as the lolcats say). If, however, you or someone you know is new to Christianity or hasn't really studied the Cross in depth, then this would be a perfect introduction.
For me, it was mostly a review, but one very worth the time it took to read. There is truly nothing more important than the Cross, and we can never have studied it too in depth. It's also a great asset to have such a succinct summary of biblical categories for the Cross in my library. I'm sure this book will serve as a nice reminder if I want to review a specific aspect of redemption (to that end, I do wish he had included an appendix or something of Bible verses for future study on each topic).
However, one insight in chapter 7 (The Suffering Servant) really jumped out at me, and I don't think I had thought about it before. R.C. first talks about how we often get things wrong by focusing on the externals - man looks at a person's actions, but God looks at his heart. He notes the many incorrect assessments of the Cross by the people who were there as eyewitnesses - the soldiers view Him as another criminal, the Pharisees and the thief mock Him by saying that He saved others but can't save Himself, the people see Him as being punished by God, even the disciples see this as the crushing defeat of their Lord. Clearly, looking at the Cross from the outside, or from the simple historical details, doesn't lead to understanding its cosmic significance.
But then R.C. takes a close look at Isaiah 53, and specifically v. 4-5: "Surely he has borne our griefs and carried our sorrows; yet we esteemed him stricken, smitten by God, and afflicted. But he was wounded for our transgressions; he was crushed for our iniquities; upon him was the chastisement that brought us peace, and with his stripes we are healed." (emphasis mine) The interesting thing here is that the crowds that saw Christ as being punished by God actually got it right! He WAS being punished by God, and even for the sake of sin. What they missed was that Christ was not being punished for HIS sin - He was being punished for THEIR sin. This is precisely what Isaiah is teaching in this verse - a remarkable example of how the Old Testament taught the Atonement (including precise specifics) hundreds of years before Christ was even born.
Apart from the content of the book, the printing of the book is high quality which is encouraging since its the first book I've seen from Ligonier's new Reformation Trust imprint. It's a hardcover book, sort of like the old Soli Deo Gloria ones where it has no dust jacket, but the cover is printed with all of the nice artwork and such. I MUCH prefer hardcovers like this, as I always find dust jackets so easily lost/torn/etc and yet these hardcovers look nice (sometimes dust jacket hardcovers are so ugly and plain w/o the dust jacket). It's also a surprisingly small book - a little over 7" tall, which isn't clear from the photos online.
All in all, its a quality book and a good overview of the essentials surrounding the Atonement and the Cross. I recommend it - 4 out of 5 stars.
Posted at 07:53 AM | Read More | | |
Sun - March 23, 2008
A new Easter Tradition (aka Dutch Baby Recipe)
As I was reading Mere-O (you've added it to your
RSS feeds by now, yes? good) this morning, I came across this post on
Feasting and Fasting. Tex makes reference to "the simple yet
monumental achievement of a Dutch baby browning in the oven." Which caused me
to ask - what the heck is a Dutch baby? and is it the delectable looking thing
he has pictured in the post?
Armed with the vast wealth of wiki/google/etc, I soon discovered that a Dutch Baby (also known as a German Pancake) is a yorkshire pudding-like confection that is sort of like a sweetened pancake/souffle that falls down in the middle. They traditionally come covered with a bit of lemon juice and dusted in powdered sugar, but the deflated middle also plays a nice host to fruits or other stuff.
Needless to say, I was very intrigued to try one of these things. So I went out and found a couple of good recipes and decided to throw my own together. As I began thinking about this, with Tex's observations on fasting and feasting rattling around in my head, it dawned on me that this might be a perfect Easter Sunday tradition. I have been looking for something to make Easter truly special for my kids - something that they will remember fondly the way we all remember Christmas.
Easter doesn't get the kind of fondness it deserves - it truly is the greatest thing we can possibly celebrate. Not only has Christ come to Earth and took on our flesh (which is what make Christmas so great), but He did so that He might die for our sins. And not only that, He rose from the dead on the third day to proclaim that even death, the very power of sin, had been utterly destroyed. Easter is the day we celebrate that nothing, NOTHING, will be able to restrain the grace of our God in redeeming us for all eternity. Shouldn't Easter get better traditions than anything else then?
Dutch Baby's are fun for kids to watch because they puff up all big before falling down, and they sound unrestrainedly sweet. I'm hoping this can be one of many traditions we can start with our kids to remind them of the wonderful joy of Easter and to help them look forward to a time when we will truly feast in a way befitting the joy of Easter.
Dutch Baby Recipe (w/ Marinated Berries)
Consider this a sort of mashup between Orangette's recipe and the Food Network recipe. I took a little bit from each to make this (though the berry sauce is taken as-is from Food Network. First things first, start by making the marinated berries:
Marinated Berries
2 tablespoons sugar
1 vanilla bean, split lengthwise, and seeds scraped out with a knife and reserved
Grated zest of 1/2 lemon
Grated zest of 1/2 orange
1 cup water
2 tablespoons freshly squeezed orange juice
1 tablespoon freshly squeezed lemon juice
1/2 pint raspberries
1/2 pint blueberries, rinsed
1/2 pint strawberries, rinsed, tops trimmed, halved or quartered, if large
In a small saucepan, combine the sugar, vanilla bean and seeds, citrus zests, and water. Bring to a boil and then reduce the heat to low. Simmer very gently until syrupy, about 25 minutes. (Note: now would be a good time to pull out the ingredients for the Dutch Baby, to allow them to get to room temp.) Remove from the heat and add the citrus juices. Combine the berries in a bowl. Strain the warm syrup over the berries and marinate at room temperature for 30 minutes.
While that is marinating, you can throw the Dutch baby in the oven. First off, preheat the oven to 425º.
Dutch Baby
1 stick unsalted butter
4 eggs
1/2 cup cream
1/2 cup All-purpose flour
3 Tablespoons sugar
1 teaspoon vanilla
Put the stick of butter into a cast iron skillet (10") and melt over low heat. Mix up all the rest of the ingredients in a blender (I add the cream eggs and vanilla first, then add the sugar and then the flour - but not everyone is as OCD as me. I'm sure you could probably throw it all in there and go). Brush the butter up the sides of the cast iron skillet, then pour in the batter from the blender. Throw it into the over and cook it at 425º for 25 minutes. But watch it - mine started getting a bit black around the edges at 25 min (Next year I may try Food Network's cooking instruction - drop to 350º after 10 minutes).
Remove from the oven, dust with a ton of powdered sugar, add the marinated berries, then praise God for food. Seriously, that last step will make it taste much better when you realize that life could be sustained by the runny goo they had in the Matrix - but to you, God has given the wonderful enjoyment of food. And sweeter still, He has given us Easter - the resurrected Son proclaiming forgiveness; our sin is no more, death has no power, He is risen indeed!
Armed with the vast wealth of wiki/google/etc, I soon discovered that a Dutch Baby (also known as a German Pancake) is a yorkshire pudding-like confection that is sort of like a sweetened pancake/souffle that falls down in the middle. They traditionally come covered with a bit of lemon juice and dusted in powdered sugar, but the deflated middle also plays a nice host to fruits or other stuff.
Needless to say, I was very intrigued to try one of these things. So I went out and found a couple of good recipes and decided to throw my own together. As I began thinking about this, with Tex's observations on fasting and feasting rattling around in my head, it dawned on me that this might be a perfect Easter Sunday tradition. I have been looking for something to make Easter truly special for my kids - something that they will remember fondly the way we all remember Christmas.
Easter doesn't get the kind of fondness it deserves - it truly is the greatest thing we can possibly celebrate. Not only has Christ come to Earth and took on our flesh (which is what make Christmas so great), but He did so that He might die for our sins. And not only that, He rose from the dead on the third day to proclaim that even death, the very power of sin, had been utterly destroyed. Easter is the day we celebrate that nothing, NOTHING, will be able to restrain the grace of our God in redeeming us for all eternity. Shouldn't Easter get better traditions than anything else then?
Dutch Baby's are fun for kids to watch because they puff up all big before falling down, and they sound unrestrainedly sweet. I'm hoping this can be one of many traditions we can start with our kids to remind them of the wonderful joy of Easter and to help them look forward to a time when we will truly feast in a way befitting the joy of Easter.
Dutch Baby Recipe (w/ Marinated Berries)
Consider this a sort of mashup between Orangette's recipe and the Food Network recipe. I took a little bit from each to make this (though the berry sauce is taken as-is from Food Network. First things first, start by making the marinated berries:
Marinated Berries
2 tablespoons sugar
1 vanilla bean, split lengthwise, and seeds scraped out with a knife and reserved
Grated zest of 1/2 lemon
Grated zest of 1/2 orange
1 cup water
2 tablespoons freshly squeezed orange juice
1 tablespoon freshly squeezed lemon juice
1/2 pint raspberries
1/2 pint blueberries, rinsed
1/2 pint strawberries, rinsed, tops trimmed, halved or quartered, if large
In a small saucepan, combine the sugar, vanilla bean and seeds, citrus zests, and water. Bring to a boil and then reduce the heat to low. Simmer very gently until syrupy, about 25 minutes. (Note: now would be a good time to pull out the ingredients for the Dutch Baby, to allow them to get to room temp.) Remove from the heat and add the citrus juices. Combine the berries in a bowl. Strain the warm syrup over the berries and marinate at room temperature for 30 minutes.
While that is marinating, you can throw the Dutch baby in the oven. First off, preheat the oven to 425º.
Dutch Baby
1 stick unsalted butter
4 eggs
1/2 cup cream
1/2 cup All-purpose flour
3 Tablespoons sugar
1 teaspoon vanilla
Put the stick of butter into a cast iron skillet (10") and melt over low heat. Mix up all the rest of the ingredients in a blender (I add the cream eggs and vanilla first, then add the sugar and then the flour - but not everyone is as OCD as me. I'm sure you could probably throw it all in there and go). Brush the butter up the sides of the cast iron skillet, then pour in the batter from the blender. Throw it into the over and cook it at 425º for 25 minutes. But watch it - mine started getting a bit black around the edges at 25 min (Next year I may try Food Network's cooking instruction - drop to 350º after 10 minutes).
Remove from the oven, dust with a ton of powdered sugar, add the marinated berries, then praise God for food. Seriously, that last step will make it taste much better when you realize that life could be sustained by the runny goo they had in the Matrix - but to you, God has given the wonderful enjoyment of food. And sweeter still, He has given us Easter - the resurrected Son proclaiming forgiveness; our sin is no more, death has no power, He is risen indeed!
Posted at 07:10 AM | Read More | | |
Thu - March 13, 2008
Thu - March 6, 2008
Joe Carter's book project
Friend and blogger Joe Carter is planning on writing a book, but he
has a novel idea on how to actually fund the project (Samuel
- not sure if this may or may not work for your novel, but its worth some
thought). It is based on the 1000 true fans idea - that artists or content
creators need no longer hope for the longshot big win deal, but instead can use
the power of the long tail to make a living by creating for their True Fans.
The idea is that every artist has a set of True Fans. They are the people who buy every release, get everything signed, show up for every show, etc. Back in my band days, we always had a few of those people. You could count on them to be at nearly every show, and they were the bedrock of your support. The 1000 True Fans idea is that if you can get 1000 of these type of fans, you can make a living by releasing things just for them. They are happy, because their favorite artist is still making music/writing/etc. You are happy because you can actually make a living and devote real time to the thing you're passionate about.
This is an idea I had been thinking about in the back of my mind ever since PodShow had launched the PodSafe Music Network. Most artists are really not hoping to score the triple platinum, major label, millionaire success. They'd take it, of course, but thats not why they make music. Most of them would really just be happy not having to slog through their day job, tired from being up all night playing music. The 1000 True Fans idea does just that - you may not strike it rich, but at least you might quit your day job.
Anyway, all of this is the background to Joe's idea for funding his book. He is going to attempt to raise $5,350 on Fundable as a sort of advance for the book. In return for people donating, he is offering some perks - $15 or more gets you a signed copy of the finished book, $100 or more gets your name and URL on the dedication page, etc. It's a really great idea and I hope he can pull it off.
My advice to Joe - expand his blog series On Conservatism into a full length book. Lay out precisely what conservatism is, what our main values should be, and how to rebuild a movement that seems to be a bit lost of late.
The idea is that every artist has a set of True Fans. They are the people who buy every release, get everything signed, show up for every show, etc. Back in my band days, we always had a few of those people. You could count on them to be at nearly every show, and they were the bedrock of your support. The 1000 True Fans idea is that if you can get 1000 of these type of fans, you can make a living by releasing things just for them. They are happy, because their favorite artist is still making music/writing/etc. You are happy because you can actually make a living and devote real time to the thing you're passionate about.
This is an idea I had been thinking about in the back of my mind ever since PodShow had launched the PodSafe Music Network. Most artists are really not hoping to score the triple platinum, major label, millionaire success. They'd take it, of course, but thats not why they make music. Most of them would really just be happy not having to slog through their day job, tired from being up all night playing music. The 1000 True Fans idea does just that - you may not strike it rich, but at least you might quit your day job.
Anyway, all of this is the background to Joe's idea for funding his book. He is going to attempt to raise $5,350 on Fundable as a sort of advance for the book. In return for people donating, he is offering some perks - $15 or more gets you a signed copy of the finished book, $100 or more gets your name and URL on the dedication page, etc. It's a really great idea and I hope he can pull it off.
My advice to Joe - expand his blog series On Conservatism into a full length book. Lay out precisely what conservatism is, what our main values should be, and how to rebuild a movement that seems to be a bit lost of late.
Posted at 10:25 AM | Read More | | |
Wed - February 20, 2008
Happy International Pipe Smoking Day
Well, I am a bit ashamed to be the last out of
Nathaniel and Van to post on this (I used to be a real
blogger, but now my two self-styled "fake blogger" friends beat me to it), but I
have to say Happy International Pipe Smoking Day to all fellow pipe smokers out
there. And though he is not technically a pipe smoker yet, because he is a pipe
owner as of Tuesday night (when I gave him a spare cob of mine) a shout out goes
to Eric as well. We'll have to introduce you to
the art of actually smoking a pipe here sometime in the near
future.
It is unfortunate that pipe smoking is somehow inexplicably thrown in with cigarettes in the culture's hatred of all things tobacco. I can honestly say I'm a better man for smoking a pipe, and were I to do so more often, I would be a better man. Pipe smoking is something I do while reading and pondering a good book, or having a good discussion with friends. People don't sit down to smoke a pipe while mindlessly watching too much TV or fire up a briar at a Britney Spears concert. It is a contemplative and reflective activity, which is a great thing indeed in a culture bent on perpetual distraction.
So whether you pack it in the traditional 3-layer method, or the new fangled Frank method, whether you're a Zippo, butane or just plain old match guy, whether you like your tobac sweet and aromatic or chock full of Latakia, whether its briar, meerschaum or corn cob - let's all fire up a pipe and meditate on what a wonderful gift God gave us in the form of pipes.
It is unfortunate that pipe smoking is somehow inexplicably thrown in with cigarettes in the culture's hatred of all things tobacco. I can honestly say I'm a better man for smoking a pipe, and were I to do so more often, I would be a better man. Pipe smoking is something I do while reading and pondering a good book, or having a good discussion with friends. People don't sit down to smoke a pipe while mindlessly watching too much TV or fire up a briar at a Britney Spears concert. It is a contemplative and reflective activity, which is a great thing indeed in a culture bent on perpetual distraction.
So whether you pack it in the traditional 3-layer method, or the new fangled Frank method, whether you're a Zippo, butane or just plain old match guy, whether you like your tobac sweet and aromatic or chock full of Latakia, whether its briar, meerschaum or corn cob - let's all fire up a pipe and meditate on what a wonderful gift God gave us in the form of pipes.
Posted at 09:38 AM | Read More | | |
Mon - January 21, 2008
Presidential Primary run-down
This blog has been mostly politics free for a
little bit (well, its been post free, mostly) but I thought I would finally
weigh in on the presidential primaries. This is probably the most exciting
primary I've ever witnessed, as it is completely wide open on both sides. So
without further ado, here's my take on each of the major
candidates.
Democrats:
Obama: Like John Mark Reynolds, he is a Democrat that I want to want to vote for. He is a charismatic man with a compelling story who is obviously very bright. While I have major disagreements with him in policy (universal health care, likely larger taxes/government, and a withdrawal of our troops without finishing the job in Iraq), I wish I didn't so that I could vote for him. I think this makes him a rather formidable force in the general election, as the number of people who are going to object to these policy ideas is less than the number who will be excited about it. (Just to be clear, I think a large majority would object to larger government if anyone could articulate the ultimate consequences of that. On the Republican side, however, who can communicate that? Romney?). It is somehwat accurate to accuse Obama of being big on ideas and small on actual application, but - as Hillary is finding out - its hard to criticize someone who is so positive and charismatic. I also love rooting for Obama because I love nothing better than watching Hillary squirm.
Edwards: I love Edwards, but not for his policies or ideas, nor for his perfect hair. I love the entertainment he brings to the primaries. Edwards is like the kid in grade school who ran for student body president by promising he'd put Coke in all the drinking fountains. How comical is a the idea of a man who is so incomprehensibly rich running a campaign to help others with YOUR money? And how even more funny is it that no one calls him on it?
Clinton: Forget my strong objections to just about every one of her policies. Does anyone think that we need another 4 (or 8?!) years of the Clintons? My generation and those younger than me are already cynical enough - do we really need to have the Presidency controlled by only 2 families for close to 3 decades? I would say most of us are already convinced that we are ruled by an aristocracy of elites, protected by money and established media, such that we are only allowed to select from a few vetted candidates. But only 2 choices? Thats enough to dispirit a good chunk of young voters. This is particularly true sense her only road to victory lies in defeating a candidate that is overwhelmingly appealing to young voters.
Republicans:
Romney: Enough already with the idea that Romney is unappealing to Evangelicals because of his Mormon faith. Michael Medved pretty much put that rumor to rest with facts from the exit polls. I don't know what it is about Romney, but he just doesn't seem to close the deal. He's attractive, has good policy positions, is WELL funded, backed by almost every major pundit, debates well with a strong command of the facts, and yet even I am only half-heartedly thinking of voting for him (mostly by default). If I had to guess I think its due to two things. First, the fact that he has changed his positions since his 1994 run for Senate and, in some ways, since he was Governor. Second, there are some times in which he seems to define his message based on whats popular. For instance, he originally was running mostly as the Reagan conservative. Now, though thats still his main message, he's talking constantly about change now after the Obama/Huck victories. While I think people will grant its ok to alter strategy a bit here and there, Romney's strategy changes sometimes feel like they may indicate principle changes. Which, of course, only serves to raise eyebrows about the first problem I mentioned. Nonetheless, Romney right now is tentatively getting my vote because I think he is being honest in his positions, and he has extensive experience being a solid executive in both the private and public sector.
Huckabee: For a few weeks, Huckabee had overtaken Romney as my candidate. He is charming, has a sharp wit in the debates, and is solid on social conservative issues. The fact that he had the guts to actually make the Fair Tax a big part of his platform also was a big plus (I believe the Fair Tax to be by far the best system of taxation for a number of reasons). The problem is he has done a couple of things that I think are shifty in running for the nomination. For instance, his Clintonesque answers on past problems like the AIDS issue, and his "I think this ad is too negative to run.... but here, let me show it to all of you; there's no WAY it'll be all over TV for free." The other problem is that while he is a very sharp witted and capable debater, he has a real problem with gaffes and being caught without the facts. Part of it is understandable - he can't pay staffers to brief him on all the issues like major candidates can - but its still a major liability.
Ron Paul: Is it rather telling that in my first draft of this post I left Paul off the list? Ron Paul has a lot to like. Long before he was known on the national scene as a presidential candidate, he's been something of a celebrity to conservatives for his "Dr. No" votes against anything unconstitutional. When people see us signing treaties that aren't really treaties (and thus don't need ratification) in order to sort of end a war that isn't really a war (in order to escape a declaration of war), a man who's devotion to the constitution is never in question becomes appealing - to me as well. The problem with Paul, other than the obvious problems of his past racist remarks, is that he is so idealistic he loses grasp with reality. Would a gold standard be better than fiat money? Thats a decent academic debate, but if you think you'd ever get that passed, you're insane. It also seriously blinds him to the threat of islamofacism, which he seems to think will go away if we curl our military up into a North American fetal position and ask everyone to knock it off.
Thompson: To echo John Mark Reynolds, "Was there ever a candidate with more promise who did less than Fred Thompson?" Fred! was supposed to be the White Knight, riding in to save the party in our time of serious lack of candidates. Instead he sorta strode in late,. yawned, and said "sure, whatever... if you make me, I'll be president" The biggest disappointment to me was that he seemed to be someone who could communicate the ideas of Reaganism - being an actor like Reagan himself. But in the debates he hasn't mustered anything memorable and I think the only time I've seen him actually articulate something was when he was attacking Huck by reading off his cue cards. When will the ruling class of conservatives realize that Reaganism NEEDS to be communicated? You can't just argue who is most like Reagan, or who is not a "true" conservative - the younger generations need to be convinced that free market economics actually work and that smaller government is a good thing.
McCain: My favorite comment on McCain is Hughitt's suggestion the John McCain needs a neuralyzer (that cool gadget in Men In Black that erases peoples memories). To conservatives, the list of McCain betrayals is plenty long enough to disqualify him from office - the Gand of 14, McCain-Feingold, McCain-Kennedy, etc. To some degree, its too bad, because he is a true war hero who is rock solid on pro-life issues and has made criticisms of the war tactics without ever casting doubt on those who serve. He is also staunchly for the war, while being just as resolute in condemning torture - a surprisingly difficult to find attribute at times (certainly among conservative punditry). But his past "maverick" actions indicate a man a little too eager for acceptance in the MSM, and his attacks in the debates and elsewhere show he is not temperamentally suited for president. I have no problem with negative ads or attacking someone's positions/record, but McCain seems to offer very little charity in disagreeing with people, using the same sort of incendiary slander-rhetoric against his own party that bombthrowers of the left employ.
Rudy: Having been to New York City for the first time in my life just recently, I can see the appeal of Rudy. We've all heard tales of the previous dark side of NYC, but they seem almost hard to imagine if you're there now. He is the only executive to actually have dealt with an Islamicist attack - and handled it so well it is reason enough for a lot of people to vote for him. But as much as that is true, Rudy is the Boromir candidate. Like Boromir, he is great on the war and good on little else. Giving him, and his authoritarian tendencies, the powers of presidency in time of war is much like the temptation of the Ring. He would simply have too much power, and his good intentions and strong will to fight might very well be used to awful means. If Rudy wins the nomination, I will have to do some serious soul searching to vote for him - right now, I'd stay home.
Democrats:
Obama: Like John Mark Reynolds, he is a Democrat that I want to want to vote for. He is a charismatic man with a compelling story who is obviously very bright. While I have major disagreements with him in policy (universal health care, likely larger taxes/government, and a withdrawal of our troops without finishing the job in Iraq), I wish I didn't so that I could vote for him. I think this makes him a rather formidable force in the general election, as the number of people who are going to object to these policy ideas is less than the number who will be excited about it. (Just to be clear, I think a large majority would object to larger government if anyone could articulate the ultimate consequences of that. On the Republican side, however, who can communicate that? Romney?). It is somehwat accurate to accuse Obama of being big on ideas and small on actual application, but - as Hillary is finding out - its hard to criticize someone who is so positive and charismatic. I also love rooting for Obama because I love nothing better than watching Hillary squirm.
Edwards: I love Edwards, but not for his policies or ideas, nor for his perfect hair. I love the entertainment he brings to the primaries. Edwards is like the kid in grade school who ran for student body president by promising he'd put Coke in all the drinking fountains. How comical is a the idea of a man who is so incomprehensibly rich running a campaign to help others with YOUR money? And how even more funny is it that no one calls him on it?
Clinton: Forget my strong objections to just about every one of her policies. Does anyone think that we need another 4 (or 8?!) years of the Clintons? My generation and those younger than me are already cynical enough - do we really need to have the Presidency controlled by only 2 families for close to 3 decades? I would say most of us are already convinced that we are ruled by an aristocracy of elites, protected by money and established media, such that we are only allowed to select from a few vetted candidates. But only 2 choices? Thats enough to dispirit a good chunk of young voters. This is particularly true sense her only road to victory lies in defeating a candidate that is overwhelmingly appealing to young voters.
Republicans:
Romney: Enough already with the idea that Romney is unappealing to Evangelicals because of his Mormon faith. Michael Medved pretty much put that rumor to rest with facts from the exit polls. I don't know what it is about Romney, but he just doesn't seem to close the deal. He's attractive, has good policy positions, is WELL funded, backed by almost every major pundit, debates well with a strong command of the facts, and yet even I am only half-heartedly thinking of voting for him (mostly by default). If I had to guess I think its due to two things. First, the fact that he has changed his positions since his 1994 run for Senate and, in some ways, since he was Governor. Second, there are some times in which he seems to define his message based on whats popular. For instance, he originally was running mostly as the Reagan conservative. Now, though thats still his main message, he's talking constantly about change now after the Obama/Huck victories. While I think people will grant its ok to alter strategy a bit here and there, Romney's strategy changes sometimes feel like they may indicate principle changes. Which, of course, only serves to raise eyebrows about the first problem I mentioned. Nonetheless, Romney right now is tentatively getting my vote because I think he is being honest in his positions, and he has extensive experience being a solid executive in both the private and public sector.
Huckabee: For a few weeks, Huckabee had overtaken Romney as my candidate. He is charming, has a sharp wit in the debates, and is solid on social conservative issues. The fact that he had the guts to actually make the Fair Tax a big part of his platform also was a big plus (I believe the Fair Tax to be by far the best system of taxation for a number of reasons). The problem is he has done a couple of things that I think are shifty in running for the nomination. For instance, his Clintonesque answers on past problems like the AIDS issue, and his "I think this ad is too negative to run.... but here, let me show it to all of you; there's no WAY it'll be all over TV for free." The other problem is that while he is a very sharp witted and capable debater, he has a real problem with gaffes and being caught without the facts. Part of it is understandable - he can't pay staffers to brief him on all the issues like major candidates can - but its still a major liability.
Ron Paul: Is it rather telling that in my first draft of this post I left Paul off the list? Ron Paul has a lot to like. Long before he was known on the national scene as a presidential candidate, he's been something of a celebrity to conservatives for his "Dr. No" votes against anything unconstitutional. When people see us signing treaties that aren't really treaties (and thus don't need ratification) in order to sort of end a war that isn't really a war (in order to escape a declaration of war), a man who's devotion to the constitution is never in question becomes appealing - to me as well. The problem with Paul, other than the obvious problems of his past racist remarks, is that he is so idealistic he loses grasp with reality. Would a gold standard be better than fiat money? Thats a decent academic debate, but if you think you'd ever get that passed, you're insane. It also seriously blinds him to the threat of islamofacism, which he seems to think will go away if we curl our military up into a North American fetal position and ask everyone to knock it off.
Thompson: To echo John Mark Reynolds, "Was there ever a candidate with more promise who did less than Fred Thompson?" Fred! was supposed to be the White Knight, riding in to save the party in our time of serious lack of candidates. Instead he sorta strode in late,. yawned, and said "sure, whatever... if you make me, I'll be president" The biggest disappointment to me was that he seemed to be someone who could communicate the ideas of Reaganism - being an actor like Reagan himself. But in the debates he hasn't mustered anything memorable and I think the only time I've seen him actually articulate something was when he was attacking Huck by reading off his cue cards. When will the ruling class of conservatives realize that Reaganism NEEDS to be communicated? You can't just argue who is most like Reagan, or who is not a "true" conservative - the younger generations need to be convinced that free market economics actually work and that smaller government is a good thing.
McCain: My favorite comment on McCain is Hughitt's suggestion the John McCain needs a neuralyzer (that cool gadget in Men In Black that erases peoples memories). To conservatives, the list of McCain betrayals is plenty long enough to disqualify him from office - the Gand of 14, McCain-Feingold, McCain-Kennedy, etc. To some degree, its too bad, because he is a true war hero who is rock solid on pro-life issues and has made criticisms of the war tactics without ever casting doubt on those who serve. He is also staunchly for the war, while being just as resolute in condemning torture - a surprisingly difficult to find attribute at times (certainly among conservative punditry). But his past "maverick" actions indicate a man a little too eager for acceptance in the MSM, and his attacks in the debates and elsewhere show he is not temperamentally suited for president. I have no problem with negative ads or attacking someone's positions/record, but McCain seems to offer very little charity in disagreeing with people, using the same sort of incendiary slander-rhetoric against his own party that bombthrowers of the left employ.
Rudy: Having been to New York City for the first time in my life just recently, I can see the appeal of Rudy. We've all heard tales of the previous dark side of NYC, but they seem almost hard to imagine if you're there now. He is the only executive to actually have dealt with an Islamicist attack - and handled it so well it is reason enough for a lot of people to vote for him. But as much as that is true, Rudy is the Boromir candidate. Like Boromir, he is great on the war and good on little else. Giving him, and his authoritarian tendencies, the powers of presidency in time of war is much like the temptation of the Ring. He would simply have too much power, and his good intentions and strong will to fight might very well be used to awful means. If Rudy wins the nomination, I will have to do some serious soul searching to vote for him - right now, I'd stay home.
Posted at 11:35 AM | Read More | | |
Thu - January 10, 2008
Sun - November 11, 2007
Our new blessing
Chloe Marie DeBow was born October 28th at 11:40PM - just in time for Reformation Sunday. She was 9 lbs., 9 ounces and 20 inches long. After a brief battle with jaundice, she is now doing very well. We are ecstatic to have her, and ask you to join us in thanking God for the blessing of children.
Posted at 06:54 PM | Read More | | |
Thu - September 27, 2007
Book Meme
Note: I found this post which I had written
almost entirely, but forgot to post back in July of 2006! I guess its a little
behind, but I'll post it now anyway because its hardly time sensitive, though
Eating Words has changed names at least twice and can now be found
here.
Eating Words (a good blog I hope all of you are reading) recently put up a book meme post, in which he answered a set of questions regarding books that he has read. If you're not familiar with blog memes, they are something of a friendly chain letter - where one blogger will respond to a series of questions and then forward the challenge to 5 others. This way they move throughout the blogosphere quickly and get a bunch of responses.
I was honored that in an update to the post, he not only tagged me, but listed me as an "interesting person." My vanity properly puffed up, I have no choice but to respond. Here is my take on the meme:
1. One book that changed your life:
Essential Truths of the Christian Faith, R.C. Sproul
This book introduced me to theology, and really spurred me onto a deeper Christian faith. I don't know where I would be today without this book, but I doubt that I would have had the desire and courage to read some other weightier works of theology.
2. One book that you’ve read more than once:
Freedom of the Christian, by Martin Luther
A classic work that has several distinctives of Lutheranism - most notably the complete and total forgiveness found in Christ and complete lack of any condemning or binding power of the law. It made my Presbyterian friends in the reading group a little queasy thinking about Christians being totally freed from the law.
3. One book you’d want on a desert island:
My Sherlock Holmes collection - there's something about these stories that just whisks you away to Victorian London. If you ever needed to forget you were on a desert island, you could easily seek comfort in Doyle's world.
4. One book that made you laugh:
Dilbert comics - the fount of geeky hilarity
5. One book that made you cry:
Just about any of the Chronicles of Narnia, but especially The Lion, The Witch and The Wardrobe as well as The Voyage of the Dawn Treader. I hate to admit it, but the great truths in these books, so eloquently hidden in a wonderful, magical story, can reduce me to a whimpering idiot. I'm also sure they've made me a better man.
6. One book that you wish had been written:
The complete guide to wise decisions for Brant's life, by God
7. One book that you wish had never been written:
I think I love books too much to wish a book unwritten. There are a ton of books that have had major negative influences, or books that I strongly disagree with, but there's a huge part of me that is glad books have that power - for good or evil. And yes, that is a cop out because I can't think of anything specific.
8. One book you’re currently reading:
Orthodoxy, by G.K. Chesterton - though those of you savvy blog readers already know you can see the books I'm currently reading in the right sidebar of the homepage. (Note: obviously, this no longer applies, but you can still see what I'm reading now on the right).
9. One book you’ve been meaning to read:
Anything by Forde. I've heard so many recommendations for Forde by Lutherans I respect greatly, that I really need to pick up at least one, if not several, of his books. I'm hoping to convince my reading group that a Forde book would be a good next step.
10. Now tag five people:
Nathaniel
Van
Josh
Nick
Steve
UPDATE: Mere-O Matt has also agreed to take up the challenge. Any other Mere-O friends may consider themselves so tagged if they wish - I'd be interested in hearing all of your thoughts on this.
Eating Words (a good blog I hope all of you are reading) recently put up a book meme post, in which he answered a set of questions regarding books that he has read. If you're not familiar with blog memes, they are something of a friendly chain letter - where one blogger will respond to a series of questions and then forward the challenge to 5 others. This way they move throughout the blogosphere quickly and get a bunch of responses.
I was honored that in an update to the post, he not only tagged me, but listed me as an "interesting person." My vanity properly puffed up, I have no choice but to respond. Here is my take on the meme:
1. One book that changed your life:
Essential Truths of the Christian Faith, R.C. Sproul
This book introduced me to theology, and really spurred me onto a deeper Christian faith. I don't know where I would be today without this book, but I doubt that I would have had the desire and courage to read some other weightier works of theology.
2. One book that you’ve read more than once:
Freedom of the Christian, by Martin Luther
A classic work that has several distinctives of Lutheranism - most notably the complete and total forgiveness found in Christ and complete lack of any condemning or binding power of the law. It made my Presbyterian friends in the reading group a little queasy thinking about Christians being totally freed from the law.
3. One book you’d want on a desert island:
My Sherlock Holmes collection - there's something about these stories that just whisks you away to Victorian London. If you ever needed to forget you were on a desert island, you could easily seek comfort in Doyle's world.
4. One book that made you laugh:
Dilbert comics - the fount of geeky hilarity
5. One book that made you cry:
Just about any of the Chronicles of Narnia, but especially The Lion, The Witch and The Wardrobe as well as The Voyage of the Dawn Treader. I hate to admit it, but the great truths in these books, so eloquently hidden in a wonderful, magical story, can reduce me to a whimpering idiot. I'm also sure they've made me a better man.
6. One book that you wish had been written:
The complete guide to wise decisions for Brant's life, by God
7. One book that you wish had never been written:
I think I love books too much to wish a book unwritten. There are a ton of books that have had major negative influences, or books that I strongly disagree with, but there's a huge part of me that is glad books have that power - for good or evil. And yes, that is a cop out because I can't think of anything specific.
8. One book you’re currently reading:
Orthodoxy, by G.K. Chesterton - though those of you savvy blog readers already know you can see the books I'm currently reading in the right sidebar of the homepage. (Note: obviously, this no longer applies, but you can still see what I'm reading now on the right).
9. One book you’ve been meaning to read:
Anything by Forde. I've heard so many recommendations for Forde by Lutherans I respect greatly, that I really need to pick up at least one, if not several, of his books. I'm hoping to convince my reading group that a Forde book would be a good next step.
10. Now tag five people:
Nathaniel
Van
Josh
Nick
Steve
UPDATE: Mere-O Matt has also agreed to take up the challenge. Any other Mere-O friends may consider themselves so tagged if they wish - I'd be interested in hearing all of your thoughts on this.
Posted at 02:05 AM | Read More | | |
Tue - September 11, 2007
Sept. 11th
This morning I woke up like any other morning,
went through all our little family routines and sat down at the computer to
check stocks and get some early work done. I don't think it really hit me that
today is September 11th until I happened to see Lileks had
posted on it (I recommend the comments section there as well, some
thoughtful responses about where they were on
9/11).
I'm not sure if I should be happy or sad that today seemed like any other day. On one part, its a great thing that we have moved so far past the specter of 9/11 that we can go about our daily lives and feel no more threatened by it than we do by December 7th. On the other hand, we have not yet defeated the people who attacked us on 9/11, and we are currently in a war with our troops in harms way daily. Can we afford to just get on with our lives when they have put their lives on hold and on the line?
I'm not sure if I should be happy or sad that today seemed like any other day. On one part, its a great thing that we have moved so far past the specter of 9/11 that we can go about our daily lives and feel no more threatened by it than we do by December 7th. On the other hand, we have not yet defeated the people who attacked us on 9/11, and we are currently in a war with our troops in harms way daily. Can we afford to just get on with our lives when they have put their lives on hold and on the line?
Posted at 10:44 AM | Read More | | |
Mon - September 10, 2007
Brant's Crockpot Carnitas
Now that we're living out in TN - far away from a
Chipotle or the wonderful Taqueria in LB and even far enough away from Costco
that we can't get theirs either - we miss Carnitas. For those who don't know
(shame on you), Carnitas are a slow cooked, pulled pork dish,
that are common in Mexican restaurants (but also common to lots of Latin
cuisine). We haven't really tried many Mexican restaurants out here, but most
don't strike me as havens of great Carnitas. However, we do have Garden Mountain
Farm out here, and they have lots of happy
pigs raised organically and locally and not in a tiny little box
(while I obviously have no qualms about eating animals, I don't think that means
we need to mistreat them in the process - so I really like buying from a farm
that treats them well).
So when you are stuck and you can't get it elsewhere, you give it a shot on your own. I'll preface this by saying that I am no chef, but we liked the way these turned out. I've basically culled a bunch of different recipes together from online sources, and picked up the things I liked about each. If you see ways of improving this, by all means speak up in the comments section.
4.5 lb pork shoulder roast
1 Lemon (juice and zest)
1 Lime (juice and zest)
2 Tablespoons ground cumin
salt
pepper
5-6 BIG tablespooons of chopped garlic (fresh stuff would be better, but with the chopped stuff I just go overboard)
1 qt Chicken Broth
Put all of the lemon/lime juice and zest in the crockpot and drop the pork right on top. Salt and pepper the top of the roast and then cover with the first T of cumin. Flip the roast over, salt and pepper that side, then cover it with the cumin. Dump all the garlic on top of the pork and then pour the chicken broth over the top.
Turn the crockpot on High for 30 min. Flip the roast over, and leave on High for another 30 min. Drop the crockpot to low and let the roast sit in there for another 7-8 hours.
Preheat the oven to 400 degrees. Pull the whole roast out (discard the liquid) and put it in a pyrex dish. Shred the roast with two forks. Put dish in the oven for about 15 min or so, just to crisp up the pork a bit.
Throw it in some tortillas with all the normal fixins and enjoy! Another great option is to fry some tortillas to make your own taco shells. Just heat some oil nice and hot, fold the tortilla over and hold it under the oil until it bubbles up and turns into a nice taco shell. For my fellow low-carb types, Mission has a line of low carb tortillas that are pretty good. This whole dish is pretty low carb, so as long as you use the low carb tortillas and watch what else you put on the taco/burrito, you should be good to go.
So when you are stuck and you can't get it elsewhere, you give it a shot on your own. I'll preface this by saying that I am no chef, but we liked the way these turned out. I've basically culled a bunch of different recipes together from online sources, and picked up the things I liked about each. If you see ways of improving this, by all means speak up in the comments section.
4.5 lb pork shoulder roast
1 Lemon (juice and zest)
1 Lime (juice and zest)
2 Tablespoons ground cumin
salt
pepper
5-6 BIG tablespooons of chopped garlic (fresh stuff would be better, but with the chopped stuff I just go overboard)
1 qt Chicken Broth
Put all of the lemon/lime juice and zest in the crockpot and drop the pork right on top. Salt and pepper the top of the roast and then cover with the first T of cumin. Flip the roast over, salt and pepper that side, then cover it with the cumin. Dump all the garlic on top of the pork and then pour the chicken broth over the top.
Turn the crockpot on High for 30 min. Flip the roast over, and leave on High for another 30 min. Drop the crockpot to low and let the roast sit in there for another 7-8 hours.
Preheat the oven to 400 degrees. Pull the whole roast out (discard the liquid) and put it in a pyrex dish. Shred the roast with two forks. Put dish in the oven for about 15 min or so, just to crisp up the pork a bit.
Throw it in some tortillas with all the normal fixins and enjoy! Another great option is to fry some tortillas to make your own taco shells. Just heat some oil nice and hot, fold the tortilla over and hold it under the oil until it bubbles up and turns into a nice taco shell. For my fellow low-carb types, Mission has a line of low carb tortillas that are pretty good. This whole dish is pretty low carb, so as long as you use the low carb tortillas and watch what else you put on the taco/burrito, you should be good to go.
Posted at 11:52 AM | Read More | | |
Tue - September 4, 2007
Another letter - this time from the House
Last week or so I
had some rather harsh words for Republicans in general and my Senator
specifically. Thing are, apparently, a little better when it comes to the House
of Representatives.
I received a letter from Mr. David Davis, my representative in the House, which stated that he voted against the SCHIP bill that included a ridiculous tax increase on tobacco. He also goes on to state he "will vote to sustain the President's veto of this bill." I'm hoping that means that Bush will actually veto the bill after it makes it out of conference, but Bush sometimes seems to have misplaced his veto pen and can't be counted on to block things.
So while I still harbor serious doubts about the Republicans in general, I would definitely be remiss if I didn't solute one who got this issue absolutely right. Thank you, David Davis for voting against this awful piece of legislation.
I received a letter from Mr. David Davis, my representative in the House, which stated that he voted against the SCHIP bill that included a ridiculous tax increase on tobacco. He also goes on to state he "will vote to sustain the President's veto of this bill." I'm hoping that means that Bush will actually veto the bill after it makes it out of conference, but Bush sometimes seems to have misplaced his veto pen and can't be counted on to block things.
So while I still harbor serious doubts about the Republicans in general, I would definitely be remiss if I didn't solute one who got this issue absolutely right. Thank you, David Davis for voting against this awful piece of legislation.
Posted at 05:20 PM | Read More | | |
Thu - August 23, 2007
A letter from my senator
Thanks to Nathaniel and Van, I recently sent my senators and other
government officials a letter (very easy - please do it yourself) stating my
opposition to a rather disgusting tax on tobacco in the name of providing
healthcare to those who cannot afford it (fine print - this group is defined by
the bill up to as families who make high as $80k a year). The tax itself is
almost ridiculous enough to be parody - $10 per cigar in some cases, for
instance. Anyway, Senator Bob Corker wrote me back and explained his position -
rather unsatisfactorily to my mind. So I decided to write him a reply, and I
thought I'd post it here for all of you to join in the fun. His letter in blue,
and my response in black below it:
Dear Mr. DeBow,
Thank you for taking the time to
contact my office about the use of a cigarette excise tax to fund the State
Children's Health Program (SCHIP). Your input is important to me, and I
appreciate the time you took to share your thoughts.
On August 2, I voted to reauthorize and
fund SCHIP because I believe it has been an important and successful program and
because I made a commitment to Tennesseans to do all that I can to expand access
to affordable health insurance. While this reauthorization bill is far
from perfect, it does ensure that more low-income children in Tennessee and
across America will have health insurance. I believe this is our moral
obligation.
As you know, the Senate SCHIP
reauthorization bill is funded by an increase in the federal excise tax on
tobacco. I agree with you that this is an imperfect way to expand
SCHIP. During the debate on this issue, I supported an amendment that
would sunset this funding source after 5 years. Unfortunately, this
amendment was voted down.
The SCHIP reauthorization is only a
short-term and partial solution to a much larger crisis facing our country: the
45 million Americans, including 800,000 Tennesseans, who lack adequate health
insurance. Beyond the chaos for our healthcare system and the economy, the
health and emotional toll is enormous.
As a first step towards comprehensively
addressing this crisis, I, along with Senator Burr (R-NC) and others introduced
the Every American Insured Health Act, S.1886, a proposal that ensures all
Americans have access to affordable healthcare coverage without contributing to
our ballooning national debt. This proposal is meant to be a starting point of a
larger debate aimed at addressing a healthcare crisis facing Americas across our
country and I look forward to pursuing this important issue.
Thank you again for your letter.
I hope you will continue to share your thoughts with me over the next six
years.
Sincerely,
Bob Corker
United States Senator
Sen. Corker,
I'm sorry to see that we have such a fundamental disagreement on the nature and scope of the federal government. I'd like to say that your views are not representative of the Republican party, but sadly it seems that Republicans - who long stood for responsible, constitutional government - have become infatuated with increasing the size and scope of the Federal government. I have no idea where in the constitution you think it authorizes you, let alone instructs you, to ensure that Americans have health insurance and I'm especially perturbed that you only see such a punitive and targeted tax as an "imperfect" funding mechanism.
I have never voted anything other than Republican in national elections , yet it is for decisions like this that I no longer consider myself a Republican. It is because of these issues that you will see your ever shrinking minority status continue in the Senate - because your base hasn't lost its ideals of small government and the people looking for handouts know the Democrats will always give it out faster. On issue after issue, Republicans have sided with larger taxes, more government, and less opportunity for the not already rich. And every time they argue, as you did in this letter, that they've somehow fought the good fight because the Democrats would be worse. I understand that politics is the battle of the possible, not the ideal. I'm a patient man who believes in compromising on certain positions, while staying never compromising principles. But I'm tired of second-worst. I'm sick of Republicans who's only idea of vision consists of doing bad things mildly slower than the opposition.
I recently moved to Tennessee from California and I have to say - when I see the same response from Bob Corker as I would have expected from Diane Feinstein, I think we can safely assume the Republican party is in big trouble.
Thank you,
Brant E. DeBow
UPDATE: I just received an email saying my reply to Sen. Corker bounced. How awesome is that? "Thank you again for your letter. I hope you will continue to share your thoughts with me over the next six years." - and yet he doesn't have a valid reply-to on his email? Nice touch.
Sincerely,
Bob Corker
United States Senator
Sen. Corker,
I'm sorry to see that we have such a fundamental disagreement on the nature and scope of the federal government. I'd like to say that your views are not representative of the Republican party, but sadly it seems that Republicans - who long stood for responsible, constitutional government - have become infatuated with increasing the size and scope of the Federal government. I have no idea where in the constitution you think it authorizes you, let alone instructs you, to ensure that Americans have health insurance and I'm especially perturbed that you only see such a punitive and targeted tax as an "imperfect" funding mechanism.
I have never voted anything other than Republican in national elections , yet it is for decisions like this that I no longer consider myself a Republican. It is because of these issues that you will see your ever shrinking minority status continue in the Senate - because your base hasn't lost its ideals of small government and the people looking for handouts know the Democrats will always give it out faster. On issue after issue, Republicans have sided with larger taxes, more government, and less opportunity for the not already rich. And every time they argue, as you did in this letter, that they've somehow fought the good fight because the Democrats would be worse. I understand that politics is the battle of the possible, not the ideal. I'm a patient man who believes in compromising on certain positions, while staying never compromising principles. But I'm tired of second-worst. I'm sick of Republicans who's only idea of vision consists of doing bad things mildly slower than the opposition.
I recently moved to Tennessee from California and I have to say - when I see the same response from Bob Corker as I would have expected from Diane Feinstein, I think we can safely assume the Republican party is in big trouble.
Thank you,
Brant E. DeBow
UPDATE: I just received an email saying my reply to Sen. Corker bounced. How awesome is that? "Thank you again for your letter. I hope you will continue to share your thoughts with me over the next six years." - and yet he doesn't have a valid reply-to on his email? Nice touch.
Posted at 12:29 PM | Read More | | |
Tue - August 21, 2007
Pseudo-liveblogging: GeekSouth
Tonight I'm attending a dinner with a group
called GeekSouth. Tonight there will be a speaker on
information security. Since there's no wireless here in the restaurant, this
will only be psuedo-liveblogging. I'll be typing everything live, but I'll have
to wait until I get home to post it
all.
Our speaker for tonight will be Erik W. Rolf, President of Deliberare, Inc. I see he's on a powerbook as well and using keynote '08 - I already like him.
Juan does the introduction and we're off.
Tonight we're going to cover the time he spent in Vegas at Defcon and Blackhat. These are two big hacker conferences. We'll also cover some "news you can use".
Blackhat:
- Grossman and Hansen: "Fun with and without Javascript Malware"
The interesting thing is that everyone says you can turn your javascript off and be safe, but thats actualy not true anymore. "New research has revealed that even if Javascript has been disabled or restricted, some now popular attack techniques - such as Browser Intranet Hacking, Port Scanning and History Stealing can still be perpetrated."
A lot of corporations spend a lot of money on firewalling, NATd IPs and such, but that filters the stuff coming IN to the network. These hacks are specifically dangerous for what they send OUT of the network, and they come in through normal web traffic so they can't be blocked.
How do we stop that? One way is through egress filtering in the corporate environment. This would specifically target the traffic coming out of the web, and possibly block malicious stuff. Another option is personal firewalling software, which should be able to block some of these attacks.
Other interesting talks:
- Brad Hill "attacking XML security" - highlighting some of the dangers in the AJAX security model.
- Sullivan & Hoffman "Premature AJAX-ulation"
- "NACATTACK" - hacks that attack Cisco software that is supposed to secure visiting laptop users on corporate networks.
He showed us a video on how they can pick physical locks with all sorts of crazy stuff - a Kryptonite lock with a ball point pen, a Master lock with an electric toothbrush, and a Kensington lock (those little cables that everyone has a hole for on his laptop) with a roll of toilet paper!
Defcon 15:
"Dirty Secrets of the Security Industry"
- Defense in Depth is Dead (at least as we know it): These are really means of only protecting poorly written software.
- You can't train everyone: Even if you do, they won't always do what they're told to do.
- Network Security is Dead: See the javascript talk above
- Full disclosure is dead: Full disclosure is when you find a hack in a certain browser or software, then you publish it everywhere to force the company into fixing it. The problem is that most hacking stuff is actually being heavily run by organized crime. If they find an exploit, most likely they will simply use it rather than disclose it because they don't want it patched.
So what to do? Fix the $#%&ing code
- Type Safety
- Secure coding taught to ALL CS majors
- Trusted computing
- At least, we need better software controls on our systems, not better firewalls.
New you can use:
- Privacy is pretty much dead. There's a lot of data out there about us, and people seem to keep finding it (e.g. TJ Maxx's recent compromise)
- Vulnerabilities are way up. SANS email just from this week said it is the largest batch of critical exploits it has ever seen in one week.
So what do we do?
- Talk to Erik - Deliberare :)
- Use a Mac (amen!)
Our speaker for tonight will be Erik W. Rolf, President of Deliberare, Inc. I see he's on a powerbook as well and using keynote '08 - I already like him.
Juan does the introduction and we're off.
Tonight we're going to cover the time he spent in Vegas at Defcon and Blackhat. These are two big hacker conferences. We'll also cover some "news you can use".
Blackhat:
- Grossman and Hansen: "Fun with and without Javascript Malware"
The interesting thing is that everyone says you can turn your javascript off and be safe, but thats actualy not true anymore. "New research has revealed that even if Javascript has been disabled or restricted, some now popular attack techniques - such as Browser Intranet Hacking, Port Scanning and History Stealing can still be perpetrated."
A lot of corporations spend a lot of money on firewalling, NATd IPs and such, but that filters the stuff coming IN to the network. These hacks are specifically dangerous for what they send OUT of the network, and they come in through normal web traffic so they can't be blocked.
How do we stop that? One way is through egress filtering in the corporate environment. This would specifically target the traffic coming out of the web, and possibly block malicious stuff. Another option is personal firewalling software, which should be able to block some of these attacks.
Other interesting talks:
- Brad Hill "attacking XML security" - highlighting some of the dangers in the AJAX security model.
- Sullivan & Hoffman "Premature AJAX-ulation"
- "NACATTACK" - hacks that attack Cisco software that is supposed to secure visiting laptop users on corporate networks.
He showed us a video on how they can pick physical locks with all sorts of crazy stuff - a Kryptonite lock with a ball point pen, a Master lock with an electric toothbrush, and a Kensington lock (those little cables that everyone has a hole for on his laptop) with a roll of toilet paper!
Defcon 15:
"Dirty Secrets of the Security Industry"
- Defense in Depth is Dead (at least as we know it): These are really means of only protecting poorly written software.
- You can't train everyone: Even if you do, they won't always do what they're told to do.
- Network Security is Dead: See the javascript talk above
- Full disclosure is dead: Full disclosure is when you find a hack in a certain browser or software, then you publish it everywhere to force the company into fixing it. The problem is that most hacking stuff is actually being heavily run by organized crime. If they find an exploit, most likely they will simply use it rather than disclose it because they don't want it patched.
So what to do? Fix the $#%&ing code
- Type Safety
- Secure coding taught to ALL CS majors
- Trusted computing
- At least, we need better software controls on our systems, not better firewalls.
New you can use:
- Privacy is pretty much dead. There's a lot of data out there about us, and people seem to keep finding it (e.g. TJ Maxx's recent compromise)
- Vulnerabilities are way up. SANS email just from this week said it is the largest batch of critical exploits it has ever seen in one week.
So what do we do?
- Talk to Erik - Deliberare :)
- Use a Mac (amen!)
Posted at 06:56 PM | Read More | | |
Wed - August 15, 2007
How do you say PWN3d in Arabic?
From my buddy Heath, maker of JarJar
hilarity (seriously, he made JarJar funny, thats rad), come this
link:
AP News photo:
Nothing wrong with that so far..... but look at the caption. This woman apparently claims these bullets "hit her house following an early coalition forces raid" in Sadr City. For those who share the AP's ignorance of firearms, those rounds she is holding are just that - full fledged rounds. Slug, casing, powder, etc. When you shoot something, only the top part of that, the bullet, actually comes out of the gun (see this helpful diagram).
To sum up, the only way those could have "hit her house" is if someone threw them at it. Ahhh, the joys of having those "multiple layers of checks and balances."
AP News photo:
Nothing wrong with that so far..... but look at the caption. This woman apparently claims these bullets "hit her house following an early coalition forces raid" in Sadr City. For those who share the AP's ignorance of firearms, those rounds she is holding are just that - full fledged rounds. Slug, casing, powder, etc. When you shoot something, only the top part of that, the bullet, actually comes out of the gun (see this helpful diagram).
To sum up, the only way those could have "hit her house" is if someone threw them at it. Ahhh, the joys of having those "multiple layers of checks and balances."
Posted at 06:19 PM | Read More | | |
Calendar
| Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat |
Categories
Archives
XML/RSS Feed
Highlighted posts
Search
The Tip Jar
Blogs of interest
The Moviegoer
Anesthetic Smoke
Scots Wha Hae!
Applied Semiotics
Odelay!
The Adagio County Independent
A Firm Nail
Eidos : Dr. John Mark Reynolds
Mere Orthodoxy
A Voice in the Wilderness
Jollyblogger
Squiblog
Beyond the Rim
ESV Bible blog
My Tobacco Cellar
Anesthetic Smoke
Scots Wha Hae!
Applied Semiotics
Odelay!
The Adagio County Independent
A Firm Nail
Eidos : Dr. John Mark Reynolds
Mere Orthodoxy
A Voice in the Wilderness
Jollyblogger
Squiblog
Beyond the Rim
ESV Bible blog
My Tobacco Cellar
Lutheran Blogroll
Currently Reading
Brought to you by
Statistics
Total entries in this blog:
Published On: Mar 27, 2008 07:59 AM
Published On: Mar 27, 2008 07:59 AM
The Church Directory
Comments Powered By
Counters provided by
Listed In
