Radical by David Platt- Book Review

So why would an unpaid blogger, writing on a website that nobody reads, take the time to criticize a book so roundly praised by "church leaders" as David Platt's "Radical". Well the answer is simple. I'm a Baptist. You see, we Baptists do not just follow and trust what out pastor, deacons, or other "leaders" tell us. No, we Baptists, who believe in the priesthood of the believer, actually tend to show up to church with our Bible's in hand, and believe it or not, when our preacher says something we do not agree with, well, we tell him that we think he is wrong. Knowing that all Baptist churches are autonomous and believe different things, we may even pack up and join another congregation from time to time, even going as far as to congregate with Methodists.

While I certainly love my church family and have the utmost respect for our young pastor, I do however, wish he had not exposed us to Dr. Platt's Bible Study, at least not the videos. In fact, I considered my first exposure to Platt's teaching to have been a form of child abuse. While sitting there with my 8 year old, Dr. Platt kept screaming over and over again "Hate your mother! Hate your father! Hate your Mom and Dad!" Now I know what verse he was preaching about (Luke 14:26), and I understand the context of that passage. But my 8 year old son was obviously confused, mainly because it took what seemed like a good half hour for the pastor to get around to that context, which he still did not explain very well. If his purpose was to shock, he did much worse. He made me quite angry. That evening I had to sit down with my son and discuss what happened to him that morning. After that day, I decided that I was not going to sit through another minute of these videos without first reading the book. After all, maybe I was wrong about this guy.

Well I did indeed read his book and in fairness, I found many good things in it. I certainly respect the man for his mission work and his passion, and I very much enjoyed the inspirational stories of believers from all over the world.  I found a few things, however, to be quite disturbing and in my opinion, not Biblical. Among those were: his emphasis on works and the questioning of other's salvation, his rejection and criticism of the traditional church, and his attack on the American dream and "materialism".

I Chapter 2, Dr. Platt scoffs "The modern day Gospel says 'God loves you and has a wonderful plan for your life. Therefore follow these steps and you can be saved.'" Well yes, count me as one who believes that! Perhaps us modern day Gospel types have read Acts 16:31, or Acts 2:21, or maybe Romans 10:9. Dr. Platt even goes so far as to call the Sinners Prayer "superstitious". The whole second chapter is quite shocking actually, as he tells how he fears that many people who think they are saved, actually are not. So much for "blessed assurance". No, according to most of Chapter 2, if you are not in a constant state of fear that drives you to tireless works, then you are not saved. Strangely though, he ends this Chapter by writing, "You might think that this sounds as though we have to earn our way to Jesus through radical obedience...." I was listening to the audio version of the book when the author made this statement, and I screamed out "YES, that's exactly what it sounds like!" He finally ended the chapter by referencing Ephesians 2:8, which seemed strangely out of place. I compare that chapter to hearing a speaker go into a long racist diatribe and then end his speech with, "But I'm not a racist." Maybe that is a poor analogy, but my point is, that regardless of the way the chapter ended, the reader in no way leaves it thinking that the author believes that anything less than exceptionally good works and obedience is required to get to heaven.

While reading this book, I thought about one of those old Billy Graham revivals and how Dr. Platt would likely scoff at such an event, where hundreds of people walk down front and recite that Sinners Prayer that he calls "superstitious". When Reverend Graham invites people to accept Jesus into their hearts, would Dr. Platt ask, as he does in his book, "Does Billy Graham really think that Jesus needs their acceptance?" Dr. Platt infers that everyone, yes every single believer, is called required to do global mission work. I crossed out the word called, because he doesn't believe global missions to be a calling, but that all, every single believer, is commanded to go to foreign lands, based on the great commission. But if missionaries are not answering a calling, are pastors, is anybody? This is strange and unbiblical to me. I believe that if one is led by the Holy Spirit, it is quite possible that he will never leave the city he was born in. Dr. Platt has done many great things as a missionary, but are we second class Christians because God has not asked us to do the same things? This type of thinking is common for a "radical" personality. The radical quits eating pork, and suddenly everybody has to quit eating pork. The radical gives up secular music, and suddenly everybody has to give up secular music. Dr. Platt has obviously been called to go to foreign lands, so obviously everybody is.

The most offending part of this book though, is the author's lack of understanding of capitalism and free markets, and his rejection of the American idea. In one of his anecdotes, he speaks of a "nationalistic" congregation and he continually shames Americans for being so rich, while the world is so poor. At times I thought I was reading something written by Jim Wallis. I thought to myself, this is not a book written for the religious right, but the religious left. It is not only anti-American, but anti-capitalist. This is the language of liberation theology or social justice, and it is a guilt that this American dreamer, this pursuer of happiness, outright rejects. We should not be spurning the American dream, as Dr. Platt teaches, but rather we should be embracing it, and exporting it. If we live in a mansion that requires a full time landscaper, a full time housekeeper, and a full time cook, are we noble for "downsizing" and putting those three people out of work? Perhaps we should all stop buying new clothing and instead shop at thrift stores. Being one who has worked in retail for the last 15 years, would that be helping people like me and my family? Of all of the charities Rockefeller and Carnegie created in their later years, none of those societal contributions compare to what the mass production of steel or the refining of oil did for this country, and yes they did these great things solely for the purpose of making a profit. As the great Adam Smith once wrote "It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interest." But if the jobs these men provided, and their contribution to an improved American standard of living, still do not impress you as much as their charity, ask yourself, would that charity have ever been possible if the money was not first made?

These "poor" countries Dr. Platt speaks of, are poor precisely because they are not free, because the people there despise the wealthy and support demagogic dictators that exploit their envy. And why does this destructive economic mindset exist in these countries? Well obviously the Marxists have influence in the third world, but the Marxists would have gotten nowhere if the foundation for their class warfare was not first laid by religion. Now obviously I am not opposed to charity and helping the poor. I am aware though, that based on history, the best standard of living for the poor is found in countries where markets are free and people are allowed, even encouraged to make as much as they can, and to spend that money they make. It is no coincidence that these countries are also the most generous. In South and Central America, where liberation theology and socialism rule the day, poverty is a way of life.

In conclusion, perhaps my criticism is too harsh. Maybe my perception is completely wrong. Often times, one person can see things totally different than another. This could very well apply in this situation, because after praising "Radical", my pastor steps up to the podium and preaches a wonderful sermon, that to me sounds nothing like David Platt. But I read what I read and thus had to comment on it. Why? Because I'm a Baptist.

Other reviews of "Radical" can be found here, here, here, here, here, here, here, and here.

Southern Lefties Like Cornbread Too!

The following is a response to a very interesting post, written by what seems to be an extremely nice, but very liberal fellow Nashvillian.

I mostly like what Ms. Gibbons had to say in her post, although I don't believe people in this region are still as bigoted as she seems to think we still are. But that's okay, Ms. Gibbons would probably consider me a little bigoted. I did use nullify in a sentence once. As for being blue in the south, I can understand the frustration with seeing the "wrong" kind of candidates elected and reelected on a regular basis.

But other than that, I can't see how southern life is much different for a liberal person. I mean, if you like cornbread and sweet tea, and sitting on a front porch swing, it doesn't matter what your politics are. As far as being gay is concerned, southern cities, Atlanta, New Orleans, Memphis, and yes Nashville, have plenty of gay people. Black folks who once migrated northward to escape segregation, are actually migrating back to the south these days. It seems that middle class and upper class black people dislike taxes just as much as white people. As for religion, believe it or not, many liberals attend church too, and the mainline, more liberal congregations often partner with the more conservative churches in the community to do good deeds, like feeding and clothing the poor and making sure every child receives gifts on Christmas morning.

The stereotypes are unfortunate. But in fairness, the same stereotype applies to people in West Virginia, and various parts of the Midwest. My issue with Maher, and the others, is their snideness. They don't see people as individuals, but pre-judge people based on where they are from. This is no different than racial prejudice, in my opinion. I believe, and I would expect Ms. Gibbons to disagree with me, but I believe that bigotry is the essence of modern liberalism. In modern liberalism, people are not individuals, but everyone is part of a group, and for "progress" to be made, these groups have to be pitted against each other. That's why the modern liberal media is so obsessed with gender, sexual identity, race, and class. Conservatism, or libertarianism, or classical liberalism, by contrast, focuses on the individual. Where a person is from, what their skin color is, or what economic circumstances they were born into, are irrelevant and unimportant in the mind of the conservative.

The underlying problem with individuals like Bill Maher and Jon Stewart though, is not their prejudice, but the fact that they just don't like people. I don't care where you go in this country, or the world, every culture has something to appreciate, and if that individual you meet from that other part of America isn't as advanced as you, cut them some slack. They're just human. This goes back to one of the core differences between modern liberalism and classical liberalism. Classical liberals believe that generally speaking, people are good. Modern liberals, on the other hand, are much more cynical of mankind.

In closing, I want to address something Ms. Gibbons, the daughter of a Baptist preacher said in one of her comments.

Data just shows that people who attend church regularly also tend to have a more Conservative (in the political & modern sense of the word) worldview and vote Republican. My own experience growing up in the Church is that although there is surface “acceptance” of difference, I was taught that pretty much everyone who wasn’t a devout Protestant was going to burn in hell.

I have been in Southern Baptist churches my entire life, and I can unequivocally say that not one of the congregations I attended taught that only Baptists went to heaven. There are some primitive Baptist churches that believe this, I'm sure, and likely some Pentecostals, but they are very much in the minority, and have always been. Now I am not saying that what we do believe is going to satisfy you. Yes we do believe in hell, but whether or not you go there when you die is not dependent on what church you attend, be it Catholic or Protestant, but whether you believe that Christ is God incarnate, was born of a virgin, lived a perfect life, was crucified, and rose on the third day. Also, we believe that once you accept this truth, this gift of salvation that comes from repentance, it can never be taken from you, not even by you. We call this "once saved, always saved". I have known many people that as adults, hate religion, because they were taught something different, and were exposed to rules and religiosity, not Jesus, and that is sad and unfortunate. But as a lifelong Southern Baptist, I have to point out that many common beliefs associated with us, well, just are not true, and are most likely the result of religious bigotry. Apologies for my digression.

Anyway, enjoy a little southern culture on your way out, via Widespread Panic. Thanks!

Some Thoughts On Penn State And All That It Still Represents

It's really hard to describe how I feel right now. I'm not nearly as angry as I am disturbed, sickened, and saddened for these children. I really just want for this story to not be true. But it is.

I visited the Penn State campus a couple of months ago, and I remember thinking how awesome it was to finally see a Joe Paterno coached team in one of the most tradition rich stadiums in college football. I remember how nice the people were there in central Pennsylvania, how they shared their food and made us feel welcome. I remember how proud they were of their University, football program, and coach.

I can't imagine how they feel right now. The most important concern should, of course, be the victims of Jerry Sandusky's crimes. But in our condemnation and calls for justice, we should remember that the people in the stands, and the young men in uniform, didn't have anything to do with what happened. Cancelling the rest of the season would not be fair to them, and it wouldn't undo anything.

We love our heroes and we hate it when they let us down. We also love our myths. Does this mean that everything Penn State supposedly stood for is a myth? If we're talking about the administration and it's coach, then yes. But if we're talking about the fans and alumni, I don't think so. The Penn State family is bigger than Jerry Sandusky, and yes it is even bigger than Joe Paterno.

They "Declared" Independence

I wonder sometimes how many Americans understand why we celebrate "the fourth of July". According to at least one reputable poll, almost a quarter of Americans do not even know what country we declared independence from. I would guess that even less understand the significance of this particular day. Well let me tell you.

Today is not the day our nation won independence. Today is the day we declared it, when several brave men risked their lives to sign a document called the Declaration of Independence. You often hear commentators use the term "our founding documents". Well actually there are no founding documents. There is only one. The Declaration is the founding document.

And what about that Declaration? Some today, like Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan, want to diminish the importance of this document. That is either a huge mistake, or the purposeful act of a statist. You see, the Declaration of Independence should be considered equal to the Constitution. The ideals put forth in the Declaration, are why this nation exists and why it was formed the way it was. The Declaration is a radical document, because it recognized the fact that our rights come from God, not man, and that if a government violates those rights then the people have the right to disconnect from that government.

Slavery was obviously a black eye on America's founding. That can not be denied. However, it was the language of the Declaration that held this nation accountable to the values and ideals expressed in it. Sure there would have been an abolition movement without the Declaration, as there was in Europe. But in America, the abolition movement continually referred to the Declaration. The Declaration, in fact, laid the foundation for that movement. Lincoln referenced it quite often.

The Declaration is everything, and it should be taught as equal to the Constitution. The belief that all men are equal, and that our rights come from God, not governments, is central to understanding why this country exists. If you do not understand those things, then you can not understand this experiment called America.

No, July 4th is not the day we won independence. Independence Day, or the fourth of July, is the day we declared it, the day we told King George that our rights do not come from him, but from Him. Perhaps today's "rulers" have forgotten this. May they be reminded.

Free Speech Applies To All, Even The Phelps Family

This is one of those posts that put me at odds with many of my friends who call themselves "conservative". These are individuals I agree with most of time.

I totally understand why people feel the way they do. In fact, as far as the emotion is concerned, I'm right there with them. My reaction to this behavior, or my reaction to something like a flag burning, is just like most people's. I'm angered.

As disgusting as their behavior is though, the Phelps family did not violate state laws. They did not come within a thousand feet of the funeral. They were never even actually seen by the father of the heroic soldier. They did not come in contact with the funeral or disrupt it in any way.

What they did was exercise their Constitutional right to protest in the most unpopular way imaginable. Sometimes we, as a Constitutional republic, are tested. We are tested by Klansman, Neo-Nazis, Communists, Anarchists, and all types of fringe groups, organizations like the Phelps family.

But our Constitution, our republic, must be bigger than this. In America, we respect the right to protest, and our soldiers fight to uphold that right. I once read somewhere, that if we are not able to burn our flag, then it stands for nothing. The same goes, I believe, for free speech. If unpopular speech is not protected, then we don't have a First Amendment. Why would popular speech ever need protection?

Folks, we should not allow people like this to trick us into trampling on our Constitution. America, the one Matthew Snyder gave his life for, is bigger, much bigger than this.

The Federal Government Should Have Nothing To Do With Education

"No matter what anyone says, the Department of Education will not just write checks to local school boards. They will meddle in everything. I do not want that."-Representative Pat Schroeder (D-CO)

Once the federal government gets it's foot in the door, you can be 100% sure that eventually, that threshold will be swung wide open. Government is never happy with just a little bit of liberty, with just a little bit of state's rights. No, Washington never shrinks it's power, it only grows it.

Sadly, most people walking around today are not aware that the Department of Education has only been around since 1980. If you mention getting rid of this massive and quite useless bureaucracy, many will accuse you of not caring about education. I even had one gentleman claim that getting rid of the DOE would prevent Alabama from having any black football players. Amazing!

Most though, just do not want to discuss the issue. They have other things on their mind. I understand that. But tyranny does not always come by way of revolution. No the worst kind, the kind we have in this country today, creeps along while nobody is paying attention. It is what Hayak called a soft tyranny.

The establishment of the Department of Education in 1980, was, along with HealthCare reform, one of the federal government's most massive power grabs. Teachers and public school administrators love those federal dollars, but they fail to understand that money isn't free. Parents love regulation like No Child Left Behind, but they fail to see the future, which is nationalization of education.

Even though No Child Left Behind had good intentions, I opposed it. Even if President Obama's administration has equally good intentions with their proposal to test teachers, I oppose it. Education has always been and should remain the job of the states. Taking that away, or nationalizing it, while still forcing the states to fund it, is a huge mistake, and a huge infringement on the sovereignty of state governments. It is just one more way to increase the power of Washington.

Somebody, some politician, has to say these things. Somebody has to educate the public on why the federal Department of Education should be done away with. At some point, the federal government has to stop growing. We have to stop looking to Washington to solve our problems. These people can't even administer Social Security or Medicare, yet many want to allow them to run education? Seriously folks, it is way past time to get rid of the Department of Education.

What Is A Right?

So what is a right? I believe the best definition of a right comes from Thomas Jefferson in the Declaration of Independence. In that document, Jefferson used the word unalienable, which means "it can't be taken away". Prior to his use of the word unalienable, he wrote "endowed by their Creator", which of course means that rights are not granted by men, but by God, by nature. In other words, we are born with "rights". Rights are not granted by governments or legislation, but instead are "natural". Jefferson also stated that "all men are created equal", which means that natural rights apply to all, and in the Creator's view, every one is endowed with the same rights. So obviously, health care can not be considered a right. It may be something that our society decides that we should grant as a gift, but it can never be considered a right. Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are rights, but nothing that requires the labor of another can be considered a right. We have the right to pursue health care, assuming that makes us happy. But no man has the right to the labor of another. To grant health care to people who can not pay for it, requires force and coercion. It either requires that money be taken from the "haves", at the point of a gun, and redistributed to the "have nots", or it requires that doctors and nurses, and various health care professionals, be forced to labor for the benefit of others. In the nineteenth century, we called that slavery, and fought a bloody Civil War to end it. So no, health care is not a right. It is a gift. We, as a country, need to re-learn the definition of a "right". We have become so dependent in this country, that we believe we are entitled to anything and everything. We are not. We have traded our liberty, our true rights, away for dependence. Hopefully though, there are enough of us left who choose liberty over security. I believe there is.

The Ground Zero Mosque

I'm watching these left wing pundits wrap themselves in the First Amendment, and I almost want to throw up. The American left doesn't give a rat's ass about the Constitution. The Constitution, in their view, is garbage because it limits the power of government and it affirms the rights of individuals. The American left is all about the state, not the individual. That's why they want to limit our exposure to talk radio (1st Amendment), and seek to limit political speech (1st Amendment) by certain groups that they despise.

So excuse me if their sudden affinity for the First Amendment causes me to puke. What I am specifically talking about, of course, is the Mosque that is being planned near Ground Zero. These leftists go on these programs and immediately start talking about Freedom of Religion. They do this, in spite of the fact that nobody, and I mean nobody, is saying that Muslims do not have a right to worship. They don't have a right to build a house of worship anywhere they want though. Any building, be it a religious building, a home, or a business, is subject to local ordinances and building codes. Apparently, the group that plans on building this Mosque, has already jumped through those bureaucratic hurdles, and has gotten permission from the city to move forward.

So the issue here, is not whether they have the right to do so. Nobody is saying that they do not. The issue here is whether they should. Can we not express an opinion on this without being lectured on the First Amendment? I mean seriously, for just once, can we maybe have an intelligent conversation with you people?

The building of this Mosque is a provocative act. It is a huge purposeful show of disrespect. It is divisive. If they want to build that Mosque, and if the cities zoning authorities are allowing them to do so, then they certainly have a right to build it. But that doesn't mean they should. We have a right to do a lot of things. We can scream the N word and even deny the Holocaust. We can do a lot of things, but we don't because we have class and we respect the sensitivities of others. Apparently the individuals building this Mosque, do not care about those things.

Why We Celebrate on July 4th

I took great pleasure this morning in attempting to explain to my five year old, what the fourth of July is all about and why we celebrate it. While my son was somewhat confused and amused by the idea of calling a signature a "John Hancock", I am quite confident that he went to church this morning with a better understanding of our nation's birth than many adults. 

Sending a reporter out to ask people on the street what the fourth of July is all about, would be a frightening endeavor. I almost hope that nobody ever does it. I imagine though that if it were done, we would hear all kinds of answers, anywhere from "the day we won our independence", to something to do with our constitution. But we all know that July fourth was not the day that independence was won, but merely declared. 

The signers of the Declaration of Independence were not loyal believers in the power of government and how it could be used to help people. Quite the contrary, these men were anti-government, anti-taxes, and most importantly anti-dependence. In a radio interview, the modern day leader of a different philosophy discussed the Constitution by lamenting the fact that it was a charter of what he called "negative liberties". In other words, it stated what government could not do to you, but it didn't state what it could do for you. The framers of that document, obviously, had a different view than that individual in the interview. Realizing that the same men responsible for the Constitution took part in the declaration, and knowing that the declaration provided the framework for the Constitution, it would not be too far of a reach to assume that the same individual, the leader of modern liberalism, also laments the fact that the declaration was one of independence, and not dependence.

That word independence is important. It has to do with individualism, liberty, and the right of mankind to pursue happiness. Independence is what America is all about. Individual independence is exactly why America has prospered. There is no such thing as American nationalism. The word nationalism comes from nation, and in this case, the word nation does not mean country but nationality. America is a melting pot, a nation of immigrants/ foreigners. The is no American race, so you can't attribute the success of this country to any kind of racial superiority. No this nation prospered and became the most powerful on earth, simply because of it's freedom. If modern regulation were in effect in the nineteenth century, there would never have been a railroad. Carnegie would have never found a cheaper way to make steel. Rockefeller would have never been able to sell oil so cheaply. These men became rich and made countless other Americans rich, simply because they were free. 

A true American doesn't want help from government. Liberty loving Americans know that any help from Washington is not really help at all, but a means of control. Americans, the ones who share the same spirit of those who signed the declaration, don't like to be controlled. They will take liberty over security any day. Those are the kind of people that signed the declaration, and they are the same kind of people that came to this country from every part of the world, Europe, Asia, Africa.

The other day, a Supreme Court nominee, dismissed the declaration as unimportant. This same future Supreme Court Justice most likely shares the same philosophy as the gentleman in the aforementioned radio interview. How far has our nation regressed when a nominee for the highest court in the land dismisses the Declaration of Independence? People, the declaration is everything. Lincoln used the declaration as the template for the Gettysburg address. The declaration, and the ideals in it, were the reason this country got rid of that wretched system known as slavery, less than a century after it's birth. The declaration affirms our natural rights, rights not granted to us by any government, but by our Creator.

When this country and it's people forget about the declaration and forget about what it truly means, we are in trouble. Now is the time to remind and re-learn the founding of this country, why it happened, and what they were fighting for. I fear that we have already forgotten these things. I fear that some immigrate to this country, not because of it's freedoms, but because of it's gifts. They seek dependence and not independence. 

Some however, still know why this country is great, and they are fighting to keep it great. Some people still come here because of our liberal freedoms, not our handouts. They love this country and dream of a life in the only place on earth where even the poor are not hungry.

When you celebrate today, think about the courage it took for those men to sign that declaration, a treasonous document. Remember the brashness of John Hancock, who wrote his name bigger than anybody else. That's what America is all about folks. God bless it. 

Just A Little Time Is All

My five year old son Frank, is a pretty fortunate fellow. He has all kinds of "stuff" to play with. Not only that, but with a forty year old dad, his upbringing is, to put it mildly, somewhat laid back. He still tends to get bored though.

Tonight, after a long rainy day of staying inside and playing video games, he was allowed to watch a little TV in bed. On my way to my own bedroom, I decided I'd drop in a catch a few minutes of Spongebob with him. His reaction to this rare visit was something else. He was extremely excited to have me in his room watching cartoons with him. He even went out of his way to explain the episode to me. The whole thing really got me to thinking.

As I sat in his room staring at several hundred dollars worth of toys, I realized that while all of that stuff was nice, it in no way compared to just a few minutes of my time.

Like most parents, I work hard and often use the excuse of being too tired to spend time with my son. What a huge failure on my part!

We live in the most technologically advanced age in history. We pretty much have it all. But even with all of this "stuff", all of these advances, nothing means more to a little boy than a few minutes with his daddy. It's good to be reminded of that sometimes.

HealthCare Bill Passage Will Be Historic Tragedy

President Obama, this weekend, said that the passage of Healthcare will be a historic event in American history. He is right. If this disaster passes, it will be historic, just like the trail of tears was historic, or Plessy v. Fergesun was historic. Being historic, or as he puts it, being “transformative”, is not always a good thing. There is such a thing as bad history.

This healthcare bill is more than a disaster. It is a mindless tragedy. It does absolutely nothing the President claims it does. First off, it imposes an unconstitutional mandate on American citizens. Secondly, it burdens the states with a huge unfunded mandate, one that can only be paid for with higher state taxes or services cut in other areas. Taxes will be raised on individuals, and also businesses. Medicare will be cut, and Medicaid will be expanded, which means that doctors will be reimbursed by these government entities even less than they already are, forcing them to either make up the cost on the rest of us, or deny care to old and poor people. This thing is an absolute disaster. There is no other way to put it.

Any honest constitutional scholar will tell you that, not only is a mandate to buy health insurance unprecedented, but it is also unconstitutional. Never before has the Federal government required you to purchase a product simply because you were breathing. That is not liberty folks. It is tyranny. Congress simply does not have the power to require an individual to enter into a contract with another. The backers of this idea always mention the states and their mandates to buy car insurance. First off, we are talking about states and not the federal government. I realize that many of you do not believe in the concept of federalism. Hell, many of you don't believe in a lot of constitutional concepts. But the framers of our constitution did. Also, there is quite a bit of difference in requiring a driver of a car to be insured, than there is in requiring somebody to purchase insurance simply because they were born. You don't have to own and drive a car. That is a choice, and it is done on roads owned by the states. As far as I can tell though, breathing is a requirement of living.

We here in Tennessee, better than anybody else, know what happens when you expand Medicaid and make it attractive for employers to drop their benefits and allow the “government” to take over. Remember TennCare? How did that work out for you Tennessee? How is Medicaid expansion working out in Massachusetts? They say the states are laboratories, but obviously not in this case. Forcing all of the states to adopt TennCare is mindlessly idiotic. It is senseless. Many of these states are already in deep trouble. Now the federal government is going to pose another burden on them. Unbelievable!

The only way that the states will be able to fund this national TennCare program is through higher taxes. But not only will we face higher taxes from our state governments. We will also see an increase in the tax on capital gains. Yes that's right. In a time of high unemployment and stagnant economic growth, our government is going to raise the tax on capital gains. But wait, it gets better. Remember how those evil insurance companies, that make (gasp!) those huge two percent profits, remember how they charge us too much for insurance. Well guess what, they are going to be taxed too. Think about the stupidity of government logic here for a minute. The government is complaining about the cost of insurance, so the government is going to raise taxes on insurance companies.  ARE PEOPLE REALLY THIS STUPID?

Caterpillar recently stated that the Healthcare bill would cost their company an extra $100 million a year. And some of you still believe that the President gives a rat's ass about jobs. Are you people even able to feed yourselves? I mean seriously, is the forty percent that support this idiocy out there on the roads with the rest of us? God help us if they are.

So basically, this bill is going to increase the cost of doing business, which will either cause higher unemployment, lower wages, or an increase in the price of the products being produced. Either way you look at it, that means less money in our pockets. It is going to raise capital gains taxes, which will depress jobs and decrease wages. It will force health insurance companies to raise premiums to account for increased taxes. But wait, there is more costs hidden in this disaster.

More people will be forced into Medicaid, and Medicare will be cut. Will they take these benefits from old people? No of course not. What they will do is reimburse doctors less. How does that affect us, you might ask? Well the doctors have to make that money up somewhere don’t they? Look for the costs of healthcare, for the rest of us, to increase quite rapidly.

So basically, not only does this healtcare bill do nothing the President claims it will do, it actually does the exact opposite. It really is nothing but a government take over. There is not even a short term benefit. I really don’t see how anybody could support this embarrassment. It just doesn’t make any sense, but socialism never does.

Life Begins At 40

For the last couple of weeks I have intended to write a post about the milestone of my fortieth birthday. It is a particularly important event for me, since my father never lived to see this age, and my brother died shortly thereafter, both of colon cancer. There was a time when I didn't expect to see this age either, but it wasn't because I feared cancer. No I suffered from a completely different kind of sickness, a sickness of the mind called addiction. I didn't just expect to die young. I actually cried out to God and begged Him to take me. No I wasn't suicidal. I didn't have that much courage.

But drugs were never my problem. They were merely a symptom. My problems were much deeper. What I suffered from was insecurity and fear, an irrational self-centeredness. Everything about this world scared the hell out of me. My only way to deal with this fear was to play the part of the clown, and to be the life of the party. I became popular and made lots of friends, but I never felt like I measured up.

I made it through college, but school was always easy for me. It's participating and competing out in the real world that troubled me. I was too afraid to succeed, so I didn't participate. When my friends were getting married, buying homes, and excelling in their careers, I was going nowhere. However, I did make several trips to the city jail.

I won't bore you anymore with my story, but I will say that at the age of thirty, I decided to "grow up". I joined the rat race, married a beautiful girl, had a son, and later bought a home. I even went back to school and earned my Masters degree, at night of course.

I have changed quite a bit in the last ten years, but who hasn't? I have calmed down considerably. Having a child kind of does that to you, I think. I am much more tolerant of others and less prone to losing my temper than I used to be. My negative mental attitude has mostly been changed to a positive outlook. But most of all I have changed the way I view myself.

I don't beat myself up the way I did in the past. When I mess up, and I often do, I cut myself some slack. When others criticize me, I am able to accept their criticism and consider it, as opposed to stomping off angrily and cursing about their shortcomings. I like myself these days, and because of that, I am able to be a better friend to others. I am able to not only love my enemies, but to forgive them and focus on whatever qualities they have that I admire. I have come to realize that people don't think about me as much as I once thought they did. They have their own problems and their own fears and insecurities. When they act out, it usually has nothing to do with me. They might just be having a bad day, and rather than be angry at them for hurting my precious little feelings, I should have compassion for what they might be going through.

Does life begin at forty? For me, the answer is yes. Rather than lamenting my age, I choose to embrace it and make a point to practice the wisdom that was given to me through my experiences. Yes life would have been much different had I known then what I know now. But I had to learn these things on my own, in my own way. My life, however difficult I chose to make it, had to be just as it was.

Yes I have learned a great deal and made much progress, but I am fully aware that I am not even close to having arrived. There is so much more to learn and so much more growth to be experienced. No, forty isn't old, not for a late bloomer like myself. It really is a beginning.

Merry Christmas

Merry Christmas everybody.

Frankie's First Jack-o-lantern

I don't know where it came from. But for some reason, there was this really little and shabby looking pumpkin on my counter this afternoon. Even though I had never carved a pumpkin in my entire life, I thought "what the heck" and brought Frank in the kitchen and carved that sucker up. Now I know this is a really amateurish job of carving, but Frank loved it. Notice the mean face he's making. Happy Halloween!

Garcia and Grisman- "Ripple"

What a sweet song! It's definitely one of my favorite Dead tunes, performed here by Jerry and David. Of course, David actually played mandolin on the album version, featured on American Beauty. Excerpt of Robert Hunter's lyrics below.

Reach out your hand if your cup be empty,
If your cup is full may it be again,
Let it be known there is a fountain,
That was not made by the hands of men.

There is a road, no simple highway,
Between the dawn and the dark of night,
And if you go no one may follow,
That path is for your steps alone.

Enjoy!

T for Texas, T for Tennessee

Damn a bunch of sad posts. I just got off the phone with Sanna, and she is going to allow me to pick up Frank from daycare today. Today is her day, so it's her call, you know. I get to spend a couple of hours with him, before I head out to the Flying Saucer tonight to see my old nemesis/friend Brittney.

Yesterday, when I was sad, I was sitting around playing blues music. My mom, who was still here visiting, walked in and said, you need to put on some happy music. You don't need "no BB King" right now.

I took her advice and found this gem (embedded below) from Lynyrd Skynrd. The band is playing "T for Texas, T for Tennessee", also known as "Blue Yodel Number 9". It's an old song written and recorded by Jimmy Rodgers in the twenties. Of course Rodgers' version features an acoustic guitar, his voice, and last only a couple of minutes. What Skynyrd does to this tune is pretty amazing. They turned this country tune into a rocking blues jam, running about ten minutes, with three guitarists swapping solos. The star of the jam though, in my opinion, is guitarist Steve Gaines. What a talent and what a loss he was to the guitar world. By the way, Gaines is the one with the beard and the least amount of hair. Lots of hair in this clip. Let me warn you, the sound quality is not that good, and the video quality is even worse, but the jam is awesome. For a better quality video and sound, click here. The reason I chose the black and white one over the color one is simple. In the color version, the cameraman ignores Gaines, who is jamming his butt off, and instead follows around vocalist Ronnie Van Zandt, as if he as some type of crush on Ronnie. It really pisses me off. Rock and Roll ain't about singers, as far as I concerned. Rock and Roll is guitar music. Put the camera on the guitar, you dang idiot.

Anyway, notice what Ronnie says at the beginning of the video. "These intermissions in between songs, are brought to you by Budweiser, king of beers." Then bassist Leon Wilkerson remarks, "Not to mention Acapulco Gold". Heh!

Today Is the Big Day

No I am not talking about that stupid primary election. Today is my son Frank's third birthday. It is also the fifth anniversary of my brother's death. My brother was also named Frank, as was my late father. I had made the decision to name my son after my dad and brother when we first found out the baby was going to be a boy. It's just so cool that he came into the world on the same day my brother left the world. I think about my brother a lot, and also my dad. I wish Frank could have known both of them. But he will someday.

Definitely Not That Word I Am Tired Of Hearing

This rant by Southern Beale got me to thinking that maybe its time to write about how much I love women and why. SB's feelings about what I may or may not be do not really bother me that much. It's her point of view. I respect it.

But I am the farthest thing from someone who hates or dislikes women.

Let me tell you why. Unfortunately, my father died when I was ten. At that time, my brother was finishing up High School and soon after that, he would become married and join the Navy. That left me with my Mama, my sister, and my Aunt Mae, who lived right beside us. For the longest time, through my most selfish years, they may have been the only people I really cared anything about. They most certainly cared about me. That's for sure.

My mother grew up a lot differently than I did. Her mother wasn't anything like the mother she would later be. Now don't get me wrong. I loved my grandmother. But I know for a fact that she wasn't a great mother to my mom. But Mama was a great mom. I will never forget the night that daddy died. My mother held me in her arms while I cried saying "Be strong." Throughout my teen years, she did the best she could to steer me right. Like the song "Mama Tried", she certainly did her best, but I was a wild soul, still inwardly angry about my dad dying. Being shy, I naturally turned to outside substances to get me out of my shell and help me escape. Through all of that, she never stopped loving me. A lot of people gave up on me and wrote me off, but my Mama kept praying, even visiting me in jail. I will always be grateful to her for that. I don't tell her nearly as often as I should.

I was also fortunate to have a good sister. Penny was five years older than me, so she didn't live with us too much longer after my dad died. But she was always around and always looking after me. I remember a specific incident at a football game. She was a majorette in the band and I was always getting into fights behind the bleachers. One Friday night a much older and bigger kid was getting ready to give me a whuppin'. I probably deserved it, by the way. But that didn't matter to Penny. She came out of the stands where the band was sitting and started waving that baton at the big kid's face, threatening him. I was so embarrassed that my sister had rescued me. But deep down I really appreciated it. It showed how much she loved her little brother. Like my mom, she also never gave up on me during the bad times.

Now I want to tell you all about my Aunt Mae. Last November she turned eighty-eight. She is actually my great aunt. There are probably a lot of people who would put her on a list like this. Words can't express how much I love that woman. She has always been so good to me. As a kid, I probably spent as much time at her house as I did my own. She loved and still does love to cook for me. Her and I used to pick blackberries together for blackberry cobbler and jam. She is a very religious person, though not very educated. Being born in 1919, and being poor, education wasn't a priority for her as a little girl. She always talked about how she wished she could have had the opportunities to learn that I had. More than she will ever know, she had a lot of influence in me taking advantage of those opportunities. She also taught me to love animals. She calls them "God's creatures". I am thirty-eight years old and she still sends me a check on my birthday and buys me candy on Valentines and Easter. It might sound funny, but that means so much to me. It always puts a smile on my face.

Finally, I want to talk about my wife Sanna, the most beautiful woman in the world. I really don't know why God blessed me with such a prize as Sanna. I certainly did not do anything to deserve her. She has such a sweet and caring heart. She always encourages me. When we first met, she saw something in me that I didn't know was there. She is not very materialistic at all. She doesn't care for jewelry or nice clothes. All she wants is to spend the rest of her life with me. She is also a great mother. She isn't perfect by any means and neither am I, but she is close enough for me. February will mark our fourth year as husband and wife, and I am still just as much in love with her now as I was when we first started dating. I still can't take my eyes off of her.

No I don't dislike women. I love women very much. But there is no doubt that men and women are different. If recognizing that makes me a sexist, then so be it. We are still equal though, but we are way, way different. Thank goodness for that.

The Problem with Populists

George Will on the Populists:

Like Job after losing his camels and acquiring boils, the conservative movement is in distress. Mike Huckabee shreds the compact that has held the movement's two tendencies in sometimes uneasy equipoise. Social conservatives, many of whom share Huckabee's desire to "take back this nation for Christ," have collaborated with limited-government, market-oriented, capitalism-defending conservatives who want to take back the nation for James Madison. Under the doctrine that conservatives call "fusion," each faction has respected the other's agenda. Huckabee aggressively repudiates the Madisonians.

Indeed. I highly suggest you read the rest of the article. Will nails it, and as for that shrinking middle class.

Economist Stephen Rose, defining the middle class as households with annual incomes between $30,000 and $100,000, says a smaller percentage of Americans are in that category than in 1979 -- because the percentage of Americans earning more than $100,000 has doubled from 12 to 24, while the percentage earning less than $30,000 is unchanged. "So," Rose says, "the entire 'decline' of the middle class came from people moving up the income ladder."

Heh! Reality and truth are often populisms biggest enemies.

My First Trip To Starbucks

I had ridden by the place several times over the years, but never dared to enter it's walls. It seemed like a different world, a different culture. I wasn't really that curious about the place though. I don't like coffee and my stereotype of the type of person known to hang out in there was quite unappealing.

But then it happened. My wife and I had a little bit of time to kill yesterday afternoon and she asked me to do the unthinkable. She asked me to go with her to Starbucks. I initially refused vehemently. There was no way that I would be caught dead in that place. Not only that, but surely the patrons would figure out that I was an outsider and demand that I leave, perhaps even refusing to serve me. She insisted that I come though, saying that she really wanted to see me in there.

Upon entering, my stereotype was quickly verified. Right there on a piece of living room furniture was "pony-tail guy" reading a book. At one table were these two thin, neat looking, young men. They looked like they were really close friends, really close. A few of the people in there actually had textbooks. Some were wearing those really small eyeglasses, the kind Brittney Gilbert wears. Some people were reading and some were having discussions, but I don't think any of them were talking about who they were going to vote for in the Republican Primary. I knew right away that I didn't belong there. I wanted to leave. My lovely wife could see how I was feeling. She was quite amused.

After ordering, we sat down and I inquired about this strange culture. I couldn't believe that a business survived by selling coffee and having people come in, sit down and talk to each other. She became irritated with my wanting to leave and said that we had nothing in common. I agreed and then reminded her of how that was a good thing. "Would you really want to be with me if I was the type of guy that hung out in Starbucks?", I asked. "I guess not," she said.

Finally she finished her coffee and I got out of there, never to return again.