Shelter From The Storm

It's really overwhelming, isn't it? There is so much that is needed, and will be needed, by the people victimized by Hurrican Katrina. Like you (since you are reading this because you're on the internet) I've been stunned by the contrast, between (on the one hand) the sheer incompetence, or negligence, or callousness, which has contributed to the suffering, and (on the other hand) the heroic efforts made by individuals who stepped in to help their fellow human beings.

There will be enough to talk about regarding this disaster, those who contributed to or alleviated the suffering, and those who will try to use this (for good or ill) to advance a cause they believe in. But, for now, the only important thing is to contribute in some way, to help those who bore the brunt of this catastrophe.

There are so many ways to help, which is probably a testament to the good hearts of Americans. In addition to whatever ways to help you may find in your community, in your profession, or wherever -

The American Red Cross - That's a no-brainer.

National Voluntary Organizations Active in Disaster (NVOAD) - Seems to be a good clearing-house for legitimate charities providing aid in these circumstances, which was recommended by FEMA, at least until it changed its webpage (after the list with Pat Robertson's charity near the top, but before stressing the more military-minded USA Freedom Corps) - Pick a charity from NVOAD's list, and you probably can't go wrong.

One of the charities in NVOAD, which has a lot of connections in the affected areas - Catholic Charities USA

And, what the heck, the two ex-presidents' Bush-Clinton Katrina Fund

A little more out-of-the-way, but still worthwhile - the Jazz Foundation of America's Fund for New Orleans Musicians. As they point out on their webpage -

We will be addressing the longer term needs of these jazz and blues artists who will have just lost everything.

We will be raising funds and distributing money for the musicians to get a new apartment or room for rent: by giving a first month's rent, possibly more, for them to start over, a place to live. ...

As well, we will be attempting to help New Orleans musicians by replacing the thing that matters most and the only way they can ever work again: their instruments.
To those who lost their instruments, like drummers and bassists who could not carry their heavy equipment, and guitarist with their amps, we will be making an effort to work with manufacturers and music stores to replace those instruments for as many as we possibly can.

Remember, New Orleans was only "New Orleans" because of the musicians...

And, finally, you can contribute to disaster relief by purchasing one of these t-shirts, from a fellow from my locality. They feature some choice quotes, including "Brownie, you're doing a great job" and "I don't think anybody anticipated the breach of the levees".

But, however you contribute, in whatever way, it's needed, and every bit helps.

Family Values

Hey, Pat Robertson sure made a splash in the news today -

Conservative U.S. evangelist Pat Robertson called for the assassination of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, but top U.S. officials denied on Tuesday that any such illegal act was being contemplated.

Venezuelan officials said Robertson's remarks were "a call to terrorism," and demanded President George W. Bush condemn his political ally and fellow Christian conservative. But Chavez, who was winding up a three-day visit to communist ally Cuba, told reporters he didn't care about Robertson. "I don't even know who this person is."

Robertson, the founder of the Christian Coalition and a presidential candidate in 1988, said Chavez, one of Bush's most vocal critics, was a "terrific danger" to the United States and intended to become "the launching pad for communist infiltration and Muslim extremism."

"We have the ability to take him out, and I think the time has come that we exercise that ability," Robertson said during Monday broadcast of his religious "The 700 Club" program.

He made the remarks on his daily program, "The 700 Club". That show is carried during the day, and at night, on the "ABC Family Network".

I guess the "Family" in "ABC Family" is the Corleone family. Seriously, though, isn't there some way to get this offensive person off the public airwaves?

Candles Lighting The Way

The Cautious Wife and I attended a peace vigil last evening. It was held in support of Cindy Sheehan. Here in our town, we also remembered Corporal Augie Schroeder (see previous posts, below). Here are some pictures, courtesy of our local peace organization, South Mountain Peace Action -





It was very simple, with a silent reflection on those who have lost their lives. A local folk singer led the crowd in a few songs, such as "This Land is Your Land", and also the following -

Lo yisa goy el goy cherev
Lo yilmedu od milchama
Lo yisa goy el goy cherev
Lo yilmedu od milchama

A participant stepped out of the crowd, to join in with the translated lyrics (from Isaiah Chapter 2) -

And every man ‘neath his vine and fig tree
Shall live in peace and unafraid
And every woman ‘neath her vine and fig tree
Shall live in peace and unafraid

And into plowshares beat their swords
Nations shall make war no more
And into plowshares beat their swords
Nations shall make war no more

Next Stop

The other day I remarked about the parents of a young marine who graduated from my local high school, and who was killed recently in Iraq. His father had asked a friend to pass this on to the community through a local internet message board - "Also, we want them to know that the question is not why, but what next." It seems that "next" has arrived. From the Associated Press comes this story -

The day after burying their son, parents of a fallen Marine urged President Bush to either send more reinforcements to Iraq or withdraw U.S. troops altogether.

"We feel you either have to fight this war right or get out," Rosemary Palmer, mother of Lance Cpl. Edward Schroeder II, said Tuesday.

Schroeder, 23, died two weeks ago in a roadside explosion, one of 16 Ohio-based Marines killed recently in Iraq.

The soldier's father said his son and other Marines were being misused as a stabilizing force in Iraq.

"Our comments are not just those of grieving parents," Paul Schroeder said in front of the couple's home. "They are based on anger, Mr. President, not grief. Anger is an honest emotion when someone's family has been violated."

...

The Ohio couple have long opposed the war and tried to dissuade their son from joining the Marines, but have made their views public only since his death. On Tuesday they urged Americans to voice their opposition to the war.

"We want to point out that 30 people have died since our son. Are people listening?" Palmer asked.

More than 1,800 U.S. servicemen and women have been killed in the war.

On Monday, dozens of people, including several holding large American flags, lined the streets leading to the funeral for Schroeder, known to friends and family as "Augie" based on his middle name, August.

"Yesterday, it was Augie's day and we didn't want to intrude upon his day with politics," Palmer said. "We have to move on and keep his spirit alive by helping to protect his buddies who are still out there."

The couple applauded Cindy Sheehan, the mother of a fallen soldier who has camped out in protest near Bush's ranch in Crawford, Texas, for bringing the war to the public's attention.

"We consider her the Rosa Parks of the new movement opposing the Iraq war," Palmer said.

Built Her Straight Out of Scratch

As I've mentioned here before, I drive a Prius. For those who don't, sorry about those gas prices.

From Jeff Jarvis, I learned about these guys hacking their Prius, taking fuel economy to another level -

It looks like a typical Toyota Prius hybrid, but in the trunk sits an 80-miles-per-gallon secret — a stack of 18 brick-sized batteries that boosts the car's high mileage with an extra electrical charge so it can burn even less fuel.

Gremban, an electrical engineer and committed environmentalist, spent several months and $3,000 tinkering with his car.

Like all hybrids, his Prius increases fuel efficiency by harnessing small amounts of electricity generated during braking and coasting. The extra batteries let him store extra power by plugging the car into a wall outlet at his home in this San Francisco suburb — all for about a quarter.

He's part of a small but growing movement. "Plug-in" hybrids aren't yet cost-efficient, but some of the dozen known experimental models have gotten up to 250 mpg.

Kewl.

By Some Kind Of Magic

This post will start with the "blinking statue" from Hoboken, NJ, but eventually get around to "Intelligent Design". Bear with me ...

HOBOKEN, N.J. - For more than 25 years, Julio "Sly" Dones tended his cobbled-together collection of religious relics at Third and Jackson Streets, unknown to all but those who had reason to happen past.

But this week, people who had no business in Hoboken, let alone a gritty section of this North Jersey city, were steering down Jackson in search of a miracle. Hundreds of them - a constant flow - at all hours of the day and night.

What they came to see was a crumbling plaster statue of Jesus - with wires poking skyward where fingers once were - that Dones, 52, said he fished a year ago from a Jersey City trash can. They came because the plaster Jesus' right eye, once not visible, can now be seen.

The pastor of my Catholic church had an interesting observation about phenomena such as this, along these lines - For some reason, many people who consider themselves to be religious, react more to these stories, than to the everyday existence of their Church, their community of believers, or their sacraments. Even Mr. Dones of Hoboken, who apparently spent decades trying to bring a little bit of hope to a seedy area of his town, does so without being noticed until his "miracle".

And, that makes me think of these "Intelligent Design" people. Instead of considering that the God they believe in could have created a universe where natural processes come together to result in intelligent life (an amazing thing if you think about it), they insist that there's some "trick" that had to have taken place. They insist that somewhere we can see the "seams", where creation came together, where something not "natural" can be seen and therefore "prove" the existence of God. And, they argue that opposition to them is somehow opposition to people of faith. They even managed to get a Catholic Cardinal to write a piece which implied that their view was correct.

I have some folks who would disagree. For example, Kenneth R. Miller, Professor of Biology at Brown University, and a Catholic -

Words matter, and they matter most of all in the context in which they are to be read and understood. On July 7, 2005, the New York Times published an opinion piece, "Finding Design in Nature," purporting to offer “The official Catholic stance on evolution.” The author of that piece, my fellow Catholic Christoph Cardinal Schönborn, got the theology exactly right, but erred dramatically in his take on the science and the politics of the “design” movement as it exists in the United States. Knowing how the good Cardinal's words will be misused by the enemies of science in our country, it is important to set the record straight.
...

Science is, just as John Paul II said, silent on the issue of ultimate purpose, an issue that lies outside the realm of scientific inquiry. This means that biological evolution, correctly understood, does not make the claim of purposelessness. It does not address what Simpson called the “deeper problem,” leaving that problem, quite properly, to the realm of faith.

Cardinal Schönborn also errs in his implicit support of the “intelligent design” movement in the United States. The neo-creationists of intelligent design, unlike Popes Benedict and John Paul, argue against evolution on every level, claiming that a “designer” has repeatedly intervened to directly produce the complex forms of living things. This view stands in sharp contradiction to the words of a 2004 International Theological Commission document cited by the Cardinal. In reality, this document carries a ringing endorsement of the “widely accepted scientific account” of life's emergence and evolution, describes the descent of all forms of life from a common ancestor as “virtually certain,” and echoes John Paul II's observation of the “mounting support” for evolution from many fields of study.

And (and I love this one) George Coyne, S.J., the Director of the Vatican Observatory -

There appears to exist a nagging fear in the Church that a universe, which science has established as evolving for 13.7 x 1 billion years since the Big Bang and in which life, beginning in its most primitive forms at about 12 x 1 billion years from the Big Bang, evolved through a process of random genetic mutations and natural selection, escapes God’s dominion. That fear is groundless. Science is completely neutral with respect to philosophical or theological implications that may be drawn from its conclusions. Those conclusions are always subject to improvement. That is why science is such an interesting adventure and scientists curiously interesting creatures. But for someone to deny the best of today’s science on religious grounds is to live in that groundless fear just mentioned.
...

This stress on our scientific knowledge is not to place a limitation upon God. Far from it. It reveals a God who made a universe that has within it a certain dynamism and thus participates in the very creativity of God. Such a view of creation can be found in early Christian writings, especially in those of St Augustine in his comments on Genesis. If they respect the results of modern science and, indeed, the best of modern biblical research, religious believers must move away from the notion of a dictator God or a designer God, a Newtonian God who made the universe as a watch that ticks along regularly. Perhaps God should be seen more as a parent or as one who speaks encouraging and sustaining words. Scripture is very rich in these thoughts. It presents, indeed anthropomorphically, a God who gets angry, who disciplines, a God who nurtures the universe, who empties himself in Christ the incarnate Word. Thus God’s revelation of himself in the Book of Scripture would be reflected in our knowledge of the universe, so that, as Galileo was fond of stating, the Book of Scripture and the Book of Nature speak of the same God.

The point of this post is not to convince anyone that God exists (or, that God does not exist). The point of this post is just to note that, in my opinion, it is the "Intelligent Design" people who need to think about how much faith they actually have. Do they need a "blinking statue" to prove that God exists? Maybe they could consider that, for a religious person, the evolution of the universe, from random atoms into intelligent life, is a pretty neat miracle after all.

In Which A Cautious Man Finds Evidence of Intelligent Design ...

That is, an unseen hand guiding creation in the world around us. No, I am not talking about evolution and creationism - I'm talking about the Internet. Specifically, I'm talking about the Unseen Hand that "scrubbed" Senator Rick Santorum's official Senate web site. Recently, it has been observed that Senator Santorum made a statement in an NPR interview that he disagreed with the President's position, that "Intelligent Design" should be taught alongside evolution -

Republican Sen. Rick Santorum, a possible 2008 presidential contender who faces a tough re-election fight next year in Pennsylvania, said intelligent design, which is backed by many religious conservatives, lacked scientific credibility and should not be taught in science classes.

Bush told reporters from Texas on Monday that "both sides" in the debate over intelligent design and evolution should be taught in schools "so people can understand what the debate is about."

"I think I would probably tailor that a little more than what the president has suggested," Santorum, the third-ranking Republican member of the U.S. Senate, told National Public Radio. "I'm not comfortable with intelligent design being taught in the science classroom."

He had a different opinion in an Op-Ed he wrote for the Washington Times in 2002. That piece is hard to find online, since the Senator removed it from his Senate web page. But, the Google cache shows that the article was there as recently as December 4, 2004. This was the Senator used to tell people about "Intelligent Design" -

The theory of intelligent design, which predates ancient Greece, contends that nature shows tangible signs of having been created by a pre-existing intelligence. This is in contrast to Charles Darwin's theory, which assumes all physical and material reality has gradually evolved through pure chance and natural selection, whereby the fittest members of each species survive and reproduce.

Critics of intelligent design, such as the newly formed Ohio Citizens for Science, claim that intelligent design is not a viable scientific theory and should not be taught in the classroom. They fear it is creationism in disguise, and hence, propagates religion in public schools. Despite a recent poll that shows overwhelming support for including the theory in the new teaching standards, these critics continue to resist its adoption.

This opposition to intelligent design is surprising since there is an increasing body of theoretical and scientific evidence that suggests an alternate theory is possible. Research has shown that the odds that even one small protein molecule has been created by chance is 1 in a billion. Thus, some larger force or intelligence, or what some call agent causation, seems like a viable cause for creating information systems such as the coding of DNA. A number of scientists contend that alternate theories regarding the origins of the human species - including that of a greater intelligence - are possible.

Therefore, intelligent design is a legitimate scientific theory that should be taught in science classes.

Now, all the Senator allows on his website is a more stealthy, "teach the controversy" opinion piece -

Darwin’s theory of evolution should not be taught as absolute fact in the science classroom. Instead, it should be taught as the leading and dominant scientific theory explaining the origin of species, but also as a theory subject to significant limitations, failed predictions, and important criticisms. We should encourage schools to teach better science and to teach more about evolution, including the gaps and controversies surrounding evolution. We should not be afraid to teach children what we know and what we have not yet discovered in science, and we should certainly not deny our children the truth about controversies surrounding science. By teaching the controversy, we remain true to science and yet sensitive to the ideas and interests of many parents and children.

Although, in both his "pro-Intelligent Design" piece, and the more slippery "teach the controversy" piece, the Senator invokes the name of Ted Kennedy as somehow supporting his position. That claim is based on a vote on what is known as the "Santorum Amendment" to the No Child Left Behind Act. It had that innocuous sounding, "teach the children well" sort of language, but has been used as a justification for trying to drive the Intelligent Design bandwagon into science classrooms. The "Santorum Amendment" was not made part of the final NCLB act, by the way.

What is the Senator up to? I don't know. But, I do know that thoughtful people need to be on the watch for stealthy attempts to sneak fake science into our science curriculums. I leave you with the words of author Chris Mooney, whose book "The Republican War on Science" will be published this September -

ID proponents have also teamed up with conservative Republican legislators to further advance their agenda. ID’s most significant supporter has been Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum. In 2001, Santorum teamed up with ID supporters to slip “teach the controversy” language into the No Child Left Behind Act. Singling out evolution in particular, Santorum’s amendment to the Senate version of the bill stated that “good science education should prepare students to distinguish the data or testable theories of science from philosophical or religious claims that are made in the name of science.” This may sound innocuous enough, but when you learn that the language comes in part from ID movement progenitor Phillip Johnson, who believes that “Darwinism is based on an a priori commitment to materialism, not on a philosophically neutral assessment of the evidence,” you see where Santorum is headed.

Read the whole thing.

Young Lives Over Before They Got Started

From my local paper -

For years, the war seemed so far away. Since March 2003, when American forces invaded Iraq, the communities of South Orange and Maplewood have managed to survive without having to make the sacrifices that others around the country have been making.

Although they may have felt the pain of war very close to their heart, or were deeply affected by every headline or television segment on the war, still, members of the community remained somewhat sheltered.

But things changed last week. Lance Cpl. Edward "Augie" Schroeder, a former South Orange resident and a 2000 graduate of Columbia High School, was one of the 14 Marines killed in Iraq on Aug. 2, when a powerful roadside bomb destroyed their amphibious assault vehicle near the Iraqi-Syrian border.

Schroeder's parents, Paul Schroeder and Rosemary Palmer, moved to Ohio from South Orange after Schroeder's graduation from Columbia.

He attended Ohio State University before joining the Marines in 2002 in response to the Sept. 11 attacks.

"It was hard to go home and tell my son that the little boy he used to play with isn't here anymore," said Cindy Espersen, family friend of the Schroeders and CHS guidance counselor. Schroeder and her son were childhood friends.

Any bright, loving child growing up in a community the size of South Orange and Maplewood will touch the lives of many people in it. Schroeder seemed to be special, however, touching so many and so deeply.

The impact of his life, although painfully short, was evidenced at a memorial service in his honor at Morrow Memorial Church in Maplewood on Aug. 4.

The chapel overflowed with people wishing to recall memories and pray for Schroeder. They said he was funny, loving, creative and devoted.

And, from the Associated Press -

CRAWFORD, Texas - The mother of a fallen U.S. soldier who is holding a roadside peace vigil near President Bush's ranch shares the same grief as relatives mourning the deaths of Ohio Marines, yet their views about the war differ.

"I'm angry. I want the troops home," Cindy Sheehan, 48, of Vacaville, Calif., who staged a protest that she vowed on Sunday to continue until she can personally ask Bush: "Why did you kill my son? What did my son die for?"

Jim Boskovitch, father of slain Cpl. Jeffery Boskovitch, 25, of North Royalton, Ohio, is supporting the U.S. military action in Iraq.

"I firmly believe, and I would echo my son's feeling on this, it is very, very important for our country to remain steadfast and complete the mission that they set out to accomplish," Boskovitch told ABC on Sunday.

Boskovitch is among several families mourning Ohio Marines who suffered heavy losses in three attacks starting July 28, when two were killed in a gun battle. On Monday, five were killed in an ambush. Nine were killed Wednesday when an armored vehicle was hit by a roadside bomb.

Rosemary Palmer, the mother of Lance Cpl. Edward Schroeder, 23, another Ohio Marine killed in Iraq, sided more with Sheehan. If the United States continues its current course in Iraq, the death toll of U.S. troops, now at more than 1,820, will only grow, she told ABC.

"We either have to have more people there to do the job and better equipment, or we have to leave — one or the other," she said.

I don't know if Corporal Schroeder's mom is now considered "fair game" by Bill O'Reilly, Michelle Malkin, or anybody else who thinks that it's socially acceptable to call Cindy Sheehan nasty names. In any event, this is what his dad asked a friend to pass along, on the local Maplewood and South Orange internet message board -

I want people to know how much they are appreciated by us. In the last 48 hours we have learned more about Augie than we knew. He now seems larger than life to us (though it isn't easy to forget the dirty socks stuffed under the couch).

Also, we want them to know that the question is not why, but what next.

Jersey Girl?

Michelle Malkin, a feature performer on Fox Bigotry News, has a post on her blog (entitled N.J. & SLEAZE: PERFECT TOGETHER) about some political doings in my state of New Jersey. She notes two items - the steering of 9-11 funds to Democratic districts, and a loan (converted to a gift) from Senator Jon Corzine (now the Democratic candidate for Governor), to a woman who he used to date (and who heads a state workers' union).

As to the former, it should be investigated. Although, it just so happens that the "Democratic districts" are the places which have the international airport, the seaport, the oil and chemical plants, the financial areas which the Administration identified as targets last summer, and the immigrant neighborhoods which are of more interest to the FBI than the typical suburban cul-de-sac. Query - where else would this money be spent?

As to the latter, the Repubican gubernatorial candidate has jumped all over this. Despite the fact that one may wonder why a candidate giving money to someone qualifies as "sleaze" (I thought it was supposed to work the other way around), the Senator apparently reported the gift on his taxes, didn't keep it a secret, and had no dealings with the woman or her union during the time they were dating. I know Republicans love a sex scandal (or, as the Capitol Steps would say, "a skex sandal"), but this particular item may have some "skex", but not really any "sandal".

Normally, I would not bother to address a tawdry subject such as this, but I was drawn to Ms. Malkin's approach to these stories. In addition to the obligatory "Perfect Together" reference, she adds in her post -

They don't call my native state the Armpit of America for nothing.

Now, let's leave aside the fact that the "Google" search she links to produces sites which question, make fun of, or otherwise treat ironically the title, "Armpit of America". Her reference brought to mind what I believe was the last time Ms. Malkin focused on her "native state" - the murder of an Egyptian Christian family in Jersey City. Before the perpetrators were arrested, Ms. Malkin gleefully stoked the flames of racial and religious hatred, asserting that this Christian family was the victim of Muslim assasins. In fact, while during the investigation local officials cautioned people not to jump to conclusions, she mocked them and accused them of some sort of "political correctness" for not pursuing the "jihadists" who she concluded had committed the crime. Even when the truth came out, she continued to imply that there were legitimate unanswered questions.

The discredited story line in the tragedy of the Armanious family, was consistent with Ms. Malkin's whole body of work. Her book last year, in which she attempted to justify the unjustifiable race-based internment of Japanese citizens during World War II, is simply the most extreme example of an obvious attempt to gain the favor of the bigots of this world in exchange for a paycheck.

In any event, she seems ashamed of her Jersey roots. Fortunately, I am a Jerseyan born, raised, and now resident by choice. Therefore, by the power vested in me as a True Jerseyan (or is it "Jerseyite?"), I hereby relieve Ms. Malkin of any connection to the Garden State. Believe me, we're much better off without being associated with her brand of opportunistic bigotry.

And, if she ever stops by here - "You're welcome!"

Souls Of The Departed

Among the Marines from Ohio who were killed in Iraq last week, was a kid named Edward August "Augie" Schroeder. He grew up in my community in New Jersey. He graduated from our high school in 2000; my own son graduated from that same school last year. I did not know him or his parents personally, but many of my friends and neighbors did. Like my own son, he was a Scout, a town pool lifeguard, took part in assorted extracurricular activities, and was active in his church's youth group. In his yearbook portrait (at this AP online profile), he looks just like a lot of the kids of our friends, and like our childrens' classmates. Heck, my son has a similar haircut in his yearbook picture. A lot of us see our own children, when we look at his picture.

He died while riding in a lightly armored, amphibious vehicle in the middle of the desert.

Whether they knew him personally or not, his death has profoundly grieved the people of our community.

There's A Joke Here Somewhere ...

... but maybe it's not that funny.

I kid you not, but the other day the charming Administration-supporting website WorldNetDaily.com posted a come-on for one of their subscription letters (the "G2 Bulletin") which claimed that August 6 is a favorite day of Osama Bin Laden. WND claims that is because that was the date of the atomic bombing of Hiroshima. But, can't we think of another reason why August 6 holds a special place in OBL's heart? -

... the day President Bush received a President’s Daily Brief (PDB) entitled “Bin Laden Determined to Strike in US.” There are many eerie similarities between now and August 6, 2001. Chief among them is that the threat of terrorism remains high, President Bush is at his ranch in Crawford, and Osama bin Laden is on the loose looking to inflict greater terrorist damage.

Bush candidly acknowledged that he was not thinking about a terrorist strike on the U.S. during the hot, pre-9/11 days at his Crawford ranch. He told Bob Woodward: “I was not on point…I have no hesitancy about going after him. But I didn’t feel that sense of urgency, and my blood was not nearly as boiling.”

See the rest of the post at ThinkProgress.org. Then think about how lucky the 9/11 planners were that the U.S. President was so detached, that we lost the chance to possibly prevent that horrific attack.

Yeah, August 6 sure is a red letter day on OBL's calendar.

"For It Means Destruction Of Innocent Lives"

Something to ponder regarding wars past and present, from the U.S. Catholic Bishops -

At this time of remembrance, we solemnly recall the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. These bombings, like other acts of total war in that conflict, brought indiscriminate destruction and death to civilians and soldiers alike. Hiroshima and Nagasaki are permanent reminders to the entire human family of the grave consequences of total war.

No matter how noble the ends of a war may be, they cannot justify employing means or weapons that fail to discriminate between noncombatants and combatants. As the Second Vatican Council declared, “Every act of war directed to the indiscriminate destruction of whole cities or vast areas with their inhabitants is a crime against God and man, which merits firm and unequivocal condemnation.” (Gaudium et Spes, no. 80)

In our day, the threat of global nuclear war may have receded, only to be replaced by the prospect of nuclear terrorism. Terrorist attacks on innocent civilians are a crime against God and humanity and merit the same unequivocal condemnation of all acts that fail to discriminate between combatants and noncombatants

(Found via Bill Cork's Tischreden)

[Edited on August 9, to add the following] Just one detail from a news item about the 60th Anniversay Commemoration today in Nagasaki -

Tuesday’s remembrances began just after sunrise, hundreds of Catholics joined in a special Mass at Urakami Cathedral, which at the time of the bombing was the largest in Asia with 12,000 parishioners — 8,500 of whom are believed to have been killed.

When the cloudy sky lit up in a sudden flash at 11:02 a.m. in 1945, two priests were hearing confessions inside the cathedral and 30 faithful were inside. Everyone in the church died and the statues around them turned black because of the intense heat.

I'm not pointing this out because I think it was worse to drop the bomb on Catholics in church. But, maybe a detail such as that helps to remind people that the victims of that bombing (no matter what their race or religion) were really not so different from ourselves. They got up in the morning, and went to work, to school, or to church, and in the ordinary details their lives would have been similar to an American's.

In a war, there is a tendency to view the enemy as the "Other", as someone who is not like us. It happened in World War II (so much so that American citizens of Japanese origin were herded into camps), and it happens today in the War on Terror (or whatever its called). Listen to some of the characters on the Fox Bigotry Channel if you need further proof.

Back In The U.S.A.

Hey, we're back. London is an amazing city, and its people are wonderful. Given recent events there, residents could be forgiven for being on edge. Nevertheless, the city and its people carried on, even working around the closures of some lines and stations on the extremely essential Underground. We had a great time.

Now, I read that today our U.S. Department of State has decided to issue a travel advisory about London -

This public announcement is issued to alert Americans to ongoing security concerns in the United Kingdom. This public announcement expires on November 3, 2005.

National and local authorities in the United Kingdom continue their investigations of the London bombings on July 7 and the attempted bombings on July 21. The London Metropolitan Police made several arrests, but also stated “the threat remains, and is very real.” The police have increased their uniform and undercover presence on the London public transportation system.

U.S. citizens are advised to maintain a high level of vigilance, take appropriate steps to increase their security awareness, and exercise caution in public places or while using public transportation.

Between that warning, and the "be scared of everything everywhere" warning of the State Department's "Worldwide Caution", you'd think that they didn't want us to go anywhere, but just cower at home and watch the latest "news" on the Fox Bigotry Channel.

I think it was better to go to London, ride the Underground, and carry on with life.

London Calling

As mentioned previously here, this evening we're taking off for our week's vacation in London. I and the Cautious Wife -


- and the Cautious Children, of course -


- aren't going to let anything, or anybody, keep us from having a great time.


See ya' in a week or so!

I found the above images (along with many, many more) at that web phenomenon known as "We're Not Afraid".

"Mind the gap."

Friday Fungus Blogging

It's been a hot, humid summer around here, and this specimen (almost two feet wide) has appeared in the backyard -



Sure, we can "cat blog" too, but anybody can do that ...

"I Went To Bed Knowing The Revolution Had Been Postponed ..."

"Sell it and they will come", as one song puts it.

Earlier this evening, as a car commercial played on the television to the strains of "Dust in the Wind" by Kansas, the Cautious Wife turned to me and said, "Hey, guess who sold his music for a car ad?" I was unaware, and she informed me, of a new Chevy Truck ad with Steve Earle's "The Revolution Starts Now" as the theme music.

Well, imagine my surprise.

Other folks were taken aback, for example, this gentleman I found while "Googling" around for some reactions -

When the Left Hand Don't Know What the Devil's Right Hand Is Selling

The most shocking moment of yesterday's All-Star Game? No, not Tim McCarver spending 15 minutes explaining his man-crush on the missing Derek Jeter (whose looks are much better than his ability to field, except for that go to his right slide and pop up move that probably truly sends Tim's heart a-flutter). No, not even the ubiquitous plug for the needless remake of Bad News Bears, with Billy Bob Matthau.

It was a Chevy truck ad. I sat there thinking, "Gee, that background music is familiar," but couldn't place it for a few seconds, probably because it was by one of the last people I ever expected to sell his songs. For what to my wondering ears did appear but the voice of harcdore troubadour Steve Earle telling us buying this Chevy meant "the revolution starts...now."

Okay, so that particular song meant something other than "trucks" at one time on this site. But, on the other hand, what better way to carry songs and their ideas to the country at large, than by entering through the door marked "pickup truck ads"? Or, is this something that has no deep meaning whatsoever?

In any event, for a Steve Earle song with a Chevy truck in it, you have to look to "The Week of Living Dangerously" ("Buddy you'd be surprised how fast a Chevrolet truck can go"), where the protagonist runs off from wife, kids and job to cut loose in Mexico, but ends up right where he began -

Well I woke up in a county jail 'cross the line in Laredo
With a headache and a deputy staring at me through the door
Well he said "Now how you got across that river alive, I don't know
But your wife just made your bail so now you're really dead for sure"

Now my wife, she called my boss and cried so I got my job back
And the boys down at the plant, they whisper and stare at me
Yea well my wife can find a lot of little jobs to keep me on the right track
Well, but that's a small price to pay for a week of living dangerously

Some of the best Steve Earle songs have a little irony in them. So, if capitalism carries a little bit of the message out, who's laughing last?

Got a Wife and Kids

The President nominated Judge John Roberts to the Supreme Court. So, of course, we will learn all about his life, including -

He reported that his wife drew a salary from Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman, but he didn't disclose the amount. Jane Sullivan Roberts, a graduate of Georgetown University Law Center, is a partner in the firm specializing in transactions involving technology.

The couple have two adopted children, Jack and Josie, both under 6.

In that case, Senator Santorum has some words of wisdom for the Judge and his family -

In far too many families with young children, both parents are working, when, if they really took an honest look at the budget, they might confess that both of them really don’t need to, or at least may not need to work as much as they do… And for some parents, the purported need to provide things for their children simply provides a convenient rationalization for pursuing a gratifying career outside the home. (It Takes a Family, 94)

Many women have told me, and surveys have shown, that they find it easier, more “professionally” gratifying, and certainly more socially affirming, to work outside the home than to give up their careers to take care of their children. Think about that for a moment…Here, we can thank the influence of radical feminism, one of the core philosophies of the village elders. (It Takes a Family, 95)

(Book excerpts courtesy of CapitolBuzz.)

"Santorumonious"

It’s no secret that Senator Rick Santorum would like to be President. There’s nothing wrong with that – I understand that every Senator thinks he or she could be President. However, in Senator Santorum’s case, his strategy includes presenting himself as the “Catholic” candidate – if not the only “real Catholic”. It’s a weapon that he can use two ways. First, he can try to capture President Bush’s conservative and evangelical base, and second, he can try to deflect any criticism of his political views by claiming that he is being attacked on religious grounds.

And for both, he has to start establishing what a “real Catholic” is, both to reassure some of those evangelicals, and to anticipate that some of his political opponents will also be Catholic. In short, Senator Santorum will tell us who and what is “Catholic’, and who and what are not.

Where do I get all of this? Well, I guess it starts with the recent dust-up over an article he wrote a few years ago, on the cause of the clergy abuse scandal in the Catholic Church. That’s a “biggie” that he has to deal with, if he’s going to get that conservative evangelical vote. Just as Bill Frist did with poor Ms. Schiavo, Senator Santorum came up with a “diagnosis” from afar –

It is startling that those in the media and academia appear most disturbed by this aberrant behavior, since they have zealously promoted moral relativism by sanctioning "private" moral matters such as alternative lifestyles. Priests, like all of us, are affected by culture. When the culture is sick, every element in it becomes infected. While it is no excuse for this scandal, it is no surprise that Boston, a seat of academic, political and cultural liberalism in America, lies at the center of the storm.

Originally, when this came up a few weeks ago, I thought that an article from several years ago didn’t really matter much. Then we saw that in response to some criticism, Senator Santorum apparently re-affirmed his assertions. As reported in the Boston Globe on July 13 -

Senator Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania, the third-ranking Republican in the Senate, refused yesterday to back off on his earlier statements connecting Boston's ''liberalism" with the Roman Catholic Church pedophile scandal, saying that the city's ''sexual license" and ''sexual freedom" nurtured an environment where sexual abuse would occur.

"The basic liberal attitude in that area . . . has an impact on people's behavior, " Santorum said in an interview yesterday at the Capitol. "If you have a world view that I'm describing [about Boston] . . . that affirms alternative views of sexuality, that can lead to a lot of people taking it the wrong way, " Santorum said.
…

"I was just saying that there's an attitude that is very open to sexual freedom that is more predominant" in Boston, Santorum said yesterday. Reminded that the sexual abuse occurred across the country, Santorum said that "at the time [in 2002], there was an indication that there was more of a problem there" in Boston.

There are a couple of things going on here, with his initial statement and reaffirmation. Three years ago he refers to "alternative lifestyles" as the cause of the abuse, and in his recent comment he refers to “sexual freedom”. One has to wonder why he thinks these are relevent to a discussion of abuse – until you look back at the infamous “Man-on-Dog” interview he gave in USA Today, in which he also said -

SANTORUM: In this case, what we're talking about, basically, is priests who were having sexual relations with post-pubescent men. We're not talking about priests with 3-year-olds, or 5-year-olds. We're talking about a basic homosexual relationship. Which, again, according to the world view sense is a a perfectly fine relationship as long as it's consensual between people. If you view the world that way, and you say that's fine, you would assume that you would see more of it.

See, the Senator is telling us, it’s not an abuse scandal, and it's not a scandal where those in authority let down the people who relied on them, or worse. It’s just some of those liberal, gay priests causing all the trouble. And since they're liberal and gay (if I may suggest where his argument is going), then they’re not really Catholic, and its not a “Catholic” problem at all. Q.E.D.

I don’t think that’s too harsh an interpretation of where the Senator is going with this. After all, he is persisting in associating Boston (as your basic liberal enclave) with the causes of the abuse scandal. In doing so, he is ignoring all of the actual facts which have been developed regarding this, including facts which the American Catholic Church itself is trying to bring to light. Senator Ted Kennedy of Massachusetts took exception (naturally) to labelling Boston as the cause of the abuse, as not only insulting but also contrary to the facts. And Senator Santorum got a well-deserved spanking in Sunday's Boston Globe from columnist Tom Oliphant:

In the end, I've decided, after a decade of absurdities, Rick Santorum is not funny, just weird.

The Pennsylvania senator's latest outburst of cruel insensitivity -- imagining some tie between the ''culture" of Boston and the behavior of priest-rapists -- is garden variety demagoguery.
…

For some reason, he and his spokesman expanded on this gibberish last week, adding the interesting theory that openness to "sexual freedom" is more "predominant" in Boston. And his spokesman went further, linking the priest-rapists to the sexual revolution of the 1960s and '70s and to "liberal bias" at Harvard and other local universities.

As insight into the mind of a demagogue, this garbage is fascinating in its embrace of contemporary media politics, where the headline value of an assertion always trumps evidence.

According to data compiled by the John Jay College of Criminal Justice in New York for the US Conference of Bishops, accusations of child sexual abuse have been leveled at slightly less than 4,400 priests involving more than 10,600 children. Unfortunately, for Santorum, this sad narrative encompasses much more than the so-called sexual revolution. It goes all the way back to 1950, when books and movies were still routinely "banned" in Boston. It would be interesting to have Santorum declaim at length on sex-crazed Boston in the 1960s, but as someone who somehow survived those days (and at Harvard, no less) I could testify from personal experience that Boston was not exactly Sodom.
…

It is not even accurate to assert that Boston was the center of the child abuse horror. A demagogue feasting off headlines could be forgiven three years ago for equating headlines with deeper truth, but the fact is, as Kennedy put it, that this horrific scandal knew no state or ideological boundaries. Using a simple, clarifying concept -- priests accused as a percent of priests in the affected diocese -- the ''center" turns out to have been Covington, Ky. -- known to business travelers everywhere as the home of Cincinnati's airport. The percentage of accused priests there from 1950 on was 9.6 percent, compared to 7 percent in Boston.

In fact, data compiled by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, and made publically available, shows the sad fact that such abuse was found across the country, and was not especially focused, nor initiated, in Boston or any other city which the Senator wants to label as a "breeding ground".

So, in order to make his case the Senator has to wilfully and obstinately ignore facts provided by the U.S. Catholic bishops. At least, he’s not attacking them as not being "real Catholics", which appears to be how he’s "responding" to Senator Kennedy. As recounted Joe Feuerherd of National Catholic Reporter -

It's all about politics, Santorum told participants on a July 14 teleconference call with members of the Catholic press. "There is no depth to which they will not sink," he said of the Democratic attacks. Then he too got personal: "I am for proper formation, something I would challenge Senator Kennedy to be for. Proper orthodox formation within the teachings of the Vatican. I don't think Senator Kennedy would follow that very closely. "

(There's a headline for you: "Kennedy Opposes Proper Formation.")

According to another press account, Santorum added: "I don't think Ted Kennedy lecturing me on the teachings of the church and how the church should handle these problems is something I'm going to take particularly seriously."

See, those who disagree with him aren’t “real Catholics” (and note, by the way, that the Senator's "diagnosis" and even basic understanding of the issue is at odds with the reports from the U.S. bishops). Apparently, Senator Santorum has the "keys to the kingdom" to decide who the "real Catholics" are. And, if you think my assessment of where he’s going with this is far-fetched, I’ll point you to an article from the National Catholic Reporter in 2002, discussing the Opus Dei order (which the Senator is not a member of, so there’s no problem with the conservative evangelicals over that one) -

In contemporary Western debates, this idea of unity between faith and political allegiance often puts Opus Dei-inspired politicians on the right. Santorum was a forceful champion of this view. He told NCR that a distinction between private religious conviction and public responsibility, enshrined in John Kennedy's famous speech in 1960 saying he would not take orders from the Catholic church if elected president, has caused "much harm in America. " "All of us have heard people say, 'I privately am against abortion, homosexual marriage, stem cell research, cloning. But who am I to decide that it's not right for somebody else?' It sounds good, " Santorum said. "But it is the corruption of freedom of conscience. " Santorum told NCR that he regards George W. Bush as "the first Catholic president of the United States. "

Did you catch that? If you want to know what a “Real Catholic” thinks, just look at the current President Bush. And that’s why Rick Santorum will be out to show that he’s the “Real-est Catholic” of them all.

And that’s unsettling.

Makin' a List

I decided to add to my reading list.

I found Dodecahedron: an online magazine in a comment to an Atrios post. Something about the guy's philosophical outlook makes him someone to check back on (we can overlook the whole Chicago thing).

And Crooked Timber recommends a new blog by an assortment of physicists, Cosmic Variance: random samplings from a universe of ideas. I'm a sucker for that kind of stuff, so they're on the list now, too.

Playing Backyard Bombadier

There's a member of the United States House of Representatives named Tom Tancredo, from Colorado, who has it all figured out with respect to dealing with extremist Muslims. Simply put, we should threaten to bomb their holy sites -

TANCREDO: What would be the response? You know, there are things that you could threaten to do before something like that happens and then you may have to do afterwards that are quite draconian--

CAMPBELL: Such as?

TANCREDO: Well, what if you said something like, if this happens in the United States, and we determine that it is the result of extremist fundamentalist Muslims, you know, you could take out their holy sites.

CAMPBELL: You're talking about bombing Mecca.

TANCREDO: Yeah. I mean, what if you said, "We recognize that this is the ultimate threat to the United States, therefore this is the ultimate threat, this is the ultimate response." I mean, I don't know -- I'm just throwing out there some ideas because it seems to me, at this point in time, or at that point in time, you would be talking about taking the most draconian measures you could possibly imagine. Because other than that all you could do is, once again, tighten up internally.

Thanks to No More Mister Nice Blog for transcribing that discussion (which can also be listened to here and here).

Think about that for a moment. Better yet, listen to the audio at one of the links above, and note the matter-of-fact way this U.S. Representative calmly discusses bombing Mecca, just to threaten or get back at some violent extremists. I looked to see if there were any news stories about this, and other than some piece of fluff at WorldNetDaily (which noted the expected enthusiastic reaction from the crowd at FreeRepublic.com), there basically was nothing. Nada. Zip.

Now, I have a serious problem with this. First of all, this is a statement which could only come from someone who was either screamingly ignorant, or simply venal - because he confuses "Muslim" with "terrorist". But, more important, you know that if some Imam somewhere said that it would be a good idea to set off a bomb at the National Cathedral, or the Lincoln Memorial, as payback for something that America did, the usual crowd from Fox News and talk radio would be foaming at the mouth, demanding that every single Muslim denounce such statements - and continuously bringing it up in case they didn't think the denunciations were public enough or strong enough.

Not to mention the fact that a headline like "U.S. Official Threatens Bombing of Holy Sites" not only hinders our nation's ability to reach out for allies in the Muslim world, but is also a handy little recruiting tool for those who need pliable, impressionable young men to strap on a bomb vest and blow themselves up.

The bottom line is simply this - why the hell aren't more people demanding the Rep. Tancredo be tossed out of the Congress for spreading this garbage?

[Edited on 7/18 to add] There was a little more news coverage of this, today. Rick at So May It Secretly Begin found an article about how Congressman Tancredo is trying to, um, "explain" himself -

The congressman went on to say that he was "just throwing out some ideas" but that an "ultimate threat" might have to be met with an "ultimate response."

Tancredo released a statement Sunday evening in which he said he was simply trying to figure out what the United States could use as a threat to deter future attacks.

"Among the many things we might do to prevent such an attack on America would be to lay out there as a possibility the destruction of these sites," he wrote.

"I do not advocate this. Much more thought would need to be given to the potential ramifications of such a horrific response," Tancredo wrote.

His spokesman, Will Adams, said the congressman is a "free thinker" who was grappling with a hypothetical situation.

"We have an enemy with no uniform, no state, who looks like you and me and only emerges right before an attack. How do we go after someone like that?" Adams said.

"What is near and dear to them? What is the pressure point that would deter them from their murderous impulses?" he said Sunday.

Maybe it's just me, but that really doesn't make him seem any less ignorant, venal, or just plain embarrassing.

So, I repeat, "Why the hell aren't more people demanding the Rep. Tancredo be tossed out of the Congress for spreading this garbage?"

And the Wizards Play

Earlier this morning, the latest Harry Potter book went on sale. The media frenzy began long before that. Now, I am writing about this because of something I saw yesterday. While having lunch with some colleagues, my eye was caught by a caption on a nearby television screen. The television was tuned to Fox News, which apparently was doing some sort of Potter coverage with a studio audience. The caption which caught my eye was something along the lines of "Pope Says 'Harry Potter' Distorts Christianity".

Fortunately, The Opinion Mill has come through for me, pointing the way to a debunking of all this silliness:

With "Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince" coming out at the stroke of midnight, the wires have been humming with the story that the new Pope thinks the Potter series is bad for kids. This meme was apparently put out by a German crank named Gabriele Kuby, who has written a book accusing J.K. Rowling of impairing the moral development of children with her occult tales. Said crank has letters written in 2003, when the pontiff was still Cardinal Ratzinger, agreeing with her that the Potter tales are full of "subtle seductions" that put youngsters on the slippery slope to hell, damnation and Ozzy Osbourne songs.

Leave it to The Leaky Cauldron, a Harry Potter fan site, to post a link to Catholic Insider, which has the transcript of a radio broadcast making it clear that the Vatican doesn't have a problem with Harry Potter. In fact, Monsignor Peter Fleetwood, a former official at the Pontifical Council for Culture, suggests that Kuby "may not have understood a very British sense of humor" when she took up the cudgels against Rowling's books.

The Catholic Insider link has more of Monsignor Fleetwood's interview on Vatican Radio, to clear things up -

I was sent a letter from a lady in Germany who claimed to have written to the then cardinal Ratzinger, saying that she thought Harry Potter was a bad thing. And the letter back, which I suspect was written by an assistent of the then cardinal Ratzinger in his office, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, suggested that there was a subtle seduction in the books. What that subtle seduction was, was not specified, which makes me think it was a generic answer. And she had written a book on these subjects and so the Cardinal's signature was at the bottom of the letter, suggesting she should send me the book.

She sent me the book, and I found it a very unsatisfactory book. I don't think she understands English humour. For example, she said: one sign that these books are making fun of Judaism and Christianity is that Voldemort, the wicked magician, who is the great evil power against whom Harry Potter has to fight, is referred to often as 'he who must not be named', and she takes this as an insult to the name of God in a similar way that Adonai, which is often written as Jawhe, is the name that should not be said in Jewish religion. Well I replied to her: don't you know that even within English families, men who make fun of their relationship with women in a nice, lighthearted way say: oh, she who should not be named, meaning the power in the house, their wife. You know, I think it was meant on that kind of level.

...

And people have obviously worked of a strange translation of what I said in Italian. It is notable that the only complaints I got were from people using a translation. I don't know who made that translation. They never asked me any questions about whether they got it right. They certainly didn't understand what I'd said in the press conference. So I only whish there had been more time to talk then, but the press conference was about something quite different, and it was only one question that was blown out of proportion.

But I remain firmly convinced that the Harry Potter novels are very well written. They are written on the classical plot of good versus evil in the standard way that the old myths were written. The characters are built up around that: the goodies and the baddies so to speak, and I can't see that that's a bad thing for children, when goodness, and the people on the side of goodness are portrayed as the ones who will eventually win. Harry's enemies resort to all sorts of evil things, and they are the ones who loose in the end. I don't see what's wrong with that, and I can't see that does any harm to children.

There's more sensible thoughts at that link.

From the Department of "Timing is Everything ..."

From No More Mr. Nice Blog's survey of this week's best-seller list, we see that Mark Fuhrman's book on the "untold story" of poor Ms. Terri Shiavo started strong, but is now sinking. He should count himself lucky that he sold as many copies as he did. Right after the book was published, Governor Jeb Bush's unwillingness to face facts caused him to get the local prosecutor to look into bringing charges against Mr. Schiavo for what happened 15 years ago, on the night his wife collapsed.

The prosecutor not only said that there was nothing to file charges about, but that there was no reason to raise all of these allegations -

Understandably, Michael Schiavo is not the only witness who has been inconsistent or had difficulty recalling the timing of events surrounding Terri's collapse and resuscitation. Shortly after finding Terri, Michael Schiavo called his in-laws and told them what happened. It is unclear whether he or the Schindlers called Bobby Schindler who lived in the same complex as Michael and Terri and who immediately went to their apartment and arrived before the paramedics. Although Terri's parents had been awakened in the middle of the night with extremely disturbing news and waited at their house for a subsequent phone call on their daughter's condition, they have no clear idea what time they were called by Michael. They had previously provided our office a timeline indicating that they were called as early as 3-4 a.m. but recently told Thogmartin they could not recall the time. Similarly, Terri's brother, Bobby Schindler, told Dr. Thogmartin he could not remember the time that he was called or initially arrived at the Schiavo residence except in relation to the arrival of the paramedics.

It is not contradicted that Michael Schiavo appeared frantic and extremely distraught throughout the incident. Under these extraordinary circumstances, where both Mr. Schiavo and his accusers have similar difficulty in reconstructing exact times, it cannot be credibly argued that this discrepancy is incriminating evidence. Nor, in light of his consistent and uncontradicted claims that he immediately called 911, can his error in estimating the time be considered an admission that he waited over an hour to get help for his wife. It does not appear that Schiavo's error was considered to be of probative value in either the civil suit or in the subsequent guardianship proceedings. Schiavo was not confronted by opposing lawyers (or by Dr. Thogmartin) with the potential inconsistency nor was he given the exact times recorded by paramedics as a point of reference. The most obvious explanation is also the most logical: under the extremely stressful circumstances his attention to and memory of the exact time were faulty - in the same way that the recollections of Mr. and Mrs. Schindler and Bobby are flawed.

You can read the whole thing at this link. I wish I could say that Mr. Fuhrman is the last vulture who will try to profit from this tragedy, but we all know that isn't going to be the case.

Fear's A Powerful Thing ...

... but not if you do not let it take control.

We've done a lot of things based on fear, or should I say, based on fear overcoming other things. I think that Americans let fear, and let politicians peddling fear, convince us that our problems would be solved if we invaded Iraq, instead of pursuing other solutions.

And, if I may be so bold, I think that we really don't know if the London bombings were the work of a vast international conspiracy, the work of a few dangerous people, or something in between. What we do know is that our governments have not been pursuing policies designed to deal with these dangers.

In any event, despite my moniker here, I and the whole Cautious Family are still taking our trip to London at the end of July. I share the sentiment of the folks who have posted their support at www.WereNotAfraid.com (Link via So May It Secretly Begin).

"And the River Opens for the Righteous"

Because, no matter what anybody tells you, Independence Day is about more than invading other countries because our leaders would rather be political than protect our nation the right way -

I am a patriot and I love my country
Because my country is all I know

And I ain't no communist, and I ain't no capitalist
And I ain't no socialist
and I sure ain't no imperialist
And I ain't no democrat
And I ain't no republican either
And I only know one party
and its name is freedom
I am a patriot

And the river opens for the righteous, someday

Little Steven, I Am A Patriot

Dancing in a Sky Filled With Light

Inspired by Tbogg's post of July 4th lyrics (for which I've sent him some suggestions to add to his collection), I'm re-running a post from last year, about celebrating Independence Day -

I am apt to believe that it will be celebrated by succeeding generations as the great anniversary festival. It ought to be commemorated as the day of deliverance, by solemn acts of devotion to God Almighty. It ought to be solemnized with pomp and parade, with shows, games, sports, guns, bells, bonfires, and illuminations, from one end of this continent to the other, from this time forward for evermore.
J. Adams, on the adoption of the Declaration of Independence, Letter to Abigail Adams (July 3, 1776)

So, here are some fireworks for the Fourth -

Sandy, the fireworks are hailin' over Little Eden tonight
Forcin' a light into all those stoned-out faces left stranded
on this Fourth of July.
B. Springsteen, "Fourth of July, Asbury Park"

I can hear the fireworks
I can hear the people, people shouting out
I can hear the people shouting out (up and down the line)
And it's almost Independence Day
Van Morrison, "Almost Independence Day"

We drove the car
To the top of the parking ramp
4th of July
Sat out on the hood
With a couple of warm beers
And watched the fireworks
Explode in the sky
Ani Difranco, "Independence Day"

Once in a while
In a big blue moon
There comes a night like this
Like some surrealist
Invented this 4th of July
Joni Mitchell, "Night Ride Home"

Counted the stars on the 4th of July
Wishing we were rockets bursting in the sky
Talking about redemption and leaving things behind
Willie Nelson, "Mendocino County Line"

And the Rockets' red glare, the Bombs bursting in air,
Gave proof through the night that our Flag was still there.
F. S. Key, "The Star-Spangled Banner" (1814)