Why do I say payback? We need to remember that the reason Lieberman is an independent today was because he was forced out of the party that he knew, loved, and had served for many years. He is a perfect example of what happens when a radical group within a party begins to gain control and is able to begin to purge those who do not live up to their ideas of what is right.

In this case, a far-left anti-war group had gained control of the party apparatus in Connecticut. They thought to put in a more clearly anti-war candidate as the Democratic candidate in the then upcoming elections. And, within the party primary, they succeeded. But, they made a major miscalculation. Lieberman had many years of service to his state, and, was seen as a true moderate. The far-left also miscalculated the anger that such a raw grab for power would generate, not to mention the assumption that Lieberman would roll over and play dead.

The result has been a Lieberman who ran as an independent, won, and is now free of all party strictures. Rather than creating a far-left seat in Connecticut, the far-left did not just lose a seat and an ally, they lost the seat for the national party, and created a major power broker. In a Senate as closely divided as ours, a single vote can mean the difference over who controls. And, that single vote now belonged to Lieberman, who could no longer be disciplined by a party to which he does not technically belong. And so, in some ways, Lieberman actually has more power now than he did before the far-left launched its ideological coup attempt.

Yes, yesterday had the strong smell of payback about it.

Then I started listening closer and doing some channel surfing. Guess what! All the cable news channels were breathlessly following the storm. As the splash/surge happened, there was breathless speculation on whether the levees would hold and, then, breathless speculation on whether the government had done enough and whether those who disagreed with the rebuilding plans for the levees had been listened to sufficiently. But the levees turned out to be high enough and strong enough. As the hours passed, I would periodically check in, only to hear what sounded like incipient disappointment that there was no worse damage to cover. It reminded me once of that old comment that what sells papers (or cable news shows) is bad news, not good news.

We do that also. Gossip is simply our version of being a cable news show. It is never quite considered gossip to pass on good news. Rarely does a person become upset if the news passes around that they received a humanitarian award. (Though I must point out that if you pass on good news that should only be passed on by way of an announcement by the parties involved, such as a pregnancy or engagement announcement, you are likely to bear the brunt of some righteous anger.) Great is the delight we feel in passing on bad news. In that, we imitate he who is known as the accuser of the brethren, that old serpent, that dragon of old.

Jesus said to some detractors, “You are of your father the devil, and the desires of your father you want to do.” When we gossip, we show ourselves to be children of our father, the devil. But, we are to show ourselves to be Children of the Light. So, let’s not be the cable news show of our church anymore. OK?

Well, if Drake’s equation proves extraterrestrial life exists, and there are an infinite number of planets, any number multiplied by infinity equals infinity, so given an infinite number of basements sooner or later one will contain a boogeyman.

If you are wondering what Drake’s equation is, you can find it here.

Too often we use the idea of eternity or infinity in the same way as this cartoon character. And, all too often, it can lead to conclusions that may not fully make sense. For instance, St. Augustine contemplated the idea of eternity. His philosophical assumption, that God is outside of time, led him to the conclusion that to God all times are equally “present” to Him. But, that means that God cannot tell the difference between past, present, and future. The future is as “present” to Him as the past according to St. Augustine. I have even heard sermons justifying this thought by using Einsteinian relativism. But, if this is true, it certainly invalidates an awful lot of Scripture about God adjusting to situations and responding to people. So, I have heard many sermons preached about how Scripture simply uses “anthropomorphic” language. Since, he cannot change, then Scripture must not really mean what it appears to mean.

And, there is the problem. We must be careful that our philosophical conclusions do not have a higher priority than Scripture. It is Scripture that is supposed to inform our philosophy, not philosophy that is supposed to inform our Scripture. Mind you, I am quite aware that the reality is that it is a “conversation” between our philosophy and Scripture. But, in that “conversation” we need to realize that it is Scripture that has the priority, not our philosophy.

So, does God change? Yes and no. I do not buy the philosophical Greek idea of what “changeless” means. I do not believe that a change in “state” automatically makes God less than perfect. I think such a conception ultimately leads to a hyper-sovereign God. But, I am convinced that God does not change concerning his purposes, his plans, his timing for the earth, his promises, his love towards us, etc.

Note for Biblical theology buffs: Yes, there are times when Scripture uses anthropomorphic language, but that is a subject for another discussion. More to come on this subject later.

Regardless, I had forgotten how “innocent” that particular movie was. It has been an enjoyable evening together, doing absolutely nothing, listening to well-remembered songs, and simply being in each other’s presence. After 30 years of marriage, I suspect I can say that the marriage “took.” May He grant my wife and I many more years together.

Ladies and gentlemen, I think we have a horse race here! I think the fall has suddenly become much more interesting, maybe even exciting.

There is no doubt that McCain’s charges of elitism are being laid to rest. It is hard to see how a middle-class mother who was raising a child without a father, who worked difficult jobs, could be accused of elitism. There is little doubt that Barack speaks like a college professor, but that is only a credit to his family, who let his dream be fulfilled. But, there is no doubt that the speaks like a college professor, rather than like a politician. One must wonder whether that is all bad.

He is speaking in short declarative sentences, which is a broad improvement over hesitant overly-careful analyses. He is currently going after John McCain with faint praise. It is one of the better uses of satire that I have seen in a while. Damning with faint praise is certainly working for him right now.

He certainly is trying to redefine how economic and national success is measured. He is saying that success must be measured by our treatment of the little person and not by the profits made by large corporations. He speaks to the focus that we are supposed to have, and that focus is supposed to be for the widow and the orphan and not for the rich and the powerful. He insists that we must keep the promise that we are our brother’s keeper. May he keep that promise, should he be elected.

Some of his promises will only be achievable should there be some technological advances. However, that would also be true of John McCain. Interestingly enough, he has spoken in favor of nuclear power. That is startling for a Democrat. And he appears to be open to offshore drilling as a short-term solution while working out a long-term solution.

I will say that his big theme is quite appealing, “Now is the time.” He speaks quite strongly against those who keep putting off action, or even speak of action while giving no action. I loved the line, “We cannot meet 21st century challenges with a 20th century bureaucracy.

He has just stolen the family responsibility issue from under the Republicans by insisting on both individual responsibility and mutual responsibility. And, he is certainly taking on McCain on foreign policy in most unexpected ways.

What is most interesting is that he has quietly avoided wording his approach in traditional Democratic language that can be most off-putting to many in the center right. I think that the campaign has just become more interesting.

It did make me reminisce. I have lived through two revolutions. As a young child in third grade, the country in which I was born, Cuban, went through a revolution. I ended up losing my country and losing contact with family members. They are still there, but there are some whom I have never met.

As a missionary, I was in Perú in 2000, when the anti-Fujimori demonstrations began after election day. Tens of thousands turned out in both Lima and Arequipa, as well as other places in the country. I was outside and saw police with shield fighting demonstrators with rocks. Tear gas flew, and I had to get out of the area quickly. A few months later, Fujimori fled to Japan.

And, I think, we Americans sometimes have so little appreciation for our democratic process. Yes, we have turned it into a quagmire of mud-slinging. We have debased the process of democracy into a giant game of “gotcha.” But, we are not shooting at each other. We are not ethnic cleansing each other. We are not in the midst of a revolution. We do not overthrow our leaders simply because they have low poll numbers. Eventually, we may truly debase our system so much that we fall into one of those other options, but, thank God, not yet.

And so today, thank God for the Democratic convention. And next week, thank God for the Republican convention. And the following week thank God that we will still be one country and not two or several.

So, did you hear the one from the high school on Monroe, Ohio that has forbidden the cheerleaders from wearing their outfits to school on game days? This news turned even weirder when we were informed that the school issued the uniforms and that the parents paid for them! So, what did the principal say? Well, the principal explained that the dress code had changed this year and that the cheerleading skirts were too short, too tight, and were slit at the side to permit cheerleading stunts. The parents are very angry. But, does this mean that it is not OK to be sexy and entice people in the hallways, but OK to be sexy and entice people very publicly when it is for sports, sort of like lust under control? No wonder this one made the news!

And, then, there is the one from New Haven, Conneticutt where the local baseball league banned a 9 year old pitcher from the mound because he was too good. They claimed he pitched too fast, disbanded his team, and told him he must go to another team and play another position if he wished to continue playing. Did I mention that his team is 8-0 and was headed to the league playoffs? So, I guess this means that only mediocrity is allowed? This is one of the anger producting ones for me.

Comedians make much money on late night shows pointing out these contradictions. The amazing part to me is that the people involved never seem to see the contradiction in what they are doing or saying! It makes me wonder how many contradictions people see in me, and why I do not see them.